“My Dear Wormwood, I note what you say about guiding your patient’s reading and taking care that he sees a good deal of his materialist friend. But are you not being a trifle naive? It sounds as if you supposed that argument was the way to keep him out of the Enemy’s clutches. That might have been so if he had lived a few centuries earlier.
At that time the humans still knew pretty well when a thing was proved and when it was not; and if it was proved they really believed it. They still connected thinking with doing and were prepared to alter their way of life as the result of a chain of reasoning. But what with the weekly press and other such weapons we have largely altered that.
Your man has been accustomed, ever since he was a boy, to have a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head. He doesn’t think of doctrines as primarily ‘true’ or ‘false’, but as ‘academic’ or ‘practical’, outworn, or contemporary’, ‘conventional’ or ‘ruthless’. Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping him from the Church.
Don’t waste time trying to make him think that materialism is true! Make him think it is strong, or stark, or courageous—that it is the philosophy of the future. That’s the sort of thing he cares about. The trouble about argument is that it moves the whole struggle on the to the Enemy’s own ground.”Screw tape letters, C.S. Lewis.
Have you ever wondered why debate is not tolerated by those who wish to cancel out their opposition? It is simple. For centuries the ‘enemy’ has known that the very act of argument awakens ‘reason’, and ‘reason’ is feared.
Once ‘reason’ is awake, who can foresee the result? There are two kinds of predictability that reason creates, one the ‘enemy’ loves, the other is feared. The enemy of reason wants to ‘know the outcome’ and will go to any length to achieve it.
What they fear is the ‘reasonable’ man, who does not fear the unknown...who adapts instantly with the confidence of his own mind and experience to create a ‘future’ without having been told what that future will be. Reason, makes life predictable and when combined with freedom, creates Liberty...the most hated condition of the enemy. This is why the ‘enemy’ has created voting machines. They are tools to create a ‘predictable outcome'...the ‘machines’, ‘destroy’ Liberty and the conditions for 'reason' in society.
Prior to the adoption of mail-in ballots and electronic OCR scanning of the ballot using OP-Tech scanning technology developed in Venezuela, financed by the British Crown and holding companies owned by the rogue U.S. intelligence agencies, people who were registered voters attended in-person voting at specific geographical locations, such as public schools setup for this process. People's identity as a 'citizen' and 'legal voter' was authenticated at the polling place by volunteers trained in the process. Picture and signature ID were common for this authentication.
This was considered the norm without question, as it was accepted as a norm that only 'citizens' could vote. After identification and authentication, the 'citizen' was issued a 'paper ballot' to fill out with a 'pen' in blue-ink. Blue-ink being considered indelible and 'official' for a 'contract'. The citizen filled out the ballot in a privacy booth. When finished the citizen with his own hand, put the 'ballot' into a 'ballot box'.
Thus, there was an unbroken chain of custody by process....citizen's hand to the 'ballot box'. No intermediate steps existed. The ballot box was perpetually in 'custody' of a bi-partisan set of people, who were legally responsible to ensure that the box was never handled without their supervision. Moving the box required visual escort of the box to the counting room, and a signature of authenticity by the people in charge. Once again, an unbroken chain of custody. The ballots were counted by bi-partisan people, who were trained in the counting process, and supervised by a bi-partisan group to ensure that the 'chain-of-custody' was not broken. After the counting and 'tally' summation paperwork was filled out, the 'bi-partisan' chain-of-custody people signed the paperwork that was put with the 'ballots'. These ballots were held under supervision until the election was over. At all times, the evidence supervision was never broken, or those ballots were either invalid, or recounted per the canvassing committee.>
Chain of custody in the current election process does not satisfy the Rules of evidence, is not multi-partisan, and relegates citizens to mere spectators. The Constitution of the State of Washington, Article I, Declaration of Rights, Section 19, Freedom of Elections states:
“All Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.”
“Free and Equal” is a key concept. It implies that the ‘election’ shall be open to all qualified ‘citizens’ who can be identified properly as a ‘citizen’. Equal implies that the same consistent process will be used for each ‘citizen’ that fills out a ballot. Together we get a transparent election process applied the same to everyone qualified to vote. “No Power, civil or military” includes the state! Is the State civil? This is a key argument that needs clarity.
Let's define 'civil authority':"Civil authority is that apparatus of the state other than its military units that enforces law and order. It is also used to distinguish between religious authority and secular authority. In a religious context it may be defined "as synonymous with human government, in contradistinction to a government by God, or the divine government."
This is the common definition. It is safe to say that the ‘State’ should not be in control of the election process, it in fact belongs to the citizens.
Here is where clarity is needed. The state may not own the process. The state may purchase equipment, hire civil servants, and monitor that the rules are ‘fair and equal’, and are followed, but citizens must operate the process itself, not the state. No state servant should touch a ballot….ever.
The state must not ‘interfere’ with an election. The ‘gold standard’ of mail-in balloting is supposed to be Washington State. How can this be the gold standard when it contravenes the very document from which its authority is derived...the constitution.
This is self-evident. The election process is demonstrably the child of administrative over reach. The hand of the state has been extended so far that it has relegated the citizen to that of an observer...not the operator of a right guaranteed by the foundational authority of the state itself.Dare I quote the Bible, as Moses spoke to Pharoah: "LET MY PEOPLE GO!"
The concept of ‘self-governance’ is foundational to a republic. This idea recognizes the individual over the collective without surrendering to anarchy or tyranny. Self-governance is the ‘middle-ground’ balancing between the two extremes. There is the recognition that a ‘government’ to handle the common affairs among the people is a necessary evil among people. The United States was the first such experiment of representative republicanism in the history of mankind, where ‘power’ was separated into branches to offset man’s natural tendency to use ‘power’ to corrupt governance through self-interest, passion, and alliances. In this new experiment, each person owned their person at birth with certain inalienable rights given by God...not government or a King.
It was the genius of the foundational thinkers to separate power among the branches of government to prevent any person or group from seizing all of the power as in the past feudal empires. Understanding this foundational thought is a life long experience, it never really ends. The formation of the first government among the colonies in the United States was not successful. Many people were ready to take the easy road and nominate a king to direct the government, going so far to ask George Washington to accept the position for life. Were it not for his character and commitment to remove the potential of both tyranny and anarchy from people’s lives experienced prior to the Declaration of Independence and during the struggle for that independence he may have allowed himself to the king.
This great experiment can be called ‘self-governance’. It’s idea is simple...leave the individual alone and keep government small. Avoid entangling treaties that precipitate wars of profit and horror against the people in nation states. Let the people keep the value of their labors and profits. This is called ‘Laissez-faire’. It does not rule out the constitutional duties of a nation; it simply implies that government should not interfere in the workings of a ‘fair market’. It does not rule out regulating by the ‘vote’ of the people through ‘transparent elections’ those common functions most efficiently carried out by elected officials to the benefit of all.
On one hand this experiment says that anarchy or tyranny are not desired. On the other it implies that a balance between all competing interests within the nation state must be balanced so that ‘power’ inherited from God and the natural rights therein are available equally to all. Understanding how to perform the maintenance of the government among men is the duty of citizens. This cannot be properly performed by an uneducated populace. It becomes a citizen’s duty to be informed about self-governance, its principles, duties, and processes.
These ‘duties’ become the ‘maintenance’ functions within the nation state. Chief among these maintenance issues is the ‘right to vote’, ‘one man one vote’, and ‘elections’ that are transparent and free for all citizens who desire to participate without interference from any civil or military group...including the government itself.
I encourage all citizens to educate themselves at:Centerforselfgovernance
SECTION 19 FREEDOM OF ELECTIONS: All Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage
The 'right to vote' has historically been left to the states by the Federal Congress accept as defined by civil rights acts. Although this may change after the 2020 election, every state has its own rules and proceses that define how the election will be held. In WA state, the subject of this article, it is clearly stated in the constitution that the state or military shall not interfere with the right to suffrage...the election process. All elections shall be 'free and equal' apparently has been interpretted by WA state's code reviewers to favor the darker side of the meaning of 'free and equal'...by darker side I mean one hundred and eighty degrees opposite of the orgininal textual interpretations. Free for whom and equal compared to what, seems to have escaped from the Webster's dictionary generally accpeted definitions of these words.
The current election process is by no means 'free or equal'. It was better in the past prior to mail-in ballots and the 'hidden and secret' machines used to prosecute a distrubed and tainted election process. What has escaped our code reviewers is the meaning of 'free'. Free has contextual meaning...in that a 'CITIZEN' is free to register to vote and no one else. "Free" does not mean that anyone who can obtain a 'driver's license' shall be eligible to vote or even register to vote. Clearly, the road to freedom and the maintenance of this road of liberty has taken a wrong turn. If 'mail-in' ballots are potholes in this sacred road, then 'election machines' are a 'dangerous crevass' into which the citizens have been steered by the 'STATE'...a state that is absolutely interfering with the 'right to suffrage'.
SECTION 30 RIGHTS RESERVED. The enumeration in this Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny others retained by the people.
This section of the WA state constitution has interesting and broad language with regards to the election process. How is it that the 'Legislature' can write laws, have them reviewed by the 'code reviewers', debate them in the public forum, and then contravene the sacred document to which they swore an oath to defend? Regarding the non-interference language of the elections, in addition to this clause, the 'state' has abandoned the constituion as a whole. The language of SEC 19 says that the state shall not interfere with elections. It doe snot say or imply that the state shall do anything it desires to run and election, or allow anyone to vote under the guise of 'freedom'. Certainly there is no language that implies that a citizen of a foreign country can vote in the United States! The Constituion says that no language shall contravene the rights of any other, yet the election process by statute and administrative code allows a foreigner to register to vote, which cancels out another righful citizen's vote. This is simple 'theft'...no different than armed robbery with severe consequences...it 'DOES' deny the rights of other 'CITIZENS'...it 'IS' unconstitutional. There is no debate here...the constitution is clear...yet the 'STATE' is not clear accept that they are in violation of the document that gives them their powers...a dangerous situation where the 'insane' are now running the asylum.
I have reflected on the election process, but from a different perspective...a more fundamental thought process beyond strategies and tactical operational contrivances. I have been reflecting on the whole election process itself...a more than 6 year journey of research and self-education. I have concluded, after having expressed my concerns in a Writ of Mandamus in 2018 to the SOS, that the entire election process has been co-opted by the state in contravention to the WA state constitution, Article 1, SEC 19.
This is clear...look at the monster that has been created! Think of how the introduction of technology has been used to NOT make the process open, fair, or transparent; but to muddy the entire election issue with confusion, extreme costs, and doubt within the civil body itself. Clearly we have failed to provide a simple, transparent, auditable, open, and reliable election process. We have allowed the state to have complete control of the end-to-end process...and this is not what Article 1, SEC 19 implies.
All Elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right to suffrage." I for one cannot discuss strategy and tactics within the framework of corruption that ignores the simple fact that we are NOT FOLLOWING THE CONSTITUTION." We as citizens within a 'REPUBLIC' have abandoned 'reason' for process, 'ethics' and 'morality' for tactics. We are all complicit in smothering the Liberty that is our birthright.
The textual interpretation of Article 1, SEC 19 is that the election process belongs to the 'people',not the state. It actually does not belong to 'one' or 'two' political parties either...it belongs to the 'people' who are legal 'CITIZENS'. It is not a game, a party, or a tactic, or a strategy...it is not even about the 'candidates' or 'initiatives' or 'referendums' at the most fundamental level. These are only 'variables' in the fundamental process. Voting is the fundamental concept in and for itself. A 'vote' is all that an individual has to ensure that the power given to each person at birth from GOD is 'not taken away'...in fact it is so fundamental in the entire scope of thought inculcated into the framework of a 'republican form of governance' that it cannot be taken away...ever by anyone accept the almighty GOD. It lives, it endures, it is the bedrock, the most fundamental expression of a human right on Earth. It is 'formative', 'preservative', 'motivational', and life-giving. It provides for the domestic tranquility, the economic stability, and assurance that 'justice' against runaway power that is built into men's souls, is reproached and corrected with a civil society. Without understanding the 'vote' we cannot ever understand an 'election'. If we cannot understand an election then we cannot understand how to hold one that is beyond a reasonable doubt proper, transparent, preservative, open, fair, and sacred to the Liberties that it protects. Without the vote being elevated to its proper level and protected, the only predictable future is tyranny, chaos, and bloodshed.
These are the lessons learned. I am in severe doubt about the threshold all political parties have crossed. I am in severe doubt as a citizen, beyond any party affiliation about the threshold we have crossed as a nation state, and a state within our Union. I am in severe doubt about whether we any longer have the courage and intellectual fortitude to restore our union or state within its context to a proper republic. I am in severe doubt that we can forgo strategies and tactics and return to ethics and a proper moral certitude that holds the entire republican self-governance framework in the context that it deserves. The cruel reality is that we have failed. We have failed "Columbia". Maybe we should tear down the Statue of Liberty and rebuild it with a 'modern grotesque' and call it 'Election Process" and instead of a bright light of hope...give it a 'black hole' from which no light can escape...the black hole of tyranny.
I admit to being a student of the CenterForSelfGovernence (CSG). www.centerforselfgovernence.com. I also admit to being a retired Public Works Director, whose sole responsibility is to ensure that the infrastructure functions properly so that the citizens with a certain jurisdictional boundary achieve a desired level of service. What do these have in common....maintenance! Just as pipes, treatment plants, roads, buildings, equipment, and parks need maintenance so that they will last and function appropriately and cost effectively, a 'republic' needs a similar kind of maintenance..perpetually without lapses in operational application. I maintain that the 'right to vote' is the single most important right of a citizen, and 'voting' in a fair and transparent eleciton process is the single most 'preservative' maintenance activity. This action must be elevated to the highest devotion and duty by each citizen.
Each citizen must understand the power a vote has, and protect it accordingly. Each person's vote must be a lump of gold, a diamond in a ring, an oath of duty, an act of preservation so sacred and important, that no one can ever compromise or deny it from a 'citizen'. It is important that this be understood and implanted into each citizen through education by all means. The vote is the oil and water in the engine of freedom, it is the pipeline that carries the water to each business and household, it is in fact so perservative to all functions within government, that the slogan 'one man one vote' is understood instrinsically worldwide as a precept for liberty. Liberty dies without the people's ability to 'vote' their will, and to do so without fear, criminal compromise, bullying, devious lawfare, government, and miltary intervention. Now is the time to reeducate America on the sacredness of the right to vote, the importance of free, fair, and transparent elections, and the sacred value that these processes have in the maintenance of Liberty.
The right to vote is 'preservative' to the union. In criminal and civil law, the term 'chain of custody' refers to the order in which items of evidence have been handled during the investigation of a case. Proving that an item has been properly handled through an unbroken chain of cusody is required for it to be leally considered as evidence in court. In criminal trials, the prosecution must typically prove that all evidence was handled according to a properly documented and unbroken chain of custody. Crime-related items found not to have followed a properly documented and unbroken chain of custody may not be allowed as evidence in trials.
Under the law, an item will not be accepted as evidence during the trial—will not be seen by the jury—unless the chain of custody is an unbroken and properly documented trail without gaps or discrepancies. In order to convict a defendant of a crime, the evidence against them must have been handled in a meticulously careful manner to prevent tampering or contamination. From the time it is collected until it appears in court, an item of evidence must always be in the physical custody of an identifiable, legally-authorized person. Thus, a chain of custody in a criminal cased might be a 'handgun' at the crime scene. A process exists to preserve the evidence chain so that no reasonable doubt of deception exists to undermine the civil rights of the accused. This is called 'chain of custody'.
Prior to the adoption of mail-in ballots and electronic OCR scanning of the ballot using OP-Tech scanning technology developed in Venezuela, financed by the British Crown, people who were registered voters attended in-person voting at specific geographical locations, such as public schools. Their identity as a 'citizen' and 'legal voter' was authenticated at the polling place by volunteers trained in the process. Picture and signature ID were common for this authentication. This was considered the norm without question, as it was accepted as a norm that only 'citizens' could vote. After identification and authentication, the 'citizen' was issued a 'paper ballot' to fillout with a 'pen' in blue-ink. Blue-ink being considered indelible and 'official' for a 'contract'. The citizen filled out the ballot in a privacy booth. When finished the citizen with his own hand, put the 'ballot' into a 'ballot box'. Thus, there was an unbroken chain of custody by process....citizen's hand to the 'ballot box'. No intermediate steps existed. The ballot box was perpetually in 'custody' of a bi-partisan set of people, who were legally responsible to ensure that the box was never handled without their supervision. Moving the box required visual escort of the box to the counting room, and a signature of authenticity by the people in charge. Once again, an unbroken chain of custody. The ballots were counted by bi-partisan people, who were trained in the couting process, and supervised by a bi-partisan group to ensure that the 'chain-of-custody' was not broken. After the couting and 'tally' summation paperwork was filled out, the 'bi-partisan' chain-of-custody people signed the paperwork that was put with the 'ballots'. These ballots were held under supervision until the election was over. At all times, the evidence supervision was never broken, or those ballots were either invalid, or recounted per the canvassing committe.
Let's ask ourselves if 'chain of custody' beyond a reasonable doubt exists in mail-in balloting, electronic machine scanning, and electronic 'tally' of the total votes? Let's compare it to the past process where people could see, touch, feel, count, and verify the observable phenomana surrounding the election process; and most importantly, use their common sense, judgement, and eye sight to make moral educated decsions about whether the process was correct or broken.
With mail-in ballots, the ballots are filled out without identification in the home or anywhere for that matter. Were they filled out by the intended citizen, or someone else? We do not know. According to the rules of evidence, the ballot fails and is not valid in court as evidence. The process should stop here, but the 'state', in violation of the non-interference law, continues the magic show. The state says that the purported citizen can merely 'sign the ballot' and put it into the mail box. Once again this fails the rules of evidence, for when the ballot leaves the hand of the citizen, the 'chain-of-custody' is broken. Its anyone's ballot at this time, open to 'man-in-the-middle' attack at the mail-box and 'substitution', in addition to not knowing who actually filled out the ballot.
There is the argument by the state that the signature is checked when it is opened by a 'civil servant'. Is a 'civil servant' bi-partisan? Never...their allegiance is to their job, and God forbid that they go against the 'trend' of favoritism incullcated in the 'government structure'. Thus in one fell swoop, chain-of-custody is exposed to poltiical favoritism, pressure, and fear; rather than blind justice where there is no portent of criminal activity when real 'chain-of-custody' is maintained, as in the 'hand to mail-box' in person ballot process. Thus, mail-in ballotting process utterly fails to the sacred preservative process of the 'republic' at this point.
I cannot imagine a 'hired hand' working under such pressure...having to scan thousands of signatures to determine if the ballot was signed by the intended citizen or by a dog named 'RUFUS'. After a few hundred comparisons, the human mind rebels into 'fuck it, close enough' mode, and moves on to the next ballot. This is human nature, and the 'hired hand' or 'volunteer' has zero skin in the game. It is far better to simply remove these actions from the process in total, and scrap mail-in balloting for what it is...criminal by design, and criminal in its outcome.
Chain of custody has been defined. As described, it is preservative to the republic, the union of states called America. Since before the Declaration of Independence the Magna Carta described the innate idea of 'one man one vote'. This concept is primordial in its context...each person inherits his individuality, his body and soul, from GOD, not any government. I quote the Declaration of Independence to document these ancient rights. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ....In every stage of these Oppression We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." In these redresses, the will of the people can only be spoken in a free society by each person's vote, in an election that holds in contempt any tyranny through devious interventions into the election process. Today, in the 21st Century, the historical ideals for which man has striven for 5,000 years, are as real today as they were through time for each generation of man who suffered without the repulican ideal and separation of powers. We cannot have an election process that is 'hidden and secret'. We cannot suffer the grievances against which much blood, struggle, and sacrifice have been given to destroy in the journey to freedom, liberty, and self-actualization.
We must be repugnant of those nauseating actions of lawfare that deprive the individual of their inalienable rights. That which is 'hidden and secret' is a devil to the soul of Liberty. Freedom does not thrive in darkness, it lives in transparency, in full-disclosure, and trust in the processes that properly maintain the republic against the evil of chaos that always leads to tyranny.
Election processes that rely on mail-in ballotting, betray the trust necessary for proper maintenance of the republic. Mail-in ballotting introduces every negative aspect that is counter-intutive to stability within the electorate. It is not possible for elections to be trusted that use magician's showmansip and diversion with sophisticated trickery on complex election machines, and untested software, with unkown third-party vendors. This by its very nature goes against the foundations of the American republic. Mail-in ballotting by sophistication removes the citizen from the election process, and whispers in each citizen's ear like a succubus with her hand in your wallet, 'Trust me, I won't steal your soul or your money or your trust...trust me! '.
The answer to the question is "NO" emphatically. We cannot survive as a nation when the elections are 'hidden and secret'. We cannot survive as a nation in Liberty when we abandon the basic sacred rights from God...one man one vote, cast without fear, without repercussion, and in accord with the laws of the 'nation state'. We must uphold the vote and the election process as the most sacred of rights in order to survive in freedom.
Take council in the following. Hebrews 4:12-13 “God’s word is alive and working and is sharper than a double-edged sword. It cuts all the way into us, where the soul and the spirit are joined, to the center of our joints and bones. And it judges the thoughts and feelings in our hearts. Nothing in all the world can be hidden from God. Everything is clear and lies open before him, and to him we must explain the way we have lived.”
The election process can be fixed. Here is what MUST happen if you want to restore LIBERTY to WA state. 1) Proper voter registrations must be held to a higher standard. It is not the quantity, but the quality that counts 2) Clean up the voter roles. If the state can't do it through ERIC, then get someone on contract who can...it is that simple; in fact as a database analyst, I can't figure out why ERIC even exists...hint, hint..think about it! 3) Mail-in balloting is too expensive and fails the most basic tenant of 'chain of custody'. 4) Tabulators and scanners are 'hidden and secret'. As a programmer, I cannot even understand why these exist. We have failed to understand that a computer can be made to lie, steal, cheat, and do anything with hidden circuits, and software. And yet, we have allowed the state to 'take over' that which is preservative to our birthrights using 'hidden and secret' technologies. Shame on all of us! 5) Tabulators must be replaced by multi-partisan teams of citizens, who count the ballots. The only tech to be used would be IP cameras that broadcast over secure lines to a public webpage, while totals are written on white boards for that purpose, and validated with phone calls on secure lines. That is all that is needed...low tech and citizens well organized by the staff we hire and pay big bucks too now. The rest is for the citizens to do...volunteers from a 'civil' society'. If we can't get this organized properly, then we are all doomed to an uncertain future.