Intellectual Technology

Intech Concepts 19
(Indicators of Reasoning Process)



Libertarian Party, again... 29 June 2004

The Libertarian Party leaders cannot understand why their party has not become a popular, dominant political party, because they verifiably cannot understand the following plain English words.

The test of time has identified the stagnated niche of the Libertarian Party's process, and the inability of the LP leaders to design a program of growth facilitating LP espousals.

The DemocanRepublicrat Party and its leaders have proven to be complete failures for manifesting the concepts in the US Constitution, written in plain English, yet those political sorts contradict themselves by espousing that now therefore void document. What rational person would continue supporting such embarrassingly illogical and incompetent leaders who hold American freedom in contempt?

Even a minimally informed, literate person can read the US Constitution, and recognize that the mentioned rights have become privileges, grantable and deniable at whim of an array of individual government bureaucrats, often court judges, and are therefore no longer rights. The sole purpose of the US Constitution was to limit the authority and power of the government it established, to prevent the type of government abuses of power that were traditional among European monarchies at that time, yet no enforceable law limits or binds the raw power of US government agents anymore, verifiably. The laws seemingly limiting the power of government agents, are now discretionary, and thus hold no effect as laws.

Simply consider the thousands of jury trials denied every year so government judges can summarily decree the guilt of people who respectfully and harmlessly exercise their rights which offend the personal prejudices and expose the maliciously wielded corruption of government chaps. And consider that the last eight significant wars started at the whim of various ego-dependent US Presidents, against other countries, identical to the nature of wars started by ego-dependent old European kings, involved no Congressional declarations of war required by the Constitution, etceteras, etceteras. The US Constitution is a fool's illusion.

That failure of the RepublicratDemocans, their pocket judicial appointees and legions of bureaucrats has caused extensive damage, grief, social stagnation and other such verifiably accurate descriptions, as well as causing the creation of third parties whose existence is predicated on the open recognition of the DemocanRepublicrat failure. An opposing political party can only exist on the recognizable failures and contradictions of the opposed party. If there are no human-correctable failures or contradictions, no rational persons capable of organizing opposition, will do so.

Therefore, the Libertarians, who easily recognize those contradictions, believed that their party, which espouses the easily identified resolutions to the saturating RepublicratDemocan corruption and contradictions, would become popular.

The concepts of individual freedom described in the US Constitution, which are inherent to the design of the human mind, remain highly popular, but are only politically represented in rhetorical illusions (lies) pandered by highly popular, power-based institutions, therefore contradicting themselves, but successfully fooling fools. Individual freedom is the antithesis of the reason to create power-based institutions, and is based on the human mind's designed reasoning process.

If the US President, a common human, can be surrounded by Secret Service agents, common humans, who carry guns, then the citizens, common humans, can carry guns, yet the DemocanRepublicrats have adopted over 20,000 illogical, costly gun restriction laws that contradict any commonly intelligent person's reasoning process, and routinely deny common humans the right to carry guns, while government insiders are not so restricted, yet remain common humans by design. If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C, regardless of how many equal entities exist between A and C. You can understand that grade school math and science concept that no human mind can successfully negate, but the DemocanRepublicrats cannot understand it, even if you show them these words and hand them a dictionary, as proven by their routine denials of human rights, to common citizens, by fabricating intermediary excuses upon which they act, while government cronies retain the rights, just as abusive old European kings did for themselves and their cronies.

Do whatever it takes to prevent your offspring from becoming as intellectually damaged as RepublicratDemocans. And do whatever it takes to not end up as so monumentally ignorant as unquestioning American adults who still support DemocanRepublicrats. Rights are inherent to the existence of the human mind which can understand them, while the DemocanRepublicrats use their institutional power, backed by unquestioning armed thugs with police titles, and equally unquestioning mental midget citizen supporters, to defraud humans of those rights, under threat and intimidation of varied punishments. Power-based institutions manifest the antithesis of human rights.

Animals or plants would hold rights if they could communicate with common humans, and express the verifiable reasoning of their holding rights, just as a common person can ask a Supreme Court Justice to present the verifiable reasoning showing that the Court sort was somehow endowed with a superior design of human mind, to create a human so superior to itself before it politically scammed the Court title from an inherently idiot politician, or to any other design of human mind, that it could distinguish which design of humans could hold unalienable rights and which design of humans could be lawfully and therefore logically denied rights.

Of course the animals and Court sorts cannot identify such reasoning, because neither are capable of arranging words or other communication that convey such reasoning, for two different reasons respectively, which can sustain logic in face of effective questioning. Therein, the lower court judges who have criminally denied thousands of jury trials and other citizen rights, and the appellate court justices who have criminally evaded their known legal duty to initiate due process of criminal law against those lower court judges criminally violating the laws, are of no more utility to the human phenomenon than the animals and plants, actually much less so, because the power-damaged minds of the Court sorts are therein proven as incapable of resolving such glaring contradictions created by their own power-damaged minds, as is the case with politicians and other power-based institutional members. And they are too weak to pull a plow or hold up a roof.

Notice in contrast that a libertarian, such as yourself if you can understand these words, can easily resolve such contradictions. Because the supreme law of the land requires a Congressional declaration of War, because that authority is granted to no US entity except Congress, before the President sends armed US military personnel off to inherently kill people by process of war, or the military would not be the choice of representatives, in Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iraq again, without any emergency so great that there is no time for Congressmen to scoot over to the Capital building from their offices across the street, then either Congress declares war, or the President sends no military to those foreign countries (simple, huh?), or the President is impeached by Congress, for criminal actions if he violates the law of the Constitution, or the Constitution is properly amended to repeal that requirement so the President is granted the power of old European kings, or the Supreme Court formally declares that English words do not retain their meaning, and invents a new language so that Americans can rationally communicate and effect written law.

Not one American RepublicratDemocan or the unquestioning chaps who vote for them to thus identify their representation of them, can understand the foregoing words, as proven by their sustained actions, regardless of any obvious lies to the contrary. Either words hold their meaning, and manifested contradictions are therefore identifiable, and therefore resolvable, or your mind is not what you have flattered it and you to be.

The power-damaged mind cannot identify the meaning of words, even if you hand its body a dictionary, cannot identify openly manifested and verifiable contradictions, and cannot resolve contradictions, as proven by its actions and the lies (contradictions) it uses to contradict the actions. Write that sentence on a piece of paper, and keep it handy.

The power-damaged mind will fabricate all manner of contradicting words in a futile but self-fooling process to obscure the original contradiction with endlessly compounding contradictions, and sincerely believe that the original contradiction was resolved, and believe that no subsequent contradictions were created.

Before it is damaged by its willful adoption of the process of institutional power, the human mind is capable of patiently asking and answering a series of questions to identify and flawlessly resolve any contradiction, no matter how complex or how many intermediary contradictions have been created to obscure the original contradiction.

Do whatever you must to preclude your offspring's minds from adopting the process of institutional power, so they do not end up like the pitiable DemocanRepublicrats or any of the other institutional drones whose minds have been rendered of no substantive use to them. The original reasoning-ability of their mind is worth more than an Oxford education, all titles, money, property, power, social status or any other human invention.

The DemocanRepublicrats, like the Greens and most other political parties, are power or force-based organizations, predicated on the primitive humanoid traditions of wars, imprisoning people, seizing assets, and demanding, via laws backed by armed thugs with police titles, that everyone conform to the contradicted expectations of self-stagnated, narrow-thinking kings or other political leaders. Those political parties are primarily based on their hatred of the other guy, and therefore the effort to force him to live his life as the Central Party drones dictate, for his own good, of course, which the test of time always proves as contradicted and not functionally good.

If the American system of government is good, then it is good to repeatedly start wars at whim of individual leaders, and therefore slaughter hundreds of thousands of people, in the name of good, deny jury trials, imprison more people than any other nation, in the name of good, hold people in confinement for over two years without allowing them access to council, family or trials, imprison people for respectfully asking government officials questions, in the name of good, and a list of obviously malicious, damaging, contradicted actions longer than the internet has the ability to handle. You know too many to recount. The thoroughly corrupted American form of government under the DemocanRepublicrat regime is a failure for human rights.

The priceless diversity of knowledge among individual minds, from which human advancement is synthesized, is reduced to the nadir of mental midgets with government titles backed by police guns, who function on the dictate of power, attempting to stop everyone from doing anything without first getting permission from said mental midgets, and even then routinely denying permission because the government dolts are ignorant and fear anything they cannot retain under their contradicting control.

The use of any form of force, such as writing laws backed by police/guns/prisons, to force the other guy to do this or that, against his reasoning, when his choice of actions damages no one, inherently resolves no contradictions, and creates contradictions inherent to the design of force, thus compounding the contradictions, which then further confuse and anger the minds of the unquestioning, mental midget politicians who compounded their problems by writing yet more laws, and therefore blaming the other guy yet more intensely, and attacking him with yet more force-based laws more loudly espoused by the Party leaders who seize more tax money to pay themselves and yet more police large sums of money, and who are worshiped with choruses of praise, by unquestioning Party member idiots. And the cycle continues, as designed, much to the amusement of the designer, by design.

The aforementioned idiots are idiots because they do not ask and answer the questions to identify and resolve their Party contradictions, so they continue manifesting contradictions that only idiots would manifest. Only an idiot would say they support the right of a jury trial, then vote for a politician of a political party which selected and retains court judges who have criminally abrogated that right by using raw power of office and the intimidation of armed court thugs.

One of the more entertaining, current examples of the phenomenon is the anguish that various of the Green Party sorts expressed over whether to endorse Ralph Nader because he hates their illusion of corporations with such Green Party conviction, but does not pay enough lip service to their other ludicrous illusions. The Greens want a true believer Green Party devotee representing their choice of force-based illusions in the public limelight, but they want someone who attracts news media attention to create that limelight.

The balance is perfect in all things. You cannot have both, without surrendering both of something else as desirable.

Ralph hates his idiot mind's illusion of the government-invented word, corporations, with magnificent intensity. He has developed the skill of defining that word, corporations, as a hated enemy which must be attacked and destroyed, just as Bush has pandered the word, terrorists, and applied it in the same manner that the famous Salem accusers applied the word, witches, easily fooling fools such as news journalists who never question the inaccurate use of journalistically popular buzz words which therefore create the damaging contradictions inherent to inaccurate communication. How many Salem witches were hung, and how many more of Bush's terrorists have been murdered in US military custody, before those who were so easily fooled by the illusions of those words, figured out that something was wrong with acting on the rhetorical illusion without asking effective questions? How many people therefore learned that the Puritans and Americans are just a bunch of mental midget murderers who kill first, at mention of popularized rhetorical illusions, and ask questions later, if ever?

Ralph Nader attacks and panders hate for corporations, to easily fool Greens and other Naderites who never ask the questions to identify what corporations are, just as terrorist haters never ask what terrorists are, etcetera. Their hatred for a nebulous rhetorical illusion creates all their problems, which they blame on their nebulous illusion and anyone associated with it. Amusingly, they want government, a power-based institution, to attack those corporations, terrorists and everyone else. Government and corporations are institutions, both invented by government, itself now almost entirely a corporation in the US, incorporating institutional minds serving the institutionally created power of their institutions, above human reasoning which could otherwise identify and resolve contradictions within the institutions, just as Political Party members serve and do not effectively question the contradictions of their Party, or they would not be Party members. The Parties cannot be void of contradictions, or no other rational person, yet alone thousands, could find a contradiction to oppose. The human mind can only sustainably react against a contradiction it perceives, by design.

Notice that the institution of terrorists makes summary decisions and has its unquestioning minions carry out what they perceive to be solutions to problems. They allow no institutionally objective questioning to alter their decisions. Now that jury trials have been voided by American government court judges for most cases, the institution of American court judges, selected and retained by the DemocanRepublicrats, makes summary decisions and has its unquestioning minions carry out what they perceive to be solutions to problems. They allow no institutionally objective questioning to alter their decisions. Read that as often as you wish.

Write the above. Ask every question you can create. The American RepublicratDemocans literally cannot understand the meaning or effect of those words, even if you hand them a dictionary. They are that flat intellectually void, and will not comprehend the contradiction or its resolution, all the way to their dying day, much to the robust laughter of observers.

The fact that Americans have repeatedly bombed and slaughtered thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan, under the rhetorical fabrication of attacking those damn terrorists, without any credible or verifiable effort to cease that ongoing American terrorism (an entrenched military tactic taught in American war schools), as was the case in Vietnam and other wars, and will continue to be the case, which constitutes unmitigated terrorism, is only an example of the concept described in the above paragraph, deeply instituted in the American form of government, and observable by any person in the world.

Concepts control humans. Learn the concepts so you do not make a fool of yourself among commonly intelligent people, lest you display yourself as the DemocanRepublicrats.

The concept of power so damages or alters the biological process of the human mind, that once adopted, the human mind, such as the minds of all those pitiable American court judges, et. al., CANNOT understand the above, or the above could not be manifested among humans. The neural routings of related data have been altered by the brain's design for the related stimuli. The process of that damage is known in such detail that the resolution to the contradiction is laughably easy to manifest, much to said laughter by those who simply learn the process.

Meanwhile, the Libertarians cannot understand why the Greens get so much news media attention with Party concepts as laughably contradicted and useless to humans, as those of the RepublicratDemocans. The Greens just want to force everyone to live their lives as the mental midget Greens demand, just like the DemocanRepublicrats want for their laughably contradicted demands. The Libertarians expressly crave that news media attention, and argue, amid self-confusion, about why they are not getting it. The Libertarian Party leaders offer contradicting conclusions, and do not ask questions about the institutional origin of those contradictions.

The Libertarian Party is based on unique concepts. It is not hate-based or force-based. In that regard the Libertarians are opposite the Greens, DemocanRepublicrats, Conservatives, Liberals, Communists, Socialists, Taliban, and other such institutions. The Libertarians do not seek to force the other guy to live his life in accordance with the Central Party's inherently flawed dictates. The Libertarians understand that the concept of human rights is inherent to humans, of diversity beyond the ability of fewer humans to accurately represent or improve, regardless of what job or title they get, such as a farmer, police officer, court judge, laborer, corporation Director, legislator, truck driver, scientist, minister, think-tank expert, or anything else. No human can acquire any lawful authority to deny the rights of another inherently equal human, because there is no verifiable super-human source to verifiably grant or deny such authority to an inherently fallible human, especially to the power-damaged mind of a dolt in government.

Of course not one person within government or other power-based institutions can verifiably identify the meaning of "rights", so these comments are of no value to the self-confused minds of institutional chaps. A right is an action or concept for which no permission can be demanded, or fee charged, by a fellow human, because rights are inherent to the human mind which can understand the concept of rights, and no super-human or higher form of human has been able to identify a source of authority to grant or deny that which fellow humans already hold, their rights as humans.

Of course the cops of Bush, Saddam, Clinton and other government thugs can gun you down if you exercise your rights, as Clinton's thugs did to the Christians at Waco, Bush's thugs did to thousands of Afghan and Iraqi civilians, and Saddam the same, and seemingly got away with it, but they did not deny any rights. They only murdered people. The concepts are not interchangeable among those who can think (ask questions) beyond the Neanderthal level of Bush, Saddam, Clinton and their ilk who believe that the Neanderthal ability to kill people is the highest form of human reasoning which can solve all problems, much to the amusement of observers.

Hate, force, and their results, are the actions that inherently attract news journalists, who are members of one of the most power-based institutions, journalism. The pen is mightier than the sword. Power is comfortable with power, and cannot exist in the face of reasoning. The Libertarian-endorsed action of letting other inherently equal adults make their own decisions for their lives, which categorically affronts power, constitutes a non action for which there is nothing to attract institutionally thinking and thus power-based news journalists who cannot understand individual, non-institutional decision-making that seeks no power.

The Libertarian craving for the attention of news journalists who inherently cannot understand the Libertarian concept, verifiably so upon only a few questions, is only one of the amusing contradictions of Libertarians who espouse the process and results of reasoning, instead of force, by foolishly attempting to manifest it with a majority rule political party, which is an instrument of force, not reasoning, but attempting to force nobody, and therefore not attracting the news media attention that they crave to help build a force-based political party within a government-taught society that therefore learns to function on force rather than human reasoning. The power-damaged minds of the Libertarian Party leaders become angry and confused when they encounter words such as these, like all institutionally power-damaged minds, rather than become curious and ask questions to advance their knowledge, as all experience has shown, and as reasoning can explain. Some of that experience with Libertarian Party leaders has been most amusing.

Libertarian Party leaders could read the words herein, and then they would keep on striving for majority rule power in a force-based system, which created the force-based system because power corrupts, without exception, by design, as is verifiable with certain questions. The power-damaged minds of the Libertarian Party leaders would remain oblivious to that contradiction, even after reading this sentence, thus continue to train their minds to never ask the questions of that contradiction, which could otherwise create the knowledge of the process they can use to manifest their non-force based goals.

If you are not laughing at the humans who create such labyrinths of contradictions from unresolved original contradictions they claim to be resolving with what are identifiably more contradictions, you are missing the only show humans know how to stage. If you are laughing, you are in a position to learn how to easily resolve the most complex contradictions humans can fabricate. The process is just knowledge. It is a multi-part puzzle.

One part, is your having learned the uselessness of hating anyone, or attempting to force any human by any means, for any excuse. Can I force you to sustainably do as I say, against your mind's reasoning, by any means, without your inherently equal mind easily devising retaliation that will cost me dearly, because my use of force creates contradictions which are therefore vulnerable to resolutions or other contradictions? Can Bush so force the Iraqis? Can the Greens so force the corporation leaders and stock holders? Can the court judges so force the citizens who harmed no one? Is there any superior design of human mind that can outsmart all common human minds all of the time? To hold the other guy down, do you not have to be down with him?

In contrast, if I ask the series of questions that lead your mind, by your own answers, to the same conclusion I hold, which benefits you and I, will your mind do as its conclusion identifies?

In all things human, seek the questions, not the answers. The power-damaged mind will not do that, because the reasoning-based questions that will manifest your espousals must first destroy the concept of power within your mind, with your own mind's answers. A power-damaged mind will not allow that to happen to itself, except for one unique reasoning process only, beyond the scope of this section. Power can never willingly surrender any portion of itself, and exist as a concept, and force can only advance power, by definition. Power serves itself, and never humans, flawlessly proven.

The Libertarian Party leaders can read these plain English words, which carry their meanings, and their minds would only be confused and angered. Their power-damaged minds will die of old age, still clueless of what went wrong with their ludicrous illusion of gaining inherently corrupting power, to rid corruption from power, just as the Anarchist Party leaders cannot understand what when wrong at their convention, if you therefore enjoy the comedy. The LP sorts asked enough questions to understand enough of the puzzle to recognize why the other guy's power-based institutions are failing the process of reasoning, but did not ask the subsequent questions (reasoning process) to understand that the controlling contradiction was that of the institution, the creation of an instrument of power, a political party process, regardless of which persons were attached to the Parties of whatever names.

The other guy is not the problem. The institution is the problem, any institution, including and primarily one's own, such as the Libertarian Party. Institutionally created power alters the human mind's perceptions, to preclude learning the controlling contradictions. Once an institution or organization is created, and therefore creates the concept of institutional power, the institution must and shall be defended by its leaders and members, above all reasoning, or there is no reason for the institution to exist.

The organizational manifestations of human fundamentals are precise and flawlessly predictable.

A magnificent example of institution leaders recognizing parts of the puzzle, but not all of the parts, and therefore never able to manifest their espousals, was certain of the National Rifle Association (NRA) leaders, who repeatedly stated over the years, that they must be ready to trade NRA for the regaining of gun owner rights. It is remarkable that the words were stated, albeit quietly among insiders. The concept is accurate, but it describes the surrender of organizational power for the manifestation of individual rights (an antithesis of power). Power-damaged minds leading a power-based institution cannot allow that to happen within their minds, or power could not exist as a concept within human minds. The gun owners would permanently regain the free exercise of their inherently unalienable rights, something they crave as individuals, without government interference or the threat of imprisonment for doing so, effected by a process that would destroy NRA as an organization. Cheap price to pay. Organizations are a dime a dozen, and can be created at whim. A new national gun owner organization could be promptly formed from scratch. But the NRA leaders did not ask the next questions, and never will, even if they read these words, to learn the process of trading the cheap NRA to regain priceless gun owner rights, even though they were offered the process that they did not recognize in words such as you are reading. To this day their leaders so intensely defend NRA as an organization, and thus its power, above all reasoning process, that NRA can be proven, against all questions, to be the primary organization having most eroded and still most eroding the free exercise of gun owner rights, much to the knee slapping, howling laughter of the observers. Read that again, proven against every question any human can ask. And gun owners still pour over a hundred million dollars per year into that cash cow for corrupted NRA leaders and their sweetheart contractor executives. NRA, like European gun organizations, will still exist, still paying its leaders and sweetheart contract executives repugnantly huge salaries and benefits, in the name of defending citizen gun owner rights, when the last citizen owned gun is seized in the US, and only government police and military thugs hold guns, to protect you from terrorist gun owners and other witches. You will then do as the armed Federal Homeland Security Gestapo says, just as the disarmed German citizens did in the 1930's and 40's, for awhile.

Likewise, for the same simple ignorance of knowledge, and the power-based dictate that the contradictions of one's own institution never be questioned, the Libertarian Party leaders will do precisely as the NRA, RepublicratDemocans and all other power-based institutions have done, right from the get-go, because their institutional benefits of power immediately became more valuable to the leaders, and rhetorically soothing to gullible, unquestioning members, than their espousals, and they did not ask the questions to learn how their espousals would more greatly benefit them, and how to promptly manifest their espousals.

Another example of not recognizing all of the parts of the puzzle, and one of the reasons that the American system of government is as doomed as that of Saddam Hussein and the old Soviets, is illuminated by the writers of the US Constitution, who recognized that European government corruption was associated with titles of nobility, so in the US Constitution they expressly forbid the granting of titles of nobility, thinking that they solved a problem. But they did not ask enough questions to recognize the other parts of the puzzle, that the controlling contradiction was that of titles, any titles, not just titles of nobility, creating power-based institutions. To what extent would the human mind respond differently to different words that were still titles of institutional power which created the related category of response? The Honorable Justices (a title) of the Appellate Courts of the United States of America were corrupted by the itemizable effects of their title, and have become more powerful than European kings of old, and have completely replaced the rule of written law with the rule of personalities with Court titles, not unlike kings, princes, dukes, lords, et. al., after having voided the substance and effect of the US Constitution, with such laughable ease that unquestioning, government educated Americans are proven to be as intellectually dull as the serfs who labored for the ego of European lords and kings. The US was a nation under the rule of written law. Which titles acquired functional ownership of the rule of written law, and thus power over the law, and therefore which personalities became the kings of the United States? Is there any power that does not corrupt? Is it the more idiot of the lawyers and judges who are laughing at how easily they seized ownership of American law, or the more self-fooled who are clueless of the concept of inescapable consequences for every human action?

It is not possible to hold a right to a trial by jury, repeatedly written in the US Constitution, the highest law of the land for which no law or action may lawfully contradict, and be denied that right, and hold a written language of any utility. The contradiction defines Americans as illiterate idiots with no useful language. A word cannot usefully hold opposing meanings. Rights and privileges are mutually exclusive. If the words do not hold their meanings, the written law is not law, and communication by words is a fool's illusion. And the American dolts wage war around the world to try to force more intelligent people to become as ignorant and malicious as Americans. Because the American public (government) school English teachers categorically failed to teach students the meanings of words, or even how to effectively ascertain those meanings, as proven by the verifiable results, such as the difference between rights and privileges, even the most idiot institution invented by humans, that of lawyers, was able to easily fool the functionally illiterate, unquestioning Americans out of their rights, and replace those rights with privileges grantable and deniable by idiot kings with government titles. American public school English teachers and professors cannot distinguish between rights and privileges, despite their lies to the contrary, proven as lies by the questions illuminating their actions which prevail above their lies.

For several decades now the successive Commanders in Chief (an obviously corrupting title) of the most powerful military in the world, the US Army, Air Force, Navy, Marines, CIA and others, have routinely waged murderous wars around the world and within the United States, at their personal whim, without any reasoning supportable against effective questioning, at cost of millions of lives and trillions of dollars in expenses and ongoing damages, and at escalating international hatred of the arrogant American swine, without any Congressional declarations of war otherwise required by the highest law of the United States, the US Constitution. No European kings ever held such great personal power.

Upon recognizing that the effect and enforceability of the US Constitution have been rendered null and void by the DemocanRepublicrat Party and its appointed drones in the Courts and other bureaucracies, wherein human rights have been replaced with privileges grantable and deniable at the whim of countless low echelon dolts in the privileged government class, and reliable law replaced with arbitrary decree, the Libertarians started an organized thinking game, a result of identifying the RepublicratDemocan contradictions, but then immediately changed it to a traditional old force-based game, a result of failing to ask and answer the questions which would have proven that the creation of political power (a majority rule political party) is the process that inescapably caused and continues to cause the original contradiction, by design of institutional power.

The Libertarians easily advanced beyond the hate-based RepublicratDemocans, Greens and their ilk, but failed to identify and question their way through each subsequent contradiction, therefore learning only the first part of the puzzle, and thus fell back into the inescapably failing, force-based process of a majority rule political power gambit, much to the amusement of observers. If the game is power, why would any intelligent person support an inconsequential power against those with significant power? The Libertarians failed to continue playing the thinking game to resolve ALL of the contradictions before they therefore needlessly started making mistakes which constituted contradictions they attempted to use to resolve contradictions, a self-defeating spiral. The LP members only asked as many and as few questions as the leaders, and are so busy with their individual lives that they foolishly do not ask further questions, or are as amused as myself. You can find my name on the LP membership list, much to my amusement, because their greed-addicted leaders crave my minimal membership fee, which I send to expressly insure their failure by rewarding their ongoing failure, more than they are angered by my verifiably accurate descriptions of the intellectually paucity of LP leaders, similar to other such organization leaders.

The Libertarians Party leaders and members, who mouth the words that force cannot manifest sustainable goals, a verifiably accurate concept unknown to Greens, Taliban, American DemocanRepublicrats, al Queda, Conservatives, Liberals, Socialists and their ilk by other institutional names, could learn how to socially manifest their words, but they are insatiably enamored with political party power, and therefore their minds will refuse to ask and answer real questions about their own institutional power, for fear that they would learn its controlling contradiction which would categorically destroy that power, but therefore create the knowledge to promptly manifest their espousals, and therefore they cannot learn the knowledge to promptly manifest their espousals.

Enjoy the show.

You will enjoy the show beyond the comprehension of other humans, laughing the laughter sought by all humans, by easily asking the real questions, and writing the answers, of the contradictions of your own personally favorite institutions. Or you may identify someone who has done so, and who can more efficiently guide you through those questions expressed by your mind's individual data base. You will then hold the knowledge of how to promptly change the show, if you wish.




The French Connection again... 30 Jun 04

Among other parts of the puzzle, your goal is to verify the design aspect of the human mind and the universe, described as, the balance is perfect in all things, until you do so, so that you can use that knowledge as a tool of knowledge to create more advanced, useful knowledge, and move on to the next part of the puzzle, as with each other part, until you recognize the whole, to thus hold the knowledge be able to resolve the most complex contradictions, and manifest whatever you wish.

Therein you will first recognize coincidences. When a pattern of a type of coincidences becomes evident, your curiosity will wisely cause you to pay more attention to that identified concept, and actively prove its existence as a concept, if you can, among many coincidences that are only that, then seek to disprove the concept until your disproof fails against all questions, if it does. Because that involves a lot of questions, you will have had to first learn the part of the puzzle identifying controlling questions, so that your attempted disproof fails against the many fewer controlling questions that have already answered the arrays of the questions they verifiably control.

Now consider the French, an amusing culture whose people are internationally recognized as being as arrogant as Americans, which is, of course, an absolute insult, for unknowledgeable people who can be insulted or offended.

At the time of this writing, after they previously dared to object to the United Nations joining The Honorable George Bush's righteous military attack on the Iraqi Evildoers, the French have now objected to NATO sending troops (including the French) to Afghanistan for one of the usual excuses for going to war, ah, security and peace, this time during an election.

How many military forces have been completely pulled back out of a nation immediately after the election they were sent to secure? What is the answer of the French who have made that mistake and recognize it in others? And how many of those elections created peace? Why did the Americans need to stay in Vietnam, in escalating force, after we secured the democratic election of our puppet President Thue and Vice President Ky? Why do democracies start as many wars as other forms of government? If the current American puppet government in Afghanistan were to have its election process secured by the French military, under the name of NATO, UN, or any other front name, what would thereafter be the ongoing reaction by the Afghan people not in government power? What is the answer of yourself and the French? Who would be the armed thugs in an election secured by armed Frenchmen securing the process of the party in power? Why do the Afghans, Iraqis, Muslims and many other people now more intensely hate the Americans who militarily invaded Afghanistan and Iraq to bring them security and free elections? Why?

If the United Nations sent a Chinese dominated, fully armed military force to insure the fairness of an election Ohio, because a local politician with Chinese and UN connections requested the assistance, how would the Americans react? Well? How do any human minds react to armed force? What itemized, openly repugnant processes have the American DemocanRepublicrat Party repeatedly utilized to keep Libertarian Party members off many election ballots, while claiming to administer a fair election process? Why do vote recounts exist? Why would Chinese military intervention in a US election be more contradicted that American or French military intervention in a Afghan election? If you make even one mistake of your own, what reasoning would cause you to believe that you could successfully impose an accident-prone armed force to correct someone else's mistakes half way around the world, in another culture with another language? How can an American President like George Bush be elected by a minority vote, when the majority vote for Al Gore is reversed by some political party insiders who are called an Electoral College, while America claims to be a democracy, and the Chinese and UN delegates can look up the definition of democracy in an English dictionary, if not by verifiable lying? Who would respect liars with guns securing their election process? Can an American who supports military intervention to force those damn third world nations to do things the American way, understand the single concept represented in the previous sentences of this paragraph? All questions are designed to be answered. Actually answering questions, for only then your mind's recognition of its own design of logic, is your mind's only access to new knowledge.

Can you resolve a contradiction with a contradiction, without being subject to the consequences of both inherently untenable contradictions?


If, after the American military (as was the previous case with the Soviet military), has been in Afghanistan for over two years, to secure it, the American puppet government in Afghanistan must plead for more military from NATO or the UN or anyone, to secure its election, the following is proven by the test of time and reasoning: 1. The American military in Afghanistan has failed (for the same reason it failed in Vietnam), 2. The American RepublicratDemocan leaders lied to the people, as usual, 3. The American puppet government in Afghanistan does not represent the Afghan people (it represents Bush), 4. The puppet government exists only because American guns are pointed at the Afghans, 5. The previous result of the Soviet military in Afghanistan, like that of the French and Americans in Vietnam, is on schedule, 6. Etceteras, much to the robust laugher of commonly intelligent humans.

The original contradiction cannot possibly be resolved with more military force. Force caused the original contradiction. More military force creates the contradictions that will create the inherently damaging consequences of themselves, and of the previous contradictions. The American puppet government in Afghanistan was fatally flawed at the get-go, by design of the concept of using force against force, rather than using reasoning, and is in a spiral of self-destructive dependence on ever-more malicious application of raw force, much to your amusement.

The American puppet government leaders in Afghanistan hold a controlling contradiction that they could learn how to resolve, and thus successfully rule with absolute respect from all Afghans and other people in the world, whether currently friend or foe, but the leaders would have to ask and answer the questions to learn the knowledge of the real reason why inherently equal human minds are manifesting, and will continue to manifest, dedicated opposition to them and their controlling contradiction, using the murderous force that the murderous, force-based government teaches the people to be appropriate. The leaders would have to ask and answer the questions to learn that power cannot allow their minds to learn that knowledge without the process of power in their minds being destroyed by the process of reasoning, a process more feared by power, than death, because reasoning is the death of power as an institution, the most powerful institution known to humans, rather than the less feared death of a mere individual.

Think. Will the human mind sacrifice itself to save itself? In contrast, will the human mind sacrifice itself to save its illusion of an institution, such as its country, its religion, its government, its political leader, its honor, its this or that by some institutional name? First, write the answers to those two questions. Do not wars illuminate the second answer?

What do the verifiable answers teach you about the power of power at play in the human mind, while questioning and therefore reasoning reveals those institutional illusions to be just illusions of the power-damaged mind? How many humans died in wars to create and defend the Roman Empire, the British Empire, the Ottoman Empire, etceteras? Where are those empires? Therefore from your answer, who were the fools, and who were the Bush/Saddam mentality swine lavishing in the material and ego benefits of great leaders praised by fools, created by the horrible slaughter of those ludicrous fools sacrificing themselves for institutional illusions? Write the contradictions.

World War II, the war to end all wars, did not, for a reason you can learn in itemized detail, to use the knowledge to end all wars, if you wish.

The insatiable craving, as proven, of the American RepublicratDemocan political party leaders, to send military everywhere to force the therefore created enemies to do as the American DemocanRepublicrats demand, is merely the ancient mechanism of power playing within mental midget human minds, a designed process. Ask the questions to learn that mechanism to the extent that no question is left unanswered. The process does not require that much time. And you have a very handy human mind to question, yours.

Some people understand the fundamental contradiction of the American war machine, both in itself and for a nation whose founders understood how kings used militaries to destroy freedom and rights. The founders of the United States thus precluded the existence of an American standing military and police force under a central control, before the American RepublicratDemocan kings slapped aside the controlling concepts of freedom, to form their permanent military war machine and federal police to advance the inherently freedom-destroying, otherwise needless power of the central authority. From the French example, some people might therefore foolishly suggest that the French are thinking more than the Americans, because the French have effectively questioned the American request for everyone else to send their militaries to kill people so the American image of world dominance does not cost the Americans so much money and so many American lives.

The French are not thinking. The French are as war-mongering as Americans, if not more so, and as arrogant as the Americans. The French Foreign Legion is at play. The French just drink too much of their own wine, so they cannot sell enough to buy enough bombers and bombs. The French are instead manifesting a type of counter balance concept to the idiot American craving for wars and more power, by frustrating the American demands for military assistance, not because the French are thinking, but because institutional power must attack the institutions it does not control, if it cannot identifiably benefit from them, and if it can do so without destroying itself. The mechanisms of power can be itemized and verified with absolute precision, to know when power will support power under the seeming control of other personalities, and when it will seemingly oppose power under the seeming control of other personalities. You can learn the mechanisms of power, to the extent of winning wars without using power, if you wish. Power serves only power, not humans, as all past empires prove, the inherent passing of current empires will continue to prove, and as is otherwise flawlessly proven with reasoning process. History will reflect that the Soviet and American empires collapsed about the same time, for the same reason. Power will continue. Individual humans come and go.

But because the balance is perfect in all things, power is that which can be used to destroy itself, if you learn the knowledge of how to effect that process, but never if you attack power with power led by an opposing personality.

Notice the corollary and difference with the concept of knowledge. Knowledge prevails. Individual humans come and go. Power destroys. Knowledge accumulates, albeit entirely too slowly among humans as a concept. Humans are yet deep in the intellectual dark ages, using their minds to uselessly flatter themselves rather than usefully resolve contradictions.

Individual French citizens, like individual American citizens and others in the world, may be able to identify the contradictions of the current era of the American attempt to militarily dominate and intimidate the world, like countless such amusing eras in history, identifying nations that therefore collapse, on schedule. Those citizens would thus be thinking. But the French government leaders making the decisions that irritate Bush and boys, are not thinking. The identifiable mechanism of power is at play in the minds of the French and American leaders, which precludes the itemizable process of thinking (asking and answering questions without any limit on the identified contradictions that could and must be questioned). The concept of American and French power, as with Afghan, Iraq, Muslim religion, oil industry, nuclear military, political party and other institutional power, is at play, on schedule. It is the game counter balancing the game of knowledge. Learn the game by learning what the idiot power leaders cannot learn while they are being played by power, because their mind will not allow them to identify the controlling contradiction of power in their power-damaged minds, or power could not exist in human minds.

Identify and verify the pattern of human actions, and the pattern of all actions in the universe, which illuminate the concept wherein, just as contradictions are manifested through a series of proverbial straw men, or surrogates, excuses, mid-points, representatives or intermediaries, to therefore easily confuse unquestioning human minds, the counter balance to them is usually manifested in the same fashion, with itemizable, intermediate concepts, for the same process of easily confusing intellectually lazy people who do not learn how to ask effective questions. Intellectually lazy people who refuse to spend a few hours to ask and answer some easy questions about their decisions that they seek to impose on other people, are prime material for the jobs of politicians, police, lawyers, militaries, judges, bureaucrats and any other power-based, titled job wherein the title, acquired by process associated with titles, implies the existence of knowledge that does not exist in their mind, or the title would not be invented, accepted or used. Common, untitled people are often curious, and thus ask questions, and thus learn about their mistakes, and thus correct them. Titled people lose their curiosity, for an identifiable reason, primarily of the knowledge identified by their title and its results, and therefore stop asking questions, and instead make statements to display what they perceive to be their knowledge or power, and thus do not learn about the contradictions they are creating by that process, and thus entrench them, and then defend the contradictions with more contradictions to defend their title. What do you want, the title, or the knowledge? Which is of utility to your mind? Are you of your mind? George is obviously not.

The same applies to scientists, who do not question the concept of their title, and thus train their mind to adopt a flawed process that hinders their other thinking. The proof is amusing.

The French excuses for not supporting the American excuses are just that. They do not identify the original contradiction which could therefore identify the sustainable resolution. While the French appear to be rightfully questioning the American excuses (asking real questions, therefore thinking), the French are not asking real questions about their own excuses, and therefore are not sufficiently thinking to actually identify or resolve any controlling contradiction. The French government leadership, or any other government leadership, could promptly relegate America and its inordinately vulnerable, completely corrupted form of government, to the trash dumpster of history, at the howling laughter of the world, but the French leaders seek power, not knowledge, and knowledge prevails, by the original, uncorrupted design of the human mind.

The French are only sustaining the American contradictions, by attempting to resolve them with more contradictions, which therefore creates the counter balance to Bush's personal craving to right all wrongs with the contradiction of bullets from his soldier's rifles, and the bombs from his war planes, much to the amusement of those laughing at the Americans, French, Romans, Huns, Khans, Ottomans, Brits and every other force-based empire that collapsed on schedule. The French could easily resolve all of Bush's contradictions, and be credited for doing so, by the world, but the French would first have to learn how to resolve their own contradictions, and they will not, for the same reason Bush will not. Your goal is to learn the easy process to create a reasoning-based social system, if you wish. You need only reason (ask and answer questions) through the process of creating a reasoning based social system.

On average, half the perceived problem will always be created by your own actions, and more so if your actions involve any form of force, to include the avid French funding for its military within its various military alliances, for use when the French leaders derive sufficient ego gratification for holding the power to make the decision to attack and kill, in the French name of peace and security. Regardless of the perceived source of the problems, if you wish to solve them, you must do the complete thinking for yourself and every other person involved with the problem, who holds no incentive or ability to do their share of the thinking. You must answer their questions, to their minds' satisfaction, including the one's they cannot yet recognize. Easy enough.

A significant sector of humans identify the pattern of the results, and rightfully conclude that war solves no problems, and repeat that mantra, and wring their hands, anguishing over why wars continue despite the fact that they solve no problems. Those people are of no utility to their mind or society for that and its resulting matters. Granted, they have thought vastly beyond the recognition of the mental midget American and French leaders, and the fools who support those leaders, but were not sufficiently curious to ask the subsequent questions to identify the process to actually solve the problem so they do not have to parrot that mantra and perpetually wring their hands in anguish. If you recognize that war solves no problems, and that the test of time proves that saying so precludes no wars, what are your next questions?

It is just a process of asking more questions, real questions, of each excuse or proverbial straw man, as impartial concepts rather than as excuses or straw men, and answering the questions of those concepts, until all the data is synthesized in your mind. One may therefore either promptly solve the problem, regardless of opposition, or laugh themselves to tears over the design they have therefore discovered. This website cannot guide you through the process, because the questions must be created by the contradictions your mind recognizes from your mind's existing data base. It is your questions and answers that will guide you through the process to learn the knowledge. You can be taught which questions are controlling, to thus exponentially increase your efficiency, but only from your mind's current questions. And while you are reading this, the author cannot hear your questions.

Just as Bush, Rumsfeld and their bevy of mental midget experts with high titles fooling fools, primarily themselves, and their unquestioning supporters, who will never ask effective questions of their glaring contradictions, accuse the French with all derogatory arrangements of words, and the French do the same of the idiot Americans, as would over half the Afghans for the French and Afghan French supporters, if the French sent armed thugs (soldiers) to force the Afghans to do things as the French (NATO, UN) decreed, the personalities of any non-absolute power (and there will never be an absolute power effected by humans despite their incessant craving for it), for any power game, will do the same for any opposing personalities with power, either openly or within their own institutions. The individual humans are of no relevance to your understanding of what is happening, and the easily predictable results, while the involved humans with power-damaged minds genuinely believe that it is they who are making the decisions, much to the howling laughter of observers. Where are those Khans and kings and Ceasars and czars? It was not humans who designed humans and the concepts dictating their game. Learn that game.

The names are not material. The concepts are at play, and categorically controlling. Learn the concepts. You can apply any names of leaders, militaries, countries, gangs, political parties or any other institutions (two or more humans organized under a separate name) utilizing any form of force, including the force of majority rule votes for laws backed by armed police, throughout history, and verify every inherent result in the past, and itemize every result in the future, and laugh yourself to tears over the most brilliantly designed comedy known to humans, humans, while fools too lazy to ask a few more questions continue to wring their hands and anguish over the results, or run off to wars or ballot boxes to create those force-created contradictions.



I am a warrior... 12 Jul 2004

2:AM, Fairbanks Alaska, local time. Radio advertisement for the National Guard. It started with the statement: "I am a warrior." And then it went on with a dozen or so superlative propaganda phrases, mentioning the poor silly sop as an American defender of freedom, sacrificing, dedicated to the mission, the United States of America, peace, security, etceteras as usual. If I had not been driving, I would have taken notes if I could stop laughing long enough.

My name is DougBuchanan.com. Among other things, I was a previous distinguished military graduate US Army airborne ranger aviator infantry officer Vietnam veteran.

I was a warrior.

I was an idiot.

And I had no excuses because before I graduated I was directly told by previous military officer Vietnam veterans that the war and the US government propaganda were lies, like all the wars started by America and other nations of Neanderthal warriors.

Fail to learn from history, and you will repeated history's abject human ignorance, much to the amusement of observers.

The history of wars shows that wars only create the next wars. All well and good. Entertaining game. But if you want to learn how the game works, for any reason of your choice, simply ask questions about it, while warriors are trained to never question orders, and thus become comparatively ignorant, and thus become that of which you will ask questions, and therefore learn about them.

Unlike the vast majority of the other American military warrior idiots, I belatedly asked questions, as did those who had previously told me that the Vietnam war and military were lies. I asked more questions than you yet understand, more than the anti-military and anti-war sorts yet understand. I did not stop asking questions, and therefore did not stop learning therefore exponentially advancing knowledge.

The human mind learns new knowledge by asking and answering questions. Start. Do not stop.

The military recruiting advertisement for warriors was made by non-military rhetorical slicksters, paid large sums of tax money. At their parties among colleagues, they laugh about easily fooling gullible young American male testosterone saturated minds, including the females among them, with simplistic word arrangements, the same ones that fooled the German Nazi Gestapo chaps into genuinely believing that they were doing good by killing Jews, Gypsies and other officially decreed undesirables, not unlike Muslim terrorist enemy combatants. It fools gullible young fools who ask no questions about the contradictions of the rhetoric, in every nation throughout history, as it did me.

The highly paid advertisement slicksters routinely test different arrangements of words and images on different target groups or social sectors of young victims, to ascertain which words and images fool the highest percentage of the groups. If you are not familiar with that process of the advertisement industry, you would be most entertained to watch it. The focus groups, which are carefully selected to represent the population pool of the targeted victims, are filmed discussing their reactions to the test advertisements they were shown. The slicksters then study the verbal and body language expressions, to highly refine the more effective advertisements to garner the most favorable response. The fools eagerly help the slicksters more effectively fool other fools, to become warriors for the empire. If you are not laughing, you are missing the show.

But the radio advertisement slicksters are the greater fools, and persons such as myself laugh at them, robustly. They first fooled themselves, or they would not have been able to present and sustain a genuine image to garner the military contracts to produce the advertisements. Yes, they privately laugh at the fools they fool into joining the military, and at the military fools who hired them, but the slicksters foolishly believe that they understand the scam. They are performing a process that only a fool would perform to create a Neanderthal war-based society in which the slicksters trap and stagnate themselves and their offspring. Would it not be only a fool who would do that? Would a mind capable of reasoning beyond contradictions create a damaging contradiction for itself?

The slickster propaganda artists are like the middle ranking military and other government officers, sincerely believing they are superior to inferior ranking humans, and not understanding that only by that concept do they prove that they are inferior to inherently equal humans who have fooled themselves with higher ranks and titles. You cannot fool another human without first fooling yourself. You need do neither, and only by doing neither can you advance your mind beyond the ludicrous lie that the singular design of the human mind holds superior and inferior designs. If your mind is of an inferior design, because you were fooled into easily fooling gullible young males into joining the military to fight for a lie, which only a fool would do, then your mind cannot be of a superior design because you were successful.

The demarcation is simply knowledge, not any design differences in the human mind. The knowledge is acquired by asking and answering questions. If curious war veterans encounter the incentive to ask the questions that prove that the government and its slickster-expressed propaganda to support the wars are lies, then he who flees the expressed questions or otherwise fails any effort to disprove the proofs, while subject to the results, is ignorant, lacking the knowledge, by a self-induced process which describes intentionally evaded knowledge (thus stupidity), that would resolve a contradiction created by the person fleeing the questions.

Did you want to remain as laughably ignorant as American adults, mired deep in the intellectual dark ages, still trying to kill and imprison their way to a better life, as warriors killing people and destroying things, and as taxpayers working hard to pay their warriors killing and destroying, instead of becoming thinkers, advancing human knowledge, when the knowledge that exponentially advances your mind's ability beyond theirs is yours for the asking?

If you can watch the professional radio, television, newspaper, internet and poster advertisement creation process for contradicted concepts, to recognize that it is designed to fool fools, and intentionally hide the questions of its contradictions, to bring into military power the most gullible, unquestioning sector of the society, which promotes itself into the most powerful sector of society commanding the military/industrial/political base of the nation, then he who produces or believes, rather than questions, the advertisements is among the most amusingly ignorant sops of that society.

Are you that ignorant? Are your brothers, sisters, parents, sons, daughters, friends or colleagues that laughably ignorant?

The human-invented process to fool themselves with laughably obvious lies, is the reason humans are still mired deep in the intellectual dark ages. No human who has fallen victim to a power-based institution, will question their way out of their own institutional contradictions, such as the radio advertisement slicksters, or they would not be within it or subsequently supporting it.

Pity them. And enjoy your laughter at them. They are no more intellectually advanced than Neanderthals, perhaps less so.

There is no mechanism within the human mind, for one human mind to force another human mind. What does that illuminate within your mind? What questions will your therefore ask of those who advance any of the forms of force as social process?

Are the warriors of America, who have made their minds useless for resolving contradictions, defending freedom, or contradicting it by waging wars that inherently destroy freedom in all regards, including that of the people who lost their freedom to make their own decisions for the money they earned because the government must take it as tax to pay the warriors and buy more bombs?

Extend your pity to the chaps who wisely learned that no form of force is sustainable among humans, but did not ask the next questions, such as the Libertarian political party sorts and their ilk, who therefore attempt to gain political power to politically force the Neanderthal American RepublicratDemocans to stop attempting to force everyone to do as the DemocanRepublicrats decree.

The warriors of the majority rule vote mob, with armed police to back their majority rule laws, do not ask the questions to resolve that contradiction, and therefore utilize that contradiction as soon as they become the decision makers, for lack of any other knowledge.

Simply ask the next questions, and answer them. Be tenacious.

The resolutions to the contradictions are readily available, with no use of any form of force. All human-caused contradictions can be efficiently resolved. The process is only knowledge, that for which the human mind was invented.

You will laugh the laughter sought by all people, and hold the knowledge to do with humans that which you wish, if you wish.

The knowledge is just a few questions and answers beyond the institutional chap who stopped asking and answering questions so he could derive money, ego gratification, titles, power, influence, social status, pick a craving, from his hasty perception of adequate knowledge.

Did you want that which has produced the current social situation, imprisonment of over a million Americans who harmed no one and violated no prevailing law, and destructive wars, based on currently popular political and thus journalistic buzz words, or did you want knowledge?

Enjoy your answer.



Humans, a new experiment... 17 Jul 04

Language offers a proof that humans are a brand new experiment.

Your goal is to learn the knowledge sought by all people, the controlling concept of the human phenomenon, the functional design of the human mind.

Because you are reading words, rather than more wisely writing your own words and asking questions of them, and answering your questions, and asking questions of your answers, these words can only offer different arrangements that might, by chance, connect two or more data points or pieces of information that your mind previously recognized as truths, to thus create new knowledge, if not exposing a contradiction that creates a useful question of what you previously recognized as a truth, and is disproven.

The written word is of efficient value only if you can ask questions of the writer at the time you are reading the written word. The same words will create diverse questions among different minds, because the data bases of different minds are diverse. The contradictions that your mind identifies from the words, MUST be resolved to advance your knowledge. Nothing sustainable can be created from a contradiction left in place.

The words themselves hold no contradictions. Their definitions are fixed by an impartial entity, a dictionary. You may and should question the dictionary definitions to insure than your mind is not confused by any aspect of the definition of a word. Because the dictionary defines a word with a relatively concise arrangement of other words, and refuses to argue with you, you can recognize a useful definition of any word, or choose a more accurate word from another page of the dictionary, or invent a new word and write its definition for public recognition.

Your words must not create a contradiction within the concept you attempt to convey. Therefore simply select the correct words, or expressed definitions.

Because your mind resolves contradictions with the use of words, for matters of human-caused contradictions, both for yourself and among other humans, the words must retain their usefulness.

The relatively new invention of language, and very new invention of written language, greatly advanced the human mind's ability, and society. Communication by meaningful sounds and written symbols allowed the sharing and thus combining of knowledge among different minds that learned different knowledge.

But notice that humans, by design of their mind, keep contradicting themselves in the full spectrum of their actions. Language is not an exception.

If language loses its utility, by contradicting itself, to any degree, society is proportionally stagnated until language regains its ability to accurately convey concepts which are not contradicted.

Consider the society of the United States of America (US), dumb as rocks.

By chance of events, they have become an internationally dominant society, in many regards. Their language, English, of no better design that many of the others, dominates much international interaction, in part due to the previous dominance of the Brits who popularized the English language.

By design of the concept of power, the use of the English language had to become flawed, or corrupted, damaged, made contradictory and less useful, as a separate instrument unrelated to the people using it, or its usefulness for conveying uncontradicted concepts would have quickly caused people to learn the controlling contradiction of power.

The Americans (US sorts) actively made their language of no utility for resolving human-caused contradictions, much to the howling laughter of those who simply learned that words must hold their dictionary meaning if language is to be of utility for resolving contradictions. Therefore, the Americans literally cannot learn how to resolve contradictions, because their communication system, by itself, creates the contradictions they attempt to resolve.

Consider a classic of countless examples. Find the controlling contradiction in the following words.

The American sorts conclusively describe the United States Constitution, the written instrument which created and defines their government, as the highest law of the land, to which no law or action may lawfully contradict. It is law. The violation of it is a crime, and cannot be lawfully allowed by the administrators of the law, the government personnel. All American government personnel, at every level of local, State and federal government, including all military personnel, express an oath, the violation of which constitutes the crimes of perjury or fraud, to uphold and not violate the US Constitution. Many other American citizens express their absolute support for the US Constitution. The definitions of the words in the US Constitution are found within the common English dictionary.

All well and good. The above can be verified as truth. Any squirrely little rhetorical tap dancing or slithering around, over any minor contradiction that may be therein, can be easily resolved to identify that law which is not contradicted and therefore prevailing.

The US Constitution, as did the writers of the Constitution, emphasizes the right to a trial by jury for anyone accused of a crime.

A right is a right, that which can be exercised without permission, unalienable or not separable from a human, by definition of the human ability to identify a right. A right is not grantable or deniable, because there is nothing superior to humans which can, or instead will, manifest the ability to separate a right from a human mind. Rights exist by the existence of humans who hold minds that can identify rights. There is no verifiable source of anything so superior to humans that it can, or instead will, demand that a human get permission to do what a human can inherently already do without permission. There is no verifiable source for the permission to grant or deny the permission for what a human was already designed to do without permission.

A right is not a privilege. A privilege is grantable and thus deniable.

Words must hold their utility in conveying concepts, if society is to convey the concepts to their offspring and others, that resolve contradictions (mistakes, screw-ups, blunders, results of ignorance, etceteras) that humans create by their actions.

The right to a trial by jury in the United States of America, for the accusations of crime, is denied more than it is granted, by American court judges.

Of course you recognize the contradictions, despite the impairment of your English language handicap.

But the following proves that no institutionally associated American can recognize the above contradiction, especially the pitiable government sops.

It is only emphasis to state that the denials of jury trials constitute categorical, criminal violations of the highest law of the land to which no law or action may lawfully contradict.

The wrong of it all is of zero concern. It is just an example, a learning vehicle. People who are jailed because they were denied the right to a jury trial, as was I and others who have asked effective questions of the pitiable idiots in American government, are just a matter of humor involved with the example. Your concern, if any, is the origin of the contradiction, for great utility to your mind. The origin is not with the idiot American court judges. They are just mental midget warm human bodies filling the available slots manifesting the concept. Their power-damaged minds cannot understand these words, even if you hand them a dictionary.

You recognize that a jury trial cannot be a right, and be denied, by definition of the words.

The Constitution states that a jury trial is a right.

You cannot have a useful language if it states in the highest law of the land that you have a right to a trial by jury while people are being denied that right by the administrators of the law.

The resolution is easy. Amend the Constitution, by the process the Constitution authorizes, to repeal the right to a jury trial, or initiate due process of criminal law against all the court judges who denied jury trials, and never again deny jury trials, or invent a new language to replace the self-contradicting and thus useless English language, with a language that defines words with opposite meanings but identifies when and how the meanings switch.

Notice in the following list who constitutes the primary or most noticeable entities which teach each new generation of young people how to use the English language, and how to communicate and function in society, and notice which ones do not stand in public with their name and title, for record, and state the resolution of the above contraction. The resolution is imperative if the American society is to hold a useful language that can lead Americans out of their labyrinth of self-induced, increasingly damaging contradictions. The resolution is imperative if Americans are to become anything more than the laughable idiots they display to the world. Then therefore consider the reason they have not and do not do so.

Public school English teachers, law professors, all other school teachers, Supreme Court Justices, all the other court judges, lawyers, congressmen, legislators, presidents and governors, US Department of Education personnel, all other government personnel, National Education Association, nearly all other citizen organizations, nearly all parents, nearly all adults, and nearly all other institutional sorts.

The proof is manifest. The contradiction exists and is increasing in frequency, amid the silence of the above sorts in regard to stating the contradiction with words of public record.

What is the commonality among the above list of those who teach such abject illogicality to each next generation?

They all hold an institutional title, either by formal paperwork, or by concept, such as adults and parents. It is easy enough to identify the superficial reason why public school English teachers and Department of Education personnel do not stand in public and blow the whistle on one of the primary mechanisms that power-damaged minds in government use to make their society progressively more ignorant and thus easily fooled by mental midgets in government wielding armed police and military power above the human mind's reasoning ability, as did Saddam Hussein and George Bush, to thus produce their ilk for the next leaders doing the same to stagnate their society until its system collapses. Anyone blowing that whistle would be promptly fired or relegated to a job in Kaktovik Alaska. And a parent would reveal the reason why their children should never again believe parents or adults who are so ignorant they allowed such extensively damaging contradictions to become socially manifested. But that is only superficial. And the jury trial example is only one among countless demonstrating that the Americans have rendered their language as a primary source of their increasing problems.

The words herein are true. The institutional minds in the above list are only peripherally worried about their petty jobs in a society where jobs are plentiful. Their minds literally cannot identify the contradictions, because they are as they were trained by institutionally altered minds. Their institutionally altered minds would attempt the rhetorical illusions to sustain the contradictions, without asking the questions of why they would express such contradictions. They were never taught the process to ask real questions about their own mind's manifested contradictions. They are ignorant of the most valuable knowledge known to humans, how to ask effective questions of any contradiction, regardless of its origin, and thus they sustain contradictions that result in their laughable ignorance, and therefore in their society's laughable ignorance.

The Americans around you, your American society, especially English teachers, as you can verify with a few certain questions, are literally so illiterate, poorly educated, and dumb as mud, that they cannot identify a contradiction in court judges denying the right to a jury trial, even if you show them the US Constitution, and they are clueless of any resolution, or how to devise it. Even if you show them these words, they will still fabricate many arrangements of contradicting words to attempt to sustain the original contradiction.

My name is DougBuchanan.com. You may quote me. It is the known legal duty of every officer of the government in this nation, the evasion of which is a crime, to initiate due process of law upon evidence that a crime has been committed. Every American court judge is fully aware that more jury trials are denied by court judges, for persons accused of crimes, than are granted, as is readily available in court records. Therefore, if the English language holds utility, as is expressed in the prevailing law stating that the meanings of the words must be applied, the court judges who denied those jury trials have committed crimes, the most repugnant form of crimes because they were perpetrated with the implied protection of power of office and color of law, and further, every American court judge (justice) has criminally evaded the law requiring him or her to initiate due process of criminal law against their judicial and other governmental colleagues.

Therefore it is criminals, the most repugnant of criminals, who comprise the American system of jurisprudence, manifesting one of the many hilarious results of the idiot Americans willfully rendering their language of no utility for conveying knowledge. They are the counter balance of their ability, as you recognize in the balance of all things.

And they are attempting to force their idiot language and social process on the world, by wars.

Until the people of the world dump the use of the English language, and leave it isolated among the idiot English speaking people who use their language to confuse themselves, the people of the world will continue to stagnate themselves, much to the howling laughter of the observers.

Your goal, if you wish, for utility beyond your current recognition, is to be able to consistently distinguish the unlimited ability of your mind from such Neanderthals, upon any questioning of your words or actions, an ability that will not be achieved by the institutionally power-damaged minds of the institution of adult humans and their ilk.

You will then recognize much of the future, before and after humans belatedly advance beyond the intellectual dark ages. When humans advance beyond that primary demarcation in the human phenomenon they will promptly synthesize the vast diversity of available knowledge without creating any contradictions, as you will be able to do as an individual before then, if you easily learn intellectual technology.

You will laugh the laughter sought by all people.

A species predicated on the recognized ability of the human mind, which has still not yet invented a useful language to convey uncontradicted concepts, is brand new, but that does not suggest any ability to sustain itself, and perhaps the opposite.



There are no great conspiracies... 22 Jul 04

I enjoyed scanning a conspiracy website.

The people who devise the suggestions of grand conspiracies are piecing together complex puzzle parts relating to the functioning of minds, and that is good practice. But the fact that they keep doing that without resolving the contradictions they suggest, not unlike the fact that I keep suggesting that you ask real questions of every contradiction you identify, demonstrates that they have not thought beyond that isolated set of puzzle parts, unlike the questions (which your mind holds and I cannot identify until you ask them) that will eventually illuminate all the parts of the puzzle for your mind to properly assemble, if you ask the questions.

One of the controlling parts of the puzzle is described in an analogy. Back when four wheel drive vehicles were used for off road travel, not just off freeway travel, when you owned a four wheel drive vehicle, you did not get stuck less often. You just got stuck in worse places.

All the conspiracies (contradictions) get stuck (fail). If you give them four wheel drive, they just get stuck in worse places.

The human brain is designed to identify and resolve contradictions, not create and sustain them. A human brain requires a trained, altered process to create and attempt to sustain the contradictions the brain was designed to resolve. A conspiracy is the process of creating and sustaining a contradiction, or the goal of the conspiracy would not otherwise need to utilize deceit.

To sustain a conspiracy within the human phenomenon of independent minds of unlimited design for asking questions beyond the control of the conspirators, which can easily illuminate and verify the conspiracy, especially when the conspirators evade a certain pattern of questions that everyone else can answer, all humans would have to be in on the conspiracy, which would certainly ruin a perfectly good conspiracy.

Humans are not sufficiently intelligent to sustain a conspiracy, because a conspiracy is a contradiction. Or better stated, the design of the human mind manifests too much intelligence within the species to sustain a contradiction attempted by a few mental midgets or power-damaged minds who would foolishly attempt to sustain an inherently untenable contradiction.

It is easy enough to lie to someone, but then add the diverse, unpredictable events of time, and / or add the number of people privy to the lie. The universe is designed to resolve contradictions, which are imbalances or illogicalities. The dimension of time is involved.

A conspiracy (a contradiction) becomes more likely to fail as time goes by, and / or more people are involved with the lie.

A graph of common lying shows less examples as the lie becomes more complex and must be sustained longer. And in addition, when those few longer lived complex lies (conspiracies) fail, the results are more noticeable, regardless of whether uninterested people knew the events were related by a common contradiction or a certain set of persons.

But the conspiracy game folks do a fun job revealing the processes of the game, and correctly describe some parts of that puzzle, although they rarely get the parts properly assembled or even in the correct picture, or they would have learned the pattern of the concept, and learned how to verify it whenever it appeared, and be able to resolve the contradictions regardless of opposition.

If you have done the conspiracy game for awhile, move on to the next game. Do not worry, there will be plenty of people to keep that game going, just like there will be plenty of cannon fodder for militaries, for awhile.

Use your unusual curiosity, unknown in the power-damaged minds of the conspirators you describe, or they would not need deceit for their endeavors, to seek out, question and synthesize more diverse information beyond your current interests. When you therefore objectively discover the reason that all conspiracies ultimately fail, and thus are the illusions or contradictions of fools who attempt them, whom you may leave with their illusions, you will have the knowledge of the processes of conspiracies as a single concept. That knowledge is useful in regard to a portion of how the human mind works. You will recognize the controlling contradiction that dooms the goals of conspiracies. And you will learn the knowledge beyond that.

Within the entertainment is the fact that the best group lies (conspiracies) sustained at the moment hold the greatest chance of colliding with someone else's completely unrelated lies, because the play pen of that concept is small, and contradictions collide on schedule or within an identifiable pattern.

Because humans are a complex set of little blithers, and there are so many of them, and the arrays of games they play for their entertainment is extensive, it is remarkable that they can sustain any contradiction without someone else inadvertently screwing it up before it even gets rolling. You need not worry about the grand ones. All contradictions are eventually resolved. Inducing them is the game of useless fools, a malicious lot when they damage other people.

Therefore, enjoy the show. You will enjoy it more if you understand it. For that you need only ask the questions that the conspirators failed to ask of their institution. And then if you wish, you will learn the knowledge of how to promptly defeat any conspiracy, something the conspiracy game folks do not learn because they do not question their own contradictions.



Add these words to what you already know... 23 Jul 04

You are aware that it is not humanly possible to get something for nothing, or get more from less, because you stayed awake in your grade school science classes, or your English language classes.

Therefore, it is not humanly possible to successfully give something for nothing, or more for less.

So what did your national leaders say we were giving the Iraqi people, and why do those leaders represent Americans?

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



Our colleagues, the humans... 12 Aug 04

Perhaps you noticed this evening's news, an ongoing comedy to those who simply learn of such concepts by simply asking and answering any question that humans can devise. This particular comedy is better than even the current Iraq - American score.

Prior to now, as now, most humans were aware, but a bit unsettled by the human phenomenon of a few certain individuals of the same sex holding a bit much of an emotional attraction to each other, which is otherwise more common among individuals of the opposite sex, by design in each case.

In the normal evolution of that concept among humans, they reached the plateau described by Americans, and certain other nations not within as much American news media attention as America, at which persons of the same sex found some fellow humans with government jobs, to officially state, with legal effect, the words of law authorizing government recognition of two humans of the same sex recognizing their personal affairs as under the definition of the word, marriage.

That is all well and good in the normal progression of humans belatedly learning the meanings of the expanding combinations of the definitions of words.

As an aside, well beyond the comprehension of those who did not stay awake in basic public school biology classes, as each species approaches its maximum achievable population, a variety of existent biological phenomenon which serve to limit the population, become more prominent, as is inherent to logic, inescapable in a finite ecosystem, and as is observable in every living species. Therefore, same sex marriages are going to noticeably increase, much to the anguish of humans who do not comprehend the concept of humans or other living things.

The progression of certain arenas of knowledge is created by the human creation of the contradictions that therefore inherently cause curious minds to ask the questions that resolve the contradictions. We create our own problems for the entertainment of solving them.

Why these fine humans of the same sex thought that they had to get some other humans, including even government sorts, to recognize an existent phenomenon, as existing, is explained elsewhere.

So after some California court judges, scamming that title as has been scammed by their ilk for millennium, with the same design of human mind as those with greater and lesser titles, including the aforementioned sorts who are not within the current majority, decreed that what verifiably exists, same sex marriages, exists, some other human sorts within the California Supreme Court decreed that what verifiably exists, does not exist, and therefore there are no legal marriages of sorts of the same sex within California, while other human minds of the inherently same design who call themselves, Canadians, among others, still decree that what exists, the concept of humans decreeing that they are married, exists, because they desire to do so, and they understand the substance of the meaning of the word, exists.

If two adults, such as court judges, cannot agree that what observably exists, exists, it does not impair what exists, but illuminates that the American DemocanRepublicrats appoint illiterate idiot lawyers as court judges who then believe that their title grants them greater power than God, to decree that what exists does not exist. It also illuminates the pitiable gullibility of anyone who still believes that they must believe idiot American adults, especially court judges.

While those idiot adults, much to your amusement because you do not flatter yourself with that perception-altering title, uselessly bicker over how those other inherently equal humans may use the words invented by humans, including the dictionary definitions written with words invented by humans, in contrast you may recognize that what is, is, and those who object simply waste-away their lives objecting to what is. They have fooled their mind into believing that their institutional titles make them so powerful that if the highest title of their ilk objects to what is, it will no longer be.

More amusing are those who, with minds of equal design and as scant an understanding of what is, have been fooled into sincerely believing that they must get another human's permission (license, permit) to do what humans can do without the permission, such as the belief that two humans who wish to be married must get a State sanctioned marriage license to be married.

Hold your laughter.

These words, describing a concept expressed by millions of other humans since humans were invented, will effect no substantive change in the human phenomenon, especially among the self-fooled American adults who sincerely believe that they may not do what humans are designed to do unless they get a government human's permission. Tomorrow more humans will sincerely believe that they must get permission to do what humans were designed to do, such as sorts of the same sex functioning under the definition of the word, marriage.

But that is only because of a waning old belief, not unlike the belief that the world was flat. Well, still looks flat while you are standing on it, and marriage still looks like two people of different sexes.

The phenomenon of a same sex emotional relationship required a few thousand or million years to manifest the current magnitude of per-person social attention, via effective news media manifested by humans in American, mostly California.

By arriving at such a plateau, the process to do so demonstrates the pattern that can only extent to its logical extreme. Notice the word, logical, therefore to that which you will answer each related question to verify your agreement with the logic.

At the institutional zenith of the question of whether humans can be lawfully authorized to do what humans can do by design, without identifiably damaging any objecting person, what they can do prevails above all arrangements of words created by idiots, referenced by the word, law.

So why did the gay and lesbian sorts genuinely believe that they must get the permission of inherently equal humans to do what they can inherently do without permission?

The answer is identical to why the court judges and politicians genuinely believe that they hold the authority to grant or deny permission for what humans can inherently do without any other human's permission.

Your goal, if you wish to easily advance your knowledge beyond those poor sad pitiable adults, is to learn, ask questions and verify answers, why those courts sorts genuinely believe that their permission to use the word, marriage, is required, and why those gay and lesbian folks genuinely believe that they must acquire that permission.

The first reactions by court sorts and the government licensed married sorts, are contradicted illusions which are destroyed by the most rudimentary questions.

Patiently question your way past those rhetorical reactions, and past all the other reactions, until you have asked and answered enough questions that you can defend against every humanly available question, to usefully recognize that the only substantive advancement of the human phenomenon can occur among those who genuinely recognize that no human needs, or can substantively benefit from, permission of another human, to do what humans were designed to do. If it were otherwise, you would still be under the rule of idiot kings of old who did not give anyone permission to defy their rule, and Earth would be flat.

You cannot logically or lawfully be required to get government permission for a lawful action, because it is lawful. And you cannot logically or lawfully be granted government permission for an unlawful action, because it is not lawful. Matters of love that do not verifiably damage an unwilling victim who objects under identified law, are inherently beyond the interest or effect of law, because law cannot successfully invade the human brain's manifestation of emotion-based perceptions.

In the past, wiser court judges recognized the above, to create the indelible common law, but because the common law destroys the raw personal power of titled American court judges and lawyers, the American system of jurisprudence, administered by idiots appointed by RepublicratDemocans, is in the temporary process of being obscured and destroyed, involving the easy fooling of gullible fools. It is just a temporary era of intellectual stagnation centered in America.

If the government dolts, court judges among the most amusing of the lot, could successfully prevent gay and lesbian marriages by refusing to recognize them in law, government dolts could successfully prevent anger by refusing to recognize it in law, and no one would be angry anymore.

The attempt to alter the human design, especially that manifested by the human emotion of love, with laws, does not alter the human design, and only demonstrates that the laws so devised are the illusions of idiots, those of the American government and its courts, including the idiots who believe American government dolts and their court judges.

Your goal is to identify the precise mechanism of the human mind, which produces human perceptions, within the same design of human minds as yours, of a perceived human ability to eliminate what is, by devising arrangements of words called laws, that deny what is, or believe that permission must be acquired for what already is, so that you can understand why the lesser-thinking humans perceive that they must get permission to do what they can do without permission, and why they perceive that they can eliminate what is by decreeing that it is not.

The people around you will not learn that knowledge, and therefore continue to foolishly believe that a law can deny what is, and that permission must be acquired for what already is. They will continue to contradict their mind, by an identifiable process, and thus not be able to learn useful knowledge beyond that contradiction, because nothing sustainable can be built upon a contradiction. They will remain ignorant, while you can learn advanced knowledge.

Tomorrow, the vast majority of gay and lesbian sorts who desire to be married for benefits of the law, will foolishly believe that they must get another human's permission do to so, while law cannot deny those benefits, if you simply learn what law is and how it functions within the human species, because law cannot functionally deny what exists, or grant it any useful permission.

If you are not laughing at humans, you are missing their only show.


End of Intech Concepts 19


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