Do you read Scripture? It is rather interesting. You should try it. Do you know where it says that the meek shall inherit the earth? This does not mean those who will not defend themselves; it refers to those who have no interest in ruling others. In Genesis, God gave Man dominion over the earth, and over all the beasts on the ground, the birds in the air, and the fish in the sea. He did not give Man dominion over Man, however.

Why does it say these things, and leave out Man? Go back to Part X and re-read what I said about the Godless killing themselves, then re-visit this thought: Soon, in America, there will be men killing other men. Some will be fighting for the Constitution, and others will be fighting to "save" the Constitution. Does this make any sense to you?

And so the godless will kill the godless, and there will be mountains of corpses to bury. You really should read Revelations now. After this series, and think about it.

The thought that I am going to develop through this Part is that you are invisible to "them" until you contract with them. They are so busy collecting every dime they can from their subjects that they really have no time for us. We just quietly slip into the background and stay there. Principally because we ask for no benefit from them!

The big part of this is to be as harmless as a Dove. Those who have a lot of anger in them (watch closely, a lot of the posts on Free Republic) can not do this. They must confront. We do not confront. We serve. We must be there when they need us, just in the background, waiting. Waiting for them, and for Him. Actively waving a large banner, yes, by all means. Trying to attract the attention of those whose eyes may only be open for a moment. Looking for that one opening that will start someone down the path we are following. In peace, in health, quietly living for Him, and striving to learn everything we can, so that someday we may join Him.

This means that while we wait, we must be changing. Are we like Him? No. Then, to become more like Him means that we must be in a constant state of learning/changing, to become more like Him. And do not kid yourself about the facts; there are hundreds of people who live just like this in America, and all around the world. But they are as invisible to you as they are to the government.

They do not send their children to the public schools.

They do not "vote" nor participate in the local so-called governing process.

They do not register their land with the government, and they do not buy their food in your local supermarket.

They do not own televisions, and few have radios.

They have no debt, and the community of like minded people band together to help a new couple get started. They are Christians, and are called a cult. And, unfortunately, much of what you are reading here has been lost to most of them, so many are having problems with their youth now, but for every one who leaves, another group is beginning somewhere.

You see, here is your advantage; you live in America. To give up God’s Law in America, you must actively seek a benefit from some man. Our forefathers won the Revolutionary War, and the tax collector does not come calling, as he does in the rest of the world, until you sign on the dotted line. Until you sign the voter registration card, the land registration form, the Social Security registration or until you sign something that begins the contractual obligation of the King to you. And, I may add, from you to the King. And the obligations of you to the King are always greater than the other way around, because the King and all his minions must be fed and clothed by you for the illusion of the benefits offered.

To continue this contractual obligation to the King is to suffer persecution as the "needs" of the King become ever greater. It is not possible, under this system, to know peace or contentment. Compare this to God’s Laws; He exacts no tribute, and the benefits He offers; peace, health, wealth and contentment plus Paradise have no strings attached. He has even given us a series of guide posts, called Laws, for our own assistance in finding Him. How silly is it then, to ignore those Laws, and suffer the slings and arrows of Satan instead.

Does this mean that, if we are in compliance with God’s Laws, some of us will not have problems? Of course not. Some will, principally because we are so few in numbers, but even the problems that we have will be minor compared to what "they" put their own property through. And, I may add, because we are so far from perfect in His Law.

I find this next part rather interesting. Talking about Rights, and wondering why we lost them? We do not go to Him for protection.

"Teaparty List Members;

I spoke with the Enforcement Supervisor at the local EEOC office about no SSN. I already knew that I don’t need one to work, pursuant to my spiritual convictions, but wondered what the EEOC position would be concerning the money that would have been withheld for FICA. I had thought that I would still be required to pay, even though I don’t need one to work. He had to check it out, and when I called back a few days later the Enforcement Supervisor said, over the phone, that I would not have to pay FICA (!). I was surprised, but pleasantly so. I have been in private contact with some of you over this matter (and I greatly appreciate your time and help), but am posting this good news to the list so that all may benefit. Sincerely, (Name deleted)

MEADOR RESPONSE

It appears that the W-4 & Social Security number issues will ultimately bring things to a head with respect to your favorite member of the Federal Alphabet Brotherhood, the Internal Revenue Service. Ironically, admission in the letter from Pegerie W. McPhaden, a CPA at IRS’ Philadelphia office (letter circulated in teaparty discussion), comes simultaneous with the above information related in a telephone conversation with the EEOC official.

EEOC has been a thorn in IRS’ butt for some time. In 1992, in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission vs. Information Systems Consulting, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, case CA3-92-0169-T, EEOC secured a consent decree over the matter of a Bruce Hanson not having to provide a Social Security number and his right predicated on religious belief. Information Systems Consulting subsequently had to post an EEOC notice for all employees. (The Consent Decree is 7 pages; the notice is 1 page; the entire case file is about 130 pages).

As memory serves (I’m not going to re-read the decree right now), Hanson agreed to withholding, but wasn’t required to provide a Social Security number. The new EEOC position, and the recent concession from the IRS "International" office in Philadelphia, constitute significant breakthroughs.

More are on the way.

Again, I suggest that researchers in particular carefully study 26 CFR, Part 31. Begin by reading Part 31.0, the introduction, as it details application of each subpart. By referring to the OMB-IRC numbering index in Part 602.101, you will find that all OMB numbers relating to the W-4 (1545-0010) arise from 26 CFR, Part 31. You will find in this part that the Social Security number & IRS-assigned individual TIN are interchangeable by application, which has the implication of geographical application. Consult definitions of "United States", "State", and "Citizen" at Part 31.3121 for geographical limitations.

To reinforce the conclusion that the S.S.N. & IRS-issued TIN are not applicable in the several States party to the Constitution, follow these authorities: Authority to establish internal revenue districts is vested in the President via 26 U.S.C. 7621; authority delegated to the Secretary of the Treasury via E.O. No. 10289 (published following 3 U.S.C. 301); application of this authority is only under 19 CFR, Part 101, which is authority for the United States Customs Service to establish ports of entry, there is no authority to establish "internal revenue districts" in the several States. Verify this via the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules in the Index volume to the Code of Federal Regulations; find that 26 U.S.C. 7621 is not listed, but E.O. 10289 is, with the above-cited authority.

26 CFR, Part 31 verifies a number of things: Withholding agents of government employers in territories and insular possessions of the United States designated in the definition at Part 31.3121 are obligated under Subtitle A & C requirements, and if an "employee" has a refund coming, he or she would file for the refund with the employer, not IRS. An "employee" isn’t required to keep any kind of record save for personal use; the "director" must notify anyone who is required to keep records for determination of liability, etc. The "employee", under certain conditions, would file for abatement or refund on Form 843, with appropriate documentation, but only after applying for refund from the employer.

Probably it will be the first of the year before I get all this information put together in comprehensible & usable form, but those focused on this line of inquiry at present might be able to construct appropriate remedies that will suffice.

I have the entire EEOC vs. Information Systems Consulting case, so those who would like the entire thing or simply the consent decree or whatever else can secure photocopies -- send something to cover the cost of photocopy & postage to my wife, (deleted)...

I would invite other researchers who go through the information set out above to work in a cooperative effort to finally put a cap on things. /s/ Dan Meador

Now just as Jannes and Jambres were hostile to and resisted Moses, so these men also are hostile to and oppose the Truth. They have depraved and distorted minds, and are reprobate and counterfeit and to be rejected as far as the faith is concerned. But they will not get very far, for their rash folly will become obvious to everybody, as was that of those [magicians mentioned]. 2 Timothy 3: 8 & 9, Amplified translation.

Dick wrote:

The employers rely on the last sentence of 26 cfr 31.3402(f)(2)-1, which states "The employer is required to request a withholding exemption certificate from each employee, but if the employee fails to furnish such certificate, such employee shall be considered as a single person claiming no withholding exemptions." Dick

Try to understand that we weren’t asking the question, but actually giving the answer. Please show us just who the ‘employer’ is according to the Internal Revenue Law of the United States. Try this: http://TeamInfinity.com/~ralph/code/t26-F-79-7701.html

Clyde http://TeamInfinity.com/~ralph/code/t26-C-21-C-3121.html#(a)

(h) American employer: > http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/410.shtml

MEADOR RESPONSE

I checked out the above web sites; they are excellent resources. Note in the Title 42 definition of "employer" that the definition is dependent on 26 USC 3231 definitions, which locks the whole Social Security business in as "territorial’, limited to insular possessions of the United States. /s/ Dan Meador

IRS Enforcement Authority

BY: Dan Meador, Dec. 3, 1998

Dialogue pertaining to IRS and application of the Internal Revenue Code has sure dragged me away from projects I’m trying to complete, but discussion growing out of issues relating to the W-4 and the Social Security number have brought in enough contributing participants that it might serve to pursue the subject further. At this point, discussion crosses over to authority of Internal Revenue Service officers and agents, with Dave Fuller and Dan Leveto of Pennsylvania directly relaying information that should be of interest to most everyone. The first stop on this journey is 26 U.S.C. § 7608, "Authority of internal revenue enforcement officers".

Dave directed my attention to §§ 7608(a) & (b). Subsection (a) is "Enforcement of subtitle E and other laws pertaining to liquor, tobacco, and firearms." At (a)(1), it is found that Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents are authorized to "carry firearms". This authorization is not found in subsection (b), which is, "Enforcement of laws relating to internal revenue other than subtitle E."

From there, we go to 26 CFR § 1.274-5T(k)(6)(ii), where we find that Internal Revenue Service agents are specifically excluded from definition of "law enforcement officer.": "(ii) Law enforcement officer. The term law enforcement officer means an individual who is employed on a full-time basis by a governmental unit that is responsible for the prevention or investigation of crime involving injury to persons or property (including apprehension or detention of persons for such crimes), who is authorized by law to carry firearms, execute search warrants, and to make arrests (other than merely a citizen’s arrest), and who regularly carries firearms (except when it is not possible to do so because of the requirements of undercover work). The term law enforcement officer may include an arson investigator if the investigator otherwise meets the requirements of this paragraph (k)(6)(ii), but does not include Internal Revenue Service special agents."

These two authorities taken together are conclusive: 26 U.S.C. § 7608(b) does not authorize Internal Revenue Service personnel to carry firearms; 26 CFR § 1.274-5T(k)(6)(ii) specifically excludes IRS agents from the definition of "law enforcement officer", and by construction, prohibits IRS agents from carrying firearms. Experience says IRS personnel regularly carry firearms, and a whole crowd of these folks frequently show up armed when they execute seizures, effect arrests, etc. The question then arises, "Under what authority do they carry out armed seizures, arrests, and the like?" A link that leads us to this obscure authority is found in 26 U.S.C. § 7608(c ). Dave & Dan were close, and they’ve proved the point so far as IRS authority under subtitles A & C are concerned, but they haven’t followed the entire route of bogus authority employed by IRS people, and I haven’t put everything together outside my longer discourses so I’ll start at the beginning, or close to the beginning, so everyone can follow along.

In order to see the broader picture, we must begin with originating authority, which means we must go to authority antecedent to IRS even coming on the scene. Since I don’t want to labor this any more than is necessary, we won’t bother with the Constitution, but will start with 4 U.S.C. §§ 71 & 72: § 71 establishes the seat of United States Government within borders of the District of Columbia; § 72 specifies that no department of government attached to the seat of government can operate beyond the borders of the District of Columbia except as specifically authorized by statute.

If we go to the table of contents for the Department of the Treasury in Title 31 of the United States Code, we find that IRS and BATF aren’t listed. They aren’t departments or agencies of departments of Government of the United States attached to the seat of government.

Next, we will go to 3 U.S.C. § 301, which specifies that the President may redelegate authority vested in him in subordinate officers via Executive Order published in the Federal Register. This is important as 26 U.S.C. § 7621 specifies that the President has authority to establish internal revenue districts. When we consult the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules, located in the Index volume of the Code of Federal Regulations, we find that 26 U.S.C. § 7621 isn’t listed. Therefore, we must conclude that there are no implementing regulations with general application under this section – no authority to establish internal revenue districts in the several States party to the Constitution.

However, when we consult 26 CFR § 301.7621-1, we find a note telling us Executive Order No. 10289 is the determining Executive Order for establishing internal revenue districts. E.O. No. 10289 is published following 3 U.S.C. § 301, so that is easy enough to find, and by reading it, we conclude that authority conveyed by the order relates almost exclusively to customs duties and the Anti-Smuggling Act. In other words, it all relates to admiralty and maritime authority, and has little or nothing to do with the normal tax, a/k/a income tax, and Social Security tax.

By again consulting the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules, we find that E.O. 10289 is listed, so there is agreement between 26 CFR § 301.7621-1 and the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules. However, the only regulation listed for E.O. 10289 is 19 CFR § 101. This regulation prescribes general authority under administration of the United States Customs Service; the Customs Service has established ports of entry in the several States. That’s it, there are no internal revenue districts in the several States. Or more appropriately, Oklahoma, Texas, California, New York, etc., are not in and of themselves and are not parts of internal revenue districts of the United States.

We have long known that the Secretary delegated authority over insular possessions of the United States to the Commissioner of Internal Revenue via T.D.O. 150-42 (1956), as amended by T.D.O. 150-01 (1986). By examining T.D.O. 150-42, we find that the Commissioner was vested with authority in the Canal Zone, the Virgin Islands, etc., and that the order also removed jurisdiction over insular possessions from district and regional customs offices in Florida, Georgia, and New York. T.D.O. 150-01, which came several years after the United States gave up the lease on the Panama Canal, deleted the Canal Zone from mention, and extended authority over other areas where the United States has jurisdiction. American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands had generally come under sovereignty of the United States by then.

Consider the above in the context of 26 U.S.C. § 7601, which is authority for canvassing districts, limiting revenue officer activity to districts established in compliance with provisions of § 7621:

"Sec. 7601. Canvass of districts for taxable persons and objects

(a) General rule

The Secretary shall, to the extent he deems it practicable, cause officers or employees of the Treasury Department to proceed, from time to time, through each internal revenue district and inquire after and concerning all persons therein who may be liable to pay any internal revenue tax, and all persons owning or having the care and management of any objects with respect to which any tax is imposed."

Obviously, the revenue officer, of whatever agency, may not exceed boundaries of internal revenue districts as § 7621 evidences the only statutory authority in the Internal Revenue Code which authorizes operation outside the District of Columbia (4 U.S.C. § 72; 26 U.S.C. § 7621), and complies with authority delegated to the Secretary by the President (3 U.S.C. § 301 & E.O. 10289). Wherever these revenue districts are, they aren’t in the Union of several States party to the Constitution.

Now we can consider the first part of 26 U.S.C. § 7608(c ):

"(c ) Rules relating to undercover operations

(1) Certification required for exemption of undercover operations from certain laws

With respect to any undercover investigative operation of the Internal Revenue Service … which is necessary for the detection and prosecution of offenses under the internal revenue laws, any other criminal provisions of law relating to internal revenue, or any other law for which the Secretary has delegated investigatory authority to the Internal Revenue Service…"

By reading through subsection (c ), it becomes obvious that under some authority, IRS can undertake pretty elaborate steps for undercover operations – purchase of real property, operate businesses, etc. But subsection (c ) is distinct and separate from (b), and there is no authority to carry firearms, effect arrests, etc., under subsection (b); for purposes of 26 CFR § 1, IRS agents aren’t even defined as law enforcement officers. Consequently, there would appear to be conflict between subsections (b) & (c ) unless the two subsections address two separate jurisdictions and classes of internal revenue laws. As fortune would have it, they do. Subsection (b) relates to Subtitle A, B & C taxes in insular possessions of the United States, where subsection (c ) relates to customs laws, particularly drug laws and related commercial crimes.

From here, we’re going back to Chapter 75, Crimes, Other Offenses, and Forfeitures, in Subchapter C, Forfeitures, to the section which prescribes judicial action to enforce forfeiture:

"Sec. 7323. Judicial action to enforce forfeiture

(a) Nature and venue

The proceedings to enforce such forfeitures shall be in the nature of a proceeding in rem in the United States District Court for the district where such seizure is made…"

Nature and venue. In legalese, venue amounts to territorial jurisdiction – the place. We know the place by way of the court identified, the "United States District Court", rather than the "district court of the United States". The United States District Court is a territorial court of the United States – three remain, the United States District Courts of Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Virgin Islands. These are defined as courts of the United States at the current 18 U.S.C. § 23.

A few people have claimed they were unable to find 18 U.S.C. § 23. The section was added by December 1994 legislation, so look in supplements of the 1994 edition of the United States Code printed by the Government Printing Office, or newer editions of the title printed by West Publishing or on various CD editions of the Code produced in 1996 and after. Otherwise, consult Rule 54(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The Rule identifies the three courts above plus the United States District Court for the District of the Canal Zone.

By this section, we can conclude that Internal Revenue Code forfeiture authority is limited to insular possessions of the United States and possibly the District of Columbia, not the several States party to the Constitution.

Next, the "in rem" action is an admiralty/maritime action. The Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Articles of Amendment secure due process in the course of the common law in the Union of several States. Equity, admiralty and maritime causes proceed in the course of the civil law. Therefore, there is no forfeiture provision that extends inland in the several States save as such an action in a "district court of the United States" might apply to a maritime contract or prosecution for smuggling. This is the nature of forfeiture actions authorized by the Internal Revenue Code – admiralty and maritime, or in the case of insular possessions of the United States, civil law.

With that matter disposed of, we will go to the approach ramp IRS uses for the springboard to exit the Internal Revenue Code. It’s 26 U.S.C. § 7302:

"Sec. 7302. Property used in violation of internal revenue laws.

It shall be unlawful to have or possess any property intended for use in violating the provisions of the internal revenue laws, or regulations prescribed under such laws, or which has been so used, and no property rights shall exist in any such property. A search warrant may issue as provided in chapter 205 of title 18 of the United States Code and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for the seizure of such property…"

We again know this section is limited to insular possessions as the Federal Rules of Civil & Criminal Procedure, Federal Rules of Evidence, etc., proceed in the course of the civil law. They’re applicable only in the named territorial courts – see Rule 54(a), F.R.Crim.P., Rule 81, F.R.Civ.P., & Rule 1101, F.R.E. Also, see 28 U.S.C. § 2072(b) for limitation. If § 7302 serves as the approach ramp, § 7327 is the springboard IRS uses to exit the Internal Revenue Code:

"Sec. 7327. Customs laws applicable

The provisions of law applicable to the remission or mitigation by the Secretary of forfeitures under the customs laws shall apply to forfeitures incurred or alleged to have been incurred under the internal revenue laws."

Bingo! The Secretary has delegated authority to IRS under customs laws, particularly relating to drugs. The regulation is 26 CFR § 403, "Disposition of Seized Personal Property". This regulation, with all subparts, is slightly over 6 pages in length so I won’t reproduce it here. However, researchers should read it closely. Pay particular attention to § 403.25 as it specifically excludes certain classes of taxable articles, and § 403.26 as it specifies that administrative forfeiture without a court judgment may be executed only on property valued at $2,500 or less. Then § 403.35 connects remission or mitigation of forfeitures under 19 U.S.C. §§ 1613 & 1618, which are customs forfeiture provisions. Forfeitures under this regulation presume that whatever property is seized has been used or is intended to be used in commission of a crime against internal revenue laws of the United States. The crimes are listed at § 403.38(d)(1).

Dave and Col. Bud Ferrell will chuckle at this reasonably simple explanation as they were constructively hot on IRS’ trail as early as fall 1995. But they didn’t know how to get from Point A to Point B in the Internal Revenue Code and applicable regulations as nobody at that time had proven the difference between the United States District Court and the district court of the United States, and few people understood the difference between due process in the course of the common law vs. due process in the course of the civil law. This reasonably brief treatment, along with material submitted in the discussion of the W-4 & Social Security numbers, should fill in a few blanks for those focused on securing relief and remedies relating to IRS and internal revenue laws of the United States.

/s/ Dan Meador

For those of you who think that reading the above is boring, welcome to research! Also, I should like to point out that the information above describes why, in large part, your wages are being seized, your friend lost his house to the IRS, the man at the airport had his cash stolen by "agents" and why IRS employees act like they have carte blanche to act in any why they wish! They Do!

There is, of course, much more to this story. Part of the reason for the Social Security act was to declare and designate anyone who signed up for it as a taxpayer. They then went on to pass as many laws concerning taxpayers, using round-about terms, as they thought they wanted or needed, and for whatever purpose "they" decided was necessary. When you think about it, there is actually an element of truth and "justice" to this. If you are a taxpayer, it is because you voluntarily declared that you were responsible for the national debt. Now, if you wish to take a "benefit" from the federal government, it can be argued that, indeed, you are responsible for the national debt. If you are responsible, pay it and do not quibble. If you are not, why are you volunteering?

To reinforce this type of thinking, and to protect the vested interest of those with their hands in the cookie jar, a few steps were necessary.

"Cause of Action

There is no dispute that the judiciary act of March 3, 1911 abolished the original circuit courts established by judiciary acts of 1789 & 1792. The Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States replaced original circuit courts. Article III district courts of the United States were vested with many of the powers which previously belonged to circuit courts. Records of the circuit courts were moved to the Supreme Court.

As I’ve demonstrated in my memorandums, what we know as the United States Code is the Code of Laws of the United States of America; it has no application in the several States party to the Constitution, as it is municipal law in territories and insular possessions of the United States. However, by reviewing sections of the U.S.C. I cited, inclusive of but not limited to 28 U.S.C., Sec. 451, 610, & 1869(f), it is clear that the "District Court of the United States" is still the Article III first-level court, and the "United States District Court" (18 U.S.C., Sec. 23, Rule 54(a), Fed.R.Crim.P., 28 U.S.C., Sections 610, 753 & 1869(f)), is a territorial court. If you review notes following 28 U.S.C., Sec. 132, you will find that the reference is to the territorial court in Hawaii in 1948 through 1959. The section is an amalgamation of sections from titles 28 & 48 of the 1940 edition of the Code.

Article I, Sec. 8, cl. 9, and Article III, Sec. 1 of the Constitution authorize Congress to establish all courts inferior to the Supreme Court, and Article I, Sec. 8, cl. 18 reinforces the mandate that Congress enact legislation to carry all authority delegated to the United States into action.

Now, the challenge is this: Show me a statute or evidence of a statute where Congress created a United States District Court for any district in the Union of several States. Show me a statute or evidence of a statute which authorizes judicial officers of a United States District Court situated in the several States to appoint clerks, recorders, etc., convene grand or petit juries, or anything else -- show me a statute or evidence of a statute which authorizes clerks of "United States District Courts" situated in the several States to collect fees.

My conclusion is reinforced by the General Accounting Office, as GAO regulations in Title 4 of the Code of Federal Regulations adopts the definition of courts of the United States used by the Administrative Office of Courts of the United States at 28 U.S.C., Sec. 610.

If you don’t care for the term "private courts," let’s substitute the term "pirate courts." Or maybe "Vandal courts". If we can agree on this terminology, we won’t have any dispute. But let’s not dignify them with the notion that they are "military" courts. Plunder and treason is military only if we accept the proposition that barbarian hoards have some lawful or legitimate cause. /s/ Dan Meador

A note before we continue. Everything you are reading from Dan Meador is designed to foster in you a belief that the system can be "fixed". This is what he, and all of his fellow researchers are diligently striving for. They "believe" in man’s law, and in man’s government. They "believe" that with a little fine tuning, it can be made to work, all evidence to the contrary, just fine. They have no understanding of being separate, of being clean, of health, or of the meaning or importance of His Law. They actually, at least some of them do, "believe" that the Constitution is under and written through His Law. And it is impossible to show them otherwise. I know, having tried.

From other information I have seen and read, I have to deduce that the above information was necessary for the final act of privatisation of the so-called court system, and to complete the control of it by the Inns of Court, from London.

You have to know such details as this before you begin to realize just how far things have gone. You see the evidence all around you, but much of it does not connect because you do not have enough knowledge. For instance, take the Fully Informed Jury Association. Great idea, if we had any juries left in America. But when you try and talk to one of the men in that Association, all you hear is "we gotta try!" Try what?

Go into a court room. Look at where the jury sits. It is on a raised dais, above the level of the floor of the court. This, in law, removes it from where the decisions are being made and turns it into an advisory panel. In addition, the jury is "boxed out" of the court room, behind a railing, so they are not actually a party to the proceedings. The judge, meanwhile, is always higher than the jury, on a "bench", and this puts him "in charge" of the proceedings. He can, and the judges do, whatever they please. They can, and do, override the jury. The judges try not to, because too much of this is not good for the blind. It might shock the public too much! But if you understand, you can read in the judge’s directions to the jury, most of the time, a directed verdict.

And this would be different if this were a unique situation, but the same citing of the jury and the judge is identical throughout the states and the possessions of Washington, DC. So you know that there is some plan and intent behind it.

One hundred years ago, all proceedings in a court room took place on a level floor, with the judge acting as a referee, as is proper. But to the elite, this situation is extremely dangerous, and at some time they could actually find themselves being held accountable for their actions.

And they would have a lot more trouble "taking care" of bothersome men like the following. The following is also very important in what will be an ongoing discussion on health. But, before we tackle this, let me tell you a little story about the History of the earth.

Dis-ease. History is the same: His-Story. It is two words. This is why the Bible was used to teach History in school. (Almighty is the same, but in this case, one of the Ls was not dropped. It literally is Al-Mighty, and al is a word. The root of this word means not, so when the so-called churches lead you in prayer to the al-mighty [not-mighty] god, perhaps you should pay attention to the rest of what is going on in that "church".)

In the His-Story of the world, there are a number of events that we are not given a clear picture of. I am sure, as I begin to see the differences in all of the so-called Bibles, this is not a mistake, but a deliberate error. Understanding the depravity of King John, and any king’s complete absorption with the king’s privilege, also explains much of this. This mis-information includes, but is certainly not limited to, the Great Flood.

To begin with, we must have a clear picture of the earth prior to the Great Flood, and I am not talking about the lawlessness of the people. I refer to the physical aspects of living here now as compared to then, because the earth prior to the flood was a very different place.

First off, if I understand correctly, "heaven" was a sphere encircling the earth composed of a hydrogen metal. This metal has been duplicated in the lab albeit for only a very short time, so we know it is possible for it to exist. Since the earth was enclosed, several important differences existed.

The most important difference was that the atmospheric pressure was much higher, possibly as high as 2.8. The oxygen content was approximately 38% and coupled with the higher atmospheric pressure of the air, injuries probably healed so fast that you could watch a cut close. The high atmospheric pressure coupled with the increased percentage of oxygen in the air meant that all livings things were highly permeated with oxygen. Naturally, since most pathogens can not live in the presence of oxygen (see following report), this meant that there would be no illness. I would also expect that a man could virtually run forever if he so desired, as there would be plenty of oxygen reaching his body for extended exertion. We are told that man lived to 1000 years in this time, and the listed conditions are the reason for this. God works within the science He created; if Scripture says that men lived for 1000 years, there is a scientific reason for that fact.

On the earth of that time, there was no rain. The entire earth was watered by dew every morning, and if you do not understand what a blessing that was, you need to do some crop irrigating for a couple of years! There were few if any large bodies of water because all of the elements that would make up the water of today was locked into the atmospheric shield and the higher content of oxygen in the air. You see, God understood what happens to man when he is allowed to live in an imperfect state for an extended period of time; he self-destructs.

When God, or man, pierced the shield above the earth, the hydrogen metal became a gas and slowly descended through the oxygen rich atmosphere, combining with the oxygen to form the water which became the oceans of the earth. There are a number of very interesting questions which are unanswered in this piece of His-Story. Did man himself pierce the shield, in an attempt to get closer to God, or to reach God, perhaps to "become more like God"? This possibility has grave implications for man today as you look at DNA de-coding and genetic twisting by man. One thing I have learned is that God’s Law is so exact, so perfect, that He generally has no need to interfere in Man’s activities. His Law works all possible conflicts out, and the only problems encountered comes from dis-obedience. From this observation, I would conclude that the most likely scenario is that man himself pierced the shield. And Noah, being very wise, understood what was to come, with or without a visit from God, because unlike the world today, Noah understood science.

Another interesting part of this is if the shield was pierced, did it come down in only one location? I have been told that this is so, and that the area of the Middle East, near where the Ark has been found, is the site of the Great Flood. If you want to spend some interesting time on the net, try searching for Ark, Great Flood, Noah and related subjects. There are some incredible sites with a lot of good information, most of which I have lost the URLs to!

For the reason stated above, that man self-destructs if allowed to live for an extended period of time, God had the elements in place that would cleanse the earth and allow man, that’s you and I, another chance. And when God allowed that judgment to happen, in all the population of man upon the earth, there lived one man who was worthy of being saved. Looking around the world today, I see very little difference, except that judgment today is brought through many different means since the concentration of oxygen in our air is no longer available to cure our ills without active help on our part.

Those who would enslave all of mankind for their ease of living are very aware of this, and the war they wage against knowledge is ongoing.

"The American Resistance Movement:

Ed McCabe, one of the top researchers/promoters of ozone therapy, called me a few months ago. He had been charged with Tax Evasion. If you don’t know, Tax Evasion is usually nothing more than a simple case of not filing, coupled with the government’s attempt to really stick it to you.

All you need to add to not filing to make it EVASION is a SINGLE SIMPLE ACT. For example, in the Matthies case, the Prosecution made a BIG DEAL out of the fact that the Matthies had opened a savings account so they could cash his pay checks. They COULD HAVE considered this an ACT intended to cover up his tax liability. Therefore, Hank Matthies could also have been charged with Tax Evasion if they had a particular ax to grind with him. (The preceding paragraph refers to another case about which there are ongoing discussions.)

I have talked to many in alternative health who have the highest regard for Ed McCabe and his valuable work.

I am writing not only to let you know about what they have now done to Ed, but more importantly to let you know what happens when ALL OF US don’t take a stand against this ILLEGAL APPLICATION of the tax laws.

The fact is that they are using Ed’s belief that he was not required to file to ruin his finances, his health and his sanity. THEY CAN DO THE SAME THING TO ANYONE, ANYWHERE IF THEY FEEL THE NEED. (Of course, there are over 1,000,000 pages [way over!] of "laws". At any time, for any possible reason, anyone in the UNITED STAES can be locked up. The reasons include, of course, simply to put a few bucks into the pockets of one of the anointed; i.e., lawyers.)

If you are still participating in the Babylonian Tribute System, you are sending money to the very demons who persecute good patriotic Americans like Ed McCabe. Ed’s only crime was trying to cure people of cancer and other diseases. The bad guys, disguised as the Babylonian Witchdoctors and the Satanic Medical Establishment, won’t allow this because they lose control and lose all the funds they derive by letting people die while using poisons, radiation and other sadistic methods to kill for profit. (True story. I wish to point out again that "they" can not see these papers!)

If a person does nothing to stand up, they might as well take the Mark and resign themselves to being a good little slave. Otherwise, they can (and probably will) be treated like Ed (do a web search on Ed McCabe) or Congressman George Hansen (ditto) or tens of thousands of other political prisoners which have taken a stand against tyranny ONE AT A TIME.

Tyranny can stand when only a few oppose it. If the masses stand up, tyranny retreats in fear. The bad guys grow more powerful every day. So if someone looked at what you DO, rather than what you SAY, which side would they think you were on???

Now for the information on Ed McCabe. Remember as you read this, he was charged with a WHITE COLLAR CRIME involving not filing Federal income tax returns -- not doing ANYTHING violent. Also remember that he has been CONVICTED OF NOTHING and is supposed to be PRESUMED INNOCENT.

ED MCCABE NEEDS OUR HELP

You know him as Ed McCabe or "Ask Mr. Oxygen." He is the person that introduced Oxygen Therapies to North America and to many countries around the world through his book "Oxygen Therapies" - A New Way of Approaching Disease. He is the person that got a lot of alternative healers started in Oxygen Therapies through his endless encouragement. (And his books are really excellent. David)

In the spring of 1997, the United States Justice Department and the IRS launched an inquiry on Ed, putting his life under a magnifying glass looking for dirt. It appears that in the first two weeks of April 1998, the IRS indicted and arrested Ed. Since that time, Ed has been in jail without a hearing or without a trial!

Ed McCabe is not a criminal. We know him as a researcher and a journalist, having authored the book "Oxygen Therapies" in 1988. Some know Ed as a radio talk show guest or much requested conference speaker and has traveled internationally, often on his own dime, to further the cause of personal choice in health and healing. How many people were touched and how many hours were spent reflecting the oxygen therapy lifestyle?

Now it is Ed who needs the help! Some 5 plus years ago, Ed’s studies led him to a personal choice, standing on the letter of US law, he insisted the IRS did not have jurisdiction over him. Negotiations progressed from cordiality to violent words and confiscations.

To catch us up to present time, Ed has been held on federal detainer since April 7, 1998, having been taken into jail once he appeared for his arraignment. He was held in New York State at the Syracuse Onondaga County Justice Center for about a month. From there he was sent on a sojourn around the US prison (detailed in Ed’s May 18th handwritten letter reprinted as follows):

FRIENDS:

One day last week, May 12th, while in Syracuse, N.Y. Onondaga County Jail, I was told at 7:00 AM to be ready to move out at 7:30 AM. I rushed to do the best I could to pack my books and legal materials & address list & phone list and envelopes & stamps. They put me into leg, waist & hand chains & took me to Oneida Airport. Here they took away all my possessions including all legal materials, and still in chains, put me on a plane full of convicts (CON-AIR) and brought us to Stewart AFB, NY.

Then bus to Otisville, NY Prison where I was strip searched and put in the hole. "The hole" means Solitary - a room with no or almost no natural light and about 7x10 in size. You do not leave this room or have contact with anyone except occasional mean voices of guards all day long. (In three days I was in chains all day as they transported me, and in the hole at night. Very uncomfortable. Amounts to torture, and I have not even been tried.) The next day they put me back in chains and flew (737) me to Alexandria, Louisiana Airport, and then to Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Federal Corrective Institution - still in chains & long stops at Indiana, Detroit, Chicago to pick up and drop off inmates - a long process stuck, chained into a seat in a 737 full of unhappy people, mostly gang types in on violence and drug violations. The young prisoners are the noisiest and worst, acting out all the time especially in the holding cells and in general population.

Finally we arrive here at the Federal Medical Center. So I spent three days in leg and waist chains with handcuffs all day long & slept in the hole at night. Strip searched 5 times with no shower or contact with anyone. No envelopes, papers, stamps, phone contact - NOTHING except my chained body. Federal Medical Center, Rochester, Minnesota is where I ended up, although no one would tell me where I was going or why. Apparently they want to be sure that I cannot come back later and claim "Insanity," so they need me certified sane enough for trial. Funny they do not require "sane certification" on any of the other inmates in the system. Everything I write is read (this is a mental hospital) and everything that comes in is read. It will be weeks before I can get any money sent in and approved and in the phone account so I can call out. All phone calls are monitored. They only allow you to call approved people, all must be approved. It took me days to get envelopes and stamps (they issue 5 stamps a month). Life in here (the hospital, or anywhere) is easier for the long term inmates, who have all the systems and accounts in place. But for an indigent person like myself who they keep moving around, I am always out of touch and out of resources. Each place strips you to nothing, so you always arrive with nothing, as it is now gone and I have no way to contact anyone individually. I will have one phone call only, so I will call Howard.

Everyone else, please try to help me any way you can think of. IT IS ALL UP TO YOU as I am so limited. I have to write this one letter to everyone. For example, two friends sent me three books. They were stolen the next day by US Marshals. So, THANK YOU, but incidents like that will only tend to discourage what little kindnesses people do for me over time. But I hope people will not give up on me, as unlike most others. I have no family or money to back me up. Constantly being reduced to nothing and waiting and waiting and waiting really makes me appreciate even a bar of soap, a toothbrush, a pen, a stamp, a piece of paper. All the things everyone else takes for granted. I do not advise anyone to go the route I have been down. In fact, stay away as far as you can.

I believe in justice and law, but I do not know if there is any left in our beloved country. I hope there is, but I have experienced federal employees lying in court and being very mean and vindictive when there is no need to. The judge was definitely not impartial, as he is supposed to be by law. Technically, they say they could hold me here forever, while trying to determine if I am sane enough to go to trial. They can do anything they want to anyone at any time. They are all powerful. But I still believe in love and not fear, when the shocks subside. "Shocks" meaning loss of liberty, being chained, being in the hole, or whatever they do to hurt me.

I have all sorts of bills piling up on the outside, and I don’t EVEN GET the bills, so I am certain all sorts of lawsuits against me are coming in debtors court as well, in my future on top of all this. Thank you everyone from the bottom of my heart for your kindnesses.

Love, Ed McCabe.

PS.: According to the latest information we have, dated 10/19/1998, Ed McCabe is expected to be moved to another jail on the 20th of October. His trial is supposed to start in "two"?? days in Binghamton, N.Y. His current treatment by the authorities forms the basis of Complaints. If you have computer capabilities, history and open discussion can be reviewed at http://www.oxytherapy.com/edmccabe Your hair will stand on end as you survey the data. It’s worth your time. Ed McCabe is in prison on tax issues - so the charges read. However, consider that oxygen therapy masters past have suffered character assassination, deportation, imprisonment, even death. Ed has been there for us in the past Now he needs our help! Please circulate this information to others to multiply the impact. Call your congressmen, Representatives, even Senators, write, fax, call, email, let the lines run hot. Call several times under different names, heck, our health freedom is - again - at stake. The number of the switchboard is (202) 224-3121.

UPDATE! To all those that are writing to Ed McCabe:

Ed was transferred today - he is now at: I.N.S. Facility Batavia, NY (near Buffalo)

DO NOT SEND ANY MAIL TO SYRACUSE! It will only be returned. Also, do not send any mail to Batavia, NY, he does not know how long he will be there. I will advise the list when we get a GOOD mailing address. Bill G.

Bill,

Thank you for this post. This is exactly the type of first hand anecdote which is so powerful in sharing some important truth about what’s going on in "health" these days. Also, this is the first good contact information to come along for those who might like to assist or keep up to date on Ed McCabe. Incidentally, contact location (shown below) through Brad Hunter is in "Poulsbo", not "Poulsboro", Washington. ;-) ICE

At 11:59 AM 12/1/98 -0600, you wrote: Friends and Patriots:

I spent most of the month of November sick as a dog with some kind of bronchitis/virus/flu affliction. Conventional, herbal, and homeopathic medication lessened the symptoms but nothing seemed to work to get rid of it.

My wife Ann and I own and operate the Unlimited Thought Bookstore in San Antonio, Texas < http://www.connecti.com/~utbook >. Primarily concerned with spiritual/how to improve your life information, we also have a very large section on holistic health and alternative therapies. We have information on oxygen/ozone therapies but I had never looked into that particular area.

I was going in to the bookstore every other day or so to take care of only the most essential work. While I was in the store at the front counter, the subject of my illness came up. One of my friends/customers told me that his wife had bronchitis for six weeks and couldn’t get rid of it. She then went for ozone therapy and was back to normal after two days. So, naturally, I went for ozone therapy Sunday, November 29, and today - two days later - I am myself back to normal. In short, oxygen and ozone therapies work on a large variety of complaints including, in some cases, cancer and aids, because all the complaints are generally symptoms (and this may be an over-simplification in some cases) of lack of oxygenation of the cells in the human body. I say "over-simplification" because it is my understanding that all illnesses have as their root cause or at least a component, a spiritual/mental/psychological/metaphysical imbalance.

Considering the wide distribution of this message, let me state that I intentionally traveled quite some distance to obtain ozone therapy. If people call me on the phone and ask for a recommendation for an ozone therapy practitioner, I will not give them information that may endanger the Liberty of individuals. Information on oxygen/ozone therapy practitioners can be found on the net, from your local holistic health/alternative therapies community, and even from (gasp!) your local "new age" community.

Currently used in Europe and from World War I until the early 1930s commonly used in the U. S., oxygen therapies have been suppressed because they work and they cut into the profits of the pharmaceutical industry. For much, much, more information see: < http://www.oxytherapy.com/ >.

Ed McCabe re-introduced oxygen therapy in the U.S. largely through his first book "Oxygen Therapies - A New Way of Approaching Disease." I am thankful to him for exposing the information that has resulted in curing what was beginning to seem to me like an incurable physical problem. Yesterday I spent a lot of time on the net in research of oxygen therapies; I learned that Ed McCabe has been "hit" by the authorities and has been both jailed and subjected to "diesel therapy" since April 1998.

Ed needs help. I am not in a position to help financially, so I am doing what I can to inform the public of his need. Contributions to The Ed McCabe Legal Defense Fund can be made through:

Mr. Brad Hunter c/o ECHO Newsletter 19689 7th Ave. NE, Suite 120 Poulsboro, WA 98370 Phone 360-394-4394

Thank you for your time and attention. Do what you feel is right and do what you can.

for Liberty, Bill Utterback.

Ed McCabe wrote this in April 1998:

Many have earnestly and caringly told me like the following to RUN, RIGHT NOW, BEFORE they get possession of me!

"The America our founding fathers won for us is under siege, and under the current circumstances I truly believe you will not receive a fair and impartial trial.

If you do not disappear, your freedom will come to an end. Your life could depend on your decision to stick around.

If you feel that you are somehow running away, you should understand this, they (the government machine, the medical companies and the military industrial corporations) do not want your research to reach the public. If you stay they WILL succeed in shutting you down. If you leave to somewhere where they could not get to you so easily, you have a fighting chance."

They want to stop teaching people oxygen therapies are better than drugs. Black helicopters hovered over my house four days before I testified for doctor Boyce at his federal trial in Mississippi where he was put in jail for getting rid of AIDS in 120+ people, and now he rots for years in federal prison in Lexington, KY. That’s when it all started, when I couldn’t, wouldn’t, take the hint.

These ex prisoners just told me of the hell holes they were in as political prisoners, and how all judges and attorneys are scared and do only the evil their masters direct, because no one gets involved after you are in jail.

The feds know exactly where you are, but keep you on a bus or plane for months at a time to keep you sick and helpless and out of the reach of any legal help. 20 foot by 20 foot ratholes with overflowing toilets and 46 men to a room filled with lice. In this country, now, places no one knows about, and the media won’t touch.

They told me people might help at first but soon disappear, and that is what the slavers count on. Will anyone stick with me no matter what happens? That is my fear, since for the 10 years I lived out of a suitcase and helped people find Oxygen therapies, but once they got well, they disappeared, leaving me broke and persecuted. Is this all humans are worth? What about you? I have been trying to help all of you for years. Will you now help me? I absolutely do not want martyrdom or sainthood, I am simply a guy in a jam, one of you, Our hearts beat together, even theirs.

For more information, see < http://www.oxytherapy.com/edmccabe/index.html >

The following is taken from the above URL: Ed McCabe Needs Your Help!

You know him as Ed McCabe - Ask Mr. Oxygen. He is the person that introduced Oxygen Therapies to North America and to many countries around the world through his book Oxygen Therapies - A New Way of Approaching Disease. He is the person that got me started in Oxygen Therapies, and through his encouragement, prompted me to create this site.

In the spring of 1997, the United States Justice Department and the IRS launched an inquiry on Ed, putting his life under a magnifying glass looking for dirt. At that time Ed informed of us of this through his initial plea for assistance.

It appears that in the first two weeks of April 1998, the IRS indicted and arrested Ed. Since that time, Ed has sat in jail without a hearing - without a trial!

Just before being arrested, Ed was able to send out his last pleas for help which can be read in the following pages:

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3

A Legal Defense Fund has been setup to assist Ed in gaining legal representation. A Discussion Forum has also been setup where you will be able to keep updated on Ed’s status. Ivan Olsen has taken on the task of being moderator of this discussion forum, and will attempt keep us updated on what is happening.

Discussions about Ed’s situation have once again commenced on the Oxytherapy Mailing List. If you are not a subscriber to the mailing list, you may read through the messages in the Oxylist Ed McCabe Archive Messages Area.

Most people have no clue what is really going on in America. I have been fortunate enough to know a number of men who have been sent to prison for "crimes" such as researching and distributing information about the foundations of America and what happened. They are researching real history, and the establishment hates that.

There is an interesting movie, a true story, titled "The Thin Blue Line" about a case in Texas. I won’t bore you with the details, but the incident involved an innocent man being accused of a crime and sentenced to prison, and the judge and prosecutors knew he was innocent. Finally, the guilty party was found and confessed, but this did not get the innocent man out of prison.

The most telling line of the movie was the line spoken by his attorney that finally got him released: "Every year in this country 6000 men are released from prison because the real guilty party is found or confesses." After speaking the magic line to the judge, the lawyer got the innocent man released. And the line is more or less correct; 6000 innocent men released each year. Think about that: If this many are released EACH YEAR, how many other innocent men are locked up, still?

Perhaps this has something to do with there being more people in prison today in America as a percentage of population than in any other nation on earth, by a very wide margin. Prisons are a growth industry, and most are now privatized, and this includes many so-called "state prisons". In some of our research, we found that the governor of Colorado had a stake in the state prison system, so every prisoner sent to prison in Colorado meant money in his pocket. I am sure, although I have seen no proof for it, that judges and prosecutors are paid for every prisoner remanded to the prison "system" in America today. Kind of like a finder’s fee type of thing.

How is this happening? With everything going on, how are so many so blind? Even the innocent have ’families that believe, for some reason, that they must have done something to deserve what happened. Perhaps reading the following will help explain. (I should also note here that everyone who cooperates with the "system" including voting and paying the taxes to support it takes at least a part of the credit, or blame as the case may be, for what is going on.)

"This material might be dismissed as "conspiracy hysteria" if it leads to the assumption that every opponent in every major group setting must be a "professional facilitator" (much like the hysterical notion that anyone you view as "doing damage" in the patriot movement must be a CIA operative). While we have no way of determining how much "professional facilitating" is actually going on out there, the development of the process itself is a matter of public record and the principles make perfect sense. It seems foolish not to learn to recognize the tactics, because they will work whether or not the "facilitator" is a professional. Much to be learned from this article. ICE

From: "W.G.E.N." <idzrus@earthlink.net>

Found this, this morning, on The Mustard Seed page. It is additional input on the Delphi Technique. I hope you will forward this out to others as this technique must be recognized and dealt with. It is the tool used against us so learn how to handle it and turn it to our use. Nice to see that our Lynn Stuter is being posted out there. Her web page: Lynn M Stuter LEARN http://www.icehouse.net/lmstuter

Jackie Juntti

Washington Grassroots Email Network idzrus@earthlink.net

Check the messageboard every day for new posts:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb70701

http://themustardseed.home.mindspring.com/bb-5.htm

Thanks to Ken (whoever he is) for the following.

Dear IP Readers, The information below describes how "consensus" is falsely reached within a group when a person manipulates the group using the DELPHI TECHNIQUE, a RAND Corp. development. The latter part describes how to neutralize this manipulation and gives a case study. (I thank a friend, Jay, for this information.)

Although many are critical of the technique and claim it is not valid, I can testify that the method is effective in moving a group’s opinion to a desired end. It was used during a local debate where I debated against a Proposed Home Rule Charter as a new form of county government. The Home Rule Advocates were coached by the DCA (Department of Community Affairs) located in our State capitol, Harrisburg.

Many may be critical of the supposed hard science of the technique and the statistics generated by the questions asked in Delphi surveys. There is no hard science on this method. That part is true. On the side of "soft science", and the way meetings are facilitated by this method, Delphi is a highly effective means of consensus building. This method could also be applied to Internet discussion groups etc. Sincerely, Ken

The Delphi Technique: how to achieve a workable consensus within time limits:

The Delphi Technique was originally conceived as a way to obtain the opinion of experts without necessarily bringing them together face to face. In Educating for the New World Order by Bev Eakman, the reader finds reference upon reference for the need to preserve the illusion that there is lay, or community, participation in the decision making process, while in fact lay citizens are being squeezed out. (This is important, unless you think the people who develop this stuff are innocent dupes. David)

A specialized use of this technique was developed for teachers, the Alinsky Method (ibid., p. 123). The setting or group is, however, immaterial. The point is that people in groups tend to share a certain knowledge base and display certain identifiable characteristic (known as group dynamics). This allows for a special application of a basic technique. The change agent or facilitator goes through the motions of acting as an organizer, getting each person in the target group to elicit expression of their concerns about a program, project, or policy in question. The facilitator listens attentively, forms task forces, urges everyone to make lists and so on. While she is doing this, the facilitator learns something about each member of the target group. He/she identifies the leaders, the loud mouths, as well as those who frequently turn sides during the argument - the weak or non-committal.

Suddenly, the amiable facilitator becomes devils advocate. He/she dons his professional agitator hat. Using the divide and conquer technique, he/she manipulates one group opinion against the other. This is accomplished by manipulating those who are out of step to appear ridiculous, unknowledgable, inarticulate, or dogmatic. He/she wants certain members of the group to become angry, thereby forcing tensions to accelerate. The facilitator is well trained in psychological manipulation. She/he is able to predict the reactions of each group member. Individuals in opposition to the policy or program will be shut out of the group.

The method works. It is very effective with parents, teachers, school children, and any community group. The targets rarely, if ever, know that they are being manipulated. If they do suspect this is happening, they do not know how to end the process.

The desired result is for group polarization, and for the facilitator to become accepted as a member of the group and group process. He/she will then throw the desired idea on the table and ask for opinions during discussion. Very soon his/her associates from the divided group begin to adopt the idea as if it were their own, and pressure the entire group to accept the proposition.

The technique is a very unethical method of achieving consensus on a controversial topic in group settings. It requires well trained professionals who deliberately escalate tension among group members, pitting one faction against the other, so as to make one viewpoint appear ridiculous so the other becomes sensible whether such is warranted or not.

Disrupting the Delphi
By Lynn M Stuter

Note: The Delphi is being used at all levels of government to move meetings to preset conclusions. For the purposes of this dissertation, facilitator references anyone who has been trained in use of the Delphi and who is running a meeting.

There are three steps to diffusing the Delphi Technique when facilitators want to steer a group in a specific direction.

1. Always be charming. Smile. Be pleasant. Be Courteous. Moderate your voice so as not to come across as belligerent or aggressive.

2. Stay focused. If at all possible, write your question down to help you stay focused. Facilitators, when asked questions they don’t want to answer, often digress from the issue raised and try to work the conversation around to where they can make the individual asking the question look foolish, feel foolish, appear belligerent or aggressive. The goal is to put the one asking the question on the defensive. Do not fall for this tactic.

Always be charming, thus deflecting any insinuation, innuendo, etc. that may be thrown at you in their attempt to put you on the defensive, but bring them back to the question asked. If they rephrase your question into an accusatory statement (a favorite tactic) simply state, "That is not what I stated. What I asked was...[repeat your question.]"

3. Be persistent. If putting you on the defensive doesn’t work, facilitators often resort to long, drawn out dissertations on some off the wall and usually unrelated or vaguely related subject that drags on for several minutes. During that time, the crowd or group usually loses focus on the question asked (which is the intent). Let them finish with their dissertation or expose. Then nicely, with focus and persistence, state, "But you didn’t answer my question. My question is --" and repeat your question.

Always be charming, stay focused and be persistent.

Never, under any circumstance, become angry. Anger directed at the facilitator will immediately make the facilitator the victim. This defeats the purpose which is to make you the victim. The goal of the facilitator is to make those they are facilitating like them, alienating anyone who might pose a threat to the realization of their agenda. [People with fixed belief systems, who know what they believe, and stand on what they believe, are obvious threats.] If the participant becomes the victim, the facilitator loses face and favor with the crowd. This is why crowds are broken up into groups of seven or eight, why objections are written on cards, not voiced aloud where they are open to public discussion and public debate. It’s called crowd control.

It is always good to have someone else, or two or three others who know the Delphi Technique dispersed through the crowd; who, when the facilitator digresses from the question, will stand up and say nicely, "But you didn’t answer that lady’s/gentleman’s question." The facilitator, even if suspecting you are together, certainly will not want to alienate the crowd by making that accusation. Sometimes it only takes one occurrence of this type for the crowd to figure out what is going on. Sometimes it takes more than one.

If you have an organized group, meet before the meeting to strategize. Everyone should know their part. Meet after the meeting to analyze what went right, what went wrong and why, and what needs to happen the next time around. Never meet during the meeting. One of the favorite tactics of the facilitator if the meeting is not going the way they want, if they are meeting measurable resistance, is to call a recess. During the recess, the facilitator and his/her spotters (people who wander the room during the course of the meeting, watching the crowd) watch the crowd to see who congregates where, especially those who have offered measurable resistance.

If the resistors congregate in one place, a spotter will usually gravitate to that group to join in the conversation and will report back to the facilitator. When the meeting resumes, the facilitator will steer clear of those who are resistors. Do not congregate. Hang loose and work the crowd. Move to where the facilitators or spotters are. Listen to what they have to say, but do not gravitate to where another member of your team is.

This strategy also works in face to face, one on one, meeting with anyone who has been trained in how to use the Delphi Technique.

From a representative republic to a participatory democracy

With the advent of education reform the ensuing turmoil among the citizenry, and the grassroots research that has been sparked therefrom, a consistent pattern with respect to public participation and input has emerged, giving cause for alarm among people who cherish the form of government established by our founding fathers. Recent events, both inside and outside education have brought the emerging picture into focus.

In the not too distant past the hiring of a consultant by the City of Spokane to the tune of $47,000 to facilitate the direction of city government brought a hue and cry from the populace at large. Eerily, this scenario held great similarity to what has been happening in education reform. The final link came in the form of an editorial comment made by Chris Peck regarding the "Pizza papers". The editorial talks about how groups of disenfranchised citizens were brought together to enter into a discussion of what they felt (as opposed to know) needed to be changed at the local level. The outcome of the compilation of those discussions influenced the writing of the city/county charter.

Sounds innocuous enough. But lets examine this a little closer. Let’s walk through the scenario that occurs in these facilitated meetings. First, about the facilitator. The facilitator is hired to facilitate the meeting. While his/her job is supposedly non-directive, neutral, non-judgmental, the opposite is actually true. The facilitator is there to move the meeting to a preset conclusion. This is done through a process known as the Delphi Technique, developed by the RAND Corporation for the US. Department of Defense as a psychological warfare weapon in the 50s and 60s. Comforting, no doubt. With this established, lets move on to the semantics of the meeting.

It is imperative to the success of the agenda that the participants like the facilitator. Therefore, the facilitator first works the crowd to cause dis-equilibrium-establishing a bad guy good guy scenario. Anyone who might not agree with the facilitator must be seen by the participants as the bad guy, the facilitator the good guy. This is done by seeking out those who might not agree with the facilitator and making them look foolish, inept, or aggressive, sending a clear message to the audience that if they don’t want the same treatment to keep quiet. The facilitator is well trained in how to recognize and exploit many different psychological truisms to do this. At the point the opposition has been identified and alienated, the facilitator becomes the good guy - a friend - and the agenda and direction of the meeting is established without the audience ever being aware of it.

Next, the attendees are broken up into smaller groups - usually of seven or eight people - each group with a facilitator. Discussion ensues wherein the participants are encouraged to discuss preset issues, the group facilitator employing the same tactics as the lead facilitator. Usually participants are encouraged to put on paper their ideas and disagreements, these to be later compiled by others. Herein lies a very large problem. Who compiles what is written on the sheets of paper, note cards, etc.? When you ask the participants, you usually get, "Well, they compiled the results." Who is "they?" "Well, those running the meeting." Oh-h! The next question - How do you know that what you wrote on your sheet of paper was incorporated into the final outcome? The answer you usually get is, "Well, you know, I’ve wondered about that, because what I wrote doesn’t seem to be reflected here. I guess my viewpoint was in the minority."

And there you have the crux of the situation. If you have fifty people in a room, each writes his/her ideas and dislikes on a sheet of paper, to be compiled later into a final outcome, each individual having no idea of what any other individual wrote. How do you know that the final outcome reflects anyone’s input? The answer is - you don’t.

The same scenario holds when there is a facilitator recording your comments on paper. But the participants usually don’t question this, figuring instead that their viewpoint was in the minority and thus not reflected.

So why have the meetings at all if the outcome is already established? Because it is imperative to the continued well being of the agenda that the people be facilitated into ownership of the preset outcome. If people believe the idea is theirs, they support it: If the people believe the idea is being foisted on them, they will resist. Likewise, it is imperative to the continued well being of the agenda that the people perceive that their input counts

This scenario is being used very effectively to move meetings to preset conclusion, effectively changing our form of government from a representative form of government in which individuals are elected to represent the people to a "participatory democracy" in which citizens, selected at large, are facilitated into ownership of preset outcomes, perceiving that their input resulted therein. The reality is the outcome was already established by others, but this is not apparent to the citizen participants.

I hope you realize that the same manipulations being discussed here, which you can identify once you understand, are also taught to teachers in the public school system. Control of public education for your children is as damaging as a bomb dropped on your home. People, and children, who have been "facilitated" have little if any resistance to the rules and regulations, or changes thereto, which affect their lives. If you doubt this, post to the Free Republic for awhile and watch carefully what is going on. Watch in particular the talk about "our laws."

Another important point to look at carefully here is to grasp how finely the control mechanisms have become, and how deeply entrenched they are. When local meetings in every community are subject to this type of control, do you expect that the same mechanisms are not being used at the highest level of "government" in order to effect "consensus’ for the proper solutions? Those who are in, (they think), control, are more susceptible to control by those farther up the ladder by the same methods taught to them than they could possibly believe. They are blinded to that which they use. Most do not understand what is being done to and around them, and have no grasp of the population control measures which are used against them and their children, even as the same mechanisms are turned against us. Forgive them, God, for they know not what they do.

Again, this also shows why it is so dangerous to identify with and attempt to work alongside the people who occupy government. You do not change what they do; you simply empower their activities by participation. And, by participation, you accept responsibility for the actions of those working "in your name."

When you look at this information, and take other things into account, such as the following, you begin to understand that what is going on is being very carefully orchestrated to result in what is desired by those in the position to benefit therefrom. They can not benefit, except by your voluntary participation. This is why there is a continual cry to VOTE! Make a DIFFERENCE! VOTE! (See Part III.) And to understand, the rule is simple; follow the money! Who will materially benefit from what is to occur?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE DATED NOV. 22, 1998

THE LIBERTARIAN, By Vin Suprynowicz I don’t know nothin’ ‘bout no Y2K!

OK, I admit it: I’ve been ducking the "Y2K" question.

It’s the most frequent inquiry I get, these days. And last weekend, while participating in an electronic chat room organized by the Liberty Roundtable, I had the questions come up several more times: "What do you see happening in the Y2K crisis? To what part of the country should we move to be safest?"

For those who have been in a cave, "Y2K" is shorthand for the problem that develops because -- computer memory having been at a premium -- the programmers who set up many of our mainframe computers back in the 1970s and ‘80s created only a two-digit field for "year."

Now -- starting April 1, 1999, if not sooner -- operators are going to try to program the computers that monitor our utility grids and phone systems, the factory machinery that generates "just-on-time delivery" of goods, even our railroad and airport switching equipment, giving those machines their instructions for the first quarter of the year "00."

But (pardon my anthropomorphizing) many of those computers will "assume" the year 00 happened 99 years ago.

Anecdotes are already circulating about mortgage holders being billed for 99 years of delinquent interest, or supermarket debit machines rejecting as "expired" brand new debit cards which carry expiration dates ending in "00" or "01. "

So far, opinion among thoughtful people has been split on the likely repercussions. Some perfectly wise folks argue that our economy and technology are the most innovative and resourceful ever devised. Even if your bank’s ATMs go on the fritz for a couple of days, even if the railroad switching equipment bogs down and produce deliveries to your supermarket grow spotty for a few weeks, armies of well-paid technicians will hurl themselves into developing "work-arounds."

To this way of thinking, survivalists who foresee the collapse of large segments of our urban culture, putting a premium on ownership of a cow and a well and a garden for the first time in 50 years, are merely engaging in wishful thinking. Generally a bunch of Bible-thumpers (as this line of thought goes), they would find it mighty handy for some kind of cosmic rain of brimstone to wipe away the urban Sodom and Gomorrah they view as the cause of all their problems, proliferating as that urban culture does the legions of the socialists, the welfare queens, the abortionists, the enviro bug-worshippers, the gun-grabbers. How fitting and handy to envision them all killing each other off, fighting over the last moldy crust of bread.

And, if the Y2K "crisis" were about to occur in perfect isolation, that argument would hold some water (even if this revelation of a nation divided into urban-versus-rural, East-versus-West, gun-lover versus gun-hater, would be worth some further study, all by itself.)

But remember, Y2K is "shorthand." And as it turns out, it stands for a lot more than just "Year 2000."

The problem is that -- not exactly simultaneously, but all within the next couple of years -- a few other problems are likely to crop up. Without predicting a specific order:

1) The fractional reserve banking system that dates back to the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1912-13 is in deep crisis. Buoyed by the supposed guarantee that the International Monetary Fund (our long-suffering friends, the U.S. taxpayers) would bail out any failures, our "private" bankers (and those of Japan) have been recording trumped-up double-digit returns by loaning billions to such bankrupt chicken farms as Malaysia, Indonesia, Russia, Brazil, and Mexico.

These loans are no good. And they are pyramided and leveraged atop one another like something out of Dr. Seuss. In this country, too, the pursuit of ever-higher returns and the presumption that everyone can live the good life on credit have encouraged foolish loans and investments based on the notion that the federal government "insures all deposits," and that we can always pay off our debts with that raise we hope to get next year.

Once these assumptions start to unravel, the only debate will be whether to describe the fallout with references to "dominoes," or that old favorite, the "house of cards."

Remember, as Jimmy Stewart explains to his depositors every year in "It’s a Wonderful Life," the current system is based on the assumption (are you noticing that word crop up a lot?) that only a small percentage of depositors will ever want to take all their money out at the same time. Otherwise, the banks would be, well, bankrupt. This kind of fraud is only legal because the government specifically licenses people to do it, on the theory that it "creates more credit, to promote economic growth." (This is partly true, partly not; see Part VI.)

2) Then comes that old stalwart, the New York Stock Exchange. Prices there have been many times what can be justified by traditional price-to-earning ratios for years. That sounds arcane, but what it means is that few investors are buying stocks these days because they’ve always wanted to own a piece of Hammermill or Coca-Cola, and look forward to reading the annual reports and living off the dividends in their golden years.

Dividends? Mere pennies! Folks buy these stocks today because the guy who’s selling them made an 18 to 21 percent return in 1997, and the buyer hopes to realize 18 to 21 percent when he sells them in the year 2000.

When the holder of a mutual fund can no longer even tell you what products or services are offered by the underlying firms that issued the stocks in his or her "portfolio," what you have is a "bubble." Think tulip bulbs, Everglades building lots, Cabbage Patch dolls, baseball cards, beanie babies.

3) Today’s dollar is intrinsically worthless. First it was made of gold; then it said "pay to the bearer in gold;" then silver, now it’s a certificate redeemable for exactly nothing. Dollar-denominated Treasury bonds are also intrinsically worthless. They are merely a promise to tax our children or grandchildren to pay us back in still more paper -- Libertarians call them "extortion futures."

Bill Clinton is one of the luckiest men in history ... so far. Most rational (non-Keynesian) economic models would predict that -- at the rate at which the United States has been printing and passing worthless green paper for the past 30 years -- we should be in the midst of a hyperinflation that would make the Weimar Republic look boring (The writer does not understand the purpose of taxation, David). But the funniest thing happened: All over the world, people love and respect America as the font of freedom, and figure the dollar must really be worth something -- certainly more than their worthless domestic ruble or zlotny. So they hide dollars in their mattresses (Wrong; they hide dollars in their mattress because international loans are denominated in dollars, so there is always a stabilizing demand for them). Those dollars don’t come back to these shores to bid up the price of American goods. So we’re fine ... so far.

But there’s a reason why the guys who get arrested by your local bunko squad are called "con artists." Their stock in trade is "confidence."

Remember Y2K? Imagine now that the ATM machines stop working. Since the nation’s major railroad switching yards are now entirely computerized -- the old manual switches were torn out years ago -- the grocery store runs out of fresh produce Some computer messes up at the sewage treatment plant, and before they can figure out a manual override some sewage backs up into the reservoir. Suddenly you’re warned to boil your cooking water, like some barefoot Third World peasant (Who just happens to be better equipped to handle the same problem because he does it every day of his life, and he watched his father cope with the same problem. David). Without explanation, the phones go dead.

Long lines form as folks start panic-buying remaining supplies of gasoline, kerosene lanterns, and canned goods -- price no object. There are a few fist fights over the last rolls of toilet paper. Pressed by jealous mobs to "do something," blustering politicians declare that anyone who stores too much stuff is a "hoarder." (If you really doubt that someone in the "government" knew this was coming, or understands what is going to happen, why are the anti-hoarding laws on the books, and been there for at least ten years?) Neighbors are encouraged to turn in neighbors -- offered a reward from the seized goods when they’re "redistributed." (If you think this sounds like what went on in the Soviet Union, you are correct. David)

Every electronic alarm in the city goes off all at once, leaving police and fireman scurrying around, clueless. Some looting starts -- after all, it’s the "hoarders" who are the real criminals, right? TV pictures of all this go out overseas, until the broadcasts are limited "to prevent panic."

What has just been lost? "Confidence." Now folks want to draw out their bank accounts in cash. They want to sell their stocks ... but how can everyone sell when the prices are falling so quickly that there are no buyers, and the phone lines to your broker are tied up for days on end?

4) There is no "Social Security Trust Fund." The thief you keep sending back to Congress helped them spend it all. Already, the retirement age is being raised, and there’s serious talk of "means testing" payments -- only making full payments to the drunks and losers and compulsive gamblers who accrued no other savings or assets. Kind of like taxing all the industrious little ants, but only paying off the lazy grasshoppers. Sound like a "guaranteed annuity" to you? (Has nothing to do with it. They will simply raise the age limits until the system balances. After all, the purpose of the Social Security Trust Fund is simply another way to curb inflation. David)

Assurances of ongoing "Trust Fund" solvency are based on the optimistic assumption (there’s that word again) that Social Security payments by younger workers will continue at current levels. But what if there’s a recession, with big layoffs? What if the computers at the IRS are rumored to be down as of late 1999? What if lots of people decide to just stop filing and paying federal taxes in early Year 2000, on the theory, "They’re off line, anyway. If we ALL stop, they can’t come find ALL of us"?

(This would never have happened in the 1950s, of course, when American taxpayers -- generally paying less than 5 percent of gross income so you could still support a family on one salary -- considered it "our" government and were proud to do their patriotic duty at tax time. But since then the liars have brought us Vietnam, Watergate, Chinagate, Filegate, Ruby Ridge, and Waco ... IRS auditors and drug police routinely referring to average Americans as "scum" and gleefully seizing our homes, businesses and bank accounts, tens of thousands of young people jailed for marijuana despite popular votes to legalize the stuff, defendants railroaded by smug federal politician-judges without even being allowed to read the Bill of Rights to their juries.

Still consider it your "patriotic duty" to feed this beast with half of what you earn? Or did you think your pal the congressman was suddenly, desperately searching for "an alternative to the IRS" just out of the goodness of his heart?)

And what happens now to the carefully-drawn charts that show Social Security is "sound until the year 2012"?

Irresponsible speculation?

If so, I’m not alone. Appearing in Las Vegas on Tuesday, Nov. 17, U.S. Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, chairman of a Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem, said turn-of-the-century computer glitches could cause "an economic downturn" in the United States and abroad.

"Potentially, this could tie up huge parts of the economy," Sen. Bennett told John G. Edwards of the Las Vegas Review-Journal, after a private meeting with executives at the Comdex computer trade show. "There will be a problem. There is no question that we can’t fix everything that needs to be fixed (over the next 14 months)."

Sen. Bennett told the newspaper he believes less developed countries in Asia, Africa and South America will be most affected by Y2K problems, though they’re reportedly "working hard" to resolve the computer glitches. "My current assumption is that the United States will overcome this without overwhelming, crippling problems," the senator proclaimed.

Then he said he is also concerned about how the millennium bug will affect the health care industry.

"I wouldn’t want to get sick in some rural hospital," the senator said, cheerily.

Meantime, the Sacramento Bee reported (also on Nov. 17) results of an August poll that shows most California cities and counties have a plan to eradicate the year 2000 bug ... "but less than half have set aside the money to pay for it."

Feeling reassured?

Into this potential maelstrom, toss three wild cards:

1) If Americans, hypothetically told at some future date that stocks and bonds have fallen to one-third of their previous nominal values, could be counted on to behave like sophisticated, diversified investors, saying "Oh well, you win some, you lose some," then the market could indeed fall by two thirds without causing a meltdown.

But the behavior of large groups of people, once they start moving, is rarely so rational. Would you want to be the last one on your block to cry "Sell"?

When a market crashes, folks lose their jobs. What happens then to folks who have no hard savings or supplies but plenty of debt ... who have barely been keeping their heads above water? What liberties -- yours as well as theirs -- would they then gladly trade for a steady supply of hot porridge?

2) The kind of people who gravitate to government "service" never voluntarily accept blame, but they are always looking for ways to expand their power. Can you spot any aspects of these "Y2K" scenarios that might give government agencies an excuse to seize more power; to further restrict our freedoms under the guise of "offering relief and restoring order"; and then to blame the whole situation on someone else. "Greedy capitalists," perhaps, who have been operating with "too little regulation"?

3) We will be increasingly reassured that "the best minds" are hard at work re-writing computer code to prevent any of this from happening. But computer nerds and denizens of the Internet are, in my experience, the most free-thinking, libertarian ... even anarchist residents of our little global village. They are immensely confident in their self-sufficiency. And they do not like Big Brother -- especially when he threatens to mess with their privacy and freedom.

So ... what if a few of them are only pretending to fix the problem? It may take a village to raise a socialist, but it wouldn’t take many Y2K saboteurs to seize this opportunity to "topple the state."

A long way around to a relatively short answer: No, I’m not a professional financial advisor. But yes, I know exactly what is going to happen. Everything listed above is going to happen. I just don’t know when each thing is going to happen, or in what particular order -- which is what you really need to know, if