 Why are we losing freedom? Why is freedom on the wane? Why is totalitarianism and tyranny rising up? Why do we see so much control and obsession with control in our society? You know, they'll see that many of them will see the rising police state. They'll see the injustices in our society. They'll see the restrictions on our inherent natural liberty Okay, but here's the thing many of them will not make the transition to grasping You know They'll say yeah, this is what's happening to the earth. It's being turned into a huge prison everywhere And at the most rapid pace right here in America Okay, and they'll see this lock going on to the cage But the question that they never get to they don't even get to the question let alone the answer is Why? They'll talk about the symptoms. They'll describe the prison. They'll describe every corner of the cage Accurately in many cases They could tell you exactly how it's working They can tell you all the different aspects of the control system But they can't tell you why it's actually going into place Why is that happening? Well, that's what this presentation answers Why are we losing freedom and it gets to the actual heart of that answer? So what this presentation constitutes is a master key that unlocks all the locks To all the doors on all the cages in the prison if it is accepted and Once again, I don't tell you that belief is required for that Because truth is always present. It's always here. It's a matter of will we perceive it as being present Acknowledge its present by stop ignoring it Okay, and then accept it into ourselves and then do something with it Understanding is not the end Taking in the knowledge and understanding it is the beginning Action is required See knowledge is required Understanding is required, but then action is finally required Above all if change is to be created That's how the laws of attraction really work so Will people as a whole as a society accept that master key? I can't answer that question All I could do is try to place it into their hands after I have taken that key and unlock my Personal prison my personal cages and freed my mind all I can do is try to help people to see Here's how this key works. Here it is Here's the information that constitutes that key and here's how you put it to work in your life That's all I can do can't make anybody take it Let's look at what problem solving entails because that's really critical to understand if we're going to get past this stage And where we're at in our stifled evolutionary development as a species There's a few main steps to solving problems any problem doesn't matter what the nature of the problem is The first is you have to recognize that the problem exists Recognize that there is a problem to begin with and I think by asking the question is everybody content with the way things are Nobody raised their hand. I think that's great because it At least acknowledges to me the people here today recognize we have a problem and that's healthy. That's good Okay, many people out there don't believe we have a problem You know, they like this place They like the world the way that it is, you know, which is unfathomable to me because to me it's a living hell And that's not because of how my own personal life is going. I'm very content with my own personal life I have no self-inflicted suffering in my personal life. I don't create problems for myself My life goes on very well according to how I live it without hurting anybody else The problem is other people and that's another thing new the New Ages won't acknowledge and they'll flip out if you say that There's a problem with someone else. There are problems with other people Okay, and people will say people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones My glass house has been taken down long since Long time ago because I went through all that personal introspective work And I dug deep into my subconscious and faced those problems and confronted them head-on and healed them and Came out of the mindset that I was once in Okay, so You know people will say If there's something you don't like you're seeing in other people that's something in yourself that you're seeing in them This is New Age mumbo jumbo nonsense. Okay If you're not part of the problem, I'm not part of this problem. I can say that honestly I'm not part of this problem. I can look at every single person anybody who's watching this and say I'm not part of the problem. That's happening on the earth with all Honesty and knowing that I am telling the truth with that Okay, but but see at one point I was part of the problem and a big part of the problem Okay What I had to do at some point is stop doing this and pointing out and saying the problem lies Elsewhere while I was still part of it and then I had to do this and Point squarely at myself and say what do I need to change here? Here and finally here in the guts in the courage, you know People will say yeah change happens in the mind it happens in the heart, but lastly it happens in the guts We need to generate what I call the heart mind guts Okay, you got to care enough to know and then put it into action the heart mind guts Okay That taking action is the most important step when it comes to creating change We're going to get to that in a moment But the whole point here is I had to look at what I needed to change about myself in my thoughts my emotions and my Actions and then change those things in myself. This is what most people want to run away from They want to say yeah I want those things that I say I want to magically to be present in my life But I don't want to do those things that require self change in how I think in how I feel and in how I act I Want it magically to happen without changing those things in me So I can honestly look at the rest of the world and say the problem does not lie within me I am not seeing a manifestation of myself in other people other people have not done the same process that I have The introspective work that I have and gone through that Painful painstaking work that involves effort Hard effort. I'm not up here telling people. I'm offering you the tonic. You're gonna take a sip and magically you will be enlightened Okay, knowing what's going on in the world is hard work It involves Destruction it's a destructive process. It involves destruction of belief systems It involves completely breaking down barriers. They're in your head Okay Hardly anybody wants to do that work People want to run a million miles an hour in the opposite direction from that work anything, but that I'll take the grave instead of that Okay, that's where most people's heads are at All right, so let's get back to the steps here for problem solving The first is you got to recognize that there's a problem if you are in denial good luck Let me know how that works out for you Because you're not solving any problem in the state of denial at all Fear-based denial of the problem must first be dealt with and conquered and stamped out and you have to acknowledge how bad it is You know people feel symptoms coming on of a disease or something and they want to ignore it because they don't want to believe I'm sick. I don't want to believe I'm sick I don't want to believe I have a problem then you're waiting waiting waiting You don't get it diagnosed and then it turns into a much bigger problem Which is where we're at as a society for ignoring this information This is what denial looks like symbolically, okay a Person with their head in the sand like an ostrich and please take note ladies and gentlemen when you're in this position When you're in the position of denial with your head in the sand You're on your knees with your ass in the air Okay, I almost say it's amazingly Synchronistic that the human body was designed like that that in order to put your head in the sand symbolically so to speak You have to be on your knees Okay, and that's where most of our society is that they're on their knees and in that state of denial The second step to problem-solving is to recognize that the symptoms that are being displayed The symptoms you are seeing are merely effects of underlying causal factors You can't treat symptoms and solve a problem. It's not possible That's not how problem-solving works. You have to get to what caused the problem Okay, instead of simply treating symptoms make an accurate diagnosis of the causes of the problem So what does the word diagnosis mean diagnosis comes from Greek? the preposition DIA Transliterated there there in the parentheses you see it in Greek script. Okay, it means through or by way of So by a method by a particular method All right, and the second part of diagnosis is the Greek noun Gnosis Gnosis means knowledge in Greek So what a diagnosis means is through knowledge or by way of knowledge? You're going to solve the problem by way of knowledge There is knowledge that acts as the requirement to solving the problem and getting what you want And here's another thing. I'm gonna keep going back to this It's gonna be like an undercurrent in this because the new age community I'm gonna be I'm have been but I'm going to become a more outspoken opponent of new age ideologies Because they are lying to people whether it be through direct willful deception or whether it be but through useful Dupes and useful idiots. They are telling people things that are completely inaccurate to how things really work All right, because they want to keep people suppressed and non-active they want people in acceptance mode of everything except except except never rebel Okay Don't take action. Just observe just watch you'll hear all these things in the new age movement. Okay The reason I bring it up is because when you even say the word knowledge to some new ages They almost take offense Because what's what the new age is becoming is the new modern-day variance? It's a new form of what's known as solipsism. We're going to get to what solipsism is in a little while Okay, but essentially People don't want to hear that knowledge is what is required Because the attainment of real knowledge not pseudo knowledge real knowledge Requires work it requires efforts it requires reading it requires listening It requires watching and you know what most of all it requires that people don't want to give up who can tell me Time Thank you, sir. It requires time There's one of the currencies people don't spend You know on many things that they don't feel they can get immediate gratification from which is why immediate gratification Is so stressed in our society by the control system. That's what keeps people in their ignorance So a diagnosis means if you're gonna get well You got to have the knowledge of the underlying causal factors that that led to the creation of the symptoms You're not going to treat the symptoms and get well You got to have the knowledge to get to the causal factors to find out what cause Put this into effect. We're going to talk a lot about cause and effect The third step to problem-solving is Through the knowledge that you've acquired now Via making an accurate diagnosis of the problem of the causal factors, right? You're going to then put that knowledge into action Understanding what created the problem is like step two, right? Stop being in denial Understand what caused the problem act on the knowledge you now have to solve the problem to make it right Okay, so action is required We make the diagnosis then we have to take the required action necessary to rectify or to set right Which is what the word rectify means the causal factors that led to the manifestation of the problem Let's talk a little bit about the concept of what truth is how I refer to truth in all of my work because people have a real deeply mystified concept of what truth is or what it means, you know They'll get into all these really deep abstract discussions of the mind of God and you know Trying to get into like, you know quantum theory and everything This is mystification of the concept of the truth and we have to demystify it We have to bring it down the real simple easy to understand language that anybody can comprehend and then really completely delineate that from Perception of any given thing Because the two are not the same when people say perception is reality Nothing could be farther from reality than that statement Perception is not reality Okay, it is just what it says perception seeing through per seed to see through something Like a lens or a filter Okay, I perceive things differently without these glasses. That's one perception when I put them on I perceive things quite differently and more clearly. Okay. Well, that's how human perception works like a lens. It's a filter Okay, but what's there is the same thing What's there's the same thing all the changes how I perceived it. All right, so let's look at this concept truth is Objective that means that it's not dependent upon the perceptions of human beings. No one wants to hear that that is That is a direct assault a direct frontal assault on the human ego Because everybody wants to hear my perceptions are important and We want to also believe my perceptions are accurate Okay, now people will say well what makes you say your perception of this topic is going to be accurate That's because I went through the process of having to admit over and over and over and over and over Again, endlessly how wrong I was about my former perceptions I went through that destructive process of breaking down my former belief systems of breaking down my former emotional patterns of Most of all changing my behavior That's the thing that's the most destructive because we get attached to our behaviors and patterns So asking people to change I recognize it's not easy. It took me like Probably probably about eight years of my life to do it Most people don't want to spend a minute on Creating personal change let alone eight years and you know when I look at myself in all honesty again None of this is to sound egoic or toot my own horn But I look at it like I was a mild case of ego entrapment a mild case compared to where I see other people act I I feel like I was the you know a very Brittle stone that just needed to be hit with a chisel a few times and it broke into powder You know other people are hardened granite or diamond You know to break them down is going to take enormous effort and work and Most of them don't even want to do it. They're so calcified You know there's they've been so compressed into that hardened state that they don't even want to start so I realized telling people your perceptions are not what really matters You know that the truth isn't based upon how you perceive things that it's Independent from your perceptions. Most people don't want to hear that they don't want to hear that Human beings perceptions are capable of wavering They can they can waver slightly from the truth and they can waver wildly from the truth. All right Okay, so we ended Before the dinner break, I hope everyone enjoyed their dinner at The concept that if there is no victim if no actual wrong doing has taken place resulting in harm to someone else There is no crime and many people are you know being jailed for victimless crimes that they've actually never actually Harmed another being and yet their freedom has been taken away Another aspect about this concept of the difference between right and wrong behavior is we have to understand that There is no such thing as the ability to delegate a wrong to someone else No one can say to someone you may harm him on a Unchallenged or unaccosted. Okay, that you're allowed to do that morally Okay, no more than anybody can say a group of people may commit a wrong doing and They have the moral right to commit it to commit that wrong doing there's no such thing as that Okay, so this is what many people who believe in things like government believe in that we can Delegate to a group of people who are calling themselves a government Something that is not a right and agree all come together and agree upon they now possess this right Rights can't be granted by human beings to other human beings Everybody is born with the same rights because rights don't come from human beings rights like the laws of nature Come from the creator of the universe. They don't come from human beings Human beings don't make up what right and wrong are Right and wrong are inherent to creation and are up to us to Discover and recognize what they are and then live in accordance with those principles so if a specific action is not a right for any Individual that action cannot be quote delegated Granted or licensed to any other individual or group and magically called the right It does not become a right if it's wrong at state it remains a wrong no matter how many people believe they can do it or delegate it Or otherwise Similarly not a right can't be turned into a wrong if it's a right and you're not harming somebody by doing it Somebody can't magically say well, that's a wrong and you're not allowed to do that And yet we have things that go right hand-in-hand with that and it's called government An action that is a wrong would forever remain a wrong under natural law So How do we know what rights are? Part of knowing rights is understand that natural law the difference between right and wrong Always holds true regardless of a population's belief system like natural law being in effect The difference between right and wrong are not dependent on any body's belief They are eternal truths that need to be understood So this means it does not matter how many people agree that a wrong can be turned into a right or that a right can be Turned into a wrong such things can never be done in reality We can believe we can do that and Act like that, but in reality it cannot actually be done a right forever remains a right or wrong forever remains a wrong People can only believe that they can claim such reversals and that this will magically make it so Unfortunately, most human beings erroneously believe that it is Morally possible for them to create and delegate rights quote-unquote Which do not exist or to take away actual rights from people which do exist They believe we can do that So when in doubt as to whether an action is or is not in harmony with natural law The visualization exercise that I always asked people to do is to imagine a scenario of a planet a World where there is only two people where only two people exist on an entire planet, okay? if the behavior in that circumstance in that visualized instance is Either a right or a wrong in that instance it remains a right or a wrong in any size Population regardless of how many people may believe otherwise Okay, so if a right is a right for one person to do toward another Okay, or if it's a wrong the action is a wrong for one person to take toward another Population is irrelevant people will say well. Yeah, if there was a couple of people that would be okay But if in a world of seven billion people we can't let people do that Well, this has nothing to do with what right and wrong is you know as if they're changeable Let's um, let's look at this scenario. So there's our world. There's two people Okay, too well-groomed businessmen And they're you know, we're gonna look at it at an instance. Let's look at Taxation the concept of taxation is taxation of any kind of right or a wrong Is it morally acceptable and justifiable or is it something that is actually a wrong? So let's look at what taxation really is and again, we're not going to euphemize. I'm gonna talk about it straight on So here's what taxation is. It's not what I believe it is I'm getting down to the heart of the matter and describing what it actually is taxation is the claim That a specific group of people who call themselves government have been given a quote right They've been delegated a right Okay, we've written down a law and we say these people calling themselves government and the IRS Have a right to do this particular action this activity. Okay, this behavior. They've been given a right to confiscate unwillingly I might add an arbitrarily chosen Percentage of the product of another individual's labor. Now. Let me just start with this, right? You ask anybody how many are you gonna voluntarily pay more taxes? Nobody will raise their hand and you say why not? Well Because I could barely afford to pay the ones I'm paying now And I don't want to volunteer any more money toward that endeavor quite frankly. I want my resources for myself To use as I see fit voluntarily But if the government then said well your taxes are going up by 5% how many people would pay the most people would because Subconsciously or or consciously they recognize this is They're under coercion. They're actually under duress. They're being told that if they don't give this At the command of the people who are confiscating it that some form of Violence will be conducted upon them whether through the form of finding them and saying we're going to take more of your resources Whether by saying we're going to throw you in a cage and make you stay there for as long as we say you need to stay there Okay, or by actually conducting actual physical harm upon them so Again, it's we're saying that this quote-unquote right is given To individuals who call themselves government and then they have the right to confiscate this Arbitrarily chosen percentage of the product out of another individual's labor Because that's what money is okay, or that that's what you know, whatever we make through what we work That's the product of our labor we work and then we get compensated for it So that's an exchange for labor that we have done. That's our property because we gave labor in return for that so This is done whether or not the other agrees to share that product voluntarily It's not a voluntary process coercion is involved Taxation is enforced by the threat of violence, which is behavior that will result in bodily harm or Imprisonment, which is the taking away of physical freedom of movement if those from whom the product is being seized attempt to resist this Confiscation this practice is always quote justified and the word justify actually breaks down Etymologically it means the word justify means to create a right That's what justify actually means us in Latin means right or law and then Fachaio Facher a means to create or to make so to justify means to create right to make a right up and conjure it into existence So it's always justified or made into a right quote-unquote by those who claim that such a practice is necessary and Required to quote-unquote uphold the common good. This is the justification offered for the seizure of the product of people's labor Involuntarily Now if we are honest with ourselves if we define the concept of slavery and I think this is a good definition for slavery Would it be fair to say slavery is the involuntary Confiscation of 100% of the product of the labor of another human being that be a fair definition You're saying you're working I'm going to take whatever you generate as a result of that work that you're doing It doesn't belong to you the product of your labor doesn't belong to you all of it belongs to me So you work for me. I take everything that you have been able to amass or create through the labor that you have done I think everybody here would agree. That's slavery. That's a good as a definition of slavery as you're probably going to get I mean we can come up with some other definitions that involve coercion and physically shackling and keeping people But if we really are honest with ourself What is the purpose of slavery to begin with is to make others work for free and then take all of the product of the labor? That's what slavery was conducted for okay, so if We're defining slavery as the involuntary Confiscation of 100% of the product of the labor of another human being We should be able to clearly see that there is no magical percentage to which we could lower this number That would no longer make it slavery So I asked people if if the person who's saying I'm going to confiscate 100% of your labor and keep it for myself would say Well, I'm gonna take 75% I'll take three quarters. You can keep a quarter of what you've created Would that no longer constitute slavery and I don't care what you say. I'm gonna use the 75% for Okay, if you're telling somebody you have no choice 75% of your labor belongs to me would that no longer be slavery just because they allow them to keep 25 Okay, let's lower it to 50 Is it still slavery? Okay, well what percentage could it possibly be lowered to for it not to be slavery anymore? Only zero there is no percentage that it could be lowered to for it not to constitute slavery and again If we're being honest with ourselves many people want to justify this in many ways by saying oh, it's used for services Services which someone doesn't have a right to refuse You know I tell people hey if I said to you I'm a computer technician you own a computer Okay, I'm now your computer technician. You're not allowed to refuse my services Think just think about that for a moment You may not refuse that I am now providing the service for your computer to keep it in good shape Okay, first of all, what have I just taken from that gentleman? Right to choose free will right there that slavery I don't even have to keep going and say hey if you refuse or you know If you whether you want or don't want my computer services I'm now your technician and I need $200 every year. I'll come over a couple of times I don't care whether you're happy with my service or not Okay, and if you don't pay me I'm coming and taking the computer now Is that your really your property if if you're living under that kind of duress or am I just the violent criminal? Who's saying I'm gonna steal your stuff if you don't give me what I say. I'm holding you under extortion That's duress. That's called duress It means I am threatening violence unto the person unless they conform to my will and That's what we're all held under. We're held under duress all forms of tactic taxation are duress It is a master class Telling people you have no right to refuse the arbitrarily set confiscation of your labor that I I deem Is going to be necessary for what I say it's necessary for So how could you possibly claim that your home belongs to you if you're paying something called a property tax? That somebody is saying for the services we provide in this community You must pay us this percentage and if you don't pay it your house is Is going to be turned over to the government and it's you know what that's called there's a term for that okay, when when a Society doesn't actually have true private property ownership rights and a higher class of of you know Masters actually owns the land and owns the property and only allows That the peasants class to live upon the property for as long as they pay tribute to the master class Who can tell me what system of government that is that's called feudalism and That's the that's the United States government and just about every government on the earth you live in feudalism There's no such thing as democracy. There's certainly not a constitutional Republic. That's for sure. Okay, the state of the de facto state of government, which means indeed in action is feudalism So how about licenses and permits these are claims that a group of people who call themselves government and again We're going back and visualizing imagine one person trying to make this claim to another person Nobody would find it legitimate Nobody would find that one person may make that claim to another person Yet we think these other people called government have rights that individuals don't have That's what we think that's called mind control mind control was getting people to accept some people have rights that other people don't have That's what it is You know so go back to that visualization exercise Can one person make that claim over another and have it be legitimate? Of course not so if nobody has that right How could that right be delegated to somebody else it can? Licenses and permits they're claims that a group of people who call themselves government have been given the right quote-unquote The right to prevent others from exercising Specific behaviors even if such behaviors cause no harm to others or their property Unless those others petition meaning beg Or pay the government for permission That's what a permit is it means permission To be allowed to exercise those behaviors This amounts to the claim that though that rights are actually merely privileges that may be granted or revoked By government at any time Okay, based upon the people in governments preference Their discretion All right Remembering that the definition of a right is any action which does not cause harm to another living being or their property There is no such thing as the right quote-unquote to stop another person from exercising a right if If if something is a right meaning it doesn't cause harm There is no such thing as someone's right to stop you from performing that action Okay, that would be called coercion which is a wrong Okay, so the actual ingest ingestion of let's say marijuana for example harms no one else You can put that into your body sit there perfectly peacefully and not cause harm to another living being That's called a right for the very specific definition that it caused no harm Okay, I would not have the right to tell another individual you may not do that action That would be a wrongdoing. Well, it's the same thing for for something when it comes to licenses and permits You're telling people. Hey if you pay me $50. I'll let you smoke that marijuana without doing violence to you Unless I change my mind and then I won't I won't give you a permit I'll just say hey, you're not allowed to do that even something that is a right like Assembling and speaking like what was done in the state of Pennsylvania a few years ago when the G20 visited in the city of Pittsburgh Okay The city telling people we have revoked the right to assemble and speak and petition for grievances You don't have the right to come and speak no protests will be tolerated or will hit you with sound and water cannons You know and people just laid down and accepted it the whole city of Pittsburgh You know because oh, we're gonna go and ask them for a permit and they just said no No, you don't have that right anymore. We find you on the street You're getting blasted with a sound cannon and deafened some people went permanently deaf Lost their hearing from what happened in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Forest versus violence. We need to understand that these concepts are complete opposites of each other They are not the same that terms should never be used interchangeably with with each other because not only are they not even remotely similar They're direct diametrically opposed opposites Let's look at the difference They're often spoken about as if they're the same and they're used interchangeably When in fact they are actually diametrically opposed to each other force the definition of force is the capacity to do work or cause Physical change in the physical world Okay for any change to be created in the physical world in any capacity force must be used and applied There's nothing you can do that doesn't require force if you're going to make a change happen in the physical Okay, so to set up this equipment force was required. We had to lift it. We had to set it up We have the plug in the cables force is required to do all those things It's the capacity to perform physical activity physical work Okay Action forces actually action with which is in harmony with morality and natural law Because the taking of it the usage of it doesn't violate rights of other people So as soon as you're stepping over the line into coercive usage of force that becomes violence The initiation of force for coercive reasons for coercive applications Becomes violence. That's what makes it violence force itself is not violence as such forces action which one always possesses the natural right to take and this includes the defense the physical defense of someone's person their their body against the act of violence Force may be applied in that situation when you are accosted with violence You do reserve the right to use physical force defensively against such an assault Violence on the other hand and this is the key to keep in mind with violence It is the immoral Initiation of physical power to coerce compel or restrain Unrightfully No one has the right to ever enact violence because violence is always starting it Initiation that's the key word there. It's the immoral the unrightful Initiation so, you know Teachers in schools will you know if there's a skirmish that happens between a couple of male students one day They'll say it doesn't matter who started it All that matters is who started it all that matters is who started it all that matters Because the person who actually conducted violence is the person who struck first They initiated the immoral use of physical behavior of physical force to core physical power to coerce compel or restrain Therefore when the person beats back that physical assault with force, they have not committed an additional wrongdoing Okay, it's difficult for many people to understand who are in right brain imbalance They don't want to acknowledge that you maintain the natural right to use force when you are accosted with violent behavior If someone just came up to me on the street and started swinging Okay, because they want something I have or just because they don't like the look of me For whatever reason they don't have the right to do that If I replied by beating back their attack with sufficient force to put that action down How many wrongdoings would have been committed? one correct one not two one Because I maintain the right to defend myself With physical power with physical force when necessary when Violence meaning someone else started the immoral behavior That's what matters the initiation who started it is all that matters All that matters and again, it's a very difficult thing for the ego to comprehend the ego doesn't want to hear that It's been conditioned so long that Responding with force is also violence We are verbally and mentally equating these two things and when they in fact they are actual complete opposites Hey, if somebody if a kid got hit by somebody else in a school And then that other kid said maybe even said once stop what you're doing And then when the other kid wouldn't stop he punched him and knocked him out Okay, I would ask other people who's who who struck first and if the kid lying on the floor struck first I'd say you got what you deserved That's it Because that person had a right to defend themselves. You had no right to strike them you initiated the violence He responded with defensive force Many people don't want to hear that Natural law versus man's law or governments Here's the differences natural law is based upon the principles. It's based upon principles and truth Meaning things that are inherent to creation are not made by humankind Natural law can only either be harmonized with due to knowledge and understanding or rejected due to ignorance So it's not it's not something that is based on compliance because of we fear the punishment that would result of not Understanding it. Okay, if you don't understand it and live according to it. The result is inescapable Because men and women are not actually creating the result. Okay The universe is bringing that result to us intelligently and dynamically All right, in other words once again, this is about consequences. You behave a certain way There's certain consequences you change the behavior. You'll change the consequential results Natural law is universal which means that it exists and applies anywhere in the universe regardless of physical location There is no place you can go in the physical universe to escape natural law Let me know if you find a way out of this universe and into another where natural law no longer applies and you know We'll take a look at it together But until you figure out the way out of this universe and into a place that's not governed by law, you're bound by natural law Okay Natural law is eternal It it will exist for as long as the universe exists and it is immutable Existing applies for as long as the universe exists and cannot be changed by anything Humanity is capable of doing or any other species in the universe is capable of doing for that matter Man's law on the other hand. Let's look at how this contrasts with natural law. It's not based on principles and truth It's based on dogmatic beliefs That are programs that are running in the human mind. These are constructs of the mind that operate like programs natural man's law is complied with due to the fear of the punishment that will be conducted upon people who attempt to not comply with it It's most of the only reason people ever comply with the law of man And that's a very low state of consciousness fear That really is only going to get you all the negative things that we say we don't want if we're in that vibration Man's law differs with location based upon the whim of legislators like prohibition Well, I'm allowed to smoke marijuana in one state and then I could be jailed for it in another my freedom can be taken if I Cross this imaginary line Okay, I'm a gun owner, okay? If I take one of if I take certain weapons that I own across an imaginary line I can be jailed for years But over this side of the imaginary line it's okay, and you're just exercising a right here over here It's morally wrong. We'll cage you for it over here. Yeah, you're allowed to do that You can have that high-capacity magazine But over here you're going into a cage for it just by crossing an imagine an imaginary barrier called a state border And people think that makes sense They think the moral relativism of man's law makes sense They actually believe something can be moral in one place and immoral in another place You know that's cognitive dissonance. That's holding two contradictory notions in the mind Simultaneously and accepting them both when they're clear contradictions with each other It's called lying to yourself. Let's be honest about what it really is. It's called lying to yourself Man's law changes with time based upon the whim of legislators, which is also moral relativism Prohibition in the 1920s Oh, it was legal to possess and consume alcohol then for years it became illegal to do so then it switched back to becoming Magically moral again. We won't cage you for doing it Well changes over time based on our preferences and likes and dislikes. Yeah, we get to make up what law is what right and wrong are It's called moral relativism All right, and it's one of the tenets of Satanism So what does this mean for the law of man actually, you know, the people seem to have so much respect for You know a word nation of law is written by men You know, we don't we don't give a damn about moral law We don't really give a damn about what's right and wrong, you know, but we have so much respect for the law of man Which we people actually believe is somehow based in morality when it's nothing of the kind could be further from It's not couldn't get any further from the truth in that it's based in moral relativism Which is about the whims of the legislator at any given time or place You know, you listen to certain forms of music in certain countries in the Middle East you could be jailed for years Just by putting a certain song on Imagine this We would think that's unacceptable and deplorable Yeah, we think you have this 30 round magazine here this state only allows 10 cartridges to go into a magazine I bring the physical object even if it's not loaded with any ammunition into another state. I can be put in a cage physical piece of plastic You know, it's just total nonsense either something is a right and you're allowed to own it and You need to be responsible for it or it's not a right because you're harming somebody You know, it doesn't get any simpler than that So what's this all mean for man's law in light of natural law? What does it mean to understand natural law? What does that mean for the laws of man here on earth? What it actually means It's simple if then logic to apply if a particular man-made law is in harmony with natural law Then it follows logically that it is redundant. It is stating the obvious. It is stating what is already known It's like saying I'm gonna write down. Yes during the day the sky Refracts a blue frequency And the sky is blue. I'm gonna write that down and make it so well It's redundant it's self-evident you can go out in the sky and look at the natural color of the sky on a clear day And and see what the frequency is with your own eyes. No, you don't need to have it written down. Okay? It's a redundancy So if it's in harmony already with natural law, it's stating a truth that is already There it's an inherent truth. It's pre-existing it's self-evident Therefore the writing down of that concept and calling it a law is irrelevant and unnecessary Now look, let's look at the opposite. What if something that man writes down as a law is in direct opposition to natural law? So if a particular man-made law is in opposition to natural law It follows logically that it is both false meaning that it is incorrect Okay, that's what natural law is it's based in truth that which is and it's also immoral Because if it's not based in natural law It means that it is doing something that is actually harming somebody by taking something from them that doesn't belong to you like taxation Like permits and licensing like suspending rights that do already exist etc. So forth Alright, so therefore it's wrong and it cannot be legitimately binding upon anyone You can't write down a wrong and say this is morally binding upon you even though it creates harm It causes harm yet you must follow it You know and people believe this we asked in the natural law seminar How many people believe that if a law is passed and it? Restricts a right that you feel you have naturally because that action that that it's saying you may not do Causes no one else any harm Do you have any moral obligation to obey that law until you could find a way to get it changed and? Over two-thirds of people said yes, you have a moral obligation to obey that law because these people are Have the moral right to issue commands and write down laws that constrain you Even if that behavior actually doesn't harm anybody and therefore is a natural right you would still have to try to find a way To get that law changed nonsense Nonsense no one can be legitimately bound to a dictate of man that prevents somebody from exercising a natural right It's called mind control is what it's called So in light of the differences between man's law and Natural law in light of natural law man's law is both irrelevant and unnecessary as it is either redundant because it is in harmony with natural law or it is Completely immoral because it is in direct opposition to natural law Order followers. These are the people who keep this system of slavery in place Okay, they're the people who keep this system of slip in slavery in place. Let me just say this again Order followers are the people who keep the existence of slavery in place Not the ruling class not the masters not the so-called elite which aren't the elite of anything But the bottom of a trash can Okay The people who keep slavery in place are the people who willfully follow their orders Nobody wants to hear that and people will hate you for saying it Okay if an individual this is key to understand if an individual is Performing the task of the following orders by definition that individual can Not the exercising conscience since by definition Exercising conscience means that one is willfully choosing through their free will for themselves Right action over wrong action. So that the concept of following orders is completely Power opposite to the concept of exercising conscience. You cannot be doing the same things Simultaneously, it's impossible to do those two things simultaneously. They are contradictions in terms by definition Okay, most people don't grasp that Okay, by definition if you're following orders, you cannot be actually exercising conscious Conscience which involves free will choice based on the knowledge of right and wrong Here's what order following gets us as far as a nation is concerned, you know, not that we're not already there Not that these people already didn't take us Because we're taken by them already covertly They took us through the school systems. They couldn't beat us militarily. So they said well Let's send our ideologues over there and get into the minds of their children And if you don't believe that's what happened, you're very very very naive Not only the Nazis, but the communists as well because really it's all just forms of socialism That's what feudalism is Worldwide socialism is there's no such thing as private property state owns everything Rights don't exist property rights don't exist Everybody's a feudal surf again. It's called neo feudalism. I don't care which branch you come at it from you want to come Out of from the left that's called communism. You want to come out of from the right? That's called national socialism Communism's international socialism They're both the same force. It's called feudalism. Let's just call it. What is it's called? Utilism which is in itself just another euphemism for slavery They want neo feudalism, which is the new world order of slavery Okay, and it's already here. It's not something that's coming. It's here now the object is to get out of it This is the result of following orders. That's what following orders gets a society Following orders should never be seen as a virtue Following orders is evil. I don't care whether you're I don't care if somebody I don't care if somebody who is considered a holy man gives me an order and I follow it I've just committed an act of evil as far as I'm concerned If I'm acting based on solely what somebody else has told me to do that's evil There's no morality in it at all at all There's it's not a virtue. It's evil Okay, let me just make that so abundantly clear and state it so unequivocally. There's no such thing as any possible Moral following of orders the two terms are contradictory All right. I was just following orders is never a valid excuse or justification for immoral criminal behavior And this lame attempt to abdicate personal responsibility should never be accepted as a valid excuse for such behavior and Why it's done is through justification and again that means to create a right from yes Meaning right or law and the Latin verb for cherry, which means to make or to create And this is what they say. I was just following orders. I was just doing my job. I was shutting down your protest You don't have a right to speak the politicians commanded me so so I just came out I was just doing my job hitting you with a sound cannon You know just doing my job just following my orders. It's a justification. You're a criminal There's nothing more on that. There's nothing virtuous and that's called criminal behavior criminal activity and What they do is try to create it into a right make it into a right by a justification and nobody should ever accept their Justifications because you know what their justifications is that you know what they are? It's called a 100% crock of bull that is a complete lie It's a lie There's a straight-up looking you in the face and saying I'm not responsible for that I just did it but I'm not the one who's responsible for because I was acting on orders We'll see this defense didn't work as the Nuremberg defense and nobody in America should be accepting it Nobody in America should be accepting it because they believe in the legitimacy of authority and government Through mind control. That's what that they believe it They believe there's legitimacy to it Most people actually believe that there's legitimacy to this criminal behavior Because a class of people calling themselves government have magically been imbued and gifted with such rights quote-unquote They believe they have rights other people don't they themselves believe it But worse is that the people who are actually affected by that criminal behavior. They believe they have the authority to do it Gandhi said you assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and Decrees an evil system never deserves such allegiance Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil a good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul Which means saying no Moral culpability What does this mean the determination of who is ultimately at fault or deserving of blame again? This is a legitimate and real concept. There is fault There is blame we got to get over this new age nonsense that nobody's at fault Nobody's to blame you should never say hey you shouldn't have done that that caused a lot of chaos and trauma for other people You're not to blame it just happened No wrong The people who did the behavior are to blame Who carried out the Holocaust in Germany the people who followed their orders to do it? That's who carried it out order followers is the answer Who carried out the purge of political dissonance in Soviet Russia order followers and They're always in the form of police. Why do you think they call a totalitarian system a police state? Why don't they call it a banker state? How come they don't call it a politician state? What about a lawyer state? How about a judge state? Why not call it any of those things you want to know why because none of those people are Ultimately responsible for bringing that condition into manifestation through their behavior They're the order givers The order followers carry out their commands and through their behavior make that condition a reality That's why it's called a police State because every police state that has ever existed has always been created by police Who follow their orders? Because they don't want to take responsibility and think for themselves and know the difference between right and wrong for themselves like an adult Instead I want to be a child who obeys daddy because I have daddy issues All right, and that's what it's really about folks. We're gonna get to that There is such a thing as blame For the commission of actions which have resulted in harm or loss to others This is what culpable means it comes from the Latin culpa meaning fault or blame it means at fault or deserving of blame Now who's more morally culpable the order giver or the order follower and please recognize I've underlined and capitalized the term more. I'm not telling you the word givers are not morally culpable. They are That's not the question is art or any of these people morally culpable is not my question My question is look at the full question. Who is? More morally culpable the order giver or the order follower always At all times and places at all times and places