Orwell’s New Law: Intolerance Is Tolerance


—=—

“A man in debt is so far a slave.”

—Ralph Waldo Emerson

—=—

I’ve got something to say, and you probably aren’t going to like it. And try as you will to dispute it, the Truth is a piercing sword, unable to be deflected even in this time of great deceit — this grand delusion.

Yes, freedom is slavery. It’s called the commercial franchise of national citizenship (legally called as freedom), a reimagined form of denizenship as a post-modern neo-feudalistic form of the same old debt-slavery of yesteryear.

Yes, we understand that war is peace. These are merely the two different extremes of a legally (secularly) bound international commerce, the state of war being a violent purge of uncooperative nations or people (tribes) seeking independence from a slave-inducing, interconnected world currency and its performance-debtor slave system through extortive taxation and internationally imposed sanctions. When the violent, murderous trade war ceases, the then subdued, defeated nations submit to the usual forced but supposedly voluntary “peace” of commerce via international trade yet again. The difference between war and peace is merely a declaration of one or the other, though both have the same goal, to profit the elite bloodlines of archons behind nation-building and United Nations programs that assure free-flowing commerce (peace) between those internationally bound corporations (nations).

And yes, we have witnessed globally that ignorance is strength. But this phenomenon is only understandable from the perspective of national governments toward their enslaved, enfranchised (free range) masses (common human live-stock), as we are hopelessly educated and entrained by entertainments and standardized, institutionalized lies (also called history), and of course what is quickly becoming our very own censored, institutionalized newspeak. My people around the world are, without a doubt, being destroyed and controlled through a mandated, standardized system that teaches and instills a guaranteed lack of knowledge. It’s called public education.

But there is an underlying Orwellian, that is, dystopian maxim that stands as the foundation for all of this, the source behind all three of these seemingly paradoxical but fully demonstrable states of induced, artificial existence detached from Nature (God), which have led to this now globalist Newspeak society we pretend to exist in. There is one ingredient, one agenda that must be pushed universally for this trifecta of dark, globalist tyranny to prevail…

There must be a despotically enforced, unequivocal (absolute) state of artificial, passively consented-to tolerance.

—=—

Our rulers can have no authority over natural rights,
only as we have submitted to them
.
The rights of conscience we never submitted.
We are answerable for them to our God.
The legitimate powers of government extend
to such acts only as injurious to others
.”  

—Thomas Jefferson

—=—

What is the highest moral (Natural) Law? To do no harm, without exception, including the use of words as weapons.

What do the governments of men thrive upon? Doing harm, and more specifically causing us all to harm one another in any way legally possible (permissively through words) as a dysfunctional lifestyle. In other words, creating and administering dystopia — a debtor’s hell.

Our society is like a poker game, consisting of a set of neighbors (players/actors) that pretend a sort of cordial camaraderie and shallow friendship while secretly seeking to competitively out-do, defeat, destroy, and bankrupt each other. Every player at the poker table is necessarily, situationally, and by disposition subjected into being a member of the anti-cult of the Joneses, always seeking to one-up each other, prideful and miserly of their continued earnings, existing solely for the purpose of profit and gain. Meanwhile, the dealer (government and banker) sets and administrates the rules of this necessary, mutually required illicit conduct, allowing legally (permissively) this abhorrent behavior within a prescribed, licensed set of rules. For this administrative “service” the dealer (government) legally steals (taxes) for its own profit the total wealth spent in each transaction (poker hand), raking in a small percentage from each round of cards (commerce) being dealt for the house — an administrative fee, of course. But as the total money left on the table is constantly diminished by this house service charge (called the take), each neighbor must constantly refresh the money pool with his own savings or, finally, leave bankrupt (as a broke loser). Essentially, this is how governments corral and subjugate their common citizenry, setting the rules of “commerce” (the rules of the game) so that we are all constantly practicing deceit and treachery toward one another while feigning to be good neighbors, the ultimate hypocrisy (simulation). It’s just business, we are entrained to say, as if this is some viable excuse to break the highest law of Nature (God) to love your neighbor, to do no harm, and to act always in love, charity, and forgiveness. But, of course, there would be no poker games or need for government if this moral, spiritual, “unwritten” Law was respected absolutely. Gambling, as does citizenship, requires God’s Law (and therefore natural rights) to be trampled underfoot. In legality, the only duty that can be found is the taxation laid upon us all. Instead of acknowledging and fulfilling our moral duty to all men, we pay a duty (tax) so that we don’t have to. Legalism is, after all, the undoing of God’s (Nature’s) Law.

The point? The legal law can only control us if we can be made to voluntarily, continuously harm and injure one another through legal (man-made) methods of false law. To injure, in legalism, means to bring someone or something IN to and therefore under the legal LAW (jure) by means of invoking it in commerce (contract), or in other words by causing all actions of men to be done through a government assigned, artificial, legal persona (mask) — men acting not in Nature (under God and Its Higher Law) but instead in legal (artificial) persona, a false “strawman” that is property of the commercialized corporation of government. We tolerate harm in every way, to each other and to ourselves, as if it’s a normal, or even natural part of “life” as citizenships (debt-slaves). We are acting as commercial vessels, and therefore, as feudal vassals.

VASSALnoun – 1: A person under the protection of a feudal lord to whom he has vowed homage and fealty: a feudal tenant2: One in a subservient or subordinate position. (–Webster’s Dictionary Online, current)

—=—

Maxim of law: With protection comes subjection (subservience/subordination).

In other words, by doing all things commercially in a false, legal persona (status, which is property of government), all actions done by national “citizens” are considered as being legally protected under international law, and, as the maxim of law goes, with protection comes subjection. You see, this maxim applies to both men and the persons (legal status) men pretend to act within, which inversely means that to have the protection of God (Natural rights), one must subject oneself only to the Law of Nature (God), never to what is legal (anti-God, anti-Nature). And so, having legal protection as “consumers” in commerce requires voluntary personhood (legal existence/status) and subjection to the false gods (magistrates) of government. The concept is not at all different, metaphorically speaking, as being either an angel or a demon. Both answer to their perspective gods and are bound by the law thereof. The personification of the angel guides men towards the Law of Nature while the demon (devil) drives men towards the big lie, the artificial aspect of false existence (citizenship in personhood) separated from Nature (God) and Its Law. The angel exists only in Nature (Reality) and may only influence and guide men towards Nature (God) and Its Law. But the demon exists only in fiction, in legal commerce, unable to do anything to men in Nature nor effect the Natural (God-given) rights of men (to do no harm) unless men can be deceived and tricked into entering into the legal, artificial realm (hell) via commercial contract, including citizenship to the legalist, secular nations. Nature (God) is Truth. Legalism is always a lie. One cannot have two opposing gods (masters), nor can one practice two opposing laws. One cannot claim the Natural rights emanating from Nature (God) while acting in an unnatural state of false existence (persona) and following only the law governing fiction. One cannot follow the Law of Nature (God) while also following its complete, intentional opposite, the law of men (legalism). And while the True intent of the concept of possessing the Natural (God-given) right of freedom of religion only exists in Nature, under God (as the practice only of the Law of Nature and exemption from legal, manmade sanctions), legalism only exists outside of and without God, without the Law of Nature. Legal law is a pretended exemption from the Law and Laws of Nature (God). It is really just satanism in disguise, for the meaning of the word satan is merely that which is adversarial to God (Nature/Truth) and Its Law. In legalism, the legal terminology (trickery) “freedom of religion” actually means freedom from religion, or in other words, freedom from Nature (God) and Its Law. All legal, commercial law necessarily defies, opposes, and abandons what is Nature (God) and Its Law, for all legal persons, places, and things (nouns/names) are false. In Nature, all of Existence (Creation) is anonymous, nameless, and therefore carries no mark, no blemish, and no sign of legal property. Nothing in Nature is property of man. Only legal (artificial) persons, places, and things (names placed upon Reality) are property (creations of) men. And so, when the Law of Nature is transmuted, reconstituted, and thus perverted from Nature (God) into commercial (legal) code, and when men can be tricked into following this artificial code instead of the actual Law of Existence (God), then men carry the delusion that all of Nature, including themselves, are property of some commercial government corporation. Every tree, plant, animal, element, and living creature has been blemished with a legal name (noun/”thing”). Every geographical area of Nature (God) has been bestowed a legal name (noun) designating it a “place” or jurisdiction. And every man has been given an additional name (noun) and other marks that identify us all as some form of legal persona (noun/name). Therefore, through this word-trickery or word-majick of the legal language, all parts of Nature have been claimed as the property of mans creations, of artificial persons (corporations) created by the governments of men.

—=—

“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie –
deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth,
persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion
without the discomfort of thought.”

–John F. Kennedy

—=—

We have allowed hell on Earth to come into existence, and we follow its pretenders, its false gods (magistrates) and legal codes as its vassals in an open-air debtors prison. And we have been so far separated from our own Nature (God) by this mythos that even the idea of self-governing under the Law of God by claiming what is inherently ours, that is, our only actual God-given (Natural) right that is to do no harm, no longer exists as even a possibility, for to exist in and under the artifice of nations and legal law we must therefore cause continuous harm to one another. To get ahead one must, either unwittingly or with deceitful understanding, harm all others. To make money (mammon) one must charge usury and act in grocery (harm/evil). And to have wealth as “property” (in mammon) one must act according to the dictates of lust, of greed, and of purposeful antagonism toward the Law and Laws of Nature (God). Citizenship, by its artificial nature, is the seven deadly sins all tied up in one corporate employment to “the state.”

And that’s just what it is: employment. A citizenship is an employee of its government, an agent to its principal. And an employee has no choice. An employee must act the part he or she is playing. A citizenship of a nation (corporation) has no right and no authority to act under Gods (Nature’s) Law. Moral choice is against the legal law. Not moral thought, only the right to act on that moral thought is taken away. Let’s face it… the continuity of government depends solely on men not acting upon their moral conscious against it. And this is the very purpose behind the multitude of false religions married (incorporated) under the legal state – belief without acting on that belief. In other words, hypocrisy (simulation) at its worst.

It is the element of choice that Truly validates ones actions. Legalism takes away choice, and often forces us to do the opposite of what we would otherwise choose to do. Choice is an illusion while we are plugged-in to The Matrix (legal simulation).

The following cannot be feigned or forced by legal sanction. They must come from the soul. They must come from the conscious mind of men, not as a bylaw of a corporation through fictional persons in simulation. For these are “family values” not corporate rules.

Lust is defeated by self-control, that is, self-government, chastity.

Gluttony is defeated by temperance, in serving others before ourselves.

Greed is cured by charity in all things, by putting the needs of others before ourselves.

Sloth is ceased when one has zeal, a zest and respect for all life, and diligence toward the needs of others.

Wrath, as anger toward another, is defeated by patience, by empathetic understanding of the disposition of others.

Envy has no place when the desire to help others succeed is more powerful than the desire to defeat, compete, or otherwise supersede them.

And pride can hold no man’s ego when one stands always in perspective humility, instead standing always in the attitude of service to all men and all True Existence (Nature/God).

The legal person is all of these in one, by legal requirement and/or as a result of the legal code, causing lustful and self-serving (glutinous) behavior, creating greed as intention and sloth as consequence, where lawyers capitalize and promote wrathful thought for profit and gain, playing perfectly into the resultant envy promoted by entertainment, advertising, and educational institutions, all packaged up in a fervent, national pride that necessarily excludes all others in the world not of the same pretended ethnicity (nationality). Personhood is legalized sin. Personhood is spiritual death.

The poker player would never follow these self-evident Laws of Nature (God), and neither can the citizenship of the nations of mammon. To succeed in mammon, all of these must be put aside to make room for evil intent, coveting after the false god of money.

Aristotle, who apparently penned the Nicomachean Ethics, expounds on what is the nature of actions in volunteerism, what is involuntary, and what he calls the non-voluntary aspects of the dualistic nature of these behaviors, which generally reflect the Law of Nature (God) as virtue (need) and the legal, commercial drive as the excess (desire/want) and/or deficiency that is expressed by a lack thereof in each virtue. Listed below, the “mean” category signifies a natural, reasonable balance between the excess and the deficiency. Of course, the legal system as commerce seeks to exploit the excess and the deficiency of moral character, just as one would expect from the demons of legalism, of those who seek to gain and promote the purely secular, legal ideal and lifestyle of their own version of “freedom of religion,” legally meaning freedom from the Law of God (Nature), legally licensed freedom from personal responsibility towards other men and from self-government (self-control under the moral Law). What is a legal version is never the same and always opposed to that which it simulates in hypocrisy.

Here I have listed these ethical principles along with the Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language definition of each term, which also reflects the same moral ethic in Biblical terms. When reading these, it must be from the perspective that each extreme represents the two trays of a scale, whereupon that scale tips in the favor of spirituality under God (the Law of Nature) and its opposing force of secularism under legalism (fallacious logic as the law of men). Yet too much of even the spiritually minded concept may cause men to act just as foolishly as the secularist extreme of that scale. It is balance we seek, not perfection. And this balance is self-governance under God’s Law (of Nature).  However, do not be fooled by the notion that legalism offers a counter-balance to perfection. That is not its design. Its design is to tip the scale in only one direction at all times, while simulating a religious foundation of moral equivalence and manifest destiny. This is a lie told by the king of lies, by men seeking power through the destruction of your ability to self-govern, and by taking you away from God (Nature) through false denominations (empty names) of the false doctrines of corporate religion. In other words, legalism is designed to keep you at all times spiritually unbalanced. All of these expressive traits, again, are based on choice. Legalism offers no choice, while the Law of God relies only on your choice to follow It or turn away from it towards the artificial construct of a legalistic lifestyle in spiritual death.

–=–

COURAGE – noun – [Latin, the heart.] Bravery; intrepidity; that quality of mind which enables men to encounter danger and difficulties with firmness, or without fear or depression of spirits; valor; boldness; resolution. It is a constituent part of fortitude; but fortitude implies patience to bear continued suffering. Courage that grows from constitution, often forsakes a man when he has occasion for it; courage which arises from a sense of duty, acts in a uniform manner. Be strong and of good courage Deuteronomy 31:6. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
fear (phobos) Courage (andreia): mean in fear and confidence First Type. Foolhardy or excessive fearlessness; is one who over indulges in fearful activities. Cowardly (deilos): exceeds in fear and is deficient in confidence
confidence (thrasos) Second Type. Rash (thrasus): exceeds in confidence

–=–

TEMPERANCE – noun – [Latin temperantia, from temper.] 1. Moderation; particularly, habitual moderation in regard to the indulgence of the natural appetites and passions; restrained or moderate indulgence; as temperance in eating and drinking; temperance in the indulgence of joy or mirth. Temperance in eating and drinking is opposed to gluttony and drunkenness, and in other indulgences, to excess. 2. Patience; calmness; sedateness; moderation of passion. He calm’d his wrath with goodly temperance. [Unusual](Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
pleasure (hēdonē)
and pain (lupē)
Temperance (sōphrosunē) Profligacy, dissipation, etc. (akolasia) scarcely occurs, but we may call it Insensible (including a lack of empathy, happiness from doing harm)(anaisthētos)

–=–

LIBERALITY – noun – [Latin liberalitas. See Liberal.] 1. Munificence; bounty. That liberality is but cast away, which makes us borrow what we cannot pay. 2. A particular act of generosity; a donation; a gratuity. In this sense, it has the plural number. A prudent man is not impoverished by his liberalities. 3. Largeness of mind; catholicism (universalism); that comprehensiveness of mind which includes other interests beside its own, and duly estimates in its decisions the value or importance of each. It is evidence of a noble mind to judge of men and things with liberality. Many treat the gospel with indifference under the name of liberality. 4. Candor; impartiality. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
giving and getting (smaller amounts of) money liberality (Rackham),
generosity (Sachs) (eleutheriotēs)
prodigality (Rackham),
wastefulness (Sachs) (asōtia)
meanness (Rackham), stinginess (Sachs) (aneleutheria)

–=–

MAGNIFICENCE – noun – [Latin magnificentia.] Grandeur of appearance; greatness and splendor of show or state; as the magnificence of a palace or of a procession; the magnificence of a Roman triumph. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
giving and getting greater things Magnificence (megaloprepeia) Tastelessness (apeirokalia) or Vulgarity (banausia) Paltriness (Rackham), Chintziness (Sachs) (mikroprepeia)

–=–

MAGNANIM’ITY – noun – [Latin magnanimitas; magnus, great, and animus, mind.] Greatness of mind; that elevation or dignity of soul, which encounters danger and trouble with tranquillity and firmness, which raises the possessor above revenge, and makes him delight in acts of benevolence, which makes him disdain injustice and meanness, and prompts him to sacrifice personal ease, interest and safety for the accomplishment of useful and noble objects. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
great honor (timē) and dishonor Greatness of Soul (megalopsuchia)
(Traditional translation “magnanimity”. Sometimes “pride”.)
Vanity (chaunotēs) Smallness of Soul (self-hatred)(mikropsuchia)

–=–

AMBITION – noun – [Latin ambitio, from ambio, to go about, or to seek by making interest, of amb, about, and eo, to go. See Ambages. This word had its origin in the practice of Roman candidates for office, who went about the city to solicit votes.] A desire of preferment, or of honor; a desire of excellence or superiority. It is used in a good sense; as, emulation may spring from a laudable ambition. It denotes also an inordinate desire of power, or eminence, often accompanied with illegal means to obtain the object. It is sometimes followed by of; as, a man has an ambition of wit. Milton has used the word in the Latin sense of going about, or attempting; but this sense is hardly legitimate. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
lesser honor (timē) and dishonor no special term in ancient Greek for the right amount of ambition Over-ambitiousness) (philotimos) lack of ambition (aphilotimos)

–=–

GENTLENESS noun – [See Gentle.] Dignity of birth. [Little used.] 1. Genteel behavior. 2. Softness of manners; mildness of temper; sweetness of disposition; meekness. The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentlenessgoodness, faith. Galatians 5:223. Kindness; benevolence. 4. Tenderness; mild treatment. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
anger (orgē) Gentleness (praotēs) Irascibility (Rackham), Irritability (Sachs) (orgilotēs) Spiritlessness (aorgẽsia)

–=–

FRIENDLINESS – noun – 1. A disposition to friendship; friendly disposition. 2. Exertion of benevolence or kindness. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
general pleasantness in life Friendliness (something like philia) First Type. obsequious (areskos), if for no purpose quarrelsome (duseris) and surly (duskolos) (contrarian)
Second type. flatterer (kolax), if for own advantage

–=–

TRUTHFUL – adjective – Full of truth. (Websters1828)

TRUTH – noun – 1. Conformity to fact or reality; exact accordance with that which is, or has been, or shall be. The truth of history constitutes its whole value. We rely on the truth of the scriptural prophecies. My mouth shall speak truth. Proverbs 8:7. Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth. John 17:172. True state of facts or things. The duty of a court of justice is to discover the truth. Witnesses are sworn to declare the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth 3. Conformity of words to thoughts, which is called moral truth. Shall truth fail to keep her word? 4. Veracity; purity from falsehood; practice of speaking truth; habitual disposition to speak truth; as when we say, a man is a man of truth. 5. Correct opinion. 6. Fidelity; constancy. The thoughts of past pleasure and truth. 7. Honesty; virtue. It must appear, That malice bears down truth. 8. Exactness; conformity to rule. Plows, to go true, depend much on the truth of the iron work. [Not in use.] 9. Real fact of just principle; real state of things. There are innumerable truths with which we are not acquainted. 10. Sincerity… 13. It is sometimes used by way of concession… That is, it is a truth; what you have said, I admit to be true. In truth in reality; in fact. Of a truth in reality; certainly. To do truth is to practice what God commands. John 3. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
truth (alēthēs) Truthfulness (alētheia) Boastfulness: pretense as exaggeration (alazoneia) Self-deprecation: pretense as understatement (eironia, same word as “irony“)

–=–

WITTY – adjective – [from wit.] 1. Possessed of wit; full of wit; as a witty poet. 2. Judicious; ingenious; inventive. 3. Sarcastic; full of taunts. (Websters1828)

WIT – verb intransitive – [G., to know. See Wise.] To know. This verb is used only in the infinitive, to wit namely, that is to say. [Latin] – noun [See the verb and Wise.] 1. Primarily, the intellect; the understanding or mental powers. Will puts in practice what the wit deviseth. For wit and power their last endeavors bend to outshine each other. 2. The association of ideas in a manner natural, but unusual and striking, so as to produce surprise joined with pleasure. wit is defined. What oft was thought, but neer so well expressed. Wit consists in assembling and putting together with quickness, ideas in which can be found resemblance and congruity, by which to make up pleasant pictures and agreeable visions in the fancy. Wit consists chiefly in joining things by distant and fanciful relations, which surprise us because they are unexpected. Wit is a propriety of thoughts and words; or in other terms, thoughts and words elegantly adapted to the subject. 3. The faculty of associating ideas in a new and unexpected manner. 4. A man of genius; as, the age of Addison abounded with wits. A wit herself, Amelia weds a wit. 5. A man of fancy or wit. Intemperate wits will spare neither friend nor foe. 6. Sense; judgment. He wants not wit the danger to decline. 7. Faculty of the mind. 8. Wits, in the plural, soundness of mind; intellect not disordered; sound mind. No man in his wits would venture on such an expedition. Have you lost your wits? Is he out of his wits? 9. Power of invention; contrivance; ingenuity. He was at his wits end. (Websters1828)

CHARMING – participle present tense – 1. Using charms; enchanting. 2. adjective – Pleasing in the highest degree; delighting. Music is but an elegant and charming species of elocution. (Websters1828)

CHARM – noun – 1. Words, characters or other things imagined to possess some occult or unintelligible power; hence, a magic power or spell, by which with the supposed assistance of the devil, witches and sorcerers have been supposed to do wonderful things. Spell; enchantment. Hence, 2. That which has power to subdue opposition, and gain the affections; that which can please irresistible; that which delights and attracts the heart; generally in the plural. The smiles of nature and the charms of art. Good humor only teaches charms to last.  verb transitive – 1. To subdue or control by incantation or secret influence. I will send serpents among you – which will not be charmed. Jeremiah 8:172. To subdue by secret power, especially by that which pleases and delights the mind; to allay, or appease. Music the fiercest grief can charm. 3. To give exquisite pleasure to the mind or senses; to delight. We were charmed with the conversation. The aerial songster charms us with her melodious notes. 4. To fortify with charms against evil. I have a charmed life, which must not yield. 5. To make powerful by charms. 6. To summon by incantation. 7. To temper agreeably. – verb intransitive – To sound harmonically. (Websters1828)

Concerned with Mean Excess Deficiency
pleasantness and social amusement Wittiness (Rackham)

Charming (Sachs) (eutrapelos)

Buffoonery (bõmolochia) Boorishness (bõmolochos)

–=–

For further outline and elaboration of these ten books containing these virtues and their excess or deficiency from neutrality (middle, mean, balanced state), see the wiki article, here:

Link–> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicomachean_Ethics

–=–

It is easy to confuse these terms with their legal opposites, word magic that is designed to simulate the form without the substance, to pretend good while acting badly. As an example, the legal system bestows the legal (false), flattering title of “honor” upon politicians and judges, as well as titles of supposed (pretended) nobility. One need not do anything special to be granted the flattering title of nobility, one may simply be born into it. Or, one may be hired on to the government corporations and be given such a legal title, which is a specifically defined term of art that has nothing to do with acting in honor in any way. This simulation (hypocrisy) is the nature of The Matrix story and movie franchise — a society so enamored in false, flattering titles that not one of us acts according to the title we pretend to bear. For while the words simulation and hypocrisy bear (carry) the same meaning, they are the products of very different intents. Hypocrisy is committed by a man that knows the Law of God (Nature) and continues knowingly and thus consciously to break that Law. But society today is in simulation, not hypocrisy. Simulation is committed by a man that does not know the Law of God except by name (form without substance), confused by legalism and false doctrine of state-sponsored religions, and therefore acts unknowingly and unconsciously to break the Law of God (Nature).

Which is worse? Why hypocrisy, of course, knowingly breaking the Law of Nature (God).

Which is more destructive? That would be simulation, for a simulator knows and acknowledges not his own hypocrisy, being inculturated and brainwashed by secular logic (legalism) and thus tricked into contract with the devils (attorneys/agents) of government – injured (brought into legal law) and submitted to a spiritually dead existence absent from Source (Nature). One that is ignorant, though this be no excuse, cannot be called a hypocrite. But he can be called evil, pernicious, and wanting of moral rectitude, as much as any farm animal might be labeled. For both exist in their own matrix simulation, an existence completely separate from Nature (Reality). One thing, however, is certainly clear… The ignorant simulators must be governed, for they cannot govern themselves if they do not know the Law of Nature (God). Trying to self-govern without God, without Logos (Christ, the Word of God personified), is like entering into a battle without a sword or shield. The piercing effect of legalism and mammon corrupts the empty mind, the mind devoid of knowledge. And we are certainly a people destroyed by our disgusting and purposeful lack of knowledge, our active ignorance.

(Author’s note: I just revealed the subject outline of my next book.)

It must be said that not any one of these virtues listed above can be obtained without the others. Each is like a check and balance upon which the others depend. For instance, one might be very witty and yet, without empathy, that is, without having temperance over ones words or actions, ones wit will certainly do harm to another or to oneself (self-deprecation). This dispensation of virtue is akin to having a shield against those seven deadly sins that the legal system thrives upon and invokes in each of us through its artificial matrix code. And so the worst of men rise to the top while the best of us are cowed and prevented from practicing this religious Law of virtuous ethics as religious men (non-persons). To be clear, the Law of Nature (God) is illegal in the legal system of men, for that is the purpose of having freedom from (of) religion, which means a state of possessing legal freedom from moral Law. Following the Law of God religiously is not a religion, it is conscious action and a fear of hypocrisy. The religions of men in no way require any man to follow the Law of God, and in fact require every man to break with God’s Law, the Law of Nature, in order to join and follow whatever false doctrine that “church” has printed, incorporated, and made legal (anti-God). Religion is steeped in and dependent on simulation and hypocrisy, for all its members and clergy must necessarily fall into one of these categories.

It is no irony that by doing no harm one therefore rises above and takes away all power of the legal governments of men, leaving the dealer (government) of the game without dependent, morally corrupted customers, without support, without players (citizen employees) in its organized, extortive, commercial business practices. A king, a government, and a poker dealer (tax collector) are useless and powerless actors without the multitude of weak-minded men paying them tribute by participating in their legal, permissive, monopolistic games so as to be harmful and be harmed as a defunct (spiritually dead), default lifestyle. Therefore, the legal system and its devilish law allows for, protects, and very much promotes injury and harm. To injure literally means to bring someone, some place, or some thing into law, and this usually means harm must be done to that legal (artificial) person (status), place (corporation), or thing (property). Though these are merely fictions of law (nouns/names), these pretended titles play an intricate role in this process, for they are all patented creations and property of government. The creator controls, as their well-established, ancient, legal maxim of law dictates. In other words, God controls Nature (including man) and Its Law, while governments control fiction (including the legal persons, places, and things of men) and the legal law that controls them. Through the fictional person, the man is controlled. Within the fictional place (legal jurisdiction of a municipal corporation) the person is governed (administrated). And through every false, legal claim of any thing as “property” by the fictional legal person in the fictional legal place, the man is therefore claiming that he or she holds “title” through some creation (persona) of government, and therefore the law of persons, places, and things is the highest – a false law held higher than Nature’s (God’s) Law. Ultimately this means that anyone that violates or trespasses upon that lie of fictionally entitled property must be punished, that is, harmed through extortion and pain. Forgiveness is not tolerated by we that justify, tolerate, and even worship patriotically this legal system, pretending God’s realm of Nature no longer exists when covered by a fictional, legal “property” line (artificial border) — that the Law of God’s Nature is equally defeated within that artificial boundary of legalism. Therefore, no moral action will be tolerated from any man because it’s illegal (intolerable) for a man bearing (using) a legal person (legal status) under and controlled (owned) by government to practice any form of True religious freedom (bound under moral, unwritten Law). What is legally written remains instead the foundational lie in which we trust.

A person (legal status) exists only in the legal fiction system (a fictional simulation created through legal code words), no differently than a Monopoly game game-piece only has power and status in the Monopoly game or a pawn or knight only has status as a pawn in the game of chess, being a useless trinket in Truth, that is, in Nature (under God), and having power only through the permissive (licensed) fiction that is man’s legal system of law. And so a man acting as/in legal persona (false character) can only act according to the law of persons, the law of the legal, commercial game, never the spiritual, moral Law of Nature (God). In other words, a man must tolerate everything that the government’s legal system of law requires its fictional persons (property) to tolerate, while inversely showing forced, equal, collective intolerance towards whatever government requires and considers as legally intolerable. Morals, values, spirituality, and just outright common sense are intolerable in any legal system. Why? Because these actions (not just thoughts) cannot be governed through legal means, only suppressed through rules attached to this persona (status in society). Only harm can be legally governed. And like a parasite, a vampiric ghoul, government capitalizes upon and taxes every instance of harm we do to one another, even going so far as to fill our heads with Hollywood (deceitful) entertainment that constantly promotes and features as “reality television” a host of paid, low-level, professional liars (actors) fulfilling quite scripted acts of competition and harm.

This is no game, this is the way of Nature (Jehovah). This is our actual default. Only the legal fiction prevents us from living Truly amongst one another in Love and Charity. And that fiction was created purposefully to destroy our spiritual release, our ability to Love and cherish each other as Real men, as Creations of God (Nature), entraining, educating, and tricking us into playing instead their legal game of monopolies (nations) by their artifices and false laws.

If this still doesn’t make sense, try and imagine a moral Monopoly or chess game for a moment, where the Highest rule of the game is to do no harm to any other player (man) or to the earth (Nature), where all “places” are only property of God and no other. Imagine playing Monopoly without money, without a banker (false god). Imagine if the dice had no power to move you and force you to harm (trespass) because you had no fictional character that, by the artificial (legal/man-made) law of that game, could control you through contract, bond, violence, and surety. Imagine having the Natural right and ability to travel through each pretended square of land because no legal system prevented it, and because the Law of the game is to do no harm, to forgive us our trespasses, and to love and respect one another as our neighbor and as we would expect to have done to ourselves? While this is the default Law of Nature, or in other words, what exists without the artifices of legal properties (persons, places, and things), it is only possible by conscious application (choice). It is only possible without temptation towards mammon (money and false valuation of what is Real as a fiction/name in commerce). It is only possible by men able to govern their own minds and actions, by men that hold the Highest Law not merely as a pretended belief system (religion) under a false corporate title like “Christian,” but as a lifestyle put into action at every moment of every new day. What games would we play if there was no competition? What wonders could we accomplish? What level of True Love could we experience?

Unfortunately, these questions cannot be answered while men are contracted with the dis-ease of legal personhood (status) under a false law, while inside the simulation of the legal matrix code and while entranced by the artifice of false, legally incorporated religions (belief without action). For the member of any religion is merely a citizen thereof, no different than that of a citizen of any nation, unable to ever act upon any moral law purveyed within that religion because that religion is a legal corporation bound wholly under legal law (IRS code), and the man attending that religious ceremony (game) is a legal citizen under legal (anti-God, anti-Nature) law. He that pretends, acts, and preaches falsely has no place in God’s Nature (Creation). The chess piece has no power except upon the chess board. The cartoon only exists in the cartoon realm. One cannot be a follower of the Law of God (exemplified in the story of Jesus Christ, the Law personified) and also pretend to be a legal person bound under legal law (false, antichrist doctrine). Each religion is a Monopoly board of its own, allowing empty belief in idols but preventing the ability of men to practice any moral actions as Law without license and permission from government. This false charity from religions can only serve to keep the poor in poverty, to fill the neglected belly of the hungry temporarily, without satisfaction, and provide only the illusion of shelter and love not as a duty to God, but as a gesture of empty, corporate greed (lust). Any welfare system provided by the corporate church serves only to support poverty, hunger, and homelessness, no less than the welfare system of the legal, corporate state serves only the continued base poverty level of its recipients. For money-based, corporate charity bound in anti-God legalism can never cure the ills of a society that worships and hoards the empty promise of money as its artificial god.

Government is only words on paper, and these words (false laws) are used by actors (politicians, police, etc.) in artificially flattering titles as justification to harm and injure the men who respect and therefore tolerate them as if their titles and legally licensed powers thereof are part of reality. This invisible badge of moral corruption, a public scarlet letter of moral incorrigibility called personhood (legalized adultery) and national US citizenship is expressed every time that status (legal, artificial persona) is invoked through identity (pretended sameness as a fictional character/name), such as showing a driver’s license or using a social security number. The law applies only to the person (fictional status), but the man acting in person is in a permanent state of injury (bound under legal law and sanction) by continued, assumed, permanent use (expression) of that persona (status) and the protection it tacitly imposes, being in bond and surety as a consequence of using another’s (government’s) property. Legal protectionism, that is, giving up liberty for security, replacing the choice of self-government with a legalistic prison in debt, is never a good thing.

And now, suddenly, the purpose of Thomas Jefferson’s quote above can be clearly understood. Your rulers use the premise of this quote against you, by causing you to abandon your natural (“God-given”) rights in exchange for their contracted dis-ease of legal, artificial rights. The devil (evil genius/attorneys) can only effect you when you get into contract with it. Legalism is intolerable to innocence. Satan requires harm be done so that its anti-God legalist law may govern and administrate that harm. With time or with money (which are the same thing), we all pay in the end.

Governments only have power over men that are weak-minded, ignorant, and warlike, men that cannot govern themselves, men that deny their own power and existence under God (in Nature/Reality). This unnatural state of being is purely a learned, societal behavior fomented on the “public” at large, for one cannot control (govern) he that is self-governing, unless that government first steals that man’s spiritual release and ability to practice any form of moral (unwritten, self-evident) Law. This is the absolute power behind the legal systems of men, a distinct lack of recognition and respect of the Law of Nature, the Law of God, and therefore the “God-given Rights” so often spoken about by the men that create governments. However, while they are happy to reserve these rights for themselves, the rest of us must be made to deny them and harm each other as a customary, common (vulgar) lifestyle in order that we may be ruled by the legalistic (man-made) rules of harm. We thrive on injury, because only through injury may we invoke and utilize the legal system. Without harm, it has no purpose. It cannot exist in a charitable society. It cannot thrive when forgiveness is the law. And it cannot control us unless we treat each other without love, as if we are not each other’s neighbors to love as we love ourselves. When our actions are no longer answerable only to Jehovah but to men pretending to be gods (magistrates/judges), then we no longer have Natural (God-given) rights. The second we invoke the legal system and law of men, we abandon all that is of God (Nature, the Universe), all that is the benefit of living in and speaking at all times the Truth. For God is Truth and the keeper of It. In other words, if we act like Lawless (soulless) animals then we shall be treated like Lawless (soulless) animals.

Governments, however, are not Truth. Governments exist and subsist solely on lies, on their own fictional inventions, and according to their own law. We seem to forget that every government in existence is immune from its own system of law, standing in the legal title of self-proclaimed, artificial, pretended sovereignty over its own property, its own false creation, including the persons (status in society) we pretend to be. We are told that we are each individually sovereign and yet also somehow subject to government, a blatant misnomer bordering on paradox. A man of God has only one Sovereign and it is never himself, for to have Natural (God-given) rights is to recognize Nature, that is the Universe as all True and self-evident Existence as a whole, as man’s only God (Sovereign). Nature is the only Truth. Truth is God. God is Truth. All else is manmade, and what is manmade is never Truth, never part of God, never part of or governed by Nature and Its Law. Therefore, what is manmade, including what we call persons or citizenship, is a lie. A lie is always against Truth. A lie is always against God’s Law. Lies are never part of Nature, thus never part of God. In other words, Truth is self-evident, and so Truth is the keeper of Itself, for Truth is the Nature and Law of the Universe (Jehovah). Man is part of Nature (God), part of Truth, and ultimately governed by Truth (Nature and Its Law), and so nothing manmade can be said to be part of God, for nothing manmade is part of (originated from) Nature (the Source of Truth). This is the essential foundation of law. Words are never Truth, only form without substance and without self-evidence. The Word of God is the Law of Truth, the Law (Logos) is the Son of God (Truth). The Word is the Law is the Son… these words carry the same meaning and Source. Whenever Truth is spoken, this is the Word of God. That which emanates Truth is acting in or speaking the Word of God, and is acting as a son of God, for God (Jehovah) is Truth. And one can self-evidently only have one True Origin, one Source, one Sovereign (God). All others are false (respected lies). This understanding does not require a degree, or even an education. It needs no religion or money-hungry, lust-addicted priest. It is a fundamental, self-evident Truth. It is the foundation of all Law, for the legal law only exists as that which is opposed to Truth. Life is spiritual Truth. Legal fiction is spiritual death. All persons (legal status under government) are fictions of law. All persons are dead. Persons are not of God, not Created from Nature (Universal Source). Persons are words, form without substance. Persons are Soulless…

If you think this is religion, you are hopelessly lost in the throws of legally imposed, active ignorance… dazed, and confused by the firm and fast grip of your lovelorn lips upon the teat of the false, legal gods of government (mammon).

—=—

“There is nothing more frightening than active ignorance.”

—Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

—=—

“We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.” 

―Plato

—=—

“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.” 

―Issac Asimov 

—=—

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” 

―Soren Kierkegaard

—=—

“We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.” 

―Benjamin Franklin

—=—

“The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see.” 

―Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead

—=—

“Five percent of the people think; 
ten percent of the people think they think; 
and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think.” 

―Thomas A. Edison

—=—

“But you can’t make people listen.
They have to come round in their own time,
wondering what happened and why the world blew up around them…

―Ray Bradbury, Fahrenheit 451

—=—

“Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn.”

―Benjamin Franklin

—=—

“An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.”

―James A. Michener

—=—

“To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today. Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

―Richard Dawkins

(Author’s Note: I do not adhere to Dawkins gibberish, and would give my left nut to “debate” him, that is, educate him and his hopeless cult-following on his fallacious rhetoric and active ignorance of the Bible story and purpose. But a Truth as this, spoken by any man, cannot be ignored lest one becomes ones own enemy. His words regard only empty, corporate religions and their flatteringly-titled followers, not the self-evidence of the Truths in the Bible. His whole pedestal relies on the “strawman argument” fallacy, arguing against the false gods/idolatry and empty images that corporate “Christians” and other religions believe faithfully without proof instead of correcting those false beliefs and instructing them in the Truth of the Bible. In this way, Dawkins is not a Truth-teller but an adversary to the Truth (God). Jehovah (God) is self-evident Truth, against which there is no debating, no versions, and is not to be confused with of defined or likened to false gods and idols. Jehovah is defined as self-Evidence, self-Existence, the Universe, Nature and Its Law, of which we are all undeniably part of in Oneness. The atheist can only exist because false religions exist. The atheist argument is only against some other man’s imagination, not the Bible Law read in proper context and understanding of the intent of its language and metaphor. Dawkins is the “fool” so often referred to therein, just as I was for believing his and other’s fallacious rhetoric instead of reading and committing to due diligence regarding the Bible. His comment above only applies to men tricked into believing the false, manmade doctrines and empty images of denominated, corporate, legalized religions, and has nothing to do with the Bible itself.)

—=—

Let us be clear that the story of Jesus Christ is a timeless (non-historical) story about the most intolerant dude I can think of, violently overturning the tables of the moneychangers and abhorring all men (fools) that acted and spoke against God’s Law, the Law of Nature, the self-evident Truth. Let us also be clear that Jesus Christ is the story of you, and me, the example of God’s Law, the Law of Nature we are to follow — haters of lies, artifice, and legal fiction, and intolerable to everything not of Truth (Jehovah). No one can possibly read the Bible as Law (doctrine) while at the same time thinking so-called “Christian” thoughts about the world (globalized, institutionalized, unspiritual secularism) around us. Christ tolerated no abhorrent behavior, constantly chastising and slyly convicting all “fools” and “hypocrites” that pretended (simulated), as many of us similarly do today, to be men of God (followers of God’s Law). Nothing in the Bible (Law) promotes tolerance. In fact, the very idea of tolerance is by its nature completely against the purpose of any and every system of law, save perhaps the corrupt legal systems of men that seek socialism, communism, and in general Orwellian despotism.

Tolerance is literally moral anarchy, that is, lawlessness to all sense of morality, and poisonous to any sort of spiritually driven values any people may collectively share — the very reason for creating a legitimate (Lawful) government. In other words, once the delusion of enforced, legalized tolerance (permission-based, protected, abhorrent behaviors and lifestyles) infiltrates what otherwise was “constituted” to be an otherwise intolerant society of men that base their participation in that society firstly on a Higher, unwritten, spiritually driven purpose, all hope of maintaining an unwritten, unspoken, unenforced moral order is diminished if not crushed, and such moral behavior is even outlawed by the legalist platform of protectionism (license) for bad behavior.

—=—

“…Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the LORD (Jehovah)? therefore is wrath upon thee from before the LORD (Jehovah)… Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for the LORD (Jehovah), who is with you in the judgment… for there is no iniquity with the LORD our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts… Thus shall ye do in the fear of the LORD, faithfully, and with a perfect heart.”

–2 Chronicles 19:2

—=—

The natural (common/lower class) man is a spiritual monster. His heart is where his feet should be, fixed upon the earth; his heels are lifted up against heaven, which his heart should be set on. His face is towards hell; his back towards heaven. He loves what he should hate, and hates what he should love; joys in what he ought to mourn for, and mourns for what he ought to rejoice in; glories in his shame, and is ashamed of his glory; abhors what he should desire, and desires what he should abhor.”

—Thomas Boston, quoted from: ‘Augustus Toplady, Complete Works’

—=—

To tolerate the existence of evil in men is not the same as tolerating the evils emulated in their behavior. One is to act in charity and love to all men, to tolerate them in their ignorance and deprivation, but never to allow or justify it, and certainly not to love it. The verse above explains that much of the evil of men comes from their status in society, their person. The person acts not under God’s Law but under the government (mind control) of a false god (men acting as gods/magistrates). Love the man as God’s Creation, but never the fictional persona (mask) he pretends to be.

To legalize tolerance is to make lawful that which is intolerable. To legalize tolerance, that is, to force “citizens” to accept all creeds and lifestyles in false, forced legally sanctioned equality, is to abandon the Source of Law that would otherwise allow good men to fight against that evil. In every case throughout written history, this institutionalized tolerance has but one causal effect — to cause good, moral men to become intolerable to the secularized society created by the enforced tolerance thereof. He that refuses legalized, forced tolerance of that which is immoral must necessarily be labeled as intolerable. It is this phenomenon that we are witnessing in America today, and ultimately in all “first-world” nations around the world. It is this tolerance of evil, this bearing of false love for the deadly sins of men due to their false, legally protected persona, that is the antichrist spirit.

One example of this destructive toleration can be seen in what is called as “modern” or “impressionist” art. When the artist no longer paints the world according to its True beauty and wonder, no longer wishing to extend in his art the glory and harshness of Truth, and instead chooses to reinvent Reality (Creation) from his own palate of demented, alternative perspective or some drug-induced “impressionist” revisionism, we have the perfect example of the spiritual degradation that subsists through unrestricted tolerance, and indeed the protective admiration and promotion of tolerable immorality.

—=—

But it’s the consequences of such universally established tolerance in a legalist, secularized society that are the focus of this short essay. For with such a learned, propagandized, and subsequently violently enforced legalistic tolerance shrouded upon a once morally-driven people, whose spiritual foundation and standing in the Law of Nature (God) against what is otherwise intolerable has ultimately been cowed by such licensure of permissive, illicit behavior and idolatry — this once strong foundation of like-minded people must necessarily become intolerant even toward the expression of their own, natural, moral instinct. We must deny the Truth and accept what is false. Such toxic, societal (legal) tolerance causes immorality in the actions of all men regardless of their upbringing and dissuasiveness from their knowledge and baser instinct, causing a legally-induced, almost helpless automation of the man under the false law of forced permissiveness of all that is against reason, stultifying every “citizen” (employee/agent) into inaction and eventually into a shameful feeling of powerlessness, worthlessness, and helplessness as a normal state of mind.

Nineteen Eighty-Four (as Orwell presented) is not merely an inevitable future but a predictive programming of exactly what has incrementally been happening to us, here and now. Good men are afraid to stand up against such oppressive, fallacious public outcries and politically-driven catcalls as “anti-semitic” or “racist,” silenced by social justice campaigns designed to do nothing more than stifle any debate and suppress reasonable consideration. To those acting intolerably, those tolerating evils, their acts of non-toleration through the silencing of any moral opposition is golden. Once tolerance of evil becomes law, only then may evil reign, their actions governed strictly (without choice) by the legalist devils (attorneys) that protect and represent them. And, of course, this is all by design. For the very purpose for this word “racism,” a term and concept that simply cannot be found in older dictionaries or in societal history, is for the purposes of selective intolerance hidden behind the logical fallacy of the goodness of socialistically ingrained, universal tolerance.

 

—=—

So if all black people get organized as a group of flatteringly titled “black” people (an artificial “black” persona/mask/status), which must necessarily be non-white or any other skin-color, they can then collectively as “black” persons fight racism? But, wait a minute, isn’t that the definition of racism? Wasn’t that the model of America — to create a “white” (pure-blooded) country that enslaved “black” (tainted blood) persons of any skin color? Wasn’t America a bunch of “white” European persons (pure bloodline families) that came together in “solidarity” to form a country that necessarily excluded non-pure-blooded men no matter what the skin-color?

Is this race denial? Is it race shame? The strange thing is that this manipulative social justice movement has nothing at all to do with ending this left over, eugenically-driven racial hatred, that is, hatred between the so-called races, but rather to promote a hatred of the distinction of race itself, a sort of collective delusion of self-hatred and self-denial. In other words, we are being ingrained and inculturated to consider race (family) itself as intolerable — exactly what one would expect from a United Nations world government that wishes to replace the family unit with globalist, corporate feudalism and the state as parens patriae.

—=—

“The state has a wide range of power for limiting parental freedom and authority in things affecting the child’s welfare… In fact, the entire familial relationship involves the State.”

The primary control and custody of infants is with the government.”

“There is no wider area for the exercise of judicial discretion than that of providing for and protecting the best interests of children.”

“The court stands in the position of parens patria[e] of children.”

Parens patriae,” literally “parent of the country,” refers traditionally to role of state as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.”

“Pursuant to the parens patriae doctrine, ‘the primary control and custody of infants is with the government, to be delegated, as of course, to their natural guardians and protectors, so long as such guardians are suitable persons to exercise it.’ ”

“In other words, the state is the father and mother of the child and the natural parents are not entitled to custody, except upon the state’s beneficent recognition that natural parents presumably will be the best of its citizens to delegate its custodial powers… ‘The law devolves the custody of infant children upon their parents, not so much upon the ground of natural right in the latter, as because the interests of the children, and the good of the public, will, as a general rule, be thereby promoted.’ 

–Prince, 321 U.S. at 167, 64 S.Ct. at 442, 88 L.Ed. 645. (SOURCE: FindLaw’s Appellate Court of Illinois case and opinions.) -and- MEADOWS v. MEADOWS, (Aug 2008), in the “Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama”?Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62; Ex parte Handley, 460 So.2d 167 (Ala.1984). -and- –Ex parte Wright, 225 Ala. 220, 222, 142 So. 672, 674 (1932). See also Fletcher v. Preston, 226 Ala. 665, 148 So. 137 (1933); and Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. 87 (1860), -and- Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986, 988 n. 1 (Ala.1989) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1003 (5th ed.1979)). -and- Chandler v. Whatley, 238 Ala. 206, 208, 189 So. 751, 753 (1939) (quoting Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. at 89) (‘ ’). (SOURCE: FindLaw’s Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama case and opinions.)

—=—

Get it? The word public means corporation (artificial family) of lower class common men (goyim) acting in legal persona because of lack of knowledge and therefore inability to govern ourselves. The nation is a corporation, and the United Nations is a bunch of nations placed under the same matrix code. But what you might not know is that another word for corporation is FAMILY — as in surrogate parent under the doctrine of master and servant (also called as volunteerism). In the terms below, the word “pleasure” when used legally means legal use of a benefit, which implies the contractual relationship between person (agent) and the state (principal). So when your son takes a joy ride, it’s always considered corporate (family) business, and the head of the corporation (family) is the responsible party for any damages…

FAMILY GROUP – Within purview of the family car doctrine, is not confined to persons related to the owner, but includes members of the collective body of persons living in his household for whose convenience the car is maintained and who have authority to use it. The children of trust settlor including an adult son are members of the settlor’s “family group” for income tax purposes. (Black4)

FAMILY USE – That use ordinarily made by and suitable for the members of a household whether as individuals or collectively. The supply of water in a municipal corporation for family use includes the supply of jails, hospitals, almshouses, schools, and other municipal institutions; id. (Black4)

MEMBEROne of the persons constituting a family; a partnership, association, corporation, guild, etc. One of the persons constituting a court, a legislative assembly, etc. A part or organ of the animal body; especially a limb or other separate part. (Black4)

FAMILY PURPOSE DOCTRINE – A doctrine that the owner of a car, who gives it over to the use of his family and permits it to be operated by the members thereof, is liable for the injuries inflicted while being operated by a member of the family. The doctrine, that the owner of an automobile purchased or maintained for the pleasure of his family is liable for injuries inflicted by the machine while being used by the members of the family for their own pleasure. The doctrine imputes relationship of principal and agent where one maintains an automobile for pleasure or other use of member of his family. It is based on theory that each family member in using such car for own pleasure is carrying out the purpose for which it is furnished, and is the owner’s agent or servant. It is founded upon principles of agency or of master and servant. It is restricted to automobiles maintained by owner for comfort, pleasure, and convenience of members of his family. A father is not liable merely because he is head of family, but the one who owns or provides the automobile is liable. A wife may be held liable for the torts of her husband under the doctrine. Agency is the very genesis of the doctrine. Grandmother standing in loco parentis to grandson was liable under the doctrine for grandson’s negligent operation of her automobile. Where wife owned automobile, husband was not liable under “family purpose doctrine,” for minor son’s negligent operation of the automobile, notwithstanding husband paid part of gasoline and garage bills… (Black4)

FAMILY CAR DOCTRINE – The doctrine rests upon the basis that the automobile is furnished by the husband in his individual capacity and as common-law head of the family for the use of the family, and not as the agent of the community. It rests on theory that operator is husband’s agent and runs automobile in husband’sbusiness”; that wife is husband’s agent in carrying out one of the purposes for which the automobile is purchased and owned. Under the doctrine, a father furnishing automobile for pleasure and convenience of family makes the use of automobile by family his business and any member of family driving automobile with father’s express or implied consent is the father’s agent and the father is liable for the member’s negligence. See, also, Family Automobile Doctrine and Family Purpose Doctrine. (Black4)

FAMILY AUTOMOBILE DOCTRINE – The doctrine is that one who owns and maintains an automobile for the general use of his household makes use of automobile for such purposes a part of his business so that any member using automobile for those purposes under general authority to do so becomes his representative, for whose negligence he is responsible. It is an extension of the principle of respondeat superior to the relation created by operation of family use automobile. See, also, Family Car Doctrine and Family Purpose Doctrine. It is based on theory that members of family were engaged in a joint enterprise or that child was agent of parents. If an automobile is owned and maintained by a family corporation for general use of a family, such as that of corporation’s manager and one of its principal stockholders, corporation may be held liable under thefamily automobile doctrineto third parties. (Black4)

FAMILY CARAutomobile used to send owner’s children to school was “family car.” (Black4)

—=—

Yes, dropping the kids off at school in the “family car” is considered an act (benefit) of commerce, done in legal persona (citizenship), as the head of or agent (member) of a legal family of US persons (a legal marriage is the incorporation of two fictional, legal persons that are both property of the state). This is the family (artificially ethnic race) of the United States, all 300+ million of us — a family (corporation) born (birthed) without love and borne (carried) through great deceit and deception. The state (national district) is the father of its national citizenships.

And now you know why the scoundrels that started the United States were called as its “fathers” (false gods), and why the Bible insists that no man call any other but Jehovah (God) as “father.”

This artificial, national family (incorporation of persons) represents a politically-driven destruction of the recognition and proudness of heritage, family history, and age-old values. It’s what one might call the New World Order (international secularism), where all men identify as fictional (legal) persons and all such fictional persons are property (corporate employees called legally as sons and daughters) of the nation (family corporation).

The false paradigm we call as racism, or what is the modernly naked, left-over, legalistic “race” classifications of the original eugenics movement used without understanding today and therefore without reason or logic behind it, as a recognition of race detached from any actual family (bloodline/heraldic) considerations, being a mostly modern construct created by Darwin’s evolutionary charting of nonsensical traits and size variations of human skulls and intelligence quotients, indeed has an organized, sinister, secular-humanist goal that is not the imaginary, fairy-tail color-blindness promoted through televised hatred and logical fallacy we see and hear all over the “news” and as entertainment on social media. Rather, this so-called racism is a being served up as a deliciously delusional blindness to reality, to the beautiful Truth of Nature, as an institutionalized arrogance and indifference to God’s Design. Race (family) has nothing to do with it, except for the intention to destroy the True meaning of that word race in the minds of men, until it is unrecognizable as a good thing… or even acknowledgeable in public and political forums as a self-evident Truth.

In case you haven’t put the pieces together yet, legal “equality” is the direct opposite of race (family). In other words, equality = incorporation. Equality is necessary to destroy actual race, that is, to destroy the Real (bloodline) family unit, in order to cause all men to identify as legal entities instead of men of God (Nature), as equalized and thus normalized national citizens — artificial sons and daughters (persons) of the nation. This methodical averaging of the brain activity of children is much like the equalizer on a sound board or stereo, where all the frequency quotients can be flattened to the same level of unique output (zero), while certain individually wanted or preferred tones or traits can be notched up to acquire the desired effect. Before certain political groups or classes can be given more rights than all the other equally normalized citizenships, the group as a whole must be made to believe they are equal, even to the point of being required to hide or not to express those differences, be they knowledge or skill-based. Once the population is flattened, only then can a minority group be made to stand out and become unequal. There is no equality without inequity, for without that which is unequal to that which is forcibly declared and entrained to be equal there would be nothing to compare said label of equality to. In other words, to create a middle or lower class there must be a higher class, lest there be nothing to be lower than.

Public school, for instance, teaches all kids equally, so that no one kid can get ahead of the rest without reprimand. One size fits all — though completely and provably a failure of logic — is the delusional paradigm of this modern, humanist pedagogy. Humanism is the false religion of the atheist, the anarchist, the spiritually dead. The big bang is the religion of science. The singularity is the religion of the futurist, who’s spirit is devoid of and opposed to his own Source. Each wants to play god in a different way, and the education system is there to further the cause of this man-as-god mind-set. And through this institutionalization of legal (artificial) equality not of men but of legal, fictional (bloodless) persons in law, the foundation is laid to cause total inequity through such institutions as civil rights, that is, special rights for special groups that suddenly aren’t in any way equal anymore to the rest of the common, legalistic family. And so the values we associate with family (race) now come from the corporation nation, not the traditional values of our True family (race). In the end, the man that through legal personhood accepts artificial, legal equality with another man’s projected legal persona can never again claim God-given, Natural rights. For the source of the legal person is not God, not Nature, and no man may commune with God when acting in a lie, when acting in legal (anti-God) persona (mask). There is only one actual definition of the legal term equality, which is that all persons of the state stand with a required and equal punishment under the law. One that acts in equality instead of in True equity deserves not equity from others, for equity requires moral choice, and acting upon moral choice in the legal (immoral) realm is illegal.

And yet, in what seems a paradox, everywhere you look in Hollywood and its governmentally sponsored and controlled viral outlets of news and entertainment media one can find only the most blatant of race-baiting, and more specifically the demonization of any modicum of “white” racial, that is, cultural ethnicity and identity. Even so-called “white” people are learning to hate themselves for being “white,” though I’ve never actually met a “white person” in my life, since legal persons are only fictions of law. If Hollywood is to be believed in its re-writing and revisionist defeat of actual history through entertainment, it was the “black” people that freed the slaves, and “white” slavery didn’t even exist, let alone the modern black-on-black slave trade in Africa and the sex-trafficking of every skin-color happening right now.

Again, racism isn’t in dictionaries before the 1900’s. Why? Because before this artificial construct of racism there was only race. You see, race means family. Bloodlines, not skin color. That which was traditionally racially-motivated was in fact family-motivated. Corporations and/or governments (States) were historically created to protect the prosperity of bloodlines of families, their family (racial) inheritance, which by their very design in Nature are, as a generalization, often similar in skin-color. Race is indeed a generic term until it is purposefully, intentionally applied to some thing.

Webster defined it as it was in 1828:

RACE – noun – [Latin radix and radius having the same original. This word coincides in origin with rod, ray, radiate, etc.] 1. The lineage of a family, or continued series of descendants from a parent who is called the stock. A race is the series of descendants indefinitely. Thus all mankind are called the race of Adam; the Israelites are of the race of Abraham and Jacob. Thus we speak of a race of kings, the race of Clovis or Charlemagne; a race of nobles, etc. Hence the long race of Alban fathers come. 2. A generation; a family of descendants. A race of youthful and unhandled colts. 3. A particular breed; as a race of mules; a race of horses; a race of sheep. Of such a race no matter who is king. 4. A root; as race-ginger, ginger in the root or not pulverized. 5. A particular strength or taste of wine; a kind of tartness… (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

RACISM/RACIST – ??? – Sorry, those terms haven’t been created by the communists yet.

—=—

Should we stop referring to the color of a “Yellow Lab” because the “Black Lab” might be offended by the Truth of the color of its fur?

Should we stop distinguishing bell peppers by their color because they all taste the same?

Racism is not specifically defined in this 1828 dictionary because in the minds of men of old there was no such thing. There was only family, cousins, genealogy, heraldry, and the fact that whole countries and cultures were set up (incorporated) and based therefore on these blood-based “family values” across the world. And they still are. America was certainly no exception to this rule, though perhaps the first family to be intentionally overcome (planned) by its own immigration policies in order to create the notion of a new global world (secular humanist) order. It is certainly not a “racist” action to attempt to protect ones own moral fabric of society created from the like-mindedness of a family (race) of men from the influence and degradation caused by the acceptance and toleration of different races (family bloodlines) that have differing or even completely opposing family values, religious notions, and moral codes. Yet to call men of moral character based on such racial (family) tradition as “racist,” that is, those that wish to preserve the very ideals of the foundation and reason behind the original forming of a political body (State), can only be labeled as exactly what it is — intolerance. Today’s modern construct of so-called “racism” is a weapon of purely political motivation, used vehemently and ironically without prejudice to foment the intolerance of Real family so as to make the “State” the father, the head of the corporation (artificial, surrogate, legal family), and especially the destruction of such traditional family (race-based) values. To destroy a society, a culture, and ultimately the law and ability of a blood-related private people to enjoy the benefits of family and Natural liberty based on moral, self-Evident Law, one only need to project the active ignorance of Eugenic race bias into the common, dumbed-down population base so that they turn against one another, so that every neighbor is thine enemy, a competitor, and a threat to some empty idol of the god of skin-color and mammon. Ultimately, the goal of the men behind these eugenic ideals is to impose a universal, legally induced (figurative/artificial) persona of corruption of blood in all men regardless of skin-color, or what the constitution calls as “attainder,” and therefore to establish a global citizenship that requires the taking away of liberty and the power to self-govern through surrender to one of many corporation nations (the voluntary taking of the mixed, legal surname over the Christian name to render a legal persona). He that cannot show his bloodline, that his blood is of God (of Nature), of a Real Family (Race) of God, and not the legal state (artificially birth-certified and registered to the district/Caesar), is therefore a slave of the State (fictional creator of legal persons). For persons have no blood, and their creator god is only man’s government. Only through legal persona (mask/status) can we all be made into the humanistic race of adam, banned from the Garden and doomed to suffer the wrath of disobeying the Law of Nature (God). The word adam in the Bible translates to mankind, by the way, or in other words all men not spiritually free of the world (artificial construct) of man’s design. Adam (mankind) is man fallen, those entrapped in the anti-God legal matrix. The story of Adam as a singular man is a personification of all men, personification being the only way to tell such a story of moral teaching. We are all acting as adam did, biting into the apple (fig) of artificial knowledge (information), the concepts, lies, and inventions of man that go against the Law and Design of Nature (God). The metaphor is beautiful and instructive when read correctly and applied to oneself.

But the race-baiting politicians and other deceitful entertainers (professional, paid liars) seek to divide so as to conquer, to oppose all moral Law, and to cause you to do the same. To do this, all that might disagree must be labeled as racist, just like Lenin intended the fallacious title to be used. And finally, when each “side” of the now equalized debt-slaves are too afraid to speak, and when our hatred of each side is the guiding principal behind policy and entertainment, then the laws of forced equality can be made firm, and we all become like a deranged triangle, where each side blames the other for the shape we are in though never actually seeing any side but ones own.

Yet all the sides of a triangle are equal, aren’t they?

The point is not to bring us together, but to force us together when such a disposition is impossible in Nature. This constant recreation of forced turmoil by folding the different cultural and often opposing laws and religious moral foundations is the total opposite of what the Bible instructs. We are supposed to leave Babylon, not force it into legal existence, and certainly not to tolerate such destruction of our moral, foundational heritage and counterbalancing, spiritual Law. We are supposed to preserve and enforce the Moral Law, not allow it to be mixed and tainted by other cultural, legal, and religious influences. But hey, such moral reactions would be labeled fallaciously as “racist” in these strange days.

—=—

“You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump’s supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? [Laughter/applause]. The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic — you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that…”

–Hillary Clinton

—=—

Intolerance is tolerance…

Should the average “American” be tolerable to these flattering titles of opposing lifestyles, as that which absolutely defeats and opposes the moral (unwritten) standard of conduct? If so, then what use is it to have a country and law in the first place? What is a country created for but to ensure a like-minded people sharing a system of law and culture exclusive of all other lifestyles and systems be protected in that moral belief system? Should the foundation of Bible Law as common law be forgotten or ignored to make room for a completely different and opposing system of law and religion, just so the appearance of intolerance can be pretended not to exist in the minds of “American” men? And come to think of it, what country, state, or nation in the history of the world has ever not been xenophobic or consequently been destroyed by its sudden tolerance of outside political and religious influence? Wikipedia explains that xenophobia is:

“…the fear and distrust of that which is perceived to be foreign or strange.[1][2] Xenophobia can involve perceptions of an ingroup towards an outgroup and can manifest itself in suspicion of the activities of others, and a desire to eliminate their presence to secure a presumed purity and may relate to a fear of losing national, ethnic, religious, linguistic, cultural, social class or racial identity.[3]…”

—=—

Isn’t that the purpose of starting an organized structure of society? Isn’t that the purpose of creating a corporation, its bylaws, and its leaders? In other words, isn’t every country, every tribe, every “people,” and for that matter every family (race) by default steeped in xenophobia? Can a race exist without racism? In other words, can race exist without being prideful and proud of what that race (family) is specifically because it is different than all others? Can one man call another man a racist without acknowledging the fact that his idea of racism stems from being a different race than he that he calls as racist? Can we really deny the existence of race so as to not appear to be racist, when the Truth of the matter is that we cannot help or quit being of a race (family) in the first place? Do you believe that the denial of the existence of race somehow alters the fact that we are all of different races (families/bloodlines)? Do you not see the trickery here? Do you not see the social engineering being foisted upon you so that you have no power to defend yourself as part of a race (family), and therefore have no power to act morally or from the Moral Law of Nature, because you can no longer identify with your own family (race) values? Do you not see that this is all designed to steal your soul away from Nature, away from your Source?

For better or worse, all of these constructs, from countries to religions, are artificial families (corporations) that have instilled their own artificial (legally derived) family values as law from the actual family (race) that started them. Only tolerance of the intolerable, those that act purposefully against the founding family (race) values, can destroy the country. And the greatest tool to manage such a hostile takeover is the good old manipulation of Christian tolerance. Not balanced, educated tolerance with all other virtues, but the artificial kind that is enforced by legal law — the kind that has allowed countless opposing religions and legal systems to be legally protected by government as they attempt to destroy and change the entire structure of law, religion, and family (race) values that made America what it is. Good or bad, right or wrong, whatever all countries around the world have become, their strengths and weaknesses, are solely to be blamed on the race (family) that created and continues to sustain them. If the race (family) is driven out of its own creation, the country no longer exists except in empty name only.

Now riddle me this… What country in history was not built on a distrust and fear of other cultures? What country is ever not foreign to another? There simply is no such thing as a non-foriegn country. And it is a much quoted subject that the man or country of men without fear of interference is certain to fail, and will ultimately be assimilated into another in just a few short generations. In other words, a People (family) that tolerates another way of life and law must necessarily lose their own, for two opposing forces must, by their nature, repel each other. If this isn’t clear, try pushing two magnets together the wrong way. They must be forced together, and the repulsion will never actually cease, and so neither can the executive military force behind it. We must be bound by the invisible chains of legalistic law in order to merge all cultures, all systems of law and religion into one global society, one soulless, bloodless family of the fallen adamites. This is like blowing up a balloon past its elastic capacity, knowing it will explode from the pressure of being forced to accept more than it can tolerate. I guess the balloon is therefore racist against certain air? Those enforcing this artificial tolerance know exactly what the result will be, and the United Nations was set up to govern the madness and spiritually dead order out of chaos they are instilling.

I want you to really consider this statement by the former first lady (of the Royal American bloodline) for a moment. More to the point, consider its holier-than-thou source. Hillary Clinton is part of the royal family, that is, the bloodlines of European nobility and kings, just as her husband (cousin) is, and just as every president and vice-president that has ever been placed by congress into the United States corporation is. In other words, Clinton’s power is a direct result of her race, her “white-blooded” (pure) family line, which by her own choice of words makes her the most “racist” figure in that room! What are the queens and kings of Europe if not one big, unhappy family (race)? And what are all of us to them if not tolerated, deplorable goyim?

The following are all a single race (family bloodline). They are not different races, only different corporations held under the same family estate. And, like the United States, they are all organized by a constitution. Constitutions are a dime a dozen, sorry… And they’re all hereditary in their lines of succession, or in other words, it’s all in the family (race). There are no heirs if there is no race (family). You really have to be a fool to believe that the United States president is not also in actuality another family minion upon this list. Trump is as “white” as they come, because in their world, the word white means a pure-blooded royal descendent of the kings of the following kingdoms:

State
Type
Succession
Dynasty
Title
First-in-line
 Kingdom
of Belgium
Constitution
Hereditary
Saxe-
Coburg and Gotha
King
Prince Philippe of Belgium, Duke of Brabant cropped.jpg
Heir apparent: Princess Elisabeth, Duchess of Brabant (eldest child)
Denmark Kingdom
of Denmark
Constitution
Hereditary
Glücksburg
Queen
Dronning Margrethe II (crop).jpg
Heir apparent: Crown Prince Frederik(eldest child)
 Principality
of Liechtenstein
Constitution
Hereditary
Liechten-stein
Sov. Prince
Fürst Hans-Adam II. von und zu Liechtenstein.jpg
Heir apparent: Hereditary Prince Alois (eldest son)
 Grand Duchy
of Luxembourg
Constitution
Hereditary
Bourbon
Grand Duke
Henri of Luxembourg in Brazil 28Nov07.JPG
Heir apparent: Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume (eldest child)
 Principality
of Monaco
Constitution
Hereditary
Grimaldi
Sov. Prince
Albert II Monaco (2008).jpg
Heir apparent: Hereditary Prince Jacques (only legitimate son)
 Kingdom of
the Netherlands
Constitution
Hereditary
Orange-Nassau/
Amsberg
King
Koning-willem-alexander-okt-15-s.jpg
Heir apparent: Princess Catharina-Amalia, Princess of Orange (eldest child)
 Kingdom of Norway
Constitution
Hereditary
Glücksburg
King
President Medvedev with King Harald V of Norway big225593 (crop).jpg
Heir apparent: Crown Prince Haakon (only son)
 Kingdom of Spain
Constitution
Hereditary
Bourbon
King
Felipe de Borbón en Ecuador.jpg
Heir presumptive: Princess Leonor, Princess of Asturias (elder daughter) [II]
 Kingdom of Sweden
Constitution
Hereditary
Bernadotte
King
Carl XVI Gustaf.jpg
Heir apparent: Crown Princess Victoria (eldest child)
 United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Constitution
Hereditary
Windsor
Queen
Elizabeth II greets NASA GSFC employees, May 8, 2007 edit.jpg
Heir apparent: Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (eldest son)

—=—

Yes, those subjects of royalty also have a constitution, you know, that thing you as a national citizenship as a status (property) created by congress has been tricked into worshiping even though it has nothing to do with you under that common, lower-class status of denizened personhood? But they are at least smart enough on some level not to worship that constitution as anything but what it is, a form of idolatrous worship of false gods mediated by magical, legal terms of art to give the appearance of some pretended state of independence, while keeping intact the “royal prerogative” and war powers of the king and queen (head of church and state) of the Crown Corporation and its realms of debt-slaves. Even some Canadians actually think they (as subjects) are not under the power of the queen, that the corporation of “Canada” is not part of that royal corporation sole ruled under the Crown. They at least know, if even in doubt of their own disposition, that they are subjects of a sovereign corporation headed by a false god (king/queen/prince). In America, though as a nation it clearly and openly calls itself sovereign under the law of nations and refers to we the common citizenships as its subjects and customers, we somehow have instilled in ourselves a false-sense of artificial detachment, of freedom from tyranny. We are like a single goldfish in a bowl that believes itself to be somehow sovereign from the man that feeds us and changes our piss and shit-filled water, without whom we would suffocate in our own excrement. We lie to ourselves and teach those unreasonable lies to our children without question, and as children we believe our own lies even after we grow out of most other childhood fantasies. We figure out that Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny aren’t real, but continue to fool ourselves that we are a naturally free people even as we use and claim the protection of the legal property (status in personhood) of the United States government and pay its tax (tribute to Caesar). God created men. Governments create persons. Big difference!

Perhaps you have forgotten or been brainwashed out of knowing what some of these words actually mean?

HEIR-APPARENT – noun – The man who, during the life of his ancestor, is entitled to succeed to his estate or crown. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

HEREDITARY – adjective –  1. That has descended from an ancestor. He is in possession of a large hereditary estate. 2. That may descend from an ancestor to an heir; descendible to an heir at law. The crown of Great Britain is hereditary. 3. That is or may be transmitted from a parent to a child; as hereditary pride; hereditary bravery; hereditary disease. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

PRINCE – noun – prins. [Latin princeps.] 1. In a general sense, a sovereign; the chief and independent ruler of a nation or state. Thus when we speak of the princes of Europe, we include emperors and kings. Hence, a chief in general; as a prince of the celestial host. 2. A sovereign in a certain territory; one who has the government of a particular state or territory, but holds of a superior to whom he owes certain services; as the princes of the German states. 3. The son of a king or emperor, or the issue of a royal family; as princes of the blood. In England, the eldest son of the king is created prince of Wales… (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

—=—

If the prince (or president) is a sovereign, and you are its subject, then you are not sovereign.

Worst of all, you have either forgotten or choose to remain actively ignorant of the fact that the sovereign royalty of America is of the same bloodlines (family) as the royalty of these European rulers. You choose to casually ignore the most race-oriented regime of corporations (nations) in the world, in all of history, the royal houses that lay claim to most of the (secular) world. You pretend that elections are fair, and that just anyone, from any race/family (bloodline) can become president. And nowadays, with such horrific race-baiting being pushed in all forms of entertainment and media, you are being entrained to believe in the fallacy that only “white” skinned people are in power. In other words, in stead of realizing the truth about the completely race-orientated royal bloodlines (families) that rule every nation, we are all being tricked into blaming all problems created by those exclusive (actual racist) bloodlines (presidents, vice-presidents, congress, corporate CEO’s, etc.) on the color of skin, completely missing the actual problem that is the respect of such royal (uncorrupted) bloodlines. All blood in reality is red when it’s visible to the Truth of the open air without legal (anti-God) consideration, not white or black. We are ruled by one race (foreign family) of men (heirs) according to heraldic, genealogical heritage, and we don’t even know it’s happening. Instead, this family of absolutely corrupt “royals” confuses and obfuscates from this reality by convincing the black people that its all the white people’s fault, the brown people that its all the yellow people’s fault, and the white people that its every other color’s fault. But the Truth is that none of this has anything to do with skin-color and everything to do with the actual meaning of the word “race.” Race is not determined by skin color, but by bloodline (family). “We, the People” is not us, white or black. It is a select bloodline, a family of men enjoined and working together to suppress, control, and extort in every way imaginable the rest of the common population of Earth. And that includes all skin-colors, with no regard to race (family). In fact, the whole idea and purpose of national citizenship is to pretend destruction, that is, legal corruption (attainder) of the blood and therefore bloodline and blood-rights of all other men not in the so-called royal family. No blood, no God-given rights, for they are inherent only to free men, not subjects in false persona (national citizenships).

Perhaps you’ve never considered that there is no such thing as a “people” in Nature? There was no people of England until it was invented. There were no Americans until America was legally created. All so-called people (a legal title) are inventions of men. And so any incorporation of “people” that supposedly exists is necessarily a fraud, illegitimate, and certainly not a Creation of Nature (God). Perhaps you never thought to ask the question as a United States citizenship just who “We, the People” actually is? Perhaps you’ve never realized that a subject of the United States is therefore a subject of whomever “We, the People” happen to be? Trust me, you would know if you were one of them, that is, one of their race (bloodline), for you would be declaring such racism in order to be part of that elite (upper-class) band of race-driven rulers of the rest of us.

To be clear, this is the epitome of True racism, and is, in fact, the only Real racism that exists in the world. It’s called royalty. Nobility. Heraldry. Genealogy. Elitism. The upper-class. And only they are considered as “white” because the meaning of this word white in legalese refers to the purity of blood as it relates only to the royal, inheritable (family) bloodline and therefore the line of blood-right succession, not skin color. Again, I tell you that Barack Obama is “white” according to legal law, being a direct descendent of the Royal family (race), as are most “black” skinned actors and politicians that are of that bloodline. You think Hally Barry isn’t considered “white” ??? LOL! Every one of them is in line for the throne, down to the last and most distant legitimately blood-linked cousin. In other words, to be a member (cousin) of the “legitimate” royal family (bloodline) is to stand as an inheritor of the corporations created by them, which they call as their kingdoms. As a common citizen of any nation, no man is actually considered as a “white” man, for the very conception of citizenship to a nation requires the forfeiture and attainder of such consideration by blood-right (God-given rights) in exchange for legal (artificial) rights. The goal is to turn all men of all races not royal unto the identity of legal persons (fictions without blood).

This modern conceptualization of racism is designed to do one and only one thing — to destroy the family unit, and therefore to destroy what is known as family values. But this sinister effort is only designed for the common citizenships of nations. The royal families exist behind the scenes, hidden beyond the corporate administrative state set up to control the plebes. Even today the queen of England pretends to be honorary, ceremonial, and not in charge of the “constitutional monarchy” that is the United Kingdom and Union. The further out of sight the hidden royal hand can exist, the more powerful it becomes.

We have no idea what it means anymore when we see signs that point to “private land” or a “private road” ahead, only that we are not supposed to go there. We only know that we would be trespassing if we did. Yet we have no idea that such a sign represents a different jurisdiction, a different realm of landholding bloodline families. We only know that we are not part of that family. And we treat that invisible border across that private land the same way we treat the US border, respecting that what lies beyond is unwelcoming, foreign territory we need permission to tread upon.

The very definition of an individual estate, country, nation, or state is that it’s foreign to all others. All 50 States are foreign to the United States (the district of Washington/New Columbia). Again, in this word foreign we garner that the law is private and strict, and therefore totally intolerant of any other culture or law — intolerant, in other words, of any other People (State) except by contract (constitution/compact/treaty, etc.). This is, for all intents and purposes, the way of the world in every country, culture, and creed (belief system). They that create a State (incorporated, private/foreign People) are always, without exception, a bloodline (family) of men. The formation of a nation is by definition the formation of an ethnicity, the creation of a new artificial “race” (legal family/corporation) of men separate and foreign to what we call as the human race. Man is not human. What is human is that which belongs to men, such as the human anatomy. Humans are not creations of God, of Nature, for the word human is manmade, a scientific classification no different that equine, feline, or canine. To be human is to be the property of man, not a man. To be referred to as a human is to be considered only as an animal, or in other words and by their own definition, as that which has no soul, a thing without self-anima, a thing without (outside of) God’s Realm and Law. The human soul does not belong to a human, it belongs to a man. What is of man is a human quality, but no man is human. To be a “human being” is to act in humanism. To be a man is to be a Creation of God. Human is only ever a property (quality/trait) of man, never the actual man. A People is never a man, for to be part of a people is to be something artificial, something that is invented by and therefore belongs to man, not God. No man is a people, for the word people is a plural. To be part of a people is to no longer be a man of God. This distinction is the foundation of the difference between moral and civil law. Civil law is for people, while moral law is only for men. The moral law must always be held higher, by all men, than that of the legal, civil law of any people he may be voluntarily a part of. It is this distinction, this protective cloak of spiritual, moral Law that has been lost to God’s people. When the foundation of anything fails, the super-structure built upon it must also, self-evidently fall. This is a maxim of law.

The funny thing is that when a person (subject) of the United States is sued, we get a letter from “the People of” whatever State that court is in. We, whom aren’t the people, know without question that we aren’t the people simply because we are sued by the people. The people don’t sue the people, because the people is a single, legal corporation. There is only one people, and it obviously ain’t us. This gets confusing because the general term “people” is used to describe us, as the common people. But the People in the constitution is only referring to the incorporation of that specific “white” the race (bloodline family) as a specific, exclusive “People” (capitalized), not the common goyim.

This private, non-ethnic status of royal privilege, by definition, requires a certain “purity” of blood, in heraldic and genealogical terms of construction. No State (People) exists without this racial (family) background in the world. This is why traditionally we would expect to see Japanese looking people in Japan, Chinese looking people in China, and Scandinavian looking people in the Scandinavian countries. This is not vulgar racism as is promoted to common goyim. This is the True meaning of race. Without race (family), one has no State (private People). And without a private People (State), one has no reason to track and keep record of pure (white) blood. And this is the very opposite of national (mixed) ethnicity (national identity). For the royal families of Africa and Thailand, I assure you, have white (pure) blood despite their dark complexion according to their heraldic records. Pure blood, of course, doesn’t actually exist. It merely refers to the active recording of genealogical records in heraldry, no different than any corporation is structured to reflect a president, vice president, and all the line of succession by blood relation. To be clear, I know no man that does not seek to pass on his inheritance to his bloodline child (issue). In other words, you are equally as guilty of invoking this false, proprietary lineage as any royal. Only the scope and size of the commercial transaction of inheritance is different. In this way, we must acknowledge the fact that we are all in fact racist, which ultimately means nothing at all in Nature (Reality), only that we wish the best for our own children (family bloodline).

But you must understand the difference between your status as a national citizenship (commercial vessel) and those private, royal rulers of that persona (property). You have been tricked and continuously brainwashed into believing that your family is the nation (corporation) you were born into. And you identify your race by that nation. There is no such think as Japan or China or Mexico in Nature. These are corporations created by private families (races). Ethnicity is simply not what you believe it to be. Ethnicity can only be understood from the perspective of master and slave. If you ask a slave what slave-master’s estate he belongs to, he would tell you the family name of his master. So too does a citizenship of any nation identify his origin by the nation he was birthed (registered/taxed) into. And so, to us, it seems perfectly reasonable to identify ourselves as “Americans” or as “Englishmen” or as “African.” This is no different than saying I am an employee (agent) of “Walmart” or “Target” corporation. A nation is an artificial construct, a fake family (race), made solely of persons (fictional characters). The fact that you have been entrained to identify yourself by your ethnicity (nationally spoken language) is a cosmic joke, for the whole reason behind such identity (pretended sameness as fiction) is to taint your bloodline (family), to take you out of Nature and place you in attainder (corruption of blood) so that you can and must be governed by the governments (mind control) of nations. Yet, as I’ve written about extensively, these royal families (races) are not of the nations. They created the nations as holding companies for we, their debt-enslaved goyim. They are private (foreign) and sovereign from all nations. Most importantly, to identify yourself by ethnicity is to remove yourself from God (Nature). It is to cause you to deny God as your Source of Existence and Law, and thus cause you to worship false idols and gods (magistrates). I am not American, I am of the Universe (Jehovah). But to the royal families (race), we are all just one color, the color of corruption, which is the color of heathens. We are all the color black to them…

ETHNOLOGY – noun – [Gr. nation, and discourse.] A treatise on nations. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

ETHNICAL – adjective – [Latin ethnicus; Gr. from nation from the root of G. heide, heath, woods, whence heathen. See Heathen.] Heathen; pagan; pertaining to the gentiles or nations not converted to christianity; opposed to Jewish and Christian. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

ETHNIC – noun – A heathen; a pagan. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

ETHNICISM – noun – Heathenism; paganism; idolatry. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

HEATHEN – noun – [Gr. from heath, that is, one who lives in the country or woods, as pagan from pagus, a village.] 1. A pagan; a Gentile; one who worships idols, or is unacquainted with the true God. In the Scriptures, the word seems to comprehend all nations except the Jews or Israelites, as they were all strangers to the true religion, and all addicted to idolatry. The word may now be applied perhaps to all nations, except to Christians and Mohammedans. Heathen, without the plural termination, is used plurally or collectively, for Gentiles or heathen nations. Ask of me, and I will give thee the heathen for thine inheritance. Psalms 2:8. Heathen, however, has a plural, expressing two or more individuals. If men have reason to be heathens in Japan– The precepts and examples of the ancient heathens. 2. A rude, illiterate, barbarous person. – adjective – Gentile, pagan; as a heathen author. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary Of The English Language)

—=—

The reference to Christians above is not a reference to the false denominations of corporate, legalist religions set up by the state to deceive and distract you from the True meaning of God and the Bible, but is a title placed on those that cannot and will not become part of the nations of men because they choose to follow only the Law of God, not men. These are the True followers of Christ, who understand that Christ is the Law (Word) of God, not a mere idol to worship as a false god. To be called a “Christian” while at the same time be called a citizen of any nation is to be exactly the fool they want us all to be, having two flattering titles that are diametrically opposed to one another, representing two completely opposing systems of law. This is how to create chaos, and then construct a legal, secular system of order from it.

So that this concept of bloodline as race is clear, please consider that the current, hereditarily acquired “black-skinned” kings of the kingdoms of Morocco, Eswatini, and Lesotho in Africa are by their very assent to the thrown racist. They are in power because of their bloodline (race), which must be understood to be legally considered as “white” in legal (artificial) color, meaning pure-bred from their own royal race (People/family) that reigned before them. And waiting in the wings are eager, blood-related men seeking to take that throne away from their brother, sister, father, or cousin. Race is power. Racial discrimination is the center of that power, and is the very difference between common, national citizenships and the People (State) that rules over them. Without race, there would be no countries, no kingdoms.

Just what do you think Game Of Thrones is about, anyway?

(Hint: In that show, those are cousins having sex with and entering into arranged marriages with direct, pure bloodline cousins to carry on the “royal” pretended-to-be-legitimate line of succession, and killing each other in order to claim hereditary blood-right as heir-apparent to those various, interrelated thrones, as head of those corporations. It’s a fictional show about the actual fiction of pretended royal families that still rule over us corrupted, tainted-blood commoners today. It’s all part of training you to remain under the illusionary power and control of their self-proclaimed superior race, by fictionalizing and pretending such things don’t actually exist anymore, not since dragons roamed the earth. And unicorns. Corporations are ruthless… because it’s always been all in the family. Royalty is just a sophisticated mafia family, organized crime under the guise of the magic and trickery that is rebranded as the prestige of royal blood.)

Now, where does this leave the race-baiting meme of so-called “white” privilege?

Imagine if I went to Japan and entered a Japanese family’s house (a term that means family or race) and exclaimed that they have “red privilege.” Or how about I go to Iran and claim that those families of the same race have “brown privilege.” How about the “yellow privilege” of the main families in China? Yet we have been entrained to accept that the people of Denmark and America have “white privilege” despite every other imagined colored race in the world. Meanwhile, we are all being extorted and seriously screwed over in so many ways by the only actual race of “People” that are still able to claim their bloodline (family/race) as the private founding families of the States (People) united. They’ve made us equal in our enslavement with the right hand while using the left hand to focus our attention on each other instead of the Source of our collective despotism, which we have been fooled into thinking is the price of freedom. And now, by turning this non-existent concept of racism into a so-called legal “hate-crime,” we now have the veritable legal tool to cause each other harm by turning this fallacy of race (family) into a dirty word, and by punishing anyone that acknowledges it. Again, this is the only way we can be governed legally, if we do harm and injure (bring into false, legal law) each other for non-crimes that are legally (artificially) imposed on nonsensical terms like “racist” hate crimes.

How do you destroy a People, a family, that bases its society on “family values?”

You do exactly what these royal bloodlines have done to us — destroy the ability of men to claim to be part of a family. If you take away race (family) from a man, you necessarily take away his ability to practice in action any form of family (race) values. And in their place, we must be convinced to voluntarily accept and thus tolerate all that is opposed to and that is actively-at-war-with our family (race), leaving us defenseless (without the ability to bear heraldic Arms of our families) against the legal matrix simulation. War and peace have no distinction, for either way the commerce of the gods of mammon shall be done. Amen. War is a very profitable commercial transaction, with instant rewards. Peace just takes a little longer to reach such profit levels.

Since the True meanings of these words have been lost on most of us as we are entertained and entranced with lies and propaganda about how we are all racist and shameful even though we are all considered legally (artificially) equal under the law as tainted, blood-corrupted debt-slaves, regardless of skin-color, we fail to recognize the difference between a nation (commercial corporation) and a State (private, incorporated People). Many of us call ourselves as “Christians” but are “unacquainted with the True God” because corporate religion is merely empty idol worship – the worship of the form of symbols, statues, heroes, saviors, fictional personas, flattering titles, and saints without substance, without actually obeying the Law of God, that is, without ever being or becoming Christ-like as instructed. This is (we are) what they of the private, royal bloodlines (race) call as heathenism, paganism, the lower class of goyim. Those that are citizenships in any nation (corporation) can only be gentiles, for they (we) follow the legal law above and most often against that of the Law of Nature (God’s Law/Word). This is not religion, this is law. This is the way the legal system works, causing voluntary attainder (legal, fictional corruption of blood), which causes class division, as those who claim blood-right (the right to Bear family Arms) and those who have rescinded that right in order to accept replacement legal rights granted and enforced by the still lawfully recognized families (races). This is every nation. The actual pre-modern Jews, as mentioned here, had no nation, which is why they were a free people and, having no nation, were called “the international jew.” The nation of Israel, unlawful and illegitimate as it is, is not full of Jews, it is full of goyim that call themselves as “Jews” just as this supposedly Christian nation of America is full of goyim that call themselves as “Christians.” No follower of Christ (God’s Law) would take a false god or its false legal (e.g. civil) law (doctrine) above that of the Law of Nature (God). In fact, that is the very aspect that confirms one is a True follower of Christ, one that in his or her actions is Christ-like, and therefore in all ways intolerable to the legal systems and nation of men acting in legal persona (anti-God). Likewise, the Native American Indian tribes and other aboriginal free peoples were never conquered (purchased) until they agreed to become “nations” instead of free tribes. To be an Indian nation is to abandon the Indian culture and life to become just another ethnic class of lower-class goyim (heathen gentiles). The citizenships of Israel today, as well, are persons of the nation, not free men of and under God. They have fallen for the oldest trick in the book, thinking that being a member of the so-called “Jewish” nation of Israel (a legal corporation) is synonymous with being and acting like Israelite from the Bible. It is the same with the “Cristians” that believe that being a follower of Christ (God’s Law) is the same as being a member of a “Christian” nation or false, legally derived religion (corporation). A nation is the perfect example of Orwell’s meme that freedom is slavery, as all men enjoined in citizenship to any nation are its debt-slaves, free to choose their mode of employment (being used) as a commodity in a neo-feudalistic human capital management system (capitalism). The point is that every nation is run by some bloodline of men, some hereditarily conjoined club of “royal” (upper-class) rulers that remain private (foreign) from that nation in their own State (private People). In other words, we are all ruled by tolerated racism.

You can say it till you’re red in the face, but the statistics always paint a different picture…

Racism is a lie told to those not of the royal, master race,
in order to hide their own institutionalized, millennium-old heredity-based racism, by focusing all goyim on a war between cultural differences, which are falsely attributed to skin-color so as to keep us busy fighting each other instead of they that enslave us.

The truth is that every one of us are equal, that is, equally under their spell…

They look like us, but once you see these royal “families” for what they are, you realize that the lie of cultural, ethnic racism is only skin deep. Black or white, or anywhere in between, we are all trapped in the lower, vulgar class they created for us, for all of our blood has been turned black, our True Nature tainted, our souls corrupted. It is amusing to think of a white slave and a black slave arguing over who is more enslaved, using only skin-color to determine what is otherwise self-evident. For Orwell seems to have shortened one of his equative, dystopian maxims…

Equality is Slavery. Slavery is Freedom. Freedom is equality. Repeat.

If equality is slavery and slavery is freedom, then freedom is slavery.
It’s simple math.

And what is equality but forced tolerance?

And what is forced tolerance but institutionalized intolerance of any individual cultural strength and unity, a culture of cultural hate?

Still don’t get it?

This cultural neutering, the making impotent of cultural custom through equalization, is the same as allowing the common people to worship (think about) God however they see fit, but never to actually act on the moral law that scriptures teach. In other words, it is literally illegal to practice moral law.

You cannot be Christian (a follower of Christ/God’s Law) and also be under an opposing, legal system of law (false doctrine/law). A Christian, by definition, cannot tolerate anything legal (man-made law), for legal law is always, 100% opposed to (the undoing of) the Law of Nature (God). One can’t live according to truth (God) at all times and also adhere to the lies of legalism. Likewise, no culture can possibly be tolerable of the influence and immigration of another, especially when the customs and laws are different and opposed to each other.

Legal equality means we are all equally punishable under the legal law, and have no right to use, act under, or invoke the moral law (God). Freedom of religion is intolerable to a man of God, for the Law of Nature never changes. The Law of Nature (God) is not religion. Religion is part of man’s creation, not God’s.

And once you see them for what they are, you suddenly lose all tolerance and respect for them. Only the law they created to control us, to cause us to harm one another instead of loving each other — only the delusion of their artifice of esteem and legal, class-based status protects them from us… only the illusion they cast:

–=–

You want proof of our equality, that poverty and despotism is colorblind, then go to your local homeless shelter. Go to your local tent city. Go to your local food locker. See the equality oozing from the disenfranchised and start doing something to change it. Or are you too good for that lower class… kinda like they are too good for your class? Go tell those “white” people that they have “white” privilege and see what happens!

These bodies politic (incorporated “People”) were created not as legal entities but as a stock of people related by blood. Their created nations are designed to hold not their own stock, but the common live-stock of we gentiles (goyim), that is, we that are born into the heathen, idolatrous nations. Have we forgotten that the very concept of the various immigration policies of every country in the world are based on race (family) connection to that people (State)? Are we just going to ignore that the whole purpose of the war and creation of modern Israel was for the sole purpose of created a homeland for “Jews” and that this means that Palestinians (Arabs) therefore were displaced because of their “race” and ethnicity, as a bloodline not considered “Jewish” and therefore supposedly impure (not white, not pure-blooded, not uncorrupted)? Are we supposed to reconsider what it is to be “Mexican” or “English” or “Indian” because that is now a racist title, let alone not be allowed to consider that many diseases are exclusive to certain races (bloodlines)? Should all True cultures be vanquished to make room for… Ah, globalism. Now it’s starting to make sense. Global dystopia, Orwellian style. United Nations are really just united goy – one big melting pot of Godless heathens without any foundation of family values living without any natural moral compass.

What happens when, instead of being a natural (uncontrollable) occurrence and inevitably natural (God-given) order of species, the word race is used instead as a shallow excuse for illicit, bad behavior? What happens when moral men cannot defend what they have built, both physically and spiritually, to protect themselves from immoral men of either the same or a different race if they (we) are forced to tolerate everything that is intolerable and opposed to the continued survival and success of the fruit of their combined labors? What happens when one can no longer be effective in ones communication when even his words are considered as racist, sexist, or intolerable merely because they have a masculine, authoritative tone behind them? The answer to these questions is apparent in most nations today, not the least of which are the North American ones.

For the first time in history, the concept of race (bloodline and recorded familial genealogy) is being treated as an evil, as if racial differences both cultural and genetic simply don’t exist… except, that is, for the “royal” families This cultural neutering must be accompanied by national and now global tolerance, not only of cultural differences but specifically of absolutely opposing laws, until no moral (unwritten) law or notion of public decency is left. In other words, the only people left over, those that are not tolerated by this newly conditioned society of universal tolerance, are those that espouse any form of moral outrage, moral law, or other values that infringe upon the legal “human” rights of the most immoral of men. Our right to possess and exhibit a moral character in society will not be tolerated. Morality is racism. Family values are akin to xenophobia. Spirituality is a thought crime. Equality is artificially induced by legal law at birth, not by knowledge or actions. Solidarity in tolerance requires intolerance of all dissent, of all freedom of thought, and of all respect for difference. Tolerance is active ignorance of what should by all rights not be tolerated. And we are experiencing these facts in everything from music, art, and media to the corruption of medical, scientific, and intellectualist Babel that is killing and maiming us in droves every day.

Here’s Michael Moore, whose own American immigrant genealogy includes a forefather that was a white slave brought to America from a European prison, speaking in absolute lunacy about whatever he is pretending to perceive “the white guy” and “white men” to be. We are being indoctrinated by these societal-actors to hate ourselves, to become intolerable towards our own people, our own rich history, and to revision ourselves as oppressors instead of being equally oppressed as all other men, and regardless of the color of our skin. This is the ultimate example of profiteering off of race-baiting, a well-orchestrated deceit used by those in power to keep it in the family (bloodline). And perhaps most disturbing is the audience response!

—=—

The promotion of “racism” is nothing if not the induction of men into a culture of self-hatred. As a deleterious label placed on moral men defending their family honor and values, Zionist and other race-driven influencers, propagandists, and race-baiters have proven this fallacious term “racist” in whatever form it is implemented to be an invaluable and destructive weapon that, in the war of public opinion, wins by default every time. Why? Because ignorance is strength, and the public is swimming in a very large and controlled vat of induced, tolerated, active ignorance. If the messenger can be destroyed by such labels as antisemite or racist, then communism in whatever form it dresses up as wins every time. But isn’t that exactly what was portrayed by those screaming crowds of common heathens in Nineteen Eighty-four in their idolatrous worship of their glorious leader (false god)? Do you think worshiping Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump is not idolatry? Of course it is! And its exactly what is expected from we, the goyim.

How does one separate anciently engrained cultures from the races of men that have continuously practiced them, when the very conception of that culture has everything to do with race (bloodline)? The answer is that you can’t, for all cultures and systems of law and religion are unique to race, save that Law which is taught by Jesus Christ. But this law is not one of tolerance or acceptance, but one of privacy, of remaining foreign from men and cultures and nations that are exactly what we have all become, common pagans in idol worship of false gods and followers of other doctrines (i.e. man’s legal systems of law). These cultures cannot be mixed. They are by their nature unique and necessarily exclusive from all others. That which opposes a foundational culture and system of law cannot be integrated together and somehow remain uncorrupted or uninfluenced by the other. The very nature of any culture is assimilation of all others. In other words, one is expected to adapt and follow whatever culture and legal law system he or she emigrates into. But this is only true of the goyim, those that are enslaved by the false freedom (legal franchise) of citizenship to a some nation (corporation), that is, idolatry to a false (legal) god (ruler by blood inheritance). And by definition any and every culture, system of law, and religion is defined by its uniqueness, its intolerance of all others. Without these differences, this foundational, integrated opposition of all cultures to all others, there would be no reason for them to exist, just as there is no purpose for the existence of legal (manmade/written) law except to specifically stand against the moral, spiritual, unwritten Law of Nature (God) as expressed in the Bible and other scriptures (books of spiritual, moral law).

In other words, the goal of universal tolerance is to destroy all culture, all religion, all law, and all spirituality steeped in morality, so as to cause the inception of a singular, completely amoral, intolerable global society called as globalism… a new world (secularist) order. But again, because we have been made actively ignorant of this ancient Latin word secular (translated as the artificial, commercial world of men, not of God, not of Nature), we have no idea how to fight the implementation of this New World Order so often projected in science fiction dystopias like Orwell’s and Huxley’s. Because the Latin word seclorum in the phrase printed on every dollar bill is translated as “world” instead of its actual meaning of “secular,” most folks do not understand that this new world (secular) order is nothing more or less than a total destruction of all spiritual concepts, belief systems, and moral actions (self-government) by men. Because we have lost knowledge of the fact that the Bible is the foundation of common law in America and in the European countries (holders of the ultimate, true “racism” attributed to the genealogically derived royal families and their blood-lines of succession), there is no referential left to us that we may fight this global secularism with that which it is opposed to. Secularism is diametrically opposed to the Bible, or in other words, legalism (written law) is absolutely opposed to the moral, unwritten, Bible Law. In a totally secular order, no spirituality or moral thought or right will be tolerated. This secular toleration of all things anti-moral is the end game of this modern, universal tolerance we are all both passively and actively accepting, acting in, and pretending to love — loving that which we should hate, as the Bible warns we shall time and again in our participation and respect of “worldly” deprivation, leading to our ultimate self-destruction. We are tolerating our own demise. We are at this point tolerating an Orwellian nightmare without even a whimper, for to speak out against tolerance will not be tolerated by the intolerable promoters of universal, secularist tolerance.

You know what I have finally come to understand? It’s a real ballbuster. The truth is that almost every public attack, every so-called hate crime, every theft and every assault, every shooting, public education, blood-sport, assault and murder… these are all racist. Why? Because one generally does not attack and steal from one’s own family.

Acceptance of what is a known evil is surrender from what is self-evidently good.

Tolerance is intolerance.

War is peace because we peacefully tolerate war.

Freedom is slavery because we freely tolerate slavery.

Ignorance is strength because we strongly tolerate ignorance.

Through ignorance, slavery, and war (which are falsely called as knowledge, freedom, and peace) we will be destroyed through our own tolerance of intolerable things, our love of what we should hate, our acceptance of that which we should not accept, our value in that which holds no actual value, until that which we have so long tolerated destroys us through intolerance of good, moral men — just like any host allows a parasite to devour it because the parasite utterly controls the thoughts of the host. The only difference is that we are passively volunteering to be devoured.

One last thing… to those playing the “racist” game, using this term so openly and without reserve to describe all the ills that have befallen you, I want you to stop and consider something for a moment. Perhaps you are being treated exactly how you are treating other men? Perhaps you are experiencing the Law of Nature, that is, that you should expect to be treated as you treat others? Perhaps your problem is that you are just being an asshole and so are being treated like one? And perhaps somewhere along the way you’ve simply mistaken the response of people to your being an asshole with racism? Perhaps your demand for equality would be better taken if, instead of invoking how different you are based on your race by saying others are racist, you actually treated everyone with respect, the way you want to be treated?

Or maybe you’re right… Maybe it is racism that makes you an asshole in the first place.

Either way, isn’t it time to overcome what you now know to be a totally bullshit logical fallacy and start being what you want others to be toward you? Perhaps you can do something about all the bad in your life by invoking the good in yourself and the people around you that you blame for your own disposition? Because, I have to be honest here, every time I hear you claim that racism is the reason for your self-created problems, I can’t help but consider that the only racist in the room is he that claims to be a victim of it. Besides, if you are so proud of your race (family), which you should be, what possible thing can I say or do to change that genealogical bloodline connection? Answer: not a damn thing.

If you want to end what you perceive to be racism, then you will necessarily be required to start behaving in a way that doesn’t invoke culture or race. You will have to give up your cultural heritage and act exactly how those elitist bloodsuckers want you to act… like the rest of us white debt-slaves.

Moral of the story: stop being assholes to each other.

.

–Clint > richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Wednesday, August 14st, 2019

Advertisements

The Plague Of Synthetic, Poisonous, Patentable “Food” Products


Please view and share the work of Camille, who researches and works diligently to provide these kinds of videos for you, and, if you are still undamaged enough to have any will left to take action, as she suggests, the hour is getting pretty damed late.

Is your food real, or is it 3D printed fakery?

Do you even know?

Do you even care?

Her channel for other vids: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_m1HUpNNfkb3x2cv9RrHjQ

.

–Clint > richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Friday, April 19th, 2019

A Parable For In Dependence Day


I’d like to tell you a story…

This year as every new one, on a hot and balmy evening in July, a man sat with his young son upon the balcony of his mansion in the hills overlooking the city. As the darkness of night began to encroach upon the day, the little boy began to get restless, for his yearly experience each 4th of July was quite different from most children, even anti-climatic in a way. From this distance and vantage point way above even the farthest of rockets launched, as the sun was just beginning to set, it appeared that the whole county was ablaze in tiny explosions, a ballet of distant flashes and bangs without the accompanying decibels. One might compare this scene to a war zone, if one had any such experience as that. But alas, as with all elite, such wars and battles are watched from afar.

But oh, how the boy would beg his father each year to take him to watch the fireworks shows up close and personal, only to be denied and silenced with a wisdom that he couldn’t quite fully grasp in these tender years. As the darkness settled and the intensity of each individual household’s shooting of multi-colored rockets into the air increased into a crescendo of non-rhythmic, barely controlled chaos, and as the spectacle of so many participants lit up the sky, the boy knew it was time for his father to speak his wisdom. For his pride was overwhelming, spilling over as he marveled at what he and his alliance of upper-class families had created to control and satiate the masses.

Though he knew the answer, the boy also knew it was time to prime his fathers ego, to ask his leading question not as an inquiry but rather as another actor might read his lines before the other spouts a monologue.

“Father,” said the boy, already knowing the answer to come, “why can’t we go down there some time to watch the fireworks?”

Pausing for only a brief moment, the father reflectively and with great care responded as such:

“Son, We are not like those people down there. We are above them. You will learn this in time. What you are seeing here from the vantage point of this high mountain is the best lesson you can learn in life. If you were down there, amongst the common goyim, you’d be under those explosions, the subject of them, marveling in stupefied awe at their artificial colors and sounds, imbibing on one of the many poisons we provide to them for such occasions. We do not participate in such low, base celebrations or sport. We always watch from afar. For we are the object of their subjection. Now, let me explain again to you exactly what you are seeing here, and every year, as long as we remain unseen high upon our hill, in our higher status and privacy. What you are seeing here is a collective farm of slaves celebrating their perception of freedom. You must never forget this fact. Our ammunitions corporations sell more gunpowder in these late weeks of June and early July than in any other month, and for that matter any other war. Where you see only tiny explosions, I see bright and beautiful dollar signs. We allow them to engage each year in the power and symbolic expression of war without actually destroying anything but their own bank accounts and credit. Their municipal taxpayer funds are squandered while their neighbors and even family members go hungry and homeless and their potholes go unfilled. What you see here are many fools that are more hopelessly enslaved to us than they can ever imagine, and the 4th of July celebration stands as proof of that fact. What you see here before you, son, is absolute control. Through these holidays, we are able to confirm each year as a sort of unspoken census that indeed our power and control over their minds as a collective is absolute, for they go through these same customary motions each year to celebrate the fact that they falsely believe they are free. It is these moments indeed, where the whole multitude can be seen expressing themselves through such ridiculous actions as lighting off gunpowder bombs and rockets, that we know with certainty our control grid remains in place. And the next day they will be back in their suits and ties and causing traffic jams again, just to carry on our agenda and corporate system, as if tonight’s delusion of freedom never even transpired. At this point, my son, they don’t even know why they are doing it. It’s purely a custom with no reason valid behind it. It is for most them just a night of licensed, controlled chaos sold as the loosest form of patriotism. Just as we turned Christmas into a celebration of greed and Passover into a celebration of one of our most addictive drugs, sugar, so too is the meaning and purpose of this night lost on most participants. As long as we can commercialize that which should be worshiped with respect and dignity, they will never wake up to our designs over them. Son, we are sitting here above them tonight not to watch the meaningless lights in the sky, but to witness the spectacle of all these people that can no more see past those lights than they can the shackles around their own necks. You must never be tricked by our own deceits as they are. You must always remain the object of their subjection. You must always be above their customs and fallacious holy-days. They must always be a spectacle for you to behold, and their voluntary participation in such debasing, low behavior must be imagined by them to be a product of their own choice and false beliefs. And for every 4th of July in the future I expect to find you as you are here today, with or without me, high above them, watching them as they celebrate in the darkness of our gunpowder lights, knowing you are their master whether they comprehend it or not. You must always be above them, for they are our sport. Do you understand, son?”

“Yes, father. I understand…” replied the boy unconfidently, fidgeting in place as his overwhelming childish desire to see those fireworks up close and personal still dominated his young passions.

“Now, son,” said the father, “we’ve been watching this non-stop charade patiently for over two hours. And amazingly, it will continue for a few more hours, as a non-stop barrage of waste and moral abandon. For as with their lamed wills, these goyim will eventually eat, smoke, and drink themselves to sleep, and nothing will have changed for it. There is no climax. There is no final show or grand finale. The will of these people has a shorter life than their attention span. Come now, let us retire and leave them to their pointless franchises. For tomorrow will be like yesterday to them and to us, for we must also continue in our roll as their unseen masters just as they as our unwitting servants. And son, while you may not understand this fully today, you will certainly understand when you become a young man and it is time to fulfill your inheritance. Until then, I forbid you to mix with those heathens or to speak in their base, common language. Now go and study your Latin.”

“Yes father. Good night, sir.” replied the boy.

.

–Clint > richards-son (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Friday, July 6th, 2018

The Four Pillars Of Fiction: Part 2: The Art Of Dissimulation


In Part One of this essay, we discussed the ancient legal custom of the keeping of and recording of time. We know that time is money and money is time. We know that without time limits, bills and speeding tickets would never be paid. And we can now understand that, while the poor and middle-class commoner pays for his crimes with time, the wealthy elite pay for their organized crimes in money, which fictionally represents time. Our entire labor pool, in fact, works on the same valuation structure, where the poor are paid in money in exchange for their time and labor, which then allows them to purchase essential foodstuffs and supplies to survive and suffer further use as employees (subjects). The disparagement between what labor can accomplish and what is paid for it in money, of course, is ridiculously disproportional. For without the labor of the poor, the wealthy simply could not exist. Most importantly though, we can now comprehend a dualistic calendric time system constructed to separate the wheat and the chaff, the common majority from the elitist minority.

Before reading Part Two, it is recommended though not absolutely necessary to start from the beginning, here:

Link–> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2017/12/14/the-four-pillars-of-fiction-part-1-a-matter-of-time/

Though one of the pillars of fiction certainly rests upon money (a simulation of the artificial/man-made valuation of time), we will save this topic of money, or more specifically that of “mammon” for Part Three of this series. For to speak of the simulation of money as the valuation of all things Real into a nihilistically circular pattern of nothingness, we must first understand the nature of just what dissimulation accomplishes in society so that such a system is accepted as a false and seemingly indispensable paradigm. We must discuss how it destroys ethics, morals, and values by separating (dis-associating) man from Nature and Its Law(s), and why this quality of attaining through education, entertainment, false valuation, and other simulations of Reality a state of dissimulation in the public mind is an essential pillar to uphold the entirety of the fictional, legally represented model of simulation.

What is fiction can never be said to be Reality accept in appearance only — as some artful form without substance behind it. Legal fiction is, therefore, always but a simulation of Reality, which causes in men a dissimulation from what is Real (of Nature).

What’s the difference between simulation and dissimulation?

Ah… the answer to this question ultimately reveals the source of all of our problems.

Firstly, we must distinguish that the word simulation is a noun, as the name of something artificial, including lies. Dissimulation is an adjective, describing the results any simulation has upon the mind and actions of men. Dissimulation is caused and based upon some simulated version of Reality. Without simulation there is no dissimulation, just as without darkness there is no light, ect.

In Dante’s Inferno, one of the names prescribed to the devil was simply the prefix of “DIS.” The use of this word-forming agent stands always as an upsetting, unsettling alteration of its root, one that is generally adversarial or damaging to that which it is attached. Dis-ease, dis-satisfaction, dis-appear, dis-respect, dis-appoint, dis-regard, dis-turb, and dis-associate are examples of this factor.

Before we may understand what dis-simulation is, we must first examine the nature of what its root word symbolizes. So just what is a simulation in the legal fiction?

SIMULATETo assume the mere appearance of, without the reality; to assume the signs or indications of, falsely; to counterfeit; feign; imitate; pretend. To engage, usually with the co-operation or connivance of another person, in an act or series of acts, which are apparently transacted in good faith, and intended to be followed by their ordinary legal consequences, but which in reality conceal a fraudulent purpose of the party to gain thereby some advantage to which he is not entitled, or to injure, delay, or defraud others.(Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

SIMULATIONAssumption of appearance which was feigned, false, deceptive, or counterfeit. In the civil law. Misrepresentation or concealment of the truth; as where parties pretend to perform a transaction different from that in which they really are engaged. A feigned, pretended act, one which assumes the appearance without the reality and, being entirely without effect, it is held not to have existed, and, for that reason, it may be disregarded or attacked collaterally by any interested person. In French law. Collusion; a fraudulent arrangement between two or more persons to give a false or deceptive appearance to a transaction in which they engage. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

SIMULATED FACT – In the law of evidence. A fabricated fact; an APPEARANCE given to things BY HUMAN DEVICE, with a view TO DECEIVE AND MISLEAD. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ILLUSIONnoun – s as z. [Latin illusio, from illudo, to illude.] Deceptive appearance; false show, by which a person is or may be deceived, or his expectations disappointed; mockery. Ye soft illusions, dear deceits, arise! (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

–=–

In other words, a simulation is a purposefully deceitful lie that is made to appear similar to what it represents. For our purposes, simulation is never a good thing. This is to say that to openly lie, to live in and by lies, is certainly and self-evidently a bad thing. For when one lies for a living, one begins to disassociate oneself from Reality, Its Nature (Source), and Its Law(s). This mental falling away is known as dissimulation.

—=—

What is like is not the same; for nothing similar is the same.

—A Latin maxim of law: Talis non est eadem; nam nullum simile est idem. 4 Coke, 18. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

—=—

In law, simulation is never sameness. It is always false and thus always untrue compared to its origin, its model. There is no exception to this rule, just as nothing of the cartoon realm may be manifested in Reality, in the Realm of Nature. Art should never be confused to be the Real thing. This should be a self-evident Truth to the reader. But Truth is very often hidden behind that which is simulated as if it were Truth (e.g. the entirety of legal law). And so we may continue with the understanding that though a simulation is never True, a simulation can cause one to dissimulate from the Truth that is simulated in its place. What is made to appear to be the same, in other words, is most often a purposeful deceit. Simulation is always a lie, despite the matter the reason behind it.

A simulation is generally created as a purposeful venture — an intentional false-hood. The dissimulation it causes, however, is often quite mysterious, as the victim of simulation often doesn’t realize his or her state of dissimulation. This notion is quite apparent in just the fact that most people have no idea that their persona (legal status) as a completely fictional, commercial vessel in society and law (jurisdiction) is completely separate from their actual (True) Self. In other words, it is when the agent (employee) begins to believe that he or she is in every way the very flattering title ascribed by some authority figure (principal/employer) that dissimulation has grabbed hold of the mind.

If I simulate a police officer, and I therefore blur the lines between the job and the lifestyle and benefits it portends, I may be inclined to abuse said authority. If I believe I am that fictional character in agency under the authority and licensure of some higher principal (authority), and that title allows me certain pretended and violent powers over others, then I will begin to develop and use those powers as if they are Real. I will begin to treat others in the common arena (without a badge or license) that I perceive to have less authority as myself without regard to any moral law. I will do this because I believe that my actions are not my own, but that of a fictional character assigned to me, so that my actions are the actions of my employer, not myself. I take no self-responsibility for my actions, as my employer/principal has granted me its supposedly higher authority to act in its name and under its insurances (liability). I no longer feel liable for my actions. At this point, I am now fully dissimulated into the fiction, believing that the simulation of this fictional character assigned to me from some higher authority is actually Reality, which through that agency relationship causes me to express the personality and artificial essence of that simulated character instead of self-governing myself under the Law of Nature.

When the artificial (legal) hood becomes indistinguishable from the Reality that there is no actual hood, the belief in that false-hood (simulation) as Truth causes dissimulation.

FALSEHOOD – A statement or assertion known to be untrue, and intended to deceive. A WILLFUL act or declaration contrary to the truth. The term is perhaps generally used in the second sense here given. It is committed either by the WILLFUL act of the party, OR BY DISSIMULATION, or by words. Crabbe thus distinguishes between falsehood and untruth: “The latter (untruth) is an untrue saying, and may be unintentional, in which case it reflects no disgrace on the agent. A falsehood and a lie are intentional false sayings, differing only in degree of the guilt of the offender; falsehood being not always for the express purpose of deceiving, but a lie always for the worst of purposes. Deceit; Fraud; Misrepresentation. A fabrication. Scotch Law. A fraudulent imitation or suppression of truth, to the prejudice of another. “Something used and published falsely.” An old Scottish nomen juris. “Falsehood is undoubtedly a nominate crime, so much so that Sir George Mackenzie and our older lawyers used no other term for the falsification of writs, and the name ‘forgery‘ has been of modern introduction.” “If there is any distinction to be made between ‘forgery’ and ‘falsehood,’ I would consider the latter (falsehood) to be more comprehensive than the former.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

So what then is dis-simulation?

What happens when the simulation, the false-hood, the deceitful appearance as false show takes over the rationality of the host? What happens when we begin to identify personally (in a person-hood) with such a false appearance with fictionally prescribed authority?

We enter into The (legal) Matrix.

Generally speaking, we become either the victim or the perpetrator of every crime against Nature (God) and each other imaginable. We become the adversary (DIS) of ourselves. For both the victim and the villain suffer from dissimulation, simply because the delusion of power in the agent can only exist as a direct reflection of the illusion of authority by some third party. Respect of the illusion of power by the victim of it feeds the delusion of power carried by the victims antagonist. In either disposition, we have plugged into the delusional, legal fiction of flattering titles. We become the agents of our own enslavement.

From my legally anonymous work (book):

But how can one best define what “agency” is when most of us have no inkling we are even a participant in this agentic relationship with the United States or other district, never being fully informed that we stand as publicly registered agents for service of process for the person (status) in the citizen-ship we are assigned at the nativity event of our fictional delivery and birth as a legal entity?

In the 1960s, Dr. Stanley Milgram conducted experiments where he controversially uncovered this “agentic” personality and how most people are susceptible to it. His experiment posed one stranger as the dominant “teacher” against another stranger given the title of a subordinate “learner,” whereas the learner would be shocked with increasingly more painful shocks through switches controlled by the teacher delivered with each wrong answer. The experiment was designed to show how far the random cross-section of common people would induce electric shocks upon a strapped in subject when they suspected the non-consent, injury, or even death of the flatteringly titled “learner” in the next room. A majority of the “teachers” would indeed knowingly deliver these shocks when told to do so by a “doctor” in a lab coat uniform, signifying a false but persuasive symbolical figure of authority. Some would only continue if the doctor took full responsibility for damage or death to the person called the “learner.” This was historically the most ambitious and frightening scientific test on personhood and agency, as to the uncovering of what men will do when given flattering titles of authority even as simple as “teacher,” and are then mentally made subjects of yet another seemingly higher authority. But the actions of these test subjects in a middle state of authoritative power through agency were completely voluntary, being fully informed and able to voluntarily quit the experiment whenever they felt the need or moral compunction, and they were even paid before the test began with this foreknowledge of the ability to quit and keep that pre-paid payment.

In the end, it was only ever the “teacher” that was the subject of the experiment, and the results were shocking to the science community. Milgram summarized his experiments within a 1974 article in Harper’s Magazine entitled “The Perils of Obedience,” where he stated:

—=—

“The legal and philosophic aspects of obedience are of enormous importance, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations. I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist. Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not. The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation. Ordinary people, simply doing their jobs, and without any particular hostility on their part, can become AGENTS in a terrible destructive process. Moreover, even when the destructive effects of their work become patently clear, and they are asked to carry out actions incompatible with fundamental standards of morality, relatively few people have the resources needed to resist authority.

—Stanley Milgram (1974), from: ‘The Perils of Obedience’ in Harper’s Magazine. Abridged and adapted from Milgram’s ‘Obedience to Authority.’

—=—

(Now you can understand why anyone in The Matrix was a potential agent.)

In other words, common people lack self-governance under a voluntary, unenforceable, moral Law. Most men acting in the agency of another, as a legal person in flattering title, has no True Religion, for a person (puppet) is not a Living man and has no spirit or control of its own. The puppet controls the man standing in surety to the puppet. The man follows the law of persons, under the law of agency. And whole militaries (of otherwise innocent men) can be made to murder each other under this incredible phenomenon of agency.

Milgram elaborated two theories that were summarized in the publication American Psychologist:

—=—

“The first is the theory of conformism, based on Solomon Asch conformity experiments, describing the fundamental relationship between the group of reference and the individual person. A subject who has neither ability nor expertise to make decisions, especially in a crisis, will leave decision making to the group and its hierarchy. The group is the person’s behavioral model.”

“The second is the agentic state theory, wherein, per Milgram, ‘the essence of obedience consists in the fact that a person comes to view themselves as the instrument for carrying out another person’s wishes, and they therefore no longer see themselves as responsible for their actions. Once this critical shift of viewpoint has occurred in the person, all of the essential features of obedience follow.’”

“A cognitive reinterpretation of Stanley Milgram’s observations on obedience to authority,” American Psychologist 45: 1384–1385. 1990.

—=—

Once this “agentic” personality is established (i.e. dissimulation), it is obviously very hard to break the ingrained pattern of personality and practice it creates. Thus the branding of citizenship and public-minded-ness upon all children in each nation is part of the economy and society, from the school system to enter-tain-ment. We literally grow up believing we are the fictional persona assigned to us at birth; the name, the number, and the titles (or lack thereof). But in Reality, we are (acting as) commercial agents for a principal “dummy” corporation, our residential address actually a place of domestic (family) business. Responsibility is replaced by insurance. Moral virtue is replaced by strict law. And Reality is hidden behind several forms of artificial matrixes and systems designed to create a sense of false security. The strawman as a dis-ease is the avatar, the projected self image we play as actors in the fictional persona of that legal matrix, a silent weapon for a quiet war over our minds.

If in your mind it is difficult to comprehend this separate, fictional persona (legal mask) and the fact that you are acting in agency within it, just think of it this way… if you can believe in the foolish personification of God by the church into a personage and likeness of man, why can’t you imagine the same personification of man into a fictional character or citizen-ship of the state? If you are emotionally effected by watching cartoon characters on the magic screen, then what makes you think you are not equally effected by the psychological imaginations and devices of the fictional legal personas of other men and by your own actions in that false persona and agentic title?

—=—

“I feel I owe you an apology. We have a rule: we never free a mind once it’s reached a certain age. It’s dangerous; the mind has trouble letting go As long as The Matrix exists, the human race will never be free.”

—Line as read by Morpheus (the god of sleep), from the movie: ‘The Matrix’

—=—

The creators of this legal fiction matrix code control our lives via (our) suretyship to its registered property. We are made to believe the character in persona we play is Real, just as the reflection in the mirror may fool our sense of True Being; True Life. Through this property (personhood) we are caused to be plugged in to its legal, commercial framework, that matrix of word-magic and illusion, and so as if the chains were actually Real, we believe ourselves to be bound by the laws of another’s property (fiction). We cannot seem to escape our own delusion.

The dangerous pride of this glad acceptance of such artificial titles, personality, property, and character is of course spoken of in the Bible, where it admonishes the proudness of men in their receivership of false and unnatural things and pretended authorities over other men through such artificial means, which in Reality amounts merely to an abandonment of the only True Equity and duty under the Law of God’s Creation (Nature). We abandon our True Selves and pretend with false pride to be what we are not, what does not actually Exist (in Nature)…

–End Excerpt, from STRAWMAN: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person

STRAWMANSTORY_Square_Actual_Book_v2_72dpi_RGB
Download it free, here: http://www.strawmanstory.info

—=—

To show the extreme parallel put forward as a purposeful metaphor of The Matrix story to the legal system and code, we only need replace the science fiction element with legal fiction and its imaginary, proprietary language. For the legal matrix code as well makes all common men equal, while the machine-like elites control us through the artificial wombs they invent and provide under legal contract.

You see, the birth certificate is your very own artificial womb. It represents the simulated birth of a legal entity, designed to cause you to dissimulate from Reality, from Nature and Its Law.

Eventually, the reader will understand that the movie is not fiction at all, but a metaphoric story of the legally controlled masses of public citizen-ships (commercial vessels in persona) of all the soon-to-be-united-as-one nations.

MATRIXnoun – [Latin matrix from mater, mother.] 1. The womb; the cavity in which the fetus of an animal is formed and nourished till its birth. 2. A mold; the cavity in which any thing is formed, and which gives it shape; as the matrix of a type. 3. The place where any thing is formed or produced; as the matrix of metals; gang. 4. In dyeing, the five simple colors, black, white, blue, red and yellow, of which all the rest are composed. (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

MATRIX Womb. A place where anything is generated or formed. (Samuel Johnson’s Dictionary, 1755)

MATRIXIn civil law, the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies must be taken. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

ARTIFICERnoun – [Latin artifex, from ars, and facio.] 1. An artist; a mechanic or manufacturer; one whose occupation requires skill or knowledge of a particular kind; as a silversmith, or sadler. 2. One who makes or contrives; an inventor; as an artificer of fraud or lies. 3. A cunning, or artful fellow. [not used.] (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

—=—

The birth certificate is a matrix in the legal sense of the word, which is the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies must be taken. Now you know why you need it to obtain a driver’s license and other legal documents, as proof of birth (existence) of the legal entity (strawman) you are claiming to be an agent for. Whatever you do in civil (legal/fictional/commercial) life will be, of course, obtained through that matrix. This legal simulation of your vital statistics at birth is what becomes your agentic, artificial identity. And what’s planned for the future of the A.I. is much, much worse…

–=–

“Genecoin: DNA for the Blockchain… So, why would anyone want to encode their DNA on the Blockchain? Like much in the crypto space, some projects are a solution in search of a problem. However, one easy reason to use the blockchain to store DNA would be as a replacement for a traditional ‘Birth Certificate.’ Notarization has long been a function provided by the Bitcoin Blockchain, so to ‘notarize’ the existence of a person’s DNA could attest to the existence of an identity, and its age. This attestation would thereafter function in much the same way as does our current oracle-based (hospital-centric) system. Additionally, for those thinking of the far off future, another fanciful notion might be to encode one’s DNA for the purposes of cloning by a future generation

—Bitcoin Magazine Online, from an article entitled, “Genecoin: DNA for the Blockchain”

–=–

Whereas today we may discard by discharge this legal identity, in the future it will be part of your genetic make-up. In other words, the dissimulation of legal identity will be a permanent part of your body, an unremovable, non-payable contractual performance debt that is property of government — the ultimate mark.

We are all programmed from childhood to dissimulate ourselves into this false, legal identity, as if we are taking responsibility for a cartoon version of us, while pretending that damage done in the cartoon world (legal fiction/commerce) is the same thing as damage done to what is Real (of Nature). Sticks and stones may certainly break your bones, but legal words are now capable of damages far beyond the temporary pain and bruising of those Real things.

This brainwashing and redirection from our Natural course is expounded upon perfectly here by Alexis de Tocqueville:

—=—

“After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the supreme power then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

“But one also finds in the human heart A DEPRAVED TASTE FOR EQUALITY, which impels the weak to want to bring the strong down to their level, and which REDUCES MEN TO PREFERRING EQUALITY IN SERVITUDE TO INEQUALITY IN FREEDOM.

“Furthermore, when citizens are all almost equal, it becomes difficult for them to defend their independence against the aggressions of power. As none of them is strong enough to fight alone with advantage, the only guarantee of liberty is for everyone to combine forces. But such a combination is not always in evidence.”

The majority’s moral power makes individuals internally ashamed to contradict it,  which in effect silences them, and this silencing culminates in a cessation of thinking.

—Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859), separate quotes

—=—

Not ironically, trying to tell people they are trapped inside a legal matrix code is not at all different than trying to tell people they are trapped inside an artificial womb and connected to a computerized simulation of Reality. Both suffer equally from dissimulation. For dissimulation is of course the purpose of creating such matrixes.

Again, I can only compare the process of attempting to wake other men up from their legalistically caused dissimulation to that epic fight scene in the epic movie (documentary?) They Live. Just put on the damn sunglasses man!

–=–


In the end, after so much cognitive dissonance, after a lifetime of existing
falsely in the simulation, he finally sees them for what they are…
This is inception. This is the moment we (painfully)
release
ourselves from dissimulative reasoning.
Perhaps then we may stop fighting each other
and destroy the source of the simulation?

–=–

Equality is not promoted in the Bible, in the Law of Nature. There is no such thing. Equality can only be achieved through legal, artificial means. Equality is purely a fictional construct of man, fruit from that tree of knowledge. Equality is not designed to free men but to enslave them. Only slaves and subjects are equal. And yet the king (sovereign) has no equal.

In short, tyranny requires equality. For simulated (legal) equality creates dissimulation.

See my previous essay on this subject here:

Link–> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/tyranny-requires-equality/

And for the history of how the notion of equity has been confused and interposed with modern political equality, I recommend this lecture:

–=–


“The language of equality is dead (spiritual death = civil life)…”
“The language of (personal) equity is alive (spiritual life)…”
“The first equality is equity.”

–=–

Equality without consideration of equity is but a dissimulation away from the foundations and intent of any moral law.

Maxim of Law: “He who seeks equity must do equity.

What is True equity in law?

EQUITABLE – That which is in conformity to the natural law.” (–Bouvier’s Dictionary of Law, 1856)

–=–

One should never confuse or intermix the notion of the Law of Nature and legal law, which are always opposed to each other. Therefore, as stated in this lecture, the idea of legal equity is merely the empty form of Natural equitableness. That is to say that a court of equity can only consider legal things within legal places and legal status (persona), not Reality, for the law of man (form) has no connection to anything in Nature (substance), only the concept of a property (descriptive words) thereof. A man must act equitably towards all others regardless of status or lack thereof in substance (in Nature) if he expects the law to enforce equitable behavior from others. Political equality defeats every man that acts without equitableness — without (outside of) the Highest Law of God (Nature).

Equality is but a legal concept, represented in law as a legal simulation, which in and of itself is merely a fictional rationalization (of man’s law) that can only be described as a dissimulation from Nature and Its Law(s). And as Alexis de Tocqueville declared above, the nature of this legal (fictional) state reduces men to preferring equality in servitude to inequality in freedom. Only the self-governing man observing at all times substantial equitableness to all of man and Nature can be free of these destructive simulations of man’s law. For to be conditioned through the eyes of legalistic (political) equality causes men necessarily to act without consideration of equitableness, for “a government can only enforce strict laws.” This is to say that while the law of equality is a creation and therefore a property of man, equity stems from the unwritten (inherent) Law of Nature, and therefore is inherent only in men regenerate of mind and thus liberated from man’s law. Equitableness, in other words, can only be expressed despite strict (legal) law.

Unfortunately, the direct result of equality is the devolution into democracy. Again, in this modern system of political equality we suffer from, we can see a mass dissimulation away from each of our own individuality, from the True Self where equity resides, in order to instill the presidents of this mob rule sense of democracy.

—=—

Democracy is the road to socialism.

—Karl Marx

—=—

Democracy is indispensable to socialism.

Socialism is merely state-capitalist monopoly which is made to serve the interests of the whole people…”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, (seperate quotes), the second excerpted from the pamphlet ‘The Impending Catastrophe and How to Combat it, September 1917’ as Lenin’s Collected Works, Progress Publishers, 1977, Moscow, Volume 25, from Lenin Internet Archive. 

—=—

Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty.”

—Plato

—=—

“Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

—John Adams

—=—

A pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth; for a multitude is often rash, and will not hear reason.

—Noah Webster

—=—

The oppressed are allowed once every few years to decide which particular representatives of the oppressing class are to represent and repress them in parliament.”

—Vladimir Ilyich Lenin

—=—

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”

—Winston Churchill

—=—

The President will lead in the treasonYour militia will leave you and fight against you… When evil men take office the whole gang will be in collusion. They will keep the people in utter ignorance and steal their liberty by ambuscade (by surprise, by lying in wait). When Government removes your armaments, you will have no power, but government will have all power.” 

—Patrick Henry (emphasis added)

—=—

The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.

—John F. Kennedy

—=—

From the Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon, under Strong’s Concordance #H571, we may understand that the only Truth, the only Reality is Nature Itself. Nature needs no simulation or false appearance to Exist. It needs no words, no names, no titles, and certainly no approval by men. It neutrally defends Itself without somehow anthropomorphically believing It has some pretended set of positive law “rights” to do so. But so that we may know the more accurate definition of “just what is Truth” from the Bible, we must attempt to define it according to its authors Original (Natural) intent while also showing its adversarial, false appearance. Herein a deeper understanding of dissimulation becomes apparent.

The lexicon for Strong’s H571 (truth) states in part:

Sincerity, opposed to dissimulation. Truth, opposed to falsehood

–=–

Here we find the key to understanding the difference between simulation and dissimulation, for we may only Truly know anything by comparing its opposite:

Truth is opposed to simulation (falsehood), though it resembles (appears as) Truth. Therefore everything that is legally (artificially) considered is by the Law of Nature a falsehood.

Sincerity is opposed to dissimulation, which dissembles (changes or lacks the appearance of) anything from Its Truth.

A simulation is a game, while dissimulation is a lifestyle.

A simulation is an outright lie, while dissimulation is a mental delusion.

A dissimulation is an adversarial simulation. While simulation in and of itself is a lie, as a purposeful departure from even the appearance and false show of what is Truth, dissimulation is the simulation of a complete lie. When simulation is based on what is already a lie, then what results is a simulacra, a copy without an original (a simulation of a simulation/lie, as a copy of a copy). Thus the lie becomes the only truth imaginable to the dissimulated man, for the lie appears to be the Truth of what is being simulated.

Simulation is indeed a deception, but dissimulation is much worse. For dissimulation is a self-deception.

–=–

“Make no mistake about it – enlightenment is a destructive process. It has nothing to do with becoming better or being happier. Enlightenment is the crumbling away of untruth. It’s seeing through the facade of pretense. It’s the complete eradication of everything we imagined to be true.

Adyashanti

–=–

To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.”

Every particular in nature, a leaf, a drop, a crystal, a moment of time is related to the whole, and partakes of the perfection of the whole.

—Ralph Waldo Emerson (separate quotes)

–=–

A simulation is a false appearance, but to dissimulate from oneself is to hide ones Real Self behind that false show (simulation) — a lie within a lie. The difference is a staggeringly important one. It enters into the realm of the simulacrum.

The Stanford University Press explains in part this term simulacrum:

–=–

Phantom Communities reconsiders the status of the simulacrumsometimes defined as a copy of a copy, but more rigorously defined as a copy that subverts the legitimacy and authority of its model—in light of recent debates in literature, art, philosophy, and cultural studies.”

—A critique for ‘Phantom Communities: The Simulacrum and the Limits of Postmodernism’ by Prof. Scott Durham

–=–

The Matrix simulation in that movie was the 6th version of a computer-generated version of a society long dead. It was a copy of a copy, also said to be a copy without an original. The model was one of control, not conformity to Reality. Likewise, the legal matrix code is designed in exactly the same way, as a device to remove one from any semblance of the Reality and Law(s) of Nature and to keep one trapped inside the copy, viewing the Real world through the dissimulation of an artificial womb built merely of symbols and signs, and based on induced, delusional belief in the veracity of the illusionary un-Real, simulated as if it were the only Reality.

Are we being sincere in our citizen-ship, in legal person-hood? Or are we acting as patient victims under that civil dis-course without responsibility to ourselves and to Nature?

Our problem is not simulation itself, but the fact that we represent a simulated version of ourselves. Representation as a concept relays the idea that the sign, symbol, or token (personification) and the Real thing are essentially equivalent (i.e. sameness) — that the form represented is for all intents and purposes equal to the actual substance of the Real. Thus the concept of “representing myself” is a redundant action at best, and downright stupid at worst. What is Truth, what is of Reality needs no re-presentation, for what is Truth needs no sign or token to be understood, for it cannot by its very Nature be misunderstood. Only its name (simulation) may be dissimulated as property (form), not the Real (self-evident) thing in and of itself (substance).

But what happens when instead we choose to re-present something that is by its nature already a simulation (a lie)? If the root of the idea of representation is that the token, symbol, name, or sign (form) and the Real substance are equivalent, then the only thing we can represent in the legal realm is that which is a lie. Man cannot stand legally without some fictional representation of his True Nature and Self any more than he can enter into the cartoon realm to commune and interact with the cartoons therein. For a simulation is always a lie, no matter how closely the form of that simulation resembles its substantive model in the Real.

In other words, when we go into court representing a legal entity, we are appearing as a lie (simulated fact). We are representing that we accept as legitimate the lie (sin) and that we are responsible and in surety for its legal actions. We are representing (personifying) a simulation (a lie). We are therefore presenting ourselves as if we actually are a creature of the simulacrum, a copy without an original. We have thus entered into the darkness of fiction as a dissimulation of ourselves. We have just plugged into the legal version of The Matrix.

It is interesting to note that the term “dissimulation” seems to apply in a dramatic way to our default status of public personhood within these nations of goyim, remembering that DIS is attributed to be one of the many names of satan (that which is adversarial to Nature/Reality).

DISSIMULATIONnoun – [Latin, to make like; like.] The act of dissembling; a hiding under a false appearance; a feigning; false pretension; hypocrisy. Dissimulation may be simply concealment of the opinions, sentiments or purpose; but it includes also the assuming of a false or counterfeit appearance which conceals the real opinions or purpose. Dissimulation among statesmen is sometimes regarded as a necessary vice, or as no vice at all. Let love be without dissimulation. Romans 12:9. (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

–=–

Inverse to dissimulation, we find probity:

PROBITYnoun – [Latin probitas, from probo, to prove.] Primarily, tried virtue or integrity, or approved actions; but in general, strict honesty; sincerity; veracity; integrity in principle, or strict conformity of actions to the laws of justice. Probity of mind or principle is best evinced by probity of conduct in social dealings, particularly in adhering to strict integrity in the observance and performance of rights called imperfect, which public laws do not reach and cannot enforce. (Webster’s Dictionary of the American Language, 1828)

–=–

If it is not now plainly obvious, these two terms and their dueling meanings describe polar opposites.

Dissimulation defines a citizen-ship in persona (mask) governed by the state (legal law).

Probity defines a self-governing man under God’s Law, the Law of Nature.

Personhood is bound by strict law of men, having only a legal capacity to act in commerce and society as property of the state, while self-governing men must observe and perform the Highest Law at all times, lest they fall back into that legal matrix.

Of course, dissimulation (person-hood) is absolutely integral pillar for this fictional realm of legalism to exist in its own little world. Just as a cartoon character is a simulation disassociated from the Real World, so too must men be made to disassociate even themselves from what is Real (Truth) so as to be trapped within this legal construct. The law of legal fiction applies only to fictional persons (legally pretended characters), places (jurisdictions), and things (property). None of these are Real…

Dissimulation can also be called as agency.

The major difference between an attorney (assigned agent) and a public citzien-ship (acting agent) is dissimulation. While the attorney is consensually hired in agency, as a temporary agent employed to fulfill and perform certain legal duties in a limited legal contract, the public citizen-ship lives his whole civil life in an agency relationship. The citizen-ship never ceases to be an agent. In his mind he becomes the citizen, unable to distinguish between himself and the fictional character (person-hood) he plays in the legal, commercial realm. Nature and fiction are blurred and thus intermixed in all his dealings. The simulation and the Real are thus indistinguishable. The Truth is blended with the lie, causing the phenomenon of dissimulation. We believe we are legal persons.

We believe we are the mask (persona) instead of the man behind it.

The problem is that the mask (persona) is property (a legal status) of its creator. The mask belongs to government. Government is the lawmaker (god) over its own property. And while no government law (legal fiction) effects any man, its legal law does apply to its property — the legal person-hood (legal mask) worn/carried by the man. Like a puppet, the man is unconsciously drawn around by legal strings he cannot see and thus by laws he needs not morally agree with. For without this fictional connection to the Real man through a simulated character in the legal matrix, without a persona, the man would by necessity either need to be self-governing or be militarily enslaved. Thus, this legal matrix of nations is a sort of middle ground between the two, allowing individual men to choose the method of their enfranchisement in a severely limited way, causally choosing their own use in agency, just like in that computer simulation from The Matrix movies. But then, in that simulation of The Matrix, we find an almost 100% saturation rate of dissimulation — of people believing they are Free in Nature under God while in Reality stuck in an artificial womb they can never break free from.

Silent weapons For Quiet Wars are described in the introduction as “social engineering or the automation of society, i.e. the engineering of a social automation system (silent weapons) on a national or worldwide scale without implying extensive objectives of social control and destruction of human life, i.e. slavery and genocide.” It also introduces the modern state of a somewhat permanent continuation of World War III as the “Quiet War,” and that it is currently and indefinitely “being conducted using subjective biological warfare, fought with silent weapons.” This document, dated from 1979, reads:

The Artificial Womb:

From the time a person leaves its mother’s womb, its every effort is directed towards building, maintaining, and withdrawing into artificial wombs, various sorts of substitute protective devices or shells. The objective of these artificial wombs is to provide a stable environment for both stable and unstable activity: to provide shelter for the evolutionary processes of growth, and maturity — i.e. survival; to provide security for freedom and to provide defensive protection for offensive activity. This is equally true of both the general public and the elite. However, there is a definite difference in the way each of these classes go about the solution of problems.

The Political Structure Of A Nation – Dependency:

The primary reason why the individual citizens of a country create a political structure is a subconscious wish or desire to perpetuate their own dependency relationship of childhood. Simply put, they want a human god to eliminate all risk from their life, pat them on the head, kiss their bruises, put a chicken on every dinner table, clothe their bodies, tuck them into bed at night, and tell them that everything will be alright when they wake up in the morning. This public demand is incredible, so the human god, the politician, meets incredibility with incredibility by promising the world and delivering nothing. So who is the bigger liar? The public? Or the godfather? This public behavior is surrender born of fear, laziness, and expediency. It is the basis of the welfare state as a strategic weapon, useful against a disgusting public.

–=–

Simulations (politicians) leading the dissimulated (citizenships)…

Welfare as a strategic weapon…

This lies in stark contrast to the Law of Nature, as the Law (Word) of God:

—=—

“…that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine (Law), Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith (Truth): so do. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith (Truth) unfeigned: From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

—1 Timothy 1: 3-7, KJB

—=—

It is through dissimulation, through the agentic relationship of person-hood, that we have been turned away from our Natural course.

To be clear, let us explore what it is to lie in agency, especially under the tyranny of kings, popes, and the democracies (illiterate mob rule). Remember, while a person (status in society) is a legalistic simulation, believing in the false truth of the simulation and thus becoming one with it is dissimulation.

DUMMYnoun – One who holds legal title for another; a straw man. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

DUMMYadjective – Sham; make-believe; pretended; imitation. As respects basis for predicating liability on parent corporation for acts of subsidiary, “agency,” “adjunct,” “branch,” “instrumentality,” “dummy,” “buffer,” and “toolall mean very much the SAME thing. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

STRAWMAN – 1. A weak or imaginary opposition set up only to be easily confuted. 2. A person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction. (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary)

STRAWMANA front, a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts as an agent for another for the purposes of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments the principal may direct. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real purchaser or to accomplish some purpose otherwise not allowed. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition)

STRAWMAN – 1. A fictitious person, especially one that is weak or flawed. 2. A tenuous and exaggerated counterargument that an advocate puts forward for the sole purpose of disproving it. — Also termed straw-man argument. 3. A third party used in some transactions as a temporary transferee to allow the principal parties to accomplish something that is otherwise impermissible. 4. A person hired to post a worthless bail bond for the release of an accused. Also termed steaminess homo. (Black’s Law Dictionary 7th Edition)

STRAMINEUS HOMO: “Latin. A man of straw, one of NO SUBSTANCE,
put forward as
BAIL OR SURETY.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

AGENCYA RELATION, created either by EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONTRACT or by law, whereby one party (called the principal or constituent) delegates the transaction of some lawful business or the authority to do certain acts for him or in relation to his rights or property, with more or less discretionary power, to another person (called the agent, attorney, proxy, or delegate) who undertakes to manage the affair and render him an account thereof. The contract of agency may be defined to be a contract by which one of the contracting parties confides the management of some affair, to be transacted on his account, to the other party, who undertakes to do the business and render an account of it. A contract by which one person, with greater or less discretionary power, undertakes to represent another in certain business relations. A relation between two or more persons, by which one party, usually called the agent or attorney, is authorized to do certain acts for, or in relation to (lie rights or property) of the other, who is denominated the principal, constituent, or employer. (Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition)

–=–

The agency relationship of public US citizenships is simple: The principal (government) creates and employs a citizen-ship status (fictional persona) within its own created jurisdiction (fictional place), by which men (acting agents) use this commercial vessel (property) to conduct business and commerce. Essentially, a citizen is an employee of its employer (principal), and does all actions through that principal and its protections. This is why insurance is mandatory for citizenships (commercial vessels) of the United States, just as auto-insurance is mandatory to rent a car (commercial vehicle). If the agent crashes the car, the principal is responsible for the actions of its agents. Insurance alleviates that commercial burden, and is thus a legal requirement to dis-associate the liability of the principal from its agent, the employer from its employee, the user from its program (see the movie Tron).

To end this particular discourse on the 2nd pillar of fiction, we must address how God (Jehovah) Itself has been driven from our consciousness. It is foolish to argue over the Existence of God (Jehovah), when the very intent and definition of this VERB “Jehovah” is as the Universe, as all of Existence Itself in its infinite entirety. This state of Life in Nature then is the eternity of Being, again used as a verb to mean all of Existence as it stands at this and every moment. God (jehovah), in other words, is all that is Real, all that is not man-made. This is to say that Jehovah (God) is the Source of everything Real that can be simulated and dissimulated from. Jehovah (God) is Truth, thus all lies are dependent upon Reality, without which there would be no Reality (Truth) to lie about, and therefore no reason or source for such simulations. Without Truth there simply is no lie. Without Jehovah there simply is no satan (adversary). Again, this line of reasoning is self-evident.

If simulation is the opposite of Truth, and Jehovah (God) is defined as that which is the very Nature and Source of Truth, then we must recognize that each of us are a part of Jehovah. Without this understanding of the meaning of this word, as the substance of the very Source of Life Itself, and that by our very own Existence we are therefore each an intricate part of that whole of the concept of what is Jehovah (all of Being), we may never overcome that which dissimulates us from our very own Nature and place within It. Without faith (belief) in Jehovah as the only Reality of Truth and Life, we will forever be stuck in a man-made simulation of that which Is Jehovah.

But don’t believe me. Believe the Law as written in the Bible:

–=–

“God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things

–Acts 17:24-25, KJB

–=–
Jehovah is the air and the water and the land and the stars we so take for granted, as that which gives us life and breath and sustenance to Exist. Religions are a simulation of the Bible, a lie told to dissimulate us from our God (Reality/Nature) and Its Law, from our very Nature of Existence and place within It.
But we must be careful and weary of such a spiritual understanding, for the men that seek to be as replacement gods (magistrates) on Earth and in their own hand-built temples give only artificial, legal life (false existence) to simulated persons (legal statuses), places (legal jurisdictions), and things (legal properties), over which the only means of control is through dissimulation from the One True God (as “Jehovah”). For none of these Exists in Nature (under God), and so none can be governed by the Law of Nature.
In the end, we may understand why it is that we may only have one God, and that we must choose between the God (verb) of Nature (Jehovah) and the god (noun/title) of mammon. And so in Part Three of this essay series, we will examine how the legal fiction of nations would fall under its own weight without the dissimulation created by the god (false existence) of mammon (artificial valuation) and its engrossing, nihilistic, empty tool of money (the currency of time).
Until then, may your gradual awakening from these four pillars of fiction be sufficiently painful and gut-wrenching that your own dis-ease of dis-simulation is cured. And as the legal superstructure falls further into dis-pair and thus dis-repair, dragging along with it all those dissimulated masses of men unable to break from that virtual, simulated copy of reality, may your spiritual awakening be strong enough to match and defend against the adversarial dark awakening happening simultaneously and adversarially to your own. For the darkness of dissimulation is coming online, as artificial intelligence, as an out of control matrix of lies. It is the legal mind unburdened by any higher, moral law, set free to recreate the world as it sees fit.
May your meekness be evident and your will to preserve that which gives us Life be stronger than that dissimulated force that seeks to dispose us of It.
May we find the spiritual path together…
.
Clint > richard-son (Realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Saturday, January 27th, 2018  (AD)

A Brief History Of The Flat Earth Society


Of all the areas of the liberal arts that need to have the Trivium method applied, this is certainly the one.

I have been fascinated by the willingness of acceptance towards unprovable “facts” used by this group of modern “flat-earther’s.” And so I knew that if I searched a bit I would come to discover the origin of such unscientific thought processes toward the fallaciously standing conclusions put forward therein. And so I’d like to share what I found. This is not meant to be offensive or spark a debate, merely to show the roots of this prima facie (on the face/appearance only) type of belief system and its spread as a subversive culture.

In a nutshell, the origins of the Flat Earth Society come from the Zetetic Society, philosophy, and method. From its modern website we can read:

The ‘Universal Zetetic Society‘ (UZS) was the precursor to the Flat Earth Society. It was founded shortly after the death of Samuel Rowbotham (aka Parallax) by Rowbotham’s adherents. The UZS was active well into the early part of the 20th century, publishing many issues of a magazine titled, The Earth Not a Globe Review?. In 1971, the UZS was renamed The Flat Earth Society when Samuel Shenton became its leader.

Samuel Birley Rowbotham (AKA Parallax) (1816 – 1884), was an English inventor and writer who wrote Zetetic Astronomy: Earth Not a Globe, based on his decade-long scientific studies of the earth, published a 16-page pamphlet (1849), which he later expanded into a 430 page book (1881) expounding his views. According to Rowbotham’s scientific method, which he called Zetetic Astronomy, the earth is a flat disk centered at the North Pole? and bounded along its southern edge by a wall of ice, with the sun, moon, planets, and stars only a few thousand miles above the surface of the earth.

Rowbotham and his followers gained notoriety by engaging in raucous public debates with leading scientists of the day. One such clash, involving the prominent naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace, led to several lawsuits for fraud and libel.

After Rowbotham’s death, his thousands of followers established the Universal Zetetic Society, published a magazine entitled The Earth Not a Globe Review? and remained active well into the early part of the 20th century.

‘Zeteticism‘ is a system of scientific inquiry. The word is derived from the Greek verb zeteo, which means “to search or examine; to proceed only by inquiry.

Zeteticism differs from the usual scientific method in that using zeteticism one bases his conclusions on experimentation and observation rather than on an initial theory that is to be proved or disproved. A zetetic forms the question then immediately sets to work making observations and performing experiments to answer that question, rather than speculating on what the answer might be then testing that out.

For example, in questioning the shape of the Earth the zetetic does not make a hypothesis suggesting that the Earth is round or flat and then proceed testing that hypothesis; he skips that step and devises an experiment that will determine the shape of the Earth, and bases his conclusion on the result of that experiment. Many feel this is a more reasonable method than the normal scientific method because it  removes any preconceived notions and biases the formation of a hypothesis might cause, and leaves the conclusion up entirely to what is observed. Samuel Rowbotham was the first to use the term in reference to Flat Earth? research. He devised the Bedford Level Experiment to determine whether the surface of water is convex, reasoning that if the water is not convex the earth cannot be a sphere. This is how he came to the conclusion that the Earth is flat. The method has been a cornerstone of Flat Earth Theory? ever since.

Link–> https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Universal+Zetetic+Society
Link–> https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Samuel+Rowbotham
Link–> https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Zeteticism

–=–

Here we should stop to define a couple of terms, which not ironically have much to do with each other. The Parallax view of convection. Let us use a dictionary from those times:

CONVEX – adjective – [Latin] Rising or swelling on the exterior surface into a spherical or round form; gibbous; opposed to concave, which expresses a round form of the interior surface; as a convex mirror or lens. – noun – A convex body; as heavens convex. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

CONVEXITY – noun – [Latin] The exterior surface of a convex body; a gibbous or globular form; roundness(–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

PARALLAX – noun – [Gr. to vary, to decline or wander; beyond, and to change.] In astronomy, the change of place in a heavenly body in consequence of being viewed from different points. Diurnal parallax the difference between the place of a celestial body, as seen from the surface, and from the center of the earth, at the same instant. Annual parallax the change of place in a heavenly body, in consequence of being viewed at opposite extremities of the earth’s orbit. (–Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of the English Language)

–=–

This notion of Zetetic methodology of science is not distinct from the blind leading the blind. Information without postulate or goal. While Mr. “Parallax” Rowbotham may have been sincere and attempting to be legitimized in his time, it appears that even up to today his followers are merely bad-mannered, browbeating Zetetics hell bent on “engaging in raucous public debates with leading scientists of the day,” and for that matter anyone that seeks rational debate. A simple perusal through the comments section of any “Flat Earth” video or website is evidence of the fallacious ad hominem and other personal, non-scientific attacks towards anyone that disagrees with their strange breed of “science.”

One begins to see similar patterns of this type of harassment in certain elements of the “truth movement” and its infamous shock jocks, and within groups like We Are Change and the various 9/11 truth movements, of which I was once very much involved. This is certainly not to say that no science backs their (and my) claims about 9/11. It is to say that the approach towards dissemination of this information, which is prima facie evidence at best, is to gather in places and have arguments similar to those of the flat-earther’s, usually ending in statements like “if you can’t see what is happening in this video you must be an idiot.” And I believe this is why such movements are so transient and ineffective, for the confidence of absolute observational correctness becomes an overwhelming force that allows no further debate and ignores all evidence to the contrary.

Now remember, I am referring to myself here, as one of the guys that used to get out in the streets and in parks and other public places in people’s faces without solicitation to spread “9/11 truth.” And honestly, I hate the thought that I might have been so belligerent and unreasonably argumentative that I turned people away from actually examining the evidence I had just by my attitudinal prejudices. And so as one with experience in this gang-up and insult methodology, I know this is a mental trap we must all grow from if we are to have any effect.

One of the most outspoken and somehow respected “flat-earther’s” is Eric Dubay.

In the following video debunking most tenets of this movement, we find that many of Dubay’s sources for flat-earth cosmology is from just where we would expect, the Zetetic Society. I recommend this entire video:

Note too in this video that “Freemasons formed Zetetic Societies to engage in anti-Christian and scientific debate.” In other words, counter-culture.

We can also find much of this sort of fallacious reasoning in Theosophical writings and movements. From the Theosophical.org website we can read some of these esoteric writings that seem to support such Zetetic methodologies and beliefs:

–=–

Earth Mind: Starting where we are in the world of appearances, we see the myriad of forms, from our time and place of seeing, from our point of view and perspective. We are the subject registering objects.

This is my world, my life, my things, my roles. Fear and desire. The mask of persona. The consumer. Habits. The everyday world. The world of natural living. This is the flatworld; the sun revolves around us. This is the data storage mind. Calculating mind. Taking care of business. This is the earth world. The outer world. The subject-object awareness dominates

Esoteric Initiations: In addition to meditation, ancient myths, and near-death research, we have a similar process described in the psychological initiations of consciousness familiar to esoteric groups. There are notable similarities between the process of natural life and death and the ending of an old value system and a rebirth into a new perspective.

Transpersonal psychologists love to look at this process of death and rebirth in consciousness. One of (the) first of these was the Romanian scholar Mircea Eliade, who observed: “Initiatory death provides the clean state on which will be written the successive revelations whose end is the formation of a new man…This new life is conceived as the true human existence, for it is open to the values of spirit” (Eliade, xiii-xiv). The process of initiatory death wipes the slate clean so that a new chapter in the book of life may begin fresh, open, and unprejudiced by old cultural and social values and viewsInitiation breaks down old patterns of behavior. It allows people to begin again and to see with new perception. The new values become the principal values of the new life.

At each initiatory death and rebirth we begin with a new view from a higher elevation. We see more, know more, and can relate to whole systems more readily. Seeing and accepting life as a process of birth/death instead of regarding life as the opposite of death is an initiation into reality

Link–> https://www.theosophical.org/publications/quest-magazine?id=2810
Sources–> Alice Bailey (Theosophy), Madamn H.P. Blavatsky (Theosophy), The Dali Lama, etc…

–=–

With its hand inside and its (formally “Lucifer”) Lucis Publishing company officially recognized and integrated into the United Nations and the Common Core agenda for world education, let us again understand the basics of Theosophy for our purposes:

 
THEOSOPHY – noun – Divine wisdomgodliness. 1. Knowledge of God. (Webs1828)

THEOSOPHIST – noun – One who pretends to divine illuminationone who pretends to derive his knowledge from divine revelation. (Webs1828)

THEOSOPHIST – noun – [Gr. God, and comment; wise.] Pretension to divine illumination; enthusiasm(Webs1828)

SOPHIST – noun – [Latin sophista.] 1. A professor of philosophy; as the sophists of Greece. 2. A captious or fallacious reasoner. (Webs1828)

SOPHISTRY – (repeated) – noun – 1. Fallacious reasoningreasoning sound in appearance only. These men have obscured and confounded the nature of things by their false principles and wretched sophistry2. Exercise in logic(Webs1828)

–=–

Logic without grammar — this is the epitome of the Flat-Earth Society. Perspective-based information without True knowledge.

Let us be clear… I have maintained throughout my research and writings that I simply don’t know the shape of the earth, nor do I fool myself that this type of knowledge is for such mortals as myself. I remain neutral. This is, if anything, a sort of divine wisdom whose vantage point is only with God, if you will. I don’t know. I will continue to answer I don’t know. But so far, the evidence lands almost exclusively in the “globular” earth model. But I still do not know.

The typical flat-earther, however, has already decided, claiming God-like knowledge as divine wisdom without proofs and without actually realizing this cultish disposition. Such confidence is reminiscent to the historical accounts of the church’s resolve in justifying the witch-burnings. Fact built upon fallacious reasoning… or no reasoning or questioning at all! Belief based purely on physical observation and perspective is obviously a very dangerous thing, and is how the masses are controlled in many areas of thought. It is not dissimilar to ignoring the camouflage of many species that allows them to hide in plain site by subterfuge so as to catch its prey unsuspecting.

But what happens when one’s perspective is changed?

What happens to the mountainous ant hill when the ant climbs a tree and observes it from directly above as seemingly flat?

In fairness, we must acknowledge that the world and those who run it is full of controlled oppositional forces. It was Vladimir Lennon who is quoted as suggesting that “the best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves.” And so as we find Eric Dubay outing almost all other prominent flat-earth researchers but himself as shills and controlled oppositions, we may also find otherwise legitimate inquiries and scientific researchers seeking the Truth of the matter. And so I leave this short essay with the following link that you may read at your leisure, which discusses the history of the Flat Earth Society, its leaders, and the fact that they may have been controlled opposition to counter any good information from being taken seriously.

Link–> http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/03/flat-earth-society-controlled-op.html

Again, I remind the reader that I remain neutral on the subject, so no need to bully me or attempt to belittle my character in the comments below. I simply ask that you consider the origins of this movement, a movement without really anywhere to move, and that you beware of any belief without supportive data. Use your grammar, logic, and rhetoric, in that order only.

Where does your grammar come from? Is it to teach or to deceive? Is it of the Nature of the Universe or is it sourced in the adverse?

ADVERSARIA – (From Latin adversa, things remarked or ready at hand.) Rough memoranda, common-place books. (Black4)

ADVERSARIA – noun – [Latin from adversus. See Adverse.] Among the ancients, a book of accounts, so named from the placing of debt and credit in opposition to each other. A commonplace book. (Webs1828)

ADVERSE adjective – [Latin adversus, opposite; of ad and versus, turned; from verto, to turn. See Advert. This word was formerly accented, by some authors, on the last syllable; but the accent is now settled on the first.] 1. Opposite; opposing; acting in a contrary direction; conflicting; counteracting; as, adverse winds; an adverse party. 2. Figuratively, opposing desire; contrary to the wishes, or to supposed good; hence, unfortunate; calamitous; afflictive; pernicious, unprosperous; as, adverse fate or circumstances. – verb transitive – advers’. To oppose. [Not used.] (Webs1828)

SATANnoun – [Hebrew. an adversary.] The grand adversary of man; the devil or prince of darkness; the chief of the fallen angels. (Webs1828)

–=–

Are the books (grammar) on your shelf and in your digital browser a gift of the light of knowledge or of the adverse of darkness as form without substance?

The world, be it flat or round, square or artificial, is abound in false dialectic (logic), in adversarial forces intent on counter-cultural confusion. Perhaps it is time to abandon such impossible pursuits and focus on the ever-deteriorating and legally (licensed) anarchistic society we find ourselves in today? No matter what side of this debate you fall on, perhaps it is time to come back to earth and treat it as home, whatever its unknown shape, and to start treating each other as we wish others to treat us. Oh, what a wonderful world (round or flat) that would be.

.

–clint richard-son (realityblogger.wordpress.com)
–Sunday, September 17th, 2017

An Open Letter To “Flat Earthers”


I am not here today in an attempt to debate on the subject of this post, and I’m not here to declare what “shape” the earth is. The most honest answer is invariable always that one which best describes one’s best disposition, which is that I simply don’t know. I cannot know. I have no vantage point to utter such a confident declaration and build a faith-based counter-cultural movement around it. I would never claim to know without seeing for myself, which I cannot.

This is, by the way, a great example of where the Trivium method (grammar, logic, rhetoric) works wonders. The trick with applying the Trivium method is to know when it is applicable and when it is not. The Truth, when told, needs not the Trivium to show it to be Truth. Only the lie, no matter how well-intentioned or ill-conceived it stands, can be defeated by the Trivium. For more on this method of distinction, this bullshit meter, visit:

Link–> http://www.triviumeducation.com

On that note, the group mentality shared between those styling themselves as “flat-earthers” has become wholeheartedly the opposite of honesty, which is to blindly state that the earth must be and therefore is indeed flat, while providing absolutely non-corelative “facts” to prove it. Though the word “flat” is wholly undefined and without any actual primary evidence whatsoever, this model of the flat earth has the same amount of primary photographs as the apparent globe model has, which is absolutely zero. Yet somehow this lack of somehow real photographic evidence (an oxymoron on its surface) only applies to what “flat-earthers” now call insultingly as “round-earthers,” a reference to how foolish everyone must be for not believing in the undefined and totally unproven in every way “flat” planet model. And so immediately and without trying, we utterly crush one of the mainstay arguments for a flat earth, which is that there is no Real picture or image of it — the same reason used to anecdotally disprove a round earth. But we must recognize and respect the maxims of law and science here, which is to say that one cannot prove a negative. In other words, a lack of evidence is not somehow positive evidence of a fact. Within the artistry and either purposeful or accidental irrationality of perfecting the use of logical fallacy, we find here that it is seemingly perfectly logical to utilize a self-damning argument (lack of photo evidence) against that which one wishes to disprove.

But the arrogant demands for real photos of the planet continue from these flat-earthers, who believe that the lack of (negative) photo evidence is positively proof that they are hiding flatness from us all.

When logic comes before or even absent of any grammar, you end up sounding like this guy:

This “flat-earther” will be our study case today.

Now, I don’t wish to talk down to or disparage this man, only to show that the fallaciously ill-conceived and unfounded confidence in what he is stating as “proof” is without anything to back it up. It is not rational, it is not scientific, and it is not reasonable. It is, however, a perfectly logical set of fallacious rhetoric. And so the intention of utilizing this video is purely to show evidence of what happens when logical fallacy becomes so out of control that it approaches the ridiculous, surpassing even religion in its vulgarity to what is self-evident Truth, simply because one’s foundation is unproven or incorrectly perceived. This arrogance of positively, rightously declared ignorance permeates throughout such stylized groups, but more so from “flat-earthers” than any other I’ve ever seen. We must ultimately call it for what it is, a strictly faith-based religious cult.

I will go point by point here, taking each topic mentioned by this self-proclaimed “flat-earther,” whatever that means, and let reason and obvious evidential proofs take their course.

Firstly, and before we even press play on the video, please take notice of the design on his shirt. This is a common model used to show an almost impenetrable, apparently highly guarded ice-wall that surrounds the entirety of the border of the flat earth. Treaties between nations are in place and the continent of Antarctica is thus off limits without international governmental permissions and permits. And this is therefore said to be a secretive conspiracy to hide the flat earth, simply because no one may thus walk to the edge of the earth and… do whatever it is one would do if one were to reach the end of the earth. Take a picture maybe? Throw a stone into space?

On the other side, the side of research and reason, we simply find this notion of an ice wall around the earth comes from the efforts of early global mappers to map a round globe onto a flat piece of paper, which is way harder than one might think. Trying to draw what is round (i.e. 3-dimensional model) onto what is a flat (i.e. 2-dimensional model) in actual simulation (representation) and scale is very difficult, of course, and involves much we need not get into here for this discussion.

Today, we have the fortunate example of computer world and background modeling to show us how such maps might appear as we warp them from round (3D) to flat (2D), though below it is opposite, going from flat (2D) to round (3D). The point is, one can easily see how Antactica would be skewed to appear to stretch around the globe if it were to be drawn on a flat map, when looking at the world from above Antarctica. In other words, what appears to be a wall of ice surrounding the oceans on all sides of the 2D map resets its original form when the map is caused to be shown in its 3D model again. The outside of the 2D map would be folded together and the continent of Antarctica would be clear. The same would be true if it was the North Pole that was the bottom of the model, if the photo was taken from the south pole. And so Antarctica is stretched out to appear as a circle around the entire map, just as illustrated below in this computer model, giving it the appearance of exactly what is pictured on our “flat-earther’s” t-shirt above.

And so this “displacement effect” upon a 2D rendered map is what a “flat-earther” tries to show as “proof” that Antarctica is a ring around our other continents on a flat surface. Again, no photo evidence, just the drawings of old mappers and mariners.

One theory is that because the flag of the “United Nations” has no pictorial image of Antarctica upon its armorial, that therefore the logical conclusion is that it’s laurels must be in actually a wall of ice spreading all around the flat earth from the south pole. But again the simplest answer is usually the correct one… For we must remember or learn the foundational fact that ANTARCTICA IS A CONTINENT and NOT A NATION. There is no independent nation in or around the geographical area known as Antarctica, which is the very reason for the afore mentioned international treaties upon it. It is wholly owned by no nation, and so it is not a party to nor is it represented in the United Nations as a nation. It is not, after all, the “United Continents.” Likewise, if all of the nations in North America dropped out of the United Nations, the flag would likely not include the continent of North America upon it. So would this lack of inclusion of a known continent somehow prove that the world is triangular, and indeed not round or flat?

A simple glance at the United Nations website gives a pretty good reason why we wouldn’t see Antarctica as well… because the very middle of the flag is a vantage point from the North Pole down!

The Design

The original UN logo was created by a team of designers during the United Nations Conference on International Organization in 1945.  The design team was led by Oliver Lincoln Lundquist.

The United Nations Emblem

The design is “a map of the world representing an azimuthal equidistant projection centred on the North Pole, inscribed in a wreath consisting of crossed conventionalized branches of the olive tree, in gold on a field of smoke-blue with all water areas in white. The projection of the map extends to 60 degrees south latitude, and includes five concentric circles” (original description of the emblem).

Link–> http://www.un.org/en/sections/about-un/un-logo-and-flag/index.html

–=–

Gee… I hope I didn’t just create a new flat-earth meme, that because the olive laurels on the UN flag are gold, they must be keeping Antarctica all for them-selves so as to hoard all the gold! Or perhaps this is where all those pesky, greedy leprechauns go with all of their damned elusive pot’s o’ gold, riding the rainbow train to Antarctic happiness…

UN FLAG1

The point here is that even without applying science, mathematics, or any other “proofs” to the equation, we can immediately see that just reasoning, mixed with a tiny bit of due diligence, defeats this entire ridiculous theory of “the ice-wall.” Antarctica is simply not a nation. How simple and funny is that?

But I digress, for I do not know if there is an ice-wall around us. I have no way of knowing and have never been there, if it actually exists. I am only here to disprove what is said to be proofs, and have a bit of sarcastic fun along the way. More to the point though, this should scare you, that people may be lead to believe in such easily defeated nonsense. For all of us non-flat-earthers are essentially heretics worthy of death by little round balls. Ok, that’s an exaggeration, of course. But we are being metaphorically stoned by these styled “flat-earthers” convinced not only that everything is a lie, but that a different set of lies are a convincing model of everything.

As for this freezing ice shelved continent, though several nations have claimed as sovereign certain overlapping sections (sectors) of the continent to conduct scientific research, it is simply not a new or unique nation in and of itself. It has no representation therefore in the United Nations and so one would not expect to see it upon any United Nations map or flag. This is quite reasonable. You can read more about the international Antarctic treaties here:

Link–> https://www.state.gov/t/avc/trty/193967.htm

Oh, and by the way, in case you “flat-earthers” decide to shift your focus to the north pole, let me nip that idea right in the butt. It sits over water, not any legally or internationally recognized land. So it really isn’t by law able to be considered a nation either. I hope I don’t need to remind you here that ice is also water as well, and that even a continent-sized ice cube still cannot technically be a nation either, since water is considered as a moveable in law. Look at the flag above. The North pole is portrayed as water and not continental land.

One down, so many to go…

Let’s go back to the first example video of our rather confident “flat-earther” and his fallacious rhetoric and continue with our analysis.

In the beginning monologue our “flat-earther” states that the biggest argument against “flat-earthers” such as himself is of course the fact that they have no actual evidence to back up their claims, though our flat-earth champion seems here not to apply himself to that generalization, and seeks in this video to rebuke the fact of no facts exist. He then states that this claim of lack of evidence comes from that dismissive majority of “heliocentric enthusiasts” as a title for what I assume is another way of disparaging anyone that believes the earth is round and revolves around the sun.

To be clear, I am not writing this critique as a helio-centrist or under any other religious and/or scientific titles or belief systems. Remember, I clearly stated that “I don’t know” in the beginning of this post, and that my only goal is to disprove what is labeled as “100% proof” of a flat earth, as if there is a such thing as 90% or 17.8% proof? Maybe their proof system is the same as alcohol is based on? I don’t know. One can hold many theories yet hold zero proofs. That’s religion. But the most important facet about this clandestine name-calling is the link made by this “flat-earther” that anyone who does not believe in a flat-earth model must therefore logically believe in a heliocentric model. Why? This is unclear, since the shape of the earth itself does not prove or disprove in any way that the earth revolves around the sun or is stationary. So what about geocentrism? Can I not be a believer in geocentrism and also believe in the general roundness of the planets and of Earth? Again, this is but a fallacious, false connection created to make the flat-earth model more appealing and factual by association or lack thereof, when in fact it makes no difference at all to the shape of the earth.

He goes on to state that the distance of the sun from the earth is a heliocentric model-based factoid, when in fact shape has nothing to do with any heliocentric theory or any other. But how could the shape of the earth be a correlation to the distance of the earth to the sun? Answer: It doesn’t. Whether these measurements are accurate or not, at best, fall under the knowledge category of I DON’T KNOW EXACTLY AND NEVER WILL. And yes, this is the best scientific answer possible! This is just more false-association and fallacious logic without reasonable grammar.

And here we see the immediate development of an us against them, or us against everyone else in the universe mentality, even as his rhetoric takes upon itself an almost religious quality of belief over reason, as if he is one of a new persecuted society of true believers.

The name of this video, by the way, is “The Sun Is The Smoking Gun.”

His first specific argument is that all drawings of the universe are CGI computer models.

Now, I hate to even feel the need to state this, but what the hell else is there? What else could there even be? This statement is one of those beg the question fallacies that implies that there could or should be some other kind of image of the universe showing all the planets to scale that is kept somehow secret from us. Perhaps the aliens faxed it over last century? You know, when faxes were universally cool? But where could such a “real” image come from otherwise? Wouldn’t one need to float way outside of Pluto’s course to possibly obtain such an image of the entire solar system? And would the sun not just appear from that vantage point as merely another bright star in the far distance?

Yes, all the pictures you see of the sun and planets are art or computer images. Duh! And no, they are not nor can they be to scale, because the scale would require 10’s or 100’s of miles of paper to print out. Not to mention, that while portrayed at such a scale the planets would be unseen by the naked eye, making the map pointless for study. So yes, they are drawn in and over-exagurated. Surprise! If you think that is a conspiracy to hide flat earth, I don’t even know what to say to that. How can this possibly be related to anything about flat earth? There is absolutely no correlation of the shape of the earth to the distance of each planet to the sun. This is just another completely unrelated topic used as false proof, as compared to the question: Is the earth flat?

100% dud there…

Now, standing as what has to be the most ridiculous disassociation from known science, physics, and just downright common sense and perception, our “flat-earther” shows a “proof” of something that I honestly have never heard before. At around the 2:20 mark in the video above, he actually points to the suns reflection on the clouds (atmosphere) and calls it a “hot spot.” He is actually looking at the reflection of the sun from the camera’s vantage point and thinking that the bright reflection of the sun’s light is causing a “hot spot” to form over the earth. Now at first I thought for sure this had to be a joke. But he just kept on as if absolutely this was a reasonable conclusion.

He then shows footage of the sun shining in different directions through the clouds, claiming that this means that if you follow the rays of the sun, it is really much closer to earth than is officially stated. Again, this photographic evidence is not proof in any way that the earth is flat, just more rhetoric without proper grammar and logic applied. If he’s right though, the sun would appear to be hovering in this picture to be about 2 or 3 miles above the clouds according to the way the sun rays line up. So it’s really close! Therefore… the earth is flat. LOL!

I’m sorry, but it is very hard to control my sarcasm here, so bear with me.

What he didn’t bother to check with reference to these “crepuscular rays,” which have everything to do with the point of ones linear perspective, are something called anti-crepuscular rays or anti solar rays, which actually do the opposite of these crepuscular rays he shows in his video example. Anti solar rays appear (as an illusion) to converge away from the sun instead of at the sun. Both are illusions, just like a rainbow is an optical illusion (unless you are a leprechaun). And so here again, just a tad bit of due diligence would show our “flat-earthed” theorist that his theories are quite self-debunkable.

New “flat-earther” meme: if the anti solar rays of the sun don’t point to the sun, the sun must therefore not exist. Oh, wait, that’s why they are called ANTI solar. The point is that these rays, called crepuscular rays, are also not coming directly from the sun, but from the atmospheric reproduction of them. And so no, they are not a measurement of where the sun is in the sky.

Logic without grammar…

By all means, simply type in these terms into an image finder and marvel at what comes up — a beautiful and well known phenomenon that we have all witnessed personally at some point in our lives. But to say something is well known does not make it any less of a natural or optical illusion.

And yet amazingly, arrogantly, confident and absolutely sure of himself, he continues in his false proofs as if a prophet of the sun deity…

His next point is the Earth’s supposed distance from the sun, called colloquially as the “Goldilocks” position in reference to the fairy tale of Goldilocks and the Three Bears, where the earth is just right. But of course, it is the atmosphere of the earth that is just right, not the position of it. If we loose our atmosphere by any significant degree for any reason, little Goldilocks will suddenly find herself with a really bad sunburn and won’t be feeling just right. In fact, her little face will either melt off or become a popsicle.

The correct answer to this distance measurement?

I do not know. Nor shall I. Nor am I meant to.

In answer to his irrational question then I would say no, I would not expect anything in space to be ablaze that is outside of the ring of Earth’s positional field because I would also not know its atmospheric capabilities. This mixture of scientific referential and bold-faced sci-fi conjecture is enough to cause a rational man to bleed out of his anus in angst and incurable frustration. Maybe that’s the point. The joke? However, again I would answer that I don’t know, man, because I have no idea what space is or what it’s made of, what the sun is or what it’s made of, nor what the distance is between these things. And neither do you. I cannot reasonably have unwarranted confidence in one unknown only to use that unknown to prove or disprove another unknown entity. But, according to “flat-earthers,” since apparently we cannot believe anything NASA says, why use NASA information while at the same time trying to prove NASA is a fraud?

Seriously, if we get any less rational, we are going to end up disproving the existence of fire by splashing water on it!

For the next one, I’ll just quote this dude to save time and energy…

“So why is it that here, on earth, you see- you look up and you see the sun, and the sun, always has a blue background, but when you see these official images from the trusted scientific community and the good folks over at NASA who are raking in that $52 million dollars a day, you see the sun and it’s always a black background. Why does that– why does that happen, why does it look that way. Ask– Ask these questions to yourself.”

–=–

It is perhaps this last statement that answers the rest. Why would one ask a question to one’s self? Knowing that one’s self does not already know the answer, is it really reasonable to proceed then to asking one’s self for the answer?

Essentially, he is asking, why is the sky blue?

But what about at night, when we look out in space and see 1,000’s of stars that are supposedly suns? Why isn’t space blue at night time? When the sun is behind us, instead of shining directly in our atmosphere, then we see the same darkness he is questioning. There is (apparently) no atmosphere (like ours) around the sun, and therefore there are no rays bouncing through our sky giving off a blue tint. We would need to be looking at the sun from behind an atmosphere to see the color of the atmosphere. Yet he questions why it is black behind, not in front of the sun. This is another laugh out loud moment, being but more priceless logical fallacy.

But by all means, ask your self to make sure your self knows the answer.

Again, this is simply a matter of perspective. The sky is no more blue than a rainbow is the appearance of its colors. Our perception of what we label as the color “blue” is merely the available light allowed (filtered) through our own limited capacity to see.

This children-oriented science museum in Louisiana explains it thusly:

“…One of the main factors in determining a sunset’s color is the Earth’s atmosphere. The atmosphere is made up mostly of gases as well as some other molecules and particles thrown in for good measure. The most common gasses in our atmosphere are nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (21%). The remaining single percent is made up of water vapor and lots of tiny solid particles like dust, soot & ash, pollen, and salt from the oceans. There are also trace gasses like argon present. Also, depending on where you live, you’ll have to factor in that volcanoes can put large amounts of dust particles high into the atmosphere and pollution can add different gases or dust and soot to the air as well.

The atmosphere of the Earth can be thought of like a filter on a camera lens.

Light from a light bulb or the Sun may look white, but it is actually a combination of many colors. When you see light filtered through a prism you’ll see this white light split up into its separate colors, i.e. wavelengths. White light is the colors of the spectrum blended into each other. And a rainbow that you see in the sky is actually a natural prism effect as rain drops split those different colors up.  The colors have different wavelengths, frequencies, and energies. Violet has the shortest wavelength. Red has the longest wavelength. The shorter the wavelength means the more powerful the frequency.”

–=–

In other words, when this guy says to “trust your own eyes,” every scientist in the world reacts in painful spasm, since our own eyes are naturally filtered from seeing most of the spectrum of available light. Our eyes are like a filter (camera lens) for the brain, which is a beautiful gift of Nature, letting us see only what we need to see for our environment and survival in Nature.

Let’s just put it this way… if the atmosphere wasn’t there to protect your sorry ass, you wouldn’t be asking why the sky (atmosphere) is blue in the first place, now would you. Why not wonder at its glory than question its visual and functional reality?

But let us pause here yet again to ask that ever so important and repetitive question: what in the hell does the blue sky have to do with the earth being flat?

Essentially, he answers his own question by stating the fact that in space, when looking at pictures of the sun, the background black, while from earth and within its atmosphere, it is blue.

And that leads us to the logical fallacy of the day: because NASA rakes in 52 million a day it cannot be trusted. NASA draws and creates CGI pictures of what it cannot otherwise take pictures of and fills in colors to see things in its published pictures (and always discloses to us it is doing so), therefore it again cannot be trusted.

By this logic, we cannot trust graphic engineers or structural architects unless their drawings match exactly to what the final constructed building will look like, including the color scheme picked out by the eccentric billionaires that will corporately dwell therein.

Again, let me remind the reader, I am not defending anyone or anything, including NASA. Please don’t shoot the messenger. I am only disposing what is labeled as 100% proof by someone who calls, identifies, and publicly displays himself culturally as a “flat-earther.”

Moving on…

Once again, at about 8:40 into this horrifyingly laughable video, I will need to quote our “flat-earther” just to show the idiocracy of what is being stated with no sign of apology or awareness of any of the sciences.

“If you actually just trust your senses — if you, you can pop on YouTube, or you can, you know, take a look at this video and find additional videos, you’re gonna find that there are time-lapses that people have taken of the sun moving across the sky. And while the sun’s moving across the sky, you’ll notice that the Earth seems to be stationary, like, the Earth isn’t moving; the buildings that you see aren’t moving. You see the sun drifting across the sky. So wha- what does that tell you? We’re told that the Earth is rotating around the sun, yet we feel no movement, we don’t see any motion, we don’t feel any motion out here, but we feel stillness when we go outside. And, in the time-lapse you see the sun moving across the sky, just like that (hand motion). So what does that tell you? I believe that tells you to trust your senses. And what does your senses tell you? Your senses tell you that the sun is the thing that is moving and that the Earth is flat and stationary. But let’s go on…”

–=–

Firstly, I love that he says trust your senses, and in the same sentence tells us to watch YouTube. In other words, trust the CGI. Trust digital technology. Just don’t trust NASA or government or any of them there round-earthers and their usage of YouTube.

So here he actually points to the fact that when we set up a STATIONARY camera pointed at the sky, the Earth for some reason does not seem to move. The buildings stay where they are. LOL! Only the sun seems to move across the sky.

Do I need to even comment on this?

If you don’t understand, then go buy a mountable camera and perhaps jump off a cliff. Afterwords, if you survive, you can marvel at how everything but the tip of your hat seems to move, but not what the camera is mounted upon. The mountains, the buildings, the sky… everything just seems to be flying by in utter chaos! Be careful though, because that large mass of land coming straight for the camera is actually the round earth about to smack the hell out of you.

As to the motion fallacy, I can merely direct the reader of this, and any flat-earther” for that matter, to go and drive your car at 90 miles an hour down the wrong side of the highway. Once you reach that speed, you’ll notice that if you drop a quarter, it falls straight down as if you are standing still. You will also notice that you cannot actually feel the motion of traveling at 90 miles an hour, since you are not accelerating or decelerating any more. But eventually you’ll cause a crash with an oncoming car or truck, and you will definitely feel that motion. May sting a little, but at least you’ll be able to rationalize how it is we don’t feel the turn or motion of the Earth.

Now again, I don’t claim to know anything about this. Are we turning? I don’t know. Are we spinning and darting through space with reckless abandon in a spiral with the sun and other planets like crumbs in the garbage disposal of space? I don’t know.

However, I will point out again that the notion that the earth is stationary or that it is spinning or that it is rocketing through space… has nothing to do with the Earth being flat or round. So please stop equating unreliable concepts together.

Seriously, this has to be a practical joke, right?

Trust your senses. But let me tell you what your senses tell you, because I’m a “flat-earther” and everyone else is round and heliocentric.

My favorite part of this video, starting at about the 10 minutes mark or so, is the ill-conceived story and experiment he tells about calling up his friends in England and in Australia to show that sunlight is in all three places at once, and that this is somehow impossible on a globe model earth. Now, he could have just gone to the time zone websites and pulled up this information himself, to see that when he called his friends internationally they would tell him exactly what would be expected at that moment. But instead, without checking any source or even having the conscious awareness to verify his claim, he arrogantly presents a completely ridiculous “story” of how the fact that his friends can see the sun rising and setting at the same time it is directly over his head in the western state of Washington proves the earth is flat.

So I pulled up what I believe any rational man would pull up, the time zone charts based on the round earth that everyone is familiar with and for which our entire time and travel infrastructure is based on. Now I have data to compare to an anecdotal phone call that presents absolutely no proof of anything except that the sun can be seen in three places at once. To our flat-earthed, this duel phone call is proof-positive that the earth must be flat. I have no idea what this is so, except again to point out the lack of grammar that his dialectic (logic) is built upon, leaving his rhetoric completely in the realm of the absurd.

Here is the data set I found after 5 minutes of reasonable research. I looked at the sunset charts for England and Australia today (August 23, 2017) which can be found and inquired of here:

Link–> (https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/@2175819)

–=–

Australia (Biloela Queensland): Time was 6:17 am and the sun was at 78 degrees — Video shows 6:06 am, and sun is barely rising (not quite yet beginning to rise – to quote: “just coming up”) in that video, just as one would expect from the data set provided.

6:18 am  (78°) 5:43 pm  (282°)

–=–

England (West Yorkshire):  Video shows sun already quote: “over the hill” referring to a sun already set and out of site, and that it was apparently a quote: “nice sunset.” The website shows an equal dataset, predicting the sunset to happen at 8:17 pm, with a 290 degree angle, just as one would expect immediately after sunset at 9:06 pm (time of video).

5:59 am  (69°) 8:17 pm  (290°)

–=–

Note that these degree points are referencing the upward direction as well as either east or west. In other words, the sun that is being seen at sunset in Queensland Australia is also being seen as a sunset in West Yorkshire England, just was recorded on the globe model.

Next we simply plug in where our “flat-earther” happens to be standing while conducting this hilariously this botched experiment while making it sound logically as absolute proof. He is in Tacoma Washington, at what just happens to be the exact middle off the day, or what is officially called the “solar noon.” And we see that the degree of angle shows the sun to be in the middle of the sky, at 180 degrees (the middle point between sunset and sunrise).

1:12 pm (53.9°), heading (180°)

Link–> https://www.timeanddate.com/sun/usa/tacoma

–=–

And so, this means that what England sees as a sunset and Australia sees as a sunrise is actually the middle of the day in the Western most United States (Pacific Time Zone). And this just happens to be exactly what the globe model predicts would happen. And yet this little “story” of our “flat-earther” calling other internationally unorganized “flat-earthers”  states this to be absolute 100% proof (the name of the video) that the earth is flat.

To be clear, when we look at the “globe” model map below, we can see that in order for this to have happened, the sun would be over the State of Washington, to which the eastern shore of Australia would see this solar noon as the eastern rising morning sun, while In Western Europe, specifically in England, we would also see the sun setting in the west. This can only happen on this round earth, for on flat earth maps we see Australia being east of both America and England. So how could Australia be seeing the solar noon in America by looking east at the same time England is looking west?

We know the answer, of course. Do I actually have to say it? That the map connects to the other side of the map…

And so even more hilarious to consider while listening to this “flat-earther” preach, this little experiment actually disproves the validity of any flat earth model, since if the sun was hovering over North America, it would be seen as a westward sunrise in both Europe and Australia, and nothing from the East. In other words, the sun would rise and set only in the west in Australia according to this flat-earth model.

Globe map

So what does this mean?

Between chuckles and outright bursts of uncontrollable laughter, it means that this self-proclaimed “flat-earther” just proved the exact readings one finds on sites such that NASA would run. He literally proved that the “globe” model does exactly what it says it does, and that a flat earth model does not jive with the suns placement in the skies!

But don’t be fooled by my research here… for this is actually, somehow, some way, proof that the Earth is flat, but satirically so, and only in a round sort of way.

Now at this point we must begin to speculate that this whole flat earth thing is just a very widely played joke, or that it is indeed merely just another counter-culture mind game with a goal towards total domination through controlled chaos of a completely irrational idiocracy… kinda like the movie version. Even the majority of comments left in this video ask if it is a joke, while most of the remainder of comments are insults hurled at “round-earthers” and “heliocentric enthusiasts” that offer no substance or proofs, very much like a religious argument should be.

But can we really compare the movie with today’s reality?

.

–=–

Perhaps the greatest and most appealing fallacies is the fact that when we look at the horizon, we see with our own eyes that it is flat. And so we again apply logic without grammar, and conclude that our perception must be correct. But please allow me to attempt to explain why it is that we do not see curvature on the horizons of our Earth, based on the globe model…

But how does one tell in words what would need to be experienced to comprehend? We can only try here to explain the only rational outcome of what it would be like to stand on a perfectly round (3-dimentional) ball or globe.

To start, we must realize that everywhere we look at the horizon, say if no mountains were in our way, that is forward, backward, right, left, and every point in between, would necessarily be at an equal vantage point wherever we may look. In other words, the horizon would be flat in appearance, and the curvature would not be perceptible, since every point on the horizon is at the same height from our perspective.

Remember, this is all about perspective. You’ll need to use your imagination for this one, keeping it bound to reason.

So let us pretend that while we are standing on a perfectly round globe model of anything, and therefore are standing automatically at its highest point, that we are then told to look for curvature on the horizon between the right and left points on opposite sides from one another, and then for the curvature from in back of us to the very front of our position.

Where would the perspective of such curvature begin and end, if everywhere you turned upon a perfect globe and therefore every horizontal point of the surface spread equally out in front of you? Answer: the horizon would appear flat (equidistant) because we are viewing the globe not in 3d but only two-dimensionally (length/hight).

If it started at the front and went left or right in its curvature, then there would be nothing left behind us when we turned around, since the curvature would not allow for that or any other equal point to exist, and this would actually, ironically, and mathematically prove it not to be a perfect globe. It is in fact the 2D perception of flatness that proves the actual 3D roundness. In other words, the horizon would need to curve back up in order to reach the level horizontal point behind us and on each side of us, and for that matter at every point we can see. If we saw a curve in front of us, curving left and right in a downward (fisheye) style, it would have curved in front of us to the point where nothing would be left to see when we turn around. But the point behind us is at the same horizontal plane as that which is in front, left, and right of us. So where could this supposed curve of the globe possibly manifest itself when the plane or horizon of it is equal on all sides (perspectives) from our two-dimensional vantage point? It cannot. It’s like a reverse optical illusion. And we are missing a whole dimension of perspective.

And so again we see here that the very answers to the questions posed by these self-proclaimed “flat-earthers” are actually the same answers as to why the earth is not flat. To apply one or two-dimensional logic to a three-dimensional equation will always cause confusion… and false religion.

I’m not sure what to conclude from this ridiculous collection of 100% proof of flat Earth, except that it is so unbelievable that someone could actually believe it. If anything, this “flat-earther” just proved that quite the opposite to be true. In any case, this whole counter-cultural meme and identity of false-persecution just needs to stop. To all my friends who have presented me with similar, easily refutable “evidence” of a flat Earth, I appeal to you to focus on what is Real and verifiable.

This is not dissimilar to the Mandela Effect hoax, to which I did a similar discourse on. The key to remember is that nothing in Nature, nothing in Reality is changing, only the artifice, entertainments, cartoons, timelines, and fictional histories of men. These are not Reality. And neither is the flat Earth model.

Link–> https://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2016/06/08/a-strong-delusion-the-mandela-effect/

However, I end this by stating again that I don’t know. I have not proven anything here today, only debunked what others are labeling as “truth” and “proof.”

If you would like me to go over other flat earth mysteries, false positive proofs, and fallacies, please let me know. I’ll tackle them one by one in the comments below. And if I don’t know, I will say I don’t know.

To be clear, for those who hurl insults instead of reasonable comments…

I do not love NASA. I do not side with any side, because Truth only has one side, and one either knows or does not know Truth. I do not love government. I despise doctors, scientists, and any other flattering titles bestowed by this syndicalist education, diplomacy, and licensing system. I am not any label, so don’t call me one. I don’t believe in the flat earth or the round earth or the square earth or the triangular earth or the trapezoidal earth. I don’t believe in the heliocentric or the geocentric or the egocentric position of the earth. And I will give no comment space for those who declare that by default I must be any or all of the above. Only rational statements of reason are asked for here. I don’t want to be dared to research anything and I won’t be amazed by what you present. I will only research it primarily and let you know what I find, with the caveat that I do not know.

In closing, it occurs to me that this would make a great script for a video. Please feel free to do so, without need of any permissions. I’d certainly love to hear this dude’s response!

Now, please focus on what is self-evident, self-existent, as that which needs no proof to establish its already clear existence. Smell the flowers and cherish what beauty and Realness is left here for your senses to enjoy, before this scientific community genetically modifies us and our environment into the internet of all things.

.

–Clint > richard-son (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Thursday, August 24th, 2017

 

 

Strawman (Volume I) Now Shipping!


Greetings programs…

After fighting what can only be described as an extremely uphill battle, being such an inexperienced little fish in a pond of some very large and filthy corporate sharks, I am happy to announce that “STRAWMAN: The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person – Volume 1” is being printed and bound as I write this, and will officially begin shipping on Monday of next week (August 7th, 2017). I can’t possibly make any more rookie mistakes or trip over any more stumbling blocks! No more changes or corrections — of which there were a seemingly endless supply. What is written will not be undone — a scary thought — and thanks to all of your support and trust, I was able to get printed a total of 2,000 copies.

How ironic that this day falls but one day before my own strawman debtor’s birth event day (August 8th) — the day the informed upon Clint Richardson was legally berthed into this open-air debtor’s prison for so-called “natural persons.” And like every victim of this human capital management system of the district, I was at every turn tricked into voluntarily using (confirming) that false persona in agency as a legal vessel in commerce.

I am assured that Strawman will begin shipping free to all who have donated towards my efforts and requested a free copy as a gift, beginning this Monday. I hope that the receipt of this gift has been worth the wait, and I thank you all for your support and patience.

I have already sent out an email to each of you that I have confirmed for shipment on my mailing list, for those in the 50 States only. I am still working on international pricing and lists. If you did not receive an email but are expecting a printed copy to be sent to you domestically, please contact me to correct my records. Those in other countries should expect a confiramtion email shortly.

–=–


–=–
Warning: This work is not approved by church and state!

Inside Volume I:
Over 2,000 legal word-terms defined
Over 300 Bible texts/verses examined
Over 500 sourced quotes and citations
—=–

For all of the delays and seemingly purposeful obfuscations I have experienced in trying to get printed this private work in book-form without falling prey to the typical legalisms, big box print-on-demand mentality, and other corporate strangleholds, as well as doing so with the firm and unbroken insistence that it was printed without numbers, ISBN’s, barcodes, or any other “publishing” marks and government interventions and tracking devices, I could certainly tell you some amazing stories. I took the route less traveled, the hardest road, sticking with my demands of privacy and thus printing an unpublished work that is certainly not in any way registered or approved by church and state! Instead, I have chosen to learn from this series of unfortunate events some very valuable lessons, both legal and moral, to accept the things and persons I cannot change, and to be contented and happy that I finally found an honest printer.

–=–

“…I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.”

–Robert Frost

–=–

Though I may be telling my own story from some future prison or camp for political and religious dissenters, I am happy to say that I will be telling it with the utmost dignity. And yes, this certainly makes all the difference.

Though presently exhausted by this ongoing work and by the mental obstical course I just suffered, I will continue to work on Volume II and other works until I physically die or am made a civilly dead prisoner of the corporate church’s state. I figure that my next-next project after the Strawman series will be the history of the CAFR and how it was used to take us clandestinely into the globalism we find ourselves in today, and how combined government (an artificial persona), through investments and proxy shareholder voting, owns and controls it all! You aren’t shopping at Chevron, Costco, Apple, or Time Warner, you are always a “customer” of and shopping at government (a singular incorporation of all corporations). No corporation is created without (outside of) government. We live our commercial (fictional/dead) existence (persona) in a national company store, where all corporations are majority-share held by government investments, and where each board of directors is elected by proxy shareholder bidding by the collective, majority shareholder, which again is collectively government. And, of course, you can only spend government’s patented script, money or credit, which are both merely debt instruments — IOU’s. And so you are always using the property of another.

Not ironically, this was one of the biggest complaints of the original American colonists, that they should be taxed and forced to sped the script of the King of England, a script they could not create and had to borrow or earn from the king itself. But then, at least the colonists knew their status, that a colony is literally a company store of the crown, and that the word colony merely means the farm or plantation of a master.

These facts answer just about every question you may ever have about why corporations literally get away with murder, and why government never regulates corporations, for they are their main beneficiary and shareholding profiteer. And the highest corporate law is that the shareholders must make profit and gain on their investment. But this is another story… the story of the ultimate in conflict of interests.

I wish again here to thank everyone over the years who has donated towards my full time, unpaid activism, movie-making, radio hosting and guesting, and writing, all of which are freely shared with all who seek and always will be.

I again remind you that my new work, “Strawman: The Real Story of Your Artificial Person: Volume 1” is and always will be FREE to download in digital form (pdf) at my website, and that the printed version is not ready to be given (see website for instructions):

LINK–> strawmanstory.info

I am today updating the final, free version as printed, after correcting many spelling and grammatical mistakes, which will look then exactly as it is now printed. Please feel free to download and enjoy this work, both as a walkthrough of the legal matrix and as a seriously huge and utilizable resource outlet.

–=–
What Now?
–=–

1st of all, I think it’s time to dust off this old blog and start using it again. So… I’m back!

2nd, of course, I will continue with future volumes of Strawman and other works.

3rd, I’d say it’s about time to make another vaccine documentary. The ultimate documentary. One that cannot be outdone. One that names names and destroys false reputations. One that exposes even the “anti-vaccine” circuit as frauds in controlled opposition, who call for “safe” vaccines as if there is such a thing. But most importantly, one that shows vaccines for exactly what they are  — a well laid plan, as a time-released, biological weapon.

4th, and this is where I could use a bit of help, I’d like to start a radio show again. But you see, like many of you, I don’t know where I “fit in” any more, or at least who would be brave (or dumb) enough to permit me to speak with free reign about how little truth is being spewed in the so-called truth-movement. Who wants to hear that patriotism is a psychopathy like Stockholm Syndrome while at the same time hearing advertisements within commercial airtime by so-called “patriot” corporations, as if Chinese junk and red, white, and blue stuff can ever feel patriotic? Who wants to hear that most of us are not one of “We, the People” or that these so-called “People” don’t actually even exist in Reality, that “the People” is just a corporation (artificial person) called as the States? Who wants to let me rant about The Corporation Nation we are all unwitting yet voluntary agents (employees) of?

—=—

“A state, is called the coldest of all cold monsters. Coldly lieth it also; and this lie creepeth from its mouth: “I, the state, am the people.” It is a lie! Creators were they who created peoples, and hung a faith and a love over them: thus they served life. Destroyers, are they who lay snares for many, and call it the state: they hang a sword and a hundred cravings over them. Where there is still a people, there the state is not understood, but hated as the evil eye, and as sin against laws and customs.”

—Friedrich Nietzsche, from ‘Thus Spoke Zarathustra’

—=—

In short, it seems there is no place out there for the self-evident Truth! You see, the Truth doesn’t sell… only mythology sells. Empty hope without end sells. Fear sells. Lies sell. Sex sells. But undeniable Truth? There is simply no market for it. And so, I’ll just simply put it out there that I am looking for a new home for my new show. I already have a title…

RED PILL SUNDAY SCHOOL

TAGLINE: Buy the truth, and sell it not…” (Proverbs 32:32)

Want to hear me rant profusely and wax philosophical? Want to see the legal matrix (artificial womb) for what it is? Want to hear again from Patrick, Daniel, and other kindred spirits sharing this journey? Well then help me find an uncensored broadcasting home, if there is such an entity…

Or, maybe you fancy yourself organized, like a producer, and want to help me to organize and run a podcast? I’ll take a radio host spot from the highest bidder… which, of course, will be nothing, nada, zero, as it always is for those who will not — can not conform. Just let ’em know I am seeking a soapbox. And, of course, that I would love to do more radio, both interviews and hosting, now that this Strawman soft cover is finally finished and available.

On a final note, I wish to thank everyone that has helped me to finally get this work printed, and for trusting in me, both monetarily but especially with your time, care, and kind words. You know who you are, and you know I could not have done this project without you, from editing to spell-checking to donations to some much needed criticism.

A very special thanks to Craig Stuckless and his artistic hand, as the cover artist for this Strawman series. His brilliant work was given to the project freely, and the time and effort Craig put into this was incredible and incalculable to most. Thankfully, his professional experience with the print industry helped me in ways I cannot begin to relay or repay here.

Craig’s portfolio of artwork can be seen here: http://cargocollective.com/artofcraigs

For those who understand what it is to give your time freely as a professional, if anyone would like to help me raise some funds to offer to Craig as a gift for his many weeks of work on this art project, I’d be very appreciative. Like myself, like my now strange story, he is trying to escape the controlled corporate art world while at the same time attempting to use his professional skills for charitable and activist purposes. And that means sacrifice, both mentally and physically, socially and especially financially. Just let me know in an email or make a note that your donation should go to Craig And I’ll see to it. At this point, I am almost tapped out from printing and must still pay for the initial shipping of a few hundred copies of Strawman, so any help in gifting him is much appreciated. Craig has helped me out along the way in too many ways to even mention here. Other examples of his work on Strawman include these:

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Just how much time and work did this take?

Check out Craig’s many layers of artistic expression on Strawman here:
–>https://issuu.com/artofcraigs/docs/the_production_manual_series_-_case

–=–

With all of this said, I can only hope this work was worth the wait, and that it brings forward to each of you what you have been seeking — self evident Truth and knowledge.

The latest version, which is the same as the now printed version (without index), will be posted and the update noted at StrawmanStrory.info and always free to download, with many errors now corrected. This will always be free in its pdf form, so feel free to share it freely, never for profit, with good intent. You cannot possibly steal from he who gives freely, so give without concern.

Now, however, I need you all once again, your word of mouth. Spread the website or give away the pdf at will, and help me to get onto different radio shows to spread this work and more importantly the True and only Law.

Volume II, by the way, is well in the works.

Check back soon at StrawmanStory.info for an updated, final and always free pdf to download.

Be and stay well, for you may already be the remnant…

.

Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
Friday, August 4th, 2017