Intellectual Technology

Intech Concepts 36
(Indicators of Reasoning Process)

Most recent comments added at the top of the page.



We agree, much to what should be your amusement.... 4 November 2010

Or otherwise stated, you agree with me, and you have no escape.

And, I agree with you, and I have no escape.

The above words are flawlessly verifiable, against your every question, stated first to entice your objection, which should have instead been your question, prior to stating the controlling concept that you should have, and may already have, recognized and stated, that is, that we first must share all of the knowledge we each know, by way of questions and answers that identify and resolve each contradiction we perceive in the process of learning everything we each know about the matter for which we would thereupon inescapably agree, by design of the human mind.

The human mind is of a single design, including its process, and therefore of the same design among us. Add to that the same knowledge, such as everything you and I know about a particular matter, and the result (conclusion) is the same, by definition and process. If, because you did not carefully read and question the forgoing, and you hold a Bush/Obama type institutionally induced perception that you cannot possibly be reduced to agreeing with me or anybody else whose words you have already failed to adequately question, then you must be able to identify the difference in the mind or its knowledge, or you would identify yourself as functionally illiterate as Obama, Bush and their ilk. And you cannot identify that difference because the forgoing words already preclude it. If we hold the same knowledge, then the conclusion of that knowledge is the same, otherwise stated as our agreement. And if you can identify a difference of human mind designs, then a few million scientists and myself would most want to learn what you have discovered, and we would ascribe your name to a prominent place in human history, and would benefit from the knowledge learned from the therefore identifiable people with the superior design of human mind.

All human-caused problems are caused by lack of sufficient communication (exchange of knowledge). All human-caused problems are solved by sufficient communication. Once the communicated knowledge reaches the level of being "the same" in two different minds, any conclusions will be the same.

The process of efficiently learning the same knowledge as another person is to ask and answer all the questions of the perceived contradictions in that knowledge.

Would not only a fool refuse or fail to learn what the other guy knows before making a fool of himself in public by stating or acting on a conclusion that involves any knowledge held by the other guy, especially if that conclusion affects the other guy against his will to therefore belatedly be introduced to the knowledge, or its results, held by the other guy, in a commonly embarrassing or less pleasant process than curious mutual discussion?

For the impatience of the related decision-makers to spend a couple days asking and answering questions about a particular contradiction or problem, such as the dramatic example of the US Afghan war, Bush, Obama, their military generals and the fools who support them, have been slaughtering hundreds of thousands of people, and destroying much of their human efforts, for more that nine years, therefore entrenching more decades of more hatred toward the Americans, with the inherent results.

The war decision-makers could win and thus end the war in a week if they simply learned the available and offered knowledge of how to do so, since their minds' design is the same as the enemy they fight, and the same as the US military industrial complex executives who own them, and the same as the people who offer the knowledge of how to win wars, and the knowledge of each is available and routinely offered, to leave them with inescapable agreement and thus their benefit, much to their resulting amusement with their prior simple laziness for learning the knowledge of how to resolve their childish contradictions.

For their impatience, they abandoned the openly available benefits of peace, individual human rights, free trade and the advancement of knowledge proven by history to be available, for themselves and their offspring, to instead garner only increasing grief, long lasting hatred and destruction created by the ignorance that induces ignorant people to kill people. Yes, they made themselves monetarily rich for awhile, at the cost of others, but would a thinking person accept the wealth stolen by killing people, when the test of time causes everyone to recognize its source, the name of the killers, and the inescapable consequences? Nothing can save any prior value in the names of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Hussein, Hitler, Stalin, Macnamera, Soviets, Nazis, Americans, Huns, and other war mongers of history, especially as humans advance their knowledge of the destructive results of seeking military power above human reasoning ability.

Simply take the time to learn everything known by the other guy, by simply asking and answering every question of every contradiction he perceives of your statements and actions, to resolve his perceived contradictions, which inherently include resolving the actual contradictions you created that you can therefore resolve, while he foolishly fails to do so of the contradictions he perceives of your statements and actions, to therefore learn that he will agree with you the moment he becomes sufficiently intelligent to resolve his contradictions, or the moment you leave him no choice by your using intellectual technology despite his opposition based on his ignorance.

Did you want him to agree with you if your conclusions were still based on ignorance that will inherently therefore more noticeably make a fool of you both when others introduce you to your ignorance perpetuated by your simple refusal or failure to learn verifiable knowledge held and offered by others? Well?

If a contradiction exists, such as your suggestion that the other guy is wrong, what is right is that to which you will agree, but as long as the other guy suggests that you are still wrong, while you do not hold all of his mind's knowledge, only a fool would accept your conclusion, while a wise person would learn what you and the other guy know, to thus be amused by your mutual retention of the contradiction.

Therefore you may wisely suggest your conclusions, and they would have a high chance of being correct if they were created by the results of your ongoing, openly stated invitation to others to ask you any question, resulting from their knowledge that contradicts yours, so that you can respond with the most accurate answer your mind can devise, revealing your related knowledge. And, as you would have been stating, if others can identify any contradiction in your words, resulting from their contradicting knowledge, and the contradiction is verified, easily done with a few questions, then the resolution would be easy, synthesizing the knowledge, conforming to logic and creating your mutual agreement, and you will thank the others for their having advanced your knowledge.

In the future, long after individuals have been routinely using the process to achieve agreements on initially perceived contradictions, such as the process manifested by freely trading, private enterprise business people since the days of the first cave man trading spear points for moccasins, the long belatedly educated government and such institution leaders will learn of each other's knowledge to resolve contradictions by the use of intellectual technology, introduced above, instead of perpetually failing the goal by using the destructive wars still used by such pitiably idiot dolts as George Bush, Barak Obama, their supporters, including their supporting businessmen who still can't figure out the fundamental difference between their process and government process even if they read these words, Hitler, Stalin, Tony Blair, Alexander the Devil, Bill Clinton, Saddam Hussein and their intellectually primitive ilk of millions defining the current and heretofore intellectual dark ages of the humans, much to the amusement of the observers.




The successful Christian attack against Christians.... 1 November 2010

It is too tempting to not mention a laughable result of the intellectual laziness of the American war leaders. They created a grand contradiction which the government-compliant US news journalists dutifully refrain from conveying to the therefore dumbed-down Americans. The Free Mason Christian crowd (any power-based institutions) of Cheney, his side kick Bush, Rumsfeld and their war mongering cronies who started the US Afghan Iraq mess, and extol the unbreakable US chains to the intellectually lazy Israeli military regime, extolled their imperative of imposing Christianity over Islam, openly pandering fear of their rhetorical illusion of an "Islamic Super-State". The Americans paid little attention to the US leadership's rhetoric of the "Christian Crusade" against the Muslims, but the Muslims did not pay so little attention, if you can imagine that.

With the lack of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction, and with the attackers against the New York World Trade Towers being Saudi, not Afghani or Iraqi, and with the US Air Force and Army military academies repeatedly exposed for prejudicially advantaging and encouraging Christian officers, etceteras, Cheney and Bush's "Christian Crusade" against Islam is an objectively logical conclusion as the reason those chaps started and maintained the ongoing US wars against the predominantly Muslim Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, in the minds of Muslims. If even half that evidence supported a predominantly Muslim nation's war against the US, the Americans would be openly claiming that the war was of Muslims against Christians.

The inherent result of using inherently self-defeating power (instead of reasoning) to advance one's cause has obviously not been the Christians conquering the Muslims. Quite opposite. There has been a historic-scale exodus of Christians from Middle East countries, fleeing and driven out, including in Israel. Well, if in the name of Christianity or Cave Trolls, a gang of malicious mental midget military morons mindlessly following orders of power-crazed leaders, started killing your family and neighbors, and destroying their homes and businesses, how would your mind inherently react toward Christians or Cave Trolls? Your answer? The answer of any thinking Christian or Cave Troll?

Most amusing has been Israel, where the Christians are being more maliciously attacked and driven out by the Israeli military and "settler" Jews, than the Christians are being denigrated by the Muslims. The Christians are being attacked by both sides, and therefore leaving. The Jews of the single-religion-State Israel, shouting their government propagandized "Jewish State" slogan, which is functionally identical to Hitler's government propagandized "Aryan State" Germany, are now more intolerant of other religions than were the prominently Muslim, multi-religion Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and other Middle East States where Christians have lived for millennia.

Christians (and women's rights) were safe under Saddam Hussein, but not under what Bush and Obama created by killing Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia, in the name of Christians. The use of power above reasoning is always self-defeating, always. To the Jews, who officially consider themselves to be "chosen by God", and officially decree that Israel is a "Jewish State", a non-Jew of any religion, whether Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or Christian, is a non-Jew, and thus an inferior human, holding no rights as a citizen or human in Israel. The Israeli Jews do not want any of YOU non-Jews in their single-religion Jewish State of Israel. They just want your money, or your labor to give value to the US Federal Reserve Notes (US Dollars) printed by the Jewish-owned Federal Reserve Bank.

Muslim-respecting Obama immediately recognized, that to sustain Bush's malicious wars to elevate Christianity above Islam, is to sustain the increasing world contempt toward the war-mongering Christians, much to Obama's private laughter. Obama is only doing what the Republican and Bush-supporting conservative Christians openly want him to do, that is, continue the conservative Christian military attack against Muslims, to create escalating world and Muslim hatred toward Christians.

This is nothing new in the wafting back and forth of the various war-monger religions amusingly claiming superiority over each other and the other guy, in the human-cried name of their gods, but this one was started by Bush and his Christian-preaching activists who intractably perceive that their god put them on Earth to kill the other people whom God put on Earth. You can blame the Muslims, whose Shias and Sunnis routinely kill each other for the same concept, but the American Christians are far more noticeably killing more people with their obviously greater military fire-power, and destroying more homes, farms and businesses, making the Christians more contemptible than the other guys doing less of the same.

The humans who perceive that they must do the killing for their god, are obviously not worshiping a genuine God who by definition is omnipotent and can therefore do her own killing for her own inherently flawless reasoning and process that cannot possibly involve the "collateral damage" (slaughter of innocent bystanders) in which the Christian Americans so revel that they keep doing it day after day after year after decade. The Cheney/Bush American military Christians are therein undeniably worshiping a false God, (identical to their kill-the-other-guy ilk of Muslims) by inescapable proof of the forgoing. Who would degrade their god to such a laughably pitiable human condition as to state that their god is so incompetent and impotent that he or she is not able to even kill mere mortal humans, and that humans must do so for their god? God created a design in which whole galaxies routinely collide with whole galaxies, as an example, expending and manifesting energy so vastly beyond the understanding of humans (but mathematically estimatable), that the suggestion that God cannot even do her own killing of the paltry mortal humans on the paltry planet of Earth, whom she might consider inferior to her "chosen humans", flawlessly proves the unmitigated intellectual void of the Bush-supporting Republican conservative Christians (identical to their opponents claiming the same of their god).

Historians will credit the historic "Christian Exodus from the Middle East in the 21st Century" to the American Christians and the Israelis who own Americans, much to the amusement of all thinking people. And the Christians will not soon move back into the Middle East. The American Christian attack against the Christians was a brilliant, historic success.

The use of force is always self-defeating, always, flawlessly verifiable. And therein is the value of learning the mechanisms of reasoning that can easily resolve all human-caused contradictions, including the foolish use of force that can therefore be defeated by the reasoning process. The Christians and Muslims have no defense against the use of intellectual technology, by the explainable and verifiable design of God.




The reason to laugh at the military suicides......4 October 2010

You can send this to Army officers at Fort Hood, and laugh at the confusion it causes their minds. This is, again, another offer to convey to them the referenced knowledge, to end their confusion, and prevent military suicides at Fort Hood.

You can send this to the relatives of military personnel who have committed suicide, and to the support groups who claim to be trying to help the families of military suicide victims, so they can understand the reason for the ongoing military suicides facilitated by the military, to no longer endure the confusion.

You can send this to people in the military, so they can learn the related suicide prevention knowledge on their own if they wish.

US Army post, Fort Hood, can be called Army Suicide Central.

The post commander of Fort Hood can be called the Commander of Army Suicide Victims, or Colonel Suicide. That he is an unmitigated failure as a military commander is manifest, unless his covert mission is to facilitate soldier suicides. When your troops are being killed, and you cannot even identify the enemy, you are obviously not "in command".

The ongoing Fort Hood suicides are just the most dramatic example. The military suicides elsewhere are the same.

So much news about the suicides at Fort Hood has escaped into the public domain that the Army command structure has spent fortunes of tax money on "experts" pandering all manner of phony rhetorical ruses and illusions to "stop the suicides" (stop the news of the suicides). And the suicides keep on happening, sometimes in numbers that raise questions even among the dumbed-down news journalists and other such Americans.

A simple analysis of the military system reveals that all the ruses and illusions to "prevent" suicides, like the other rhetorical ruses common to military training process that induces suicides, make the problem worse. The minds of the military officers and their "institutional experts" hold an objectively correctable, fundamental contradiction that fatally flaws all of their related decisions and thus actions in regard to suicide prevention.

Worse. The Fort Hood command structure, and the Pentagon chaps, have been repeatedly offered the verifiable process to prevent the suicides, and they never ask the first questions that would start the verification process (for an explainable and correctable reason). It is only a minor indicator to again state that the minds of military personnel are institutionally trained to never question orders, which is to say, ask no questions. And it is well known within the military that promotions go to the personnel who ask no questions, and robotically do as they are told, with a crisp, "yes sir", at every level of command.

That concept is predicated on the premise that he who is "in command" can do no wrong and make no mistakes, and is therefore above question, a fool's illusion defying the design of humans. A military officer can read that sentence, and his or her power-damaged mind will continue to function on that fool's illusion.

Asking questions is the process your mind uses to learn knowledge, such as the knowledge of an error or potential error. Fail to ask questions, and you will fail to learn new knowledge, fail to correct errors before they happen, and even fail to not repeat them, and thus you will be highly qualified for the military or any government job. The least intelligent military personnel are therefore promoted soonest and farthest, to the highest ranks making the most encompassing decisions for the most military personnel, by institutional design, verifiable against all denials and military rhetorical tap dancing. This in part explains why the existence of militaries has failed to create peace, even after thousands or more years of attempting to do so. The dumbest people of each society, who are trained to want to kill people (opposite of peace), are making the related decisions for more intelligent people who inherently do not want to kill people.

First you train your mind, and then it controls you, well beyond your perceptions of the involved institutional training, by design. All power-damaged minds cannot comprehend the concept and extent of the prior sentence, even if you hand them a dictionary, yet the concept verifiably controls their minds.

If your mind was successfully trained to make one mistake (never question the other guy's conclusions), is it not inherent that it can be trained to make other mistakes that you inherently do not prior recognize, by definition of "mistakes"?

If your mind is trained to perceive that the solution to a problem is to kill the other guy (the military concept), your mind will stop thinking through the questions seeking a solution for a difficult problem as soon as the number of involved contradictions exceed three (3), and revert to its trained solution, or otherwise actively support the trained solution, such as voting for a different lying politician if you were trained to believe that democracy (mob rule) solves problems (obviously false), or killing the other guy, if you were trained by the military (which likewise, obviously fails). Read that again, if you wish, and start questioning your institutionally taught illusions. When you learn how to ask effective questions in a series of contradictions exceeding three, because you actually resolved each contradiction before advancing to the next one, you will laugh at how easily you were prior fooled by institutional dogmas that sustain contradictions.

The offers of a verifiable process to prevent military suicides (as with those of police, lawyers, etceteras) (except that nobody wants to prevent lawyer suicides), logically include indications of the process based on using methodically verified "reasoning" (conclusions flawlessly verifiable against all questions from anyone), the process that is used to resolve contradictions in the human mind, therefore the process that eliminates the contradiction-induced mental frustrations that can become so compounded in the human mind, in relation to certain fundamentals of the human mind's design, related to suicide, that escape (resolutions) becomes imperative by design of the mind, and, lacking recognition of the related questions and answers that resolve the contradictions, for failure of simple education, suicide seems to be the only recognizable and well known escape for the mind.

But of course every commonly intelligent person recognizes that "reasoning" is the ultimate enemy of the power-damaged mind, therein the US military officers, as is verifiable against every question that any military officer (and anyone else) can ask. Reasoning inherently involves questions to verify the validity of each reason for each decision. It is a questioning process. Military officers cannot recognize or tolerate the simple questioning process to prevent military suicides, and cannot comprehend that the process can concurrently be used to make a vastly more effective military, in part because military officers are trained to never question conclusions from the hierarchy, in a hierarchal system. Therein military officers sustain their millennia-entrenched process of shooting before they think, then excuse-making to perpetually avoid even subsequent thinking, instead of thinking before they shoot, or they would be called commonly intelligent people instead of military.

(It is laughably easy to defeat any enemy without shooting him, if his bullets are not already whizzing past your ears, literally.)

If you do not like what your neighbor is doing, do you shoot him, or use reasoning to resolve the contradiction? On what is your neighborhood predicated, and thus on what is your social training predicated? How, by a complete and accurate description of the verifiably controlling concepts, does that differ from military training? Would you want all of your neighbors to be trained to militarily solve neighborhood problems, while you are only socially trained with the reasoning process? Do you want to live in a society predicated on everybody threatening everybody with being shot to solve any perceived problem, instead of using reasoning without logical use of the option of shooting the other guy to solve a problem not related to him shooting at you? What happens to the inherent percentage of minds that cannot successfully synthesize social training, and psychologically intense military training, for simple lack of the correct questions and answers conveyed by simple education related to the known results of such contradictions? If a contradiction involves the military trained desire to want to kill the guy who is perceived as creating a problem, and the person so trained is a neighbor, colleague at work, or a family member, would you not consider it prudent to simply convey the knowledge of which questions to ask that would resolve the obvious contradictions created by such a trained desire?

As an aside, do not consider that we are talking about "those military guys". People who commit suicide would prior scoff at the idea that "they" would commit suicide. These words discuss YOUR mind's design, and everyone's. You do not control your mind. Its design controls you. People who commit suicide do so because their mind encounters a frustrating array of a certain type of contradictions too extensive for them to resolve, with an imperative for escape, and their only known escape is suicide, while the process and questions to resolve those particular contradictions are known and easily conveyed.

But the military refuses to convey such knowledge, or even inquire of its inherent and routinely offered existence, to therefore avoid learning about it, because the mental midget US military officers are trained to fear questions about killing people, including oneself (or any other questions), because they are trained to perceive that the zenith of the human mind's ability is to devise more effective ways to kill people as the ultimate solution to any frustrating problem.

Therefore the Army shovels vast quantities of tax money to institutional cronies of military and other government insiders, inherently by design of the organizational manifestations of human fundamentals, who offer rhetorical ruses of "suicide prevention programs" that are designed to feed the Army the arrangements of words that the Army requests for "suicide prevention programs" obviously void of any knowledge of how to solve the problem. Like other grant or military contract scam artists, the Army cronies inquire as to what the Army wants, then writes those Army-provided words in the proposals, and hires a psychologist or psychiatrist with the proper titles and credentials to sign the proposals, and get the lucrative contracts. The institutional "suicide prevention program" experts want the money, not any prevention of suicides which would end their excuses to get more money for the same scam, as is verifiable.

The suicide victims are merely pawns for one of countless tax money scams, with the process having nothing to do with any actual suicide prevention, as is verifiable.

It is the same process that DemocanRepublicrat politicians use to get elected. Their tax paid staff and pollsters ask the voters what they want (what they want to hear), then the politicians say those words to the voters to fool the voters into thinking that the politicians want the same things. The politicians lie if their lips are moving, as proven by the results, decade after decade, millennia after millennia. Unquestioning people never figure it out, even if they read these words, because they never ask the effective questions that convey the related knowledge to their minds. The ultimate result is the same, as with all accumulated, unresolved contradictions. The process leads to the accumulation of such therefore seemingly unresolvable arrays of compounded contradictions that the government, like all governments, eventually commits suicide (destroys itself) by compounding, rather than solving, the damaging contradictions, such as the perpetual wars in the name of peace, unbridled printing of therefore worthless paper money in the name of creating wealth, and other such ultimately doomed contradictions that completely destroy their system of institutional existence.

To emphasize that scam, that precludes any solution to the problem, using these words, the unquestioning (dumb) Army administration officers read the proposals, and see the same words that they requested, and conclude that the proposal must be good because its words match what the Army said it wanted, and is signed by a person with a lot of abbreviations after his or her name. The institutionally power-damaged minds of military and other government personnel are not capable of any greater thinking, with the proof manifest.

The test of time proves the failures of the programs, but everyone overseeing the problem, including the unquestioning DemocanRepublicrat congressmen, are fed the same arrangements of impressive words by titled and credentialed "experts", and are therefore satisfied that "something" is being properly done about the problem. Nowhere does anybody consider the test of time or the failed results of the prior programs that are the same as the current failing programs because the institutionally power-damaged mind verifiably cannot recognize that the institution is doing anything wrong.

Nobody in the institutions ask fundamental questions of the institution's obviously failing process.

They perceive that "the institution can do no wrong." "The king can do no wrong." "The other guy is to blame."

Any exposed flaw or problem "is being addressed" by the institution, by those arrangements of words presented by "experts". The Army power-damaged minds cannot comprehend the test of time, that is, the prior results of the same process being currently used, even if they read these words.

A commonly intelligent person (one who asks questions of contradictions, and answers them) can analyze all the military suicide prevention programs, identify the commonalities that explain the manifest failures, and describe them. But such a person is never allowed to even present such an analysis to the military because the description is that of a fundamental institutional failure. Such a person's words are immediately recognized as either suggesting that the institution can in fact do wrong, which cannot be tolerated within the institution, or the words are not understood because the military minds are confused by a suggestion of what power-damaged minds perceive as an "impossibility", that of their institution doing something wrong. Asking related questions is either not allowed by each such trained mind, or the useful questions are not recognized because each of the military minds never practiced the learned skill of asking effective questions that actually resolve contradictions.

The suicides themselves are immaterial to the Army. The military has plenty of cannon fodder. The military's primary concern is that of how to silence or mitigate the public news of the suicides. There again the "suicide prevention programs" only need plausible descriptions by people with titles and credentials that fool the therein perpetually fooled, unquestioning news media. It is the "bad news prevention programs" for which the taxpayers are paying.

The military inherently treats military suicides as it does "collateral damage", by institutional training. When the over-riding institutional goal is to kill people, a process of obviously profound magnitude that requires intensive retraining of human minds that inherently do not originally want to kill people, the details of contradictions are over-ridden by such intensive training. That in part explains why the daily "collateral damage" of slaughtering innocent, unarmed women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan (as was done in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Korea and other US Presidential Ego Gratification Wars) is ongoing, with no verifiable process to stop or even mitigate the slaughter, functionally identical to the military reaction to military suicides, by military training of the minds of military personnel.

Within that training, involving an array of concepts, the military officers treat the human mind as a muscle, incessantly telling troops that they must be "tough" as a process to ignore "collateral damage", and not commit suicide, explaining why the contradictions are compounded and why commonly intelligent people recognize military personnel as "muscle-heads" who are laughably ignorant of how the human mind functions, and confused by its actual functioning.

It is one task to train your mind to want to kill the commander-decreed "enemy", which rarely prevails in the test of time, by design of the human mind that was inherently designed to not want to kill the other guy while oneself is the other guy to every other guy, a profound, increasingly anguishing contradiction in the human mind's original design, but another completely separate task to train your mind to accept the slaughter of innocent, unarmed women and children, without sooner and more dramatic results effected by the inescapable design of the human mind. The blissful ignorance of the general public believing the unquestioning news journalists, the Bush/Cheney/Obama type politicians and most senior military officers, of what happens in war where the bullets and bomb shrapnel are zipping through the air, is not conveyable to the minds of those who discover the extent of the slaughter of innocent civilians and fellow soldiers on both sides who belatedly recognize that the training is based on unmitigated lies. The human mind was designed to not be able to erase knowledge that is learned by direct "experience" creating the inescapable questions of the involved contradictions. When the mind perceives new answers to profound questions, which contradict the answers entrenched in its neural routing by intense institutional training, and the connecting questions resolving the contradictions are not available because they were never mentioned in the institutional training, and the process to individually discover those questions was never conveyed in any institutional training (school and society), self-compounding confusion or mental anguish results, to an extent in a percentage of people, that results in suicide. It can be reduced to a mathematical model or algorithm, neither of which is useful to the involved person or observer without learning the related questions.

Therefore, when a mind "joins the military", or fails to quit, regardless of the results, upon encountering the first obvious controlling-contradiction, the controlling decision is made to attempt to contradict the human mind's design, to train oneself to want to kill the other guy to solve a problem that is created by killing the other guy, a military institution imperative. At that decision, the resulting death of the person joining the military, by being killed, by either the enemy, "friendly fire", military accident or suicide, is accepted, by default, whether prior recognized or not, usually not. "He who accepts the benefit, must accept the liability." Military suicides are as normal to the process as being killed by the enemy, a normal result of the human mind profoundly contradicting its design in relation to humans killing humans, made more obvious by the fact that US military suicides currently exceed the number of military personnel killed by the enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan. The decision was already made at the moment of "joining the military", an institution predicated on profoundly contradicting the human mind's design.

So if your son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister, other relative or neighbor joins the military, you can be equally proud or dismayed by any method of their resulting death, but fully understand it. "He who accepts the benefit, must accept the liability." Their error or intent was the original one, to join the military, a killing and dying game effected by contradicting the human mind's design that cannot be successfully contradicted, by design. And while the suicides are laughably easy to prevent, the military institution is predicated on NOT conveying knowledge of the process to prevent the suicides, or learning it, because such knowledge questions the power game of killing people, the game upon which institutional military ignorance is predicated and dependent.

When you join a killing (and dying) game, and you willingly surrender your own reasoning based decision-making process to the absolute life and death control of recognizably trained-to-be-ignorant (unquestioning) leaders (military officers), who display contempt for human life as proven by their disregard for ongoing "collateral damage" (slaughter of more unarmed women and children than enemy military), and when that contempt obviously extends to YOUR life, if you join the game, by doing nothing even remotely sincere or logical to reduce the game-induced suicides of the game players, as proven by the unabated suicides when a verifiable solution has been repeatedly offered, then you have no defense against the suggestion of your intellectually void cranial activity. Likewise, that does not speak well for friends and family who do not adequately warn the potential victim of that nature of that game.

While the US military leaders routinely make the statement that the military "must think outside the box", proving that their mind is aware of the concept and the need to use it, to solve frustrating problems when those problems, for which the military holds no known solutions, become embarrassing news in the news media, the same leaders will not even look outside the "box" (their insider cronies who have already failed for decades) even when the daily suicides in the military exceed the number of soldiers being killed in two major ongoing wars. That is not mere negligence. That is a willful, entrenched, trained policy to hold in contempt the lives of their own personnel who are committing suicide for a military-induced reason that is laughably easy to identify and correct. That is another identification of a power-damaged mind. When the lives of American military personnel are at stake, what is the comparative cost of asking and answering harmless questions that might initially seem to embarrass the dumb conclusions of a few military officers who never took the time to ask those obvious questions their entire military career? Compare your answer with the manifested answer of every US military officer. Who, of what description, would trust the life of their son or daughter to such people? How many American soldiers have committed suicide so the Pentagon kids can avoid a few questions that are no more embarrassing that the amusingly embarrassing questions I asked and answered about my laughable ignorance while I was a distinguished military graduate Army officer?

Knowing that, you can therefore start asking and answering the questions that military personnel never start asking, because of their training, to easily discover the questions that can prevent military suicides, make a vastly more effective military that wins wars (defeats enemies) without firing a shot, or any other goal if your intent is to resolve the related contradictions. Learning that knowledge, you can convey it to any military person, if they wish to learn it, much to the confusion and rage of military officers if they knew what you were doing (questioning the institutionally unquestionable).

As an amusing aside, when the military persons who decide to commit suicide, eventually, inherently recognize that it was the institutional lies (contradictions) of their commanding officers who induced the extent of suicide-inducing contradictions, and refused to help resolve them, even when the resolutions were openly offered to the military officers, it is entirely possible for the suicide candidates to decide to kill their commanders as part of the process, and thus benefit fellow soldiers. That decision could efficiently become a popular part of the process. Such a trend could not be stopped by the military and its experts, for the same reason the current trend of suicides cannot be stopped by those institutionally trained minds who refuse to learn new knowledge. It has already started, but only as an anomaly, not yet a popular trend.

Enjoy the show.




To scientists studying how whales and dolphins think and communicate.... 28 August 2010

And to thinking people studying how whale and dolphin scientists do not think or communicate.

Humans are trying to learn how whales and dolphins think and communicate. The well-funded research produces popular nature study movies, prepared by journalists who are so ignorant of how humans think and communicate that the journalists are impressed with the dolphin scientists, rather than laughing.

But humans are making no scientific effort to learn how humans think and communicate. That is verifiable by asking a few questions, despite any objections by any scientists. The results are obvious. Destructive wars, imprisonments, forced taxation, contradicting laws, confusion and frustration still reign among humans, while they claim to know how they think and communicate.

Actual thinking and communication preclude all wars, regardless of opposition by non-thinking Obama Bush sorts and their legions of like-mindless military and police minions. The military and other such force-based criminal minds hold the same brain design as all humans. They are demarcated from reasoning humans by the military, police and lawyer sorts having adopted the perception of "institutional power" that re-routes data from the reasoning neurons in the brain to the power-perception neurons, as a non-detailed description. Upon learning the design and functioning of the human mind, one can do as they wish with any other mind, verifiable. Of course that ability is the dream of military sorts and the Obama Bush family of power-damaged minds throughout human history, but the design quite logically precludes the power-damaged minds from learning the functional design of the human mind, except by the outside applied results of intellectual technology that no mind can escape, by design.

Clearly the common human ability to think and communicate is so primitive that the human attempt to study dolphin thinking is an amusing comedy. The ability to fully understand dolphin thinking and communication is readily available to those scientists who first learn how the human mind thinks and communicates. No scientists have learned that knowledge, or they would not claim to be scientists, and they show no interest in learning such knowledge, or they would already have started asking why scientists so often contradict themselves with a process that was supposed to resolve contradictions.

You can copy and email this section to any whale or dolphin scientist, their institutions, their gullible funding sources, and nature movie journalists. But they will not understand these words because those chaps verifiably do not know how their minds think or communicates with words. In contrast, YOU might understand these words, to therefore more thoroughly enjoy the comedy of scientists.

Now consider, from the evidence shown to humans by the movies of the dolphins reacting to scientists, that the dolphins may understand the concepts expressed herein, and need only learn the association of the printed words that the scientists obviously cannot understand.

If an American scientist who is studying dolphin-thinking, living in the US, is told by Person A, such as any public school teacher, that the scientist lives in a nation with a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, and the scientist is told by Person B that the government keeps secrets (classified information) from the people, and Person B's claim is verified and obvious, and if the scientist does not therefore identify Person A as a liar or so damn dumb he reveals the unmitigated failure of the US government's public school system, then the scientist again reveals the unmitigated failure of the US government's public school system, and the impossibility of his understanding another animal's mind, with a human mind that cannot understand what it says to itself.

The resolution of the contradiction is easy. Either replace the secret-keeping government of the government, by the government and for the government at the people's expense, with an honest government of the people, by the people and for the people, therefore holding no secrets, OR, simply state that the US government is a government of the government, by the government and for the government at the people's expense, at each opportunity it is appropriate, and likewise ridicule the ignorant public school teachers who dutifully serve the government's imperative to incessantly lie to school students to keep the common people more ignorant than the obviously ignorant government sorts who believe that Americans live under a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The latter resolution is obviously easy, and establishes one's thinking and useful communication ability.

The former resolution is also very easy, upon learning how to think and communicate, while ignorant government sorts and their scientists would inherently remain confused, and respond with self-defeating contradictions. Humans hold no ability to sustain contradictions, especially against certain questions, in certain formats, that their minds could not escape, or their effects, by design of the mind.

The examples of the inability of scientists to think and understand human communication are nearly endless. I keep repeating my favorite examples, such as the scientists holding no comprehension that an inferior law contradicted by a superior law holds no weight or effect as law, even if you hand them a dictionary and the US Supreme Court ruling in those words, so the highly titled and credentialed, PhD Magnum Cume Loud scientists are routinely, easily fooled into making fools of themselves, at their obvious damage, paying unnecessary taxes and doing as bureaucrats, cops and lawyers demand under claimed authority of inferior laws contradicted by superior laws, etceteras and etceteras.

They do not ask the question, under recorded penalty of fraud, if the law at question is an inferior law contradicted by a superior law, or if it is the common law and therefore the highest law, not contradicted by any higher law, for the basic action at question.

If you train your mind to not understand the contradictions it makes, and not ask effective questions when the possibility of a contradiction is indicated (any time a government person's lips are moving), your mind will routinely contradict itself while it fully perceives that no contradiction is involved, by design of the trainable human mind. If you pay a fee to enter a National Park, while the government holds no authority to charge a fee (tax) for the exercise of a right, and you hold the right to travel by common means on the public rights of way (drive your car on the roads), and the right to walk on public land, then your mind will not understand the other foolish contradictions you routinely create or to which you gullibly acquiesce.

And then if you attempt to study what may be a logically thinking dolphin mind, with an obviously illogical human mind, you may impress unquestioning fools, such as US journalists, but not the dolphins who respond to only entertain the primitive humans playing dumb games for lack of a more useful mind. The dolphins may not be fooled, and are laughing when telling the stories to other dolphins, using dolphin words that do not contradict themselves.

If the dolphins are trained by scientists, to respond to a concept, such as analogous to the scientist-believed concept that Americans live under a government of, for and by the people, or that the Americans hold the uninfringable right to keep and bear arms as stated in the highest law of the land (US Constitution), and the dolphins successfully learn the concept and respond accurately, and then the dolphins more often randomly respond opposite of the concept, the scientists would be confused, yet the dolphins would be demonstrating human intelligence to the level of highly credentialed American scientists who recognize no contradiction in the government keeping secrets from the people, and the government demanding that you get police clearance (permission) to buy a handgun from a licensed gun dealer, etceteras and etceteras.

Animals that do seemingly illogical things and make sounds toward each other, that are not understandable to humans, are displaying the highest level of human intelligence demonstrated by institutionally taught humans who believe and acquiesce to the millions of laughably obvious contradictions created by government personnel, officials and other power-based institutions. Read that again, if you wish. It is flawlessly, scientifically verifiable with a series of questions. It illuminates why only fools claim to be scientists or any other institutionally taught person.

Until the humans learn intellectual technology, their understanding of the world will remain as amusingly primitive as themselves. And if school students are believing their teachers, including the highly credentialed university professors who helped produce scientists who are studying dolphin-thinking, instead of questioning those teachers down to the verifiable fact that they are dumber and more self-confused than the students, then the US will continue to descend to the nadir of Obama Bush and their unquestioning news journalist parrots (with apologies to the parrots for equating them to US news journalists).

In the competition for learning more useful knowledge, several other countries are obviously excelling beyond the US, while the US, like its Roman predecessor, squanders its human energy and minds (taxation of human productivity and time) on more effective war processes to deceive, kill and destroy, each of which cannot possibly be sustained by the human design, much to the amusement of the observers.

There is no need for YOU to become as ignorant and self-confused as American scientists. Ask your school teacher, university professor, news journalist, lawyer, politician or parents, if it is possible for you to own your body as an adult, if the government can dictate what you can and cannot put into it, without your harming anyone else, under threat of jail. And then after he or she reveals their void of understanding of how humans usefully communicate with words, ask if you can hold human rights if you do not hold exclusive ownership of your body. Then ask if it is possible to own private property for which one must pay property taxes, etceteras.

Never stop asking questions, and answering them, and questioning your answers, for the extremely valuable knowledge which such a mind-training process will create. Ask the questions of yourself, because the next person, especially those with titles and credentials, most likely stopped asking questions early in the game, to instead flatter a comparatively ignorant person who could give him a title, credential, mindless job, promotion or a vote for a government office.

It is difficult or impossible to fool a dolphin. It is so easy to fool the humans, even with blatantly contradicted words, that the humans are the best comedy on the rock.

Enjoy the show.




Definition of dumbed-down Americans, and YOUR human rights.... 26 August 2010

The inability of Americans, to accurately and verifiably describe or define human rights, with human rights being a controlling concept of human existence, defines the dumbed-down Americans as such.

Go ahead, ask your children, of any age, or parents, to flawlessly define human rights, to recognize how useless to themselves you have left them, as gullible victims of whichever power-damaged mind with a government title or other institutional title tells them what they must do, and are not allowed to do, by decree, routinely contradicting human rights.

Prosecutors, other lawyers, court judges, cops and other government bureaucrats, using power of office and color of law, can lie about what you must do, denying your human rights, as easily as a con artist or any other human. And by a series of simple questions government personnel can be proven to lie more often and more consistently than a common person, by design of their institutionally power-damaged mind.

Government power is based on fooling or intimidating unquestioning people out of their rights, and then granting or denying those previous rights as privileges, creating the power of the person so granting or denying YOUR previous rights.

If you cannot flawlessly describe each of your human rights, you are prey for even the dumbest government sorts wielding power of office.

The ability (intelligence) to articulate (state, say) what human rights are, is the legally required and logical demonstration to claim human rights.

A pet dog does not have rights because it cannot describe them to humans. A pet dog only has privileges granted and denied by humans. Humans who cannot accurately describe human rights, and are thus ignorant of what their rights are, including your offspring or parents, are routinely treated as pet dogs, and thus denied human rights, by power-craving cops, lawyers, court judges and other government bureaucrats.

Human rights are reserved by prevailing law for those who are sufficiently intelligent to accurately describe them. In the early days of written law, it was assumed by power-craving government sorts, flattering their egos with their mutually awarded government titles, that those people who are not sufficiently intelligent to understand and describe (articulate) such a basic concept as their own human rights, were too ignorant to make reasonable decisions for themselves, and therefore hold no rights, and therefore the more "intelligent" (more highly titled but usually less intelligent) government sorts may make the decisions for such "ignorant" people. That seemed logical to the power-damaged minds of government sorts who crave power over other humans, because the government sorts (wrongly) assumed that their knowledge of their laws (which were designed to create their power) created a superior form of human intelligence. At that time many people, such as the peasants who were too poor to afford an education to learn the skill of reading and writing, had to be verbally told what the written law required, and were therefore easy prey for the power of government sorts saying the law said whatever they said the law says. Laws are actually a minor, easily learned arena of knowledge that just sounds important, like the words, "national security", while "security" is an illusion in the real world. There is no "security". And a literate person can quickly and easily learn the PREVAILING written laws, without any need for a lawyer to say what the law says, if one knows what "human rights" are by precise description.

An analogy would be a situation in which the auto mechanics became the rulers of society because the knowledge of fixing cars, more difficult to learn than law, was seized by government accredited auto mechanic schools and a government certification bureaucracy, and who would not fix the cars of anyone objecting to their rule, while the unquestioning populace therefore believed that they held a superior form of intelligence. Well, that is what the lawyers did, primarily because they recognized that the common Americans had become so dumb that they did not even know what human rights actually are, at the intelligence level of pet dogs.

As more people became more educated, the government sorts, such as government-licensed lawyers, then progressively wrote laws in the needlessly complexified language of legalese to always keep the understanding of the written law seemingly too complex for YOU peasants to learn, and thus YOU must be verbally told what the written law requires.

That system is a ruse, because above all the legalistically worded inferior laws designed to fool unquestioning fools, the common language easily learned common law prevails.

The government-licensed lawyer system is the same as the "secret societies" or "secret gangs", wherein you must know the secret handshake or passphrase to be told the secret knowledge that is not really secret if you look around, and is rarely anything special, but fools unquestioning fools. A classic example is the routine "executive sessions" of the National Rifle Association (NRA), reserved for the Board of Directors only, wherein secret information is discussed. These are the same common people who commonly talk about what they know outside "executive sessions". If you were to attend those sessions, as I have as a previous NRA Director, you would have a difficult time not openly laughing at the childishness of those grown adults discussing nothing that is secret to anyone, and nothing that is of value as a secret, and what they commonly discuss outside of executive sessions. They are just intellectually immature, insecure children flattering themselves with their illusionary "secrets", identical to lawyers who memorize the language of legalese as their "secret passphrase", for an "insider club" system that fools fools into believing that only lawyers can understand the written law that you must obey.

It is impossible to obey a written law that you cannot understand from the written words. The only laws that you must obey (prevailing laws) can be easily understood from the written words, as required by law. The writer of these words can teach you everything you need to know to obey the few laws you must obey, in a couple hours, replacing all of the best law schools, and verify the substance of this sentence against all the questions of all the lawyers, judges and law school professor emeritus' in the nation. Or you can just read this section and a certain few others of this website, and learn the vast majority of the law you must obey, and any remainder by your answers to your resulting questions that you can learn how to make effective within this website.

The assumption that knowledge of the law is a superior form of intelligence, was ascribed to prevailing law, for a flawed reason described elsewhere. The law requires that you "expressly reserve your (human) rights under the common law" to demonstrate your awareness and understanding of them, so you can recognize when they are being denied, so you can be treated as a human equal to the administrators of the written law, and not treated as an ignorant pet dog or victim. That law, like all the laws of the common law, is never mentioned to the common people by the government's public school teachers, or any lawyers or government sorts, because as long as people do not "expressly reserve their rights under the common law" to each government agent upon any initiation of official communication with them, the cops, lawyers, judges and other bureaucrats can "lawfully assume" that their victim is among those who are too ignorant to understand human rights, and therefore "acquiesce to the inferior laws" that allow government sorts to make decisions for their human prey.

The above described government demand that you expressly reserve your rights under the common law, is partially valid reasoning, except for the controlling reasoning that describes such a government assumption and its effects as the crime of evasion of a known legal duty. All government personnel accept the benefit (salary, benefits, perks of title of office) for the liability to administer the law. Government personnel hold only the authority to administer prior written law, only the prevailing law, and the duty to do so. That liability includes informing the people of their rights under the common law, as a duty for which the common people pay the government personnel via taxes, at any indication of that the people or persons need to be informed. That can be verified by several means, including the full concept and law that effected the scant government requirement that they notify a person of their right to remain silent, upon an arrest. It is rational (the basis of all common laws) to presume that all tax payers or other citizens want their government personnel who administer law, to inform the citizens of their rights according to the prevailing law, if any question of their rights involves a potential denial of their rights by government personnel acting under the prevailing law that must be lawfully administered (obeyed) by government personnel who function of, by and for the people not the government.

The US cops, lawyers, court judges and bureaucrats simply violate the law with impunity, as usual, and lie to you if their lips are moving, because that is the source of their insatiable POWER over you, and their excuse to get more tax money from you, because YOU (if that is demonstrated by your actions or statements) and all the other Americans have been so dumbed-down by the government personnel, schools and news journalists that you cannot even describe (articulate) human rights. The first thing any intelligent species with a mind would teach its young is how the mind completely functions, its complete design, and the second thing, if the species held rights, would be the flawless description of those rights. Both such concepts are completely omitted in the American education system designed and maintained by power-damaged minds who cannot even accurately describe human rights.

Okay, once again.... A human right is, by prevailing law, an action for which the government holds no lawful authority (or any legitimate source of authority) to require permission (permit, license, mandatory paperwork or action), or any authority to demand the payment of a tax or fee. In common law countries, including the United States of America and about 35 other countries whose laws are of British common law origin, an action can be unlawful, and therefore not a human right, only if, 1. said action verifiably damages a real person, with a real, verifiable damage (eg. assault, theft, destruction of property), or 2. verifiably threatens real people with a real damage, which has not happened by chance alone, with a high possibility of that chance (eg, driving through red stop lights), or 3. with a low possibility of that chance but with such extensive damage that society has determined in the common law that society does not want to take that chance (eg, storing nuclear bombs or a large quantity of explosives in suburban residences), all of which is on record in written law, available for anyone to read.

The common law prevails above all the other laws and jurisdictions of law in common law nations, such as the United States. The common law contains no laws that contradict each other, by design, unlike the inferior law jurisdictions that are saturated with laws that contradict each other, creating the rule of personalities (cops, prosecutors, judges) who can decree which law they shall apply to their friends, and which to other people who are not favored.

A court under the exclusive jurisdiction of the common law requires the judge to administer only the common law as written. The judge becomes an administrative secretary without any power. In dramatic contradiction to a court of the common law, an equity court allows the judge to administer any of millions of contradicting statute laws, case laws and many other laws, at whim, or simply write a new law, as a case law, creating his POWER over the ignorant victims brought before court. Never enter a court (cross the bar) without identifying the precise jurisdiction of the court. It is impossible to defend under the law, if the jurisdiction (the set of laws) is not identified, or if the jurisdiction contains any contradicting laws.

As the US Supreme Court has ruled, and genuinely literate Americans have recognized, "An inferior law contradicted by a superior law holds no weight or effect as law". Over 85 percent of the so called "laws" enforced by the notoriously ignorant, malicious and self-serving American law enforcement agents, prosecutors, judges and bureaucrats, are inferior laws contradicted by superior laws. That enforcement of contradicted inferior laws constitutes felony crimes by cops, prosecutors, judges and other law enforcement bureaucrats, but among dumbed-down Americans whose parents, schools and government agents failed to teach the knowledge of rights and the common law, said enforcement of inferior laws is foolishly endured, and constitutes the excuses for enforcement budget funding, and taxation by fraudulent citation (fines) that pays the excessively high salaries and perks of cops, prosecutors, judges and bureaucrats. The other taxes have been diverted to the costly whims of countless other government officials squandering tax money from gullibly compliant, dumbed down Americans.

Rights can be exercised at whim, without any lawful interference, demands or delays from government.

A human action is either lawful under the common law, and therefore a right of the people, or unlawful under the common law, therefore allowing no government authority to demand permission (permits, license or mandatory action) or the payment of a tax or fee to exercise a right, and no government authority to allow an unlawful action (crime) by granting said permission or collecting a tax.

The obvious inability of the vast majority of Americans to understand the foregoing sentence, again defines the dumbed down Americans as such. They gullibly pay an unlawful tax to exercise the right to walk on their own public land, and the right to travel by common means on the public rights of way, every time they enter a National Park, etceteras. Dumb. The entrance tax pays the National Park Service cops (rangers) who are only there to arrest the people who do not pay them for arresting people who do not pay them. Likewise, as another example, dumbed down gullible people ask (acquiesce to) permission (building permit) to exercise the right to build a house, etceteras. The act of asking for permission (permit, license), or acquiescing to a demand that one get permission, or pay a free, is the act of willfully surrendering one's human rights, the act of a dumbed down American.

If you can be "permitted" to build a house, with a mandatory building permit system, then you can be denied the RIGHT to build a house, and thus be forced by the government to live on the streets or in a cave. Such government power defies the reasoning ability of the high court judges who wrote the common law to preclude the government from holding the power to deny the right of the court judges' offspring, to build a house, and thus force them to live on the streets and recognize that their high court judge parent was a malicious idiot.

It is either lawful for the public to walk on their own public land, to travel by common means on the public rights of way, and build a house, or it is not lawful to do so, and thus government-demanded taxes and permission (permits, licenses) for those acts constitute crimes by the involved government thugs criminally using power of office and color of law (inferior laws contradicted by superior laws) to effect a damage (value of time for process) to the permitted or taxed person.

Now, suggest that your children write the above and be able to explain it to anyone, or leave them to be gullible, ignorant victims, classic dumbed-down Americans, for any cop, lawyer, judge or bureaucrat who verbally states that this or that is against the law, requires a permit, fee or other mandatory process, without producing the related prevailing law as it is written.

Consider the following, related to this section, as variously stated in other sections.... If required to appear in court, before "crossing the bar" (the little gate in the court room, between the litigants and the public observers) state, and place a written copy on the gate or partition, for the judge, the following: I expressly reserve my rights under the common law. I do not acquiesce to any inferior law or any jurisdiction of inferior law by any means, words or actions, implied, inferred or perceived. I do not acquiesce to the jurisdiction of an equity court. I do not acquiesce to the liability of any compelled benefit. If any implication of such acquiescence exists, it is an error, most likely due to government deception, and I hereby renounce and recant it and its effects. I insist that any demand or action imposed upon me by any officer of the government or courts, be in harmony with the common law, under criminal penalty of fraud, evasion of a known legal duty, perjury to oath of office and other laws. I insist upon my right to a court under the exclusive jurisdiction of the common law. Am I being denied my right to a court under the exclusive jurisdiction of the common law?

Memorize or write the primary parts of the foregoing and carry the paper with you always. Carry extra copies to hand to any cop or government agent the moment you interact with them. Court judges will normally become angered or enraged upon your statement, and threaten you with all manner of intimidating threats. Hold your position. Answer no questions (you cannot be required to answer questions). Respond to any question with the following: "I seek to obey the law. What words constitute the lawful answer to that question? Show me the prevailing law requiring those exact words, and I will state those exact words to obey the law. You hold no authority to demand anything other than that stated in the exact words of the common law." And if under threat, such as the threat to conduct the court case regardless of your participation, simply state that you will remain to take notes on the criminal actions of the court judge and other government personnel using power of office and color of law to effect a criminal damage in violation of your human rights, including the right to a court under the stated and recorded, exclusive jurisdiction of the common law.

If American soldiers sacrificed their lives to create and defend YOUR rights, you do not deserve them if you are not willing to risk mere imprisoning (free food and lodging), or bureaucratic hassle, to defend your rights.

But to defend them, you must know what they are. They are any human action......(now write the rest from the above, or from your answers to your questions of the above).




A common process to dumb-down Americans..... 10 July 2010

This is how you are dumbing down your children, and how your parents, schools and government dumbed you down, if you concur.....

It is beyond the thinking ability of government personnel, from the president to his lowest echelon minions, and their supporters, to recognize or understand that they are just common humans with the same brain and mind design as everyone who does not have a government job, including themselves before they got a government job. Therein all the common derogatory adjectives used to describe government dolts are founded in substance.

The proof is flawless.....

(If you can understand these plain English words of the reasoning of the proof, you are not, or soon will not be among the dumbed-down Americans as you question and reason your way to advancing knowledge, which will get you fired if you are a government dolt, at great benefit to you.)

For common person X to cause person Y to perform an action, X must convey to Y the reasoning that causes Y's current knowledge base to recognize a benefit from the action. Therein reasoning is used, and any questions are answered with more reasoning. Because Y inherently holds knowledge that is different from X, the reasoning must include an understanding or learning of knowledge beyond that held by X, and therefore the knowledge of each is advanced as the different knowledge is synthesized with each person's current knowledge, by process of X describing a benefit from the action.

That describes private enterprise, wherein your mind must recognize a benefit from your willfully spending of your money for a product or service. The result may not be a benefit, as you may learn later, but you will therefore learn that additional knowledge for your future decisions. Your decisions will advance your knowledge.

An example of learning new knowledge, even government chaps learning new knowledge, albeit a dramatic example because such examples are more interesting...... I once met a person who stated that he would kill his own family if he thought they were involved with any (recreational) drugs. His ilk saturates the police institution, perhaps to a lesser degree, only imprisoning "the other guy" and not one's family. He had a government law enforcement job, perceiving that his decisions were superior to the decisions of those common humans, because he was government. Two years later, because of certain unusually specific, occasional correspondence involving questions (reasoning) designed to synthesize different knowledge, he responded with a complete reversal of his prior conclusion, stating that all drugs should be legal for adults, since adults should exclusively own and manage their own bodies which include their brains, the most basic human right upon which all rights are dependent, because government personnel are too incompetent to manage even their own bodies (since they perceive that government should manage their bodies), and certainly hold no rational ability to own or manage the bodies of other humans who hold different knowledge (a prerogative of God and slave owners).

In contrast to common person X, a government dolt holds the institutional power of the government to more conveniently demand that Y perform an action, under threat of jail initiated by armed, notoriously trigger-happy, unquestioning police and a gaggle of enforcement-budget dependent prosecutors, judges, jailers, bail administration bureaucrats, secretaries, Prison Industries Inc officials and a legion of other government dolts avidly supporting (paying-off) legislators to make more laws creating more government power.

THEREFORE, the government dolts hold no incentive or imperative to articulate the reasoning for the action. They simply threaten arrest or fines backed by arrest and jail. They therefore do not have to think, reason or synthesize any different knowledge held by Y.

THEREFORE, neither the government dolts or person Y share the complete knowledge of the reasoning related to the action, or its lacking, to synthesize it with their prior knowledge and what they learn in the process, to learn the knowledge more advanced than that prior held by each one of them.

Therein, by decree of the government dolts, they each learn and retain only their current institutional illusions, analogous to that held by the government cartographers who decreed that Earth was flat, and that Christopher Columbus should not be funded to physically question the government knowledge base.

Therefore, to the extent that you or your children deal within private enterprise, you will advance your knowledge beyond the competition among humans competing for new benefits of greater knowledge. Your children will learn the reasoning for doing or not doing things, which then becomes useful for other things.

And therefore, to the extent that you or your children deal within government, you will be dumbed-down to the paucity of intellectual ability that the world ridicules as the dumbed-down Americans and their Roman styled war machine that functions on force, which is therefore doomed. In the designed human competition for more knowledge and its benefits, dumb people lose.

A government functioning on force instead of reasoning, as is the case with all military and police-based governments, is comprised of dumb people and dumb supporters, most obviously those of America.

If your children do things because "it's the law", as cops teach their children to keep them dumb, they will not learn the diverse, vastly more valuable reasoning for doing or not doing diverse things. If your children wear seat belts, don't smoke dope, don't steal things and don't rape people, because "it's the law", you taught them to be that dumb in all things. Do YOU not kill your neighbor because "it's the law", or because it creates a damage and a few dozen other obviously valid reasons? Well, what do you teach your children? What process teaches your children to use and practice reasoning (their thinking ability) instead of the force of muscles and police guns? What intellectual ability do your children have when "the law" is not applicable to an action, or "the law" is obviously wrong? Shall you have taught them to be confused, and unable to make a rational decision? Who have made fools of themselves obeying obviously illogical laws imposed by corrupted law makers and regulation-writing bureaucrats who were paid-off by lobbyists and such crooks, that were belatedly ruled as unconstitutional and therefore never of any effect? It was "the law" that women could not vote, and Blacks must sit in the back of the bus, etceteras. Those laws would still be "the law" if all parents taught their children to obey the law because "it's the law", instead of use their minds to figure out the flaws of the excuses to use force of law above reasoning.

The laws against smoking hemp, adopted by corrupted congressmen who were paid off by the cotton industry lobbyists, and enforced by monumentally dumb, unquestioning, unthinking and malicious cops, will belatedly be repealed by REASONING people who belatedly recognize the mountain of lies used to impose and sustain those laws. If somebody unlawfully smokes pot to laugh, instead of lawfully drink alcohol to become belligerent and start a fight or cause an automobile accident, who is damaged against their will? Precisely why, in your written words for the public to judge your reasoning ability, is there a law against a beneficial action that damages no unwilling person? Do you smoke or not smoke hemp because of YOUR MIND'S REASONING, or because "it's the law"? With highly paid, socially elevated lawyers and judges smoking more hemp than any other professional group (since artists are mostly not professionals), are your children so dumb as to obey the law, because "it's the law" that the judicial branch violates with impunity and laughter? Who makes fools of people who function on "the law" instead of their own reasoning ability? Many lawyers and judges are smoking hemp while you are reading these words. What have you taught your children about "the law"? After over 70 years and billions of YOUR tax dollars wasted on the law against smoking hemp, not one person in America lacks for readily available, untaxed hemp, which is one of the reasons hemp smokers laugh robustly at "the law". But those comments relate to reasoning, that of which cops and their indoctrinated children remain clueless.

What is more valuable to you and your children, the knowledge of the human mind's reasoning ability, or "the law"?

Enjoy the comedy of the American government sorts and their supporters who cannot understand a word of the above.

It is an aside to mention the amusing responses the writer of these words gets from government people and their supporters who accuse the writer of all possible word arrangements describing a completely incoherent idiot, a nut case babbling and rambling on with lunatic rants and diatribes of undecipherable things, and worse, much to his amusement.

If you are not laughing at the humans who use their minds to flatter themselves, attempt to make the decisions of other people, attempt to force those decisions on other people, and cannot think beyond "the law", instead of learning new knowledge by reasoning through contradictions, you are missing the only show they know how to stage.




Laugh..... 9 July 2010

In the future, children will laugh at their primitive ancestors of today, who were so intellectually retarded that they willfully acquiesced to forced taxation, that is, slavery to a therefore increasingly counter productive gang of government parrots doing nothing for which commonly intelligent people would voluntarily pay their money, as proven by the act of forced taxation.

No excuses or rhetorical illusions of potential good negate or excuse the controlling contradiction of the use of force above reasoning.

The use of force instead of reasoning dooms that for which force is used, by the verifiable intent of the design, and therefore the design.

And among the many popular proofs of that intellectual retardation of the dumbed down Americans of today will be that of US King Barack Obama (with the official title of president) who hired over a dozen handmaidens for this wife, giving them over 100,000 taxpayer dollars per year to only fluff around flattering the president's wife, plus millions of tax dollars for their "expenses", with the taxpayer slaves not impeaching the president, recalling their congressional "representatives" for approving the funding, or running the king out of the country, for that unlawful, disgusting expenditure of public money.

If you attempt any defense of those tax paid handmaidens for a US President's spouse, her close friends, simply read the resumes of those handmaidens, to learn the nature of all government employment.

And with the trillions of dollars of corporate taxes and countless other layers of taxes all directly passed on to the end product and service users, the vast bulk of those tax dollars come from the poorest 30 percent of the American people, to pay for the handmaidens of king's wives. How many of you earn over $100,000 per year, with nearly unlimited expense accounts for your every expense except the meals you cook at home?

Who of you would publicly ascribe your name to support the forced seizure of tax money from those people earning less than $10,000 per year, to pay government drones vastly more for doing nothing the people will willingly pay money, as is the case? Well, do you vote for DemocanRepublicrats, and then lie to your children, keeping them ignorant and thus less intellectually capable than people who learn truth, by obscuring your direct support for taxing people who earn less than $10,000 per year, to pay government drones vastly more for doing nothing the people will willingly pay money, as is the case?

Of course the examples of the previous US presidents are as many, but you may concur that over a dozen handmaidens, at that huge expenditure of tax money, for a president's spouse, rivals the expenditures of the Egyptian Pharaohs and Roman Emperors for the same "public services" (for the leaders only).

And of course the tax funded US Presidential Ego Gratification Wars (Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Panama, Grenada, Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia and several others not so well known), that is, slaughters of poor people in other countries, will be the most common examples of the intellectual void and Neanderthal character of today's humans, but the handmaidens for an early 2000's US President's wife will not escape the notice of the descendants of the intellectually absent tax payers of this era.

Do not wonder why the US empire will go the way of the Roman empire, and all such force-based empires, because dumbed down Americans kept voting for DemocanRepublicrats, and why the children of the future will be laughing at the American slaves who could not yet figure out how to use their mind for its designed purpose.




Cure for killing....... 3 June 2010

By chance of the specific knowledge-learning events of my life, I hold the knowledge, verifiable against all questions all people can ask, to be able to openly identify any power-damaged mind of any future murderer who is willing to murder people, before he kills anyone, and cause him to never murder anyone, using intellectual technology.

I can cause a known murderer to never murder again, using intellectual technology.

Concurrently, with the assistance of a neurology researcher, and modern brain activity instruments, we can identify the precise neural location(s) for the decision to kill other humans, and further quantify and qualify every separable neural action in relation to the conclusion to kill, leaving the neurologist and a body chemistry sort to discover the medical process (electrical or chemical) to cure potential murderers before they murder anyone, or cure a known murderer, verifiable against all questions all neurologists, chemists, body electricians and everyone else can ask.

Now, if that is true, and it is, would not that knowledge be avidly sought by all the common people in the US, especially those city chaps and others who are generally afraid of everything, and sought by any neurologist who wanted to make himself or herself famous?


Who do those common Americans hire to solve the problem of people murdering Americans?

The answer - cops, military chaps and legions of other government agency personnel.

How much total money flow goes to cops, military chaps and government each year? Is that not a multi hundred billion dollar flow that is dependent upon the sustained existence of people "out there" who will murder and otherwise damage Americans?

If you can't figure it out from the above arrangement of words, for the entire spectrum of government actions, you are a common American successfully dumbed down by the government's public school process, and by the most obvious products of that school system, the American news journalists further dumbing down Americans with the most ludicrous government lies ever told, reported as fact.

The vast empire of American cops, prosecutors and judges (your parents or children if among them) knowingly and intentionally imprison harmless people who violated no prevailing law, harmed nobody and who demonstrate no intent to ever harm anyone. They are imprisoned on the government scam of accusing them of violating inferior laws, without telling them, and criminally evading the known legal duty to inform them that the applied inferior laws are contradicted by superior laws, thus those inferior laws are void and hold no effect as law (over 85 percent of all arrests). The incentives are, first and absolute, the brain's trained addiction to exercising "power" over other humans, and agency budget excuses insuring job security, and to sustain the extremely profitable Prison Industries Incorporated (slave labor) whose stocks are largely owned by the aforementioned government chaps.

AND the corollary is more damaging... the cops, prosecutors and judges knowingly and intentionally (verifiable) efficiently return to the streets the great majority of real criminals, by the usual legalistic maneuvers, ("revolving door") to maintain the social damages (murders, rapes, robberies, assault, etc.) that fool dumbed-down American fools into demanding yet more police, prosecutors, judges and government thugs, and thus demand that said American taxpaying fools work more hours to pay more taxes for more government to damage the American fools more by the aforementioned easily verifiable process.

The majority of Americans are that extensively ignorant (lacking in available knowledge) of human fundamentals, as once was I. The majority of Americans will remain that amusingly clueless even if they read these words, by design of the power-damaged mind (he who supports the use of power to damage people under any ruse, such as voting for the DemocanRepublicrats who keep funding the criminal police, prosecutors, judges and all the other government thugs, for their manifested purpose of keeping real criminals on the streets to create the lucrative budget excuses for more police, prosecutors, judges and higher pay).

You are wisely the exception to the above, because you ask real questions of these words, and answer them, as with all things, to make the resulting knowledge useful for your next questions. Is that not so?

A supporting example of how easily unquestioning people are fooled with lies, is revealed by the process that created the US income tax. When the intelligent rich people concluded that a majority of the dumbed-down Americans had been fooled by the normally lying DemocanRepublicrat politicians, into believing that they could get something for nothing, by taxing the rich to pay for the government serving the poor (a classic fool's illusion), the commonly intelligent rich chaps paying off certain of those DemocanRepublicrats in the Senate, therefore easily designed the income tax system to include certain obscure "prevailing law" and "settled law" supreme court cases that by only slightly convoluted but flawlessly logical process, for imperative to maintain a private enterprise system that could financially support an inherently greedy government, exempted the rich business people, and turned the taxes back on the dumbed-down, unquestioning low and middle income majority of voters, the functionally uneducated (public school educated) Americans who were fooled into believing they could get something for nothing.

If you ask enough questions about the US tax system, including the comparatively inconsequential income tax, to therefore learn the related KNOWLEDGE of taxation systems (theft by force), you recognize that the poor and middle income Americans are paying for the government that attacks them and benefits the rich, and further, the taxes paid by the rich logically and fairly pay for the government programs that benefit the rich, leaving zero for the poor. The rich are not getting something for nothing. They are getting vast wealth from their investment of extremely valuable thinking time to learn how to fool unquestioning people with the contradictions that the greedy majority of voters created to attempt to get something for nothing, to make somebody else, the rich, pay for benefits going to people who are not comparatively working for those (mostly damaging) "benefits" to the middle class, using the most obvious DemocanRepublicrat lies ever told by any human, believed by people who ask no questions, or ineffective questions.

It is impossible to get something for nothing, or more for less. There is no free lunch. And if a person is sufficiently ignorant to believe he can get something for nothing (make the rich pay for the government to benefit the middle class and poor), then he is ignorant enough, and sufficiently unquestioning, to easily have his greed turned against him with easily crafted laws that sound like they make the rich pay for the government benefiting the poor. The poorest people in the US pay the greatest percentage of their income in taxes, with the income tax inconsequential in proportion to the countless other "passed-on" taxes which are increasing in number every year under the insatiable federal, State and local governments and their "permit fee" requiring bureaucracies. The super rich and knowledgeable rich pay no taxes. You pay their taxes in the products and services they offer, that include every expense, including their taxes and their accounting costs for the paperwork to pay the taxes, plus an additional charge for the logical value of intelligently administering those higher dollar figures. Therefore you pay all the "corporate" or business taxes, among a long list of "passed-on" taxes, the personal taxes of the business owners passed on in the cost of their products, plus the "tax" or fee to the business owners for their thinking and staff administration time spent dealing with the taxes.

If Americans knew the actual (scant) cost to produce and retail any common product, without all the government-induced taxes and costs going to pay Obama's wife's dozen hand maidens over $100,000 per year, and such corruption, there would be a revolution by early morning.

The example of the US taxation system is comparable to the example of the US law enforcement and judicial systems fooling fools into believing that the government system solves problems rather than creates and sustains the damaging problems to fool more fools into giving government more money to solve the problems that government holds no incentive to solve, and is diminished in wealth and power if it does solve the problems.

For how many days would you pay a baker for a loaf of bread, if he took your money each day for a promised loaf of bread that you never received? How long have the dumbed down Americans paid for a police system that has increased damaging crime on the streets while filling the costly prisons with a majority of people who VERIFIABLY harmed nobody?

The power-damaged minds of the "powerful majority" (mob) of unquestioning American voters will keep paying the government to functionally keep the murderers (and other private sector thugs) on the streets to randomly murder Americans, their families and others. But that system creates a real damage that eventually illuminates its flaw among slow-learning humans. Therefore the inherently, increasingly desperate government chaps must use progressively more desperate tactics to maintain the illusion. The obvious current tactic was to facilitate the "terrorists" to the extent that every American is now a "suspected terrorist", and more police are required to hunt them down, functionally identical to the Nazi tactic of defining Jews and Gypsies ("undesirables") as "criminals".

Of course the system is doomed, by design. Wiser to be the current victim of government rather than a current government thug or minion. Things always change.

Therefore the greatest threat to the insatiable government whose wealth and power is 100 percent dependent upon protecting and increasing the number of killers and such thugs in society, is the KNOWLEDGE that can cure killing. Government chaps, each by name, will kill their own families before they allow that knowledge to be socially effected, verifiable in front of their families and the public by the type simple questions that flawless identify the power-damaged minds of killers (and therefore subject to be cured by an extended questioning process, before they would kill anyone, verifiable.)

Consider the fatal heart attacks among the military generals, police captains, lawyers, judges, prison wardens and DemocanRepublicrats if their mind could comprehend the inherent existence of the always-available process that can efficiently cure murderers and other criminals, without the use of force, therein destroying the most damaging criminal enterprise in human history - government, the concept that maintains the comedy of unquestioning humans killing each other instead of asking questions to learn the knowledge to efficiently resolve the obviously damaging contradiction of humans killing each other.

And because they are so successfully dumbed down, with the laughable lies taught in the government's public schools, the Americans will not ask for the knowledge, or even ask enough questions to recognize its inherent existence, even if they read these words. They will keep paying their money to the institutions, both government and private, that maintain the problems that maintain the gullible Americans sending them money.

Precisely why, with YOUR flawlessly accurate answer openly stated for the public judgment of your thinking ability, do you perceive that the same net effect of wars, prisons, opulent lifestyles of the government officialdom, including Michel Obama's dozen handmaidens paid over $100,000 per year, and taxation that robs the people of the opportunities they work for, achieved by Hitler, Stalin, Hussein, the Roman emperors, the Kans, the Huns, the Neanderthals, and British kings, the other European kings, the Pharaohs and the Middle East war lords including those of the Jews, are in full effect in the United States of America right now today?

No human could ever create such a perfect brain design to maintain the perfect comedy of humans needlessly attacking themselves to fail to solve the problem of the humans attacking themselves, and repeating the show every day and night for millennium, much to the amusement of the creator, and the laughter of the observers who simply used the brain's design to ask the questions to learn the process and thus the "punch line" that creates the perpetual laughter at the humans.

Is that not so?

Enjoy the show.


End of Intech Concepts 36


IntechConcepts 37, 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