Thanks to the lurker who pointed us to this blogpost:

The Failure of Democracy
Let’s just take a look at some of these headlines:

=> Coalition government: take cover for the £3,000 tax bombshell

=> David Cameron’s coalition is off to a green start

=> Coalition government: outcry over Capital Gain Tax plans

What do you do if you’re opposed to paying more taxes and subsidising more corrupt green nonsense? What do you do if you’re opposed to anything the ‘Glorious Coalition’ government does?

Simple.

You can’t do anything. Yes, you might say you could vote UKIP or BNP, but these will always be fringe parties. Perhaps if I actually believed in democracy myself I would be wasting my time in stuffy church halls stuffing envelopes with UKIP literature, but there’s really no point. Because whatever you do, the British government always gets back in again.

And here lies its problem. Because the British government has always been very clever at hiding itself behind the skirts of its political puppets, who wave blue, red, and yellow rosettes around every five years, to persuade us that ‘things are going to change’.

But now it is very obvious that nothing has changed. And that it is impossible for things to change. However you voted, whatever you did, you have legitimised this dreadful rotten government, which is already stuffed to bursting with cronies fighting over how they can help themselves to the pelf generated by more tax rises.

And they cannot be replaced. The only hope is that they self-destruct (which is likely). However, self-interest could still see them hold themselves together ad infinitum.

But fear ye not, pilgrims. This simply marks another nail in the coffin lid of democracy, as an idea which can be sustained with a straight face. We will see more and more turning their backs on the politicians and refusing to be their playthings. What we are witnessing is the gradual death of democracy as a relevant idea for the future of humanity.

What the Greeks knew, throughout the entire Athenian experiment with democracy, is that mob rule is volatile and dangerous. Which is why they abandoned the experiment so quickly. We should have learned from their mistake. And never toyed with this horrible form of government ever again.

May the next death of democracy be swift. It is happening before our eyes. Let us just hope that more than a handful of us can actually see it, through the lens of all the propaganda our schools shovel into our brains about how marvellous democracy is. Yes, vote against Trident and get a Trident-supporting government in place. Vote for inheritance tax cuts, and get a government in place which hates the wealthy. However you think, whichever way you vote, you get the ‘Glorious Coalition’.

The British government has never been so naked. Democracy has never been so visible as a sham.

[…]

http://angloaustria.blogspot.com/2010/05/failure-of-democracy.html

It reads sweetly.

Essentially what is in front of everyone is a choice between Libertarianism and evil nonsense like Fabian Socialism and the myriad variants of collectivism.

Since socialism cannot produce prosperity and is completely contrary to human nature, Libertarianism is the ultimate destination since it is the only sustainable, just and reality based way of being for humans. As the state crumbles and ‘society’ does not completely break down, i.e. people start to realise that they do not need a ‘Health and Safety Executive’ to order them to conform in matters of risk, that if there are no speed cameras, CCTV, local councils, state grants and anything else that comes from the state, the sky will not fall – when this dawns upon them, the spell will be broken. Forever.

The problem is that many people do not know what Libertarianism is, and these people are Libertarians but do not know it. There is a small proportion of people in the population, like Ed Balls and the evil Milliband brothers who actively reject humanity and Libertarianism in favour of collectivist totalitarianism. What this small minority of sociopaths wants is in the end irrelevant, since economics is going to shut their foul dreams down. Remember too that most normally functioning and informed people are Libertarians; the ones that are not are either not normally functioning (violent sociopaths) or are not informed (believing that ‘capitalism is a con game’, capitalism is ‘$INSERT_FALLACY_HERE’, we need the government to license the exceptions etc etc).

And for the record, when I say ‘sociopath’ I really mean it. Look at this list of characteristics of sociopaths, and note how well it fits with the character of every New Labour politician:

• Glibness and Superficial Charm
• Manipulative and Cunning
• They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
• Grandiose Sense of Self
• Feels entitled to certain things as “their right.”
• Pathological Lying
• Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
• Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
• A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
• Shallow Emotions
• When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
• Incapacity for Love
• Need for Stimulation
• Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
• Callousness/Lack of Empathy
• Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others’ feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
• Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
• Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
• Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
• Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet “gets by” by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.
• Irresponsibility/Unreliability
• Not concerned about wrecking others’ lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
• Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
• Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.
• Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
• Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
• Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.

Other Related Qualities:

1. Contemptuous of those who seek to understand them
2. Does not perceive that anything is wrong with them
3. Authoritarian
4. Secretive
5. Paranoid
6. Only rarely in difficulty with the law, but seeks out situations where their tyrannical behavior will be tolerated, condoned, or admired
7. Conventional appearance
8. Goal of enslavement of their victim(s)
9. Exercises despotic control over every aspect of the victim’s life
10. Has an emotional need to justify their crimes and therefore needs their victim’s affirmation (respect, gratitude and love)
11. Ultimate goal is the creation of a willing victim
12. Incapable of real human attachment to another
13. Unable to feel remorse or guilt
14. Extreme narcissism and grandiose
15. May state readily that their goal is to rule the world

Point of interest: in the 1830’s this disorder was called “moral insanity.”

Shocking isn’t it? All of these characteristics can be seen in any one of the New Labour politicians you would care to name, male and female, without exception.

These people really are insane and the longer they are able to control you, the worse off you are going to be….until now that is.

Finally, the end of the road for democracy is in sight. All of the money (the value created by entrepreneurs and productive people) has been used up, and the collectivist democracies are bankrupt. Sadly for places like Iceland, there are not enough people who have read any Rothbard, and they are going to replace their old, discredited and bankrupt state with a new one. It will not last long however, because all the other predator states will fall before they can entrench themselves.

Or maybe not? Who knows?

One thing is for sure; business as usual is off the table. New Labour has left a debt-bomb under every desk in government in the form of last minute contractual commitments that the coalition is going to have to defuse. This is the act of criminal sociopaths, and is just what you would expect from scum like Ed Balls.

There is no one in the world who has the capability to solve this problem. This problem is analogous to a ten mile wide asteroid discovered six hours out from earth impact. No force on earth, no combination of forces can fix this using the tools of Keynesianism and statism. They both have to die for everything to move forward, and that is the great breakthrough.

The money is finished. Its GAME OVER. No one is going to stand for being a mug in the greatest bank robbery of all time.

Your job now is to understand what is happening and to rid yourself of the fallacious ideas that brought everything to this sorry place in the first instance. Your job is to make sure that you do not do anything to prolong the agony of democracy. Your job is to survive and make sure that you and your offspring never become part of the problem.

The evil, vicious, lying, DCSF has been ABOLISHED and replaced with a new Department for Education.

This is one of the instances where ‘better than nothing’ is the absolute opposite of the truth, but at least we have seen the demise of a truly destructive, anti family, dastardly arm of totalitarian government consigned to the dustbin.

Hopefully the staff from the DCSF will all be expelled and the new staff that make up this new department will all be Toryish thinkers… who knows? I’m sure the DCSF salary addicts, should they be shifted to the new department don’t much care who the master is, as long as they collect their paycheques.

We have seen by their despicable behaviour that they have no morals or ethics of any kind, so whether its tearing families apart, threatening to destroy them, ruining schools, brainwashing and sexualizing children, or simply sitting back, twiddling their thumbs and minding their business, like emotionless computers, they will just do as they are told, without judgement. Of course, that is giving them more credit than they are due; they actively, willingly and creatively participated in evil under Ed Balls, so in fact, computers are better than them, because computers are neutral tools.

While we are at it, have you heard of Nicola Blacwood?

Background
Nicola was born in 1979 in Johannesburg but her family returned to Oxford just two months later after her father had angered the Apartheid government by speaking up for the rights of the black community. In fact, her lifelong connection with Oxford began before she was born – her parents met at the Radcliffe Infirmary and both worked for the Oxfordshire NHS for many years. Her father is still teaching medical students at the John Radcliffe. Nicola now lives in Summertown, is a Governor at her local special school and has just been trained as a Domestic Violence Champion.

Nicola’s Experience
Nicola was trained as a classical singer at Trinity College of Music from the age of 14 (and home schooled for her GCSE’s and A-Levels in Oxford) before gaining a First in Music at St Anne’s College and an M.Phil. in Musicology from Emmanuel College, Cambridge.

[…]

http://www.nicolablackwood.com/about-nicola

My emphasis.

This is a good example of the superclass that the Fabian collectivists in New Labour fear so much. Home Educated, Nuclear familied super achievers who (by nature, and eventually in action, and if not by nature, then by getting some sense) hate the state.

Even if this woman is a lover of democracy, and is for registration of Home Educators and everything you hate there is now an example of the awesome power of Home Education sitting in that discredited house for all to see. This is how high Home Education can bring a child; to the very centre of power and influence.

If that is where they want to go.

I have to say, this woman is probably going to be in for a heck of a ride, should even a word be breathed about Home Education in the Commons. She is the unelected point man for Home Educators, like it or not. And you all know what that means. TL;DR communiques, relentless logic, crying mothers, blogalanches of evidence, history lessons and common sense…

Now that is what I call a poison chalice!

After many years of writing, campaigning, pledging, linking blogging, commenting and incandescent rage…

ID CARDS and the evil NIR are a hair’s width away from being TOAST:

That screengrab is from the Identity and Passport Service website!!

And in case the scumbag, human rights violating beast-like animals take it down, here is a complete screengrab of the announcement.

All the evil people, the regime liars, human trafficking profiteers, abusers and human vermin who collaborated in this immoral and purely evil ill fated scheme; the delusional, incompetent, unfit for purpose Blunkett, the Liar Andy Burnham, the Elephantine hog wild regime liar Charles Clarke, the Kebab eating harpie Jacqui Smith and all of the rest of them whose names I cannot be bothered to type out – you may now safely go straight to hell and burn there.

You have LOST.

and FYI you incompetent imbeciles you ‘achieve this’ by issuing:

DROP DATABASE

and then you telephone this company:

To permanently and SECURELY destroy the Hard Drives and all the data collected.

YOU STUPID IDIOTS!

This bodes well for all the other nasty nonsense that the fascists of New Labour brought in, but of all the sickening schemes, the ID Card was the worst, because through it, they would have been able to gain absolute fine grained control over every single carrier of that card. They would have been able to shut off your access to food, to medicine, to your own money, to travel (even on busses and trains); they could have used it to build any number of truly horrible systems of control and surveillance with it. I do not believe that there are many people in the UK with a complete grasp of just how bad it could have become.

But that does not matter anymore.

This scheme is finished, and no more schemes like it will be possible for many years, should anyone be so stupid as to try and resurrect its corpse.

Britain is completely out of money. The state will struggle to sell its worthless bonds, which will soon be relegated to junk. It doesn’t matter what the ratings agencies say, investors know junk when they smell it. The pound may have ‘rallied’ but Gold is climbing steadily despite the pathetic offer of worthless help from the delusional Biden and the fantasy proposal of a trillion Euro bail out fund:

The fact of the matter is, the Nation States are bankrupt thanks to socialism, central banking and warmongering, and the worthless paper currencies that they are printing to destruction will not last much longer.

Very shortly, you and your family will be free of many state controls, simply because there is no more money left to pay people to use violence against you.

And that is a very good thing.

Once again, we see how the world can change from one day to the next. One week ago, it was not certain that the NIR and ID Cards would be scrapped. Now, their abortion is almost a forgone conclusion.

There is no reason whatsoever why a transformation to complete liberty should not be possible; what is the difference between today and last week? Nothing more than perception. Think about it; no direct order was given to the Identity and Passport Service to put up that page; they merely perceived that they should do it, and now, ID Cards being consigned to the shredder is a reality.

You need to think hard about this!

Tonight, we crack open a bottle of Jacquesson Cuvee Number 733 Brut Champagne to celebrate!

The Libertarian Party Manifesto is the only party manifesto that has an extensive section dedicated to Home Education. You should read it, so see what the other parties should have included in their documents.

Home Education

The Party will dismantle barriers to Elective Home Education, including the repeal of new measures being planned by other parties in or out of government.

Although the Party will be implementing a Voucher System roughly along the lines implemented in Sweden[1], this will not mirror any clamp-down or coercive programme directed towards Home Educators that exists there. One of the cornerstones for us as a Party is to dismantle monopolies, not remove one only to replace it with another.

This raises important issues in regards to the funding of Home Education. We need to strike a balance between preserving the freedom of parents and children with that of Taxpayers, who, we must never forget, are being coerced and forced to fund government spending on pain of imprisonment.

On the one hand parents may wish to be free from any State control, while Taxpayers have a right to expect the State to spend their taxes prudently. The nub is “prudently”, as it immediately becomes a value judgment and a collectivised one at that.

Our position is that we would not prevent people Home Educating, nor would be demand any kind of “notification” across the board, which can rapidly become a Trojan Horse for State control[2].

However, should the Educator request that the taxpayer fund such education – take the State’s Shilling as it were – there would need to be evidence that the funding was in fact delivering an education [3]. It is

unreasonable for anyone to demand no strings funding from the Taxpayer and we feel that genuine Home Educators will understand this point completely.

In exchange for Taxpayer funding we would expect, in almost all cases[4], improvements in literacy and numeracy over time, where literacy is one of reading, writing, comprehension and critical reasoning. We are not interested in curriculum specifics and to be so would be irrational – one of the reasons some choose Home Education is due to their rejection of a centrally controlled and imposed curriculum, regardless of if that centre is National, County, City, Borough or even Parish[5].

Should even this be unacceptable to some Home Educators, they will always be at liberty to decline the funding and its attendant measurements for a period of time or throughout. Our Policy will not demand “all or nothing”, “now or forever not” or “once and forever more” conditionality upon the funding, which would be coercive, in our view, and may distort decision-making.

In summary, it is not unreasonable to expect that Taxpayer funded spending come with strings attached, but that one shall be free to decline the funding and, consequently, the strings. Educational funding is no exception.

[1] This differs from the Conservative Party approach, which still retains central control, commissioning, granting and approval powers. Fake, in other words.

[2] The idea of notification has been touted by others, including the Liberal Democrats:

The unasked question: is the “present job” of the Local Authority necessary, correct or beneficial? What is also ironic is that there are cases where the education of children by the Local Authority in schools is “of poor quality or non existent” and that is sometimes the motivation for Parents or Guardians to embark on Home Education in the first place. The problem with notification is that it rapidly becomes registration then an approval process – “granted until refused” then “refused until granted” – backed by monitoring, box ticking, targets, curricula and logistics such as teaching environment. The conceit of many that the State “owns” children, “knows best” or they need to be tagged/tracked like livestock is not lost on the Libertarian Party. We reject such self-serving notions.

[3] Blank cheques will create all manner of unintended consequences when one considers that a child might “yield” £’000’s pa in cash each year for a parent.

[4] In some cases this might not apply due to the particular child and this must be taken into account.

[5] It is important to remember that under the Libertarian Party approach to a Voucher System with its removal of barriers to the formation of educational establishments and micromanaging thereof, Educators will be free to form their own arrangements including whatever level of cooperation they are comfortable with, up to and including no longer being “Home” Educators once educational establishments form that meet their needs or forming such themselves.

[…]

http://lpuk.org/

Here it is:

Chris Mounsey is right in what he thinks of course (except his views on copyright!), and all reasonable, rational people understand that he is free to use whatever language he wants on his blog, which is his personal property.

The entire English language is at his disposal to use in whatever way he sees fit. In my humble opinion, using expletives in a blog post is less offensive than mass murder and all the other revolting crimes of the state, or journalists who write pieces to excuse those crimes, or newspaper editors whose only purpose is to reinforce the system that makes mass murder possible.

Chris Mounsey is a free thinker. It is a badge of honour to be ridiculed by the likes of Andrew Neil:

Resistance to Liberty
We can now see that the rapid growth of the libertarian movement and the Libertarian party in the 1970s is firmly rooted in what Bernard Bailyn called this powerful “permanent legacy” of the American Revolution. But if this legacy is so vital to the American tradition, what went wrong? Why the need now for a new libertarian movement to arise to reclaim the American dream?

To begin to answer this question, we must first remember that classical liberalism constituted a profound threat to the political and economic interests — the ruling classes — who benefited from the Old Order: the kings, the nobles and landed aristocrats, the privileged merchants, the military machines, the State bureaucracies.

[…]

In all societies, public opinion is determined by the intellectual classes, the opinion moulders of society. For most people neither originate nor disseminate ideas and concepts; on the contrary, they tend to adopt those ideas promulgated by the professional intellectual classes, the professional dealers in ideas. Now, throughout history, as we shall see further below, despots and ruling elites of States have had far more need of the services of intellectuals than have peaceful citizens in a free society. For States have always needed opinion-moulding intellectuals to con the public into believing that its rule is wise, good, and inevitable; into believing that the “emperor has clothes.” Until the modern world, such intellectuals were inevitably churchmen (or witch doctors), the guardians of religion. It was a cozy alliance, this age-old partnership between Church and State; the Church informed its deluded charges that the king ruled by divine command and therefore must be obeyed; in return, the king funneled numerous tax revenues into the coffers of the Church. Hence, the great importance for the libertarian classical liberals of their success at separating Church and State. The new liberal world was a world in which intellectuals could be secular — could make a living on their own, in the market, apart from State subvention.

To establish their new statist order, their neomercantilist corporate State, the new conservatives therefore had to forge a new alliance between intellectual and State. In an increasingly secular age, this meant with secular intellectuals rather than with divines: specifically, with the new breed of professors, Ph.D.’s, historians, teachers, and technocratic economists, social workers, sociologists, physicians, and engineers. This reforged alliance came in two parts. In the early nineteenth century, the conservatives, conceding reason to their liberal enemies, relied heavily on the alleged virtues of irrationality, romanticism, tradition, theocracy. By stressing the virtue of tradition and of irrational symbols, the conservatives could gull the public into continuing privileged hierarchical rule, and to continue to worship the nation-state and its war-making machine. In the latter part of the nineteenth century, the new conservatism adopted the trappings of reason and of “science.” Now it was science that allegedly required rule of the economy and of society by technocratic “experts.” In exchange for spreading this message to the public, the new breed of intellectuals was rewarded with jobs and prestige as apologists for the New Order and as planners and regulators of the newly cartelized economy and society.

http://mises.org/rothbard/newlibertywhole.asp#pix

Rock on Chris Mounsey, and next time, bring your army with you!

The Internet is the Krell machine.
Trolls are the monsters of the ID.

Human progress is based on the copy, the ideas materialized emulation by others in the past, improving competitive creations of others, on the combinations of various ideas with its own original contribution minimal.

ll, before you can view the DVD we had rented at the video library on the corner, we have endured this message Authorities us hammering the message that copying a movie would be robbery as ugly prying her handbag at a little old. This defense simplistic, bordering on immaturity, intellectual property is based on a false intuition and pass a basic, yet critical distinction in this debate: the tangible property are to exclusive use (if someone takes away my phone portal I can not call), while intangibles like music, inventions or ideas in general are not (a copy of a CD does not listen to it).

Basically, the function of property rights is to avoid conflicts that may arise in connection with the use of an asset or resource. According to the liberal principle of ownership, the right to decide on the use of the property belongs exclusively to one who has the fairest claim on it, that is to say who gave him the usefulness first or who has received a legitimate third.

In this framework, intellectual property has no coherence. Go back further in time and observe the man of antiquity occupy a parcel of land and start cultivating difficulty depending on local rainfall, becoming de facto owner of the land. Now let the other side of the country where the peasant has never set foot, someone who has developed an irrigation system. The implicit logic of intellectual property would entitle the latter to prevent our farmers to use irrigation technology development and then claim royalties for each use. But we immediately understand that by doing so, the developer of the irrigation system violates the property rights of peasants by forbidding it to do what he wants on the parcel of land it occupied first. Under what the peasant could not copy and use this irrigation technique on his plot?

Depending on context, copy can be inelegant or even dishonorable. It is embarrassing that we take advantage of us and it is logical to try to avoid that. But there are many legal ways to take advantage of people, from adultery to the false promise through emotional blackmail or despotism to a subordinate. The laws are there to punish crimes, not to impose good manners and protect us from our naivete innocent.

Ultimately, why raise a hue and cry on the ass on the copy? This fact, however much a part of life, we copy the behavior and continuously take the ideas of others without feeling remorse or design the quirky idea that people would feel so abused. Human progress is based on the copy, the ideas materialized emulation by others in the past, improving competitive creations of others, on the combinations of various ideas with its own original contribution minimal.

One can understand the irritation of an artist who sees his music downloaded from Internet or copied several times in succession. But if today we had to pay royalties to the heirs of the inventor of the supermarket, light bulb or the telephone, the artist would defend it or criticize it for the fact enjoy legal privileges at the expense of other competitors and the rest of society? This artist would he think that the legislation should be amended to “protect” against the copy a style of dress, a new architectural structure, a new mathematical formula or a new dance step?

Throughout the last two centuries, the United States, the trend has been to extend the time limits of copyright with the evident intention of artificially prolonged legal monopolies very profitable for certain businesses (14 years, there has been any the life of the author plus 70 years). The patent law is so far from his stated goal that emerged are the companies “trolls” who are solely dedicated to patent “inventions” and get royalties without ever producing anything or, to put it another way, to extort businesses that they produce on the basis of these ideas.

There is no “right to culture” and therefore it is perfectly legitimate that artists employ various modes of exclusion which makes it more difficult to copy – as in his time, kept jealously secret Sistine Chapel partition the Miserere of Allegri, Mozart again until this work of memory. But they have no right to appeal to the state to protect their interests at the expense of consumers’ freedom and taxing the sale of CDs or continuing users as criminals who unload the music made available by d others on the Internet. Not to mention the fact that if we paid for everything that we “copy it” routinely, we would be ruined at the end of the day.

http://www.contrepoints.org/Copier-n-est-pas-voler.html

“Copier n’est pas voler”

French…. so beautiful!

This just flashed across my screen:

Now lets take a look at this which is an interesting site, where they ask questions like:

Why can’t Africans decline the bad constitutions that condemn them to death?

Which is a very good question. Not only for ‘Africans’ but for anybody, anywhere.

Those in the know understand that any state, no matter how small turns eventually into a big state. No constitution can ever protect your rights in the long run, because someone, somewhere, will either just ignore it entirely or chip away at it until it becomes meaningless. No matter how it is drafted, either by a group of highly moral and intelligent men, or in an ‘Open Source’ manner (whatever that means) the idea of a written constitution as a means to create a supreme law is flawed.

Then we have this really interesting ‘declaration of individual sovereignty’:

Declaration of Individual Sovereignty

I, ____________________(Name) being of sound mind and judgment do hereby on this ______________________(Date), Declare myself a Sovereign Individual with no authority or law above me, but that of the one true, eternal, and almighty God.

• As a Sovereign Individual I have the right to Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of Prosperity.
• As a Sovereign Individual, I declare and reserve, without qualification by any present day State in Africa, the following inherent and inalienable rights and liberties:
• To freely practice my religion and openly share my beliefs and convictions with others.
• To self-ownership – the free and voluntary use of the attributes and powers inherent to my body and mind and of my property for whatever purposes I deem fit, with no legal precondition regarding its effect on my body and mind or on my property.
• To property-ownership – the wages and compensation received in exchange for the labor of my body, the thoughts of my mind, and all the efforts of my work. No association or governance has the right to take any coerced levies, fees or taxes from me. Any and all payments, physical or mental contributions must be voluntarily arranged, agreed upon, signed and documented beforehand. I have the right to protect myself from theft by people and associations.
• To freely express myself in speech, writing, thoughts, media, art, and every other form. This right is not to be limited by labels of slander, defamation, or hate; nor constrained during times of emergency, public danger or distress.
• To the privacy of my person, papers, communications, home and property, against any search or seizure.
• To freely associate with any individual, and to form voluntary agreements and contracts with other individuals. This includes the right to form privately held for-profit businesses, social organizations, charities, local Cantons, dispute resolution organizations and religious organizations for my benefit and the benefit of my family.
• To freely and voluntarily enter into marital arrangements with any person of my choice and to reproduce by the conception, birth and rearing of my children who themselves will have the right to Life, Liberty, Property, and the Pursuit of Prosperity.
• To freely assemble, march, protest, and demonstrate with other individuals both in public and private.
• To freely travel within Africa from place to place without permit, license, passport, or permission from any authority.
• To own, carry on my person, conceal and use firearms for the protection of my property and the defense of myself and others in my home and in all public places.
• To self-defense against any form of force or fraud, whether initiated by an individual or associations. This right of self-defense includes the right to take another person’s life in defense of my person, liberties, family, or property.

The enumeration in this Declaration of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage my other natural, essential and sacred rights and liberties retained in my individual Sovereignty. I hereby recognize these rights both for myself and all other sovereign individuals, whose same rights I will always respect.

I hereby declare these rights and freedoms for the entire world and all of humanity to know and recognize them as God-given, and thereby acknowledge my individual sovereignty.

SIGNATURE____________________

With this declaration in place and the means to enforce it, who needs a constitution at all? Why would you need to collaborate with other people, or a ‘steering committee‘ to draft a redundant constitution?

While we are at it, where does ‘Africa’ end? The land mass currently called ‘Africa’ connects to Saudi Arabia at the country called ‘Egypt’, last Time I checked; what is to stop those ‘Saudi’ people saying that ‘Saudi Arabia’ now extends into ‘Africa’?

It’s an interesting question.

Presumably anyone who gets to the shores of ‘Africa’ can call themselves an ‘African’ and claim all the rights that ‘Africans’ claim through this document.

All good, according to Libertarians.

I happen to agree 1000% that Hong Kong, Dubai style transformation can happen anywhere in the continent of Africa if the conditions are correct, and the building of such a place is long overdue.

No matter what comes out of the efforts of these particular people, its clear that Liberty is on the minds of everyone, and not just living under a more liberal government that steals and murders less than the previous one; people are interested in REAL liberty, where there is NO STATE WHATSOEVER.

‘Africans’, you are going to need lots of guns, and yes, because no one has ever done this before, it is going to work!

Home Educators in the UK have a new tool to help them keep violent busybodies out of their lives.

It is called The Home Education Database, and all over the country, the violent aparatchicks in Local Authorities are mortified that they are going to be subjected to a class of tool that they themselves use to index and harass people.

Already, in the ‘Hall of Shame‘ we get a glimpse of what this will mean:

“Her name is Marion Solomon. She is the EHE officer for Caerphilly council Caerphilly council’s website explicitly states that they do not like the law- as there is little they can do if people ‘choose’ not to allow visits. I wont allow visits to my children because she is a member of “Inclusion serices” the department who also deal with SEN provision and they engaged in an antagonistic campaign which included threats of telling social services we were abusing the children in order to get me to drop a SENDIST tribunal.I did not- and we won.

However when we withdrew the two younger children from school we were ‘doorstepped’ by an officer sent by Marion Solomon, she insisted she be allowed entry, her boss said she had to come in and complete a form about the children. I asked her to show me the form and I would complete it/decide whether to allow it to be completed. She informed me that I would not be allowed sight of the form nor the information collected about the children. This is obviously a breach of the data protection act. There then folllowed a series of breaches, including correspondence routinely copied to the head of the primary school that the children had attended, who used to refer us to social services for spurious reasons and eventually was told by the social services to stop as they were not concerned about my children.

I also recieved a phone call from my GP demanding that I bring my daughter for a medical examination. She would not give me a medical reason for this but said she wished to discuss my daughters recent casualty admissions. I said I was more than willing to discuss these by phone and then when trying to discuss and obtain the reason for her enquiry she became evasive and started to question me about my family circumstances and included the words “can I ask why you are home educating when you have so much on your plate”. I can only assume that Marion Solomon referred the case to the GP. Social services had already stated they were not concerned and presumably they wanted the GP to check my child over for signs of abuse.

Caerphilly council also require two sets of visits be carried out, one by either Marion Solomon or one of her colleagues from the education welfare department and also one by ESIS who are their school inspectors and Inset providers. These people arrange 6 monthly visits to the home where the children are tested by their inspector and a report completed. It took repeated letters to both Marion Solomon and ESIS to get them to accept the evidence I wished to provide in writing.

From the start, the tone of their letters was aggressive and misleading in terms of the law. I was not offered any alternative to visits and had to refer to case law and Welsh Assembly guidance in repeated letters to both ESIS and Marion solomon reminding them of their responsibilities and powers before they finally conceded that there remit was education and that a report of provision would cover all their responsibilities and remit.”

[…]

http://www.theartofsurvival.co.uk/homeeducation/staff.php?id=24

oooooohhhhh!!!

Fred Mowbray – Surrey LA is a very dubious character. Some of my favourite things said by Fred are:

“The reason we need to see these (HE) children is because of the Fritzl case (Josef Fritzl) That could very easily happen to home educated children over here.” Say what?!

“Home educating one child when others are at school never works, in my experience” – And that would be what, Fred?

“In my experience, single parent families can’t home educate.” Bearing in mind that he’s been in the job for 3 years maximum and when he joined SCC he sparked an imposter scare as no one (including the call centre staff and main reception) had a clue who he was, his “experience” seems somewhat questionable.

He also takes along his slippers to home visits (ie your floors are too dirty for my socks) and lies effortlessly even when confronted cold hard evidence.

He doorsteps people on a regular basis and yet for all this, can’t understand why people don’t want him to visit?!

As a group we have tried on many different occasions to open lines of communication with Surrey EHE dept. At a meeting in 07 they made various promises as the line mgr at the time was very pro HE, however since then nothing has changed and the only reason we were “allowed” to see the draft policy was because someone FOI’d it. At one of the meetings we were told we weren’t allowed to see it until it had been passed by a committee despite the dept agreeing the year before to consult with local HE’er on it.

Although Surrey aren’t one of the worst LA’s out there, they are one of the most devious and deceitful.

[…]

http://www.theartofsurvival.co.uk/homeeducation/staff.php?id=37

ROTFLMAO!

How long do you think it will take before one of the LAs listed on this great tool hires a lawyer to take it down? No doubt the LA intruders and potential paedophiles will bristle with resentment at being put into a tool like this against their will. That is what it feels like to be violated in this way you scum, suck it up and enjoy it, and be thankful that it was not made private and secret with access only to Home Educators; after all, that is the way that ContactPoint works, everyone except the people who are catalogued on it have access. Absolutely disgusting!

If everyone contributes to this tool, there will not be a single person an LA can send out whose behaviour, tactics and demeanour will not have been well documented, rated and catalogued.

The responses of the submitters will be neatly collated so that contributors know what to do and what to expect.

Priceless.

Now all that is missing is an attack dog legal firm to put the fear of God into these vicious, ignorant and profoundly immoral people.

File under ‘don’t get mad, get even’.

Very VERY well done!

A Home Educating family from Germany has just been granted political asylum in the USA. This is highly significant:

Homeschooling Family Granted Political Asylum

Immigration Judge Says Germany Violating Basic Human Rights

In a case with international ramifications, Immigration Judge Lawrence O. Burman granted the political asylum application of a German homeschooling family. The Romeikes are Christians from Bissinggen, Germany, who fled persecution in August 2008 to seek political asylum in the United States. The request was granted January 26 after a hearing was held in Memphis, Tennessee, on January 21.

“We can’t expect every country to follow our constitution,” said Judge Burman. “The world might be a better place if it did. However, the rights being violated here are basic human rights that no country has a right to violate.”

Burman added, “Homeschoolers are a particular social group that the German government is trying to suppress. This family has a well-founded fear of persecution…therefore, they are eligible for asylum…and the court will grant asylum.”

In his ruling, Burman said that the scariest thing about this case was the motivation of the government. He noted it appeared that rather than being concerned about the welfare of the children, the government was trying to stamp out parallel societies—something the judge called “odd” and just plain “silly.” In his order the judge expressed concern that while Germany is a democratic country and is an ally, he noted that this particular policy of persecuting homeschoolers is “repellent to everything we believe as Americans.”

The italics are my emphasis.

Of course, this is exactly what is happening in the UK, with its new fascist law. Under this new law, if a family in the UK fails to apply for a state license to home educate, the quality of home education is not to be taken into account in any proceedings, a home education license is to be automatically denied, and an School Attendance Order is to be issued.

This is not the action of people who are interested in the welfare or education of children, it is the act of people whose sole concern is that everyone is registered.

‘Embarrassing for Germany’

“This decision finally recognizes that German homeschoolers are a specific social group that is being persecuted by a Western democracy,” said Mike Donnelly, staff attorney and director of international relations for Home School Legal Defense Associaton. “It is embarrassing for Germany, since a Western nation should uphold basic human rights, which include allowing parents to raise and educate their own children. This judge understood the case perfectly, and he called Germany out. We hope this decision will cause Germany to stop persecuting homeschoolers,” he added.

The persecution of homeschoolers in Germany has been intensifying over the past several years. They are regularly fined thousands of dollars, threatened with imprisonment, or have the custody of their children taken away simply because they choose to home educate.

The Romeikes expressed relief when they heard the decision.

“We are so grateful to the judge for his ruling,” said Uwe Romeike. “We know many people, especially other German homeschoolers, have been praying for us. Their prayers and ours have been answered. We greatly appreciate the freedom to homeschool we now have in America and will be building our new life here,” he added.

Donnelly testified at the hearing on January 21, telling the immigration Judge that homeschoolers are persecuted all over Germany.

‘Ignoring the Truth’

“There is no safety for homeschoolers in Germany,” Donnelly said. “The two highest courts in Germany have ruled that it is acceptable for the German government to ‘stamp out’ homeschoolers as some kind of ‘parallel society.’ The reasoning is flawed. The fact is that homeschoolers are not a parallel society. Valid research shows that homeschoolers excel academically and socially. German courts are simply ignoring the truth that exists all over the world where homeschooling is practiced. They need to look beyond their own borders.”

In 2003 the highest administrative court in Germany, which interprets its federal Constitution, ruled in the Konrad case that it was permissable for parents who have jobs that require them to travel—such as circus performers and musicians—to homeschool, but homeschooling was prohibited for parents who wanted to for reasons of conscience. The highest criminal court said in the Paul-Plett case in 2006 that the government was allowed to take custody of children whose parents want to homeschool for reasons of conscience.

Reasons of conscience, and your right to act by their motivation is an essential freedom that everyone has. It is the same for conscientious objectors, people who will not eat meat, etc etc. For a german court to rule in this way, that it is OK for people to home educate for reasons related to MONEY but not conscience, is an accurate indicator of the pure evil that resides in the bosoms of Germans. And once again, this is not just the German government that is on trial here; just as it was in the 1930's the German people cannot claim that "I know nothing" A German family has FLED due to this persecution. They are all culpable. PERIOD.

Donnelly challenged the reasoning of the German courts.

“It is ridiculous for German courts to say that homeschooling is allowed if you have practical reasons but disallowed if you have conscientious reasons,” Donnelly said. “This is simply about the German state trying to coerce ideological uniformity in a way that is frighteningly reminiscent of past history. Homeschooling is a growing social movement all over the world, and the Germans want to stamp it out based on a fabricated notion that homeschoolers are a ‘parallel society.’ Germany’s treatment of homeschooling families is worthy of condemnation from the international community. I am proud that a United States immigration judge recognized the truth of what is happening in Germany and has rendered this favorable decision for the Romeike family.”

German homeschoolers have been organizing and trying to draw the attention of German politicians. It has been difficult. Juergen Dudek is a homeschooling father who had been sentenced to 90 days in jail for homeschooling, but whose sentence was reduced to a $300 fine. He noted that officials in Germany have no appreciation for homeschoolers who think differently than the state.

‘Send a Loud Message’

“It is incredible to me that these officials give absolutely no weight to our faith or other conscientious objection to attendance at the public schools,” said Dudek. “We have had a number of families who are not homeschoolers, but who know that the German school system is failing, who called us to encourage us. In our re-hearing the judge issued a decision reducing our sentence from jail to a fine but was totally dismissive of our reasons for wanting to homeschool. We have always been encouraged by the support of American homeschoolers, and we hope that this decision will send a loud message to the German people that what our country is doing is wrong.”

A board member of the Netzwerk Bildungsfreiheit, an organization working for freedom for homeschoolers, said that the ruling would be helpful to homeschoolers in Germany.

“This decision reveals to the rest of the world that the German state acts outside the mainstream of Western democracies. Germany is in the company of countries like China, North Korea and others where fundamental human rights are not respected. Germany’s behavior exposes the totalitarian character of the German school law that takes away a parent’s right to educate their children. A decision on behalf of the Romeikes puts blame on the German government and is a serious warning to Germans officials to change their policies and further accept the rights of the parents. We hope that the decision will send a clear message to authorities in Germany to make changes right away!”

Mike Smith, president of HSLDA, also applauded the decision.

“It’s recognition that the German state is persecuting homeschoolers,” he said. “We are pleased to have been able to support this courageous family, and we hope and pray that this decision will have a decisive effect on German policy makers who should change their laws to recognize parents’ rights to educate their own children.”

http://www.hslda.org/hs/international/Germany/201001260.asp

What this jugement says is that Germany is an illiberal and unfree country, where illegitimate and immoral Nazi era laws, rather than being removed from the statute books, are being enforced with a ferocity, zeal, fervour, glee and intensity worthy of the original Nazis.

This Jugement means that any worker from the evil Jugendamt who tries to come to the USA to kidnap Germans on this most absurd of pretexts will be told in no uncertain terms to go back to Germany. Contrast this with the shameful way that France treats Germans on the run from the Nazis.

This story is going to cause Germans to re-assess their perfect society to which no parallel is to be allowed. This judge is calling all of Germany a state that is not fit for free people.

The Swedes should look very seriously at their Utopia and how the world perceives them; what is for sure now, is that any Swedish family that wants to escape their fascist government now has a country where they can escape to and be guaranteed that they will be protected. All they have to do is get on the plane without having their children kidnapped before it takes off.

The Romeikes are going to find that they have landed on their feet. They are now in a country that not only accepts Home Education, but it is also a place where there are millions of Home Educators. They will have a great Home Ed social life. In the USA Home Educators are highly organised; it is a place where there are services and publishers that will be happy and eager to serve them. The Universities are competing to attract Home Educated people to become their pupils. It is a place where Home Education and its practitioners is not a sponge cake soaked in bitter and foul ideologies where irrational, negative, serf minded and noxious people are desperate to control others whilst demanding freedom for themselves.

And best of all, they will not have to be constantly looking over their shoulders… it’s a place where they can be free!

Should they be foolish enough to set foot in Europe, they can expect to have their children kidnapped on the spot of course.

FURTHERMORE

Read this shameful article in Der Spiegel, which shows that the German public and in this case, the press, are completely culpable:

Religious Persecution?
German Home-Schoolers Granted Political Asylum in US

Why the question mark? These people are being persecuted because they are Christians. PERIOD.

A family of evangelical Christians who said they were being persecuted for their religious beliefs in Germany have been granted political asylum in the US. The couple fled to Tennessee so they could home-school their five children, which is illegal in Germany.

They did not ‘say they were being persecuted’, they WERE being persecuted!

Most asylum seekers in the US tend to flee wars or dictatorships, but one German family moved to the American South in 2008 because they believed they were being persecuted for their religious beliefs. On Tuesday an immigration judge in Tennessee agreed, and granted them political asylum.

A shameful, Nazi law promoting scumbag wrote this article. CLEARLY they did not BELIEVE they were being persecuted, they WERE being persecuted, and that is why they were granted asylum.

Uwe and Hannelore Romeike, who are evangelical Christians, say they were forced to go the the US because they wanted to educate their five children at home, something that is illegal in Germany.

Judge Lawrence Burman issued the ruling on Tuesday in Memphis, according to the Home School Legal Defense Association, which is representing the Romeikes.

The family left Germany after several run-ins with authorities.

They FLED Germany, to avoid being fined, imprisoned and having their children kidnapped by the state. That is a little different from ‘leaving Germany’.

The parents had ignored repeated orders to send their children to school.

As is their duty and right. The writer inserts this as if it is a proper pretext for the law to act.

German state constitutions require parents to send their children to public or private schools and they can face fines or even imprisonment if they don’t comply.

Now this Nazi is trying to put a spin on the true origin of the law, Hitler, by saying that ‘German state constitutions’ require school attendance. This shameful lack of acknowledgement of the origin of this evil law makes the writer complicit in it and the persecution of this family and all other Home Educating families in Germany.

In October 2006, police came to the Romeike home and took the children to school.

This is not right, understandable, moral or defensible. That it is stated as a plain fact is nauseating.

In November 2007 Germany’s highest appellate court ruled that in severe cases of non-compliance, social services could even remove children from home.

‘Severe cases of non-compliance’… is that all it is? ZIEG HIEL!

Uwe Romeike told the Associated Press that the 2007 ruling convinced him and his wife that “we had to leave the country.” The curriculum in public schools over the past few decades has been “more and more against Christian values,” he said.

A decent parent.

‘The Freedom to Choose’

Lutz Görgens, a German Consul General in Atlanta, Georgia, said in an e-mail statement that German parents had a range of educational options for their children. Mandatory school attendance in Germany ensures a high standard of learning for all children, he said.

This is a lie, and a distraction. No matter what schools are on offer anywhere, the parent has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to educate their child in any way they see fit, and this is not the affair of the state in a free country.

“Parents may chose between public, private and religious schools, including those with alternative curricula like Waldorf or Montessori schools,” said Görgens.

If you cannot choose no school, you have no choice. Only a brainwashed Nazi boosting official like Lutz Görgens could put forward this rationalisation.

But Romeike was not comfortable sending his children to public school anymore. He said three eldest children had had problems with violence, bullying and peer pressure. “I think it’s important for parents to have the freedom to choose the way their children can be taught,” he said.

The couple took the kids out of school in the southern state of Baden-Württemberg in 2006 and were fined around €70,000 ($100,000).

Par for the course; the state dolls out theft, followed by violence.

In 2008 Romeike, a music teacher, sold his collection of pianos and rented out his home in the village of Bissingen. The family now live in Morristown, Tennessee, in the so-called Bible Belt. Like many of their neighbors they teach their children at home.

And MILLIONS OF OTHER AMERICANS you pathetic beast.

The decision on the family’s political asylum could still be overturned if the US government appeals the ruling. But Mike Donnelly, the attorney for the Home School Legal Defense Association, said he hopes Tuesday’s ruling will influence public opinion in Germany — which is part of the reason his group offered to represent the Romeikes, he said.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,674312,00.html

First of all, why would the US Government appeal this ruling? On what grounds?

Once the news of this gets out, it is unlikely that anyone in the US will go against this family. The millions of Home Schoolers in the USA will make such a deafening noise (or at least, in a perfect world that is what would happen) no politician would DARE call for this family to be sent back to the reich.

SHAME SHAME SHAME on DER SPIEGEL!

Wow! That Copenhagen package really worked. Global warming has been dramatically reversed. In fact, if Al Gore could see his way to turning the heat back up just a little, most of us would be deeply appreciative…

“Climate science” is the oxymoron of the century. There is not a city, town or hamlet in the country that has had its weather conditions correctly forecast, over periods as short as 12 hours, during the past week. This is the “exceptionally mild winter” that the climate change buffoons warned us would occur as a consequence of global warming. Their credibility is 20 degrees below zero.

Yet nothing shames them, nothing persuades them to come out of the bunker with their hands high and “fess up”. Patronisingly fobbing off the public with fabricated excuses has become second nature to them. Latterly they have been concocting alibis about the Gulf Stream to explain Britain’s Arctic conditions. Uh-huh? Is it the Gulf Stream that has frozen the Vistula and given Poland a temperature of –25C? Is it the Gulf Stream that has caused the worst blizzards in Beijing since 1951?

The entire Northern Hemisphere is frozen. The world looks like a Christmas pudding with icing on the top. That is completely normal, part of the random climate fluctuations with which our ancestors were familiar. Yet fraudulent scientists have gained millions of pounds by taking selective samples of natural climate change, whipping up a Grande Peur and using it to advance the cause of world government, state control and fiscal despoliation of citizens.

2010 should be the year when all that ends. It is time for Zero Tolerance of AGW fraudsters and their political masters. It is time to say: Green taxes? We won’t pay them. Nor will we vote for or permit to remain in office any politician or party that supports the AGW fraud. This year is one of those rare occasions when we have an opportunity to punish and control our political masters – provided Britons have the will to break with the two-party system.

[…]

Telegraph

My emphasis.

You can start by refusing to pay for the ridiculous and pointless ‘energy efficiency’ certifications required by the EU for anyone who is renting or selling their house.

But why not go all the way? Why not refuse to pay this astronomically large and illegitimate debt that the governments have run up so that a small cabal of bankers can have money transferred to them?

Why not get rid of it all?

We know that we do not need them for anything whatsoever; why not be done with it, with the state, once and for all?

That is the real question. No government in opposition is going to run and be elected on a platform of destroying their own power, even if that is what they should be doing.

The pressures that are mounting in the hearts of every man (as we can read in Gerald Warner’s piece above) are going to cause an explosion (or more accurately an implosion), bringing about the sudden end of the state. There need not be any violence or disruption; just like it happened in South Africa and East Germany, all of a sudden, it will all simply end and everyone will wake up in a very different place. This is coming. It is inevitable. The only thing that is unsure is what the shape of that place will be after it happens.

Today marks the first day of my self declared freedom to live under common law and simply ignore whatever “laws” those 646 idiots in Parliament decide on my behalf is good for me.

I have become a “Freeman of the Land”.

Great, you say. Wait and see what happens when the bailiffs or the coppers turn up. Well, that is exactly what I intend to do. Common law has worked for the people of England perfectly well until Parliament decided they could do the job better. I see this journey as a massive learning curve, involving huge amounts of researching law and challenging authority, standing up to bullies and thieves and living the one life I am lucky to have as I see fit.

The first of a raft of letters goes out tomorrow informing various authorities that I no longer submit to their authority. The fact that I was born does not mean I have to give my earned income to the State in taxes, it does not mean that I am not free to speak my mind wherever and whenever I chose and it does not mean that anyone has any authority over me. To use a religious argument, if I am made in God’s image, then he and he alone has authority over me. No one else. By law.

So, what do I expect to happen? Well, they won’t like it, that’s for sure. I expect lots of various bodies to come knocking on my door, demanding my appearance at court or payment for this or that. Tough luck guys, Old Holborn has learned how to say no and mean it. It is not negotiable and never will be.

If you want to understand how common law works, there are numerous sources on the Internet, like the excellent TPUC site. Freemen are growing in number and living their lives as they wish. They don’t drive Ferrari’s, don’t own villas on the South Coast of France and they (generally) don’t wear Ted Baker suits either. They don’t have credit cards or P60’s, Rolex’s or iPhones. But they do have their God Given liberty and they scare the establishment shitless.

Today’s first step is a little sign on the garden gate. It states quite clearly and politely:

“No Intended Access”

Walk up my garden path and I will assume you to be as hostile to me and my family as if you’d jumped over the back garden wall. You take the consequences of that action to enter my property, uninvited. (Note to self: let the milkman know)

So here’s to a year of bankruptcy, arrest, summonses and threats. Just for simply saying no.

Bring it on. Others lost their lives in wars for rights and freedom. I have my entire life to gain.

[…]

http://bastardoldholborn.blogspot.com/2010/01/free-man.html

This is very significant.

Old Holborn runs a top twenty political blog (16th in the UK), which is read by hundreds of thousands of people.

Two things are going to happen. If he does this, and demonstrates that he can do it without consequences, other people will follow him and the curtain will finally and quickly be pulled back, the fat naked emperor will stand shivering in the cold and it will be the beginning of an explosion of true liberty in Britain. If the state decides to make an example of him, it could spread the message of the ‘freemen of the land’ by the power of the national press and if it’s ‘D Noticed’ by the even more powerful blogosphere.

Either way, there is going to be some noise.

There are many people in the UK who are ready to follow Old Holborn and to get O.U.T. and like we and all the other smart people keep saying, there is nothing that they can do about a mass refusal (mass implosion) to accept anything that comes from the state. No violence is required, no pointless demonstrating, 1, 2, 3, 4, and the (n+1).

The absolute last thing anyone needs is to replace one state with another ‘better’ state; the state itself, as a concept, as a way of ‘organising society’ is the problem. The freemen on the land, particulate, individual, self governing, property owning, freely interacting, contracting and exchanging without any coercion or force is the ideal. In practice not having a state would mean that there would be no one to tell you you can or cannot do something on your land or in your own house that does not affect anyone else. It means there is no one to tell you that you cannot imbibe whatever you like, say or print what ever you like, cook food for strangers and all the other things that are regulated ‘for your own good’ – in other words, you are free. Some people (and they are, despite their claims to the contrary, completely violent types) will rail against and resist freedom, claiming that violence needs to be used against people who cook food for others or who drive on the roads or who build houses or cut hair for a living etc, all meted out by a state. There will always be violent, control freak types. Without a sate to back up their violent tendencies, they will be reduced to nothing more than hot air machines.

Old Holborn has a family. He is not putting just himself at great risk of physical harm. What he is doing should be instructional to all those who still think that engaging with the state is in any way a sensible option. Pulling apart their illogic and lies is entertaining and informative and should be done, but there has to come a point where you throw up your hands and say, “enough is enough”, and mean it.

All eyes on Old Holborn, everyone O.U.T.!

Despite the press blackout on Climate Gate, it seems that the jig really is up, though some people, in this case, people who really should know better, are hanging on to the lie until the last possible moment. A Science Museum’s, campaign, paid for by money stolen from you, continues to push this Global Warming garbage and propaganda, despite everything that has happened. By all means, go to this link and count yourself out.

They really should know better, because the history of science is full of examples of theories that were widely accepted for long periods of time only to be shot down by the increase of knowledge (Spontaneous Generation), and it is also full of examples of scientific fraud, like Piltdown Man.

The Science Museum should now stop all activity related to promoting Climate Change as a valid scientific theory. Full stop.

Then we have this simply fantastic article at The Telegraph:

A week after my colleague James Delingpole , on his Telegraph blog, coined the term “Climategate” to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated, What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Professor Philip Jones, the CRU’s director, is in charge of the two key sets of data used by the IPCC to draw up its reports. Through its link to the Hadley Centre, part of the UK Met Office, which selects most of the IPCC’s key scientific contributors, his global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it.
Dr Jones is also a key part of the closely knit group of American and British scientists responsible for promoting that picture of world temperatures conveyed by Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” graph which 10 years ago turned climate history on its head by showing that, after 1,000 years of decline, global temperatures have recently shot up to their highest level in recorded history.
Given star billing by the IPCC, not least for the way it appeared to eliminate the long-accepted Mediaeval Warm Period when temperatures were higher they are today, the graph became the central icon of the entire man-made global warming movement.

[…]

Telegraph

Which spells it all out perfectly.

Sadly, it may be the case that someone doesn’t want this very popular article spreading around the internets.

Finally, we have ‘Lord’ Christopher Monckton calling for the UN to be disbanded. He smells the stink, and traces it straight to New York:

The fallout of Climate Gate may just be the destruction of the second attempt to create a world government (the first being the League of Nations).

Good!

Dropped into the BLOGDIAL inbox (twice!):

[…]

This is urgent, and requires active participation by all HEs. Please read and forward to all HEs and HE lists that you belong to.

This act is not in competition with or an attack against any HE person or HE organisation. Now is not the time for an HE civil war. We need to deal with the real threat first, then try to resolve conflict within the HE community later. OUR STRENGTH IS NOT ONLY IN OUR CONVICTIONS IT IS ALSO IN OUR NUMBERS.

The Badman recommendations have generated a great deal of fear within the HE community; but the threat is an illusion. If we ALL refuse to cooperate nothing will happen – they will NOT come for you and your children. Their power over us is based on our own fear.

This is a declaration to parliament, putting them on notice that they should not add the recommendations of the Graham Badman Report into new law, and that we will not co-operate with any such law should they dare to enact it.

If you agree with what it says, select all the text between the dividers, copy the text to a new document, print it, sign it or otherwise make your mark on it, and then send it to your MP. Then forward this entire message to any Home Educators and parents that you know and urge them to do the same. You may disseminate this public notice to anyone and any place you think will help it gain momentum.

Whether you are involved in the petition or any other initiative makes no odds. Use this to deluge your MPs and show them once and for all that we are united!

To find your MP’s address use this site: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Notice of Refusal to Co-operate

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

WHEREAS the recommendations of the GRAHAM BADMAN REVIEW OF ELECTIVE HOME EDUCATION have been accepted in full by the Secretary of State.

AND that these grossly disproportionate recommendations hold serious implications for the civil liberties of parents, children and families in this country.

AND that these recommendations place primary responsibility for assessing the suitability of education and the welfare of the child on the state, rather than the parent – with no prior evidence that either is unsatisfactory prior to this grossly intrusive intervention.

AND that the recommendations of the review assumes that the home is an inherently unsafe or unhealthy place for the child to be.

AND that these recommendations undermine the role of the parent and trample over family freedoms in its haste to set parent and child up against each other, bestowing additional and selective “rights” on home educated children that only the government can adequately minister to.

AND that these recommendations destroy the very possibility of true autonomy in learning.

AND that these recommendations operate from a position of requiring proof of parental innocence rather than reasonable suspicion of guilt.

AND that these recommendations discriminatorily use the coercive and interventionist tools of parental licensing, warrantless entry to the home, inspection according to arbitrary external standards, and an unconscionable new power to interrogate the child without the parents present.

AND that the outcome of these recommendations will be horribly discriminatory to a minority community, the measures eventually having to apply to anyone who has their child at home with them: parents with under 5s, those whose children attend private school, and also those with school-aged children who are at home in the evenings, over the weekends, and throughout the summer holidays.

AND that the outcome of these inspections will be based on the very human whim and prejudices of a local authority officer, who will have the power to destroy the life and education that that parent has conceived for his or her child.

AND that if the government is to avoid further discrimination it also stands to reason that each child who attends school must be given the same “rights” as home educated children – to “have their voices heard” regarding whether or not they are happy to be educated in school, whether they are satisfied with their teachers and whether they feel safe in such an environment.

WE ACCEPT that it is right that appropriate and proportionate action, as currently outlined in the law, may be taken to rectify a situation if there are serious concerns about a child’s welfare, observing that a child being at home with its parents is not, and never has been, in and of itself a child welfare issue.

AND HEREBY RESOLVE that any such utterly disproportionate legislation if passed will fundamentally alter the relationship between citizen and state, and would constitute a fundamental violation of our rights,

AND that any such legislation is illegitimate on its face.

NOW UNDERSTAND that by this declaration, Parliament is PUT ON NOTICE that I and others will not co-operate with any such legislation, and strongly caution you not to consider, debate, or enact any such legislation.

Signed _______________________________

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well well well. At last, the sleeper has awakened!

No more begging. No more pleading. No more nonsense.

No means ‘NO’, and that does not mean ‘maybe’, or conditionally, or partially or “come back after you have thought about it some more”.

Right is right, and wrong is wrong, and no matter what, this is the LAST STRAW. You may go NO FURTHER.

I have said it many times before; there is nothing they can do to force you to obey them, and they rely on your good and honest nature as if it were a character flaw so that they can do bad things to you. They cannot stop the hunters from hunting, they cannot keep drugs off of the street and they cannot even keep them out of the prisons. They are massively overstretched on every front, almost to breaking point. There is no money to come after Home Educators, who are the lowest priority of all priorities. Ed Balls and the other evil clowns have announced a list of 23 new guarantees for all pupils; how are they going to pay for all of it when they are CUTTING The budget by TWO BILLION POUNDS? The answer is THEY CANNOT.

Anyone who says that they are going to cooperate in any way is quite simply a total fool. Filling out their vile forms and engaging with them does 99% of the work of control. If no one communicates with them, if no one cooperates with them they will find their plans to be completely stymied. There are not enough of them to chase up and control everyone. There are not enough of them to collate all the information they need, and of course, whatever they can write down will not have your consent and will be worthless. Even if they could do it, there are not enough people to enforce their disgusting plans.

The facts are these; if you want your liberty you can take it; it is yours, right in your hands right now. You need to put all of your fear aside and simply… ‘do not’.

But that is only if they manage to pass the legislation, and that might not even happen. Certainly it is not going to be made easy for them.

In the final analysis, no matter what happens, either way they have LOST!

FURTHERMORE

In case any of you simple minded people out there have any doubts about the ill intentions of these monsters, take a look at where the Home Education licensing proposal is listed at the website of monster central:

[…]

under ‘Safeguarding the Vulnerable’!

Full screen grab here, in case they try and re-write history.

Absolutely unbelievable. These people are declaring that the children of home educators are in need of safeguarding, simply because they are educated at home!

Are you angry yet?

This is just like the scandal of Neu Liebour officially listing Landsbanki as terrorist organisation:

Absolutely appalling.

Once again, there is no depth to which these people will not sink, no lie they will shirk from telling in order to get their grubby fat hands on your children, and as we have seen, the women are as bad as if not worse than the men.

If this has not pushed you over the edge, then you do not have a pulse.

If you are wasting your time bickering over nonsense instead of doing everything you possibly can to put a stop to this, you deserve everything that you get.

They really are the worst bunch of people imaginable, and they really are after you and your children!

This is the response to the Graham Badman proposals by a ‘Neil T’:

1. Do you agree that these proposals strike the right balance between the rights of parents to home educate and the rights of children to receive a suitable education?

Disagree

This disgusting war of attrition on a legitimate section of society, which has used every trick in the book, not to mention outright insults, betrays the total lack of decency, integrity, or even safety of this reivew and therefore also of this government. The totalitarian intentions that lie behind this attack on fundamental constitutional freedoms, for no credibly demonstrated reasons forces me to conclude that I can have zero confidence in it to do anything but harm. It has demonstrated to me that it is a completely illegitimate despotism, and I hereby withdraw my consent to its rule. IMO it is unfit to make any changes to current education law or practice.

The government’s role in education has become irredeemably toxic, and the state should get out of education, and repeal the insult of compulsory education altogether, restoring that unmolested natural impulse of the young of our species to learn what it needs to learn without coercion.

The education of my children is none of the government’s business unless it appears that I am neglecting my s7 duty. If LEAs understood and respected this law of the land since my parents generation fought and died fighting for ‘freedom’ while it was being drafted, then children would be protected as well as they can be, and far better than the current dangerously deficient fiasco of universal child molestation and destruction of their privacy embarked on by this government.

2. Do you agree that a register should be kept?

Disagree

N/A for reasons cited above.

3. Do you agree with the information to be provided for registration?

Disagree

N/A for reasons cited above.

4. Do you agree that home educating parents should be required to keep the register up to date?

Disagree

N/A for reasons cited above.

5. Do you agree that it should be a criminal offence to fail to register or to provide inadequate or false information?

Disagree

N/A for reasons cited above.

6a Do you agree that home educated children should stay on the roll of their former school for 20 days after parents notify that they intend to home educate?

Disagree

Absolutely not. Either parents are responsible for the education of their children or the state is. There is no legitimate reason for this incursion, other than to intimidate and dissuade parents from this course of action altogether, as HEers already experience from those schools and LAs which already assume they have such powers, and for which the Pupil Registration regulations 1995 were always a dead letter, no prosecution ever having been brought for the many breaches of a law never intended to be policed, but given as a sop to Education Otherwise to trick us into imagining that talking to government might actually get us anything we wanted.

6b Do you agree that the school should provide the local authority with achievement and future attainment data?

Disagree

The question makes no sense. Why would a school have anything to do with home education? The state system has no role in monitoring education that is not provided by it, nor should it have.

7. Do you agree that DCSF should take powers to issue statutory guidance in relation to the registration and monitoring of home education?

Disagree

I do not need permission from the government to home educate my children.
Why would any sane parent vote to give up such a fundamental freedom?, and that is what registration is. The state also has no statutory monitoring role, despite dishonestly claiming such a function, thereby misrepresenting its powers, and since it militantly and relentlessly determines to misunderstand what HEers do, it perpetually demonstrates its own profound unfitness to judge what it cannot and does not want to understand.

8. Do you agree that children about whom there are substantial safeguarding concerns should not be home educated?

Disagree

Is this a trick question? Children about whom there are substantial safeguarding concerns will by definition already be being seen by social services. If in the course of any such contact ‘if it appears’ that a child is also not receiving suitable education, then the LA is already well placed to invoke s437 and involve the LEA. Current protections and procedures therefore seem highly adequate. It is conceivable that a good education might be being provided despite specific welfare concerns for a child, so a blanket ban would seem unnecessary and crude.

9. Do you agree that the local authority should visit the premises where home education is taking place provided 2 weeks notice is given?

Disagree

Our home is not a ‘premises’, its our home, and we are entitled under human rights instruments not to have it invaded. The so called home visit, which is really a non legally sanctioned state inspection of families by deception and misrepresentation of powers the state does not possess, should hardly predispose anyone to vote for making such unwanted and unhelpful intrusions legal.

10 Do you agree that the local authority should have the power to interview the child, alone if this is judged appropriate, or if not in the presence of a trusted person who is not the parent/carer?

Disagree

If this suggestion does not actually have its specific origins in a paedophile agenda, it might as well have. This suggestion invokes necessary child protection actions by any responsible parent against a negligent state (at best), that cannot manage to make its own institutions safe from harbouring dangerous child predators, and at worst, manages to look like a perverts agenda in the first place. This suggestion is beyond vile, and will simply never be tolerated by a large section of society. No decent government could propose such an outrage against families. Powers already exist to enter homes where serious welfare concerns exist, but to suggest this as routine for all families is to debase citizenship utterly, and put all children at a new and totally unnecessary risk.

11 Do you agree that the local authority should visit the premises and interview the child within four weeks of home education starting, after 6 months has elapsed, at the anniversary of home education starting, and thereafter at least on an annual basis? This would not preclude more frequent monitoring if the local authority thought that was necessary.

Disagree

The LA is entitled to make enquiries, and draw conclusions from non responders, or responses which only state that the parents are home educating and no more. It can then require information to be provided or serve an SAO. That is power enough, or would be if LAs understood the law they are supposed to administer.

HEers have been trying to humanise and get LAs to understand and respect the law, and the validity of what we do, probably ever since there have been LAs, and certainly ever since 1944, but with mostly little success, with one or two notable exceptions. It is pointless to contemplate greatly increased powers of intervention when so many LEAs are already local despotisms that act as if most of these powers already existed anyway. It is to shudder to contemplate what would befall us as a result of giving them these proposed new powers, even if they never exceeded them, but it is already no mystery to HEers, and we don’t believe it is any mystery to government either, which is the principle inciter to ultra vires despotism by LAs.

Government should be aware that the people will not be pushed in the direction of totalitarianism for ever, and that there is a line which government can cross that will not be tolerated, such rule, disobeyed.
For myself and many others I know, that line has already been crossed in this shameless and disgusting process, and as I have said before, and now reiterate, government does not have my consent to this process or any outcome from it. I will not submit to such tyranny. I will not obey this rule.

[…]

http://maire-staffordshire.blogspot.com/

My emphasis, underlined.

This is music to my ears, and of course, I agree with all of it.

We can but hope that this is the strength of sentiment in the vast majority of Home Educators.

Whoever Neil T is, he is a hero, no doubt about it. Blistering, flawless logic, delivered in the correct voice, with a clear declaration that all bets are off.

When these consultation responses are ignored, then the rage will increase exponentially as will the resolve to completely resist.

These people are making enemies of every last person in the country. There are not many people left who are not at the end of their tether. Everyone is fed up, everyone is harassed, pressured, squeezed and pestered.

And for what?

No one wants to be troubled with this sort of nonsense; I am sure that Neil T would much rather be doing something else than boiling his blood over Neu Liebour and its latest perversion.

The fact must be that these monsters crave disorder, ill feeling and violence. It is the only conclusion that a logical person can come to, since everything they do breeds murder, violence, chaos and disruption.

As I have said for years, no one should give them satisfaction.

Protesting in demonstrations merely puts you on cards like this (N.B. not that cards like this mean anything at all in the grand scheme of things; just ask the East Germans, many of whom appeared in their local equivalent. Decades later no one is affected by those records and they are just a bad memory, just as this card and the victims on it, in the long run, will not be harmed by this, when everything changes. In fact, cards like this are a symptom of the impending death of a nation, where ordinary decent people are criminalised because the state is totally illegitimate and completely corrupt: “The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government” Tacitus. These cards are designed not only as police tools but to spread fear and to shut down people’s willingness to act. It never succeeds in the end, EVER.):

Whilst doing nothing to achieve your goals.

Whatever you might think the solution to any particular problem is, one thing is for sure, doing again and again what has not worked is insane, and everyone who calls for more of what does not work is… not helping.

These are the key parameters that anyone who wants to solve a problem needs to understand:

1. There is not enough money for them to do everything that they want to do.
2. There are not enough aparatchicks to enforce everything they want to enforce.
3. There are too many of any single constituency to control, whether we are talking about motorists, smokers, drinkers, Home Educators, motorcyclists, hunters or any other group of people made up of large numbers.

If you can get all the people in your group to agree to obey only common sense, and do disobey any order or directive that violates your rights, then essentially, there is nothing that anyone can do about it. Common sense and order will prevail and insanity and disorder will cease to exist.

Physical reality is consistent with universal laws. Where the laws do not operate, there is no reality — we judge reality by the responses of our senses. Once we are convinced of the reality of a given situation, we abide by its rules. We judged the bullets to be solid, the guns to be real, therefore they can kill. I know the bullets are unreal, therefore they cannot harm me.

Spectre of the Gun

This is what the hunting crowd have discovered; they keep hunting and nothing has stopped them. It is directly analogous to Neo’s not running anymore, turning around and saying very calmly ‘No’.

It is directly analogous to THX and SEN being shown by SRT that in fact, there are no barriers to escape, and if you try to escape, nothing will stop you.

Finally, there is no need for violence from you. Power is an illusion. If enough people say no, there is nothing that can stop them, in fact, bullets cannot kill what energises them because bullets cannot kill ideas.

Read it and deal with it:

1. Please stop asking us if it’s legal. If it is — and it is — it’s insulting to imply that we’re criminals. And if we were criminals, would we admit it?
2. Learn what the words “socialize” and “socialization” mean, and use the one you really mean instead of mixing them up the way you do now. Socializing means hanging out with other people for fun. Socialization means having acquired the skills necessary to do so successfully and pleasantly. If you’re talking to me and my kids, that means that we do in fact go outside now and then to visit the other human beings on the planet, and you can safely assume that we’ve got a decent grasp of both concepts.
3. Quit interrupting my kid at her dance lesson, scout meeting, choir practice, baseball game, art class, field trip, park day, music class, 4H club, or soccer lesson to ask her if as a homeschooler she ever gets to socialize.
4. Don’t assume that every homeschooler you meet is homeschooling for the same reasons and in the same way as that one homeschooler you know.
5. If that homeschooler you know is actually someone you saw on TV, either on the news or on a “reality” show, the above goes double.
6. Please stop telling us horror stories about the homeschoolers you know, know of, or think you might know who ruined their lives by homeschooling. You’re probably the same little bluebird of happiness whose hobby is running up to pregnant women and inducing premature labor by telling them every ghastly birth story you’ve ever heard. We all hate you, so please go away.
7. We don’t look horrified and start quizzing your kids when we hear they’re in public school. Please stop drilling our children like potential oil fields to see if we’re doing what you consider an adequate job of homeschooling.
8. Stop assuming all homeschoolers are religious.
9. Stop assuming that if we’re religious, we must be homeschooling for religious reasons.
10. We didn’t go through all the reading, learning, thinking, weighing of options, experimenting, and worrying that goes into homeschooling just to annoy you. Really. This was a deeply personal decision, tailored to the specifics of our family. Stop taking the bare fact of our being homeschoolers as either an affront or a judgment about your own educational decisions.
11. Please stop questioning my competency and demanding to see my credentials. I didn’t have to complete a course in catering to successfully cook dinner for my family; I don’t need a degree in teaching to educate my children. If spending at least twelve years in the kind of chew-it-up-and-spit-it-out educational facility we call public school left me with so little information in my memory banks that I can’t teach the basics of an elementary education to my nearest and dearest, maybe there’s a reason I’m so reluctant to send my child to school.
12. If my kid’s only six and you ask me with a straight face how I can possibly teach him what he’d learn in school, please understand that you’re calling me an idiot. Don’t act shocked if I decide to respond in kind.
13. Stop assuming that because the word “home” is right there in “homeschool,” we never leave the house. We’re the ones who go to the amusement parks, museums, and zoos in the middle of the week and in the off-season and laugh at you because you have to go on weekends and holidays when it’s crowded and icky.
14. Stop assuming that because the word “school” is right there in homeschool, we must sit around at a desk for six or eight hours every day, just like your kid does. Even if we’re into the “school” side of education — and many of us prefer a more organic approach — we can burn through a lot of material a lot more efficiently, because we don’t have to gear our lessons to the lowest common denominator.
15. Stop asking, “But what about the Prom?” Even if the idea that my kid might not be able to indulge in a night of over-hyped, over-priced revelry was enough to break my heart, plenty of kids who do go to school don’t get to go to the Prom. For all you know, I’m one of them. I might still be bitter about it. So go be shallow somewhere else.
16. Don’t ask my kid if she wouldn’t rather go to school unless you don’t mind if I ask your kid if he wouldn’t rather stay home and get some sleep now and then.
17. Stop saying, “Oh, I could never homeschool!” Even if you think it’s some kind of compliment, it sounds more like you’re horrified. One of these days, I won’t bother disagreeing with you any more.
18. If you can remember anything from chemistry or calculus class, you’re allowed to ask how we’ll teach these subjects to our kids. If you can’t, thank you for the reassurance that we couldn’t possibly do a worse job than your teachers did, and might even do a better one.
19. Stop asking about how hard it must be to be my child’s teacher as well as her parent. I don’t see much difference between bossing my kid around academically and bossing him around the way I do about everything else.
20. Stop saying that my kid is shy, outgoing, aggressive, anxious, quiet, boisterous, argumentative, pouty, fidgety, chatty, whiny, or loud because he’s homeschooled. It’s not fair that all the kids who go to school can be as annoying as they want to without being branded as representative of anything but childhood.
21. Quit assuming that my kid must be some kind of prodigy because she’s homeschooled.
22. Quit assuming that I must be some kind of prodigy because I homeschool my kids.
23. Quit assuming that I must be some kind of saint because I homeschool my kids.
24. Stop talking about all the great childhood memories my kids won’t get because they don’t go to school, unless you want me to start asking about all the not-so-great childhood memories you have because you went to school.
25. Here’s a thought: If you can’t say something nice about homeschooling, shut up!

http://www.secular-homeschooling.com/001/bitter_homeschooler.html

A great and insightful blogger Renegade Parent has just received her order of books from the Ludwig Von Mises Institute. The books she has on display will educate anyone on what is really happening with the dollar crisis, what money really is, the true nature of liberty and what needs to be done to restore and preserve it.

Happy reading!

Now on to Max Keiser. For ages I have been saying that demonstrating is pointless. All those G20 protesting morons should listen to Max, because he has just delivered the sort of 21st century tool they need to completely outflank and destroy their enemy, whilst liberating themselves in a single move. In chess it looks like this:

[Event "Human versus Crafty"]
[Date "2009.10.02"]
[Round "?"]
[White "White"]
[Black "Crafty"]
[Result "1-0"]
[BlackAI "Crafty"]
1. e4 c5
2. Nc3 d6
3. Nd5 Be6
4. Nf4 Qd7
5. Nxe6 Qxe6
6. Qe2 Nc6
7. Qe3 O-O-O
8. b3 Nd4
9. Bd3 Nf6
10. c3 Ng4
11. Qg5 h6
12. Qh5 g6
13. Qh3 Nc6
14. f3 Nge5
15. Qg3 Nxd3+
16. Kf1 Bg7
17. Ba3 Nce5
18. Ne2 f5
19. Nd4 cxd4
20. cxd4 f4
21. Qh4 g5
22. Qh5 Nc6
23. d5 Qe5
24. Rb1 Nd4
25. Bb2 Rd7
26. Qg6 Rc7
27. Qf7 h5
28. Bc3 g4
29. a3 gxf3
30. gxf3 Kb8
31. a4 Ka8
32. a5 h4
33. Rg1 Bf6
34. Rg6 Rhc8
35. Rg8 Rxg8
36. Qxg8+ Rc8
37. Qxc8# 1-0

Here is his brilliant piece of thinking:

“If everyone did buy gold, if every activist in the world who was protesting against a centralised world government or a centralised banking system in the US or the UK; if every single one of those people bought just one ounce of gold bullion, the price of gold would double and it would put these banksters out of business!”

That means for $1000 each, all the G20 protesters, instead of being kidnapped by military police, getting sprayed with pepper gas, deafened by LRAD sound weapons and held like an animal for a trophy shoot by police, they could bring down the countries of the G20 by simply using money as the the tool.

Of course, these demonstrating idiots are of the type that think ‘Capitalism is evil’ and other brainwash induced nonsense like ‘free $insert_lie’ and ‘everyone should have the right to/of $insert_non_natural_right_that_is_actually_a_good’ etc etc.

The fact of the matter is that the G20 and all the people in ‘authority’ are scared shitless. What Max suggests is the kind of thing that we have been talking about:

[…]

That would be a revolution, an amorphous, nebulous, static swarm of disobedience, which could not be countered, any more than a truncheon wielder can batter a cloud to sweep it away. Without the compliance of everyone, the state would simply cease to exist; the monsters who control it would scream and shout hysterically at first, but would very quickly want to associate with the static mass as they desperately try to reposition themselves for a role in the new disorder. Those creatures are very good at sensing the right time to jump ship – when its about to do down – they are after all ‘political animals’ (rats).

[…]

http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=1694

The tools to do this are available, and all the soldiers who will participate are constantly connected to them. All the people could be mobilised and activated without any of them even leaving their bedrooms or interrupting their routines. The call would go out on Twitter to ‘buy one ounce of gold on any day in November’… for great justice. Once the effect starts to take hold, everyone everywhere would start to chip in. In a very short amount of time it would reach critical mass.

Not a shot would have been fired. When South Africa was under Apartheid, there was a call to boycott Kruggerands. Now its the opposite call that will bring down the bad guys.

What a life!