Posts Tagged activism
(Preface – I would like to see “business ethics” no longer be an oxymoron. The day needs to come (and it IS coming) when the legal rights of a single person are greater than that of a corporation. Modern-day court decisions have given corporations all the rights of a person with little of the legal or moral responsibility.
This unwarranted legal interpretation has been used to its fullest extent over the past two centuries. It has enabled the modern corporation to become the most powerful legal form of wealth transfer in human history. They are perfect mechanisms for doing so, because even though they are often traded “publicly”, they have clearly evolved over time to benefit the few at the expense of the many – always able to hide behind ‘personhood’ or by providing lip service about ‘giving back’ while extracting as much as possible from the communities and countries where they are located.
On Friday night, June 12th 2015 in Farnham, Surrey England, four agents from Trading Standards (Consumer Protection Agency in the UK) broke into a private home and disrupted a church service of the Genesis II Church of Health and Healing. While I was explaining how to restore health from a certain tropical disease called “Chagas”, the owner of the home, Mary, screamed as the front door was broke open by a very big Trading Standards agent, along with three other agents, forcing themselves into this private residence.
Additional information; The word “cure” should be replaced with the word “purge” in this context because the word cure could mean to “preserve” such has been the corruption of the English language. This word has/is and continues to be the problem with alternative means of restoring health due to it’s ambiguity, The Corporations use these weasel words against us.
Below is the context and video of that event.
Due to recent developments about the legal name I may have to take down a few pages tabbed at the top of this blog because if this information is true then I cannot copyright my name even if done using common law;
Following these developments and watching the video’s put out by Hannah Rose on http://losethename.com/hannah-rose/I took a leaf out of Hannah Rose’s book doing my due diligence and emailed the following to the Head of GRO:
To the head of GRO,
At the bottom the birth certificate there is a statement which
reads as follows;
CAUTION: THERE ARE OFFENCES RELATING TO FALSIFYING OR ALTERING
A CERTIFICATE (C) CROWN COPYRIGHT
Warning: A CERTIFICATE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY.
These statements have been brought to my attention and I need
clarification on meanings of these two statements and why we
have been encouraged by government and all it’s agencies to
use names which on the face of it looks as though they are
Because of the possibility of breaching Crown Copyright I am
not going to use the full name but use my given name which
I believe is not copyright which also needs clarifying.
Please reply in substance to this inquiry as it is of the utmost
urgency because on the 7th May there is going to be a general
election where everyone voting will be using there copyrighted
name and will be committing mass Copyright fraud.
If I receive no reply within the next seven days (7) days then I
have to assume that the name is Crown Copyright and that
everyone should stop using it.
It will be very interested to receive a reply, I don’t expect one but who knows. If I receive a reply
I will of course put it up on the blog for everyone to see.
The following is a few paragraphs from the maidsafe blog:
The press has been deluged in recent times with reports about the surveillance and eaves dropping employed by intelligence and security agencies around the world. Barely a week goes by without a new revelation being announced. But it cannot be ignored that surveillance is big business and this is in fact the way in which many of the largest Internet companies make the vast majority of their revenue. These businesses don’t call it surveillance of course, they call it advertising.
Google generated revenue of $66 billion in 2014, 89.5% of which came through advertising, while Facebook generated 88.5% of their $12.5 billion revenue via the same source. As I said, selling access to us and our data is big business. American cryptographer Bruce Schneier summed the situation up very nicely advising that ‘surveillance is the business model of the Internet’. Informing us, as others did before him, that we are not the customers of these services, we are the product itself, the advertisers are the customers.
This model has been the dominant force for a number of years, but is it all the fault of the Google’s and Facebook’s of this world? Can we lay all the blame at their door? Maybe in part, but we were the all too willing recipients of the ‘free’ services. I suspect that only a small minority of us stopped to think that the seemingly complementary search, mail, maps and social networking platforms came with a higher price. Although most of us didn’t realise the extent of it at the time that price was and is our privacy.
But it is not only our freedom and liberty that is at stake. Our economic well being is also at great risk. This may seem a counter intuitive statement at first glance, how can free services be bad for our economic situation? It may be bad for our privacy, but surely it’s good for my wallet!
If you want to learn more about this exiting innovation of a new secure internet then click the link below:
How to change your status from a Domestic Slave Citizen to Foreign National. Great information but it must be well studied and you must change the way you think.