FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Our Future Vision: Full Spectrum Liberty -inc. Audio
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 9, 10, 11  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> The Thinking Zone
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
heiho1



Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 133

PostPosted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 5:51 pm    Post subject: Re: Audio: Creating our Future Vision: Full Spectrum Liberty Reply with quote

navari wrote:
- What might FSL look like in 100 years?


For an extreme example of Liberty, I recommend reading GODS OF RIVERWORLD by Philip Jose Farmer. This is a science fiction novel centering around a world where all of humanity has been resurrected on a single planet. They are being resurrected again and again by a group of "Ethicals" who are trying to promote the ethical advancement of the human race. In the book, a small group of adventurers gain access to the Tower which runs the resurrection planet. In this tower, the alpha class individuals refuse to continue to follow the lead of Richard Francis Burton, who led them to the Tower. Burton realizes that these highly individualistic people simply cannot follow a leader when they are, essentially, completely at their own Liberty in an unrestricted environment where they can, literally, create anything they want. They are also at Liberty in that their extreme power forces them to consider their responsibilities in the use of that power.

So, for the caveats around FSL, I'd recommend considering that individuals will be flowering and will be individualizing as much as their environments will permit.

Another example of FSL, taken to a fictional extreme, would be Howard Roarke from Ayn Rand's THE FOUNTAINHEAD. FSL is pure creativity where the individual expresses a singular reality with which others may peripherally participate in, adapt with or counteract against. The cumulative expression of such a society would be an explosion of diversity.

navari wrote:
- How will the money supply be created and managed?


Roy McAlister recommended in his book SOLAR/HYDROGEN CIVILIZATION [I got a copy from knowledgepublications.com] that the money standard be based upon hydrogen. The rationale makes a surprising amount of sense if "hydrogen" is taken to mean "energy potential". For example, wood and oil and newspaper could be exchanged based upon their potential energy release via, say, combustion. Wool and cotton and hemp could be exchanged based upon their "energy profile" or insulation value.

navari wrote:
- What do national border look like?


National borders are a concept based upon a perceived collective identity revolving around a "general welfare" for a common social group. If FSL was realized, the "general welfare" would automatically reflect the widest possible grouping...ergo, national borders would cease to have meaning.

navari wrote:
- How do states maintain security without infringing individual's rights?


If the fraud of the state can be eliminated [adventuresinlegalland.com explains this concept brilliantly by claiming "There is no state."] then FSL implies that smaller, local groups will operate to secure themselves from local threats. Larger scale threats of a terrestrial nature would require larger groupings which would form in spontaneous response. It is the existence of the state which causes the infringements in the modern age. As small groups collaborated on larger scale defense, the "circle" of concerns would restrict action, and hence the potential for infringement, to the appropriate level.

To underscore why an established "state" as we understand them is not what I advocate, consider Operation GLADIO:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0210-22.htm

Quote:

As one of Gladio’s operatives said, “You had to attack civilians, the people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security.”


navari wrote:
- How do we insure proper citizen oversight on the public domain?


By ensuring full access to all aspects of the public domain. Bruce Schneier, author of the phenomenal APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY, has said that, to paraphrase, "Security through obscurity is no security at all." What this means is that "security", which would be the goal of oversight, must operate upon a principle of the design of the thing being overseen being as open and scrutable as possible. I would submit that is the goal of the Internet model of society...and the whole reason I became a web engineer in the first place was that potential for complete transformation of the previous society.

BTW, I was perusing some of the Terence McKenna videos posted on another thread and I came across this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARIG-BQRATs&mode=related&search=

Well...he's right damn it. Leave it to McKenna to state so clearly what my bumbling above hinted at.

Some good questions...hope to see more thoughts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
urbanspaceman



Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 325
Location: London , UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 7:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is such a complex topic because there are so many aspects to consider and things to balance. The individual freedoms must be balanced against the security of the whole. Full Spectrum Liberty would not mean that everyone does what they want. A system such as this would RESTRICT the liberties of morally immature individuals, such as the current PTB, who I'm sure we could all agree are low on the morality scale. The current system encourages the scum to rise to the top, not the cream. In order to have a stable soceity that includes the greatest liberty for the most people, only the greatest liberty should be granted to individuals that could demonstrate a higher sense of morality (people who in their hearts feel that they are brothers and sisters with all of humanity. A worldcentric morality). The powerful elites who are the problem, who have a tribalcentric or ethnocentric morality, should be considered moral children. In a mature society they should be treated as children...they should have strict rules and placed on them until they can demonstrate responsible and moral behaviour.

Gnostic Christianity is something I've been interested for the last few years, and the societies they created around the beginning of the Christian Era have many things to teach us about liberty. They created small communities that were highly individualistic, included women and other races, and had almost no need for the rule of law. In effect, anarchistic communities. But the only reason they were able to make this work was to keep it elitist...only those that had achieved worldcentric morality (in this case it was fostered by some kind of spiritual practice) could fit in. If your soul taps into the universe, and you geniunely experience every human being as your brother or sister, you have no need for laws. You will not harm those you deeply love intentionaly. But until you have achieved that, until humanity is your family, you require some kind of guidance and rule of law. The amount of liberty you can handle goes hand in hand with how developed your conscience is. When your conscience is turned on at a mature level, you intuitively take actions that benefit the good of all, and you no longer need laws to inform you how to take moral action.

In short, a free and moral society can only work if the individuals are moral. The outside must relect the inside.

I've come accross a number of activists who call themselves anarchists, who truly believe that the best society would be an anarchistic one. It may be the best one for them and their friends, but it would be a disaster for the whole planet. Just as Ormond said, the anarchists would be overrun by the Huns as soon as the controls were removed.

So FSL is not just desiring liberty, but it is also keeping the appropriate restrictions on liberty in place to protect those not ready for FSL! That is why I'm critical of a totally flat system for as a global social structure. That would be great for the people on BFN, but what about the rest of the planet? After all, Fintan said that we here on the forum are on the edge of the evolutionary wedge. We are ready for extreme forums of individual liberty and moral responsiblity. So by definition, we are an elite group, and there is a natural heirarchy (we ARE discussing "the next level") where the people who have developed enough in consciousness become the leaders and cultural creatives.

Certainly we can all agree that nation states, as a current structure, is sometimes oppresive. But I'm not convinced that national borders and nation states will dissapear completely, or whether they should be. I'd argue that that is revolution, not evolution. If individual freedoms are championed far above social responsiblity, it could deteriorate into tribalism. If we want to apply the internet model to society, let's try and avoid the downside of the internet....a bunch of lonely people isolated in their rooms typing away, removed from others.

Back in the early 20th century, Duchamp proclaimed that painting was dead. 100 years later, people still paint. In the 80s and 90s, computer gurus proclaimed that the office would be paperless. Now bookstores are filled with expensive and quickly out of date computer manuals. Sure, the introduction of photography changed painting, but painting remained. Computers are changing the nature of the printed word, but it will probably never get rid of books.

People proclaimed revolution, but what happened was evolution. Some things went away, but mainly new structures were built on top of older ones. That is why I don't think the nation state will dissapear. I'm highly skeptical of those who proclaim that national borders will simply fall away, and that will be better for everyone. Evolution always works by building upon some kind of existing stable structure. We have to be careful that we are not destroying the ground underneath our feet.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
RedMahna



Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1512
Location: USA

PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree we still can work within practical, pragmatic roadmaps, and continue think outside the box somewhat.

Concerning stuff on the internet for sale:
Sharing information, even BEFORE the internet age, is a practice among kind people, real people, some famous, some just your grandma or uncle.

Now then, any printed, published info on any subject can be borrowed from a library, and if you can't get it there, visit your local Barnes & Noble, Doubleday, or whatever, and sit on their floor to read it if necessary.

On the current topic, we have a variety of people that will need to be affected. The two that are obviously in position to see a change of ways would be, 1. Adults with access to information and, 2. School-aged children who need to get education differently than it's given today.
We haven't come to a definitive way to change the world, if that's our objective, but these two groups are possibly the ones who'll need the tools with which to turn society around, I would assume.

My message to them would be to challenge their form of logical thinking. What can we do to spark true thinking, opinion, solution-sharing, and move away from pop-culture, mass media, commercialism, tainted history, etc?

Perhaps if real thinking was the common phenomenon, a better culture would be evolutionary.

Red

_________________
just cos things are fucked up doesn't mean it isn't progress...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
zak247



Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 949

PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Full Spectrum Libery: A worthy goal for us all too seek!

Great rap Guys
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
zak247



Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 949

PostPosted: Sat Feb 17, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great idea about the police and politicians. But also the most dangerous people in the government in my opinion are prosecutors. These people don’t ever follow the rule: seek the truth, don’t just try to put people in jail. But no, many of them only are concerned with their careers, and will put their grandmothers in jail to further it. It frightens me that every day you read about a guy getting out of jail after 20 years because they find out he is innocent through DNA.

Can you imagine how many innocent people are in jail because prosecutors are only interested in putting people away, not whether they are innocent or guilty.

Definatly they should be monitored
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hit Submit, then when it seemed to hang, cancelled on browser, then Submit again. Hence 3 posts.

Last edited by dilbert_g on Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:38 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The idea of putting police and public servants under camera surveillance which can be accessed live on the web by the public....that's a stroke of genius! Current technology could provide some of those much needed checks and balances in the future.


I saw an article on Houston. The Police Chief or Mayor was calling for mandatory surveillance in all new construction apartment hallways, maybe inside apartments, maybe old ones, maybe private homes.

In response, a group offered $1000 reward for anyone who could catch this public official on camera committing a crime, and someone else from out of state upped it by $410 or so.

Hell, CIA balks at even CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT. Same for President now. All of them want NO OVERSIGHT and are busily legislating that. Corporations are also busy writing legislation to eliminate both oversight and responsibility. Severe "moral hazard".


Last edited by dilbert_g on Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:47 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Navari, great audio and great thinking. I need to listen again, and honestly to read the rest of these posts a little later.

I wanted to note a few things. One, my opinion on Government is that it exists to "defend Liberty and Freedom". Largely this amounts to keeping commerce running and keeping people free from outside attack, just as Libertarian minimalists suggest. Even in pre-capitalist systems, I think "the economy", and defense against intruders, were still the biggest or sole reasons for having government instead of none. (Often emperors would conquer some region, kill some people, take over, and then extract a reasonable -- but not too heavy --- charge for protecting the region from competing empires and bandits. The conquered were often -- from what I understand -- satisfied with this arrangement if there was a perceived net benefit.)

I also believe (at this time) in the more Modern Liberal notion that Government exists to also defend freedom against economic tyranny. I think it has been proven sufficiently that economic tyranny is not simply a myth created by politicians to give them more powers. In the absence of govt mediating conflict and relations between labor and business, what began to arise was a lot of conflict and in some factories outright labor anarchy. Auto Workers, Reuther.

This "low level war" or complementary antagonism between labor and business (IWW the most radical element of labor) was probably a workable status quo (oppositional bonding, sometimes hostile but not violent) under equal laws, without govt mediation and without creating NLRB etc to "manage" labor. The problem exception was that business tended to hire thugs and "detective agencies" or bring in govt goons like State Police to enforce their will, via terror, violence, assassinations. Over many decades, the disruptions began to be seen as counter-productive to prosperity and profits, so FDR and business I think BOTH sought managed compromises from Labor, which were accepted by both sides. "Saving Capitalism" from revolution, this is what my historian friend says to me about the role FDR.


I want to note that "Liberty" and "Democracy" are loaded buzzwords for knee-jerk rightwing and leftwing viewpoints. They are not merely what I thought they meant conventionally. AND, they have different emphasis which is legitimate and important to acknowledge. (I'm sure many here know this.)

The world "Liberty" is tied to the Patriot right wing, John Birch, Alex Jones, and farther right, and is often a code word for anti-communism, anti-govt, i.e. no social support (even in cases of obvious 'market failure') because that would be "communism". In extreme this is used to remove all government regulation. It's like a boxing match, shoot referees, gloves come off, now it's just a street brawl, Tough Man Contest. Lotta "liberty" though.

In my opinion, this Liberty is in some sense "natural". Social Darwinism is in some sense "natural" just as Natural Selection is natural. On the other hand, Natural Selection favoring Corporate Persons over Human Beings is wholly unnatural, but most people have been trained to be oblivious to that, or even to go out of their way to defend Corporate Persons as "free enterprise". (I think this may be one example of a "frame" as described in my "fastseduction" post.)

One point (per Dawkins) is that human civilization has evolved beyond mere "survival of the fittest" so that many different kinds of people with different and varying values can survive. The West has accellerated this comfortable system in part by exploiting other societies mercilessly and ultimately at gunpoint, but I do not believe that it is necessary to turn some societies into slaves so others can be free. Nor does this de facto or actual slavery actually benefit the majority, but rather the bottom line of a tiny minority.

The business culture is designed "naturally" around "survival of the fittest" to a large degree. However, "fittest" includes "best able to exploit or create rent-seeking" i.e. direct govt contracts, subsidies, and regulations which prop up a particular business model. The modern industrial-corporate model is designed around simple math, to minimize and eliminate costs, especially the need for human labor, as well as to "externalize" costs, in other words, throw uncounted costs off on other people.

It has also been designed so that the more ruthless and thorough the human exploitation, the better the reward. Western Society has largely accepted those values, and America is seeking to "engineer" them into more liberal-ish "welfare states" of Europe, where people are somewhat cared for as a part of society.

The question needs to be addressed: Do we really want to go back to and emphasize social Darwinism and even actual Darwinism and Natural Selection? Extreme Libertarians and Conservatives DO support this model, including Ron Paul. Would it truly be a "level playing field" if all social welfare AND corporate welfare were eliminated? I think not. I think I agree with Kangas and others that the market DOES need corrections and that people need help to compete, esp. with corporations. Do Americans really want to go back to the "golden days" when robber barons robbed and the elderly starved? We are on that path right now, despite key industries posting record profits, and with smaller businesses collapsing like starving deer ready to be devoured.

One interesting point we could probably expand upon as an antidote -- though I am not an economist -- is something called Post-Autistic Economics, developed in France. This movement arose as a written student protest against being confined to studying an economics model which they could clearly see did not apply to the real world, only the world of calculations. Adherence to that model naturally produces "autistic" results, in other words results which work mathematically or should, but do not work for humanity.

Much more could be discussed about how much Human Liberty actually exists in a conservative "small govt" anti-welfare-state model, or whether it's just a matter of substituting corporate tyranny for tyranny of govt.

What about a "dictatorship of the Proletariat"? What's wrong with that? Well, conservatives argue that it is still a dictatorship, and a particularly ruthless one at that, where the "Managers of the Will of 'the People'" are fully empowered and fully justified in destroying anything and anyone that can be framed as an Enemy of "The People". In practice, tyranny of the majority, or minority pretending to be the majority. See democracy.

The world "Democracy" or freedom, other than liberty, but especially "Democracy" means different things to different people. To those on the Center/Left it means popular voice, People's voice, public participation in decision-making.

Paleo-Conservatives and some Constitutional Libertarians caution against democracy, calling it "two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner" is the standard line. (Some suggest the sheep simply needs to be armed.) Paleo-cons argue in favor of a "limited republic", but what does this mean and where is it beneficial? One example would be what Navari mentioned about psyop-ing or brainwashing the public, and this Iraq War slash "War on Terror".

The argument goes roughly like this: In a republic, where govt is limited by a Constitution (which could be amended), and where law itself (statute, ordinance) is limited by a Constitution, Congress could not have abdicated it's war-declaring powers to the President, simply because that would not be allowed. [FONT=Times](The Constitutution should not allow "executive orders" to trump the legislative process either. This is a function that has been snuck in and evolved over time towards dictatorship.)[/FONT]

The strong argument is that there is SO much "law enforcement" floating around in the way of govt tyranny which is simply UNLAWFUL though LEGAL, and which should rightly be thrown out. The "War on Drugs" is the most visible target, as a corrosive, disruptive force. Long before "Freedom to Fascism", Aaron Russo spoke with an interviewer named Scott going by the name of Philip Dru (website), and one of the things he brought up was how American Prohibition, regardless how stupid, at least a Constitutional Amendment was passed to grant the Feds the Power to outlaw alcohol. With the "War on Drugs" (a.k.a. War on Americans), which began just as Prohibition was ending, no one bothered with altering the Constitutution. The govt just passed laws and gradually upgraded this system. This means that the "War on Drugs" is itself UNLAWFUL.

(Sourcewatch under "State of Emergency" describes the legal theory or fact that anytime Congress declares a "War" on something, the President gets access to the War Powers Act and America enters a "State of Emergency", giving the Executive de facto powers of dictatorship, to use as needed. This "State of Emergency" has been continuously in effect since the Great Depression, I think 1933, when FDR declared a National Emergency.)

So while in some sense and on some level, "Democracy" is vitally important, lest everything be limited to tyranny within procedures, on another level, if "Democracy" is reduced to "poll-checked consensus" driven by media brainwashing, then this carries with it some serious problems and dangers, primarily "no brakes".

In terms of something like "Universal Health Care", i.e. single payer, it would behoove America to forget about whether this is "communist" or not, but also not simply re-affirm the precedent of allowing Congress or the President (Big Pharma) unlimited powers to enact this shape this in any manner they choose, and add on to it as they see fit (slippery slope), but rather re-establish the precedent of passing a Constitutional Amendment establishing "Universal Health Care" under certain guidelines and principles, and limited ONLY to health care. This could then be used to deny govt additional unlimited powers to take other actions "for the public good" without consulting the public.

I think -- and would hope -- this discussion "FREEDOM" branches out into more concrete solutions, a path from here to there. One one hand, I can see how this all is probably far too complex to have one unified theory, yet on the other hand, dividing up the discussion into tiny areas is too limiting. Perhaps a little of both. We can certainly identify and clarify SOME Truisms which are True and some which are not, and some which are partly true in certain circumstances.

I think we can break down and work to conquer/clarify crippling code words and loaded ideas.
Back to top
jose



Joined: 23 Jan 2007
Posts: 23

PostPosted: Mon Feb 19, 2007 9:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Never forget: The internet was created by DARPA and those guys don't leave anything to chance...

So you are into creating a new more fair society?

Read some of the ideas of Lysander Spooner:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysander_Spooner

His magnus opus, "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority" can be downloaded from:

http://www.adventuresinlegalland.com/index.php?/content/view/32/36/

_________________
If you have to kill a hundred to save the lives of a million, you are still a mass murderer...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
and i



Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 300

PostPosted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The antithesis to mass-programming via television:

All elected officials must watch on average 3 hours a day of television programming which re-enforces the idea that government exists to serve the needs of the people and which outlines the agenda of the common good...

_________________
Can't be beat, won't be beat, etc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RedMahna



Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1512
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 1:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
All elected officials must watch on average 3 hours a day of television programming which re-enforces the idea that government exists to serve the needs of the people and which outlines the agenda of the common good...


good one!!

i was thinking about the idea of cameras and mics everywhere they go, but it would do 2 things:
1. become a worse reality show than CSPAN already is
2. might make 'em speak in code worse than current doublespeak used

so, forcing TV as prescribed above gets my vote!! what a nightmare for them!!! more fun than a firing squad!

red

_________________
just cos things are fucked up doesn't mean it isn't progress...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DaftAida



Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 62
Location: BabyLondon

PostPosted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 4:12 pm    Post subject: BACK TO THE FUTURE PART 1 Recapturing The Vision Reply with quote


On full spectrum liberty, the suggestion of installing cameras in politician's bathrooms was funny in a sad kind of way; most of them are already doing the dirt on their electorate through use of hidden cameras for blackmail purposes (kiddie sex, setups, that kind of thing). Besides making for very dull viewing, we'd be watching the wrong guys, folks.
Cameras in The Vatican Vaults, now, that might be interesting but honestly, it wouldn't make any difference at all, you'd be shown, just like TV what they want to be shown to you. So stuff that. True, Habeas Corpus needs revival and The Patriot Act needs out, along with the Gun laws and The Fourteenth Amendment, together with the all the other little Amendments over-writing the Bill of Rights. All laws pertaining to 'National Emergency' aka Martial Law in fact one big national bonfire should take care of the lot with some obvious 'Guys' sat on top and internationally televised during a week-long beer fest of freedom for people celebrations! Do you know that November 5th Guy Fawkes night used to have an effigy of The Pope to burn? That's another inspiring idea, flipping the table on all those burned at his mis-take. Aah such burning visions ... now, where was I?

I can find no finer example of human endeavour which created a World that worked for everyone with common core values, liberty, prosperity and grace than the brilliant enlightenment of The Reformation. Such was its success, it created a whole new continent of promise: America. Such was its success that tremendous moves were made to cripple, thwart, subvert and destroy this model of citizen empowerment to the benefit of one and all, and we can see the success of this attack in the US Corp. before us today.

The Reformation didn't happen overnight, stones were laid throughout the preceding 1500 years; always opposed, often snuffed out and yet, men and women of vision and committment ignited by the fires of freedom and justice, carried that torch faithfully so, by the time Luther burned the Papal 'Bull****' and nailed his proclamation for all to see, the wave of light and long-held vision within the hearts of the people erupted. Contemporaries in England, Ireland and Scotland translated the hidden truths and made these available to all. That took some courage, fuelled by some vision.

Just as the internet has enabled the potential for all to research and find truth, dialogue with others and create a new way, the printing press had just been invented in Wittenberg, Germany; enabling the hidden and jealously guarded treasures of knowledge to be exposed to the light of day thus providing the people with the tools to work in unity with a common understanding for a common goal towards the common good. This, amid cruel Inquisitions and the persistant Crusades (contemporary Wars and Torture) and parallell shackles of mind-control, psyops of false religions and beliefs.

Now we have too much information duplicating non-sense and people are overwhelmed with useless propoganda. All this is spawned from exactly the same source as it was in Luther's age and going back to Babylon as we find ourselves right here and now in The Babylon Matrix and from which we here and elsewhere are determined to extricate ourselves.

How do we do this and what vision will light our path clear to a future of our own determination? First, look at the real history of this planet and how and by what means the truth and human desire has been obscured so that we stand on a firm foundation able to detect and head off diversions and perversions and not be distracted. I tell you, the truth is amazing and it is only so due to the falsehoods fed, consumed and digested. Time for a great big enema, folks and what will they do when this collossal pooh hits the fan?

What inspired these men and women to cast off fear of ridicule, defamation, imprisonment, torture and murder? What inspired them to drop all and venture into unkown lands with little more than the clothes on their backs and a book of truth? What courage did certain Kings and Queens possess for them to stand by their people and the liberties of their people against the treacherous powers of the Roman Religious Empire? Who were they truly and where the f*** are they today? I tell you; nowhere - not one honest man or woman of courage can be found amongst our cowardly rabble of criminal 'leaders'. But, among us, the people, we are the light and the way. Yet, we still watch television and pay taxes, still vote and still believe this Earth is spinning around the Sun and is billions of years old .... and many are still convinced they are descended from .... wait for it - APES! Isn't that extraordinary? What do you mean, NO? How far are the docile prepared to be pushed, I wonder, straight into the mincing machine, I fear if the latest ludicrous proposals for black box tax monitors in cars is anything to go by. It's not true that the meek shall inherit the Earth; the meek are always slaughtered first. Where are our swords of justifiable defence? Where are our men, our warriors among us? Not watching football or pornography, or down some filthly warren of 'gay' debauch or gangsta rappin' some jive with their 'ho' displaying Darwin's demented dream for sure. Are they here, perchance and are they armed, I pray?

Would it make a difference to know that we are on Terra Firma; meaning a firm, fixed, stable Planet and when the planet 'moves' it's called an Earth-quake. What does it feel like to have the evidence of our common senses confirmed in simple statement? What does it feel like to consider that this Earth is only around 6000 years old? Doesn't this information throw a completely different light on 'history' and debunk the falsehood of 'evilution'? Would this knowledge inspire a new vision? Would you, like me, find this empowering?

What I have rediscovered of our hidden and very recent history has led me straight to the place where, for the first time in human affairs, people were united in harmony, common industry, prosperity of spirit, body and mind. And it worked and will work again because it is based on nature and truth. In order to arrive here, however, I had to wade through the causes of opposition, disease,misery,terror and stare their progenators straight in the eye. All roads lead to Rome my friends and all destruction leads from it and has infected our beings. It and its dark pagan roots found in Assyria (Ethiopia),Babylon(Iraq),Egyptian Dynasties with their dictators,blood sacrifices and terror. As is the same before our eyes today, most visibly in the current Bush-Jesuit controlled 'administration' and the reality of Guatanamo and Iraq. In our short history, the tracks of our tears can be easily traced and, I suggest, easily erased if we but wipe our eyes clear of their lies.

The Reformation spawned great works of literature, art, architecture, nutrition, husbandry, commerce and industry uniting all with a common bond of fraternity, goodwill and honesty. Money was based on real silver, the currency of the common people which could be taken into any mint and molded by anyone into coinage for currency. There were no taxes! There was no usery! No Communism,Socialism,Feminism,Fascism or any other schism to divide and enslave. What I have realised is that it's not so difficult, when you know the real history and facts of life, to pick up the discarded batton and carry it on through to its destined goal. It will not be carried by the many, but the few. And those few are the self-elected the self chosen ones who will as ever, shape the course of destiny for the many who'll 'catch on' to the idea but there is a warning to heed. The elements responsible for destroying the fabric of humanity and those who support this must not be allowed any influence and some tough decisions will have to be made along the way. Otherwise there's little point in exerting the will and effort required unless we relish martyrdom and end up where we began. Right here, right now.

What can each individual do in there personal sphere to delink from and disempower the devouring machine? It has to start with individual freedom and privacy extending outwards. Each could evolve from the 9-5 imposed tax/labour on our lives as best we can (become self-employed). Get back to self-sufficiency in growing our own food in our back yard or create/join co-operatives for supply and exchange. Seek alternative energy sources away from the national grid. Turn all controlled media off forever. Home educate the children and keep away from doctors - simply boost the immune system nature's way. Learn, learn, learn - we don't need to reinvent the wheel, turn back a little way and look what our forebearers achieved and pick it up from there. Now we have the advantage of technology undreamed of in the 16th - 18th Century, although the lightbulb was known and used in 'ancient' Egypt!

It's seen as terribly quaint these days to talk about or even suggest that the Protestant (Scottish) pioneers who put the 'Great' in Britain and made her truly an Empire to be proud of (before the takeover) and who founded America might have 'been on to something' that is essential for us to know right now, but there it is and this is what I have found after a lifetime of wondering/wandering, exploring everything other than this and finding that nothing else will work without this knowledge which revolutionised the World. And what better ally could they call upon other than God the Creator of All that is? I'm looking to these great men and women to feed my fire and fuel my Vision, won't you join me? It's an adventure worth living and dying for. Won't you join me?

Some references:

Google Alberta Rivera and The Black Pope also 'who created islam'
www.reformation.com or www.cabotia.com - links will lead into a rare work Scottish History by Rev Wylie also see Vatican Assassins by Eric von Phelps but The Reformation is just two words that light up a world of inspiring true history!








Code:

_________________
L.U.C.K. - Labour Under Correct Knowledge
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> The Thinking Zone All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 2 of 11

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.