The Open Door!

search continues for intelligent life on earth!

Activists are not Terrorists

 The Battle of Internet

“please, please, please... find some time to address the topic of the balance of good and bad in the universe.” A good friend An attempt to call

People like these terrorists, when they are only conscientious objectors to the established and failing political leaders of our age

There for

            As requested


 It strikes me as worthy to note that as a people we have been well divided by the evil that runs the world in a way that is antithetical to evolution. Take for an example “Conservatism” in the UK. Here is a bunch of domesticated primates who believe that keeping things the way they are is somehow the right thing to do in a world that will always, by the mechanism of evolution, tend to adapt itself with a view to something new, something that when the environment is right will always set up bottlenecks and have sudden, staggeringly amazing, moments when it becomes “out with the old, in with the new”.

 First objection:

            It is true that such a bottleneck situation of “punctuated equilibrium” within biological evolution, as much as social evolution, is by no means the perfect engine of progressive evolution. However, to fight against it is to be conducting a pyrrhic tactic that can never win anything of a war.

Now consider;

 As was placed recently in the global brain (Internet) it has fallen to the force of law to wrongly label everyone against the system that funds their goals as a “terrorist”. This is a completely baseless accusation since the people they call terrorists have the moral high ground and are, when viewed correctly in English, “freedom Fighters” who are protesting an unjust system of economic monetarism that is considered by all intelligent people to have looked into it as being corrupt, and the antithesis to the evolutionary mechanism that will always tend toward progressive steps to keep the planet safe and the right types of “being” (human or otherwise) heading forward and getting better, smarter and in all respects evolved beings.

 This has not happened yet. Evolution is a slow process and in order to work, bearing in mind that adaptation through natural selection at the level of adaptations being random and often with counter-productive benefits hard to see without the right pair of eyes and minds looking, a static process until the environment produced by these adaptations suddenly causes a bottleneck that will radically alter the field of play.

 The people ultimately responsible for the anger that causes people to protest and issue are governments and corporations who seek only to fuel the present system they operate to maintain their power and riches at the expense of everyone. So, for someone to say I want to protest for green rights, then that person is better off aligning themselves not with small minded green rights activists, but to show their support for the larger picture by joining with activists whose goal is to change the political system itself in favour of intelligently managed use of planetary resources. The Zeitgeist movements, to name one of countless examples, are advocating a system in which all parties would get what they want the moment the idiots causing all the problems are removed from power by more intelligent people who would change the world for the better and are not concerned about money or power but with the well being of all people including the planet we live on. In short, give up your own narrow short sightedness to the greater good and effect change by changing the system that angered you in the first place by making plans that conflict with your own personal ideology.

 I admit this is no easy task. However, one should note that all wars, going back past the Roman Empire, have been one by dividing the people so that they may be conquered. Margaret Thatcher did this remarkably well as prime Minister of Britain when she successfully increased the divide between the richest middle class and the poorest working class that has since resulted in the death of British politics and a constant trend of people who no longer vote, let alone protest, because they are now well divided. And it will take some miracle to get all those people together to drop their own minor battles with government and ally themselves with the wide minded perspective of genuine political change (NOT to be confused with reform).

 “United we stand, divided we fall” and it is for that reason the last centuries of divided activists with their limited aims have never managed to unite enough people to actually create a genuine movement for political change or win their tiny battles for green peace, an end to prohibition, or any such minor issue; because at the end of the day you are all fighting a well organised structure of power who hold all the keys and have in their pockets the best propaganda and tools with which to further divide minds and keep people afraid and in debt to the point where activists are not only divided but they have their hands tied behind their back.

 Thus, Britain especially, has yet to see a revolution the type of which Karl Marx saw as inevitable. So the proposal here is to abandon your own small minded desire to be free to smoke the plants you like, or to protest against any minor injustice; in short unite your goals under a single banner of no confidence in your leaders and a total change of the political engine that causes all your anger to begin with.

 Some Dude

This Just In!

Should Julian Assange be hung out to burn in extradition?


    The unsung heroes of the Internet’s rights after John Perry Barlow, as far as I am concerned did exactly what the US did for their war of independence. The Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace was made in 1996. Today we see I direct attack on the Internet’s Netizens rights to free speech, being punishable through the real world. Now, having declared our independence of cyberspace, praise be unto Barlow, hallowed be his name (Who when I emailed him to get his views on this has ignored my question, my earnest request for his thoughts on this matter) so far has left me hanging on this issue.

 Technically I consider it an act of war against internet and Julian is its first victim.

Tim Berners-Lee some 20 years on states it like this.

“The concerns that I have are that there will be some sort of central control and in some countries it’s the government; and in some countries it’s the companies; and I think we have to be always vigilant about this, these threats. Or the whole web will become to frightening to use.”

The Virtual Revolution – first aired on BBC 30 January 2010

 Recent weeks have seen what can only be construed as dubious attempt to shut up the one man on the planet who has somehow amassed as much information about our overlords in the real world as J Edgar Hoover had in his day. If not more so.

 Having been following this bizarre and recent flow of information it came to my attention that the mainstream media outlets have once more failed to actually see the point. The declaration of the independence of Cyberspace has been made! Any attempt by a government to attack one of its Netizens should be seen as an Act of War! Thus what follows is the first skirmish to be fought in the revolutionary war for the independence of cyberspace. It was the governmental misuse of real world legislature and intimidation to silence free speech in the independent state of cyberspace, by attacking the character of Julian Assange who has spent all his time leaking the truth about our overlords and their lies. So many lies, I shall add, that their questionable actions and crimes should see them in court for their crimes. But hey, in the United States of a land supposedly free has so much freedom that lying is NOT against the law.

 Right now the governments that feel Julian Assange is guilty of crimes so dastardly that they have felt the need to intimidate all support to his organization and deny him his rights as a human being is trying to extradite him on some very erroneous charges in the real world for crimes in the independent state of Cyberspace.

 “To his fans, Julian Assange is a valiant campaigner for truth. To his critics, though, he is a publicity-seeker who has endangered lives by putting a mass of sensitive information into the public domain.” BBC article December 7th, No doubt to these allegations made are all true. But they all have missed the crucial point. The independence of Cyberspace, that no country seems to have a position on at all, has none the less been made (albeit without the signatures of its dwellers – John Perry Barlow has claimed it for us. Therefore the real story here is that when Julian Assange surrendered to British Authorities over a Swedish sex crime allegation the first battle of the free speech of, and therefore its entire freedom, cyberspace it seems is now under invasion by the US, the UK and their Swedish allies. Along with “any of the 188 member countries of Interpol - from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe - in connection with the Swedish case.”

 “Everyone, in this case, is the US - where government lawyers are hoping to prosecute on espionage charges - and the European Union, where he is wanted for questioning about an allegation of rape.”

 There is no doubt much debate to be had in the world of sensitive people and wild ego’s who are demanding that too much truth is not necessarily a good thing. It still is however, so far as I can see, of immense more importance that any governments attempts to silence people from speaking freely (a subject I thought we all had cleared up and were entitled to as a form of freedom), to be stopped and the last shred of genuine freedom (Our thoughts likely to be next) our right to free speech is to be denied? And what is far worse that they intend to attack on our basic rights to speak the truth from the real world to launch an assault over the free and independent state of Cyberspace.

 Surely it says a lot. For one mans actions in the realm of free speaking and freedom of information to, having made so many enemies, now have himself tracked down like Osama Bin Ladin, which Sarah Palin (well known to be mistaken of the truth) has actually been suggested, did we ever catch Osama? And are Julian’s crimes even close to those proposed to have been perpetrated by Osama Bin Laden?

 'First and foremost, what steps were taken to stop Wikileaks director Julian Assange from distributing this highly sensitive classified material especially after he had already published material not once but twice in the previous months?.' she wrote.

 Read more: >HERE<

 Now I will not here be the first philosopher to point out the obvious jibes coming from that woman who can barely keep the words coming from out of her own mouth making sense let alone being trustworthy enough to have opinion on any matter accounted for. I know, I know, it is Ad Hominem, and usually I would hit her with the wealth of her own verbal faux pas before you will finally come back to this.

 Why? Why is it that a man whose sole focus has been to report what is really happening something that all good journalists are supposedly educated to do by profession. Why oh Why? Are we now being asked by the few world powers governments be allowed to release such very sketchy and equally Ad Hominem conjecture about a man Palin argues is equally as dangerous as Osama bin Laden? And I ask again, when was Osama brought to justice?

 All of which flakes over the true and key point of this now menacing debate. That namely the freedom of both speech and information is under attack from highly powerful figure heads of countries that have long been shown to leak misleading information of their own, here I shall site Hussein’s WMD’s. Now I will here never believe for a moment that the wars being run by the US and my once loved UK are legitimate wars. Read my other articles if you really want to understand my position on the oppression of democracy thrust at the world. I am not sure I fully understand it myself and am forced to ask why it is that too much truth on any issue is a bad thing.

 The freedom of information Acts, the others of the same ilk, the continued attempts born out of the internet constitution and its declared independence from real world politics, alas, so far as I know are not yet ratified by any nation other than for the obvious rising groups of online think tanks and such that state information should be free and clearly proves there is a market for this in the greater community. Personally I would push for harder legislature using sodium thiopental to get at this truth which comes in two terrifying ways – I will not go into my own political beliefs here though.

 Firstly it has meant that Wikileaks donations and such have given him a supply of money with which he has been using to assure anyone who feels their life or their families are being threatened to keep schtum; well Julian off his own back set up a way that they could leak their information to him and thus remove the threats to the simple people unlucky enough to have discovered a blatant lie being spread through genuine share of free information on Internet.

 Now the demand of its Netizens has been a simple one. They believe the right of Internet to be governed solely by the netizens and further finances for the continued structuring of the internet be a place where no governments has the right to control what you watch or see and that freedom is at the very part of this unholy case in which Assange's treatment seems to go against the very ideas of the last century in which people had indeed fought tooth and nail to protect human freedom from what, draw parallels if you will, a fascist dictatorship of corporate conglomerates so outraged at the wealth and mass of information he has already revealed quite freely for the viewing of anyone, usually independent people seeking out the truth of these last two suspiciously called Wars in countries without any relevance to our own.

 His work has already poked so many holes in the mainstream news vendors to the point where it is at the quintessence a matter of the human beings rights to seek out the truth from the fiction by allowing a poor Julian Assange to be punished for publishing the truths that no one else felt their lives would last longer if they were to go out and do this for themselves.

 I thank Assange because it has caused the worlds leaders to ignore me for doing no less than the same game as Assange. Julian and I see clearly that the truth, as dangerous as it can often be; namely that is to try and provide internet with the truth in a century that is running out and spending money on less believable (Stephen Glass) like information that is no doubt a greater threat to our world, its subsequent earthlings and even the plants that grow on the lower end of the echo system. Give people the truth and they not only become smarter they eventually come to a moment when they have been asked to do something that, in this messed up sense, “Internet is forcing people to do something they have never done before, that is try to make an independent decision”.

 A well stated quote by Old Bob Wilson shows that it appears at this date and time the government puppets are living in great fear now as to what information Julian was about to be working with. And they set about it like an aged, over the hill, Linford Christie, to try and silence one of internets most public and eagerly watched sites to date.

 Such attacks on the freedom of speech as well as the independence of Cyberspace cannot possibly be justified in a way that sees truth as some form of terrorism. No doubt weirder and darker attacks will soon dawn on freethinkers for saying and linking what they see and via our global brain as netizens. Whether we have all yet to read, write, or even ratify a constitution for Cyberspace (see >HERE< first attempt at a constitution by Neale Morison). It all flies in the face of freedom and has me wishing Jefferson were alive to give his better and more informed opinion on this particularly hideous in invasion of the human rights, namely, to speak freely, to reveal truth; what one finds should be spoken, to think freely; and to fight against what cannot be misconceived as government oppression and their subsequent authority to do their jobs and perhaps even their titles as human free thinking beings.

 So, the internet versus for example the never ending alterations of the US constitution

 This was bound to happen. When America themselves proposed writing one to put and end to their War for independence from paying taxes to the European Monarchies & Parliaments, Banking systems and such brought about an age of greatness for what then became the United States of America.

 It has become now little more than the United States of whoever has enough money to guarantee the lack of free thinking politicians now desperate to keep people quiet playing games, watching biased television and numbed up with Xbox and games to prevent them getting into the great debate of our age. Fitting that once more the peoples of planet earth are witnessing a digital war for the freedom’s died for during the last of the big wars.

 Tim Berners-Lee In June 2009 then British Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced Berners-Lee would work with the UK Government to help make data more open and accessible on the Web, building on the work of the Power of Information Task Force. .

 It is here important to wonder about the arrangements of such task forces. In the mid 19th Century Hitler himself had set up many and they were not at all about the freedom of the people so much as they were edited, rewritten and calculated to ultimately gain information by force and then use that same force to silence anyone with valid grounds to implement its anti-force. Such Anti-forces out there attempting to ensure Berners-Lee’s original dream for the internet will be achieved regardless of any government intervention on what is for many the last free space-time on the planet.

 Julian Assange actually represents the battle against the misinformation of mainstream media, their anti-force and has attempted to, in accordance with Berners-Lee’s idealized internet, the independence that followed; and so far as anyone to have looked into this it seems more and more that we are about to witness the possible culling of a very brave man whose belief is that the people should be allowed to know what their governments are truly up to. Free Speech and more importantly to leak the truth!

 Now it must be getting to them no doubt. If they were forced to intimidate a group of companies who, by US legislature have a responsibility to their investors first, to begin breaking that law and using their power to both physically and verbally attack Julian Paul Assange's belief that the freedom of information should certainly be a priority for a free Internet and a global consciousness that has been forming since we all started to get online. I feel it is well placed given the Internet Constitution does exist in spite of no governments yet really talking about our Netizens proposed move toward independency see >HERE!< A declaration of the independence of Cyberspace

 “The founder of Wikileaks has built his life around an uncompromising quest for information. At the age of 39, he has no home and travels the world with one bag containing his clothes, and another holding his computer. Acquaintances who have worked with him on some of Wikileaks' biggest scoops point to a man who is "precise and obsessive", and who talks, with equal knowledge, of computer security and geopolitics.”

 The very briefest YouTube search will show any one who can decipher human language, body language, mental language, belief and facts. That it is a great fact that he believes in what he has been doing even if others do not.

 And so when I caught this article claiming that Sarah Palin so clearly has no idea what a terrorist is. Which is in truth hard given her politics and the fools she must be hanging around with in her way too much spare time; she thought at one time North Korea to be her ally. Well I find it hopeful that other ones,  suggest that there is a lot of support out there contrary to her claims that he is as dangerous as these supposed terrorists she herself cannot name correctly and would be argued, as was of the great Bush Afghan-Iraq, a Freudian slipper like no other.

 Here she is messing up something quite simple, for your amusement.



Palin messing up North and South Korea thus perhaps expressing her own views are indeed more similar to her North Korean Allies than even her own people? This is here say and I am not here to call into question what that poor excuse for a politician is up to only that I disagree with her in that Julian Assange is, perhaps not a hero, but he certainly in the free domain of cyberspace should not be preyed upon in the real world for his libertarian free speech in cyberspace.

 The question here has been, and I may have lost some of you by now. But is it of greater importance for Internet’s globally forming consciousness right to protest against what can only be referred to as an unjust witch hunt resembling those of the great inquisition to shut down a site aimed at keeping the truth of matters in the public domain, however dangerous it seems to be?

 That Wikileaks should be protected, along with internet (As well proposed by Peter Joseph in his work at Zeitgeist). Thus I find nothing more than peace to be found when an anonymous group of Netizens would wilfully take up their fingers and click at their ion canons for the freedom and independence of cyberspace. An ideal that is, in no way different from the U.S. history, cyberspaces founding forefathers wanted freedom in cyberspace and I am delighted to throw superlatives at the people defending that notion of freedom that died long ago in the real world and still thrives to this day here in Cyberspace.

 And the assumed danger that is mooched by his critics I find, to be quite frank, heresy of the highest order. Given that the bulk of his leaks have merely shown that the mainstream media outlets, largely already in the pocket and under control of the right wing governments who started all this in the first place, by lying, and not being straight with the public who voted for them to do just that. The truth must be spoken in politics and in the so called “news” for if it is not then the whole system needs to be rethought immediately because lies regularly slip through the editor and onto the front page. Don’t believe me about that? Go ask Ben Goldacre at He has seen similar problems with the news as it relates to medicine. But the crucial crux of this case is that War has started, Julian may well end up being its first casualty. But our peaceful cyber-civilisation has now fought back and the battle is on for control of the internet, dominion over the independent state of cyberspace and; if everyone decides to be as apathetic as usual then we can probably kiss goodbye to the value found in the invention of internet if we the netizens lose this war.

 Whether or not the intimidation from this massive global brain, choosing (and rightly so given that republicans have shown they will kill anyone who gets in their way) to be anonymous is fair or just on the apathetic people who refuse to be actively involved in this outrageous incident is right or wrong I think pales into insignificance of the greater question. Why should they need to? Why is it that governments are really so keen to disintegrate the integrity of Julian Assange and the work that he does in the domain of a free state of cyberspace? Clearly he is hitting all the right buttons if he has brought them knocking at his door in the real world.

 What is it about the lies governments have been telling now for hundreds of years that justifies one mans life be disintegrated from the global brain purely on the grounds that their own beliefs think it is dangerous for the people to know the truth? Now phrased like that the first culprit is fear. If ever enough people were told the truth of which the politicians are not working for us, actually working, harder than ever to shut one man and his pro freedom of information stance in a free and independent Cyberspace. Then isn’t the greater danger the very real assertion that governments and the mainstream media centres, Murdoch, his allies, Fox TV, the Sun Newspaper to name but the first few out of paragraphs in a list I have that goes on for 60 pages of untrustworthy people caught out in some of the greatest lies and scams to have been perpetrated upon innocent people both in the real world and in Cyberspace, all be they apathetic people, is nothing short of the force now for right wing propaganda to fight back against the very real possibility that they will be out of a job the moment people have figured out the lies they are all implicated in. Peter Joseph long ago anticipated attacks on netizens such as these in his documentaries. “Protect the Internet” Joseph said.

 I ask you are these computer hackers, philosophers with ideals and plans to uphold the freedom of truth, information and the end to decades of lies that have been regurgitated out of the mainstream propaganda arms of the very politicians threatened by Julian Assange a threat? Or are they perhaps the first and most daring A-Team the world has ever seen fighting to keep internet safe from all the poor behaviour patterns of the real sinister threat; namely the politicians and lawyers relentlessly permeating lies in order to consolidate yet more power over an apathetic, docile and easily led populace in the real world at the expense of our liberty here in Cyberspace?

 They (The media in the real world and “Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel”), seem to have escaped punishment for so long and are responsible for the numbness of mind created by the mainstream media, who thus dichotomised the world into people who now are in the know from those who are not, those who are their psychologically manipulated victims. Is Julian Assange a terrorist?  Are anonymous dangerous? Or, are they the liberty fighters that WWII war veterans everywhere would respect for their fight is for freedom of the Internet, of Cyberspace itself, which is every bit in accordance with Berners-Lee’s original idea of the internet being for the people.

Please study the following two links carefully. Remember them word for word because this state of cyberspace declared its independence in 1996 courtesy of John Perry Barlow in no way different to those American colonies who rejected the British authority of crown and monarchism, monetarism; Cyberspace was given to us for Free by Tim Berners-Lee and now it appears after so much peace we are finally to start the revolutionary war against the real worlds government and their intended invasion of Cyberspace is fully underway. I call all of you to arms! Do what you can! They are coming!?

 A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace

But also, a first attempt at a constitution by Neale Morison


 By Paul Blanchard