Russell Twyce

Almost all prison inmates seem to say “I am innocent” and they are ALL telling the literal truth.  Not a single person in any rule-of-law jail is there for what they actually did (or didn’t do).  Suppose a convict is in jail for robbing a liquor store, ooops, wait a minute, that’s NOT why he’s there.  The court really didn’t care whether he held up a liquor store and threatened the life of the proprietor, he was on trial for his breaking the state’s prohibition against that action.  In other words, the person in jail was actually charged with making an anti-government statement by defying one of the government’s edicts – the one against holding up liquor stores.

But the person in jail professes that he ‘was innocent’ and I’ve supported the truth of his statement, then in the last paragraph I supposed that he did rob the liquor store AND he made an anti-government, anti-law statement with the act.  How does that say ‘INNOCENT?’  By very simple logic of what does exist in reality and what does not exist in reality.

[private_Chevron]When Herman Melville penned ‘Moby Dick, his writing the novel did NOT cause a real life while whale to slash into existence in the Atlantic ocean.  Reading Melville’s fictional novel only brings Ahab and the whale into mental existence in the reader’s imagination.  A parliament writing and enacting a law is EXACTLY the same: NOTHING comes into physical existence!  The law never came into being, only a concept was created in the deluded minds of people who believe in law.  And since a law does NOT exist, a person cannot do anything to a law by holding up a liquor store or by anything else–yet that is precisely what they are in prison for.  Every single person in every prison IS innocent of the charge they were put in jail for.  People in jails are wrongfully incarcerated because the law itself is a fiction, the law is a lie!

Now in fact, most people in jails probably did rob those liquor stores or whatever else – BUT – I can show by logic why they may not have held up a liquor store at all, had the law against it not existed.  But that will be in another post.

Does it not make more logical sense to try a person for what he/she may or may not have ACTUALLY done, instead of for what they could NEVER have done to a thing (law) that doesn’t exist?[/private_Chevron]

The rule of law has completely ingrained itself into our culture and it has surrounded itself with untrue notions.  [private_Chevron]To wit:  1. Law suggests that it protects people, when it really only protects itself. 2. That the opposite of law is ‘chaos’ ‘anarchy’ ‘lawlessness’, when the true opposite of law is a justice/protection system that works perfectly well without law’s many drawbacks.  Law is so ingrained into people’s minds that they actually become irrationally angry, as if by post-hypnotic suggestion, when I even try to discuss the perfectly viable alternative.  3. That law is freedom when it most certainly ISN’T: the rule of law is slavery to law – and that is unnecessary.  4. That the government has the ‘right’ to enact laws: the government has the ‘power’ to enact and inflict laws  BUT it does NOT and has NEVER had the right to.

Law operates on the untrue premise that a person committing a wrong against another person has instead hurt the law itself.  That is incorrect and actually illogical.  The law does not exist in the physical universe and the action did not affect it in any way.  A person or people was/were harmed or threatened and justice system of truth would deal directly with that issue.

Let’s look at a particular law as a way of showing how non-law could function better than law, and on true and logical principles.  (It might help your understanding if you attempt to think of law exactly as it is stated and as it functions, instead of with the fuzzy misinterpretations that surround it).

A person is seen speeding.  According to the law, the car’s bumper broke an invisible law and although there are no shards of broken law to sweep up into evidence, the officer decides that the driver has harmed the government’s authority to keep him as an obedient slave.  And a ticket is issued.

A person is seen speeding.  According to non-law order-keeping, the officer feels that the action is a hazard to the pedestrians and other drivers, whom he is tasked with protecting.  And a ticket is issued.

The obvious difference is that the officers authority to act in the first instance, is on his power to protect the government’s mighty authority.  In the second instance the police officer’s mandate is to protect people and their right to safety/security.  Which one is actually and intrinsically true?

Law does NOT do what you think it does.   Law does not and never has protected you.  Law only protects itself and a government’s authority to push you around: that causes further problems that I can discuss in another post.  There IS a better way to deal with crime and it should be explored rationally.[/private_Chevron]

I see in the news this morning that inmates at a prison have rioted. Why wouldn’t people kept against their wills and with NO JUST CAUSE riot against the illegitimate system that has them penned. Should these people be in prison at all? YES. They have probably done harms and they are a treat to society. BUT, not one of them is imprisoned on truthful charges and each of them know it in their souls.

It’s a commonly known fact that most prison inmates will claim they are innocent of the charge that put them in prison. Each is telling the literal truth: each IS NOT GUILTY of what they were charged with. [private_Chevron]Each prisoner was charged with breaking this law or that law, but laws only exist in the mind and it can’t be broken in the physical world. Law is an illogical concept. Yes, these prisoners may well have committed rapes, robberies, murders and such. They should doubtlessly be locked up but their incarceration is not for a reason that is TRUE. Then they have very good reason to complain and to riot: even if in their conscious minds, they are not sure precisely why they are angry.[/private_Chevron]

A judge will ask a witness in court to tell ‘the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’. If the lawyers and judges were under the same sworn compulsion, the law would be doomed to fail – as it should. Because law is a lie and everything law touches becomes a lie too. Yes, people do need social justice and protection but it needs to be based on reality, logic and truth. Reality, truth and logic are the three things that law cannot abide with because law is comprised of nothing but delusion, propaganda and deception.

[private_Chevron]When social justice is founded on truth, instead of on law, prisoners would have no cause to riot. But then, there would be a lot less of them in prisons and a lot less crime on the streets too. Law is a major cause of most of our societal woes and we need to examine the truthful and logically effective alternative. [/private_Chevron]

Doubtlessly, you’ve heard of the secret or you’ve read the secret.  You’ll know about the law of attraction.

Learn the secrets of the secrets.

Try thinking logically about this ‘secret’. Your brain knows that people really can’t do ‘magic’ in the real world. Then suddenly, this ‘secret’ comes to the public attention and it almost seems to be ‘magic’, so how can those two seeming opposed concepts both be true? Here is a secret: your mind and body can’t do the magic of ‘the secret’ – it’s your soul that does it and it has been doing it for a very long time.

Your soul works the law of attraction all the time with full success.  Unfortunately, the results are not what but they ARE what you expect and your skepticism actually works against your best efforts. You don’t believe you can, or put another way you DO believe that you can’t do the magic of ‘the Secret’ and that is what you attract with the law of attraction. Your soul has manifested successfully to seemingly block your own manifesting.  Did that make sense to you?

I put a banner link at the top of this page to the ‘Eleven Forgotten Laws‘ but now I’m going to tell you that you DON’T need to know them.  In fact, applying the law of attraction for your benefit is so simple that too much knowledge can be an impediment because unanswered questions can effectively block you.

Your EXPECTATIONS are EVERYTHING!  That is all you have to know and I can prove it to you.  Look at the square banner here for ClickBank Pirate.  I want you to click that banner and read it with a POSITIVE attitude.  ClickBank Pirate is unlike all other Internet money programs I’ve seen in that it is ‘automatic’.  That mean that with my intricate knowledge of the ‘law of attraction’ I can personally guarantee what I’m about to say.  “If you buy the Clickbank Pirate program and try it with the expectation that it WILL make you money — then it WILL.”

Yar! Auto-Plundering on The 7 Internet Seas

Conversely, if you do it with the anticipation of failing at it then you will but let’s not even think about that. Let your soul attract your expectations of success for you. Use the secret of the secret to work the manifesting magic with ClickBank Pirate. Or read more about the secret in the Eleven Forgotten Laws and then come come back to where you could’ve just started.

“We fight for the rule-of-law!”  The politician hammers his fist on the podium and shouts.  “The rule-of-law is our way of life.”

“Freedom rules,” a young man in the audience shouts at the top of his lungs, “and law drools.”

The politician’s security squad hustles out, tackles the youth, and they drag him away.  The other folk in the assembly are uncertain of how to react.  The heckler had said ‘freedom rules’ and that was a concept they’ve been taught to cheer, but he had finished with a slur on the rule of law.  His message was mixed and so is the general reaction.  Some hope the lad is severely pummeled by the burly security guards, and he doubtlessly will be.  Another group feel compassion and wonder why youth is so rebellious towards a rule-of-law system that protects them (the rule-of-law really doesn’t protect anyone).  The third segment of the crowd is unsure of how to feel, so most exercise apathy and push the confusion to the back mind.

[private_Chevron]There two opposed concepts in the young man’s criticism of the rule-of-law.  The first was ‘freedom’ and the second was ‘rule’.  One cancels out the other.  You can have freedom or rule but not both.  To suggest otherwise is illogical.  I know that you’ve been conditioned to believe the rule-of-law equates to freedom but it doesn’t-period.  Rule is (obedience, non-freedom, slavery) and freedom is freedom.[/private_Chevron]

Right now, your brain is likely screaming “ANARCHY!” Because that’s how your trained to react. But that’s also false.  The opposite of the Rule of Law needn’t be Anarchy and Chaos, just as the opposite of a PC is not ‘no computer’.  The opposite of rule of law could be, and should be social order keeping by a method that isn’t the rule-of-law, just as the opposite of ‘no PC’ can be, and is ‘Mac’.

[private_Chevron]Those who favor the rule-of-law, do not want you to believe that an alternative is possible: they don’t even want you to think clearly and rationally about a different system than law–so the society you live in has been stuffed full of pro-law propaganda.  Your brainwaves have also been saturated with the false belief that; the rule-of-law protects you (it doesn’t: the rule-of-law only protects itself), without the rule of law there would be chaos (without any public order keeping there would be anarchy but the rule of law isn’t the only way to keep chaos at bay), and that the rule-of-law and law makers are addressing the social problems that seem to be growing despite all efforts (In fact, the rule of law is CAUSING most the ills in society.)

The solution to the problems with the rule-of-law: Get rid of the rule of law in favor of a better method.  There IS a far superior alternative but you’re not even going to be able to comprehend that unless you can overcome your societal programming to think logically and clearly about the rule of law issue.[/private_Chevron]

Don’t rob a bank, harm anyone, or drive irresponsibly: that’s not what I mean by breaking the law.  To break the law we need to break the slave grip the law has on people and we will thereby save the world.

Law is a horrible and STUPID concept.  We are idiots for adhering to the rule-of-law’s slavery.  There IS a much better way of providing public protection and justice.  [private_Chevron]Breaking the law, breaking the law’s hold on us would save our world.  No.  I’ll say breaking the law WILL save our world because it’s going to happen.  The rule of law WILL fall and good F**king riddance when the heinous rule of law is finally gone.

People are conditioned like Pavlov’s dog to bow, scrape and obey the law, even when it is utterly stupid to do so.  For example, If a street is closed for repairs and barricades are up to stop traffic, there will be no cars driving down that street.  So on the crossing avenue, the traffic light is completely redundant.  Yet what happens when that light turns red?  The stupid drivers stop and wait.  For what?  There is NO crossing traffic.  There are barricades.  You morons are trained to obey law, even when it is completely brain-dead to do so.  And that complete acceptance of abject stupidity is precisely why our world is a such screwed up place.[/private_Chevron]

Wake up your brain: wake up your subconscious and feel it's awesome power

How many tons of carbon are dumped annually into our environment by cars idling at an intersection, when there is no crossing traffic, but where the light is red?  The answer is in the millions!  STUPIDITY! Break the law, free the people and save the world.  This is simply one aspect of how retarded the rule of law is and how moronic people are for accepting such an inept method of social order.  There IS an better way than law but to see that, you need to be free, or at least have the capacity of thinking free.

“You should support the men and women that are fighting for YOUR freedom”  An irate woman replied to me, in response to something I said that she obviously took offense to.  This fighting for freedom or fighting to enslave post should tweak her ire.  Fighting for Freedom is an OXYMORON.  You really mean they are fighting for your freedom to tell everyone you’re fighting with how they should feel free after you’ve usurped them of their freedom and enslaved them to your utterly non-free freedom.

Gain Confidence in Your True Freedom

[private_Chevron]I am personally free despite living in a non-free North American nation BECAUSE I know that slavery is NOT possible unless one willingly submits to slavery.  I don’t submit.  I’m free and I don’t have to fight.  “If you cut me then I’ll bleed, If you kill me then I will die.”  But in the sanctity of my thoughts, I’m free and while I’m living in a body that I alone control, I’m free.  And unless my mouth is taped, I’ll continue to say.  The rule-of-law is slavery.  And the rule of law is unnecessary,  And the rule of law is a crime against humanity – as your fighting to enslave people to the rule of law is a crime against humanity.

This fighting for freedom you’re doing now, should be held up to a war crimes trial later.  But of course the rule of law doesn’t allow any examination of itself.  Nor could the rule of law provide a just judgment, So it’s crimes against humanity goes untried and unpunished, as doubtlessly will your fighting for the freedom to enslave.  [/private_Chevron]Damn!  The rebel south really should’ve won the American Civil War.  What a better world we would all be living in now. We would all actually have freedom and the fighting would be long-since over because the whole world would be a free world.

“I personally feel that I am protected by law.”  A person said to me in a discussion

“But you are deceived by your learned perception of law’s function.” I answer.  If you can push the propagandized training aside and examine inner working of the system of law with straight logic, a different version emerges. [private_Chevron]The ‘supposed’ intent of the rule of law is to protect, but the system of law does NOT actually do that. Law protects only itself from being broken – it is against the law to break a law.[/private_Chevron]

[private_Chevron]Instead of protecting you, (which the law doesn’t do but which ‘deterrence’ does), the rule of law law has set you up as a target for people who want to break laws. The rule of law makes it possible to ‘lash-out’ at society as a whole by breaking any law, even when it hurts only one person.  It’s logical to surmise that ‘some’ crime would not occur if a law was not there for a malcontent to strike out at (and an innocent person would not be harmed in that instance just because someone hated the government).

And the ‘deterrence’ that ACTUALLY does the protecting could easily be accomplished with a system other than law. And Police could function and courts could work using a different rationale than the asinine theory that a person’s wrongful action has caused damage to a theoretical item. And as a result the crime level would have dropped by the amount that the crimes were previously being committed just to spite the authority, and the deterrence previously meted out by the rule of law, would still be in effect through the non-rule-of-law justice system (based on protecting human rights and safety, instead of on an imaginary rule-of-law king’s theoretical power to issue edicts).

Whether you like it or not, the rule-of-law is dead.  It simply doesn’t know that its head has been removed.  As a society, we really need to start discussing the logical replacement for the dark ages system of law, that really should have died a hundred years ago.[/private_Chevron]

I’m personally manifesting for the rule-of-law to fall.

Blame the Rule-of-Law for Police Corruption – Everywhere

People and the Western media like to point fingers and offer nasty exposes of the police corruption in Asia and Latin America. The west puffs up and boasts: “Here we have the rule-of-law”. To burst your bubble, they have your ‘rule of law’ in developing nations too and yes, there is police corruption in Asia and Latin America, but it is of an honest sort of police corruption. IE. The police are open and straightforward about the corruption. They hold a hand out after a traffic violation and a driver hands over some cash and it’s a done deal without the courts, lawyers and the pernicious system becoming involved.

Now let’s look at the police corruption in supposedly “civilized” Western nations. [private_Chevron]The police don’t stick their hands out seeking cash bribes—BUT—there are other forms of payments and one is career advancement. The police officer that meets his/her quota of revenue generated with tickets gets promoted and a pay raise. A ticket ‘quota’ is a government’s crime against its citizens and it contributes to the hidden but still nefarious police corruption in the West.

But ticket quotas aren’t the only form of police corruption in the supposedly civilized parts of the world. Another way police are ‘paid off’ by western governments is with an entrenched protection against prosecution for crimes the police commit—and they regularly commit MANY. Some police crimes are taking sex from prostitutes/speeders in lieu of ticket issuance or arrest and taking money from criminals in return. Police are NOT subjected to ANY investigation either individually or the whole department, except by themselves. Similarly, the entire justice system is NOT up for internal scrutiny, except as looking in a mirror. Let me put it this way. [/private_Chevron] Nobody polices the police and supposed justice is not held to justice. This is NOT a healthy situation. It INVITES police corruption and it rewards corrupt police.

Become an Expert Persuader

[private_Chevron]‘When you point at something, there are four curled fingers pointing back.’ That’s a well-worn expression but it is utterly poignant in respects of police corruption. Asia and Latin America do have corrupt police but the corruption problem there would be easier to solve because it’s in the open. The more difficult cure is where everyone knows the police are corrupt but on society’s urging, all pretend to think otherwise. There are corrupt police all over the world because the corruption problem is systemic. The rule-of-aw is a horrible system of justice that facilitates and encourages corruption. We need to replace the rule of law with a better system of keeping public order. Only then will police corruption come to an end.[/private_Chevron]

Political Corruption – Both Sides of the Dirty Story

The term ‘political corruption’ seems to conjure up images of a shifty looking person handing over envelopes of cash to cigar-smoking political figures but in reality, the picture is more insidious and widespread.  In actuality, the government system of the western world is founded on the principles of political corruption and the system itself is the recipient.  I’ll cite a few examples.

[private_Chevron]A large chain grocery store wants a traffic light put on the entrance to their parking lot—for the convenience of customers and to draw more business.  So they pay the city’s cost of installing the lights.  The city has buckled to corruption and the driving public (tax-paying citizens) now must contend with yet another an extra traffic light.  The fact that the money went into city coffers, instead of an individual politician’s fat wallet doesn’t mitigate the fact of corruption.  The store paid and the government did what was paid for = political corruption at the expense of the majority of people.

A person wants to operate a shady business that defrauds people.  He doesn’t have to pay a bribe to the police: he only needs to pay regular taxes on the money he bilks from his customers.  The revenue department doesn’t investigate the doings of tax paying business.  That is also political corruption and a protection racket.  And when complaining victims finally initiate an investigation that uncovers the crimes, the government officials yell and point fingers at the villain—but it doesn’t give the tax money the taxes the villain paid back to the victims.[/private_Chevron]

When people begin to realize that the government system is the WORST offender in corruption problem, then perhaps we can effect a change to a governance system that is based on honesty and truth.  Here is one final point to ponder on the topic of political corruption – ‘It takes two to Tango: a disreputable business person couldn’t offer a bribe, it there wasn’t a greedy hand stretched out to take the dirty cash.’

What can we do about the political corruption?  Not much.  It’s deeply ingrained into society that the people should pretend they don’t see it as political corruption.  When more of us are free we might effect positive change but in the meanwhile, all one can do is wait.

Or you could click the ‘endorphin release’ button here to feel good while waiting and hoping for real changes in 2012.  Political corruption is a stumbling block hampering our path forward.  Political corruption will not end until we put a stop to it.  Fortunately, stopping political corruption is not as hard as you might think.

Join and Find out How we can Stop Corruption.