 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Last week, the Egyptian security apparatus cut off Internet access and even cell-phone service across the country in response to protests that have rocked the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak. Many of the demonstrations were actually orchestrated using social-networking services like Facebook and Twitter.
In response, the group of hackers had been helping protestors circumvent the recently lifted web blackout. When service was restored, Anonymous began “Operation Egypt.” It went after the web portals of the Ministry of Information, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology, and even the “president’s” National Democratic Party site. And it succeeded. All of the regime’s targeted sites, including the cabinet’s, remained down on Thursday.
The power struggle is always a question of numbers because the cost of power required by each individual is divided by the number of people adding to the power supply.
1 person alone is limited in power and that power can be X.
If it takes 10X or much more power X to the 10th power, for example, then 1 person is powerless against many when many can pool or combine or collect their individual power into one massive power supply sufficient to accomplish the targeted task.
The rationale behind compassionate or moral government is the protection of the individual, weak, or minority from criminal attack by overwhelming criminal powers exceeding the defensive power of the individual, the weak, or the minority.
When a moral government, a compassionate one, one based upon the ideal of protecting the innocent, powerless, and weaker from the criminally stronger among us, goes bad, is when the operators of the government employ the power of government toward the elimination of competition by criminal means, or by, in a more specific, and less ambiguous, definition: by injuring the targeted innocent, on purpose, and for profit.
1. Law = legal power is absolutely equal, no exceptions, all are as powerful as everyone else, and known as universality.
2. Crime = willful injury of innocent victims by criminals as criminals define such things as crime by what they do, not what they say.
The false rationale, therefore, is half true, as the criminals employ law to except themselves from the power of law, to gradually remove all defensive power that could conceivably target the criminals with one exception.
1. True law = the collective power of the many employed toward the defense of the few from the criminal power
2. Legal crime = legalized criminal power as criminals take over the operation of law and employ law toward the elimination of competition
3. Competing legal criminals = the power of numbers reapplied to the power struggle between competitive groups of legal criminals
The false rationale, used by legal criminals, is the rationale that says "we need to be worse than our enemies", or some other such apology for torture and mass murder becoming legal, or much sooner the false rationale merely apologizes for a small subsidy transferred to one competitor.
The false rationale employs the true rationale as a cover story, when the actual design of law alters from the true rationale toward the criminal one.
1. True rationale = protect the weak, innocent, power-less people, from the strong, criminal, power-full people.
2. False rationale = criminalize the true rationale by using the power collected from the true rationale storage fund toward the criminal rationale whereby the criminals operating the law power use that power to except themselves from that very power = eliminate competition.
3. True reality = another bigger and more powerful legal crime organization may over-power the smaller and less powerful crime organization.
The reader may be confused by my comments and in particular the confusion at this point may be a confusion over what my comments have to do with the topic of people who have shut down the internet web sites of the Egyptian government after the people running the Egyptian government have shut down the internet access to the people of Egypt.
If the reader is confused by my comments relative to the topic then I can add one more comment in an effort to tie things up.
The true rationale is the only path to greater power collected and stored into a fund, without that type of government working, without a non-criminal organization in play, there isn't any increase in power flowing to that collection of power into the supply of power that the people running the government use to run the government.
That is a very serious thing. That must be understood. Not having that thing understood, is a powerless state of being in the face of criminals, and in the even greater danger as innocent people face organized crime, and in the even greater danger as innocent people face legal crime.
The innocent people are the only people who have the capacity to increase the supply of power available to anyone for any reason including the rationale of protecting the innocent from harm by criminals, and including the rationale of eliminating competition.
Without innocent people working together, toward greater supplies of excess wealth, power, there can only be the power supplies produced by individual people, working separately, alone, and powerless.
A. A single person, working alone, can only produce, at best, enough excess power to survive, and no more.
B. Two people, working together, can more than double the supply of excess power and begin creating a supply of excess wealth, power, to reproduce and thereby ensure the survival of the species.
This is very simple stuff, in the light, and out from under the rock, the veil of falsehood, produced by legal criminals who operate a criminal government.
No criminal government ever earned one cent of excess power, all the power spent by legal criminals is power earned through voluntary cooperation by innocent victims, stolen from them, and then used against them, as the legal criminals set about excepting themselves from that very power that was formerly collected into a fund for the purpose of defending against crime.
The first act by which a supposed governor excepts himself, or someone else, from the power of moral law, is the first criminal use of that moral law, and such act destroys competition - weakens a potential competitor, and strengthens the criminal committing that first crime or strengthens any other person receiving that subsidy, potentially overpowering the potential competitor.
A. All competitors are shackled by law to compete with other competitors in the work of supplying the highest quality at the lowest cost/price, in moral law zones, where moral law is practiced, and where moral law renders everyone equally shackled by moral law.
B. Competition is gradually eliminated as law is employed by legal criminals in the work of transferring all power to them from the source of power, which is the power produced by innocent people, and the only way to accomplish this is to eliminate competition.
Criminals do not exist in zones where moral law is maintained by innocent people who produce a vast supply of surplus wealth and a vast supply of power.
legal criminals can't exist within or even without moral law, therefore the observer is empowered to know the facts in any given situation on earth, such as the one in Egypt.
If the people in Egypt stop sending power to the legal criminals who are running the Egyptian government the Egyptian government will no longer have power flowing to them through those mediums, those channels, and those sources.
American people send power to the legal criminals running U.S.A. Inc. LLC The Dollar Hegemony, and through that channel, power can still flow to the legal criminals running the Egyptian government.
How to:
How to know, for sure, if a government has turned from moral government and if a government has turned toward legal crime.
A. Torture is legal
B. Mass murder is legal
C. The people running the legal crime government confess their crimes by their actions, not their words, and they use the power of government toward the work of eliminating compettion
If torture is legal, I rest my case, and there is no rational excuse possible, for a victim of torture, to excuse torture, while the people financing, or the people actually performing torture, can make up any excuse they desire, so as to enable further torture, in their own minds, as well as in the minds of the victims being tortured by actual torture, or by the torturous condition a mind must be in once a mind begins to excuse torture by any excuse imaginable.
Once the torture bodies begin to pile up in mass graves as a result of on second over the limit of torture for each victim, the evidence abounds, and all the person has to do to prove who is guilty of the crime is follow the paper trail back to the source.
Person A in pile A was tortured and murdered by torturing mass murderer B.
Person seeking the truth:
"Why did you do it?"
First person caught red handed (literally):
"I'm just following orders."
Person seeking the truth:
"Who ordered you, and, by the way, how much did you get paid?"
First person caught red handed (literally):
"Here is my check, there is the person signing it."
Person seeking the truth:
"Thanks, that is a good start."
Institutionalized punishment is arguably as ineffective as torture, as a means by which innocent people can defend against victimization by criminals, so please don't assume that my perspective signs onto that methodology. I don't.
I don't sign onto, for example, the idea that an eye for an eye works, morally.
The attack on the criminal government by the person or people running Anonymous can be better understood, from my perspective, if the reader takes some of their time, energy, and power, to peruse the following link:
Modern politics defined
Discussion is against the law, so you are on your own.
Thanks for the soap box.