Intellectual Technology

Intech Concepts 27
(Indicators of Reasoning Process)


Simplest social equation in human history.... 4 January 2006

It is among the simplest and most proven social equations in human history.

The use of force escalates to the self-defeat of the institution that is using force, always.

Even when the US RepublicratDemocan Regime created the US Homeland Security Gestapo, patterned after its German predecessor of the 1940's, in addition to the 54 other overlapping armed US federal law enforcement agencies designed to use force, in addition to all those of the State and local governments, not one DemocanRepublicrat in the US, either with or without a government job, could understand the equation, or they would not be RepublicratDemocans.

As each force-based American government enforcement agency failed its claims, on schedule, because it created rather than resolved contradictions, creating the perceived need to form each next such armed agency, not one DemocanRepublicrat understood the reason for the failure of the other enforcement agencies predicated on the aforementioned equation. Not one of the pitiable lot could comprehend the concept of resolving the controlling contradictions of the existing agency or agencies to thus preclude the need for fabricating each next armed agency that was therefore doomed to duplicate the unresolved contradictions that inherently insured the failure of each next armed agency.

They could read these words, and they will still create each next such government agency threatening and attacking the people with more armed force, wielded by unquestioning mental midgets given government titles, guns, and yet more power to summarily impose force above reasoning. The first agency was not enough, nor the 10th, nor the 20th, nor the 50th, nor the next number, until that process in sum defeats itself, on schedule, for the simple failure to understand the above equation.

The humans, especially the Americans, are that laughably ignorant and primitive.

Enjoy the show.

If you are young enough, not yet fooled by the ignorant adults, simply learn the knowledge of how to preclude such a government of malicious idiots using force to dictate your life, if you retain any incentive to use the knowledge after you learn it.

Simply ask and answer the questions that the adults flee or dodge with their laughably obvious lies and other contradicted answers that they believe to thus fool themselves.



And Now Therefore...... 6 January 2006

Having considered the above obvious equation regarding the inherent self-defeat of power, and next reading this section rather than more wisely asking and answering the questions your own mind creates, what more would you want to know of the power game, for this use of your time?

The power game identifies an ignorant and primitive human society, and is that which stagnates humans, to slow or preclude what they would otherwise achieve with the perhaps unlimited ability of their mind. Power is the counter balance to reasoning. Reasoning can achieve the zenith of the human design. Power is designed to destroy that potential, for a purpose you may have recognized.

If you function within a society of ignorant humans, you are beset by the game. Your only escape from the game, while living, is to live as a true hermit, or learn how to change the game. The paucity of hermits indicates another part of the game. A change in the game has not occurred as of this date, for a reason you can learn. Any rhetorical ruses do not effect an escape from the game. If you interact with the ignorant humans, you are in the game and its effects, until you or a person with the knowledge and incentive changes the game.

Therefore, if you wish to regain the command of reasoning, and preclude the effects of power within the game of your existence, first you must prove the above, not merely conclude that it is true. And you would do that for a particular reason.

No belief, no matter how intensely you believe the belief, is of utility to your mind for knowledge beyond the belief until you can prove the belief by being able to answer every possible question of the belief, and therein resolve every perceived contradiction to the belief. Therein your mind will hold the knowledge that is used for the questions of the next contradictions beyond the belief.

Ask the questions. Answer them. Write them.

Your having done that, to verify the flawless nature of the self-defeat of power, if you wish, you therefore recognize, among all the other examples, that the US RepublicratDemocan Regime, including its every politician, bureaucrat, court judge, lawyer, think tank expert and flag waving supporter, will continue its insatiable, inherently self-defeating quest for infinite power over the other guy, his any reasoning ability, by each increment it can create, on schedule, until it collapses, after progressively destroying everything it can, and causing as much human grief as it can, within the North American society and elsewhere. Every DemocanRepublicrat could read these words, and they would still maliciously destroy the US society, as such, on schedule, for the proof that you would be able to identify against every question, or they would not be RepublicratDemocans.

Are these words not true of every power-based governmental empire before it inherently collapsed, and did the government supporters not all say that their government was better than the other governments, and working to correct its own mistakes, as do the American DemocanRepublicrats?

Therefore, what could your unlimited mind do with the knowledge that can be proven against every question any human can create, while every US DemocanRepublicrat is attempting to defy that knowledge to seize more armed power over the other guy, for what they foolishly perceive as the mechanism to save their Regime from the increasing threats that they perceive from their current lack of enough power?

Your mind would therefore hold the knowledge lacking in the minds of every RepublicratDemocan (any power-based institution), and can identify their every inherently self-defeating contradiction, and therefore identify every resolution, much to your robust laughter at the comedy of the American DemocanRepublicrat Regime and all other power-based institutions.

Thereupon, if you retained any incentive to do so, instead of otherwise continuing to advance your knowledge into arenas of inordinate intrigue, you could promptly defeat and correct their contradicted or maliciously damaging actions, and effect a quantum advancement of the American society.



Define your intellect... 7 January 2006

From your own answers to related questions, who are verifiably the least intelligent people of your society?

And why?

Would not some identified classification of people, by your perception of, least intelligent, occupy that definition?

And of what intellectual utility is your ability to verify your perception?

Are they not the military, police, court judges, legislators, lawyers, governors, presidents, government bureaucrats, and their ilk, quite like myself when I was so foolish as to have stagnated my mind as one such sort?

Do not the least intelligent people of any society display, manifest or espouse their desire to force those other people (you) to do what those least intelligent people want more-thinking people to do? Would not a person resort to the use of force (muscles and guns) because he is too ignorant and too intellectually lazy to figure out (ask and answer questions) the easy process to utilize reasoning (the mind) to achieve the assistance or cooperation of other people?

The defining or controlling concept is the use of force of arms instead of the human mind's reasoning ability.

For how long would an automobile dealer, house builder, candy or wine maker, or anyone else offering a product or service, be successful if he forced you to buy his products or services, at gun point or threat of jail?

What controlling mechanism distinguishes private enterprise from government enterprise?

How do inherently equal human minds react to another person's use of force, by design?

For how long can your people force those other people, before those other people, therefore acquiring incentive to learn how to outwit your people, learn the knowledge to easily do so because your people have learned only how to use force of muscles or guns, rather than their minds? And would you want your offspring to be among mental midgets learning only how to more effectively shoot the other guy, or how to use their mind?

Are not the least intelligent people those who perceive their muscles and guns to be superior to their minds? Would that perception not be identified by their use of guns instead of their minds?

How long does it take each person to learn how to use the simple and interesting mechanical invention of guns, useful knowledge and a fun sport, but after that two hours, would it not be a remarkably ignorant and self-stagnating society which spent tax money to further train people in armed force rather than reasoning ability?

Street thugs, police officers or army soldiers may point a gun at you, and order you to do something under threat of being killed, which is the reason they carry guns and had already abandoned the utility of their minds.

Another person, such as a lawyer, judge, legislator, bureaucrat or their ilk may show you a law, or describe one, and order you to do something, under threat of being seized and imprisoned by an aforementioned armed police officer who may kill you if you attempt to express reasoning to his power-damaged mind.

Both above such persons, police and lawyers, are functionally identical in their use of force instead of reasoning, one with a gun, and the other with a leashed idiot with a gun. The ruse of law backed by armed police, fools only fools, such as government lawyers, judges, legislators and their ilk, into believing that they are using their minds rather than armed force, to attempt to achieve a goal. The gun remains as the controlling concept. The armed street thug, and the lawyer using laws back by armed cops, both function as armed thugs verifiably not functioning on reasoning, or they would not need their guns. The controlling concept is force, which creates a contradiction that only reasoning can sustainably resolve.

Go ahead, try to threaten a contradiction into resolving itself, and laugh robustly while police and congressmen continue threatening it with their guns and bombs.

The legislators, judges, lawyers and bureaucrats, who routinely disparage what they privately describe as their less intelligent minions, the police and military chaps who mindlessly do as they are ordered by their unarmed political leaders using simpleton deception to fool fools, are completely dependent upon the guns of the unthinking police and soldiers.

If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C, regardless of how many intermediate equal entities you apply.

Laugh yourself to tears at the majority of humans, especially the government-schooled Americans, who literally cannot understand that equation as it applies to even the simplest human actions, as you can verify with a simple series of questions, even of American public school teachers and prestigious law school professors, in front of their students.

Consider reading the above two paragraphs again.

The intellectual zenith of the police and military officers, the US Supreme Court Justices, the US President, US Senators, the most highly paid and foolishly respected government-licensed lawyers in the nation, their think tank experts, and other such Neanderthal mental midgets, is the use of a gun to threaten or kill anyone who does not do what such idiots order them to do under rhetorical ruse of law.

If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C.

Without the gun and the unquestioning therefore ignorant cop or agent with his finger on the trigger, those highly titled, self-flattering government idiots in suits and ties are feckless and ignorant of how to even start a process of reasoning with other people. If you suggest otherwise, consider stripping government of its guns, to reduce all of its personnel to the process of individual reasoning, somewhat approached by normal private enterprise, to then recognize that the government dolts are lost in an intellectual void, without their guns and processes of force.

The use of force only creates the controlling problem or contradiction.

Do you want to be forced to do something, under threat of prison, seizure of your assets, or death?

Or do you want to hear the verifiable reasoning within which your mind recognizes the benefit to you for assisting the other person with what he or she suggests for your time, effort or money?

What are your answers? Notice that government dolts flee the questions.

Of what utility are your answers for your recognition and understanding of the government people and other thugs who use force to achieve their desires?

What are the answers that would be stated by the police officer, soldier, lawyer, judge, legislator and their ilk, if they could not flee the questions?

What are the answers of the other guy facing the police or military mental midgets?

Verifiably why do those government chaps state one answer for themselves, but attempt to force the other answer onto other people who have the same brain design as the government chaps?

What would you discover as the demarcating reason for said, why, if you recognized which questions to ask as a result of the above questions, and this one?

Who are those other people in regard to the government chaps, if not you, and other government chaps, and their offspring, and persons of obviously greater education and social success?

What verifiable process related to the ability of the human mind demarcates common humans, including you, from those government chaps who seek to force you to do what they decide you should do?

Why do government bureaucrats sincerely perceive that you must get government permission (permits), under threat of jail, to do what you can obviously do without that permission?

If a reasoning-based law requires you to perform a particular action, why would you need to get government permission (a permit) and pay a permit fee, to perform that action, under threat of jail or government seizure of your money for failing to get the permit and pay the fee, instead of just performing the action in accordance to the law whose reasoning is stated in the law, without the permission to obey the law, if not for the intellectual absence of the government chaps and the unquestioning people who get the permits under threat of force?

If you are required by law to do something, does not a requirement to get permission (a permit), which if grantable is deniable, to do that something, constitute a contradiction and a proof that government dolts are laughably ignorant of the contradiction they created?

If you are required to get a government permit for an action that is lawful, while the permit is inherently deniable or it could not be permission, is the government not claiming the authority to deny you permission to perform a lawful action, which would therefore constitute an unlawful denial of your rights?

Notice that any reasoning person can answer that question, while not one government person will do so.

And therein, does not the use of government force identify a person who is too ignorant to use reasoning?

Would you want to so damage the ability of your otherwise useful human mind by getting a government job, or to teach your offspring to be that laughably incapable of thinking?

If an action is lawful, no denial of a permit (permission) to perform the action is lawful, and therefore no inherently deniable permit can be lawfully demanded. If an action is not lawful, no permit (permission) can lawfully authorize the performance of that unlawful action, and therefore no inherently grantable permit can be demanded.

The entire United States government, including all the Supreme Court and other appellate court justices who are only the most dishonest and ignorant lawyers who were therefore politically appointed to judge positions, and all the State governments, and therefore every employee of them, literally cannot understand the inescapable truth in the above sentence, as proven by the existence of government permits in the laughably ignorant nation of the United States of America.

If an action is lawful, can government permission to perform the action be lawfully denied? If an action is not lawful, can government permission be lawfully granted to perform the unlawful action? If words are not used in harmony with their meanings, does language have any utility for conveying useful knowledge?

Imagine your amusement if a government chap were put in a position to answer these questions in front of his or her offspring in a grade school or high school class of students holding tape recorders, while a common person would have no difficulty with such a situation. Government permits, licenses or mandatory registration, to perform lawful actions, contradict reasoning and prevailing law, and because they exist, identify the inability of any government person to think, as is verifiable by asking any government person a series of questions that would cause a normally capable mind to recognize one of the processes to solve all government problems. Or as a farmer would express it, prove that government idiots are dumb as a post.

Now notice how those offspring would answer the questions if you were sitting with them writing their answers as a test of their intelligence, if those offspring were young enough to still be asking normal questions, rather than having already been socialized to believe (rather than question) the laughable lies and glaring contradictions of their government employed parents.

The power-damaged minds of government and other such institutionally altered sorts literally cannot understand the concept of reasoning prevailing above the power of government to use force (guns) to deny the existence and utility of the human mind's reasoning. They trained their minds to deny the existence of the utility of their minds, by design of the human mind, much to the howling laughter of the observers and the designer.

The answers exist, and are verifiable against all questions.

How can you use that knowledge?

Would government people want their offspring to be sufficiently intelligent to answer these questions, and verify the accuracy of their answers, or would the government sorts want their offspring to remain so ignorant in life that they could not answer these easy questions while the offspring of non-government folks can learn such useful knowledge and laugh at the parentally induced ignorance of government offspring?

Notice that government court judges (lawyers) literally cannot answer that question, and are usually successful in keeping their offspring as laughably ignorant, or the institution of American court judges (lawyers) would have already learned how to answer such easy questions. The test of time has been more than ample.

Consider the high school and college offspring of government folks, who are reading these words, and who recognize that their parents and government school teachers have kept them so ignorant that they cannot answer these questions, and are routinely laughed at by their peers who can openly answer such questions.

If any of them perceive that they can answer these questions, ask them the questions in front of their parent court judge, and ask if any court judge has ever performed his or her known legal duty, the evasion of which is a crime, to initiate due process of criminal law against any court judge who has fined (convicted) any person for not having a current license or permit for an action that is otherwise lawful to perform, to thus identify their parent court judge as a repugnant criminal on millions of counts, or just so damn ignorant they cannot comprehend the contradiction.

There is no shortage of American school students who are fooled by their A grades and other honors designed for flattery, especially among government or other privileged class families, who cannot answer the simple questions herein, and who are rightfully laughed at by average and below average students who can answer the questions herein. Public school teachers are government employees, who verifiably cannot answer the questions herein, and cannot tolerate their students even reading such questions. Power-damaged minds loathe and fear the expressions of reasoning that illuminate the contradictions of power, or power could not exist as a concept within the human mind.

In contrast to the utilized power of government, notice the existence of the concept of private enterprise among humans, that is, the concept of presenting the reasoning, which anyone may openly question, that causes people to willingly trade their time and money for something that they perceive to be of benefit to them.

Notice the concept of governmental force, that is the threat of killing or imprisoning you, or seizing your money for what a government person says is of benefit to you, while that government thug is not subject to your questions before your money is seized.

Notice that, except for the notoriously malicious US RepublicratDemocan Regime and certain others who use military and police force as their primary form of communication, existing governments function with each other by the process of private enterprise, while they each function with their subjects or citizens by process of force.

If force prevails above reasoning as a means of sustainable human interaction, why does the US not attack the conquerable oil producing nations (Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Iran, west coast African nations) and seize their oil, rather than using the reasoning-based process of purchasing the oil? Notice that governments purchase the oil from other nations, then use force to seize the money from their own citizens, to pay for the oil used by the government, especially their notoriously gas guzzling militaries which ridicule fuel savings suggestions. Notice that the concept of governments has lasted longer than any one of the governments, for reason you can identify in this paragraph.

What mechanism in the human mind facilitates the contradiction to its own process of recognizing the contradiction? Write that question on a piece of paper, if you did not immediately answer it. Why do government leaders, especially the idiot US RepublicratDemocans, not understand from history that the trading nations produced the greatest advancements for their people and all people, while the warring nations all collapsed their empires, and within the gradient of any warring nation, the trading (use of the mind) created the advancements, while the warring (use of force) produced the stagnation and destruction? Not one DemocanRepublicrat in the US can understand the foregoing, as is verifiable, or they would not be RepublicratDemocans. Would not the understanding of that mechanism within the power-damaged minds of the DemocanRepublicrats and their ilk, be among the most valuable knowledge known to humans? It is readily available by simply answering the questions you are reading, among certain others.

Notice that a government dolt functioning as a court judge will routinely use force to seize assets or effect demands, while the same person outside his job will use the private enterprise process of reasoning. A police chap will routinely use force, then retire and routinely use reasoning, albeit in both cases only at the laughably rudimentary level of feeding and housing themselves because their minds have fatally damaged their otherwise vastly greater ability.

Throughout, it is the same design of human mind among all the humans, who synthesize data or information differently, that is, make different decisions that contradict the same mind's fundamental process for the same fundamental data in regard to one particular difference, that is, the illusionary perception of power over another human, consistently endorsing the use of power when power is perceived, while immediately reacting against the suggestion of another human mind expressing the same illusion for interaction with the first mind. If you think not in for first case, try to find a power-damaged mind which will willingly surrender power to rely on reasoning.

The primary and most dramatic demarcation among humans is an illusion, only an illusion, resultant from a laughably minor and easily correctable, stimulus induced neuron impulse routing within all human minds, by design.

You can learn more about that illusion, than you can recognize from these words, if you ask enough questions, or ask effective questions. If you do, you will laugh yourself to tears at the humans and the comedy they are acting out in simple ignorance, the lack of simple knowledge, while the knowledge they most crave, is theirs for the asking.

Again, did you want to trade your time and money for what you decided is of benefit to you, or did you want an idiot with a government job, inherently serving himself with insatiable power, to decide what you would get for your time and money the government seized by force to serve only its insatiable craving for more power that benefits no human?

Not one person in government is sufficiently intelligent to answer these questions with his name on public record, and would deceive or lie to her or his offspring, at obvious damage to them, if unable to escape answering the questions, and would therefore usually train such offspring to be too ignorant to accountably answer these simple questions, who would thus be so intellectually crippled that such offspring are often left with insufficient intelligence to get a job dependent upon even simple reasoning ability above the use of raw force or deception. The same phenomenon is at play among non-governmental, institutionally force-based sectors of the public. And therefore prisons are full, wars rage, and frustration reigns, because the whole lot of them are simply too ignorant of how to easily question their way out of even the most simply resolved contradictions, much to the amusement of observers.

Your goal is to learn the readily identifiable mechanism within the mind, that causes the dramatically different data routing and thus different answers, from the same questions, with the different results. Therein, your answers to questions must be flawlessly verifiable as uncontradicted, which requires amusingly few additional questions, if they are effective.

Reasoning resolves contradictions. Force creates contradictions. Pity or laugh at those folks who never learn the verification of the foregoing, readily available by simply asking and answering questions. Ignorance of that easily learned process dooms one to a life of the most common and recurrent frustrations. Government folks teach that ignorance to their offspring, including the ignorance of how to question their way out of their ignorance, at ongoing damage to themselves and their government-subservient society, much to the amusement of those observing the human phenomenon.

Define your intellect, your ability to think.

Ask and answer the questions that ignorant institutionally trained minds fear.

Pity those offspring who were so successfully kept ignorant that they cannot answer these simple questions. Yes, they were intellectually crippled by their parents, and they will likely sink to government jobs, and maliciously attack you with government power if you attempt to advance society into greater knowledge, but that is the current condition of humans, still mired deep in the intellectual dark ages. Enjoy the show.



PBS again.... 10 January 2006

Having watched another PBS Special, and laughed robustly...

If it were possible to be a conspiracy, and it is not, it would be among the most elaborate and sinister in the nation during our times, albeit like many others.

The Public (government) Broadcasting Service (PBS), bleeding heart, liberal, tree-hugging, left wing, environment worshiping, pinko draft dodging, pot-head, homo enamored, extremist, soft-on-crime, add-a-few-similar-references, war protesting pansies support their god-figure tax subsidized PBS TV and radio programmers..... who consistently glorify war leaders as great heroes and social leaders, rather than as the intellectually void, disgusting mass murderers that they are, therefore consistently training the minds of the liberal young that slaughtering people, a lot of them, in the most repugnant manner, defines great leaders, great nations, great societies and great causes, precisely what military leaders successfully prey upon when those pre-programmed young get older.

No parents can match the effect of the grand, theatrically dramatic teaching process of PBS Specials or its routine programming, for the intensity and extent of training young minds that slaughtering people produces great leaders, especially when those parents are as abjectly incapable of reasoning as PBS supporters.

They could read these words, and those intellectually void liberal anti-war dolts will continue to write checks to PBS, to support PBS glorification of war leaders, to thus train young people. And then those PBS supporters will continue to complain about George's current ego wars, great national leader that PBS taught George how to be.

It is not a conspiracy. It is a comedy. The best comedy humans can produce during these intellectual dark ages.

In the future, after humans emerge from the intellectual dark ages, when every war related documentary and entertainment show displays war leaders (and followers) as precisely what they were, intellectually void mass murderers with power-damaged minds incapable of reasoning process, there will also be documentaries on PBS and its idiot supporters, illuminating them as among the most advanced war process and ignorance sustaining mechanisms of their day.

Copy this and send it to the PBS folks, if you wish, and therefore laugh, because their intellectually self-crippled minds, trained by PBS, literally cannot identify the contradiction or ask and answer the resulting questions to resolve each subsequent contradiction identified by each prior question until they arrive at conclusions for which no question can be asked that was not already asked and answered with an uncontradicted answer, otherwise described as, verified TRUTH, a concept, easily ascertained with a little patience, nowhere to be found in the PBS institution.

Enjoy the show.



A useful proof of the Brits and Yanks.... 12 January 2006

A couple of government employed Brits leaked the story about George Bush suggesting to Tony Blair, at a formal policy meeting, that they bomb the headquarters of Al Jazeera new service. Like all petty tyrants, George does not like news companies that publish the news rather than illusions flattering George.

George Bush's White House spokesmouth denied the suggestion and described it as outlandish.

Tony Blair denied the event.

Therefore, among those chaps who traditionally believe titled government chaps, rather than question government, the event did not happen. Two heads of state denied the report. The government employed Brits were apparently lying, a common human phenomenon.

Logic dictates that if the event did not happen, then there is nothing left to discuss in regard to the event.

So on 10 January, the British government announced that it was charging the two government employed Brits, not with lying, but with the crime of revealing government secrets.

Unless the British judicial institution has decided to fabricate its own lie, the action of the British court therefore did two things: 1. Identified the British Government's verification that Bush and Blair were lying in their denials, and that the event happened. 2. Identified the act of speaking truth about the official actions of the people's elected leaders, as a punishable crime in England, identical to what not-elected Saddam Hussein defined as a crime in Iraq.

To embarrass King Blair or King Bush with the truth, is a punishable crime against the crown, as is traditional for the power of kings and other such petty tyrants.

The government denial of the event for which the government is punishing people for revealing, proves that the folks who believe or respect Tony Blair or George Bush are idiots. They are so ignorant of reasoning process, they could read these words and would still perceive that Tony and George created no contradiction.

No human can sustain a contradiction.

Because power-damaged minds attempt to resolve contradictions with contradictions, such as punishing the people who spoke the truth about what the power-damaged minds denied, the contradictions are compounded, and the therefore compounded consequences are inordinately laughable.

If it were punishable to reveal an illusion, all fiction writers and movie directors would be punished.

Caught with George catching himself lying and being malicious as usual, if a friend of George sincerely wanted to maintain his belief in, and his open support for, George, while that friend preferred to retain his own integrity and public image of common intelligence, that friend would logically go to George and help him resolve his contradiction. That is what friends are for.

That would involve the friend and supporter telling George that he obviously cannot successfully deny an event while his crony Blair is attempting to punish people for having revealed the event. George could therefore say the event happened, and that the two Brits should be punished for saying the same thing, thus resolving George's and Tony's current contradiction, and concurrently insisting that other people expressing the truth should be punished. Or George could restate his denial, and tell Tony that he cannot logically punish people for revealing an event that did not happen. Or he could say the event happened, and that people should not be punished for revealing what their elected officials officially do to represent the people.

It is not possible for an elected representative of the people to represent the people with a secret that the people are not told, while words hold their meanings.

Simply resolve the contradiction, and then resolve any contradiction that might be created by each hasty resolution. And do not stop that process until no contradiction remains in effect.

If that friend and supporter of George (typical Republicrat), perhaps a person you know, cannot successfully communicate with George, because George has surrounded himself with a defensive fortress of idiot advisors who deny access by anyone sufficiently intelligent to tell George that he obviously cannot successfully deny an event while his crony Blair is attempting to punish people for having revealed the event, and those advisors obviously cannot figure out that George must be told that he obviously cannot successfully deny an event while his crony Blair is attempting to punish people for having revealed the event, then the friend and supporter of George would have to be an idiot to continue supporting a person who is too ignorant to figure out the contradiction himself, too ignorant to find advisors who are not equally ignorant, and too intellectually absent to allow access by supporters who are not that ignorant.

There is no escape from that reasoning, or from any reasoning that identifies and resolves fundamental contradictions.

Ignorance of fundamental contradiction resolution process (thinking), results in creating contradictions and attempting to preclude their resolutions.

While it is fun to routinely use George Bush as an example, and George, like his predecessors, the King George series, earned their position as an example of abject human ignorance, because of their unmitigated ego and disregard for their malicious damage to the common people, the concept and its effects in the human mind are consistent for any power-damaged mind, that is, otherwise equal fellow humans who accepted a title and thus the perception of power which altered their mind's reasoning process to result in the creation and attempt to perpetuate institutionally induced contradictions, the pursuit of a fool, rather than simply resolve the contradictions, including resolving the contradiction of attempting to use power instead of reasoning to resolve a contradiction, the pursuit of a reasoning person.

Enjoy the show of ignorant people who are so extensively ignorant that they insist that their obviously ignorant government leaders are intelligent, rather than simply ask the questions that reveal the ignorance and therefore the incentive to ask the questions that replace the ignorance with knowledge.



Is this writing difficult to read or understand?.... 15 January 2006

You will remain frustrated your entire life, over common individual and social problems, otherwise easily solved, as has most of the human population, if you do not learn the simple process of resolving multi-part contradictions.

You must genuinely learn each part of the related knowledge puzzle, by asking your questions of the contradictions you perceive in regard to each part of the puzzle, and answering the questions, in writing so that you remember what you learn, to apply it to (synthesize or combine it with) each other part of the puzzle.

If, because you are skipping around at this website, or forgot that you need to learn a 17 part puzzle, with the knowledge of only 16 parts completely useless for solving complex problems, because you did not ask yourself questions of that concept, or did not write them and your answers, then you are still in the process of learning how to solve complex problems.

To know how to successfully drive a car, you must know to slow down AND turn the steering wheel, to go around a sharp corner. You cannot do just either one. You must synthesize or combine two parts of that knowledge puzzle. That is what your mind is designed to do.

To make chocolate chip cookies, preferably a double batch, you must know to add each of the ingredients, in the proper sequence, mix them as required, and turn the stove heat on. That is easy because you can do everything slowly, reading the instructions carefully, before you turn on the stove. Then let me know when they are ready to eat.

To drive a helicopter you must coordinate different movements of each hand and your feet, on different control devices, for each change in the helicopter movement, and be thinking of what might happen next, because you already made the foolish mistake of launching into the air in a helicopter. That is why you study the process before you sit behind the cyclic and beside the collective, and mess with either one after turning the ignition key.

Solving the most complex problems that humans can create is easier than most human endeavors, because you can patiently ask and answer each related question, in writing, and combine the uncontradicted answers, at your leisure, until you have identified the solution, and then manifest the solution with little effort because you already asked and answered the questions of how to do that.

Now therefore, reconsider a part of the knowledge puzzle previously explained. If you understand the English language, you will notice the ease of reading and understanding these words because they are plain common English. There are no technical terms, phrases or sentence structures. The cyclic and collective in the above sentence about the helicopter, are just aircraft control devices that are not important to the understanding of the sentence.

You may suggest that some of the sentences are long, with a lot of phrases and commas. No problem. The phrases are just identified concepts that are properly placed in relation to each other (combined, synthesized), by being in the same sentence. They must be synthesized or combined in your mind anyway to understand the solution to a problem (resolution of a contradiction). The combination of concepts within the sentence is the equivalent of turning the car steering wheel AND slowing down to get around a sharp corner without rolling over, or pulling up the helicopter collective AND pushing on the left peddle to gain altitude without turning sideways, or putting the cookie dough in the oven AND turning on the oven to bake chocolate chip cookies, preferably a triple batch, AND telling me when they are ready to eat.

Because you have enough time to learn how to solve complex problems the only way they can be sustainably solved, and because one of the parts of the puzzle is your ability to synthesize or combine uncontradicted concepts, you can slowly read any long or complex sentence, reform it into a series of short sentences that you might prefer, and put them back together in a single long sentence, or make a longer sentence to combine more concepts that must be combined anyway, for the same reason that chocolate chip cookies require the full combination of their ingredients to be chocolate chip cookies, preferably a quadruple batch.

If you seek to actually solve any common social problem, rather than compound its damages with temporary illusions that fool gullible fools, you have only the following three choices, none of which any titled institution leader has ever learned, or can ever learn on their own. 1. Patiently learn intellectual technology on our own, and therefore how to understand the above and the other parts of the puzzle. 2. Hire a person who already knows intellectual technology, to efficiently ask controlling questions that will train your mind to understand, and how to use, intellectual technology, from your own mind's answers that your own mind flawlessly verifies against all questions. 3. Hire a person who already knows intellectual technology, to promptly manifest the solution to the problem.




First, only your own mind... 16 January 2006

You are more on your own than you may recognize, if your interest is the solution to any social problem.

For proofs elsewhere, which you must learn, if you wish, from your questions of your words or anyone else's words, one human mind, and only one, by design of human minds, not unlike separate computers joined only by voice transmission using words with multiple meanings, connotations, implications, inferences and other such hopeless ambiguities, must patiently resolve all contradictions, to identify the functional solution to the identified problem. And then that mind can convey the solution to other minds by two processes, one being their expressed willingness to learn it, and the other being regardless of any lack of desire to learn it, or any initial opposition to its manifestation. The difference between the two processes, is just the knowledge of that difference within what one must learn to resolve all human-caused contradictions.

You can learn the knowledge on your own. Or you can learn it from somebody who has learned it. Or you can learn it if someone manifests it regardless of you.

But you cannot learn it by participation in a named organization of two or more people who set out to learn it, by design of the human mind. For two or more minds to learn the process as an organization, they would first have to harmonize all the knowledge they hold, to therefore represent the knowledge of the organization, before they started learning new knowledge, so no unnoticed contradiction within prior knowledge created a contradiction in the perceptions of any new item of data. Not rationally possible. The organization cannot learn an uncontradicted set of data from the data of each organization member's mind because there is too much life data and too many brain neurons, and no single brain of the organization.

May you learn the most knowledge of the most concepts, most efficiently.




To kill your enemy's leaders... 17 January 2006

This, upon a news article about Rummy Rumsfeld expressing success in the US killing the enemy leaders in Iraq.

Is it not obvious, because they do not ask the obvious questions, that not one American RepublicratDemocan can figure out the obvious results of variously attempting to, and successfully, killing the so called enemy leaders in Iraq, sporadically one at a time, in an obviously low casualty war that is not slaughtering the enemy's entire military force, legions, brigades or divisions, in set battles, that the process merely effects the normal rank promotions identical to the the US and every other government or military replacing personnel who are killed, otherwise die or leave their jobs, and concurrently serves only to more intensely anger the people in another nation that the arrogant Americans keep attacking?

The greatest intellects of the entire American government literally cannot ask the above question among themselves, even if they read these words, and cannot state the obvious answer that any commonly thinking person can state.

With that obvious answer, the next obvious question can be asked, and answered, and questioned, and so forth until the process to promptly win the Iraq war becomes obvious, much to the ongoing amusement of the observers laughing themselves to tears at Rummy George and the DemocanRepublicrats who support him.

They obviously cannot figure out, from the current results of their past killing and imprisoning of their enemy leaders, that such a process is a fool's illusion, and when you later remind them of the words they stated at this time, in face of their ongoing failure, they will still be unable to understand the meanings of the words you state, and they have most likely trained their equally unquestioning offspring to be that ignorant.



The process to learn the results of the questioning process... 18 January 2006

If you want to devise a learning process for a controlling concept within intellectual technology, simply write a series of questions, relating to common public or institutional issues.

Then find a person with any titled position, no matter how minor, within the institution related to the questions you wrote.

Tell him or her that you want to learn a simple questioning process, and tell him that you have a series of questions relating to public concerns in regard to that institution, nothing personal or private. Tell him that he does not have to answer any questions, and that the questions are only for your learning process, nothing of public record.

The mere fact that you say you have questions, which you must say at the outset, instead of saying you only want to learn about his institution from a discussion, will scare away most institutional chaps, but you should be able to find some one, of some lesser title, who will assist you in learning a questioning process for increasing your knowledge. Perhaps suggest that it is a school project or some other innocent sounding project.

Start with easy questions, such as his name, title, institutional duties, location of his office, types of meetings he attends, with whom he interacts, etcetera.

But progress to the type questions that could resolve some of the glaring contradictions of his institution, still politely and casually asked. Methodically advance your questions into significant controversies or contradictions involving the institution.

Openly write his answers, as notes, and tell him that you are not going to make any of the notes public, because this is only for you to learn about a questioning process.

Notice the first question that results in a response that is not an answer to the question, and is instead a rhetorical fabrication that would be a logical response to a different question.

Of course to notice such a thing, you would have prior had to learn how to use words that hold their meanings, a concept beyond a journalist's ability to learn.

Then notice when such non-answer responses are offered for each of your questions.

Then notice when the person refuses to answer your questions, objects to them, and gets angry with you.

Keep politely asking your written or spontaneous questions until the response is that of the questioned chap expressing anger and walking away from you.

Then review the questions.

Then find more people within that institution, or representing any title of any other institution, and do the same.

Synthesize or combine the commonalities of the questions and responses.

When you laugh robustly, you will recognize what you learned from the institutionally power-damaged mind.

Oh, if you do that to government drones in the US, it is entirely possible that you will later be arrested and jailed for having prior asked those questions. You will be amused, and have learned even more.




Watch the movie (video, DVD), Brave Heart.... 20 January 2006

How did the British king and his followers describe and react toward Sir William at the time? How did they describe and portray themselves?

How did the movie writer and producer describe and portray them?

Was not the tyranny of the British kings undisputable upon the test of time, with rebels of the United States of America one of the results, among the other British empire colonies who abandoned that malicious form of government?

Watch other such American and foreign movies depicting previous national leaders and the rebels who opposed the inherent corruption and maliciousness of the central authority. What is the consistent difference between how the people of the central authority described themselves, and described the rebels?

How do US president George Bush and his followers describe and portray themselves?

How do they describe and portray Osama bin Laden, the rebel to George's military might?

How shall the movie makers of the future portray each of them?

Who will be more accurate?

Like the war mongering British kings whose malicious rule was ultimately abandoned by the people of each of its colonies, have not the recent US presidents, during a period equivalent to two British kings, started wars against eight nations that did not attack the US (Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq, in addition to extensively bombing Cambodia and Laos)?

After all the current government-paid, self-flattering propaganda that routinely fools fools, with the test of time illuminating the fundamentals of human nature, how will future movie makers depict the current American presidents, and the rebels who attempted to stand against the United States Presidents who functioned on raw military power, void of reasoning?

You can easily know the answer, to know the historical movies of the future from the historical movies of today, and rightfully laugh at the pitiable British kings and US presidents, and the fools who believed their self flattery that contradicted the objective reasoning of time.

Is it not inherent and known at this time by all thinking people, that a few years after George Bush is dumped from his earthy reign, all of subsequent history will illuminate him as a malicious villain, and will illuminate certain of his enemies, most dramatically Osama bin Laden, who would be a villain if he had not opposed such a more malicious villain, as a great and admired hero of the common people for his efforts to stand against the likes of King George Bush?

Just as no effort beyond the bringing back to life of the people slaughtered in the World Trade Towers, or otherwise the use of intellectual technology to use that event for advancing human knowledge and its benefits to all people, could regain respect for Osama bin Laden among the people in the future, if he had not used that event to stand against an obviously more malicious and callous villain, US President George Bush and the US DemocanRepublicrat Regime cannot possibly regain any respect among anyone except fools, without bringing back to life all the people their military, police and other government thugs have slaughtered, tortured or imprisoned, or otherwise use intellectual technology to use that slaughtering and torturing of people for advancing human knowledge beyond such Neanderthal government endeavors, with the resulting benefits for all people.

Pity those who insist on remaining too ignorant to enjoy the show.



Iran smiles..... 21 January 2006

Unlike the leaders and citizens of many countries, notably those of the United States, the leaders of Iran have learned that they are genuinely equal humans on this planet, and therefore can be seen routinely smiling, the mind's result of that knowledge.

The substance of their smiles is enhanced by their knowledge that the American leaders are therefore angered.

Because it requires so little effort and time, and offers valuable knowledge, simply notice which leaders of which nations are smiling when you see news articles with photos of them. Look closely at their smiles, if they are smiling, and consider their related actions.

The US leaders genuinely perceive that they are superior to other inherently equal humans, for reason detailed elsewhere, and thus all those other humans are opponents or enemies inherent to the human reaction against people who consider themselves superior to humans, creating their mind's perception of a constant threat, and thus the facial muscles conform to those neural signals from the brain.

The phenomenon is an interesting generality, with exceptions. Careful observation of the phenomenon offers significant knowledge. One can learn to distinguish the people who smile in an attempt to deceive themselves and others, from those who smile because their mind identifies genuine amusement with the contradictions of others.

Those who are maliciously attacking other people, such as the American DemocanRepublicrat Regime, along with their military, police, prosecutors, judges, bureaucrats and their ilk who have achieved what will later be described as nearly identical to the Nazi German police state, who therefore perceive the people around them as enemies, as a generality do not and cannot display the facial expressions associated with the mind's enjoyment of life as its normal or relaxed mode.

Consider the North Korean governmental sorts who, like the American leaders, are also mad at the world, considering everyone as an enemy, and thus smile less often.

Consider again the Iranian governmental sorts who do not display as much anger with the world, and thus smile more.

Circumstance facilitates such phenomena. The Iranians have a lot of oil and are thus economically independent and energy independent. They are educationally advanced to an extent of curiosity and ability in regard to nuclear energy, a normal point in the evolution of human knowledge. They defended themselves from Saddam's maliciousness, and are watching the amusing results of Saddam's and America's maliciousness, consuming each other just across the border. And more. The Iranian government chaps are currently enjoying a good show.

Fully knowledgeable of their inherent human equality, the Iranians are watching the American and Israeli leaders preparing a grand, self-defeating contradiction over the inherent Iranian right and ability to do what the inherently equal humans in America and Israel have done, in regard to developing nuclear energy, as will other societies as they advance their curiosity of elsewhere existing knowledge. The Iranian leaders, like other commonly thinking humans, are therefore smiling.

The results are compounding. The world sees the Iranian leaders smiling, and thus admires and respects them more, a normal result of the human mind's reaction to that visual effect.

In contrast, the world sees the American leaders with their expressions of anger or serious concern for what their minds perceive as threats, and the deceptive nature of the sporadically contrived smiles. Again, there are exceptions to that generality, but the generality creates the prevailing result. US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld most visually displays the anger of America accented with overtly contrived smiles that fool only the most gullible fools, first Rumsfeld. Britain's Tony Blair is another superlative example of a noticeably contrived smile that is immediately vulnerable to questions of his actions, questions he must constantly evade.

The phenomenon can be used to learn useful knowledge of any society, government or individual, to a limited but useful extent, and more usefully, about oneself.

In contrast to a laughable, multi million dollar, tax paid scam once attempted by George Bush's idiots, probably the reason Rummy Rumsfeld sporadically displays such phoney smiles and laughs, sustainable results of smiling or laughing cannot be achieved by practicing smiling and laughing for the sake of smiling and laughing while the mind is creating maliciously damaging contradictions. The counter balance to the attempt without its substance is subsequently more intensive anger, fear or perception of vulnerability. The attempt creates an additional contradiction within the brain's neural routings of electro-chemical process, which of course cannot be sustained, and inherently creates more contradictions because the original contradiction is not resolved, inducing neural signals to facial muscles, that are opposite those creating smiles.

Smiling and laughing are a result of the mind's neurologically induced resolution of a contradiction, among other descriptions. When smiling is manifested without resolving a contradiction, as a contrived display of deception, thus inducing a contradiction, the consequences are what no thinking person would ever choose. Because a contradiction is created, a perceptive observer easily recognizes it.

Generally, the smiles of the Iranian leaders are genuine. The test of time will illuminate the results of the very small but possible chance that they advance their knowledge from the knowledge they could derive by learning more precisely why their minds are inducing the smiles.




Permanent warrantless searches in US.... 22 January 2006

This again illuminates the amusing ignorance of the dumb-downed Americans, quite like the great majority of humans who consider the other guy, you, to be the ignorant masses.

If you are an American this is how ignorant you are, unless you can easily PROVE the ability or your mind to resolve this contradiction that defines Americans.

The US Congress has not declared war on anyone in decades. Therefore, the US is not at war because the US government holds no authority to engage in war unless the US Congress declares war, and no government officials have been arrested for violating the supreme law of the US Constitution.

The current US president, George Bush, has stated that we are engaged in a war on terror, and has dispatched US military troops to Afghanistan, Iraq, Philippines and certain other places, where American troops are obviously engaged in war.

The Americans have not resolved that easily resolved contradiction. Congress need only declare war, or impeach the president for the obvious high crime of starting personal, deadly wars.

The Americans are too intellectually absent to figure it out.

But such a dramatic level of ignorance cannot be isolated, and cannot be limited.

George Bush has been caught ordering the unlawful government spying on millions of Americans, with wiretapping of people's telephone and other electronic and mailed communications.

Congress and the people have not impeached George, therefore condoning and encouraging that surrender of privacy rights described in the US Constitution.

George Bush and his vice president Dick Cheney have stated to the news media that such domestic spying, identical to the practices of the governments the US has fought against for what the DemocanRepublicrats have told the gullible soldiers they were fighting to precluding such practices ever happening in the US, was necessary for the war on terror, and is only a war time measure.

And George Bush has stated that the war on terror is not likely to ever end.

George and Dick could read these words, illuminating the verifiable statements of George and Dick, and their power-damaged minds could not recognize the therefore permanent end to the right to privacy in the US, as described in the now voided US Constitution, and thus the manifestation of the US being that which the US fought against, and thus the absolute betrayal of every US soldier. Current US soldiers, made as ignorant as George and Dick, by George, Dick and their government ilk, could read these words and still remain so clueless that they will continue to mindlessly serve the military that serves the idiots in the DemocanRepublicrat Regime just as the Roman soldiers fought to defend their laughable illusion of freedom.

Not one American RepublicratDemocan can understand the synthesis of the words of George and Dick, unless they openly state that their political party openly endorses the abrogation of the US Constitution, and the perpetual government spying on Americans, as all tyrannies did to their people, thus the end of privacy.

You goal is to not become as monumentally ignorant as the gullible American adults, especially the military minions as I once so foolishly was.

Therefore, among other things, you would easily state to anyone that you would never vote for a RepublicratDemocan, and then resolve the other obvious contradictions in your actions, and then learn how to resolve all contradictions.




You cannot be an American.... 24 January 2006

Your goal, if you wish, is to learn the readily available knowledge of how to promptly resolve all the contradictions (solve all the problems) that humans create, or at least never again make a fool of yourself in front of commonly intelligent people by indicating any frustration with any human-caused contradiction (problem).

If you have learned that knowledge, you are either not reading this, or you stumbled upon this section and recognize the substance of the entire website from the indicator herein. If you are not certain, because you perceive that you recognize the substance of this section but you still have questions about why these idiot humans do what they do, you are not certain because you have not learned all of the parts of the related knowledge puzzle. This section only indicates one part of the puzzle.

To learn the knowledge on your own you must ask and answer all the questions of all the human-caused contradictions, writing them, and therein learn how to make that process efficient by learning controlling concepts, until no question is left not answered, a tedious process but quite possible. Or you must exchange a specific series of questions with a person who has learned the knowledge. The questions within such an exchange with another person must resolve the contradictions your mind identifies within the resulting series questions, which is why no set of questions and answers that another mind creates and presents, such as in a book or on a website which cannot provide the answers to your mind's resulting questions at the time, can possibly convey the knowledge to your mind. The preceding sentence does not limit the results of the first sentence of this paragraph.

Consider a significant contradiction routinely in the news of the current American RepublicratDemocan Regime's war on the illusion of terror. The news, for those wisely outside the American news media cocoon, routinely reports that the Americans are still holding, or have released, another journalist or prisoner who was held without charges for months or years, and who was not charged with any crime upon release. Therein the Americans routinely reveal that they hold people as prisoners, denying them normal human rights which the Americans rhetorically say they recognize, for shear expression of raw power void of any reasoning. If reasoning was involved, the Americans would publish the original reason they seized and held each prisoner, and upon later recognizing the lack of substance in their obviously inadequate, mistaken reason, fully compensate the prisoner upon release, for the imprisonment time and anguish, that is, make the damaged party whole again, just as the Americans would want done to them if they were likewise seized and held prisoner by armed thugs of another government.

The Americans can read the foregoing paragraph, and will remain clueless of the contradiction, and more clueless, if that is possible, of the resolution, as proven by the ongoing news of American government thugs seizing and holding people in prison, without charges, for long periods of time, and releasing them without compensation. The phenomenon is ongoing, not an isolated aberration in history. It will happen tomorrow, and next year, and next decade. The Americans are not just the thugs among Americans, as most governments are among their own people. The Americans are the thugs of the world, who saunter around the world, heavily armed, with thousands of nuclear bombs in their arsenal, grabbing and imprisoning or killing people without any accountability to the law the Americans claim as authority for their actions. The Americans are malicious thugs who criminally violate their own laws and most other laws, not because of these words, but because any impartial observation verifies that their actions match the definitions of the words.

The physical seizure and holding of another inherently equal human, against his will, without expressed reasoning promptly (within one day) subject to effective public questioning, that is, subject to the process of the British-origin common law and a jury trial, constitutes tyranny, or the absence of reasoning process, or the laughably primitive, Neanderthal mind of the amusing Americans.

Your goal is not to stop those laughably malicious Americans, or government thugs, or your enemy, or the damn neighbors, etceteras, from doing what they are doing. That is the goal of all the ignorant people who therefore fail their goal, as the test of time so obviously illuminates. Your goal is to patiently learn how to resolve each minor little contradiction your mind recognizes, primarily your own contradictions, read that again, your own contradictions, that which your opponents will not do, and actually resolve them, and ask the questions to identify more contradictions, and resolve them, one at a time, until you recognize the contradictions that control entire arrays of contradictions, and therefore the resolutions that resolve those arrays. If you are tenacious in that boring process, you will learn how to stop your perceived opponents from creating contradictions that damage people, and you can manifest the effect of your new knowledge, if you still retain the incentive. There are no short cuts to your mind learning that knowledge. It must learn how to identify and resolve each contradiction. If you leave even one contradiction in place, within your mind, nothing subsequent to it is sustainable.

If the ignorant Americans, in the year 2006 are still imprisoning people without any publicly accountable charges against them, which is the case, while claiming that such an act would be unlawful if it happened to the American government thugs who are doing so, to thus identify themselves as criminal thugs, proving themselves to be primitive, intellectually absent, malicious people, too ignorant to identify such a glaring contradiction, and if you are an American thus embarrassed by such a contradiction, and you want to efficiently resolve that contradiction, you need only publicly state that you are not an American, for that reason. I am not an American. The Americans display themselves to the world, by their actions, as malicious idiots, the equivalent of the mindless cave troll depicted in the story, Lord of the Rings, which will recklessly kill anyone it is told to perceive as an enemy, including anyone else near them, as collateral damage, including the troll's equally ignorant handlers, identified as friendly fire incidents.

The cave troll is wiser than the Americans, because it only swings a club. The Americans incessantly throw bombs into villages, openly knowing that they are slaughtering innocent women and children, with the laughably idiot claim that the Americans are legally trying to kill only enemy soldiers not in sight but rumored to be in the area, while not one other person in the world is fooled by the glaring lies of the therefore laughably idiot Americans.

How more intellectually self-impaired can a human mind become, than performing such an obvious and dramatic act as imprisoning people without an expressed reason in law, while the same mind claims that it lives under the rule of law, and claims that it would not want to be imprisoned without an expressed reason in law?

If resolving that contradiction by openly claiming that you are not an American, while you are living in America, creates a contradiction, learn how to resolve that contradiction. If you perceive that the resolution to the contradiction is to move out of America, but you want to live in America, learn how to resolve that contradiction. Is it possible to not be an American while living in America? What is an American? Is it possible for an idiot conservative to live in a community whose government is controlled by the idiot liberals who therefore represent the people living in the community? When the less-questioning person stops at a conclusion that he insists is the only available conclusion that is obviously not the only available conclusion because a contradiction is still apparent, keep asking questions. When you start laughing, you will recognize that you have questioned your way past your previous failure to ask enough questions, and past the obvious failures of the people around you. You will have solved a knowledge puzzle. Do not stop there.

Yes, the Canadians and Argentineans live on the American continents, and can therefore be called Americans, but because the USA folks have become so economically dominant in their current and soon to pass era, that people around the world commonly refer to the USA folks as Americans, and because those Americans have associated the reference to them with the most perfidious and ignorant humans in human history, the commonly intelligent Canadians, Argentineans and other Americans must routinely distinguish themselves from the Americans who associate with and perpetuate the USA DemocanRepublicrat Regime in the same way the Cave Troll associated with and perpetuated its handlers, until their self-inflicted demise relegates their reference to history. The process is to simply distinguish oneself at any consideration of the wisdom of doing so, which just requires more words.

I am an Alaskan, and not one that supports the Cave Troll American RepublicratDemocan Regime currently holding Alaska under the jack boot heel of Washington DC. I offer a more detailed description upon any identification of any related contradiction, or indication of such.

Being or not being an American or Alaskan is not the issue. Training your mind to instantly recognize every contradiction, and instantly resolving it, is the issue, so your mind will efficiently do so for the more complex contradictions. Your mind must immediately recognize that you cannot be an American if you do not describe yourself as the murderous American thugs prove themselves to by the democratically elected government they foolishly say represents them.




Mind or matter... 25 January 2006

Search the military, police and other government power technology data, of any government.

Notice that government is a controlling social organizational concept.

Notice the proof therein that humans are a primitive species which has not yet learned how to resolve the contradictions it creates.

The referenced data is overwhelmingly centered on the use of physical weaponry and force.

If you can find what you perceive as a government attempt to advance the intellectual ability or utility of the human mind, email me with what you perceive as such, and I will ask you the questions that prove you were amusingly too hasty by suggesting the opposite of what I asked.

Amusing lot these humans. They were given the greatest gift known to humans, a human mind, and their greatest use of it is the search for more effective devices to imprison or kill it.

Enjoy the show.



The Iraqis.... 27 January 2006

Consider the Iraqis under Saddam Hussein.

Their society was a modern educated society with access to schools and international knowledge.

Among many examples, quite opposite the insatiably greedy American government which taxes the people's energy sources to an extent several times more than the production value of the energy, the Iraqis prospered with government subsidized energy sources priced below the production cost.

The Iraqis and the Americans shared a debilitating governmental system of mental midget leaders who squandered the hard work of the people, for a destructive military industrial complex to threaten other people and to feed the useless tough guy egos of said mental midgets. Saddam seized ownership of Iraqi oil, otherwise owned by the people, to finance his war machine. The American DemocanRepublicrats did the same through oil taxes, and further taxed nearly every money exchange of the people, otherwise owned by the people, for the American war machine.

The Iraqis learned enough of American social systems to learn of their (illusionary) social advancement mechanisms.

The Iraqis desired social advancement, regardless of who was representing any particular, related knowledge. It was only a matter of time before the inherent desires of the Iraqi people would advance them within the normal mechanisms that sporadically advance all societies.

Left to their own learning process, because all humans hold the same brain design, all societies will advance, at differing rates at different times amid different circumstances because of the differences in knowledge, and each therefore contribute to the total knowledge base of humans, that would not be created if they all learned the same thing at the same time. Knowledge is efficiently advanced by comparative analyses (asking and answering questions) among contradicting processes or manifestations of concepts.

Then the Americans, yet again, more obviously revealed the American propaganda to be just that, identical to Saddam's propaganda, by creating more social destruction under illusions of advancement that fooled fools, and openly exposed said fools to everyone, not recognized by themselves of course.

The Americans militarily invaded Iraq, destroyed the homes and cities of the Iraqis, destroyed their commerce, social and service infrastructures, that of their electricity, their water and sewer systems, their transportation, energy and fuel systems, their airports, schools, hospitals and more. And the Americans slaughtered Iraqi men, women and children, bombing them back to the proverbial stone age, with intent about which the Americans prior bragged. In doing so, the Americans paid their own government insiders billions of tax dollars, and openly lied about repairing even a token of what they destroyed in Iraq.

Saddam Hussein and the recently evolved (1950-present) American RepublicratDemocan Regime predicated their governmental systems on destroying other social systems, just as did the Romans and all war mongering governments, the basis for all military industrial complexes about which then US President Dwight Eisenhower repeatedly attempted to warn Americans against, before the DemocanRepublicrats buried his words with the power-feeding rhetorical propaganda of the threat of communism, terrorism, drugs, guns, rock and roll, Jews, Muslims, hippies, or whatever the rhetorical threat was or is at the moment.

Of course the Americans were (will be) eventually thrown out if Iraq, like they were thrown out of Vietnam, and like the Soviets were thrown out of Afghanistan, etceteras, for the purpose of teaching, at vast cost of lives, money and human effort, a few more slow learning Americans, what they could have prior learned by simply asking and answering a few questions, at zip for cost, in less than one day.

Enjoy the show of these laughably primitive humans, the US DemocanRepublicrat Regime currently the most primitive among them.



US President Billy Clinton.... 28 January 2006

If you have any sense of pity, sincerely pity previous US President Bill Clinton.

He was just a scheduled example of ignorance to teach a few more people what not to do, a common phenomenon.

There is no human ability, no matter how many fools are fooled in the interval, to prevent Bill Clinton, and the nation of fools who acquiesced to being represented by him, from being forever recognized for their greatest achievement of that time, intentionally burning to death the men, women and small children Christians in their church in Waco Texas. The reason for that inescapable recognition is based on the future understanding of the controlling contradiction of the use of force instead of reasoning, as a demarcating measure of social intelligence or ignorance displayed by each national leader's most dramatic examples in that regard.

Not yet, but in the future, all humans will recognize that all the good a person or society does, cannot possibly excuse a single wrong, because the wrong is a contradiction, and no contradiction can be sustained by the human mind, by design. The good was just a recognition of prior resolved contradictions. The wrong was the fool's attempt to sustain prior contradictions.

US President George W. Bush insured the aforementioned primary recognition of Clinton, Bush, and the American fools who acquiesced to be represented by them, with Bush's greater slaughter of men, women and children in Iraq. Bush functioned on Clinton's, and the primitive mind's, same controlling contradiction of using force instead of reasoning within an animal species (humans) predicated on the original design of the human mind's ability. That ability, so far still socially self-damaged among a majority of humans, will ultimately effect the recognition of the controlling contradiction of force, and the resolution within reasoning, by design of said mind.

Of course some previous US presidents will be recognized for their burning to death thousands of Vietnamese, with napalm, among the countless, trite examples of the primitive human condition.

In the future, movies will be made depicting those primary examples of maliciously destructive human ignorance, and thus the primitive nature of the Americans. Pity them.

But after you have spent a short time pitying them, laugh yourself to tears at the currently primitive nature of humans who flatter themselves and their leaders to the extent of the human language, which will also be depicted in future movies.

Words of this nature at this time will be central to those movies in the future, for a reason no chaps of any government and all the fools fooled by them, can possibly understand even if they study these words the rest of their lives, or the movies of previous wars would already portray the laughably primitive nature of humans rather than the glory of great war leaders.

Enjoy the show.



Hamas win puts Mideast peace brokering in turmoil (Reuters headline)...29 January 2006

The Americans/Israelis needlessly angered the majority of the Palestinian people with such effectiveness, that they used America's so called Democracy that was forced on them at the muzzles of guns, to democratically elect the American government's enemies (Hamas) (not the people's enemies), as their leaders, if you can imagine such an outrage, amid your tears of howling laughter.

And therefore the president of the nation (USA) that has started its previous eight wars against nations that did not attack it, currently engaged in two such wars where the US continues to bomb and slaughter women and children in their homes (a bit violent, as you might recognize), demands that Hamas renounce violence before the American leaders will talk to Hamas, amid your tears of howling laughter.

The American demand, in 2006, that another nation renounce violence, will be the inspiration for many comedy movies in the future, depicting America's zenith of social absurdity.

And next the Americans/Iraqis will bomb the Iranians, Syrians or whomever else, because even if the US DemocanRepublicrats read these words, and not even one among them is searching for advanced knowledge, so they will not read these words or any words outside the DemocanRepublicrat fortress, they cannot figure out their controlling contradiction, because they are clueless of the concept of asking questions of their glaring contradictions, amid your tears of howling laughter.

Not one US RepublicratDemocan can understand that the yet escalating police state and war mongering tactics of the US DemocanRepublicrats, attempting to force the people of the world (piss them off) to live a rhetorical illusion that the US DemocanRepublicrat Regime does not live, while teaching the world to use force rather than reasoning to resolve contradictions, is the source of the world turning against the US DemocanRepublicrat Regime's war mongering police state, amid your tears of howling laughter.

President George Bush and his colleagues have so thoroughly contradicted themselves that they now openly renounce the inherent results of their efforts, amid your tears of howling laughter, and those chaps still cannot recognize the resolution to their self-defeating contradictions.

Somebody send them a note, to suggest the process for resolving their spiraling contradictions, not to effect a resolution, but to recognize why no such note can ever reach them, amid your tears of howling laughter.



A description of perceived intelligence.... 30 January 2006

One of several descriptions of perceived intelligence is that of the ability to synthesize (accurately combine with no resulting contradictions) a large number (not practically quantifiable for this purpose) of items of information (data points or such description), of some interest or arena of knowledge.

But there is not yet a controlling measure of acquired intelligence, because there are a vast number and a vast gradient of general and subdivided arenas of interests or knowledge for a highly complex human brain that has a rather large number of neurons directing related data to specialized areas of the brain, that share a gradient of ability to route data within surrounding areas of the brain, without a currently known data harmonizing center.

It can otherwise be stated that we just know different things, and different things among those things, none of which is objectively qualifiable or quantifiable.

However, there are certain arenas of interest that are more useful for the human society, for any one duration of time as social knowledge advances. People who are able to synthesize large arrays of data in regard to castle siege warfare and a local king's personal preferences may be as comparatively intelligent as a brain surgeon, but might not be commonly recognized as such these days. The computer whiz kid who is baffled by a sewing machine, leaves the perception of his intelligence differing among different interest groups. Therefore those people who synthesize more data than others for currently popular social interests will often be perceived as being more intelligent. Their knowledge is more discussed and therefore more noticeable by more people, but not measurable in sum of all arenas of knowledge.

And the current intelligence test writers are quite often laughably ignorant, verifiable as such, beyond the cocoon of their largely useless arena of intelligence test writing interest.

But a controlling measure of intelligence acquisition potential, rather than sum, can be described, somewhat, by the demonstrated intent, willingness, and routine exercise of the process, to question everything, with incessant questions, including of one's own answers, and the subsequent answers, as time permits.

Until then, one has already ascribed their intelligence level to the intellectual dark ages, currently best represented by US President George Bush and all the other such unquestioning dolts in the US DemocanRepublicrat Regime or its ilk around the world.

The current level of popularly perceived human intelligence is identified by acquired and variously titled institutional statuses based on who you know, not what you know, and not questioning (with real questions) those people who therefore granted titles and credentials that identified real institutional power with only the illusion of knowledge.

The laughable ignorance of the highly titled and credentialed people who knew, and failed to question, the people who therefore advanced their titled and credentialed illusion of intelligence and social status, is easy to illuminate with the most basic questions universal to the human phenomenon, but who will still be able to display significant intelligence of their interests, including the process of flattering and not questioning their way among those who they know, who were able to facilitate that process because they knew the people before them.

Because the first level of intelligence beyond the current intellectual dark ages and the process that sustains them, that is, the effected process to question everything, is the first unit of intellectual advancement potential above the current norm of Neanderthal humans, for the purpose of this section I here identify that potential intelligence acquisition level with the number, 1.

If your intelligence acquisition potential is number, 1, effected by noticeably questioning everything, with real questions, you have advanced beyond 99.99999 percent of the people, or thereabouts. It is a quantum advancement, because it places the involved mind into an entirely different activity level of thinking, intelligence, or some such thing.

A person with an intelligence acquisition potential number of 1, and a low IQ, if they are literate and can access a dictionary, can promptly advance their intelligence beyond the Oxford or Cambridge Professor Emeritus of Advanced Intelligence, if one exists, with an IQ of whatever IQ numbers go up to, or their ilk, because said person will, by definition of their number 1, incessantly ask questions that will inherently zip to, through, and beyond the scant few questions asked and answered by the Professor who only fooled unquestioning fools into perceiving that formal educational degrees and titles were acquired by asking and answering questions rather than dutifully agreeing with what prior titled dolts parroted from what they were told by their course advisors and institutional funding agencies incensed by anything but agreement with their stagnated old perceptions. If you think not, consider the prestigious degrees and titles, from prestigious universities whose highly titled administrators have not rescinded those degrees and titles, of all the government, military and think tank personnel, and ask why wars yet rage under their Neanderthal administration? Only a person with at least intelligence acquisition potential number 1 will have asked that question, answered it, questioned the answers, and so forth until no unquestioned, related question can be identified.

A higher measure of that ability and process of asking questions, which results from noticeably exercising that ability to the extent of the higher measure, involves the demonstration of understanding controlling contradictions, those contradictions that when resolved by asking particular questions, resolve noticeably vast arenas of related contradictions.

That effects a second quantum advancement, making any human-caused contradiction, no matter how complex, as easy to resolve as any less complex contradiction, albeit perhaps requiring a few more weeks or months of process paperwork to manifest the resolution if the contradiction is one of the real whooptidoos that humans have managed to accumulate.

Because that level is the second unit of intellectual advancement potential beyond the folks who made it to Square One, I here identify that potential intelligence acquisition level with the number, 2.

If your intelligence acquisition potential is number, 2, you have advanced beyond what may be a big number of the number 1 folks, as you will notice in your conversations. It is a quantum advancement because it places the involved mind into a noticeably different level or arena of contradiction resolution efficiency.

Any higher measure can be comparatively derived, as a generalization, by combining the total number of questions asked and answered per unit of time, and the total number of controlling contradictions resolved per unit of time, times the number of years the process was utilized.

Or just recognize the results.

Anything beyond an intelligent acquisition potential number of 2, is just a measure of self flattery similar to that of those IQ folks.




NRA again.... 5 February 2006

The US National Rifle Association (NRA) leaders, fooling their easily fooled members as usual (identical to the scam of the equally idiot anti-gun organization leaders), emphatically advertised the recent defeat of the Canadian liberal government, by Canadian conservatives. NRA claimed that the defeat was in part due to the failed gun bans imposed by the liberals.

So why did the conservatives previously lose to the liberals, and why will the conservatives lose to the liberals again, and so forth, on schedule for Canada, the US, and every government?

The NRA leaders and members are literally too ignorant to answer the above easily answered question. The NRA leaders can read this section, and will not even attempt to answer the question with their name ascribed to their answer for questioning and the test of time. The NRA members are so gullible, identical to the gullible members of the anti-gun organizations, they will continue to send money to leaders who flee the questions that reveal the ignorance and incompetence of the money-scamming leaders, identical to the laughable DemocanRepublicrats.

Upon starting to ask questions about the liberal / conservative cycle, one immediately notices the failed drug bans, among other anti-citizen rights government processes, that are in part why anti-drug conservatives cyclically lose to liberals. NRA leaders are verifiably known to often support anti-gun politicians, amid genuinely laughable rhetorical tap dancing for excuses, but NRA steadfastly supports conservative anti-drug politicians. NRA is conservative anti-drug first, because that is where the political money is, related to the multi-billion dollar war on drugs. NRA is pro-gun as a distant aside in regard to the actual voting records of politicians, while easily fooling fools with loudly spoken pro-gun rhetorical illusions. The NRA money flow to its wealthy leaders, insider politicians and sweetheart political contractors, like that of the anti-gun organization leaders, is based on pure political power plays only peripherally related to the rhetorical illusions fooling fools.

Your goal, if you wish to easily be more intelligent than the idiot conservatives, liberals, NRA sorts, anti-gun organization chaps, pro and anti drug organization devotees and their ilk for every issue, is to identify precisely why power and force does not, and cannot, effect a sustainable goal within the human species predicated on the operating system of the human mind.

You need only ask or answer one effective question beyond the aforementioned ilk, an easy task in face of said ilk fleeing every effective question. And then you might be sufficiently curious to keep asking questions vastly beyond the intellectual ability of said ilk.




YOUR mind.... 6 February 2006

Your goal, if you wish to cause world peace, or manifest any other seemingly impossible goal, regardless of magnitude, involving the solving of human-caused problems, concurrently defeating any human opposition, if you retain any incentive to do so upon learning the knowledge, is to learn how and why a human mind contradicts itself.

Your mind !

If you still foolishly perceive that the following does not describe YOUR mind, then perhaps you might wish to ask and answer the questions to identify, verify and resolve the contradiction of your perception, against any questions anyone can ask, so that your mind will, with that new knowledge, recognize which questions to ask to advance you to the above referenced knowledge.

As long as your mind fails the following exercise, or its equivalent, your mind will function identically to US President George Bush's, or Iraq President Saddam Hussein's, or any other such amusing idiot whose self-unquestioned contradictions manifest their damaging results in relation to the circumstances into which they or you stumble as a result of your ignorance that they or you will blame on the other guy without asking the first question.

Your goal is to learn the amusingly easy knowledge, the most valuable known to humans, that is not known by any institutionally titled adult in the world, but is known by certain people. No institutionally titled adult can teach you the knowledge. You are foolish to look for knowledge among those who have already failed to manifest what they say should be. Is that not obvious? You can find the knowledge only through the laughably simple process of asking your own mind certain questions, either on your own at cost of more time, or in a few days with someone who has learned the knowledge.

How and why does your mind create contradictions? Read patiently. A foolish person perceives that the examples relate to the issues of the examples, rather than to a controlling concept.

Consider the comparatively poor person who drives through a nice neighborhood of rich folks, on a fine spring day, and comments on how nice the houses and yards look, and wishes he could live in a place like that, then goes to his house in an obviously lower income neighborhood, plants a new small tree in his yard, to improve his yard, and leaves the shovel, a white plastic bucket, the garden hose, and a yellow plastic fertilizer sack, in a pile beside the front steps, the entire summer. Look around your house, or another person's house, and notice the visual contradictions. The nice houses look nice, that is, appear visually pleasing to the mind, because, in part, junk and maintenance implements are not in sight. It is laughably easy to resolve the referenced contradiction. A person can easily make a house and yard area in a middle income or run-down neighborhood visually appear as flawless as the millionaire's mansion, with a few hours or a couple days of simple manual labor and very little if any money. Just clean the damn place up, flawlessly, and arrange some vegetation or visually pleasing stuff. Even old peeling paint on the house can be made into an art item, without the high cost of painting the entire house, by an inexpensive effort of trimming the house edges with new bright (but matching) paint, and putting an artistic sign by the sidewalk, stating: Yea Old House.

Or just never suggest that the rich person's house looks nice, or that you would like to live in nice looking place. Openly state that you prefer living in a cluttered, junky place, and that you perceive the neat houses to be sterile or lacking in adequate visual complexity. Can the resolution to a contradiction get any easier?

It is only your mind that creates contradictions. Learn how to resolve the simple ones, flawlessly, to therefore train your mind in the process to resolve the more complex contradictions.

Your brain is a trained device, often referenced as your mind when considering the knowledge it uses, not unlike the programs you load onto the hard drive of your computer.

Consider four highly credentialed neurology scientists, who purport great knowledge of the human brain, and who accept high salaries for their knowledge, one who states that he is Christian, other who states that he is a Muslim, the other a Jew, and the other Hindu. Does a rich person who is verifiably capable of reasoning, leave a white plastic utility bucket laying in the yard by the front steps all summer, or a poor person with the junk in the yard want a nice looking house, or a neurology scientist purport the existence of an openly contradicted belief without simply asking the related series of questions to resolve the contradiction?


What precisely described mechanism in the human mind causes most American gun owners, even after reading these words, to rail against the politicians, police, court judges, bureaucrats and other such government chaps who are openly violating the US Constitution's second amendment by increasingly infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, denying the people the free exercise of their rights, and state that they support the US Constitution, and demand that government chaps obey that law, then vote for politicians who support the American government's war on hemp smokers, in unmitigated violation of the US Constitution's ninth amendment, denying the people even the ownership of their own bodies? The gun owners rail against those damn pot smoking liberals, saying they have no right to exercise the controlling right of humans (ownership and management of their own bodies), without which a person holds no right to possess or carry a gun. What causes the mind of the gun owner to so adamantly contradict itself? It is too easy for the gun owner to simply state that he supports the rights (law) described in the US Constitution, and thus recognize each person's ownership or their body, or that he does not support the US Constitution, and that rights should be defined by he who controls the most power (guns or votes backed by gun wielding police). What causes his mind to be unable to resolve that obvious contradiction, even if he reads these words?

It is 2006. Laugh yourself to tears at the people who want a nice looking house, but leave junk in their yard, the scientists who profess openly contradicted religious beliefs, but do not use their knowledge of scientific reasoning to resolve the contradictions, the anti-rights gun owners facing an armed anti-gun owner rights government, and national leaders who send gullible idiots to war, for peace. And then ask the questions to resolve every contradiction within YOUR mind.



Much not uploaded.... 7 February

Much useful knowledge is written by the writer of these words, that is not uploaded. The knowledge exists. Like that of the writer, your mind will recognize other knowledge when you ask the related effective questions, or stumble upon particular arrangements of words that sufficiently match a related, recognized neuron routing, and then for some chance reason create the next question that resolves the next related contradiction.

The latter is chance alone until you learn to question everything, and then an opportunity at every sensory perception.

Ask the questions. It is the process that reliably advances your knowledge beyond chance. But you must actually ask the questions, and answer them, and write them.



To kill the mind that holds the knowledge... 8 February 2006

Which fools would kill the minds that hold the knowledge not yet understand by the fools, but known to wiser people, such as the minds holding the knowledge that caused Saddam Hussein, George Bush and other persons who killed people who were perceived to politically oppose said minds, if not minds of their ilk, fearing the knowledge that could be learned, that could then be used to preclude any perceived reasoning to kill another human mind holding knowledge a wise person would seek to learn?

Would a wise person not seek to learn all of that knowledge, which requires that the murderers be kept alive and methodically questioned to the zenith of their knowledge, and concurrently that of the questioner, and its synthesis, to discover the controlling contradiction of all such minds, to therefore easily resolve the contradiction, and easily apply the resolution to all minds, to preclude such an illogical perception as that of an incentive to kill any other minds?


End of Intech Concepts 27


IntechConcepts 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1