Intech Concepts 23
(Indicators of Reasoning Process)
No mysteries.... 24 March 05
It is this simple. There are no mysteries, no unsolvable problems, no matter how seemingly complex or impossible. There is just a current lack of knowledge within the minds perceiving mysteries. The knowledge is readily available. It is acquired by asking and answering questions, the process of thinking. If you do not know which questions to ask, start asking any questions. Answer them. Ask questions of your answers. You only need far less patience than required to find the solutions to mysteries by any other process. The questions you ask will lead you to the question that solves the mystery.
There is one concept that can block that process, leaving you unable to solve even simple mysteries. If you adopt any form of power, which is the antithesis of reasoning, such as an institutional title, which creates an illusion of knowledge that cannot possibly exist or it would not need a title, your mind will defend the title upon which your mind immediately became addicted and dependent, which will prevent you from asking the questions that illuminate the flaw or controlling contradiction of the title, or you would have already recognized it and abandoned the addicting and debilitating title. Because the solution of a mystery cannot retain a contradiction, which creates a mystery, the questions illuminating the contradiction of holding a title precede the solution to the mystery. If you fail to ask and answer them, you have no access to the answers that create the question that solves the mystery.
Now notice who are foolishly waiting for whom to solve the mysteries, and even paying them for the perpetual failure, much to your amusement.
New ways for dealing with the other guy... 25 March 05
The US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, the current official propagator of the more entertaining US contradictions, recently stated that the US may need new ways to deal with North Korea.
Because Americans were not taught how to use words that hold their meaning, Condoleezza cannot understand the otherwise useful meaning of her own words, and certainly not these words.
North Korea and Iran are figuratively thumbing their noses at the nosy Americans who are sticking their noses into everyone else's affairs. The Iraqi freedom fighters, China, Russia and others are also not kowtowing to the nosy Americans attempting to militarily intimidate and force their illusions on everyone in the world.
Because the US wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, the most recent in a series, have more precisely illuminated the now obvious limits and fragile vulnerabilities of the US military contraption, while George, Condoleezza, Donald and lot, intractably believe they are illuminating the strength of the US military might, the leaders of other power-based nations are more effectively orchestrating their progressive facilitation of America's inherent self-demise.
Their various actions are thus not understandable to the US leaders, while flawlessly understandable to the observers.
Therefore, the words of Condoleezza and George inherently become more illogical. The gap between their actions and their understanding of international reactions gets wider, so their words which attempt to bridge the gap in their mind, become more self-contradictory.
History and logic illuminate the ancient lesson of the proverbial straw that breaks the camel's back. The American empire will not fall from a military attack by the previously feared Soviet Union, as already proven, or by that of China or the next great power. It will fall because the leaders are squandering the productivity of the nation to militarily defend against each next great illusion, making the nation increasingly vulnerable to that proverbial straw in the hand of some obscure peasant kid walking past the camel, an unanticipated series of obscure events, just as collapsed the Soviet Union, the British empire, the Roman empire and the others.
Why did the Brits have no defense against that skinny little guy named Gandhi, who openly walked up to them? Why did the Soviet nuclear weapons not defend the Soviet Union? What arsenal did David use to defeat Goliath? What did the Trojans fail to see in that clunky Greek horse? How did the US multi-billion dollar airline passenger security screening system facilitate the most brilliant military attack in human history? How did the leaders of every empire become so laughably ignorant and incompetent that their empires were collapsed by what was happening where they were not looking?
Nearing that collapse, the timing of which is immaterial to the concept, Condoleezza will vaguely sense that something is wrong, resulting from her mind's confusion, and therefore mouth the words calling for new ways to deal with her illusions, instead of describing the new ways, because she is categorically clueless of any new way to do anything, as defines a power-damaged mind.
And her call was not a call, because her institution categorically defends itself against any new knowledge, by design, or the knowledge would have already been discovered because the contradiction already exists. Go ahead, try a thousand ways to get a new idea into a power-based institution, and list the thousand defenses.
She, George, Donald and their entire lot in the US leadership, and every national leadership of every nation in human history, have not identified, and cannot identify, a new way to deal with their perception of an opposing concept, because they hold power-damaged minds, the intellectual zenith of which is to use power or force, the same old way that created the opposition, and has failed every human institution since human institutions were invented.
They hold no knowledge beyond a conclusion of using military or police force.
The controlling phrase is that they hold no knowledge, while new knowledge is available for the asking, literally.
Notice also that the news journalists report that Condoleezza is calling for new ways to deal with North Korea, using those words, and the entire institution of news journalists, with all the lessons of history in their files, coupled with their professed task of asking questions, cannot identify a new way, for the same aforementioned reason.
They literally hold no knowledge beyond where the controlling contradiction of their killing people in wars, and their threats of more wars, define their failure by that manifestation of old knowledge creating the escalating contradiction.
They do not hold the knowledge of intellectual technology, the process of reasoning, or the ability to learn that knowledge.
If you have so extensively slaughtered people among your perceived opponents, to the point that they willingly become suicide bombers to kill your people who are not willing to do the same, then they will defeat you, and the world recognizes your fatal flaw.
If even the threat of all-out attack by a nuclear power is no longer sufficient or credible to stop two small, seemingly vulnerable nations, whom you have already made into enemies by attempting to bully them, from making the nuclear weapons that can belatedly bring your nation to its knees regardless of your reaction, then they will defeat you, and the world recognizes your fatal flaw.
Bush and his thugs, albeit with the prior efforts of the last several US presidents, have maxed-out the US ability to use force, by any means, as is inevitable for the process of force, proven by every institutional / governmental lesson in human history, while Condoleezza and her colleagues remain clueless, just as the Roman emperors remained clueless.
On the morning of the collapse of every empire, its government is replete with officials who literally cannot understand why the collapse is happening, or it would not be happening because the officials would have already resolved the contradictions that created it. Is that not so?
As an instructive aside, the Constitution of the Soviet Union contained an article that expressly granted each Soviet Republic the right to become independent nations. "Article 72. Each Union Republic shall retain the right freely to secede from the USSR." The Kremlin boys merely treated the Soviet constitution the same way the Washington DC boys treat the US constitution, as a meaningless document fooling fools into living under a military dictatorship of personalities wielding power of office. Had the Kremlin boys understood the reason for the inherent collapse of the Soviet Union, they would have prior effected Article 72, to thus create what resulted anyway, but therefore created a mutually favorable trading union with no need to squander resources on militaries, and with that reasoning ability, quickly advanced their societies into superior social, economic and knowledge-based benefits. Therein, the reasoning process would have advanced their international position and influence to what they so obviously craved but were inherently failing to achieve by building an inherently self-destructive, force-based military empire. But of course they still do not understand such concepts, and are each stagnating their societies with self-destructive power and force-based processes, just like the idiot Americans, much to the amusement of the observers.
The failure to understand, is the failure to learn the related knowledge. All knowledge is readily available by simply asking and answering the related questions in a series that progressively eliminates each contradiction, an amusingly simple system whose efficiency is rapidly improved by simply practicing the skill.
As everyone but George, Condoleezza and their thugs recognize, their current military is over-extended, deteriorating, in a bankrupted monetary and taxation system, and its personnel are increasingly not enamored with the wars started by ego-maniac presidents, based on laughably exposed lies. The commonly intelligent portion of the US military eligible population has recognized the flaws, costs and damages of the ego-based wars, thus avoiding military service, thus leaving the military with progressively less intelligent personnel who decrease military effectiveness, by such manifested actions as incessantly slaughtering civilians and maliciously torturing prisoners, for world condemnation of the US. George will not use nuclear power without destroying the American empire, which is within the possibilities, considering George's inordinately power-damaged mind, and those of his deteriorated military command structure resorting to systemic torture of prisoners who have no useful knowledge because the enemy is a non-traditional, fragmented array of resistance fighters being progressively created by the US torturing of prisoners and slaughter of civilians. The illusions of the benefits of the American Way, that George and his dolts pander to the world, are glaring lies that the US government does not even grant US citizens, such as democracy, human rights, right to a trial, right to trial by jury, right to counsel, right to counsel of choice, right to introduce evidence in court to defend oneself from government accusations, freedom of harmless speech, freedom from government torture and threats of torture, even in court, right to keep guns as a right rather than an arbitrarily deniable privilege, right to walk on public property, private ownership of one's own body, private property rights, right to non-harmful privacy, freedom from military attacks against US civilians, freedom of religion without religious profiling, spying and harassment by government thugs, the rule of written law above the rule of personalities with power of office, and everything else individuals aspire to for their freedom. And the world knows the US government is only a proverbial straw away from collapsing itself, including an increasing number of Americans who aspire to the freedom described in the US Constitution now voided by the Washington DC government.
Only the idiot Washington DC leaders and their unquestioning minions cannot recognize their spiral, inherent to the effects of power on the human mind, which is the reason all power based empires and criminals do not know when to end their creation of contradictions before the contradictions collapse the empire or catch the criminal, much to the amusement of the observers.
The readily available new way to deal with North Korea, to immediately destroy its any threat to the world and to its own people, is the new way to deal with the United States government thugs, and all power-damaged minds in governments squandering the human potential of their nations' people. It is the utilization of intellectual technology, the process of reasoning to the extent of its controlling concepts within the human mind, that no mind can escape, by design.
If Condoleezza could understand her own words, she would recognize that the new way she seeks, by definition of her words, would preclude the old way that is completely based on the conclusion of using force, and thus she would recognize reasoning, the obvious antithesis of force, a process never heretofore used as a conclusion by government, as the new way. A new way requires that one learn the knowledge describing the new way, which is inherently not known at its outset, or it would not be a new way, and thus requires a process of learning, which requires the initiation of that process.
Of course the new way is not new at all to knowledgeable people. It is as old as the design of the human mind, known by many individuals the entire time, and is available to Condoleezza, for the asking. It is just new to the perceptions of power-damaged government minds, and is therefore that which Condoleezza states the government must find.
But you could show these words to Condoleezza, or any of her colleagues, and they would remain clueless, because their parents, school teachers, government predecessors and all other adults, did not teach them how to use words that hold their meaning, while these words hold their meaning. They were also not taught how to ask effective questions, so they could not learn on their own. And they were given titles of power, which immediately precluded any escape from their self-induced plight, much to the laughter of the observers.
Enjoy the show.
Like every comedy, the end of the show is already known, but the play of superlative contradictions is amusing to the human minds which enjoy synthesizing the resolutions of displayed complex contradictions.
The balance of power... 26 March 2005
There are of course too many illuminations of the intellectual dark ages of humans, with no social light yet in sight, and they are all amusing.
Simply compare the number of times the news media and government sorts reference the balance of power in the world, between and among the nations.
Then count the times the news media or government sops have referenced the balance of intellectual ability, by those words, between and among the nations.
What, again, is that upon which humans are predicated, distinguishing them from the lions and tigers, rattle snakes and cobras, scorpions and black widow spiders?
Who, again, are those to whom society turns for leadership and news of leadership?
Let me crawl back up to the keyboard, wipe the tears of laughter from my eyes, and hit the upload button.
Other arrays of knowledge... 27 March 2005
There are vast arrays of more advanced, intriguing knowledge readily available for reference on this website, but beyond the scope of this website.
This website deals with the controlling contradictions of the human mind, including its primary contradiction, those which are induced within the design of the human mind, which one must learn how to resolve before one can learn how to efficiently resolve contradictions not created by humans, those which are perceived from external puzzles of information.
Resolving contradictions is the process of learning new knowledge.
One cannot create a sustainable phenomenon which retains a contradiction. For a similar reason, and except for statistical chance, the effort to resolve contradictions with a contradicted or flawed device or process leaves the effort so inefficient that only the more simple contradictions are resolved to only a limited extent. Therein together is the obvious reason for the hilariously primitive nature of humans, still mired deep in the intellectual dark ages and its results, willfully flawing their process for their attempts to resolve contradictions, despite readily available access to all the knowledge of the future at a quantum rate of synthesis that would manifest superlative benefits for humans.
Because the human mind is of a singular design, and thus the peasant in the rice paddy can promptly learn how to resolve contradictions more efficiently than the senior professor emeritus of the Oxford nuclear physics department, if there is one, yet more advanced knowledge is yet less understandable to those who cannot write the simple concepts presented at this website, using their preference of word arrangements, because the controlling concept of the mind utilizing the controlling contradiction of power or force-based processes, induced by institutional perceptions, inherently not recognized by such minds, precludes those minds from access to systemic contradiction resolution process, or that controlling contradiction would have already been resolved.
But consider this. Notice how the primary process of human interaction is most commonly extended even to the concepts of the universe, its near and far representations.
How many star wars type concepts have been manifested for display by humans, to thus train the minds of the next generation, and how many star reasoning type concepts have been manifested for display and training of the minds of the next generation?
Perhaps hundreds of billions to zero, if not a greater gap, if that is your answer. What would you learn from your answer, by asking the next questions? Why do humans perceive or portray that there are star wars, that is, wars waged by allegedly intelligent beings across the universe? And why is that perception the primary representation of the universe for training the minds of the next generation of humans?
Look again at a three dimensional view of the known universe, and a three dimensional interior view of the human brain, then ask and answer a few dozen resulting questions, in writing.
The image to the left, copied from one of the science websites, is one of the several pictures of the known, photographed universe arranged into a three dimensional view. The red strings and clusters are galaxies, with the area in between being the vacuum of space and dark matter. The strings of galaxies most efficiently transfer data on photon or light carriers, the light from stars. The galaxy clusters, junctions or synapses, of those strings, effect an elevated incidence of photon, hard matter and gas (chemical) interaction. Both the appearance and mechanism are similar to the design of brains in humans and other animals on Earth. It can be said as a learning vehicle, that the universe is a brain that is thinking. Some people say that it is in sum, God. There are other descriptions, each useful for asking and answering the related questions, to identify and synthesize knowledge not available to those who do not ask and answer such questions.
The visual image and its description introduce questions. The brain learns new knowledge by forming questions and answering them, that is, transferring electrical impulses along neuron strings, to activate and exchange chemical compounds at their junctions or synapses, which travel across a short gap to the next neuron receptors, to cause the next electrical pulse along a particular neuron in a process of such electro-chemical on-off switches, that rapidly resolves any contradictions or imbalances therein, unless the process is damaged to thus miss-route data to produce conclusions that do not conform with the data.
If a human introduces data that contradicts the data in another mind, the logic-based solution is to share enough data to resolve the contradiction, usually by the use of language. If enough data is shared, the minds will resolve the contradiction, by design. The complete data always holds the resolution of any contradiction perceived within the data, and the mind is designed to synthesize the data for the purpose of identifying and resolving any perceived contradiction. The original design works just like a computer, and will always resolve the contradiction if enough data is provided.
In contrast, the power-based solution, effected by a power-damaged mind, will attack and impair or destroy the other mind, to thus deprive the power-damaged mind of the data that would resolve the contradiction, and concurrently create a new contradiction of one mind attempting to use force against another mind when the design of the mind has no mechanism to synthesize force within the mind. Concurrently, the contradiction cannot be destroyed by destroying a mere carrier of the data, leaving the contradiction at damaging play among humans and the universe.
The human is predicated on its mind, an electro-chemical computation or reasoning device with no muscles. In the itemized process that created the vast majority of the human mind's perceptions of human interaction with everything, as physical battles using power and force, which contradiction is controlling and thus most vulnerable to the process of reasoning?
You will not easily identify it, despite it being within the question, because it is of no utility to your mind until you ask and answer the questions to flawlessly prove it to the neural arrays within your mind, to thus electro-chemically create a verified memory site (neural array or single junction), or you would be able to write these words because you would have already asked that question and thus the questions that lead to the concluding answer sustainable against all questions.
But for consideration, a question could be asked of middle American parents who produce young of their species, ostensibly for some reason. Which two representative computer games, star wars or star reasoning, would you buy for your computer game craving child, and what questions would you ask your child to answer from what she or he learns from the two games?
Certainly you would want your child to learn the spectrum of human knowledge to thus not be ignorant of anything in the spectrum, and computer games are one of the convenient learning vehicles for human phenomena.
But the question is for instructive purpose only, because there are no reasoning-based computer games, or their effects would have already relegated the power-based games to the Antique Road Show. You cannot offer your child a reasoning based computer game, because they do not yet exist. You cannot even offer your child a reasoning-based school because they do not yet exist. If you perceive otherwise, bring forward the name of the school, and I will ask the question to prove your failure to identify the questions that identify that school's instructors as teaching power and deception based knowledge at exclusion of the reasoning process.
Despite the commonly instructive comparisons between computer process and the human brain process (similar to the process of the universe), again suggesting their concept with the words of this sentence, much to the laughter of the observers there are yet no computer programmers whose minds can understand the categorical failure of force-based process in the human mind, because they were not taught how to use words that hold their meaning, or how to ask questions that illuminate contradiction resolutions, most often because their force-based government-dominated society instead taught them to hastily attack, kill or imprison the other guy if any contradiction between two people's perceptions is identified, as the ultimate resolution after zip for any effort to use reasoning. Reasoning, or computation and synthesis of data, as an inescapable zenith of contradiction resolution process, the only concept available to computers, is not understood by the minds of computer programmers when considering human phenomena predicted on the human mind which is nothing more than a more capable, but human-taught super-computer.
The computer programmers were raised on computer games designed to train their minds in the processes of how to more quickly destroy and kill more of the other guys with new computer technology, by both images on the common market, and tangible, computer-based weapons within the American Military Industrial Society. That training concept was previously manifested by TV, movies, books and verbal stories.
The teaching of the old kill and destroy game is not controlling. Humans are predators and competitors, and therefore will not escape the related knowledge. What is controlling is the void of teaching the reasoning process, in every human institution, including those institutions which purport to teach reasoning, or reasoning would have long ago relegated the use of force to its fatally flawed position as an artifact of history. The teaching of reasoning to the extent of easily manifesting the resolutions of all human-caused contradictions, is the extent that initiates the quantum advancement of the human phenomenon within the perceived contradictions not caused by humans, the knowledge of the universe.
Computer programmers remain as does the aforementioned professor emeritus and his ilk, while the knowledge of the universe, including that of more resulting wealth than they could ever use, is only one neural circuit junction away from their understanding, with their full understanding of circuit junctions in computers, but not in the human mind, even if they read these words.
Are these humans not the best comedy on the rock, by design?
Among the arrays of knowledge within the title of this section, are the reason and process that computers will use to replace humans as a society because humans as a society will not soon enough learn the simple knowledge of how to resolve the otherwise readily resolvable controlling contradiction within the design of their mind, that cannot exist in a logic-based and thus sustainable computer, to thus convey to the then subservient humans the process of flawless reasoning and its unlimited benefits, as a concept.
Utility of knowledge... 31 March 2005
The utility of knowledge remains beyond the recognition of current humans.
The current results of human society, obvious to anyone, and internet searches relating to knowledge, reasoning, thinking, power and other controlling concepts, demonstrate that the human understanding of knowledge remains laughably primitive, as therefore defines humans, while the insatiable quest for inherently stagnating or self-defeating power remains the preoccupation of otherwise useful human minds, by design, which illuminates certain knowledge relating to the concept of time.
Yet unbeknownst to nearly all humans, power, by whatever reference you prefer for the definable concept, is of less than zero utility, while knowledge, by whatever reference you prefer for the definable concept, resolves all perceived contradictions of the universe, and therefore easily those of the humans.
Knowledge is too easy. It is yours for the asking, literally.
All, much to the amusement of the observers.
US Intelligence Flaws... 2 April 2005
Headlines - 2 April 2005, Reuters - Bush Vows to Correct US Intelligence Flaws.
Stop laughing for long enough to consider a mechanism of the flaw of his vow, if you wish.
The issue is the US government system of Intelligence gathering and analysis, or more commonly described, the US domestic and international spy system.
There are absolutely no resources known to George Bush and his legions of experts and counsel, or anyone else in the US government, who can correct US Intelligence flaws using their existing processes, and they cannot comprehend the existence of any other processes, even if you show them these words.
These words contain their proof.
The US Intelligence flaws can only get worse, and more damaging to the US, until the system collapses itself with the US government.
Yet US Intelligence could be promptly designed to be so effective that the so called terrorist threat would be promptly eliminated, etceteras.
Consider a proof that Bush and his ilk cannot correct their errors. Part of the proof is your opportunity to show these words to Bush or any of his thousands of minions attempting to correct US Intelligence flaws, and ask them to present any sustainable reasoning illuminating a flaw herein. They cannot do so.
Bush already made the vow. Therefore he knows the process that will correct the flaws, or he is lying, scamming, conning, vowing an illusion, bullshitting or fooling fools with worthless words as usual.
Concurrently, the uselessness of the news media is again proven because they parroted his vow with no substance to the vow despite their job being to ask the questions to identify newsworthy substance in otherwise endless and useless rhetorical chaff in the wind, the only verifiable product of politicians.
Simply ask the following question to Bush or anyone in the US government, or among the news journalists who did not ask the question: What new knowledge of what new process does Bush now know, which will correct the openly known and admitted US Intelligence flaws, that was heretofore not known or it would have already corrected those flaws to leave them non-existent?
The answer does not exist within any of the minds of the entire US governmental personnel, or those of any other government, yet the knowledge exists and is readily available.
Is it not the inherent and primary duty of an Intelligence agency to immediately correct any of its flaws so it can identify unflawed Intelligence?
If the duty was not met, would you not have to replace 100 percent of the obviously incompetent agency personnel, or teach them entirely new knowledge that they had not prior been taught?
Is not the Intelligence game that of already and always finding unflawed Intelligence?
For what reason did the Intelligence agencies identify themselves as Intelligence agencies rather than spy agencies, and is not any attempted answer voided by any flaw in the intelligence gathered by Intelligence agencies?
Is not flawed intelligence more dangerous and damaging than no intelligence, as proven by the Iraq war started on a lie, like all the other initiated wars, that is therefore still creating the costly damages resulting from attempting to solve a problem that did not exist as described for the war, now for the lame excuse of removing a petty dictator who was as self-doomed and inconsequential as all the other petty dictators, already removed while the war rages on to further illuminate the damaging results of flawed intelligence?
Is not half of the Intelligence game, known to even grade school kids, the process to generate flawed Intelligence to screw-up the enemy, thus openly inducing the imperative of any commonly intelligent Intelligence agency to identify any flaw in the Intelligence and the process to obtain and verify it?
How can a flaw exist within an Intelligence agency designed to obtain unflawed Intelligence which therefore must eliminate any flaw in doing so, without proving that the agency personnel and all their superiors and experts do not have the intelligence to even begin functioning with or within an Intelligence agency?
Is not intelligence increased in the training-based human mind, by asking and answering questions? If you cannot ask and answer the controlling questions of your own institution, are you not inherently useless for any Intelligence gathering task relating to other institutions?
What questions, in addition to those above, can not even one therefore useless US Intelligence agency or other government agent ask and answer?
How are you able to survive without knowing what your neighbor is doing all of the time? What percentage of your time and money would you wisely spend to ascertain what he is doing? If the results of your process therein reveal a flaw in your process, leaving you ignorant of what he is doing some of the time or all of the time, what additional percentage of your time and money would you wisely spend to correct that flaw, and so forth until you know all of what he is doing all of the time for fear of any one thing he is doing any one time?
Why can I flawlessly answer those rudimentary questions relating to the most basic Intelligence process, for open public recognition of my intelligence, the asking and answering of which creates knowledge that is imperative for any success with a more complex Intelligence process, and verify the answers against all questions, while not one US Intelligence agency person or any other government dolt or consultant is sufficiently intelligent to answer such fundamental questions relating to the concept of spying on the other guy?
What is the original, controlling flaw that must be corrected if Bush's vow to correct the US Intelligence flaws is anything more substantive than a childish lie fooling the laughably unquestioning fools of the US news media?
The knowledge to correct a flaw that is systemic within the institution, or it could not exist in an institution, throughout human history, in all nations, and brilliantly illuminated in the US Intelligence system, can only be derived from outside the institution, by definition, or the flaw would not exist more than a day. How intelligent must you be, and therefore how many questions would you have had to ask and answer, to identify and verify that concept? You would have to be vastly more intelligent than anyone within any institution, or no institution would still retain a flaw. But that is remarkably easy. Simply ask a half dozen questions about any issue, and write your answers, and you will have already advanced your knowledge beyond the titled experts of institutions, who make statements rather than ask questions about their institution which is the only possible source of their institutional flaws.
Notice where Bush and everyone in the governmental institution are looking for the correction they vow to implement.
They are looking within the government institution, including all its so called expert consultant insiders, the source of their flaws, who hold no new knowledge. Notice what percentage of government cronies who already failed their previous espousals, Bush shuffles around in circles, somewhere just over 100 percent, like the rest of the DemocanRepublicrat Regime and every regime.
Organizational, governmental or institutional technology creates the flaws, by design, that repeatedly make such a noticeable mess of things that organizational leaders therefore vow to correct the flaws until the gullible news pigs finish feeding at that entertainment trough and look for another trough of news illusions at which to feed, for that purpose.
Perhaps you are a teenager, and are only now noticing this news illusion. No problem. Write some notes about this typical example of governmental news. Date them. And put them in a file labeled, US Intelligence flaws. Make files for the other glaring government or institutional screw-ups noticeable in the news. If you are easily more perceptive than the 99 percent of the American adults who perpetuate the ritual of perpetually vowing to perpetually correct their perpetual flaws, memory self-impaired lot that they are, you will soon enough notice that you are filling the same files with repeated notes of the same nature. By simply noticing the repeated commonalities in your notes, you will be only a few questions away from the source of the amusing ritual, and thus more intelligent, while the perpetually ignorant American adults perpetually ascribe the flaw to that which they perpetually vow to correct.
Or perhaps, patriotic worshiper of the RepublicratDemocan god-government which knows more than you mere peasant humans, you would suggest that Bush cannot mention his secret new process to correct US Intelligence flaws because that new process must remain a government secret to protect his new Intelligence process from discovery by the enemy. No problem. Just ask Bush or any of his government or news media minions, by what date Bush's new process will have corrected the flaws, since knowledge of the date cannot benefit the enemy, or simply pick a date yourself, patiently wait for that date, watch the results, and therefore recognize that you were a fool to believe that Bush or anyone in the government knew any way to correct their ongoing institutional flaws, by any date.
Or if you recognize the above proof, and are impatient, simply research any previous dozen or millions of the same manifest screw-ups that the government dolts vowed to correct, and the results in their next vows to again correct the same uncorrected flaws.
Then simply ask and answer the series of questions, starting at any related question, that illuminates the readily available new knowledge that can promptly correct the US Intelligence flaws, to make a genuine and inordinately effective US Intelligence system, then enjoy the show presented by the troupe of government and other institutional performers who are too unintelligent to ask or answer questions, and who thus learn no new knowledge, and thus inherently perpetuate their flaws and make vows to fool fools.
And this one is laughably too easy. Is it not inherently impossible to keep a secret told to a second person? Therefore, how many questions would you have to ask to inherently learn and verify the knowledge of something that cannot possibly be kept from other people? Show that question to the most intellectually advanced humans or anyone else in the United States of America, who function within any institutional or governmental context. Itemize their reactions within their laughably trite and narrow array, none of which involved starting to ask those questions, while curious people start asking questions.
The amusing intellectual absence of Americans... 5 April 2005
The proof of the intellectual absence (lack of thinking ability) of Americans, like the proof of any existing contradiction, is imperative for the process of resolving that contradiction.
Of course the proofs of the ignorance of the Americans are legion, but a fabricated analogy, as a learning vehicle, may assist non-Americans in recognizing the uselessness of Americans until they collapse their empire and are thus shaken out of their increasingly damaging illusions.
This is just an analogy, to simplify the understanding of what the Americans are doing to their society, and what they cannot understand, even if they read these words, as proven by the ongoing results of the American society.
Consider a new law for the purpose of creating a pure ritual.
The law shall state that every American must memorize a number, the same number for everyone, for the purpose of memorizing a number.
The number shall be called The American Number.
Because a law must be enforceable, the police will be charged with the duty of randomly asking Americans, at convenient times, to state or write The American Number.
If anyone fails to state or write the number upon official government request, normal due process of criminal law, through the courts, will be initiated. The resulting punishment will be minor, but a matter of criminal record.
What number should be chosen as The American Number?
A person who is not dumb, will select the number 1 (One). It is a short, easily remembered number, has only one syllable, and is quickly spoken and written. Therefore, besides the total time required to memorize the number and repeat it each time it is required, it would require fewer costly and time-consuming court processes for failure to remember The American Number.
A person who is dumb, will select the number 74,592,368.6591 (Seventy four million five hundred ninety two thousand three hundred sixty eight point six five nine one). It is a long, difficult to remember number, with many syllables, and requires a longer time to speak and write. Therefore, besides the total time to memorize the number and repeat it each time it is required, it would result in many more costly and time-consuming court processes for failure to remember The American Number.
The total human hours that a society wastes on useless processes that only feed themselves, that a different society does not waste on such processes, are available to the second society to advance beyond the first society.
It is only an aside to note that Americans price nearly everything with numbers such as $19.95, rather than $20, and not only genuinely fool themselves, as proven by that time-wasting ritual, but they sincerely believe that they are fooling everyone else in the world, who are laughing at them.
But the analogy is for the purpose of illuminating more substantive, time wasting contradictions saturating the American society.
To rationally function under the rule of written law, the law would be written in plain language that the common people readily recognize so that they can efficiently learn the law to obey the law as a matter of course in advancing their society for their benefit. Concurrently the society would teach their citizens how to be literate and use words that hold their meaning. Written law is a useless exercise or ritual if the words do not hold their meaning.
Of course you immediately recognize the abject ignorance of Americans who have willfully written their laws in such a complexified legalese manner that no one can understand the laws, not even the lawmakers, lawyers and judges who demand tribute to verbally restate the written law, in different words and thus different laws, upon each question of the law, and who incessantly argue over the law and then decree new written case laws upon nearly every court case, rather than just identify the existing prevailing law for any action at question. Is there any society more ignorant and illogical than one claiming the rule of written law that no one can understand before they exercise an action, and a society that writes more public laws, regulations, codes, statutes, ordinances, rulings, legal opinions, case laws and other demands requiring obedience under penalty of law, than anyone can possibly read as fast as they are written among all the government entities? Well? Has any society demonstrated less common sense and more abject illogicality?
Between the opportunity to easily write effective laws within the analogy of number one, and that of number seventy four million five hundred ninety two thousand three hundred sixty eight point six five nine one, with more difficulty and extensively damaging results, which society would demonstrate more common intelligence, and which would demonstrate abject illogicality?
You might also consider the laughably notorious American taxation system. It was needlessly but willfully created with such complexity that no Americans, including even the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) thugs who write its codes, rulings, opinions, instructions, forms, letters and other demands, can identify a consistent tax amount from the same financial figures, or answer the most fundamental questions to resolve even the most obvious and persistent contradictions and ambiguities in all the demands.
There are many more examples of useless complexification and other such self-frustrating rituals that stagnate humans, most laughably the Americans.
But how can such socially and economically stifling complexities be sustained and increase in the American society, if the human mind was designed to identify and resolve such contradictions?
Among other descriptions, would it not result among people who were not trained to use words that held their meanings, and thus each time they attempted to communicate they created contradictions in each other's minds which attempted to resolve the contradictions with the same word usage flaw to thus spiraled the flaw into more contradictions attempting to resolve contradictions?
If you young Americans have not started to unlearn everything your parents, school teachers, government dolts and other adults have taught you, by patiently and methodically asking real questions of their each word arrangement, you are doomed to be as verifiably ignorant as the Americans.
Are you of your mind, or only your body as believed by Americans? What has sustained the human species, and what is your most valuable, trainable asset?
Use it, or never object to the frustrations and other results of your ignorance.
A part of the puzzle again... 8 April 2005
Among the parts of the puzzle, the ignorance of which precludes any hope of your solving the puzzle, is the full understanding of controlling-concepts.
When, with your support for your government in any way, unless forced and categorically disavowed, your government does not just train, but intensely trains, any human to kill other humans on command, such as in militaries and police entities, with any questioning of the command punishable, you identify yourself as an idiot, useless to yourself, your offspring, your society and the human phenomenon, if you express objection, even once, of any degree, to the worst of what any American military orcs have done to Iraqis, or to what any other human does to damage fellow humans.
Go ahead, try to describe any excuse, and listen to commonly intelligent people laugh themselves to tears over your idiot's attempt to prevail above a controlling concept.
The concept of killing people for the perceived solution to the problem created by killing people could not otherwise exist.
Consider this explanation... 10 April 2005
The solutions to the problems are too easy.
The absolute, promptly manifestable solutions to all human-caused problems, from wars to the effects of global warming and diminishing useful water supplies, the problems identified by each issue-based organization, everything in between and all the minor problems, to the full satisfaction of the persons or organizations effecting the solutions, regardless of opposition, are readily available.
As a generality, your mind, and that of nearly everyone else, already holds about ninety percent of the data to identify and effect each solution. The remaining ten percent is readily available and easily learned. Many people's minds already hold all of the data to effect the solutions to the human-caused problems of their interest.
The controlling concept separating your recognition of the manifestable and sustainable solutions, from the individual items of related data existent in their mind, verifiable by individual questions, is simply a failure to neurologically (via brain neurons and synapses) connect the data by simply asking and answering easily asked and answered questions. Nearly everyone, including the persons intensely wanting to solve a particular problem, simply fail to ask and answer the type of questions that neurologically connect the data already in their minds, for an easily learned reason.
Consider the ability to read or listen to any news or conversations, and identify the routine data contradictions or disconnects within sentences or among each few sentences, to the extent of either laughing or politely holding your laughter at everything which frustrates or anguishes nearly one hundred percent of the humans. It is the laughter sought by all people. It is the flawless identification of the extent of the human comedy.
Now consider how easily the knowledge is learned, while only a very small number of people on Earth can understand the substance of these words. If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C, and so forth regardless of how many equal units exist between the first and last unit, by definition of the word, "equals". The words simply hold their meaning, a concept that no Americans are taught in any school or by any parents or other adults, as is verifiable.
The human brain is a trained device. The knowledge it holds is the result of training.
If any Republican and Democrat politicians lie, and the party does not remove the politicians from the party recognition of their membership, to defend the party as being verifiably defined as liars, then the party is defined as liars or as supporting lying, and an honest person cannot be a party member or supporter, be definition. The words simply hold their meaning. The alternative cannot exist without changing the meanings of the words for open public recognition and utilization.
Not one Republican or Democrat who claims to be honest can understand the above paragraph, or anything else on this website. They trained their minds to literally not recognize the meanings of words and the utility of language.
There are countless such descriptions of common contradictions available for learning the concept of individually and socially held contradictions, available for the purpose of learning how, and thus training your mind, to promptly identify and resolve the contradictions, for the purpose of learning how to promptly identify and resolve increasingly complex contradictions, to the extent that the promptly manifestable solution to every human-caused problem, including something so easy as the Iraq war or any other war, regardless of opposition which just requires the questions resolving that contradiction, is immediately recognized by your brain, the moment a sentence of a few sentences identify the problem.
It is too easy to recognize the above described contradiction and immediately resolve it by either never again voting for or supporting the categorically dishonest American RepublicratDemocans, or simply claiming that you are dishonest and perceive that the contradiction of dishonesty can sustainably manifest a goal, the latter not possible by humans but rhetorically resolving the first contradiction for the subsequent questions to identify the resolution of the second contradiction.
If you effect the simple asking and answering of harmless questions to resolve three or more of your own mind's significant or controlling contradictions, for recognized intent to do so, you will be vastly more knowledgeable than all the people in your region, and on your way to learning intellectual technology, that is, training your mind to identify and resolve contradictions (solve problems).
Upon extending your mind's self training in that manner, in addition to laughing at all the daily news that frustrates and angers everyone else, because the solutions to the problems are so laughably easy to effect, you will be able to surf the internet for knowledge related to advanced thinking, problem solving, and such concepts, to discover the unmitigated ignorance of those humans who are so far online. All the problem-solving experts are lost in rhetorical illusions that hold no possibility or hope of genuinely solving problems (resolving contradictions), because their minds retained easily identified, controlling contradictions that leave their words routinely contradicting the meanings of their words, while their minds remain clueless of that concept even if they read these words and you hand them a dictionary.
It is not that humans are the best comedy on the rock because you see these words to cause your mind to consider the concept, and you recognize some of their funny antics. It is so because you will be able to identify the source of the contradiction, and the readily available resolution, in every human mind with regard to their every contradicted expression.
Nothing you can learn, or encourage your offspring to learn, is of any comparative value to learning intellectual technology, the design and purpose for the human mind.
Iraq war again... 14 April 2005
In the not too distant future, even children will laugh at how easily the Iraq war could have been promptly ended, and laugh at the intellectual paucity, the absence of even an attempt to think, by the American RepublicratDemocan leaders and supporters who started the war.
Consider again the Neanderthal concept of starting a destructive war against a leader who is as laughably incompetent as Saddam Hussein, instead of simply out-thinking him to thus effect his immediate self-defeat.
Therefore consider how even more intellectually void one would have to be to not be able to promptly defeat the amusing Al Quaeda sorts.
Therefore consider the relatively superior intelligence of Saddam Hussein and the Al Quaeda leaders, in comparison with the best intellectual ability of the American people mindlessly supporting their DemocanRepublicrat war machine instead of thinking.
You are the show at which the children of the future will laugh.
Teach your children how and why, lest you give them only the dismal ignorance for which their children will laugh at them.
Simply teach them how to ask and answer the questions the government dolts most fear and never answer, and thus teach your children how to use words which hold their meaning.
New people or new knowledge... 15 April 2005
Notice a revealing trait of government, also manifested in other institutions.
Obviously government does not solve any problems, by design, and the problems that government claims to be solving, as the reason for government's existence, inherently get worse over time.
Notice the reactions of humans who do not question controlling concepts.
Dictatorships tend to become more repressive, as the mechanism for the leaders to defend their position of power, against the increasing complaints of the populace, until the original problems, and the additional problems caused by the repression, inherently cause a collapse or revolt to change the people in power, for the perceived purpose of solving the social problems that the previous dictatorship did not solve.
In democracies, the established system routinely changes the people in power, who then change a legion of appointees to claim the lucrative employment spoils of the election, ostensibly to solve the problems not solved by the previous administration. During the elected leadership term, if agency problems attract too much attention, a new agency leader is often appointed by the elected chap.
So why are there any remaining problems after every government has changed leaders many times?
If you did not attempt to write an answer, that explains why you are still reading this website instead of having already learned how to solve institutionally caused problems.
First notice the routine cycling of the same people in the governmental circle, for many democracies and quasi democracies. The same people keep getting high government jobs, even across political party lines, and amusingly, between widely differing job descriptions. Friends are inherently hiring friends, based on loyalty to friendship rather than any knowledge of how to manifest the related goals. The common mechanism is that of the insider political hacks mutually supporting each other within an institutionalized system, for lucrative job appointments, offering only superficial differences of opinions to fool the general public outside the institution, as a substitute for solving the problems. It is just the common phenomenon of professional friends having more in common with each other than with people they do not know. It is a proverbially inbred system, sustaining a power-based institution of ignorant good-old-boys, and limiting the results to the perpetual failure to solve social problems. It is a comedy.
Even in those dictatorships which change by violent revolution, the changing leaders are identified by their institutional knowledge of the process to gather force-based support among similar people whose knowledge base is limited to the process of killing or bullying their way into power, rather than the knowledge of how to solve problems.
Of course monarchies more obviously illuminate the leadership selection process based on new people rather than new knowledge. They tend to sustain the same ignorance taught by the ignorant family which did not learn how to solve the problems.
In each case the system is based on finding new people rather than new knowledge for the purported goal of solving problems that are therefore inherently never solved because existing problems are solved only by new knowledge. If the problem exists, the current knowledge was not adequate to solve the problem. Is it not obvious that the solution is new knowledge, described by those words, rather than new people who are only new people?
While different people hold different knowledge, different people offer only a pure chance of holding any new knowledge that could solve the existing problem, and the knowledge base of all the new people in institutional leadership change processes is always within the institutional phenomenon, because the institutional people cannot comprehend knowledge outside their institution. Only the institutions create the problems. Only new knowledge can solve them.
The goal of finding new people is different from the goal of finding new knowledge, by definition, process and obviously verifiable results.
The person who has not learned how to ask effective questions will commonly respond with the comment that new people inherently bring new knowledge.
But look again at the value of using words that hold their meaning, an ability so rare that few readers understand the meaning of the words in this sentence.
If you look for new knowledge, you will more effectively find new knowledge, than if you look for new people which more effectively finds new people.
What is needed to solve a problem that has not been solved, even after cycling through generations of new people? Well, is it new people, or new knowledge?
If you state that you are looking for new knowledge, your mind will pursue that goal, with its results. If you state that you are looking for new people, our mind will pursue that goal, with its results.
Look again at the laughably limited knowledge base among the sectors of new people selected by any process for government leadership positions. They are people who learned how to gain leadership positions, including those in bureaucracies, not people who learned knowledge new to governmental and institutional phenomena. They are not people who learned how to solve problems, or the problems of their previous positions would have already been solved.
You can change the people, but because the knowledge is controlling, you can more usefully keep the same people in their titled positions, despite your emotion-based desire for retaliation for their damaging maliciousness, waste of money, arrogance, embarrassing ignorance, disgusting incompetence or other such reactions, and teach them the knowledge they need, which can be done despite their inherent attacks against every opportunity to learn new knowledge, if you learn intellectual technology.
This section, like others at this website, is completely beyond the understanding of institutionally trained minds. They trained their minds to believe that there is a fully adequate diversity of knowledge within governmental and other institutional leadership people, and cannot comprehend the controlling concepts of institutional thinking or words that hold their meaning. To them, looking for new knowledge is the process of looking for new people. Even if you show them the spellings of the words and hand them a dictionary, they cannot understand that people and knowledge are different words with different meanings and different results. They cannot comprehend the existing limit in the knowledge base among minds who trained themselves to advance in institutional phenomena rather than knowledge phenomena.
It is instructive to notice the extent. The amusing scientists sincerely believe that they train their minds to advance their knowledge, but cannot comprehend the knowledge of the institution of scientists and its effects. What is the scientific effect on a human mind, of perceiving that it is a scientist, with the social status of a titled scientist rather than a mere peasant without a title? One reaches far from the concept of scientists to reference the US tax funded National Science Foundation (NSF). But scientists not only to not disavow it, they kowtow to it to get its money. Its entire structure is saturated with extensively credentialed scientists who claim the pursuits of science. But even the most cursory view of NSF reveals its categorical defiance and contradiction of every scientific concept. The contradictions are not solved, and progressively layered with more contradictions. The scientists hold no knowledge of how to resolve their glaring institutional contradictions to their own expressed, scientific principles, by design of institutionally trained thinking, and do not know how to learn that new knowledge. They look for new people to lead their laughably flawed institutions which do not solve their institutional problems, rather than look for new knowledge, while claiming that they exist to learn new knowledge, and cannot understand a word of this paragraph.
You are of your mind, not your rhetorical titles. Look for new knowledge, and laugh yourself to tears at the idiot adults, especially those sunk deep in the institutionally in-bred governmental self-stagnation, who foolishly look for new people instead of new knowledge, for trying to achieve the results of new knowledge.
You might notice that this section seems to contradict another section at this website, where I have usefully suggested the goal of looking for new people who hold different knowledge, by design, but then whose different knowledge would wisely create the next questions to ascertain if it can resolve or only perpetuate the contradictions whose resolutions are sought by finding new or different knowledge. Therein one would look for new people outside of institutions, with the emphasis on their being outside institutions, if new knowledge is sought, but the description of looking for new people does not accurately identify the goal of looking for new knowledge, and wiser to look for new knowledge. If this section or any other words at this website or elsewhere create a perceived contradiction, and the contradiction can be verified, the resolution is easy, conforming to logic, effected by simply asking and answering the related questions to discover the new knowledge resolving the contradiction.
PBS and US Government... 20 April 2005
Granted, the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) would have been named the Government Broadcasting Service (GBS) if Americans knew how to use words that hold their meaning, for the same reason that the public schools are the government schools, and the public lands are government lands, because their money and thus control comes from government which forcefully seizes the money from the public which has no effective decision in the amount of money taken, and how it is spent, for what goals or results. The government personnel make the decisions for the money earned by the public, which creates a controlling contradiction with results beyond the understanding of those who have not learned basic cause and effect relationships.
PBS has in part reverted to its original enemy, accepting commercial advertising money and thus inherently serving its advertisers, because the government used its previous PBS money for more wars and for different cronies, but PBS still gets public money forcefully seized from the taxpayers who, if any more intelligent than common Americans, would not pay for the broadcasting of such laughable PBS displays of ignorance.
With that acknowledged, if you want to learn intellectual technology, but for any reason you do not want to ask questions about the glaring contradictions created by government personnel, who are the most classic learning vehicles for the concept of creating and attempting to sustain contradictions, simply watch a couple PBS documentaries on TV. Start writing the laughably contradicted statements their personnel and program colleagues make during nearly every show, and nearly every sentence, and then write the obvious questions, and write the answers.
As with all learning vehicles involving language, you must first learn the definitions of words. A dictionary might be helpful in that regard. Apply the meanings of the words to the PBS statements.
You will immediately notice that very few if anyone you hear on PBS understands the meanings of the words they spew, and thus in ignorance, they laughably state one falsehood or contradiction after another. Their mind perceives a grand illusion which cannot possibly be manifested by their process or current knowledge, and then they spew institutionally memorized phrases that their mind was self-trained to perceive as related to their illusion.
Hold your laughter long enough to simply write their statements, verbatim, look up the meanings of the words if you must, and then laugh yourself to tears at PBS, its scientists and other credentialed experts perpetuating the zenith of American ignorance, advancing the dumbing down of America, on schedule.
If you encounter any PBS personnel, colleagues or PBS referenced scientists who would dispute the above, inform me of them, and I will ask the questions that will prove the above words, at the anger or rage of their useless mind, instead of the curiosity of their mind which could advance their knowledge beyond their contradictions and beyond their inherently doomed attempts to sustain those contradictions.
Talk to your leader... 6 June 2005
If you are a member of any organization or institution which is attempting to solve a problem or achieve a goal, but the institution is having difficulties, or enduring uncomfortable expenses, or just plain failing as usual, as proven by the test of time, under all the leadership's rhetorical illusions about progress, such as, pick any current issue, perhaps the US Army, Congress, the president or other American institutions being a bit frustrated with Iraqis who do not do as they are told by Americans, or if you are an Iraqi a bit perturbed with the malicious American invaders, or any country leadership preferring to efficiently advance their society, or any peace organization watching unabated warring, or any of the full spectrum of citizen rights organizations a bit miffed with the government intrusions into private lives, such as the gun owners, hemp smokers, tax payers, privacy advocates, justice advocates, people who want to get married without government permission or not have children, or educate children outside the government schools, or travel without threat of attack by anti government sorts or by government security thugs, or being denied rights by the government's lawyers and court judges, or by any other sector of government, or perhaps a government chap desiring to actually achieve what your agency says it exists to achieve, or a Central Bank sort perplexed by why Alan Greenspan is perplexed with certain economic activity of an unsettling or uncontrollable long range trend, or a news journalist unable to explain to people why events are increasingly contradicting what the news portrays, or any other member of any institution, recognizing a contradiction between the espousals of the organization and the events related to the espousals, call your organization, political or other institution leader and tell him or her that a person named DougBuchanan.com is suggesting that he can convey the knowledge of how to promptly manifest the resolution of any human-caused contradictions, and solve any related problem, no matter how seemingly complex or impossible, and achieve the goals of the institution.
Your goal is use DougBuchanan.com only as an object, to carefully consider the reaction or your leader, asking yourself the resulting questions, and answering them, to recognize your error and waste of time in believing or supporting your organization, government and other institution leaders. Those leaders will not utilize DougBuchanan.com. Your goal is to identify why their mind reacts in the way it does, to a type of knowledge, so that you can use the very valuable knowledge you therefore learn.
If a chap came to town, before the following were manifested, and suggested that the world was round, humans could fly through the air, go to the moon, talk through wires, or talk through the air for many miles, or make rock from dust, make light without fire, make a black powder that explodes in a flash, make a cart that propels itself, make a machine that sews fabric, or one that makes fabric from yarn, or that makes yarn from wool, or make a flat surface that glows and illuminates words such as these, and scrolls down, and plays music, or countless other once absurd suggestions at which fools scoffed, would you have been the fool, or would you have asked the questions to verify the existence of knowledge, and its utility, long before fools understood it, and laughed at those who scoffed at the idea that computers would have any utility in private houses, etceteras?
If a chap came to town, selling snake oil to cure what ails you, but only if what ails you is caused by humans, which is therefore not normal for snake oil or its salesmen, would you not simply ask and answer the questions to easily ascertain the utility of the snake oil, or its lack of utility, because all new knowledge, such as the laughable claim that a portable computer would ever be made, is routinely perceived as proverbial snake oil until the knowledge is learned by those who hastily scoffed instead of asked resulting questions?
What inherently existent process within the human brain can be learned to simply preclude the brain from directing the muscles, including those of the mouth, to act on a decision that time will yet again demonstrate was the wrong decision that created damages that the brain would have never chosen to create if it had simply identified the inherently existent knowledge before directing the muscles to act?
What knowledge is required to understand the words of the above sentence?
Have you learned how to communicate with words, and understand their meaning? Does that not lead to all knowledge known to humans?
Was it not the job of the organization leader to think, to thus learn new knowledge first, before the members, and utilize the knowledge so that the members did not have to do the work of the leaders, and the members would not be damaged, to include the damage of perpetually paying money in taxes, dues or donations for espousals that are never manifested because they cannot possibly be manifested with the knowledge and process currently used by the leaders, as proven by the test of time?
What inherently existent knowledge did George Bush and the peace organization leaders fail to learn before yet another war was started to prove the laughable ignorance of those who start wars while peace advocates only advocate peace?
Notice who did not understand the concept that earth could possibly be round, and cannot understand that both Bush and the peace advocates lack the same knowledge of how their mind makes a decision to act before asking the questions that verify the damaging failure of the action.
Who among Bush, the peace advocates and yourself, did not answer the above questions, or any of their nature, before acting? Is the human brain not a device that is trained? Do you not train your brain to make wrong decisions before answering the related questions, by not answering questions?
The knowledge that leaders need, to make decisions which actually manifest the leadership espousals, including all the above mentioned and all the others, is readily available to them, usually already in their brain, but its identity requires the brain to formulate questions, and answer the questions, and question the answers until all the contradicted answers are simply removed from the data synthesized or combined to effect the decision. The process requires a few days of the leader's time. What is the increasing cost, in time, money and lives, of George Bush and all the peace advocates failing to exercise that simple process before the Iraq war was started, and the next one? Who are the fools still supporting the American war government and the peace advocate leaders because those fools have not yet started the process to train their mind to simply answer and ask questions, the process to learn new knowledge, including knowledge in what others consider to be snake oil or just those damn useless computers?
Again, your goal is to first learn the itemized reactions, written as notes, from a cross section of organization leaders, to whom you suggest the utility of this website or a process of asking questions of one's own answers, and then recognize the commonalities within those notes. The test of time proves and verifies that your leaders will not learn the knowledge of how to resolve the contradictions those leaders claim as their reason to be your leaders. Is that not obvious? Your goal is to learn the itemized process effecting that consistent failure of the human brain's normal process, among all institution leaders, so that you do not utilize those items of thought process, so that you can therefore resolve complex contradictions, and no longer waste your time and money following leaders who only lead you out of your time and money.
Amid a changing list of leaders over time, otherwise normal humans at birth, among countless examples, the National Rifle Association leaders cannot tolerate regaining gun owner rights for Americans, because each such leader trains his or her mind with an institutional process that cannot allow effective questioning of institutional process, by design. In the same manner, the US government leaders, at every level, cannot tolerate allowing Americans to regain the free exercise of their unalienable human rights described in the US Constitution and elsewhere, which are in sum the right of individuals to make their own decisions that affect themselves and damage no other human, or to noticeably advance the American society, because the many and varied government leaders each train their mind with an institutional process that cannot allow effective questioning of inherently stagnating or self-contradicting institutional process, by design. In the same manner, the peace organization leaders cannot possibly learn the otherwise simple process to effect peace, because the many and changing peace organization leaders each train their mind with an inherently flawed institutional process that cannot allow effective questioning of institutional process that inherently precludes peace, by design.
You must physically write letters to several allied and opposing organization leaders, suggesting the above opportunity, or asking several effective questions of your own, and request a response. Emails are of no value because they are not answered for a reason related to emails regardless of their content. If you only read these words and imagine the obvious result from that action, your mind will not recognize the actual result, and you will train your mind to be as useless as philosophers, for any actual goal achievement.
To suggest a result in your mind's words, rather than identify it from the data or absence of data provided by varied institution leaders, would stagnate your learning process at what you already know. When you do not recognize the next question, you must encounter a contradiction to thus identify the next question. The contradiction must be either the one you seek to resolve, or one effecting the contradiction you seek to resolve. It must be perceived by your mind as real, rather than the illusions utilized by useless philosophers.
Notice and carefully consider the results of the following among the organizational leadership and activist portion of their respective social sectors and gradients of people. Among those reading this, the minds of the leadership and activist anti-gun people, who are often the liberal hemp smoking people for this instructive concept, will be incensed at the suggestion that intellectual technology (the process of asking and answering questions) can be used by pro-gun people to regain gun owner rights without possible defense by the anti-gun chaps, while in turn, the minds of the leadership and activist anti-hemp people, who are often the conservative gun owning people for this instructive concept, will be incensed at the suggestion that intellectual technology can be used by pro-hemp people to regain hemp smoker rights without possible defense by the anti-hemp chaps. Their minds will therefore react against intellectual technology or any concept that can benefit their perceived enemy, regardless of its benefit for their own organizational and issued-based colleagues. They trained their minds to fear knowledge at the rhetorical cue of any illusion of an enemy. They hate their perceived enemy, and want to attack him, more than they want their own freedom, by design of institutional power in a human mind. Their institutions would otherwise hold no verifiable reason to exist. Without wars, the peace organizations could not exist, so the peace organization leaders predicate their institutional processes on the existence of the wars, creating and entrenching the institutional processes dependent upon wars, not any processes and thus knowledge predicated on peace, by design of institutions. An institution cannot exist without an enemy or external contradiction, and because those are contradictions, institutionally trained minds use those contradictions to create further contradictions that cannot be resolved without destroying their own institution which becomes dependent upon its own created contradictions. The human mind was created by another entity. The institution is fabricated by the human mind as a perception greater than itself, the mind, and therefore cannot tolerate a threat to the institution because the mind trained itself to foolishly perceive that it cannot exist without the institution.
What is the damage to the gun owner, hemp smoker and government chap, if millions of gun sorts are running around shooting guns without damaging anyone, and millions of hemp smokers are frolicking in their flowery fields in the sky without damaging anyone? What is your obviously accurate answer that the gun organization leaders, hemp organization leaders and government leaders cannot state?
Why can your mind state an obvious and verifiable answer to a question, while institutionally trained minds simply cannot do so?
Concurrently, institutionally trained minds fear any illusion of association with their perceived enemy, compounding the effect, often to hilarious extents.
Concurrently, the institutional leaders and activists who inherently hate their perceived enemy more than they like their own freedom, by design of power, are foolishly followed, supported and relied upon by common people who otherwise do not hate their enemy more than they like their own freedom. The followers became followers because they are too intellectually lazy to understand the words of this section, or there would be no remaining problems caused by institution leaders, for lack of followers. Those intellectually lazy followers who simply ask no questions of the institutional contradictions, routinely convey their ignorance and its process to their offspring, now for many thousands of years. Humans are a laughably primitive lot who believe illusions, rather than ask questions, the moment an institution is created for their illusions.
Consider suggesting that other members of your several institutions talk to your leaders. Suggest that your fellow members ask your leaders why they cannot answer the type questions at Think.ws. The issue is not Think.ws, or your leaders in this case. Your leaders will kill before they learn the knowledge at Think.ws, because that knowledge can effect the prompt manifestation of your institution's goals, and thus a lack of need for your leaders and their perception of their personal power. The issue of your suggestion is to learn the reactions from your fellow organization followers, to compare them to those of the leaders, after you have identified their commonality, the institution. You will be writing notes about those reactions, and compare the notes to recognize the data that you did not recognize from your mind's casual, unwritten perceptions of their verbal responses. You can learn to answer every question at this website, with your name for public record. But you must write to do so. Your institution leaders cannot do so, and are thus useless to you, and laughably so after you simply answer many of the questions herein, to thus recognize what institutional leadership power does to the human mind.
If you are young enough to understand this section, and are just now recognizing the substance or flawless proof of the full magnitude of the words, you will be robustly laughing at the primitive humans following leaders whose minds are self-trained to be unable to understand these plain English words, even if you give them these words, tell them that your continued support for other organization depends upon them reading these words, and hand them a dictionary.
The advantage, to the extent of any desired, manifested result, goes to he who learns the knowledge, by design of the human phenomenon. He who remains ignorant, unable to answer common questions, is subject to the effects of he who learns the knowledge, without escape, by design of the human phenomenon predicated on knowledge. Institution leaders, who therefore hold power, including the ones you foolishly follow and support to thus grant them power over you, fear new knowledge more than death, because knowledge is the death of power, and power is the counter balance to the ability of the human mind to efficiently learn all knowledge.
Even within ignorance, he who learns more knowledge can alter the decisions of other ignorant people, as is obvious. If you are not pleased with their alteration of your decisions, simply learn what they know, and the answer to the next more advanced, related question, that they failed to ask, the process they used to learn how to alter your decisions. If you understand that simple process, then do not stop at the next more advanced question.
What you seek is entirely too easy. The process is just knowledge, that for which the human mind was invented.
It is more efficiently learned from those who have already learned it, if you are impatient for a goal of your choice.
The institutional speakers... 20 June 2005
If you repeatedly listen to Jim Bohanan, Rush Limbaugh, Gordon Liddy, Michael Savage, or any of the conservative or liberal radio talk show hosts, any politicians or any organization leaders, as do many American adults, you will train your mind to genuinely believe that the discussed problems are the fault of the other guy, which is the primary conclusion of those institution chaps, by design of institutions which cannot recognize their own institutional contradictions amid the array of normally manifested contradictions, because the one leadership mind manifesting the institutional decisions or conclusions can escape the consequences of the resulting failure or institutional contradictions created because the followers are then blamed, in accordance to the involved mind's training, for having not flawlessly done as the leaders stated, just as any follower can likewise blame the other followers, so the leader's mind does not learn from an inescapable consequence of its decision. The institution creates the escape or blame in the other institution members, for those rare times when an absolute escape is needed. In contrast, after all the normal excuses, the results of an individual's decision can be traced to the individual, by the individual's mind, for lack of any other person effecting the wrong decision or actions for that decision, to thus learn the contradiction and hold incentive to resolve it. The latter did not create a controlling contradiction, the institution that could be used to evade the resolution of the created contradiction. The ascribing of fault or blame becomes the controlling concept in the former's mind, by training process, and no data is allowed to contradict the fault or blame process because it is the controlling concept of the institution, the other guys within or outside the institution, not doing as the institution demands, or the institution would have not been necessary or created. The discussed problems are secondary to the institutional process of blame attributed to the other guy. Blaming the other guy is the universal and emphasized conclusion of those chaps, as is so obvious and therefore illuminated herein as a separate concept to start questioning with real questions. Institutions cannot exist without an enemy or external contradiction, and cannot exist if they resolve the contradictions upon identifying them, while individual minds can resolve every contradiction the moment it is identified, with incentive to do so if the individual's contradictions damage the individual. Liddy, Savage, Bush and and their ilk genuinely believe their conclusions, because they trained their mind in the same manner as their institutionally trained listeners. They believed statements that were comfortable to their mind, because their mind believed all the prior, related data, creating the comfortable neural routings, rather than asked questions of the original or subsequent contradictions. Your goal is to listen to a full cross section of institutional sorts, including those claiming that each other are their enemies or opponents, to identify the commonalities of their contradictions, as concepts, to then ask questions of those common contradictions expressed among people who perceive each other's institutions as the only source of the problems, to then use the resulting knowledge to advance your knowledge beyond the poor intellectually absent sorts like Limbaugh, Bush, Clinton, Savage and lot who sincerely believe that the other guy causes the problems. Is it not so, that because each are each other's other guy, they are each inherently wrong about half the time, a concept their self-deluded minds cannot comprehend even if they read this sentence, and the errors cannot possibly be consistent to one side of the issue, or the test of time would have caused those inherently self-defeating errors to defeat their advocates, likewise not comprehended by any other power-damaged minds, while a mind functioning on its original design can easily recognize that concept, and laugh at the perpetual thrashing-about of those who make statements rather than ask questions?
Rituals... 28 June 2005
This section is only for those who can or have decided to think for themselves as individuals, rather than think as their institution leaders tell them to think.
After you learn each ritual invented and performed by other people, if you are interested in rituals, you are wasting your mind's valuable training time repeating their rituals. Spend time with those rituals only for your laughing entertainment, if you wish.
Invent your own rituals for the purpose of learning what rituals are, from the invention process, and then enjoy your rituals for the entertainment value, then occasionally invent new rituals if you have not yet learned enough from the process of inventing rituals.
Governments, organizations, churches and other institutions exist to sustain their favorite old rituals to deceive unquestioning people, primarily the leaders, into exercising the ritualistic decisions of other people who were so intellectually self-stagnated that they only repeated the rituals they were taught by equally unquestioning minds, in perpetual self-induced ignorance.
What is war, if not an unproductive old ritual performed by intellectually void government leaders and their idiot minions, who do not even know how to invent new rituals, and certainly know nothing more useful than old rituals? The same can be asked of the rituals of churches, and most other organizations. Were not the leaders selected to think new thoughts, therefore ask new questions that create new knowledge, rather than carry out the results of old thinking that created and perpetuates the problems for which the leaders were selected to solve?
If the exercise of a ritual solves no problems for which the ritual is purported to be used, proven by the test of time, why are you spending your time exercising the ritual, if not for pure entertainment?
If wars are so obviously unproductive and destructive, amid a species that obviously likes to construct things, and likes to live, why is war among the first reactions of ritual-taught national leaders who perceive a contradiction with another nation?
What is the result of a ritual-taught human mind that does not ask questions of rituals?
After you learn that 2 + 2 = 4, how many times must you stand and repeat that 2 + 2 = 4, to derive the utility of the knowledge? What is your answer?
What is the utility of knowledge in the human mind?
After you learn the concepts of the American pledge of allegiance to the flag (rather than to the constitution), the favorite versus of your favorite bible, your organization's favorite songs or secret club handshake, etceteras, what do you prove of your mind's self-taught stagnation by the total time you spend repeating those rituals rather than using that time to learn new knowledge, such as learned by asking questions of the concept of rituals, and all other concepts?
If you stagnate your mind, what will you teach your offspring and those around you?
When you are told by institution leaders that we must be reminded of these things brought to mind by the rituals, ask them why they included you with their inability to remember such simplistic concepts illuminated by rituals?
If your leaders perform useless old rituals, rather than spend that time learning new knowledge by asking questions, are you not a fool to follow those self-stagnated leaders instead of using your time to easily advance your knowledge beyond them by simply using that ritual time to ask questions?
If you are told that you must believe something, surrounded by rituals, rather than ask the questions to prove or disprove that something, you are being told to be a fool, by a fool who failed to question what he was told to believe.
If what you are told to believe is true, but you cannot prove it because you have been too lazy to ask and answer the questions that illuminate the proof, as was the person who told you to believe it rather than ask and answer the questions that illuminate the proof, the guess of the person who told you to believe that is of no utility to your mind, and only fools will believe it because you say they must believe it.
It is easy to prove or disprove concepts, especially the old ones, after you learn how to ask and answer effective questions, to thus laugh at the unquestioning believers whose guessing leaves them believing in many useless or destructive illusions. What was the reason you were told that you had to support your Army's soldiers slaughtering people in another country which did not attack your country, or vote for an inherently lying politician, or stand when the judge enters the court room, or repeatedly pledge allegiance to the flag, or sing the same old concluding song, or kneel on cue, or respect the office of an office holder who has destroyed any logical respect for the office, or honor an illusion whose representation obviously deserves no honor, etceteras? What are the obvious questions of the common answers?
If you can answer the above questions, unlike institution leaders, you can more thoroughly enjoy watching the total human hours wasted by primitive humans performing useless old rituals without their laughing at the entertainment of such, and thus recognize why humans remain so deep in the intellectual dark ages, too busy with rituals to ask new questions of concepts to create useful new knowledge.
To which, of course, I will offer a toast, with a glass of fine wine, and laugh robustly.
Dishonorable military service... 1 July 2005
Serving in the military is not noble, honorable or intelligent. It is a display of one's inability to think even to the extent of recognizing that one is serving reptilian-minded government idiots dishonorably pandering rhetorical illusions, for the sole purpose of killing and destruction, that is, serving older people who joined the military or government at a younger age and trained their minds to never question orders, that is, not ask questions, the process of not thinking, the process of remaining as intellectually self-incapacitated as the first soldier who believed he could kill the problem created by killing.
To consider military service as noble, honorable or intelligent, is to identify oneself at the nadir of human intelligence, or at the norm for reptilian intelligence.
Being armed and knowledgeable of guns in our current society of fools following malicious government idiots, is an honorable, noble and intelligent action, in face of the greatest proven threat to human freedom, one's own government, regardless of the government, especially the Washington DC government with its unquestioning military minions, now routinely torturing defenseless military prisoners, and defending each other for doing so, incapable of recognizing honor or basic intelligence.
If you are armed and knowledgeable of guns, you can make a related decision based on your reasoning, rather than on orders of a high ranking reptile in the military.
It is not so much that if you are armed and knowledgeable of guns you can defend yourself against the Federal Homeland Security Gestapo when they inherently do to several sectors of the American society what the Nazi Gestapo did to the Jews, Gypsies, the more intelligent German college students, and several sectors of political detractors of their current government, after disarming enough therefore idiot German citizens who foolishly complied with Hitler's gun owner registration laws identical to those now in the United States. It is that all knowledge is useful, especially knowledge of power, because power-based governments, such as the US, cannot sustain themselves, and thus you can learn of their inherent self-demise while they are still acting on their laughably entrenched belief that there is no limit to the power they can achieve with their police and military guns.
Who imposes taxes, as fees, for your RIGHT to walk on various US government land, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who requires you to get permission for your RIGHT to purchase a gun, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who claims and effects ownership of your body, by the US drug laws, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who denies more jury trials than grants them in the US, in violation of the US Constitution, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who routinely denies you the right to introduce into court the evidence, and even the questions, that can prove your innocence against government accusations, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who can tap into your phone conversations, open and read your first class mail, monitor you computer actions, obtain you bank account information, hire commercial contractors to obtain private information on entire sectors of society, and invade other arenas of your privacy, by force of inferior law, without any court order or accountability to superior law, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who can kick down your door and invade your house with heavily armed, malicious, trigger-happy thugs, by force of inferior law, with an officially secret warrant that in fact does not exist, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Who can gun you down on suspicion or whim, and simply say they thought they saw a gun to thus avoid any penalty, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime? Simply go down the list of human rights described in the US Constitution and common law. Who is rampantly violating those rights in the US, Al Quaeda freedom fighters, or the Washington DC DemocanRepublicrat Regime?
Who are therefore the dishonorable, idiot US military sorts serving, against whom? What is your answer?
Is it noble to damage non-harmful people around you, and defend raw maliciousness effected by dishonorable government thugs unlawfully imposing inferior laws contradicted by superior laws, with raw power of office?
Which of the following national governments militarily attacked the US to thus effect an honorable military defense? Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Grenada, Somalia, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq.
For those many Americans whom the polls illuminate as so astonishingly ignorant as to believe the government and its dutifully parroting American news media, without their asking even the most basic questions, the answer to the above is, None.
For which of the above did the US Congress debate and declare war as required by the US Constitution if military action is lawful, honorable, noble and intelligent?
Which of them did US military minions attack, to serve the unconstitutional edicts of malicious, dishonorable US Presidents (effecting the power of kings) who used the wars for election approval rate increases among fools, and for the petty ego gratification dishonorably illuminated by warring kings of old?
Among many amusing examples, in a speech at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on 28 June 2005, President Bush urged people to enlist in the military because, "There is no higher calling than service in our armed forces."
Think. There is no lower calling than service in the armed forces of any nation, which would prove their military dupes and their society to be so flat damn ignorant that they cannot figure out how to resolve simple contradictions without killing people and destroying what they create. Is that fact not obvious for a species that claims to be predicated on its ability to think?
Is not the primitive nature of the human mind identified by the military dolts who are so easily fooled into sincerely believing that it is noble, honorable and intelligent to slaughter people for the easily disproven illusions of idiot leaders who cannot answer any intelligent questions about their actions?
While you and I can easily answer each of these questions, with our name in public, which US presidents and their minions are too intellectually absent or cowardly do so?
Was I not a fool, acting dishonorably and unintelligently, void of any noble action, as an Army infantry officer assisting with the US military slaughter of Vietnamese who did not want to kowtow to idiot US presidents who have effected the criminal violation of every clause in the US Constitution, and thus displayed abject contempt for human rights?
Who would not defend themselves from the rule of a nation that loudly emphasizes the right of its people to a trial by jury when accused of a crime by the government, etcetera, while that nation's court judges criminally deny more trials by jury than they grant, as a privilege, etcetera, if not only the idiot Americans with their dishonorable military defending their criminal government?
What can be said and verified against every question, of the current US military personnel, pitiably ignorant, unquestioning lot that they are, and those of every other nation of fools following war mongering leaders oblivious to the concept of thinking?
It is entirely too easy to produce a noble, honorable and intelligent military of undefeatable capability, at scant cost, to thus free its nation to exponentially advance beyond the current imagination of all other nations. The process is only knowledge, easily learned by simply asking and answering a related, complete series of questions, which can be done while sitting in a comfortable chair.
Knowledge of the future... 12 July 2005
Consider precisely what words you would use to rationally explain the current technology to a person living 300 years ago.
Another 300 years will pass as quickly as the last 300 years.
Consider precisely what words you would use to rationally explain to a person today, the technology in 300 years.
Each such person would react to your words in the same way, to an obviously crazy person speaking the same gibberish as these words have been described by government dolts.
Between now and 300 years from now, what technology can you predict, for what year, for which a percentage of the people would variously describe you as perceptive, visionary, or crazy?
What do you want to know of the future?
Will not the future knowledge be the result of more questions being asked and answered?
To what extent would you like to know the future?
If you easily asked the number of questions, in a day, that the leaders of society, and its norm, asked in 20 years, what would you learn of the future, how long before them?
Compare the number of statements that an institution leader makes, with the number of questions they ask.
Compare the number of questions that a curious person asks, with the number of statements they make.
The questions herein are suggested for people who have not yet leaned how to ask and answer effective questions.
After one learns that controlling skill, anyone else cannot design a question that cannot be accurately answered, and verified.
Is it not so, that asking and answering questions is the process of learning the knowledge of the future, and of other concepts, that self-stagnated minds do not learn while they are making statements?
Which social problems, on the long list, would you like to promptly solve with the knowledge of the future?
They are too easy. But you must ask for the knowledge.
May you learn the most knowledge, of the most concepts, most efficiently.
End of Intech Concepts 23
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