Censor Yourself First

Termination Restrained

We are witnessing life imitating art. Remember the Terminator sequel, a cyborg destroyer, was sent back in time to protect the catalyst for change in the future by defending the movement from being destroyed in its infancy and development.

So likewise, freedom of speech and open exchange of ideas has become John Connor, the endangered crusader in need of protection with future survival hanging in the balance. Never mind, sticks and stones make break your bones, now freedom of speech, exchange of dissenting ideas, and exercise of liberties will hurt you.

The advancement of HUMANITY has and will always depend on an exchange of ideas and perspectives, with the ability to freely and theoretically discuss them. This dialogue must be expressed, exchanged, or challenged to become validated.

It can not be imposed by fear or censorship; otherwise, it becomes oppressive, suffocating logical reasoning. As a result, the fragility of thoughts has regressed into hearing no evil and thinking no evil, not allowing for the concept of evil to be a moral judgment, not logical reasoning.  Changing the judgment changes the moral code or conclusion and expectations of adherence. It is entirely subjective and prone to fluctuate by interpreter and interpretation.

The fragility to not tolerate voicing our differences of perspectives or the right to choose them most likely violates the circumstances and assertions regarding the process and mechanism used to establish them. The process is the supreme principle of establishing, accepting, and maintaining these concepts and resulting liberties. It is to convince by persuasion, not the denial of expression.

At the initiation of this republic, it was deemed essential that freedom of religion, speech, and the press was the cornerstone and foundational concept reflected in and by the Bill of Rights. So vital that it is the first amendment established.  Notwithstanding its imperfect observation and practice at times, it has repeatedly overcome the fragility of mind and spirit by being a statutory aspiration.

This is the genesis of all distinctions, designations, and categorizations of every demographic of population or integration of acceptance. The accommodation of freedom of speech has led to and will lead to any transformational variations of principle, tolerance,  or thought.

The bitter must sometimes be taken with the sweet with allowances tolerated. Just as it has aided in converting benefits favorable to you, the process must also lend itself to benefits complimentary to another.

Its suppression prevents future progress and undermines past ones. From ancient times philosophers and stoics recognized the importance of free exchange of ideas and philosophies even at the risk of being offended. 

They suggest that the exchange is more important than an insulting delivery. The delivery reflects the deliverer, not the message. The message can be evaluated and separated upon its merit from the messenger’s rudeness.

So the message is of primary importance, not a feeling of insult or indignation. Often these emotional sentiments are more telling on the offended than the offender. It might be a matter of perception or self-image, not of intent. 

There are actual instances of disrespect and insult in the conveyance of a message that should be rebuked. However, devoid of this or an overt affront conveyed, the perspective cannot be offensive because it requires an intellectual evaluation, not an emotional response.

The counterattack to any insult is the same weapon chosen to deliver it, in this case, a verbal response if needed. Surely the sting of a venomous comment can be met with one exceedingly cruel, but this descends into an exchange of insults, not dialogue. 

Is it a battle of wits or insults? None should be taken if no insult was intended, even if the perspective is repugnant when willingly engaged. The ability to absorb, decipher, and navigate conversations and ideas resists the lure of ignorant or emotional engagement.

The prevailing cancel culture to force others to denounce at your insistence or for your sensitives is counter to freedom of speech and choice. It is further an individual decision even if collectively engaged. It should be by voluntary means of personal sensibilities being offended or supported.

The sum of those offended then constitutes a collective. If force is the instrument of choice, then it should not be the shield as well. These should be simple instances where you are not in agreement and have the discretion not to support or participate while not forcing others’ allegiance.

The cognitive dissonance of the acceptability and dissemination of contrary ideas that reflects inconsistencies defeat their foundational merit by default for lack of continuity and subjective application. It is outrageous to force acceptability of your position on others who may disagree but then bellyache about accepting theirs being forced upon you.

Suppose an exchange or perspective has no constructive control or impending damage. What power does it really possess other than the power you surrender. Why make it more than the musings of a self-declaring fool? 

Conversely, succumbing to them gives the appearance of resemblance and validation. Either you stand on your spot with conviction, entering the fray boldly or wither under the first cloud of dissension. Still, either way, you declare your position, not on your idea but your right to the freedom of it.

Make your freedom of speech something that must be wrestled from you, not surrendered for lack of fortitude. This is the ying and yang of discretion, both using it or suppressing it. Either way, it bears consequences, and you must make a decision which way is preferable. Whining is not allowed for either using it, refusing to use it, or others refusing or using theirs. Whatever benefit or consequences are yours or theirs individually, only becoming collectively by accumulation.

Applying the metaphysical philosophy of Plato, freedom of speech is self-evident beyond questioning but becomes meaningless if restricted and untested. Freedom of expression is paramount to understanding and being understood. It facilitates persuasion as a concept of certitude, revealing its validity beyond emotional or sensory perceptions measured by the quality of its intellectual proposition.

Any emotional meltdown is an admission to an incapacity to function outside your emotions when triggered. A rejection of responding to the message as thought but instead anger or rage facilitates stagnation discouraging resolution.

Imagine being in a relationship where there are severe limitations on the extent of disputed discussions, where silencing of expression is required. The natural inclination would be to wonder why disagreement results in submitting as if confronted by a standard-bearer above reproach and reasoning. It invites more dysfunction than to evaluate it and discard it as insignificant or feeble.

Suppression exaggerates resistance to resolution. Regulation reveals your limitation on your thought process as a governing element to prevent challenge or invalidation. There is a direct correlation between the measure and extent of our emotions and understanding. It not only limits us but gives us expectations of conformity from others because you think or did so, insisting others should too.

The recent controversies of Dave Chappelle, Kyrie Irving, abortion rights, sexual identifications, and violence come to mind. These contemporary issues reflect the dichotomy of freedom of speech, freedom to exercise well-established liberties, restrictions of choices by someone else’s determination, and unfiltered behavioral influences.

Each has its entrenched supporters and detractors, which I will not challenge. However, I will examine the discrepancies of contention pertaining to the restriction of freedoms guaranteed in the Bill of Rights and quite frankly sanctioned by humanity.

Let’s start with the premise that everyone has one, not two, not yours and mine, just yours. With that said, I have not seen Dave Chappelle’s special, so I speak from a conceptual application of the freedom of speech. Unfortunately, censure has claimed many a victim of late, and the list continues to grow. As I understand it, he offended the LBGTQ+ community and some who identify outside the traditional realms of gender classification. 

Gender classifications are the symptoms of a different offense restricting the autonomy to self-identify. But, freedom of speech and recognition of liberties have progressed this cause, and changes are enjoyed now despite having more terrain to travel. However, acceptance is growing, and assimilation seems to be the goal now, where these isolating distinctions are no longer considerations.

It should not be taboo to comment on or criticize any segment of society as an exempt group protected because it may have the opposite effect of the intended protections. It may generate resentment and prolonged acceptance. It must be judged by the content and context, not the manner. The content can be rejected, refuted, or evaluated. It is not what you say but how you say it. Likewise often it is not what you do but how you do it that is offensive.

Every segment of society is a member of multiple subgroups that don’t raise condemnation when mentioned. Is it the level of acceptability at play instead of the content or context? Why can’t others outside any subgroup not be allowed to speak as those within it think without offense being taken?

To continue these labels of sexual orientation, race, gender, or other categorizations, perpetuate distinctions and separation. It also psychologically impairs and exaggerates the differences when they should be of no significance. Without these identifiers, what distinctions can be made?

These outrages to references with expectations of exemption keeps it isolated from other subgroups. Why must all Americans have a secondary ethnic classification by ancestry? Even with religion, it helps with the divisions that have no practical bearings but separation or discrimination. 

Not feeling what someone said is the price of freedom of speech since if any of us talk long enough, we are bound to rub someone the wrong way, even if by simply claiming our rights. Ironically, rights that others readily claim. 

Theoretically, denial of others’ freedom of speech diminishes yours by contrast and context. It is bound to restrict some subgroup that applies to you or yours. By context, content, and contrast, how damaging could Chappelle’s words really have been compared to obstacles overcome in the past?

Because he spoke them, does that make them accurate or applicable to you as a group or individual? It would appear that feelings maybe were hurt, but how by someone who doesn’t know you?

Perhaps, his comments relied on you including yourself in the disparage it implied for it to be offensive. Not to justify or make excuses for his words. That’s left up to him. However, his right to say it is protected by his commitment to speak freely under his liberties.

I am sure he also spoke in ways that other subjective groups may have felt some kind of way about, which did not offend you. You may have even found it funny. It was a comedy show, and uncomfortable topics by definition and expectation should be anticipated. Talking about wives may have been offensive to wives, I don’t know. 

Suppose you or your subgroup found whatever comment offensive. In that case, that is fine, but expecting others who were not offended to be a force to uphold your offense is contrary to your goal of acceptance by comparison. However, if some would like to support your position voluntarily, that is fine too. If not, you have to be comfortable with that being your hill to climb. 

The Kyrie Irving situation has a slightly different nuance regarding actions or, more specifically, inaction. Still,  understandably, the temperature runs high when it comes to vaccination. Due to the loss of lives, risk of infection, and fear of contagion, as well as the complications and implications on vulnerable loved ones and family members, the concern is legitimate.

Despite these concerns, we must ask ourselves if our fears supersede his right of choice. Clearly stated is the ramification of his course of inaction. It may be governed by his conviction or even the color of his shirt; nevertheless, it is his choice and his right. He is far from alone in his resistance to the vaccine. He is also notoriously vilified based on the venue since a different location would produce no sanction. 

 If the sentiments against the unvaccinated are so high and crucial, why is it not mandatory or universally applied regardless of location? I doubt if freedom of choice is the reason for voluntary compliance. But seemingly because of politics, for and against, since many other vaccines and requirements are mandatory for the wellbeing of society or for participation.

Denial of participation seems fair to preserve freedom of choice. You absolutely can choose as you please, but that does not transcend the right to participate. Participation is a criterion of eligibility according to the requirements and standards set forth being met.

A driver’s license to drive, a license for certain professions, and so forth operate under the same principle and acknowledgment of requirements to be met. By choosing not to comply, you also select not to participate but still maintain your right of refusal.

The vaccinated exercised our right just as he is exercising his. Still, the opposition is in his choice, which is different from ours. I cannot overstate that I am not an anti-vaxxer, just as I cannot understate that it is his right to choose as he pleases.

What he does for a living, the chance to win a championship, or the money forfeited as the driving persuasion to comply when pressured by others is not freedom of choice but external validation and compulsion by bounty. Yet, others may deem these considerations to be irresistible.

Still, is it not commendable that Irving stands in adversity unwavering against others’ judgment about his right. Many may think it is selfish or foolish, and it may be both, but it’s his consequences to shoulder. So, consider, can another’s disappointment in your choices anoint them the captain of your ship and theirs.

As a contrary examination, what if he were in the majority and you were scorched for getting vaccinated? Would you let others’ opinions sway you to go unvaccinated? Many claimed to have been forced, but you chose to concede unless you were tied and highjacked.

Anger from his failure to surrender where others have been compromised by their own declaration of concession still is not sufficient provocation for him to follow. Besides, you condemn yourself for lack of conviction if you truly oppose the vaccine but relented. 

What other pressures or compliance are you susceptible to when avoiding discomforting consequences before it really gets thick? It seems Irving’s refusal to knuckle under is the underlying issue with echos of how dare he? You chose your consequences of preference, him his.

Now let Irving confront his, least of which is being sidelined. The principled person would rather lose their head than their conviction, according to Socrates and Epictetus. So his dignity remains intact even if he decides to take the vaccine for reasons other than force.

Related to the subject of vaccines and choices is the abortion issue again. I am pro-life but pro-choice, understanding that it is not within my quarry to dictate the decisions regarding another’s body and personal expectations. 

It is absolutely not a deliberation I feel the authority to dictate as a man imposing my restrictions on women. Since a woman is a vessel by which birth is produced by the preponderance of the burden, contrasted by just sperm donation, these decisions should be left among them to decide.

I equate this question to the vaccine dilemma where choosing what you use your body to facilitate is your choice. How can an anti-vaxxer who is opposed to being dictated to what they must subject their body to manage to be anti-choice regarding abortion? 

It is the same question in principle of supreme authority over your body. Weigh the shot against forced childbirth and child-rearing for life and tell me which one is more demanding, restrictive, and uncertain.

If the sanctity of your body is your right, how can theirs not be also? We are still talking about bodies that are capable of making decisions. Since the unborn child can not make the decision, the logic is it must be made to protect them. Protection then becomes the primary. So, should you be vaccinated to protect yourself and others, assuming the primary standard is protection?

The preserving element is choice, not the protection of controlling interest. If vaccinated, you still chose what you do with your body. Your body should be your choice and not others’ selective protection or enforcement of this right, certainly not suppression of it. Furthermore, once these mandates are imposed and the child is born, where is the consistency of commitment.

 What about the lack of adoptions, given the vast anti-abortion elements which could easily practice what they preach? Where is the assistance and relief by those who are comfortable with their situation unconcerned about the struggles forced upon someone else?

Imagine your nonexistent right to infringe and impose your will, then where is your real responsibility after getting your imposition? But, again, I am not advocating abortion, just choice. I am just questioning the discord between mandate, support, imposed determinations, and unintended consequences.

This leads me to intended consequences and unfiltered suggestions regarding sexuality. If anyone’s sexuality is exclusively their business, then why are there so many public declarations and assumptions? If the desire is to make it commonly accepted, then it would seem that these distinctions and proclamations would be counterproductive, your orientation being nothing unusual.

The consensus is that it is immaterial to most except for who you are getting down? Considering the persecuted twentieth century, the relief and celebration welcoming alternative labels are understandable, but the choice is normal. Encouraging personal acceptance of your sexuality exiting the closet of concealment resisting exterior discriminations is the empowerment of courage despite depictions of others’ intolerances.

The movement for acceptance and recognition of same-sex, alternative non-traditional options, and non-binary identifications reflects the progress made and recognition deserved as just as normal as any other identification. These varied influences need to be available for encouragement and bonding with its portrayal to release the taboo of concealment.

This courage can be promoted by not having undue challenges to undermine it. Allowing for the benefit of interpretation to distinguish many choices encourages freedom when making any choice. Whatever the decision, your preference should be supported if the same standard afforded others are used by you. Remember, the standard for choice is the primary element, not the selection.

But, to sincerely be commonplace, the distinction should not be uncommon or unusual, but just another accepted available option. Thus, a new day has dawned where a third rail of acceptance includes self-determining identities and sexualities without discredit. It is important that role models and identifiable reflections of the human spectrum represent a diversity of normalizations and their possibilities. 

Of course, any subgroup of identification and beyond has its critics and unique characteristics. Still, one subgroup’s influence is not more significant to the others, especially if not a member. To be different is not the right to impose on the other subgroups but to have freedom within your own and not be infringed on by others. The opposite must be observed as well.

Objective acceptance is the goal, not subjective compulsion. The freedom to choose from neutral influences of autonomy and acceptance without persecution, not judging or being subjected to judgment. The resistance is to oppose being classified and coerced into an unwanted classification not descriptive of your identity, right, or choice. Just respected, not as a sexual designation but as a human one. 

It is a question of having an identity or actual choice which is unassailable even if outside others’ preferences. Without undue influence or intolerances, unapologetically free to choose or be, having all options an equitable decision respected without criticism. Beyond acceptance, it is a demand for respect, respect for your identity.

Never above, never below, but always equal. I have carefully explained the distinctions of my perspective to contextualize that it is about freedom of expression, not the actual expression.

My point is the sexualization and promotion of all general subgroups of self-identification and sexual orientations seem to direct unfiltered influence on children at inappropriate ages. This portrayal has been traditional and untraditional.

Traditional breeds discrimination while untraditional invites shattering perceptions, but both produce resistance to change. Change is the fear from the expansion of definitions of conformity. It exposes the feat to let be and to be. Within this struggle is the portrayal of influence for survival and acceptance of subjective preferences. This includes music and media content, dress code, suggestive dancing, explicit language, and other reckless indulgences.

The sexuality and sexualization among adults should remain there and not be directed at or exposed to children intentionally or subliminally. Not subjected beyond the demonstration of their awareness or curiosities organically influenced from within themselves. 

The sexualization of cartoons and comic books can be argued they demonstrate and support identity, not encourage particular dispositions. Still, there are residual consequences to that assumption, whose premise is if that should be their focus at such early ages. Age-appropriate behavior and exposure is the overriding concern and influence. I think we can agree that smoking, drinking, or porn is unquestionably inappropriate indulgences for small children and young teens.

However, what exposures are they otherwise permitted that are insidious and cloaked programming but just as harmful as to impressionable young psyches. It reduces the shock and heightens the chances of their involvement at ever-decreasing ages despite the laws and social propagation contrary to this expectation.

The concern is whether it does more good or damage from a child’s perspective. The lesser evil must be chosen, which is not universal as awareness and development vary but generally apply. Remember, most early behavior is imitation and impersonation of exposures. 

The orientation to any explicitly implied sexuality seems like early initiation into participation, trafficking, or exploitation. The same is true of the violence desensitizing mechanisms lessening self-control and making violent responses compelling default reactions without remorse, willful restraint, or consideration but conditioned.

Neuropathways indoctrinated by the constant bombardment of war games and violence-enhancing entertainment evokes responses to reality indistinguishably from games. This brainwashing produces aggressive, destructive tendencies. The hostility in our young people is according to their intentionally programmed code of violence and our historical demonstration. They respond largely as programmed or taught as the default from which other decisions are made.

The inducing proliferation of violent and sexual influences now appears to blur the lines of acceptable behavior by children and towards children. It is a thin line getting thinner whose violation and validation are routinely reinforced.

This can not lead to beneficial developments. Instead, it indicates an unfiltered stimulation of influences encouraging violent impulses, sexual misconceptions and disrespect, and propensity for danger-inducing behavior at younger ages.

The issues mentioned on the surface appear different but, at their core, are identical. These distinctions, designations, and classifications conditioned, coerced, and expressed are remnants of control for the division and quest for hierarchy, manipulation, and validation.

Elimination of these titles and characterizations of subversive origins would lessen the need to champion resistance against them or suppress others. As a result, some expressions or suppressions create exploitation of advantages while others vulnerabilities.

The assault is misdirected, manipulated, and subliminal. It seems the primary intent is the promotion of influences diminishing unregulated individuality, installing replication of perspective by either outrage, indoctrination, or association.

Opposite ends of the same spectrum ensnaring all within its survey producing predictable simulations for narrowing behaviors and socialization. Essentially defining and shrinking the parameters by the illusion of expansion camouflaging salacious inspirations and obstructions reducing liberties.

The flip side is there are acceptable constraints on freedom of speech and expression that should be observed and complied with whose regulations specify the manner and context of each. Don’t yell fire in a crowded theater and other common-sense measures or forbidden outbursts. Thus, observance of general boundaries is recommended.

It should be balanced for the social good, no malicious intent, situationally appropriate, measured for harm, not incite violence or hate as its objective, and permit challenges. Direct and indirect implications must be considered. A dubious manner of delivery and awkward context should be contested but not content or choice. Content invites debate, discovery, understanding, and progress

These questions and perspectives risk offending the restrictive mind refusing to expand by exposure to concepts contrary to embedded perceptions. Similarly, new wine must be placed in a new pouch to accommodate its expansion. New perspectives expand the mind necessitating expanded capacity and tolerance, not to agree but to understand. These freedoms commented on extends vicariously to many other issues and applications of freedom and tolerances.

Protection of freedom of speech without censure, cancelation, or termination is fundamental to progress, acceptance of differences, and equality of diversity. These freedoms of speech, freedom to exercise well-established liberties, freedom from restrictions of choices by someone else’s determination, and monitoring unfiltered influences need to be protected for future generations.

Be careful not to judge someone else’s reality and expression by your own claiming to be just because from their perspective, the opposite may be just. Censor yourself first. What you seek to terminate today may be what protects you tomorrow. So, how about we leave the terminating to the science fiction movies.

 

Thurston K Atlas
Creating a Buzz

 

 

 

Can I bother you for Change?

Changing Times Changing Minds 

Let’s talk about personal change and relationships. We all have unique and specific traits developed from life experiences that shape our perspectives and desires from a young age. It defines us.

We were forming the basis for a powerful combination of compulsions and expectations reflecting how we act today, accounting for our varying expressions, rationale, or personal accountability.  It also influences the criteria and parameters of our relationships.

In other words, everything we have experienced contributes to some fluctuating degree of how we view life and what we become. Subsequently, it directs our behavior from the beginning of our life’s interactions, whether conscious of this fact or not.

Consequently, we learn by what we were taught or by what we were exposed to etched as accumulating experiences.  Even if these are shared experiences, they can never be perceived or imitated identically. The parts and participants are different. However, the expectations and projections often remain similar to the initial impression.

Our core integrity and identity evolve from our impressions as instructions of emulation. It even prevents us from being free to disengage or be open to change, being hostage to the psychological impressions of unwanted occupying depictions. Instead, we are compelled to imitate or resist replicating these influences as being preferred or not.

Don’t get me wrong; everything is not subject to negotiations or change, either governed by choice or compulsion. But, of course, we have our standards and will defend them because changing sometimes is not an easy task, especially if unaware.

From the restrictive lens in the confines of our “learned knowledge” and “limited experiences” specific to our influences, the standard is established by which we project ourselves as well as judge others.  Thus, the inconsistencies appear when we judge others in a manner that we prefer not to be judged.

Judging not the specific actions but the steadfast adherence to a way of being or insistence that another not be a particular way. We should not be caught being guilty of what we accuse others of, should we? By this standard, insisting on change can only be subjective and internally directed. Yet, it is the only change we have control over, and sometimes not even then.

Time may heal wounds, but it also exposes the truth. It most certainly distorts our core perception to shield examination of our predispositions from questioning.  The prior held compulsions from the period they were developed are distorted by time. But, is it in conflict now not accounting for the changes since that time? The need to conceal or deny them provides the answer, in which change is the solution.

After expanding our knowledge and experience, which initially consisted of significant diaper and potty time, we began to build a social rolodex of emotions. It is understandable if children do childish acts of concealment and lack the proper self-control but less so as you age and certainly not as adults.

The passing of time should enhance relationships and not smother their aspirations and possibilities. When sacrificing expression of your core desires through commitments and routines that build boredom, resentment, or limitations for the fulfillment of others, it does you no favors.

Just as they are free or not to express themselves, so are you and vice versa. The even yoke refers to the compatibility of your sincere freedom of expression manifesting authentically with your mate. But, maybe it should be to yourself. Any pretension or incumbrances indicates dissatisfaction and the need for it or you to change since someone else’s change is outside your domain.  

Conversely, as much as you are committed to your way, why can’t someone else be just as committed to their way? Why are their beliefs not just as certain as your commitment to yours? The key is both must be respected and devoid of infringement and must possess acceptance or at least tolerance if necessary. Tolerance is a parallel option to change.

All things change. It is inevitable. But, as time waits on no one, how much time do you have to wait on someone else’s change before bringing about one in yourself? Time is a valuable limited commodity. The young become old, the body’s flexibility is exchanged for flexibility of thought called maturity.

As things evolve, change is going to happen. So why is depletion or deterioration often necessary before a change occurs? The passion you used to feel, the anticipation, and the intoxicating excitement has been dulled by father time and lessened by your surrender to another’s restrictions.

It required complete surrender to acceptance, comfortability, and familiarity with the thrill being gone. It might not be decision-making time, but at least it is evaluation time. Is it your choice, which is fine, or undetected by time dulling of the senses and expectations? Pleasure is what you define it as for yourself, contentment devoid of dormant desires forsaken for complacency. 

Otherwise, it is a compromise of respect or diversion by dissolution. An agreement is not required because an agreement may not be attainable. It then does not require your consent but your submission. Acceptance may be a tolerable solution under the immunity of honesty.

Under a treaty of honesty, without deception or reprisal, primary is the courage to say it or receive it being said. Persuaded to lay bare the requirements of your satisfaction or willingness to satisfy.

Of course, a person can not be expected to meet all your needs and expectations, just as you cannot theirs. However, there is a tipping point where it is no longer fair exchange but robbery. Honesty would then be preferable to expectations begrudgingly met.

The reward for honesty is trust, and the penalty is acceptance of the honesty, not necessarily the conditions. Under this understanding, we only have to agree that you will respect mine as I will respect yours. It is a manageable compromise based upon what you are willing to give and what you are ready to accept that meets each other’s level of acceptance and satisfaction.

Concealment of your core promotes a response toward a masquerade instead of what would satisfy your needs. So, for example, parts of people you think you know very well are hidden from view and not for display shrouded by secrecy, shame, or deceit. The gift is glimpsing their nature and exposing yours protected from a penalty for doing so.

This hidden core either propels or confines but remains a third or fourth party to the relationship. As a result, most actions will hit the projection but miss the target.

Are you adhering to obsolete and antiquated images that form a projection that comforts you while deceiving others? Or maybe it restricts you while comforting others. Do you cling to that which is familiar but of little benefit, a prisoner of expectations?

 

Are you still guarding the fox hole when the matter has been determined long ago to be no longer contested as to who and what you are? How much time will you trick off pretending while mostly fooling yourself? Acceptance of you starts with you, the same as accountability and responsibility.

Will it be kept one thousand protecting the smothering masquerade or changed to release the unfulfilled real identity and expectations of yourself? Achieving a compromise or change must be directed toward securing a satisfactory outcome for the real problem or fear, your authenticity. You might have to accept their’s as well since the mirror is a projection and a reflection.

The more concessions you receive, the greater level of satisfaction you have. Consequently, what compromises or accommodations are you willing to give in return to maintain that level? Thus, a balance is created by transferring equitable preferences received in exchange for mutual satisfaction.

It is a give-to-get theory, but it may call for change or a willingness to change. Your actions then become a negotiated understanding by your benefit received.

A mutual understanding of this is the motivation to adhere to an acceptable level of conduct to receive the agreed-upon consideration in return. The cost comes in many forms, and payments are accepted in many more forms. The exchange is transactional for that thing you do.

Do you still expect the exchange without providing the value? Is it a stubbornness of expectations that prevents you from producing an exchange that improves the value of your association with each other?

First, let us examine why things might be the way they are or have been to evaluate if logic guided these responses and behaviors or errant emotions and deceit. We can then assess the changes we have control over.

So let us take it back before it goes wrong. Remember when we were motivated to impress a long time ago. As a result, we improved to be more alluring and the best adaptation of ourselves to attract our expectations. Was the change real or deceitful? This creates the very reasons we do the things we do, the why, and how or with whom we do them. 

Time reinforces distortions that magnify and create most insecurities, leading to a voluntary forbearance of our needs based on anticipated returns. Therefore, it builds dissatisfaction while craving a resolution to satisfy the void, the unfulfilled expectation.

It is human nature to feel a deficiency and have a corresponding emotional disposition. Thus, the feeling of lack is embraced as recognition of a void craving greater satisfaction. Accordingly, a desire to the addiction of expectations surrendered may develop.

It requires expressing our very nature to avoid feeling unable to give or maybe unworthy of receiving by refusal to express or reveal ourselves. It flows freely when given purely and is humbling when overflowingly received. This is the nectar illustrating what once was could be restored for just the tiny concession of change.

We must simply realize that the change in the relationship I am referring to is the one with ourselves. The internal influencing the external. Therefore, the changes are the ones we need to make within ourselves, influencing the change in others. However, their evolution may never come.

If they only would have changed have been adjusted as denial to justify our inaction. This blame perspective does not assert accountability over ourselves as the persuasion for others to recognize our value. If not, we can not blame others for the decisions we refuse to make.

A fresh start is frequently needed for rejuvenation or liberation to unleash our uninhibited expression. It requires breaking free from previous masquerades of restrictive expectations and behaviors. It requires making a choice.

Is it cheaper to keep our situations, projections, and perspectives devoid of the joy and exhilaration of self-expression? The beneficial effect on ourselves, others, and the quality of our relationships and life being hostage to an image, an imposter?

The power, control, and responsibility for our feelings or behavior remain our own. Therefore, in addition to being accountable for what we do or fail to do, we must refuse any obligation to be responsible for someone else’s. Instead, are we giving what we are seeking to receive, making a self-assessment to determine what is desirable, and implementing what it requires.

The change we would want the most is probably the one we need to make the most. So, double the improvement, solving two issues with one change.

First, holding ourselves to a standard of determination and perspective to portray ourselves without misconceptions seeking validation from others for their permission to be us. Secondly, our perspective dictates our mood, consequently controlling our mood controls our behavior.

A willingness to change by improving, evolving, growing, reinventing, pursuing, expressing, challenging, and in other words living without self-restricting doubts or perfection.

Accepting our uniqueness and insecurities as an unfinished work in progress reassures the only person we need to convince, and that is us. As humans, we all have limitations, so accept them but improve them.

Like wearing new clothes that make us feel good, a fresh perspective and self-fulfillment can work wonders, and we can wear them every day. But, initially, a shake-up of old self-defeating unfulfilling restrictions has to occur. Much like outdated gear, that has to go, especially if it is a loose fit or, worst, way too restricting.

Be sure not to become the very thing you despise the most and bring dissatisfaction upon yourself by refusing to change. Your level of contentment rests with your adaptability to your environment to attract your desired preferences that reflect your expectations.

Don’t flatter yourself. What is not attractive in others is no more somehow attractive in you. It is a difference between a classic antique and just plain outdated.

Start by eliminating excuses and becoming what you want to be by sacrificing the required effort to become self-fulfilling and authentic. That will be the best relationship you have ever had.

Do not be that person where it is said behind your back, of course, that you are no bed of roses. No matter what, don’t be the biggest problem in your life because you cannot change. Keeping those negative attributes is never cheaper to keep em when you add them up. Bothering to change is much better.

Keep in mind this is not gender-oriented but people-specific, where one size fits all changes. 

 

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

 

Hocus Pocus- Election 2020

Lesson Learned,  Strategy Applied

Hocus Pocus is a catchy phrase that is associated with magic tricks. It is a concept that captivates your attention without any detection of its sly execution. But, in practice, it is meaningless talk or activity specifically designed to draw attention away from, deceive, or disguise what is secretly happening in front of you.

It magically enchants or charms you using a series of words and actions directing your thoughts towards a diversion. While at the same time conducting the deception. It has already brought about some sort of magical distortion by undetected sleight of hand or mind when spoken. The hocus pocus is the diversion that exploits perception with the pretense of magic. Thus it is called a trick for this reason because you are indeed tricked by deception.

The 2020 election has been the magic act, while the protest, civil unrest, and political shenanigans have been the hocus pocus diversion exploiting our perception against our objectives. We must realize the right to and the purpose for protest is not questioned or diminished by examining its objective and effectiveness but redefined and improved.

Is the goal of protest in and of itself for emotional release or to achieve a beneficial objective? Removing emotions must be replaced with the resilient decree of logical substantive resolutions. Furthermore, the ensuing political circus has been a well-orchestrated misdirection concealing an even more sinister plan, stroking fear to solidify power fueling re-election. 

My commentary is not a political statement and is devoid of politics or concern for who won the election because this has nothing to do with who won. It is more about the tactics of how the election was almost lost ideologically. Nevertheless, the need for adaptation in the premises and implementation of opposing strategy is brought in context by the support for Trumpism, which cannot be easily dismissed as just racist.

It is therefore prudent to develop counterintelligence from the ideologies that oppose our interests and learn from them. We must identify, know, and understand the instruments of repression used against our progress. 

Foremost, people align themselves with their interests more so than being opposed to someone else’s when they are not mutually exclusive or diametrically opposed intrusions. Thus, social justice can occur without threatening to upend society but promising to improve it if done strategically.

What does threaten to upend society is the fear of senseless violence and random destruction. This path has been traveled repeatedly and has not accomplished social justice but more alienation, ours. But, on the other hand, the contortion of Democracy and suppression of mechanisms of change continue as obstacles to be challenged and transformed.  

Regardless of any other section of society’s condition, we must concern ourselves with our condition. Comparatively, our grievances are legitimate, but we must maximize the actions within our power to affect our change. We must consider what has aided different segments of society to exceed and excel while we remain relatively stagnant. 

Complaining, making excuses, and finger-pointing relies on the offender relenting and granting us some degree of redress at their discretion.  Recognition of limitations beyond an empowering point produces weakness and is demoralizing, leaving us begging. There are more significant dynamics at play within our control and the development of effective ideological initiatives. 

What is within our control is, in fact, our power, and utilizing power needs no permission. Therefore, a structured demographical, tactical, psychological, economic, and political crusade using a calculated, disciplined, and focused application is required to create and expand our ideological initiative. Initially, we must be brutally honest in identifying our condition, counterproductive influences, and course of correction.

We must also assess our human resources, level of resilient commitment, best deployment options, and methods of quantitative accountability. Finally, any strengths and weaknesses of our resolve must be accurately assessed to formulate discipline to a resolution.

Supporting pointless actions must not become engrained or flourish within our objective. Once a blueprint is devised, identifying activities that jeopardize or damage that blueprint must be isolated, neutralized, or discontinued. It is minimizing or eradicating self-inflicted harm eroding our collective objective. The more focused and comprehensive the commitment, the more effective the plan is, expanding the considerations for implementation. 

Those who oppose this objective should not be able to infiltrate, associate, or instigate under the cloak of the collective objective. This infiltration of provocateur’s detrimental behavior is then wrongly associated with our protest and purpose when allowed or tolerated.

The method used to isolate and eliminate this infiltration is accomplished by adjusting our methods and directives of objection. Denouncing these actions as unrelated Operandi of an antagonist intention in opposition to our goals. This is not to endorse cowardly behavior or spinelessly tolerate repercussions but to advocate for logical and tactical outmaneuvering of opposing ideologies.

When in conflict, the allocations of the adversary must not be contributed to or enhanced but lessened or eliminated. As part of our resistance, it is foolish that we would provide the incentive, justification, sustenance, division, or discord to be used against us. If it does, then that policy is fortifying the opposition, feeding their interest against our objective. It simply cannot be allowed to nourish their starving resistance.

When building our formidable resistance, the dimension and composition of the participants is the primary determination, utilizing them as a cohesively focused demographic unit. We must use the right tools for the job, remembering that selected suitability varies according to purpose by capabilities. Some who could not or would not protest in the streets are eager to contribute otherwise. They can also contribute by other values and associations.

With only 14.7 % of the U.S. population identifying as black, we cannot underestimate our need for alliances with other demographics to accomplish our objectives. We need to project shared interests and avoid unnecessary alienation that does not promote our intent. Thus, promoting mutual effort by mutual gain emphasizing their benefit by coalition with a shared principle or common aspiration. There is no need to create opposition where none exists.      

Bullhorns and rhymes have their limitations. Old practices should be scrutinized and avoided if they create too many negative implications with minimal practical benefit. Resources and volunteers must have a mission, be purposefully mobilized, and be preserved from harm by design.

For example, where demographics are strong on local municipal levels, we can dictate our fate in the areas where we reside and work, then expand outward and upward. Considerations and accommodations in our concentrated demographic regions can provide a favorable safe haven or bubble where our circumstances are protected and expanded by legislative means. 

There must be recognition and proactive countermeasures enacted to prevent the games being played. Mauling voting rights is the emerging contention by voter suppression and redistricting to circumvent the antidotal counter to defend against the hocus pocus. 

We cannot proudly remain exclusive from others when we so desperately can use their help. There is strength in numbers, and mathematically these coalitions make it easier twofold by creating support and removing resistance. Furthermore, we need to reasonably identify our strategic advantages and partners, what resources and techniques are required, and methodically strengthen and apply them. 

 

 

 

Tactically, new creative methods of protest that rely less on physical presence, raging emotion, or confrontation are the most compelling, effective way to gain a powerful advantage. It is not hiding; it is stick and move, strike without being struck. Accomplishment is the goal, not posturing or grandstanding.

Additionally, conservative and religious forces need to be favorably engaged in extracting adherence to their stated core beliefs, aligning and consolidating them with our social justice goals. The incentive would be to embrace support for the freedoms they enjoy or claim to represent. 

Make them an offer that their belief cannot refuse or further expose and identify the basis for their hypocrisy, thereby being specified as part of the remedy or a fraud. Psychological actions imaginatively applied using proven, but unconventional applications are also less likely to be proactively neutralized or resisted. There would be no proven recourse for this fresh approach and its nuances.

Educational persuasion repetitiously applied in a targeted manner to a youthful perspective would be enormously influential and effective. Time is a tool for the progress of perspectives using generational change and leverage. Also, economic and political support or their withdrawal are significant motivations for attention to our social change demands.

Support withdrawn should be reminiscent of the sixties bus strike, where withdrawal of consent and economic patronage was transformational declarations of resistance. Withdrawal of support has always been a compelling motivator where our participation is needed, or our money is wanted.

Our consolidated demographic should encourage different economic and political choices to coordinate a more concerted effort and stimulate cooperation. Under these circumstances, more will align themselves with our interests instead of against them using our support.

Our economic platforms can directly inspire and enrich our people by diluting adverse power and influences. We must not beg for what they created from us or need us to sustain. We must prioritize our social justice and cultural needs to reflect our participation redirecting our actions to promote self-actuation instead of dependency.

Numerically, we must lead the way and carry our burden collectively, not overly relying on the rich and famous among us.  It is more of us who are less affluent and prominent than who are famous. The number one priority is our self-evaluation to better ourselves and our condition. We need to be aware of others’ interpretations of the images and actions that we project that harm and obstruct us. We must be accountable and responsible for our conduct and presentation.

How this projection harms us and restricts our progress needs to be considered more than the context of the implications received from this election. Our projections must be examined in a historical context just as they were created in one. What do we stubbornly cling to and justify? Is it just as damaging to ourselves as what anyone else may do to us? 

If others deem our objectives to be anti “law and order,”  should we examine what behavior we exhibited is legitly associated with eliciting this claim by not regulating our behavior, particularly towards each other. Thus, there are two sides to the coin of accountability, theirs and ours.

Have we become conditioned or disillusioned to exist or remain an injured people?  We must now claim our place without reservation or limitation to the equality that others enjoy. For example, does other’s financial interest oppose ours because we do not generally participate in the knowledge and profits of these investments and the resulting prosperity, or are we forbidden?

Is it only to the extent of our exclusion from opportunity, or is it a lack of choosing participation? It starts with our thoughts giving way to our actions, becoming our habits establishing our reality leading to our prosperity. But, first culturally, we must determine what we want to project, be associated with, or profit from generationally.

Realizing we are at liberty to choose or create the communities, education, and economy we want to live in, patronize, and stimulate. Elevating our spending habits, actions, self-education, education of self, discipline, and sacrifices will be required. Any success unique to our advancement can quickly elevate our condition, but only if we control and maintain the supply, demand, and quality.

Whatever division exists outside our interest, we cannot deny the need for more solidarity within to promote our prosperity. Consequently, whatever our outrage should be more reflective in our steadfast commitment to refrain from or institute actions according to our expectations. 

Expectations are similar to planting an apple tree. To bear fruit, it must mature, and it must ripen before harvest. It is an exercise in time, cultivation, and patience. The path can be long, but then so may the yield when expectations are realized.

The intel derived from the election totals for Trumpism, widely considered questionable political regard or disregard for our concerns and condition, is a better barometer of what may lessen opposition or assertions that harm us. 

Just because they are wrong, sometimes we might not be right. Of course, two wrongs do not make a right, but we need to get at least even. All considerations must be on the table for reevaluation. At the very least, we must not harm our interests by our actions toward ourselves or others.

Winning the battle or skirmish but losing the war causes collateral damage that will eventually be restored at our expense. So considering, despite civil unrest, the status quo was only interrupted for a penalty imposed upon our interest, but with limited substantive change achieved.

Instead, evaporating support and selective change have been arbitrarily metered with the diminishing sustainability of outrage and protest.  Rage burns like fuel. It will eventually extinguish itself when exhausted, and it is unsustainable at elevated levels. At the very least, it suggests that it needs supplementing or replacing with something more effective and sustainable.

Hocus pocus, sleight of hand, and our indignation was used to validate their fear, weaponizing voting their fears against our methods used to address social justice initiatives. It is a lesson that rage and fear are opposite sides of the same perspective and must be skillfully and situationally utilized for maximum effectiveness.

This fear-based sleight of hand and the delusions created by social distractions nearly disguised a sinister election plan to highjack Democracy, which was narrowly averted. They were attempting to achieve their comprehensive political control, thereby suffocating our fractional objective. Our objective remains encompassed and restricted within their agenda, making it a fraction within the whole.

The election was advertised as a runaway condemnation of Trumpism but shockingly was closely contested. Our objectives and objections must employ the tactics of chess and not checkers to logically repel the nonsense and diversions which undermine our interest. 

We must heed the lessons learned from this election to adjust our crusade avoiding the hocus pocus but producing some real magic. Working smart will create the magical results needed without succumbing to delusion.

The blueprint for agendas on diverse objectives, conditions, and cultures does not deviate too far from these tactical fluidities of perspective. It is interchangeable parts and transferable skills utilized with purpose.

It requires committing to the cause of self-determining your preferred condition. Remember, roses are beautiful but fragile devoid of nourishment. Plant apple trees, though taking longer to cultivate, provides a nourishing sustainable harvest.

 

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

 

 

Economics of Racism and Covid-19 Tariff

Social Economics and Contingencies

The economics of fiscal responsibility requires focusing on return on investment of capital expenditures and social resources producing tangible gains. In short, return on the mighty dollar, dollar-dollar bill, the bag.

The cost analysis of racism manufactured (CORM) is similar to the cost of goods sold (COGS) model. We will use it to determine the profit margin and feasibility of the continued cost and production of racism and disregard of the Covid-19 virus.

A spreadsheet analysis will attempt to quantify the tangible cost of the actual and projected theoretical losses to estimate the profitability and sustainability of the country’s expenditures and their impact on America’s income statement. Basically, it is a monetary and social cost analysis and budget projection.

This cost analysis and resulting balance sheet, income statement, and labor projections are prepared for the public shareholders. The shareholders, stakeholders, and the board are the people, the American public. A board proxy vote of approval and confidence will determine the organization’s health under the former CEO’s tenure. The proxy was the 2020 Presidential Election.

Let’s crunch the numbers regarding the CEO since the books are in a mess and need an internal audit. We will also examine the shift in market share and demand, adherence to protocols and regulations.

The board and shareholders have equal and dual ownership rights without distinction, granting one vote per member. Finally, the presentation to the electoral assembly of owners will detail historical, current, and projected operational losses and expenditures.

This organization has had a long racist history dating back centuries. Operating much as the founders managed it with insufficient adjustments over time despite monumental shifts in demand patterns.

Our fiscal recommendation is that the business model is obsolete and creates a competitive disadvantage and toxic culture. In addition, the lack of brand demand is choking the supply chains as tolerance and preferences have changed.

Discontinuing the racist brand in response to the current situation is suggested and essential to the organization’s survival. Research and development reveal that the majority public is shocked that we still produce racism ignoring the plummeting support and adverse social liabilities.

Consequently, in recent decades, the racism product that we have espoused for so long has cost us presumably billions in protest, lawsuits, and loss of productivity. Thus, highlighting the persistent risks which are well known and devastating to the public trust.

Public demand and support for our racist products are at an all-time low, with fewer visible enthusiasts and closet endorsers. Still, quite frankly, it is a relic of the past that we again suggest being discontinued as financially unfeasible. The cost analysis will bear this out.

The beginning inventory of bigots has hit historic lows. For all intent and purposes appears to have self-liquidated through aging with their hateful, ignorant preferences passing with them.

This bigoted inventory used to fly off the shelves in the past, but shifting humanity clearly demands that we will not revive racism and make it a great seller again. It is on its deathbed as a product exposed for its destructive nature and unreasonable cost.

The cost of the raw material to make bigots has risen as the demand for them has dwindled. Additionally, the necessary materials are increasingly scarce, with the projection of ignorant practitioners educated to the fallacy and deception of their superiority. White skin should not guarantee you anything but a good tan.

It does not make you taller, faster, wiser, or anything as a collective group, evident by the market sampling of the white demographic. There is no natural group advantage based on white skin tone alone. Any human advantage is individual and opportunistic, not race-based.

The white advantage, manufactured to discourage competition and promote white privilege, has soured with America’s changing appetite. The resources of ignorant raw material to be brainwashed have substantially dried up or been educated.

With the beginning inventory very low, the acquisition of ignorant raw material ever scarcer, and the ending inventory stagnant is consequently subjecting the organization to continued exposure to litigation and maintenance costs that cannot be justified or sustained.

The gross income for centuries from racism cannot be over-calculated. Over time Blacks, Chinese, Mexican, and other’s labor have been oppressive or free, resulting in extraordinary profit margins for the organization.

The organization also benefited from no profit-sharing expenses to limit profits and the endless exploitation of the labor force without workplace regulations. CORM was consequently in its hay day of gross income and profitability with little overhead for the cost of racism manufactured by following strict adherence to the immoral human racial atrocity method of accounting.

The current racism cost generates no benefit to the organization’s profitability, having sustained heavy damages to revenue by social unrest. The cost is crushing when combining this economic forecast with the loss of nearly seven hundred thousand lives due to Covid-19.

The forecast regarding Covid has been bleak at best. Escalating loss of productivity, medical and hospitalization cost, stimulus packages, and social liabilities continue to accumulate, sparking shareholders’ concern, disgust, and outrage.

The CEO’s failure to position the organization has resulted in devastating consequences with colossal ramifications on the loss of life, future earnings, and organizational resources.

This CEO’s tenure has been quite debilitating. He inexplicably finds it more adequate to promote self-interest and ignore the apparent contingencies forecasted. Instead, he administered a poison pill to leverage his continued tenure while dispensing death, assaulting democracy, and exploding the national dysfunction creating colossal losses.

 

 

 

 

It definitely proves an ounce of precaution and discretion could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives, trillions in stimulus, massive civil unrest, and staggering political liability. Instead, the resulting liabilities, penalties, and overhead have endangered our foundational prosperity for the foreseeable future. The art of this ordeal has left much devastation in this CEO’s wake.

With these losses on the books and counting, his management skills are considered an unnatural national disaster. But, unfortunately, what is obvious to the world is not evident to the organization, its wimpy subsidiary enablers, or self-serving governing bodies.

For some un-Godly reason, some felt it was more important to pacify and protect the decisions and actions of this CEO. Subsequently, it cost the nation untold death, unrest, and future cost in the process.

The erosion of public trust has led to general divisiveness. It continues to escalate out of control while democracy is in shambles. Survival is dependant on restructuring the organization and its operating agreement.

As an elected acquisition, this CEO is extremely costly societally, politically, and economically, driving loss and suffering through the roof. This CEO is not to be outdone in human devastation or fiscal expenditures that trumps all with an ego of delusional success regarding denial of his monumental failures. Disclosure of his failures and concealments is evident by the disruption of many lives and livelihoods.

AT least, this CEO has been remarkable in his multi-tasking ability to endanger democracy, slander elections, stir hate, and offend foreign allies. As a result, he has earned a rebuke from religious figures, bullied and silenced Republican puppets, misused the military, and ignited his base of hatred.

He has further unmasked extreme racist views of those in power and alienated over half the public. Let us not forget while taking timeout to tweet relentlessly. Is there no price too high for this CEO or his dysfunctional enablers?

The future of people and businesses has been decimated by what he has done and failed to do. This CEO’s mismanagement has undermined large segments of the struggling American public. He has welcomed millions more to that struggling reality that could have never imagined they would be in such dire straits.

These losses are permanent, especially in the service and real estate industry, accounting for trillions more in losses. Now it is up to the Shareholders, The Board of Directors, The Owners of this organization, the American people to decide based on the human and fiscal feasibility of retaining this CEO’s vision. Perhaps, this CEO solidified his undeniable designation as the nation’s best worst President ever by far.

Now that it has been time to proxy, he has been let go. It is ridiculous and irresponsible to have retained this CEO, knowing this is not the last time the organization would have paid dearly for his ego therapy.

It is even more ridiculous for him to have thought so. Changing CEOs was our only hope against enduring the cost of his incompetence, both human and fiscal. Shamefully, his rabid racist display has proven to be too toxic to carry on the books.

His vindictive and pathologically destructive pouting and his denial of the no-confidence vote received reflect just how unfit he was all along. Having been let go, he has refused to leave any remnants of functional or remotely salvageable government behind. Since being ousted, his spiteful interference reveals a scorched earth mentality.

The future liability and ramifications have enormously damaged this nation in ways that may not be fully revealed for years to come. The very public this CEO swore to protect entrusting him with our future and prosperity has been betrayed by his incompetence first and now by spite. He has violated his oath of office, now causing intentional damages.

A one-person wrecking ball enabled by many gutless wonders of self-indulgent accomplices on their power-driven agendas fearfully sat by refusing to clothe the emperor except with their indulgence.

Thus, this CEO with a perversely obese ego was allowed to sacrifice the vitality of the whole nation, democracy, elections, nearly 700,000 Covid lives lost, and economic ruin, with very few among his cronies willing to stand opposed to him and in favor of the American people because of a label, being Republican. Let their proxy reflect their deeds as well, for he was not alone in this destruction. Their allegiance is not to the flag, the country, the American people, or the Presidency.

It is to the man in the office, not the office. Their fear commands them despite the posturing of righteous conviction and fortitude. This is a gross dereliction of duty and trust bordering on treason by the betrayal of the people.

Still, many continue to lie and enable. In contrast, others scurry in avoidance, but we see you and know you by sight and name, as well as your disgraceful actions. This theft and betrayal of the public trust have effectively put in motion the trajectory that has forever changed this nation and successive generations.

Millions of American citizens braved the Covid virus to protest these scourges on the soul of America and denigration of the Constitution and Democracy. We can only pray that there is still not more of a price to pay. But, unfortunately, losses are already much too high to justify the economics of racism and the Covid-19 tariff.

I originally thought this was the act of an egotistical mad man. But then, I considered that this self-proclaimed genius may have fooled us all by bringing us together by highlighting systematic vulnerabilities and inequities. Consequently, he successfully united the people against racism, the virus, economic exploitation, and to some degree him.

So shocking is the unthinkable corruption and deception that it can never be allowed to happen again. Wholesale vulnerabilities were exposed, crying out for corrective policies that requires implementation.

But, could it be, the old stun them and leave them stymied grift? Could he have done this deliberately as a whistleblower and agent of change? Was it reverse psychology? Have we witnessed the genius of a petty sycophant which can never be underestimated? Nah, but did we?

 

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

 

America’s Most UnWanted

Unwanted Dead or Alive

Attention. Attention, we interrupt your programming to bring you this breaking news bulletin to alert you to America’s Most unwanted being spotted in your area. They should be considered dangerous and not to be entertained, engaged, or challenged. An all-points bulletin has been issued with this warning, so be on the lookout for them or their gang.

They have eluded our checkpoints, APBs, and capture. We ask for the public’s help to bring them under control and end their rampage throughout society. Unfortunately, they have become more emboldened and arrogant in the audacity of their attacks and penchant for crossing boundaries to elude detection. Our efforts have been to detect, identify, verify, and prevent their wanton disregard for social order.

As we increase our efforts to bring this gang under control and critical information continues to pour in, we will keep you abreast of any additional developments. There have been widely reported sightings and leads pouring in. Still, without the public’s diligence and performance of their civic duty, we may labor in our pursuits. But, again, I repeat, do not be lulled into or swindled by their unassuming demeanor and deception.

There have been reports of sympathizers who have aided and abetted this gang by harboring and nuturing them. It seems they are undoubtedly unaware of the risks and danger they assume by hiding them or their danger to the public. This gang is volatile and may ruthlessly turn on you without much provocation or warning.

Many documented instances have occurred where the aftermath of their wrath has devastated those who have harbored them. Be especially diligent regarding impressionable children as they are notably susceptible and preferred victims of this gang, as are developing young adults.

At this time, we want to share with you as much information as we can without jeopardizing our efforts to suppress this gang or endanger the public unnecessarily. We are working to identify the members further but are reasonably certain of their roles and areas of expertise.

Their two oldest members running this gang, referred to as Public Enemy one and two. They are believed to have started the gang and provide its direction. However, various gang members have been known to operate independently or in conjunction with other members. One element that makes this gang increasingly dangerous is they are all very proficient in their own right, but when combined or operating as a whole, they are very formidable.

The entire gang rarely works together simultaneously as their motives may differ. However, there are reliable reports that members may be present but not participate in the actions of the others. They all flee the area together despite their participation. Their descriptions and characteristics provide distinctly identifiable profiles.

Public Enemy number one is without denial the mastermind and orchestrator. Number one controlling the gang’s activities is an active participant at all times. The gang benefits from this member’s charismatic and alluring persuasion.

This member displays the ability to infiltrate the heart and minds of unsuspecting civilians and is ruthlessly determined to deceive and connive others into assisting. Logic, reasoning, outright deception, and persuasion are the specialties of this member.

Public Enemy number two may be the downfall of this outfit for the flashy and braggadocious manner brashly displayed. Not the most dangerous member, but the confidence projected along with the skill set possessed makes this member the driving force of the gang and to be revered.

The image of the gang is shaped by this member and generates an assuredness of unlimited power and invincibility. This member is always present, and the influence is active and compliments Public Enemy number one quite well. Number two has also been known to take charge directing the gang’s activities.

The next members are fraternal, not identical twins, although they bear a strong resemblance. They often act as one unit with many similarities in their behavior. They are by far the most dangerous of the gang. Like Public Enemy number two, they are revered but also feared for their insatiable anger and hostile anti-social disposition.

They are more controllable if kept separated but must be constantly monitored by the other gang members, wary of when they may explode. Unprovoked, they may become extremely callous and violent. It is a delight that they savor when getting their hands dirty or doing the heavy lifting for the gang. But, unshockingly, it seems to unleash their psychopathic appetite for violence.

Once uncorked, they are tough to bring under control until they satisfy their thirst and exhaust their rage. Their only value to the gang is to do the unspeakable without remorse. They are simply muscle without much thought or self-control, often displaying psychotic behavior.

This fifth member is the twins’ cousin and can also become unhinged by the slightest provocation with actions that range from petty to outrageous. It must run in the family being first cousins. Their behavior differs slightly, with this member having a more sociopathic lean, including impulsive behaviors and responses that are not justified by the circumstances.

This member is tolerated only because of the value of the twins but not trusted or well-liked because of constant complaining and petty tendencies. The displays of neediness, proclamations of possessiveness, and conspiracies of betrayal detract from any value to the gang.

The sixth member is known to contribute as much as is sometimes taken away, displaying a demeanor with aspirations much larger than capabilities. This member has lofty ambitions of one day running the outfit despite glaring limitations.

Additionally, number six is unreasonable and though clever, claims to know more than the other gang members. Though very determined and principled but always resisting suggestions and instructions. Being irreplaceable as encouragement and a go-getter when on point, this member is the checks and balances of the gang.

The following two are related, although uncertain how. These two have only one objective, which is what is in it for them.  Not surprisingly, they are the least trustworthy of the bunch and most likely to flip when confronted, possessing little fortitude and even less loyalty. They have a tight bond and high ambitions.

Their tools of the trade are an eye for big-time scores and corruption of others’ vulnerabilities. They are first-class high-stakes grifters. Every outfit of ill repute can find value in their talents.

The last to round out the crew is the getaway driver providing a hideout to meet when something goes wrong or if separated. But, wait, what’s that? Our top-notch inspector spotted them and tracked them to their hideout with no time to call more backup. Therefore, they must act immediately, not knowing if and when a chance like this will present itself again.

They have the place surrounded, and apprehension is imminent. However, They must move quickly and use the element of surprise on a gang that often disappears as ghosts that transcend time, space, and body. Hence, the go-ahead has been given to execute the raid with extreme caution. We are awaiting word of the all-clear.

We are proud and relieved to let you know that the raid was an overwhelming success. All members have been apprehended and identification now known. The identifications are as follows; the leader Public Enemy number one is the Conscious Mind, a notorious enabler and deceiver. Public Enemy number two is the Ego, known to initiate bloated perceptions of self.

The twins are Hatred and Evil wanted for many unspeakable crimes of brutality. Member five is the cousin Jealousy, aka Envy, wanted for pettiness due to easily hurt feelings or bemoaning other’s good fortune, a real hater.

Member six is Pride, who led to the gangs’ downfall and a real know it all. The following two found hiding together, Greed and Lust, were no doubt hoping to hide the goods and escape discovery. Lastly, the getaway driver, Denial aka Ignore, was found to use the same pattern of getaway when returning to the gang’s hideout, the heart and minds of compromised individuals.

We and the public would like to recognize and thank the one responsible for figuring out this group of punks, tracking them down, and bringing them to accountability. Furthermore, we are indebted to the only one possessing the cunning to corral this gang, which is the one and only Subconscious Mind.

The subconscious mind is the most powerful computer known to man and not even remotely understood for its full range of capabilities. The subconscious mind is the unregulated truth, where change occurs and is a servant guiding our actions and beliefs. It controls not only our bodily functions but our perspectives and resulting accomplishments.

Unleashing the subconscious mind’s power controls our conscious mind and well-being. But, we must recognize and allow it to “apprehend” the deceptions of the conscious mind and the ego where these henchmen get their direction and permission.

Allow your subconscious mind to control your conscious mind and ego to overcome any insecurities and self-limiting behaviors. It is the direct path to correcting your flaws and controlling your emotions. Please further research the subconscious mind to understand its function and unlimited power.

Your conscious mind is designed to justify your thoughts and actions, no matter how unreasonable according to your self-justifications and weaknesses, making it easier to succumb to insecurities, fears, and delusions. This is the core of hatred and jealousy. In addition, it creates dangerous comparisons of self inadequacies. Thus, it develops either an inferiority or a superiority complex in contrast to the comparison. It can therefore generate evil validations.

The ego is a creation of the conscious mind and leads to excesses. It generates actions that crave confirmation and validation outside of yourself. It forces you to develop needy low self-esteem and self-doubt or a narcissistic exaggerated alter ego. Pride and denial often deceives what we know to be true. The result is a masquerade that fluctuates based on flattery and constant external validation. 

Interrupting your programming is a reference to the psychology of your conditioned perspective. It refers to the undetected forces that distract your focus, scattering your concentration exaggerating the symptoms while disguising the cause leading to the cure. 

The cure resides in the subconscious mind to directly address the compulsion instead of the manifestations presented by the conscious mind. Consequently, the command resides in the subconscious mind, while its resistance will be mounted in the conscious mind by default.

The conscious mind is the hardware. The ego and the enemies mentioned above are acquired perspectives, the apps. The subconscious mind is the software and coding or operating system. The operating system dictates the functions of the hardware providing the hardware has compatible and accommodating  capacity.

Extraordinary power exists in everyone to command the subconscious mind’s services and benefits. Those who can access this power on demand discover an amazing ability to develop willpower, discipline, and peacefulness creating their success.

Consider how anger, desperation, dealing with pain, or dire circumstances produce some of your best efforts because they take the thought or conscious mind out of the equation. It removes the limitations that can only thrive and persist in the conscious mind allowing the subconscious mind to excel.

The subconscious mind serves at your discretion like a machine to do what it is told, making the key to its effectiveness removing the coding limitations. The ascension process is reprogramming it with empowering affirmations, positive instructions, and removing self-limiting negative programming. This extradinaily effective apprehension unit stops public enemies before they can rummage or obstruct your potential. Your mind can be an elite weapon.

MAKE YOUR SUBCONSCIOUS MIND YOUR SUPERPOWER. YOUR DOUBT IS YOUR LIMITATION! YOU BECOME WHAT YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE. PLOT YOUR COURSE AND POSITION YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY.

 

 

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

 

 

America’s Tombstone

 America’s terminal in critical condition.

The grave disorder afflicting what was formerly known as the union has a terminal prognosis. The unthinkable is upon us, threatening to engulf and suffocate us with our arrogance, inequalities, and stubbornness constricted by clinging to the misgivings of history. Unfortunately, history often painfully repeats itself.

Have we not learned anything from history and the collapse of world powers before America. History is poetic in stating that the greatest threat to the republic would be from within its borders and domestic, not foreign. America may be too mighty for any other country to defeat but not mighty enough to resist a self-destructive implosion.

The nightmare of the house divided has become real, and this division is set on an irrevocable path of self-destruction if allowed to continue. The question is, at what price is the destruction of another worth your demise. The answer then becomes how much will you injure yourself to inflict injury upon another where neither survives if survival is the objective. 

Just as a house divided will not stand, a structure built on a faulty foundation is eventually doomed to collapse upon its weight, unable to support its faulty construction weakened by time. The realistic commentary is a perfect union is not attainable, but a more perfect union is possible. Let us not pretend that America is not without its blemishes, a utopia of perfection. It has much room for improvement despite its greatness and the freedoms afforded by it.

However, it will, without doubt, require the truth. So first, there must be an admission and recognition that there is a problem to be solved, identifying the problem accordingly with brutal honesty.  The majority of dissatisfaction on many topics reflects deep discontent on fundamental issues. This discontent needs resolving to instill a therapeutic response while rejecting the nostalgic imbalances of the past. Adherence to inflammatory practices and principles can only lead to the extinction of them and their practitioners.

Change, while often uncomfortable for some, is necessary for the evolution of life and progress. Consequently, unjust imbalances can not go on indefinitely. These masquerades and deceptions must end at some point exposed as bogus. Thus, the damage is no longer tolerable whether being either naively conditioned to believe or maliciously following errant agendas of deception. Either way, the reality is never pleasant when the outcome proves destructive.

Likewise, the creation of these diversions enables covert schemes to be executed while distracted and concealed by the bickering fractions.  The astute manipulation of the public’s sensitivities to produce a predictable outcome based on emotional ignorance accomplishes this agitation. Everyone must stay mad at someone at all times. 

Politicizing the intent and purpose of the Constitution and government authority underscores many vile exploitations of power. The collective will and good of the people was the original democratic design. But, unfortunately, it has been blatantly mangled in a power grab that threatens to bring civil war and financial collapse, enriching some while eroding other’s freedoms.

How can we destroy ourselves? Let me count the ways. Overall, we have civil discourse, protest, rioting, a Capitol siege, and the accompanying damages and cost. We have a denial of economic and human rights. A pandemic that was downplayed by 45 to avoid panic but not to prevent the spread. Both have occurred, panic and spread along with monumental loss of life and resources.

We have the disastrous stock market manipulation by a cocktail of quantitative easing, propping up of the bond and equity market corpse, and pending evictions and foreclosures of residential and commercial properties. The erosion of pension funds and retirements is happening again. Also looming is the eventual banking system recurring collapse, as evident by the repo market activity indicating insolvency again due to reckless operations and greed. 

The effects of many supply chain disruptions and shortages are emerging. In addition, inflation fears and labor force dissatisfaction are rampant.  Then there are the increasingly overwhelmed medical system and societal bickering concerning vaccines, income and gender inequality, gender and sexual preference intolerances, abortion rights disputes again, and racial disparities. 

Include immigration policies, denial of historical racial ramifications, the Confederacy resurgence, resistance to new law enforcement initiatives, and reluctant criminal justice system reform. Continuing with the bias political redistricting, voter suppression, unsubstantiated elections fraud claims, and you name it.

America has suffered more damage than any terrorist group could have ever deliberately inflicted simply by allowing the political deceptions guided by greed to run its unfettered course. The intoxication of power at any cost has undermined Democracy and Capitalism. Yet, at the same time, the public is intentionally distracted over trivial differences inattentive of the hardships imposed upon them.

It is a risky gamble for control of the political system, which affects all Americans. Red or blue, Republicans or Democrats, it is a gang turf war with the public as collateral damage. Separately these events create a volatile discord of dire circumstances. But, combined, what is the prognosis of America’s survival, if not terminal? 

Even more outrageous is the destructive ideology fueling a combination of the budget deadline and debt ceiling scabbles implicating hints of a national shutdown and default for political gain. But, can we risk the devaluation of the U.S. dollar and America’s status as the world’s default currency triggering a global financial collapse and ushering in digital currency controlled and monitored by the government?

To ensure that the wealthy pay a fair share for taxes, they must monitor our transactions for over six hundred dollars. Likewise, banks must report activity on our lowly accounts as if the wealthy cannot be otherwise identified by their bank accounts. Every time they crack down on someone else, the general public must bear the squeeze.

Fear and compliance are the tools of deceptions used to limit the public’s freedoms, and we are always eager to oblige. It reaks of predictable behavior manipulated and triggered by fear of terrorists, the Covid, tax cheats, race, religion, sexuality, and maybe our shadow next. Are we to believe information harvesting, artificial intelligence, digital or electronic banking, electronic surveillance, or thirst for power and greed is not a threat?

Furthermore, we have witnessed the attempted coercion of the 2020 Election to maintain power, an uprising against the seat of Democracy at the Capitol, and now fiscal roulette for political gain and power. The cannibalism of our Democracy has been intensifying while disguised by discord.

The second amendment right to bear arms gives citizens the right to oppose an authoritarian federal government. But, by definition, wouldn’t that be one overthrowing Democracy? An armed militia intimidating politicians, dissenters, and unarmed protesters by political gangsterism would qualify. A violent coup whose forceful imposition of views and governance upon their fellow citizens or denial of other’s rights, which they proudly claim without reservation, seemingly would also qualify.

Resorting to force against the practice of Democracy and the freedom to exercise civil liberties, no doubt, descends into opposition to Freedom? Ultimately, the force used against the Democratic structure is the same violent instrument used by the power mongers against the people. Attempting to implement a military authoritative state or dictatorship brought about by a coup, suppression of the people’s vote, and government takeover effectively eliminates Democracy. 

Dictators or monarchs are what this country was created to escape from, a king and his dynastic lineage by creating a separation of power and the democratic vote. At the core of Democracy is voting and for the duly elected to reflect the best interest of the majority, not party affiliations, much less individual interest.

Any effort, foreign or domestic, to hijack the democratic process is an assault on the very principles of Democracy. The country cannot exist as presently constituted without Democracy. You can not take over the Capitol, discard an election, and still have Democracy. Any attempt to circumvent the prescribed electoral process is a hostile takeover with fatal repercussions. 

Unfortunately, the mutiny against the Democratic majority and its sovereignty’s principles continues as the minority seeks to prevail and promote their agenda. Ironic how minority status is unbearable but should be fine for others but is not honoring the majority vote paramount to Democracy. Did you expect any less when you were not the minority?

Acceptance of this reality has always been the rule notwithstanding dissent but reflected or upheld in the next voting cycle as the majority’s will, disdaining mutiny against the foundational principles of our voting rights. Otherwise, the whole system and Democracy collapses. Divisiveness enforced by might and contentious rhetoric has proven inadvisable and unsustainable in this country. Instead, it leads to repetitive civil unrest and opposition, be it race, abortion, war, or what have you.

Integration of law enforcement and military by race and ideology would splinter efforts of a violent coup. Predictably, law enforcement and the military would have to first turn on their respective ranks, eliminating those not in agreement. These two groups are critical to enforcing radical distortion of the judicial process and free speech in any authoritative society. The true principles of Democracy rely on cooperation, not force. Force is no longer a viable option for all occasions.

America is at a tipping point. Remembering history may help prevent it from repeating itself, as seen in the rise of Nazi-Germany and its race-based utopia of superiority. It is tragically ironic that Hitler got his ideology from Jim Crow in addition to eugenics. The symbolism of white power is the Nazi flag and swastika, which should have been roundly denounced when soundly defeated. In America, the racist ideology at its core was the symptom manifested by greed, the illness.

All the above alluded to precarious events are at their roots based on racism, casteism (shudra), and power manipulations for wealth fueled by greed. As a result, America is on the brink of moral and fiscal bankruptcy, deprived of political and ideological solutions or compromise for mutual survival.

Even if the balance of power switches, nothing is resolved. It is just reversed without resolution, still about winning and accumulation by any means necessary. The objectivity of fairness and compassion are sacrificed as collateral for personal ambitions. 

 

 

To further complicate matters, this perfect storm of destruction brewed and calculated from the inception of this republic and exacerbated over time necessitates exploitations being expanded beyond the traditional groups to sustain itself. But, this expansion is camouflaged by race, immigration, and socialist accusations to deflect from the actual cause, greed.

Any titan of leadership understands that when proclaiming the buck stops with them, responsibility must begin with them. Deflecting any bitter occurrences is not a shared debacle when charged with leading. So, where has leadership led us, if not to the brink of destruction by divisiveness and selfish ambitions? But, change is still staunchly resisted continuing to perpetuate societal detriments.

It is a collective failure of leadership if only by constructive possession of the governance of Democracy. Heavy is the head of leadership and guidance, accepting both credit and blame. To claim otherwise is a self-indictment, a discredit to your position, and a disservice to the country. While the blame game is a favorite game of politicians, the general public is left to take responsibility for its contribution while also suffering from theirs.

As a result, we are allowed to struggle at the bottom suffering from the virtues of the very Capitalism that we fund. Consider the distractions of the last two years that have the public preoccupied while grand larceny is afoot. Democracy was born out of Capitalism in concept and practice. But, unfortunately, both have been perverted to elite set-asides and bailouts contrary to the principles of Capitalism.

How resilient can America be, and how tolerant will a disposable public remain before significant course corrections are too little too late. The power grab excludes the elite and politicians from suffering while willing to risk triggering a global financial crisis with the brunt of domestic suffering skipping them.

I suspect essential workers are expendable when exposed to heightened risk and hazardous conditions for similar compensation. Does your compensation reflect your value? During this Covid crisis, being bestowed the title of essential worker makes you an interchangeable clog that has suddenly become scarce and valuable.

It resembles indentured servitude but with a more palatable twist, making it a lot easier to accept. Duty or coercion are the tools of persuasion used to disguise and accomplish blind submission. It is capitalistic exploitation at its finest. This hybrid capitalism where supply, demand, and efficiency do not apply to all in the valuation of essential services or labor.

From an economic and governmental standpoint, providing protections with governmental subsidies for big companies, political cronies, and banking favorites should violate capitalism. However, these same protections are bemoaned and conditional when provided to the general public and labeled as socialism.

Rebellion against taxation without representation started this country. But, will little or no tax on big business or the wealthy end it? It is the weiner for the ham swindle to relinquish something of greater value for a lesser value or benefit. Could the founding fathers envision the ablest paying no taxes while the least able collectively pays the most taxes? The economic shell game will be played with diminishing returns; the more conditioned, mind-controlled, and hopeless you become.

It is not a condemnation of riches but an accurate assessment and indictment of some unjust methods of achieving it. Funny how the rules loosen and the opportunities expand with the more money or favor you possess. To suggest that all pay their fair share is unfair and outrageous, if not for sure downright extreme leftist and un-American, right? But, on the other hand, resisting exploitation is unpatriotic too.

A dog-eat-dog cannibalistic quest for prosperity at the bottom and a doctrine of exclusion or exploitation at the top preserve our economic imbalances. It is not by accident; it is by designed calculation and deception.

Capitalism needs a tune-up to run smoothly for all instead of just smoothly for the advantaged. Money is not the root of all evil, but greed and power can be argued as the roots of most of America’s problems. In this pursuit, the disregard for passing the sugar sours the essential workers’ expectations, ambitions, and opportunities.

America’s greatest resource is the people, but sustaining and preserving their well-being has become a casualty of this power grab restricting liberty and prosperity for the lower classes. A caste system is swelling with the increasing disappearance of the middle class. It creates a blight on the standard of living, which economic and political vampires are systematically draining.

What was planted has grown. The seeds of deceptions and inequality planted long ago have blossomed into a system in need of an overhaul if it is to survive. Democracy, The Constitution, and fiscal solvency will not survive the status quo as the pillars upon which a crumbling society will no longer support.

It is time to compromise and make alterations for the country’s survival as the challenges escalate without reprisal. Remember, when people take to the streets in overwhelming numbers to protest, that is usually the last warning that the level of dissatisfaction with the governing body or system has become no longer tolerable. History is undefeated in that regard.

However, the aftermath of not heeding the warning is undisputed as nations and civilizations must inevitably change or perish. They have always changed, or they have always perished. We can be certain that radical change always precedes avoidance of collapse or results from a disastrous outcome. We are at the crossroads of history where we choose a collective survival or fracturing destruction. But, we can no longer be unresponsive to the glaring warning signs.

America’s historical precondition of affliction did not just start in the last five years. It began with blatant exploitation and indifferences at inception. Now, the lies promoted and the promises unfulfilled to conceal those lies have swelled to the current national dysfunction.

It worked on an unsophisticated callous public, but the currently available information and knowledge have revealed the evil sorcery of these traditional policies and practices. Time has expired for reckoning, and change is the modifying salvation.

The naked truth and change is the final resort of reckoning for survival, or it was a good run. It was better for some than others, but the final obituary will read that we could not rest in national peace, so we perished in national discord. The jalopy has finally broken down, leaving us in need of new wheels.

There cannot be a return to America’s way tailored for white males and the economic elite strife with injustice and greed. Because of gains of women’s rights, changes in domestic violence laws, women employment opportunities and accomplishments, commonality of young people; same-sex, biracial, and inter-racial relationships, LBGTQ recognition, sensitivity to racial discrimination, a global economy, and similar evolutions, those days will not be returning.

Many now display a significant change in the sentiment and rejection of bigotry being only an interchangeable pronoun away from a persecuted or ostracized group. I would think more people are aligned with equal justice than ever before by more people being subjected to injustices and economic hardships. 

Furthermore, the economic expenditure and residual fallout from the civil unrest since late May 2020 and the Covid virus has amassed such an enormous total.  Likewise, scrutinizing motives for disregarding the massive impact from Chavin’s knee to 45’s Covid denial, will contextualize their explosive impact on the ensuing mayhem, which was avoidable.

Additionally, resistance to both has had dire consequences and astronomical expenses. A different decision here or there would have netted vastly different results and conditions. Better decisions should have been made with their handling.  We should have learned by now that opposition to evolution is to invite revolution. Change is constant and can not be restrained, at best only delayed.

But some change is beyond delay or denial. Such is nature’s fury. Foolishly, the defiance of nature has caused an escalation in the severity and seemingly frequency of catastrophic weather conditions and fire. Therefore, it would have been more prudent to address and mitigate the problems in hindsight than to ignore them. We should have learned by now that resistance to evolution is to invite revolution by circumstances, humanity, or nature. Change is constant and can not be restrained, even if delayed.

Unfortunately, the meter is still wastefully running. Many wasted resources and ill-fated decisions should have been contemplated far more beneficially. We must now relinquish a time gone by and logically improvise to address the prevailing circumstances. It is impossible to resuscitate the past by pretending it is the present. But, on the other hand, there are many benefits in seeking solutions and few in denying the problems.

The resulting distortion of Democracy, Capitalism, and the Truth is much too high a price to pay to avoid dealing with the symptoms, illness, and remedy for America’s afflictions. The only alternative diagnosis is that sustained disregard welcomes the certain toppling of Democracy and Capitalism.

By antiquated ideology, shakey fiscal policy, and a rampant virus America is on the brink. We are presently confronted with severe self-inflicted challenges. It is a bloated conceit to behave above the laws of nature and our common interest as citizens. Both will prove to be the wounds from the bosom of America too detrimental to survive.

My how times have changed having remained the same. The absurdity of events now has political zealots and separatists polarized, demanding land of their own to preserve their sense of nostalgia or rejection of inevitable changes. 

Still, father time waits for no one, and change does not ask permission. Is America not so beloved and grand that its destruction is preferable to resolutions to instill equality and address its inequalities no matter the culprit? If so, surely, you couldn’t tell by appearances. America’s terminal in critical condition.

It appears now that it is only a matter of time before we know what America’s tombstone will read. Here stood a great nation severed by arrogance and ignorance. Reluctant to change, unwilling to survive, and condemned to fall.

P.S. If it provides any comfort, America is not alone as country’s and governments around the globe seek to prevent significant changes beneficial to the people they supposedly represent. The mass suppression of economic, religious, and human freedoms demands satisfaction as swells of discontent stretch across the globe. The names, places, and circumstances are different, but the desire is universal, change.

 

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

 

 

Collision on the DJT Expressway

Off the Road Again- Multiple Fatalities

Good evening and thank you for joining us for the evening news. We tell it like it is with the latest perspective on a variety of topics of the day. But, first, we bring you this shocking, late-breaking, and still developing story by our affiliate on the scene, Creating a Buzz. Thurston K. Atlas here reporting from the location of this tragic, fiery crash. I can now tell you that the authorities have released minimal information.

Authorities are telling us that this tragic and horrific collision was unnecessary and preventable, with some saying that their worst fears have come to pass. Unfortunately, there have been several fatalities. Currently, it is unknown if there are any survivors, with emergency crews still working to determine the extent and details of the crash.

Some preliminary information surfacing has yet to be verified or confirmed, so we will refrain from speculating about the alleged victims’ identity and condition until further information from emergency personnel can authenticate the facts. Let me start with a bit of background information on the road. The DJT expressway was constructed amid extreme controversy and trepidation. Some say that the design was flawed and would lead to tragic circumstances due to its bewildering and hazardous messaging.

It was completed in late 2015 and opened for the public on January 20, 2016, with accusations of the use of defective materials. This stretch of road has been seemingly a constant source of outrage, controversy, and some would say coverups from the earliest design stages.

Many mishaps and complaints regarding the DJT have been reported. Numerous inadequately investigated accusations have surfaced; thus, many felt that a calamity of this magnitude was bound to happen. There are claims this was not in any way unforeseeable, just delayed and inevitable despite warnings. Furthermore, the road itself is a small stretch that has racked up huge tolls on the public, sparking widespread protest.

From information coming in now, this is what we can tell you about the crash itself; eyewitnesses tell us that it appeared to be multiple occupants in the vehicle headed south at a high rate of speed on the DJT turnpike in a reckless manner. In addition, the vehicle disregarded all posted warnings and operated weaving at times off the road, according to eyewitnesses.

From the debris, authorities suspect that some mind-altering substances of abuse or hallucinogens may have been involved in impairing the driver’s judgment. In addition, the DJT was poorly lighted and had patches of darkness that obscured vision. It is also believed that the signage being misleading and frequently missing along the way undoubtedly contributed to the off-road fatality.

We have just been told they have identified several victims, but we will not be releasing the names out of respect until the proper notifications are made. Several sources familiar with the victims have arrived on the scene and are devastated by the loss.

I am told that the crash destroyed the vehicle they were traveling in. It was an old historical model which was quite durable. However, it did have significant mechanical problems believed to have contributed to the collision exacerbated by driver error.

Lost in the crash was an elderly married couple who had spent a lifetime together. The couple was always in company with each other and well known. But, of late, they had been going through a rough patch. But, they’ve seen rough patches before and always managed to stay together, so it is no surprise that they would perish together.

They complimented one another well, and one was said to be very popular while the other thoroughly enjoyed the trappings of prosperity. They witnessed many changes over their long union, but they remained unchanged, resistant to the changing times, and stuck in their old ways. They loved and needed each other dearly despite disputes and indiscretions along the way. Often heard to say, they would ride until the wheels came off, and well, they literally did.

Another victim in the vehicle was said to have been instrumental in the elderly couple’s union. As a close acquaintance of both, having helped them pick their historical vehicle way back when it was new.
Indeed, a true friend often mediating disputes between the two, which probably significantly contributed to their longevity together. This old companion was the voice of reason, and some would say, a source of guidance since they heeded this respected good friend’s counsel.

The final occupant, through some miracle, is barely alive and life-flighted with serious life-threatening internal injuries possibly not expected to survive. We have learned that this victim is unconscious, unresponsive, and being kept alive on life support, at this point barely clinging to life.

This victim was generally loved and embraced as an example many tried to emulate but has suffered catastrophic damage. We can only hope and pray some level of recovery may be possible. The authorities have just released a press briefing with the full details of their investigation, eyewitness accounts, and the victim’s identities.

We know the hazardous road was Donald J Trump’s presidency and the vehicle the United States of America. The driver was a segment of the American public impaired. A toxicology will be conducted to determine if mind-altering perspectives or moral deficiencies influenced the driver.

The elderly married couple was Democracy and Capitalism. The good friend to the elderly married couple was The U.S. Constitution settling disputes, and the survivor placed on life support was the Truth.

For those lost in the crash, can they rest in peace because it seems we can’t?  Unfortunately, the crash scene will take some time to be removed, and additional resources will be required for a catastrophe like this to be cleared. The DJT expressway should be closed permanently, and the resulting losses have left a massive challenge for survivors and loved ones. But the sad commentary is some insist the DJT remain open.

Unfortunately, it appears that continued use of the Donald J. Trump Expressway can only lead to more nightmares. Yet, despite the terrible damages leading to instability for everyone on all sides of the spectrum, there are denials that the DJT was a horrible and deadly stretch of road that led to significant consequences and regrets.

Thurston K. Atlas reporting live from the scene of this horrific off-road collision on the DJT Expressway.

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating a Buzz

 

Lessons from Breonna

 

Search Warrant Reform

The underlying principles of a search warrant originate within the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The Fourth Amendment maintains the right against unreasonable search and seizure, especially in our residence. To protect this essential Constitutional Right, the law requires at a minimum that there be sufficient probable cause and a sworn oath by an affiant to the facts and truthfulness of that probable cause.

The affiant is the law enforcement official seeking the warrant, usually a police person. A material violation of either the compulsory probable cause or the sworn integrity of its content violates the foundation of the Fourth Amendment Rights. Moreover, it excludes or invalidates the tenets of any warrant issued and the signing judges’ fiduciary creed.

The judge’s duty is procedural to assess the legality but not validate the probable cause, as they have no way of knowing the accuracy of the information that would support that probable cause. The affiant bears witness that the facts of the probable cause are true and accurate according to their personal knowledge. 

The judge then signs the search warrant on the sworn testimony of the affiant, which indemnifies the judge and places the burden squarely on the affiant to justify the warrant. Therefore, acts of willful deceit to obtain a warrant by the affiant are criminal.  

The search warrant is a two-part document. The most important part is the affidavit, which outlines the probable cause used to obtain the search warrant detailing the suspected crime or illegal activity. The search warrant precisely states the premises, person, contraband, or other criminal tools to be searched or seized along with any evidence that may confirm the suspected activity.

The warrant must be executed within 72 hours. The exceptions such as no-knock, contingent, or otherwise are described within the search warrant. A night-season search warrant must be expressly stated and permits the execution of the warrant outside of the regular allowable hours. Night season is generally considered to be between 10:00 pm to 7:00 am and is deemed to be risky and more dangerous than the execution of a typical search warrant. 

Just as a no-knock warrant language is explicitly stated, so is a night-season warrant stating the specific circumstances justifying its nighttime execution. The Taylor search warrant execution time was at approximately 12:30 am and fits into the definition of a night season search and must contain language in the affidavit allowing night season execution. The affidavit is secret and usually not disclosed.

Still, the search warrant portion, part two of the warrant, must be given to a person or left on the premises of the place to be searched, along with a search warrant inventory detailing the items seized. A search warrant return packet must be submitted to the county clerk’s office within days after executing the search warrant to conclude the process. At this time, the request for sealing the warrant is made.

In the Taylor case, certain elements can be stipulated that probable cause did exist for the warrant to be sought for Taylor’s premises. However, other aspects of the affidavit are not authenticated as factual, timely, or containing firsthand knowledge. Therefore, these elements, which were absolutely material to obtaining the search warrant, should either have been stated differently, amended, or omitted. 

Any known deviation from the truth stated within the affidavit technically is false and a violation of the oath the affiant takes, stating that they swear personally to know all probable cause to be true and accurate. Hence, this deviation invalidates the affidavit and, consequently, the search warrant due to probable cause issues. 

To satisfy the judicial integrity regarding this particular warrant, many discrepancies of perception and fact contradict practicality and the legality of the stated probable cause. Those discrepancies also prevented a clear and precise depiction of the warrant’s justification and compromised the judicial integrity of the warrant. Thus, deception, incompetence. or both is indicated by the factual inconsistencies and questionable actions in obtaining the warrant.

Clarification and resolution of the probable cause are vital to assessing the legality of the issuance of the warrant. Administratively the search warrant validation began with the investigative facts that led to obtaining the search warrant. It is where any inquiry or Grand Jury proceedings should begin to legally establish the police right to be there or even initially to obtain the warrant. You must start from the beginning.

Regarding the Postal delivery of packages of suspected drugs to Breonna Taylor’s residence, there was no confirmation to validate that claim. In fact, no packages were delivered, only letter mail was received there. Additionally, although a common practice of drug traffickers, it must be proven that the receiver opened the package. Thereby knowledge of the contents is proof they are criminally engaged. The alleged package appeared unopen according to police.

Suppose the allegations were true that multiple packages believed to contain suspected drugs had been received. In that case, conducting further investigation could have conclusively determined a pattern of Taylor’s proven participation in drug activity existed. The package could have been targeted during transport for surveillance and exigent circumstances. 

All other elements of probable cause appear to be factual assumptions, but these assumptions are not based on timely or currently valid information. Facts or further invest revising or explaining Walker’s, the new boyfriend, appearance and presence at that juncture of the investigation was lacking. The time contrasting the search warrant probable cause observations and intel relative to the discontinuation of the relationship between Taylor and the ex-boyfriend, Glover, should have been a consideration for pause. 

Walker’s presence created uncertainty and changed the dynamics of activity at Taylor’s residence. So had the alleged operation changed with the relationship change? The initial probable cause was not supported by further investigation or assessment despite Walkers’ presence. The investigation continued as if no dynamic had changed. As if business, as usual, was still being conducted between Taylor and Glover, namely that her residence was a stash house or a delivery point.

Other elements of probable cause were equally insufficient. Legal acts are not evidence of a crime unless proven to be knowingly and willingly used in the commission of a crime. Thus, cell phone and vehicle registrations in her name, while unadvisable, are not prima facia criminal. Although, some other evidential probable cause did indicate some degree of her knowledge and prior participation. 

 

Her continuation of participation for search warrant purposes must be established to be current. Otherwise, an arrest warrant or indictment for prior activity is appropriate, not a search warrant. These observations should have amended the facts avoiding the appearances and commission of any misrepresentation of the facts. Establishing current conduct revealing a continuation of Taylor’s participation despite the relationship change was needed.  

Most of the information appeared to be stale, should have been known or disregarded as not useful. The investigation process substantiates the suspicions, the participants, and the probable cause to establish the case. That investigation then sustaining the suspicions of drug trafficking, results in an affidavit and a search warrant being drawn up. It is the reason to secure the proof as the standard for probable cause.

It appears that both were drawn up by the lead detective, not a prosecutor, and then presented to a judge for approval and a signature. This practice is legal and permissible in some jurisdictions while banned in others to safeguard objectivity, completeness, and the substantiation of the required legal criterion of the probable cause. Eliminating the prosecutor’s input removes a level of objective, scrutiny, and legal knowledge.

The affidavit should contain the investigative techniques used to build the probable cause. It appears that surveillance was heavily used and presumably to some degree informants. The value of informants is not limited to information but also drug buys and the identification of suspects. Thus, the affidavit would also include whether drug arrests or drug buys were utilized and if undercover officers were used for any of the drug buys. Using undercovers solidifies the firsthand chain of testimony.

Furthermore, it needs to be disclosed if a confidential reliable informant was the source of confirming the delivered package contents as drugs. Did a CRI provide any information relative to Glover’s activities pertaining to Taylor or her premises? Without these additional sources and verifications, the search warrant criteria are extremely suspect. With this amount of uncertainty, a warrant never should have been obtained, and had the facts been known, never signed.

Administrative checks on residences, phones, vehicles, and individual’s backgrounds assist in building probable cause. In addition, multiple arrests of individuals leaving the drug house after buying drugs further establishes activity at drug houses. What were the verifiable investigative techniques detailed in the affidavit, and when?

Any packages observed leaving Taylor’s residence by Glover could only be speculated to contain drugs. Therefore, using collaboration with the Postal Inspector establishes if drugs were shipped through the mail. Any suspicious packages should have been appropriately investigated before delivery. Additionally, if Glover was observed to leave Taylor’s apartment with a package and had an active warrant or other means, it was probably prudent to apprehend Glover and the package to prove that he was receiving drugs there. 

While in transit was the most opportune time to intercept Glover. He had the least legal or Constitutional protections at that time against being arrested and searched incident to arrest. Supposing Glover was observed to go to a drug house and active trafficking observed. In that case, raiding it using exigent circumstances and securing it until a search warrant is sought afterward was legally permissible. After a fresh delivery, presumably seizing the maximum amount of drugs. 

With the postal package seemingly being the pivotal action that initiated probable cause for the search warrant issued for Taylor’s residence, it was never definitively determined to contain drugs or be recurring drug activity. At any rate, even the referred to postal package occurred nearly four weeks before the warrants’ execution, as well as recorded phone calls that implicated Taylor’s participation. Both were stale.

Considering the misrepresentation of the verification regarding the delivery of drug packages to Taylor’s residence, the unknown contents of the packages retrieved by Glover, and the time-lapse between other stated probable cause securing of a search warrant violates the principle and intent of the law lacking Constitutionality. 

It is unlikely that a judge would have signed a search warrant. It is also unlikely that a judge suspected that a night-season execution of the search warrant on a soft target was necessary. Otherwise, it is a contradiction. A prosecutor review would have surely required more clarity of probable cause and more recent justifying evidence.

While there are specific indications of Taylor’s knowledge of Glover’s activities, the evidence was somewhat circumstantially outdated and no longer accurate or subsequently proven. They found no evidence after the deadly incident to support the probable cause as current or accurate.

The implications and ramifications of the affiant’s sworn assertions of probable cause resulted in actionable infractions that would not have occurred otherwise, which ultimately resulted in Taylor’s death. The affiant committed a legal infraction in obtaining the search warrant, constituting a crime that would have resulted in no warrant being issued and definitely not being executed in the night season. 

Additionally, search warrants should have each page numbered and signed by the prosecutor drafting it and the judge issuing it on every page to prevent substitution of original authorized content. Furthermore, the prosecutor’s original copy should be submitted to the clerk’s office later reconciled with the search warrant return package to authenticate the contents as original.

Currently, only the last page of the affidavit and search warrant are signed by the judge. The prosecutor’s copy remains on their hard drive or is discarded, never reconciled with the detective’s returned search warrant.
The criteria for the search warrant or probable cause perhaps need two affiants to affirm the facts lessening the chance that two officers would tell the same lie under oath. Currently, it is an honor system of claims without proof aside from drug test results and one detective’s word.

If swat is not utilized for entry, the entry team should be cohesive, competent, skillful, and experienced. Assembly of random personnel should be avoided unless under extreme circumstances. The main reason for this is performance and tactical. An experienced entry team would never fire into a structure from outside under any circumstances or bottleneck the egress.

These are some of the main issues, revelations, and remedies concerning search warrants from probable cause to execution. Any earnest reform should address these issues if a serious undertaking of accountability is assumed. The Breonna Taylor case has many of these problems present, culminating in her death with any one element erased, she would still be alive. This is the lesson from Breonna Taylor’s incident that should not be ignored. Search warrant reform should evolve with law enforcement capabilities and criminal techniques.

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz

 

 

Dr. Frankenstein, I presume.

Whose monster is it?

We all remember how scary the story of the monster Frankenstein was with his weirdo look, limited motor skills, and infantile mentality. He produced mass fear and hysteria, particularly when he rampaged the villagers. But, let’s face it, his inability to understand and to decipher much resulted in his outbursts of anger and frustration, which made him more frightening.

There is no Frankenstein monster without there being a Dr. Frankenstein, the creator to construct the monster. The monster’s creator pieced together a composite of body parts, effectively building the physical monster devoid of humanistic traits. Although noble in his quest, Dr. Frankenstein knew not the ramifications of his proclamation “It is Alive,” 

When you piece together a person using body parts, physical inventory accounts for the physical parts needed. However, how do you account for the parts unseen without a physical component identifying their presence? Perhaps this is where Dr. Frankenstein went astray in his construction, the intrinsic qualities.

Due to extraordinary advances, you can now secure a better unit with all the physical characteristics desired by Dr. Frankenstein in his work. A starter kit, if you will, intrinsic qualities are still not included.

You must provide the fundamental moral qualities and training for your unit. Providing compassion, morality, and the like. However, your unit is highly observant and extremely impressionable, often mimicking your thoughts, attitudes, and behavior. Your unit comes in your image with striking similarities to yourself. Wonderful, what could possibly go wrong?

To set up your unit, there are no definitive instructions, just loose guidelines. This unit requires guidance to function properly. It is not a self-sufficient unit. It requires extensive setup for initial functionality, and from time to time, will exhibit a random selection of free will. The unit’s functionality increases as time pass to require less from you to function independently.

Wait, this mad scientist business is starting to get a little tedious. OK, but you still have a unit to maintain with expected sacrifices. Furthermore, the test is not only of your unit to receive instructions but you to instruct. So avoid saddling it with your unresolved burdens, always remembering the essence of what this unit becomes is guided by you.

  You can damage it from being a properly functioning demonstration by insufficient effort or weak commitment. You can refuse to make sacrifices for the benefit of your unit. Finally, you can ruin the unit’s future by your lack of discipline and resolve to nurture your unit.

You can instill outdated rules of conformity and acceptance of beliefs and actions long determined before the existence of your unit. The unit can be restricted by your past and learned tendencies. For your unit to function properly, use only your absolute best efforts. After all, you don’t want your unit to become a monster. It is not like you’re Dr. Frankenstein, right?

The intrinsic qualities are utterly necessary to the unit’s programming. Select the correct software for programming this unique unit. Your unit holds you in very high esteem with the ultimate trust submitting to your guidance, influence, and authority. Programming is the difference between producing a monster or a masterpiece. Your unit will most likely reflect your efforts, integrity, and character, otherwise termed programming.

As time passes, your unit will exercise its very own judgments, unique displays of expression, and intelligence. Its achievements become your pride to be credited or your shame to be blamed. Of course, there are random external factors at play, but your influence is the earliest and most constant. It is presumably disproportionately persuasive in the unit’s core construction and programming.

Now let us switch gears by keeping the same perspective but redefining the context to which we examine historically long-held practices or programming of questionable significance.

Imagine you are still the creator, but we redefine the unit as anyone you have authority over, responsibility for, or have accepted as dependent upon you. For example, someone significantly impacted by your decisions, like maybe your children. So, for the sake of argument, let us define the unit as your child.

The child enters this world with a clean slate totally dependent upon you for survival and guidance. The world the child enters is pre-determined by the circumstances and standards in which you live and provide. What that standard of living happens to be and the opportunities and expectations begin to influence the child’s programming from birth, even if inadvertently done.

Now you cannot underestimate the influence of geographical location of birth on cultural and philosophical systems of adherence, practice, and perspectives. Even within the same demographics, there is a vast difference of specific beliefs. Often those who share the same core beliefs differ among themselves on many things even within that belief.

Aside from the physical necessities required, you also have a responsibility to cultivate, not indoctrinate, your child. Rather incorporate within a child the analytical veracity to determine what is factual or conditioned belief.

It would be best if you gauge the suitability of the programming, knowing the origins, purpose, and current practical application of the knowledge. Recognizing the current relevance and value of the cultivation, not familiar irrelevant conditioning. The passing of time suggests that a conditioned response’s consistent application might be impractical now when not in the past.

 

 

 

 

 The very reason and purpose may have shifted over time, requiring a more current analysis with a current resolution, a sorely needed update. Reevaluating your perspectives should strengthen the teachings. This provides an audit to scrutinize them as impractical teaching or not.

Thus, unsaddled by past assumptions, the conveyance of knowledge is tested and accepted as factual free from past bias. Otherwise, your unit is unprepared for the present and future having outdated software.

The objective is life skills in preparation for the future, not an application for the past. Resistance to adaptation by conformity is a hidden cost of sorts. It maintains widely held assumption that often perpetuates and permeates society with an opposing purpose other than their stated intent. Therefore, it must present a clear benefit and comparable value supported by the frequency of its usefulness as a determining factor.

To further give a prime example of such a purpose, look at the trust and belief associated with the material’s content now presented as education. Which is more valuable, the stated purpose of knowledge or the intent of conditioning? Furthermore, within the quality of education, the frequency of its knowledgeable application throughout a lifetime impacts the pursuit of money and quality of life.

The benefits of incorporating currency, financial systems and business structures, abstract and analytical thinking, investments, and real estate could provide a comprehensive foundation of literacy and understanding for advancement throughout their life of how these systems actually work. Unfortunately, though critical to adult life, these topics seem relegated to insignificance compared to other topics presented as essential education that are not as useful in adult life.

That is where you, the mad scientist, come in to supplement and make sure that the knowledge of these things, which makes a massive difference in the trajectory of your child’s life and possibly generations after, is not left to randomness but are essential required learning. You do not have to know it. You have to make sure that they know it, the best-updated programming.

The presentation leads to consumption, which leads to the implementation. But, you must first plant the seed for it to grow. Education, curiosity, creativity, and personality must never be stifled and consistently encouraged in the child.

Please beware of the dismissive manner in which we discipline and discourage children. It profoundly influences their development, belief system, and ability to absorb a positive self-image. Avoid reckless negative reinforcements, don’t douse the fire of ambition, curiosity, accomplishment.

Your limits should not become your child’s limits, especially if they are generationally afflicted limitations. Yelling and demeaning children reinforce their acceptance of this behavior from someone else later in their life disguised as love.

Since they love you so dearly, they are conditioned to confuse it with acceptable behavior. It becomes familiar from someone else they so dearly love as just part of an expression of love. It creates a cycle of self-defamation of spirit encouraged by a loved and trusted source, you.

Why do they have to pay for conditions they had no hand in creating within you? Don’t let your inability to deal with your monster take away their chance not to become one.

Take no satisfaction in poisoning someone else because you were poisoned and healing has eluded you. Your unit can be your healing. Give them a chance, even if someone hindered your prospects, the child didn’t do it. Sort of ethical rules of engagement for a player to avoid soft innocent targets.

Set the standard and enforce it upon yourself, demanding accountability of yourself to refrain from projecting our deficiencies and lack of knowledge as examples for the child to believe and duplicate. Resist the refusal to accept change and initiate change because it is contrary to your conditioned reality. Where does the cycle end so an improved one can begin? Programmers use to say garbage in garbage out.

Without recognizing faulty programming in you that recycles in them, forms an extremely limited projection continuing the mistake of Dr. Frankenstien. Furthermore, it disregards the intrinsic value of new programming and information that benefits your child.

It might be too late for some of us, but not them. We need to pledge. I will endeavor to present the best demonstration and presentation of myself to be an example for those who would hold me in such esteem.

I further endeavor to offer encouragement to rise above my limitations and shortcomings. That their accomplishments will reflect their abilities and not my faults as a testament to my contribution. Otherwise, the villagers will let you know because they will metaphorically march on your castle with torches seeking the monster and its creator.

The full impact and understanding of the impressions we generate should not be recklessly transmitted messages of damaging programming. Instead, give the child a chance you did not have or declined to accept so that their life is not derailed or carry the regrets you have.

You are enough, even if you can only be an example of what not to do but celebrate their possibilities. The world does not need any more monsters or Dr. Frankensteins, I presume.

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating a Buzz

 

Grand Jury Proposal

The Totality of the Facts

The entire Breonna Taylor case from the beginning has been cloaked in secrecy with limited information disseminated. I believe that this has not been done by accident. While the Grand Jury proceedings have shed some light on the incidents of that night, it has also cast much doubt on the grand jury.

Unfortunately, full disclosure and complete access to the facts may never be obtained, but there should be a release of information that satisfies the many unanswered questions that exist. It should also cover questions about the grand jury process that manipulated the outcome.

You must ask the right questions for a correct answer to create transparency and shed the appropriate insight into the case. These questions and answers should then be presented to another Grand Jury in their entirety so that an unbiased informed decision can be made for possible charges and indictments, if any. Thus, following the trail of truth wherever it leads and whomever it implicates.

The Grand Jury proceedings by law are kept secret, as well as the identity of the Grand Jurors. These are the first two flaws of the proceedings, notwithstanding the constitutional traditions which permit manipulation of abuses and loopholes. The criteria of member selection can influence the decision by a predisposition of perspectives slanted toward a particular outcome affecting the decision maker’s interpretation of the evidence.

Members should maintain anonymity redacted from the public record and view, but member protocol needs adjusting under these exceptional circumstances. The criteria for member selection may very well be questionable when these exceptional circumstances arise. Maybe random selection, maybe not, but the point is there is no transparency conducive to understanding the process.

Secondly, if the person alleged in the proceedings is a public servant of public record acting in a public capacity, why are their proceedings private in contrast to their public service. It would stand to reason that secrecy is their right if operating privately but not in a public capacity. It is a determination relative to their public actions, not a private capacity occurrence.

It is a mixture of public and private concerns governed by strictly private rights as a citizen when the actions were not of a private citizen nature but a public employee. Standards for public employees distinguish acts committed as an employee or elected official as violations of public expectations. If the offense is public, should the determination not also be public to promote transparency and fairness?

Make the presentation of evidence public but not in its entirety, only satisfying the level of charges sought. Another alternative to protecting the integrity of the secrecy of the proceedings is to have opposing interests present or ensure that an impartial conveyance of the facts is conducted. The proceedings could then remain private but balanced in their presentation.

Whatever alteration must ensure the totality of the facts and possible charges be presented to avoid steering or to restrict the grand jury process. The saying goes, a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich meaning the outcome can be manipulated beyond reason, but the opposite is also true. It can be restricted beyond reason by the limitations of the information or charges submitted. This phase is where the abuses and loopholes exist.

It has the overwhelming potential to distort the purpose and outcome by tampering with the intent necessitating transparency. Nevertheless, transparency is required under these extraordinary circumstances of mistrust, and the skepticism created even sometimes among the members of the Grand Jury themselves. The demand for procedural disclosure has raised suspicions about the credibility of the process, evidence, and charges presented.

The Grand Jury is tasked with a no bill or true bill determination but can only consider the charges put before them. Meaning an indictment is either denied or upheld considering only the evidence and the suggested changes presented to them. They have no power to suggest charges or have any knowledgeable requirements of the nuances of the law.

They rely on the prosecutor’s presentation of the facts and the changes suggested. They cannot consider charges that have not been presented to them. Facts unknown to the Grand Jury, in essence, restrict their considerations to only the choices available to them. So, the facts not presented have probably more impact on the decision to indict or not than what is presented.

With that said, to avoid any impropriety and maintain impartiality, all evidence and witnesses should be presented to the Grand Jury. Then the culmination of that information made public or arbitrated as an Amicus Brief with only the names of the individuals redacted for their protection and anonymity if they are not public servants.

This will preserve the transparent disclosure of the facts and the value of the evidence presented without significantly impacting the integrity and procedures of the Grand Jury.

To highlight these procedural principles or lack of, altering a judicial determination while claiming impartiality in submitting the complete facts warranting no charges, consider their practical impact. With an understanding of the possible methods used, it becomes evident where and how undue influence and tacit persuasions can go undetected.

A city settlement had been reached in the Taylor case prior to the grand jury proceedings revealing some level of acceptance, if not an admission of guilt or liability. The settlement alone indicates that the city’s position was much more fragile and dubious than errant shots into an adjacent apartment which caused no bodily harm. To prevent the facts from being vigorously pursued, establishing uncontestable culpability, this is the first maneuver.

The settlement agreement has probably restricted some of the family’s rights to legally implement key principles such as duces tecum or discovery to reveal elements pertinent to the events of that night. Thus, surmising it would behoove the city to enter into a settlement before the legal wrangling began, only if it admitted no guilt, regulated disclosure, and restricted recourse.

The settlement would certainly restrict any recourse or some of the family’s further exercise of legal rights about the case. The optics and practicality appear peculiar, and the settlement obscured the State Attorney General’s obligation for full disclosure to address the family’s interest.

Public outrage was then the only recourse remaining for accountability considering the facts not presented to the grand jury. The outrage has subsided as they knew it would despite no full disclosure or honoring of legal request for evidence still not released a year later.

Furthermore, a settlement was not negotiated with the victims of the grand jury indicted action signifying undisputable criminal negligence against an innocent family in the adjacent dwelling. Conversely, the family of Breonna Taylor, where no indictment was returned in connection with her death, was given a settlement.

It seems strange that a so-called totally justifiable shooting would warrant a twelve-million-dollar settlement, and the victims of the unquestionable reckless endangerment would not result in settlement of any known dollar amount thus far.

That said, to further examine the events of that night, much more remains to be scrutinized using deductive reasoning of the evidence parameters not presented to the grand jury before they could reach a decision.

Presenting the evidence with the spectrum of charges applicable and letting the grand jury make a legal determination on what does or does not support an indictment would secure an objective assessment. After all, convening the grand jury to provide an objective assessment and factual determination was the objective.

To make an objective assessment, it cannot be a limited or subjective presentation of the facts. The totality of evidence to be fully presented and considered should include the search warrant process and probable cause, the execution of the search warrant and critical incident review, and all witness testimony or statements taken, including fellow officers.

In particular, the swat team personnel criticized the shots fired into the apartment, striking Taylor as an unconfirmed target and suppressive fire.

Further consideration must include a comprehensive review of all evidence, any incriminatory or exculpatory indiscretions of significance, and any revelations from subsequent investigations.

In addition, they must be reviewed for any impact on impartiality or transparency on Grand Jury revelations for any reasonable charges as a procedural matter. Thus, as a projection of consequences since material facts were misrepresented, which would have prevented obtaining a search warrant, all actions resulting are attributed to that lie.

Consequently, no search warrant would or should have been granted or sought. No search warrant, no murder since there was no legal right to be there. Since a lie leads to the critical incident, why would not the liar be held criminally accountable for every action the lie set in motion?

Similar to a getaway driver, planner, or lookout for a criminal act. This principle is applied to civilians universally, then why not the police, especially when a murder was the result. It was not presented to the grand jury, but the city fired him for it.

Undeniably, in addition to the State Attorney General (AG) or prosecutor suggesting charges, there needs to be an agreed-upon individual acting in the capacity of Amicus Curiae to assure an impartial and fair interpretation of the evidence presented and application of the law. That would ensure that all interests are equally represented fairly and objectively to satisfy any accusations of impropriety or coverup.

To ignore the impact of the crime committed by lying under oath as the affiant securing the search warrant, which resulted in the firing but not prosecution for the lie or murder, is reprehensible. Don’t look any further for a colossal abuse of the grand jury process by omitting facts and evidence. It was known at the time before the grand jury was seated.

The complete and thorough examination of the evidence should be of paramount interest to all parties for a just resolution. Therefore, when assessing actions of that night, any police action relying on pertinent information must be known before or at the time of the occurrence or incident in real-time, not after the fact. The lie was known.

Subsequent information ascertained by further investigation or implication only frames the structure for support or rebuttal by which the circumstances of that night can be evaluated.

It is not sufficient to cite traditional grand jury protocol protections when the AG has been exposed to have practiced deceit by commission and omission. Instead, the process must be presented and released for objective examination and understanding since exposing the previous secretive process as a farce and wholly inadequate.

The process cannot be suborned to conceal, deny, or mislead accountability for malfeasance or misfeasance. The integrity of the Grand Jury system must supersede and resist the impulses to disguise the guilt of law enforcement with equal enthusiasm as it applies to imposing it on others.

The purpose of an exhaustive probe is not to create doubt but to establish clarity and transparency of application and interpretation of the facts. There is a fiduciary duty to present the facts in their entirety. Total satisfaction for all is not realistic or attainable, but fairness, complete presentation, and honest determination should be.

Conceding that some partialities are not factually based and governed by the emotions of opposing beliefs, no matter the outcome, there will remain a contention of disputing opinions.

However, when proceedings are properly conducted in full consideration of the facts conveyed unbiasedly and transparently, a greater level of satisfaction is obtained whomever the outcome disappoints. The total and indisputable facts must be revealed and judged accordingly, letting blame fall where it may.

The Taylor case illustrated some methods of abuse when manipulating the system, but there are other methods involving circumvention by avoiding the process. Any homicide should be presented to the grand jury even if an arrest is not made.

This provides transparency and clearance of wrongdoing. The circumstances should be submitted as a matter of facts, not presentation, then the charges resulting from the actions can be determined fairly. The Ahmaud Aubrey case best illustrates the circumvention of the law by not submitting the facts to a grand jury.

Several refusals occurred before exposure of the facts necessitated multiple arrests and indictments for his murder. Federal charges were also brought. So how could there be several determinations that there was no crime unless it was to conceal the facts and the participant’s guilt?

The mere submission of the facts to a grand jury was the difference between injustice and justice. This cast doubt on the motive and judgment of the prosecutor and law enforcement, who initially refused to arrest or indict, remiss in honoring the facts. The errant determination rested in their hands, resulting in a coverup.

This is a common occurrence to pretend no law was broken and no crime was committed. Thus, the appearance of impartiality masqueraded as a thorough investigation while biasedly corrupted. It amounts to a dereliction of duty exceeding bad judgment and should be examined for any criminality.

If these decisions are unduly influenced, that would be a crime. However, if this crime was in furtherance of concealment of another’s crime, they should share their fate since they decided to share their concealment.

To not present the case to the grand jury at the minimum is either law enforcement misconduct or prosecutorial misconduct, if not both. An expanded system of review or panel of review would remedy these biases of judgment and injustice.

It should also trigger a personnel review when the misjudgment is this blatant. If criminal intent is not proven, it most certainly sustains disciplinary actions. The system must have deterrents and enforcement of violations to assure its integrity.

Those entrusted to uphold the integrity and intent of the law violate this by deceptive means or concealment of material facts. In that case, they should be exposed and judged harshly, perhaps by having their facts presented to a grand jury.

These grand jury proposals will address some abuses, loopholes, and circumventions to no longer be allowed to be exploited under the pretense of justice. Corrupting the process is corrupting justice and promoting violations. Grand jury reform for public employees should reflect their capacity as a servant to the public, not a private citizen. Furthermore, automatic grand jury review of instances similar to the Aubrey case has to be mandatory. 

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz