G.A.I.T. General Track Features: Aggregate Substrates

I'm not particularly fond of the acronym, but it's what we've got, and it's just cheesy enough to be memorable. Use this list to study tracks during practice and recognize the features until they become natural for you to spot. Obviously do not to bring it as a reference to a real tracking situation.



Guild of Advanced Interpretive Trackers (G.A.I.T.)
General Track Features: Aggregate Substrates (Revised)

After Concentric Line, look for: CCC BAT BLIGHT BRAT when Tracking through detritus and other matter.

• C = COHESION (when blades of grass (especially damp ones) stick together by water molecules and compression)


• C = CREASE (A dedicated fold in a leaf, stem, or other matter)


• C = COMPRESSION (overall or general pressure in shape of foot (or other object) in substrate and detritus)



• B = BREAK (typically found in dry material, a break caused by compression)

• A = ABRASION (friction that causes damage to matter, most common between stones or other matter against stone.)

• T = TEAR (can be in any material, but caused by opposing frictional forces or rooted matter getting caught in a shoe and pulled apart)


• B = BEND (a non-dedicated fold (less than a crease) in a leaf, stem, or other plant part, or a leaf (such as grass) bent away from the node)

• L = LOFT (the relative way the substrate depresses (negative loft), lifts, springs back, or “fluffs” after recoil or pivot)

• I = IMPRESSION (like a compression, but an indentation found in a plant stem or leaf caused by something like a stone in the substrate or shoe tread after compression)

• G = GLAZING (when drops of dew, rain, or blood, etc. are smeared upon a surface such as a leaf)

• H = HAZE (dust or discoloration caused upon a plant leaf by pressure or friction (not damage, as in an Abrasion))

• T = TRANSFER (substrate or matter moved from one place to another by adhering to shoe)


• B = BIAS (directionality indicated by the bending of matter from its normal state caused by compression)

• R = RANK (an alignment of plant parts or blades of grass so that the flat sides face the same direction showing dulling or shine)

• A = ADHESION (the substrate particulates that stick to the bottom of matter following compression)

• T = TWIST (leaf attached basally to stem twisted from its natural position against stem)

Tracking III: Movement Indicators

Movement Indicators

Anyone who has been the least bit interested in Tracking, and has looked into the science and art as presented by Tom Brown Jr., has heard of Pressure Releases. I started trying to figure these mystical Pressure Releases (more commonly known as PRs in the tracking-circle) since I was a kid. I am now in my twenty-fifth year of working on this puzzle. I started learning from the books by Tom, which presented the concept without too much detail. Mostly, as I struggled to understand what exactly he was seeing in a mere footprint that could tell him vast and detailed stories of the subject and the environment surrounding the subject, I was going by faith. I only attended the Tracker School, Inc., in New Jersey when I was in my early twenties. By that time, I had become extremely proficient in the survival skills (I had already done a primitive year in the woods in New Hampshire), and I was becoming increasingly aware of the workings of the PRs. In fact, by the time I began taking the classes at the school, I was using them more as a system of validation than a resource for information, particularly for anything that was already covered in the books. I took the basic information and concepts from the books, and I ran with it, and I began to see things that weren’t in the texts, which started me on this path of exhausting, infuriating, research and development with no way to find any validation except to find proof in the tracks.

Though the Tracker School takes the student to a certain degree of Tracking knowledge, there seems to be a cut-off point for the information. Not only have I tried to speak to Tom personally in the workshops, to no avail, but I’ve actually mailed and emailed drawings and my own definitions of these things that I’ve found in the tracks that seem to be consistent with particular conditions and circumstances. Regardless of whether I was “right” or “wrong” in the school’s eyes, I never heard anything back, except from one former instructor who confirmed one of the prs that I found, but admitted that the pr information seemed to be locked up pretty tightly at the school otherwise, and he had no other information available.

Therefore, since I have attempted to make contact several times, to no avail, I could only continue to work on this study of Tracking by creating my own version of maps, concepts, definitions, and names for my discoveries. By no means am I the creator or inventor of these things in Tracking, whether you call them Pressure Releases or Movement Indicators. In fact, the Pressure Releases number in the thousands in presentation, and they were established by Apache Trackers (on our continent, anyway) over generations. I am attempting to put together whatever I can in a few decades, and I’m not sure I’ll come close to thousands. I do, however, have a good handful, and I’ve established what I feel is a pretty solid foundation for my interpretations. I have attempted to give different names to everything from what the Tracker School uses so as not to be claiming anything that I didn’t actually earn. I admit out front and off the bat that I learned the basic PRs that are found in Tom Brown Jr.’s book: The Science and Art of Tracking, from Tom Brown Jr. However, as far as Tracking goes, all other information regarding Fine-motor and Visceral Movement Indicators, as well as the mapping of zones of the body, are by my own research into other concentrations, such as kinesiology and gait analysis, as well as—and for the most part—practical and empirical investigation, or, good old trial and error. Nobody stood over my shoulder, and nobody gave me any information regarding the intricacies, details, or advanced principles of Tracking. The advanced concepts are my own work. Further, because of this, I’m going to take out some of the advanced details and descriptions I had in this writing for a couple of reasons.

1. It has taken a lot of time and effort (and ridicule and heckling) to develop what I’ve accomplished so far. I figure that if someone else is out there teaching it to the military and police, and making millions of dollars on the information, I’d rather keep the details to myself and a very close few.

2. If you are truly passionate about it, then you can either figure it out like I’ve been doing, or you can make a decent donation toward helping my family live in this god-forsaken system and toward helping me establish my Communal Village. I’ve already given lots of information out to many people for free, and it hasn’t helped my family avoid discrimination and persecution, so I guess I’m done with that, sorry.

3. Yeah, the military and police thing? I’m not into giving even more power of information to the very entity that forces me and my family to compromise our beliefs, integrity, and health (you’ll know exactly what I mean if you read the other articles in the blog). So I’m not about to make myself a hypocrite and give this stuff out for the government to abuse. Look at what they did with Einstein’s work.

So, why am I writing this, then? Because I’ve been teaching and talking about this stuff for decades, and I’ve developed some really good concepts and practices (including Clock-Tracking and the Golden Ratio Height formula), and I figure that even if I don’t so much care about making millions for selling the information, I still would like it to be known that I did this. Even if it’s just that my grandchildren find my buried and tattered writings one day in the future, I want them to know that I was one of the forerunners in putting together this information about Tracking while most people thought Tracking was little more than identifying and following footprints. I’m putting it out because there are so many would-be Trackers out there who claim they can see things (“head-turns” is a really common one) regularly in the tracks, yet they’re asking what these more intricate and delicate indicators are. This tells me that something doesn’t jive. Reading “head-turns” accurately and consistently is not as easy as folks would like to believe it is if you don’t know what to look for. And if you only practice what’s in the books, you don’t really know yet what to look for. But that’s okay; just don’t get cocky.

This article was meant to go into Wikipedia, so it’s somewhat clinical, I suppose. If it makes it, cool. But since I am the only resource for the majority of the information here, there’s nothing to cite, and I don’t have the funding or the connections to gain any “official research date from an accredited agency” or any garbage like that, so I don’t believe it will hold up on Wikipedia. It is what it is. If you don’t buy it, it won’t hurt my feelings.

Movement Indicators—a term coined by Jeff Rychwa, for use in Tracking, to describe the responses and reactions of any substrate or surface to the influence of an applied force, typically associated with the force of a subject’s foot upon a surface. A movement indicator, or MI, is the simple result of physical force—in this application, a force of kinesiology, various gait patterns, and physiological affects—applied to a surface or substrate so that the reaction of the applied movement is recorded in a meaningful, legible way.

There seem to be three categories of MIs: Gross Motor, Fine Motor, and Visceral. As well, there seem to be three zonings or “maps” that generally coordinate these movements and influences with particular regions aligning with the body of the maker of the tracks. For example, a gross-motor movement of the right leg being placed forward of the horizontal centerline of the left foot will display movement indicators within the ball-mount and digital areas of the left foot track. However, general indicators of issues regarding the right leg, such as a muscle injury, will present within the heel area of the right foot track. Further, a movement or injury on one side of the body will show counter- or compensatory-indicators either on the opposite side of the coordinating track, or even in the opposite track altogether. This is particularly prominent with issues or injuries compromising leg functions.

Gross-motor and Fine-motor MIs seem to present as “hard” influences upon the substrate, while Visceral MIs seem to present as “soft” influences. In other words, the action of propulsion in a substrate such as dampened beach sand will cause a recoil in the substrate, which can be seen as a portion of sand being pushed backward due to wasted energy in overcoming inertia that breaks the substrate’s coefficient of static friction. The amount of substrate and the degree to which it is dislodged and moved is directly proportional to the amount of energy is used to overcome inertia and the friction in order to propel the body in a particular direction. Other elements must be considered, as well, such as the content of the substrate regarding moisture and other impurities such as rocks and foreign objects. Further, slope of the substrate and other topographical conditions must be accounted in determining the proportion of recoil to acceleration in any given track.

It seems that animals, particularly quadrupeds, move in a way that eliminates recoil, or severely hampers recoil, as they move their center of gravity in a more efficient and unified way than humans, who contrarily move in a series of stalls and starts, dropping the center of gravity into a deceleration, only to throw the body forward and push off again into an acceleration. Recoil is common in human gaits, and it seems to testify to the inefficiency of human movement as a condition of our species moving away from it natural tendencies.

Visceral MIs are the most erratic, difficult to see, and difficult to interpret of the Movement Indicators. The Viscerals are also the most difficult to convince an increasingly untrusting and skeptical society of their existence. Even in reading Viscerals and pointing them out to individuals, many subjects are loathed to accept their validity, similar to the way society has taken on difficulty in accepting many relatively far-fetched truths when introduced, such as the Earth being round, or the existence of germs, bacteria, and even atoms.

Viscerals appear to be created of energy influences primarily. Gross-motor MIs are large, physical movements of leverage and torque, whereas Fine-motor MIs are more subtle, dealing with seemingly isolated musculoskeletal and skin movements, while Viscerals are caused by fluctuation of energy, perhaps even blood circulations and otherwise invisible shifts of fascia, ligaments, and muscle fibers. However, the influences of energy seem to be logical as energy flowing throughout the body does cause things to function and malfunction; simply look at twitching muscles, the heart beating, and even random pains and itches. These are all directly related to neural transmissions by way of electrical and chemical impulses. Another grossly simplistic model of such energy transfer is found in creating static electricity by running a plastic comb through dry, clean hair several times, then holding the comb within a half-inch of a smoothly flowing trickle of water from a sink faucet. The electricity will bend the stream of water. It seems to follow that energy will directly translate from the body to the substrate with which it makes contact, leaving various patterns upon the substrate, thus indicating particular conditions within coordinating zones of the body. This part of reading the Movement Indicators in Tracking is closely related to Reflexology and other studies of energy flow and manipulation from around the world.

An example of a Gross-motor MI would be the recoil of acceleration upon the sole of the track, in the form of the substrate being pushed backward for a forward acceleration. An example of a Fine-motor MI would be the feathering of the substrate (particularly damp sand), caused by skin movement in response to the torque of the upper body and head twisting in a particular direction. An example of a Visceral MI would present as a rectangle or “boomerang” shape in the sole of the track within the zone of the bladder area indicating the bladder being full to some degree.

To make things more complicated, since the body functions as a closed system of checks and balances, there will thusly be MI that must present in order to back-up other MIs in any particular movement. The numbers of back-up indicators for any particular movement or condition would logically be staggering, depending upon the depth and size of indicators one would choose to incorporate into a reading for increasing detail and accuracy of the reading of the tracks. This is where the task of attempting to recognize, define, and coordinate all of these MIs--particularly considering that compensatory MIs can cause confusion in and of themselves—becomes intimidating at times, and daunting at best.

Composition of Visceral MIs can be of extremely fine particles of sand or dust. However, even a basic shape can show up in a particular zone as a dust-line shape, a crevasse shape, a butte, or a depression. These subtleties lend a great deal of confusion to the process, let alone finding coordinating MIs to pinpoint a particular, coordinating condition or action. Fortunately, as the body is systemic and stems from the nervous system for function, Jeff speculates that tying together MIs in order to develop more accurate and detailed readings will be much “easier” based upon the logic of synergy rather than trying to read each MI as its own entity.

It is worth mentioning Identifiers here, as well. Identifiers present in the tracks in the same way that MIs do, except Identifiers seem to appear consistently in a particular track (always in the right footprint, for instance) and for a particular subject, no matter what action the subject performs. In other words, Identifiers look similar [to Jeff] as typical MIs, but they don’t have function. Identifiers can be created by a blatant injury or anomaly, such as a wound to the sole of the foot, or a wart, for example, or by a particular deformity, anomaly, irregularity, or other condition or pathology particular to an individual. There seem to be several Identifiers in any given track, and, since they are consistent and “fixed” to the track of that subject, the combination of them may be used as a reliable method of identification for an individual that may not be found in any other individual of that species, much like a human fingerprint.

Tracking II

Tracking was used by ancient cultures around the world for thousands of years for many purposes. In some cases, it meant survival for a tribe whose scouts could find and interpret the tracks and movements of the enemy. But tracking was primarily a skill used for finding, following, and taking game. Tracking was so necessary for survival that it stretched far beyond the common concepts of tracking that we believe today. It developed into an art-form of sorts and a science, and ancient trackers essentially were the first forensic investigators. Their abilities were not limited to following footprints, but also included reading the landscape, interpreting signs, weather, and other animal activity. Tracking was a gateway to a holistic awareness that was crucial for survival.

Now, as a wildlife control operator, tracking was a staple of my work, as well as a key to being successful and efficient. As an Expert Tracker, there isn't the luxury--and, frankly, nor is there a necessity--of laying out tracking powder; there is no putting paper into suspect structural holes in order to assess usage; there is no wondering where to put an evictor or where to place a trap. It’s all in the tracks, and the tracks never lie.

I talked with another pest control company one afternoon about trapping large mammals—my shirt logo, which reads, “Forensic Tracker” prompted his asking for an explanation. I explained that there are several levels and methods of tracking, and that Forensic Tracking involved studying and interpreting subtle actions within the tracks. I said that tracks reveal much more about the maker than its taxonomical Family and direction of movement. Tracks told a story, and also indicate crucial elements about the maker, especially regarding our line of work. I asked him about his process of identifying and trapping a nuisance animal. He shrugged and said that he just goes to the site, if the client says they have a skunk, he simply sets some traps with skunk bait and keeps trapping until the skunks are gone.

I was baffled. I said, “but what if you’re trapping a skunk that has babies in the den?” He responded, “well you just have to take into account the time of year and assume there will be babies.”

I suppose at least that is the safe way to assume. But I don’t see that as particularly efficient. I went on to explain that my inspection consists of isolating signs and tracks of the animal involved, but also what other animals may be involved, and what draws them there in the first place. Further, if you’re trapping skunks, for example, it’s useful to know whether you’re catching the skunk from under the house or the skunk from under the neighbor’s shed, not to mention that there are often other animals sharing that space with the skunks, such as cats and opossums. If you funnel the traps off the entrance, how do you know how many to set? How do you know the client didn’t mistake the identity of the animal? (I had a call for an opossum in someone’s bathroom one night. It turned out to be a long-tailed weasel.) And in Search Tracking, for a missing dog for example, how do you maintain that dog’s trail if they’re in coyote territory with coyote-sized feet? It’s all in the tracks.

He didn’t believe me when I told him that it is possible to read pregnancy, gender, and even ailments in an animal’s track. That’s okay, though. I’m not the one wasting time with superfluous trips to check and alter my trap-sets.

Granted, I don’t always make my catch on the first rotation. I’m not a “Master Tracker.” But I can read tracks to the point that I can make more cost effective decisions and take appropriate actions. I was called to investigate skunk activity around a wheelchair access ramp on the front of an apartment building. The landlord said that the tenants had seen several skunks walking around the yard and that the animals were living under the ramp. The ramp was snugged tightly to the building on one long side, and it was flush to the ground on the other side, except for the place that the skunks dug out for entry. Now, according to biology, it didn’t make sense at this time of year for a bunch of juvenile skunks to be walking around with mom. The tenants described the skunks as, “about six inches long” from nose to butt. It didn’t follow. But weirder things have happened.

I found two sets of tracks on that day. Two different skunks had made the tracks. One set went under the ramp. That set showed me that my culprit skunk had given birth. And it was because of that indication that I had the landlord’s carpenter help me tear up the ramp the morning after I trapped mom. And I pulled out five newborns. (You can see a blurry shot of them on my website, in fact.) Mom and babies were reunited and relocated to a rehab together. This isn’t an isolated incident.

All of my technicians must learn tracking. They must be able to identify tracks, gaits, and signs, and they must be able to see tracks on a variety of surfaces from leaves to dirt to plastic and concrete, whether raccoon, mouse, or snake. It’s not easy. But it works.

Tracks display Identifiers, which are marks made within the tracks that are specific, particularly in combination, to a particular maker. There are also Movement Indicators, which show everything about the maker of the tracks and how the subject responded to their surrounding stimuli. The MIs display Gross Motor movements, Fine Motor movements, and Internal fluctuations. These MIs can be anything from a mound of substrate shoved in a particular direction to a fine ridge of dust on the floor of the footprint. There can be many forms and shapes of these indicators that typically take on associative names, such as: hockey-stick, pirate’s-hat, or chains, and they represent transfers of energy and kinesiology. In other words, indicators can be constructs of simple, physical mechanics of leverage, or they can be made of energy that moves throughout the body. If you’ve ever built up static electricity by rubbing a balloon on your hair and sticking it to a wall, or by combing your hair with a plastic comb and holding the comb near a very slow, steady stream of tap-water, you can see a dramatic example of how this energy works.

These MIs are very difficult to discern without a guide. And they change shape, position, and texture, because the body is a malleable organism. Just when you think you’ve finally pinned one down for a particular, coordinating action, it will change or vanish altogether and make hours of hard work turn into a frustrating disappointment. But they are there. And when someone shows you what to look for, they become easier to see. However, for me, even after twenty-five years of trying to figure out the art and science of tracking, I have not been able to put together complete combinations of MIs for all situations. I get by so far on being able to pick out key MIs and extrapolating by using other clues, for now. There’s just too much to figure out for one person in one lifetime, but it doesn’t mean I’m not trying.

Tracking & Movement Indicators

In order to be a well-rounded and effective Tracker, I don't believe in studying only the Movement Indicators. (Some circles call them "Pressure Releases" based upon the teachings of Tom Brown Jr., but since I didn't learn these from him, and since I'm developing a list of functional indicators, I will only refer to them as Movement Indicators or MIs, so as not to infringe or plagiarize.) That wouldn't be realistic because Tracking is not restricted to one perspective or paradigm.

Personally, I study things like:

Landscape (Glacial impact, topography, etc.)
Water flow
Flora
Fauna
Ecology
Forest age and composition
Sunlight
Wind
Weather
Substrate conditions, structure, and make-up
Travel routes
Draws
Concentric lines
Bird activity
Human activity (roadways, distant smells, sounds)
Skeletal structure
Animal biology
Foot Morphology
Clinical Gait Analysis/Kinesiology
Natural, Physiological Gait Analysis
Stride, Straddle, Pitch, Trail Width
Dust & Grit Impressions
Fingerprints

Signs:
Rubs
Chews (and dental morphology)
Scratches
Smudges
Scrapes
Scat and Urine (smells, composition, make-up)
Hairs from different parts of the body
Blood spatter
Kill Procedure
Feather Morphology
Decomposition and associated Entomology
Burns (bark, bones--whatever)
Litter
Breaks, bends, tears, creases
Basic Mycology
Nutrient Impact on soils, invertebrates, flora, and up the chain
Pollutant Impact
Tracks
Movement Indicators

It's all Tracking. There is no "right" or "wrong" method; there is no one better way than another. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a matter of how much information you want from the scene and surroundings.

I just happen to be extremely passionate about the movement indicator element because it gives me more accurate detail on a deeper level of knowing the maker of the tracks.

Again, I wouldn't waste my time if it was invalid or useless. It's part of my job.

Identifiers are like tags or fingerprints that are specific in their combinations to a particular maker, and they present consistently no matter what the maker may do to try to camouflage them. Identifiers are important when tracking a specific subject, such as a missing person, or, more commonly in my experience, a missing- or “nuisance-“animal. At this point, aside from developing an ability to establish identifiers in tracks, I have been able to identify movement indicators representative of these functions (barring general locomotion):

• Full/Empty Bladder
• Full/Empty Colon
• Knee injury/ailment
• Back injury/ailment
• Male/Female indicators
• Menses
• Carrying objects over five pounds (in either hand, both hands, or on back)
• Arm movements (major positions)
• Head Turning, lifting, lowering
• Internal shifts and disturbances in several areas:
o Stomach/abdomen
o Sinuses
o Lungs/Diaphragm

I’ve noticed that there are at least two major “maps” of zones for discerning the gross motor, fine motor, and internal indicators, and much of them overlap. As well, many of the gross motor indicators present in the opposite places that they occur, making reading tricky at times. There is much research to do, as I am working alone to develop a system based upon methods supposedly established by generations of native trackers.

I’m also confident that the indicators I am discovering are useful to identify internal ailments on at least an elementary level for use in Chiropractic treatments, for example.

It's relatively easy to see the gross motor mi's (recoil, overthrusts, sweeps, etc.) and to practice getting to know how they work. That's the beginning. As you become proficient in one medium, take it to another and become proficient there. Even in one medium you will not see the exact same overthrust every time you do a specific turn, but there are reasons for that that simply have to do with the body not being a robotic machine. You will, however see the same overthrust for that turn every single time.

If you want to figure out the fine motor mi's, start with something "simple." Walk through your box. Then walk through your box carrying a ten-pound object. You'll see a difference, but you won't know why. Then you'll look closer and after a while you'll think you found it. Then when you do it again, it will be different. Now do this hundreds of times. Eventually, you'll figure it out. This is what I've done. Nobody stood over my shoulder or gave me documentation on this stuff.

But this neither precludes nor excludes any other element of Tracking. Study EVERYTHING, and find your own comfort level. The point is to find your place in the progression of elements where you feel satiated with your Tracking. The cool thing is that the progression is limitless.

"Money" revisited

Money equals life. It equals the food we can eat. It equals the space we are allowed to occupy. It equals the clothing we wear. It equals the comforts of homes.

Even if you plant a garden, you must have a place to do so, which costs money, and you must have access to water, seeds, and even tools and equipment, such as a plow and fencing, in order to properly maintain the plot and make the most efficient and cost-effective return for your efforts. But no matter what, living, in modern society, costs money. There is no true freedom anymore, because society has a grip on all we need to survive, and in order to obtain those essentials, we must be part of a system of economics.

Money equals happiness. Money buys nice things, good clothing, entertainment, healthier foods, more efficient vehicles and more land. Money is also equal to the obtainable types of depravity in modern society in all forms of contraband. Money equals generosity in the form of donations to a charity, while it also measures sycophantic behavior in the amount given to celebrities, whether they are actors, singers, or sports stars.

We will readily spend billions of dollars on politics, religions, wars and entertainment--as well as other depravities—yet we still have masses of poverty-stricken families in the economic society. Even destitute people will find ways to come up with money to support their addictions and cravings.

Money equals freedom; it is restitution for some crimes committed, and it is a cost of bail, as well as the potential for legal defense in the attorneys we can purchase.

Money is the god of our society, for it rules all life, health, and happiness in the majority of our culture and species.

There are few who understand that true happiness is not found in the provisions of money, but realistically, these people must know that not partaking in the economic system means having no access to the necessities of survival. Having more money means having a better life.

We give money readily to the celebrities, and that means they deserve a better life than we do if we are not celebrities. People who sing songs, throw balls, and play-act are better than we are. People born into affluent families are better than the rest of us, and they deserve a better existence than we do. Most of our society says that this is not true, but we know that it really is, otherwise we would have to face the fact that we really do worship materialism, instant gratification, and depravity.

Those with more money are allowed to own more land. They have no idea of how to be Caretakers for the land, but those of us who do know are typically not interested in contributing to the system of economics. We know that money corrupts, and it supports materialism and destruction.

The modern system of economics supports technology, which is the foundation of artificial existence. Artificial things—things made by humans and that are not found in the natural world—make up the fantasy world in which most humans exist. In order to maintain this dream-world illusion, money must move throughout the system. By supporting this paradigm, we support the overpopulation of humans (which is a provable fact that propagandist, disinformationists in denial will try to justify, but can easily be disproved), the over-extraction of natural resources, the spreading of diseases to all species worldwide, the pollution of the air and waters, the destruction of established forest ecosystems, and so forth. It is a fact that participating in the economic system supports destruction of nature and life.

Money only equals life in the artificial world.

Money also equals a new kind of economic Darwinism or Natural Selection called Eugenics. Eugenics means that in spite of one’s inferior genetic traits, such as lack of fur, poor eyesight or hearing, lack of the proper, biological “tools” to survive and propagate in the natural world, one can still not only survive, but thrive in the artificial world. In fact, the artificial world bolsters genetic deficiencies and anomalies. No matter what the physical condition of a being, if that being gains money by being corrupt, depraved, throwing a ball, or having a nice voice, or being conditionally “attractive,” that being is entitled by economic status to have a better existence than anyone with less money. That being is entitled by the standards of the artificial world to pay less to live, yet to leave a larger impact of damage upon the environment that we all need to survive. And by contributing to this system, no matter what one’s income status is, we support eugenics.

Eugenics means that if I have more money, I get privileges that even your sick child does not get. The rich have health insurance or at least enough money to pay out-of-pocket. The wealthy have better schools. And since money equals life, power, happiness, and health, if I have more to spend, then I can buy more favor than other people can. It means I get preferential treatment. It means that I get organic food and solar power and more land than you do, in spite of your knowledge, spirit, or genetic superiority. If I live in a poor community, then even the foods and resources available to me are going to be limited and governed by money. Just by my place in society, I may have access only to inferior necessities than others do, who have more money to live in more prosperous areas. I always thought that a body of water, such as a lake, would be accessible by natural right to anyone for swimming and fishing. However, humans “purchase” and “own” lakeshore property, and they have “no trespassing” signs and boundaries that prohibit others from accessing the majority of these bodies of water save for miniscule public landings. Having more money means one can afford to be in denial, and one can afford to think only of one’s own welfare because they have tricked the rest of us into giving them more than we have.

We are not allowed to not participate in this system. We must pay for all of our needs. That means that if we want to live, we must pay money to live. That is an abomination. That means that our people have determined that money is god, and that this idol rules over all inherent freedom and rights. I cannot leave this system because it is now impossible to survive anywhere without being charged for a place where the land is viable enough to live freely, and where there are no ill-effects of the detrimental impacts of our sick society. Even now our society is actually developing new ways to alter the amount of sunlight to hit the Earth, as well as to change weather patterns.

What if some of us do not wish to contribute to this system? What if we do not want any part of living in the artificial world of greed and idolatry? What if we do not wish to have the weather tampered, or the waters polluted, or the land paved? Where do WE go while the rest of the humans destroy this place? I ask again: To whom do we take our grievance if the highest authority is the source of the destruction and depravity?

Of Secession, Warriors, and the Elusive Truth

In my writings on this blog, it is easy to see that I strive to adhere to natural law above all manmade law, and that if we, as a species, wish to survive and insure a healthy future for our progeny, we must abandon our fantasy-land existence and overcome our fears of mortality and our desires for power and luxury.

My purpose is to provide information based upon Universal Truths so that we may all find our true selves and our true place and purpose; so that we may learn to temper our spirits and become reasonable by existing from a neutral center based upon the reality of the natural world instead of as defined by artificial parameters of a manmade world; so that we can stop the devastation that we cause upon the Earth to the environment and to other species; and to preserve the well-being of ALL forms of life, and not just our own.

In order to accomplish these things, we must all embrace the Truth—the same Truth about which Mahatma Gandhi, Jesus Christ, and Buddha spoke—that creation is reality, and that manmade ethics and materialism are distractions and depravities that will taint our spirits and cause degradation of our species to the point that we become a cancer that consumes the lands and eliminates itself. Unfortunately, most people of the modern world are in denial of the state of existence we occupy: living in a dream-world and losing our connection to the reality of nature.

I seek emancipation in order to shed the perversions of modern existence and to move away from the corruption of economics and manmade-biased justice, but I’m not sure I see the efficacy of appealing to a dishonorable culture of terrorism with honor and passivism. Further, a true Warrior does not immediately resort to violence in order to enforce a point or justice. Instead, a true Warrior seeks balance through peaceful, but not pacifist means. In other words, following the essence of Aikido, for example, a true Warrior did not seek conflict or control through strength, power, or clout—that would make a person nothing more than a bully or terrorist. A true Warrior also did not sit idle and wait for the Universe to solve all of the problems created by Man—as some modern folks suggest is the right thing to do. I submit that this attitude provides us indemnity from accountability and responsibility for cleaning up our messes and helping ourselves. “God doesn’t help those who don’t help themselves,” correct? As well, that mindset of letting the Universe handle our problems reminds me of the anecdote of the man who sat on his roof in a flood praying to God to help him. [When a floating log came by with people hanging off of it, and they offered him help, the man said, “No; thank you. God will save me.” As the waters rose, a man in a row-boat came along and offered help. The man on the roof said, “No; thank you. God will save me.” And he continued to pray. Then, as the waters rose closer to the peak of the roof where the man now perched upon his chimney, a helicopter hovered above him and dropped a ladder. The man shouted, “No; thank you. God will save me.” And the man finally drowned. He approached God and complained, “Lord, I was faithful to you, and I prayed for your help. Why did you let me die?” And God said, “Pffft! Whadd’ya want? I sent a log, a boat, and a helicopter!”]

My point then is that in order to obtain peace, one must be willing to embrace what may be inevitable conflict and seek a productive resolution. In other words, if I am attacked, I will not simply sit idly while you beat me, because that is not a viable resolution to the conflict. Instead, I will embrace your attack and seek resolution that benefits us all. A Warrior understands this. A Warrior understands that his actions cannot be based upon his interpretations or biased concepts of Truth and Justice, but that they must come from a Universal Truth in order to be righteous and just.

The concept of “turning the other cheek” is part of being a true Warrior, but it does not mean to let oneself be abused. This pseudo-enlightened mindset of pacifism is not realistic, and it has been proven over and over throughout history that it is also ineffective against a corrupted entity. Jesus was assassinated. Gandhi was assassinated. And so have many other martyrs been killed in the name of peace. But modern society is still overwhelmingly selfish, greedy, depraved, twisted, and destructive to Creation, as well as defiant toward natural laws. No, the enlightened Warrior does not sit, because if you sit still, you will be destroyed by that thing you oppose. The Warrior is realistic, and there is more than one way to stand-up for oneself without resorting to violence. But if violent acts are made upon the Warrior, then the Warrior is prepared to redirect those actions into a viable resolution.

Sovereignty is an inherent right, because no being should be ruled by another. So utilizing the legal system (which means supporting the legal system that is not real and is the way of the oppressor in the first place) to fight the system in order to gain the sanction of the system for an inherent right seems wholly illogical. If you need to defer to a power in residence to allow you your freedom, doesn’t that mean that you are still ultimately ruled by that power?

Since the U.S. makes the laws, the U.S. can change, interpret, and bend the laws in order to win and gain what they want. This is not a new concept. You can sue the U.S. all you want, but you can’t win if they don’t want you to.

I absolutely understand seeking sovereignty in light of the situations that others, such as the Lakotah, for example, face in their society. Poverty, disease, abuses of many forms, loss of culture—I get that. If for no other reason, then I at least honor their efforts to seek restitution and justice for the horrific conditions set upon them by the deceit and terrorism brought by the United States. I wish them all the luck and power for their effort. But I am not so “fortunate” to be part of a nation within a nation. I was born into the modern, Western culture. Regardless of the base of my ancestors, I was born here, on this soil, and I am native. And at birth my inherent freedoms were stripped, just like yours. I understand the Truth of the Universe and natural law, and I do not wish to contribute to the modern system of economics, eugenics, materialism, power, and destruction of our Earth. I face a different kind of discrimination and persecution from what others face, as I am expected to mind my place because of my birth, not in spite of it, and I am the outcast in a society of people who do not understand what reality is anymore. I have lived in the natural world by using the old ways, and I have a connection to nature that most modern people do not understand anymore. I want my inherent freedoms back, but I cannot even begin to be heard, let alone to bring my case to any forum that understands Truth. Where does one go for justice when the highest power doesn’t even see Truth?

I am tired of being pushed into despicable conditions of living, abuse from schools and those in positions of power, and being backed into a proverbial corner. It is not uncommon to be ridiculed and insulted by others when discussing Truth, even though Total Prosperity is a concept that works in favor of all life in the natural world. I’ve even been told that all of the information I have gathered from uncountable resources over the past twenty-five-or-so years is completely made up of “misinformation and disinformation,” while all the information that everyone else has researched is apparently absolute fact!

I speak on behalf of Nature. After having lived primitively in the natural world, I have gathered knowledge of Truth, and the information in my writings is, and has been, proven. Therefore, I will persevere and attempt to bring Truth to all people, because it is only through natural law and a unified consciousness of reality that we can hope to preserve the welfare and Total Prosperity of all beings.

I wish there was a way for people to band together and reclaim our birthrights, to reinstitute the Caretaker ways of aboriginal people worldwide in order to begin a model of bringing back health, vitality, and balance to the Earth, as well.

I have to believe that there are many others in my situation who wish to live a non-destructive lifestyle out of the grasp of any modern government, as well as to make efforts to stop the pollutions and destructions that compromise all other life and the potential for us to reclaim our inherent freedom to live upon the wild lands without facing the harms brought about by those pollutions and destruction. I would really love to bring everyone together to move toward the change that needs to come, not with violence, not with passivism, but with resolution of Truth and Total Prosperity.

Policing Styles, Operational Strategies, and Tier Organization

Policing styles have evolved over the past 170 years in direct correlation to the predominant need or ruling conditions as determined by the developmental periods of America’s systems of politics, economics, and sociology. In the 1840s, just following the deaths of thousands of Cherokees who were deceived and sent away per President Van Buren’s order upon the Trail of Tears, and just as the war with Mexico was being ignited—all events being related to the business of expansion by a growing, greedy, and self-centered people--which, whether pro-war or anti-war, the majority of political leaders desired, as they were entirely motivated and supported by Capitalist powers of landownership and its spoils, as well as industrial progression. Racial discontent in the South, coupled with class struggles in the North, such as the Anti-Renter movement in New York—one of many riots and strikes that would surface over the era--would see a growing need for policing in the communities, in spite of the military rule. Sheriffs would be hired to act as agents for the landowners to collect rents from tenants—little more than elected errand boys--but disorderly conduct would typically be handled by military interventions, especially in large-scale uprisings. In fact, it is not surprising that the first police department in New York was formed in 1844, one year before the rejection of the Anti-Rent bill, and the consequential revolt.
As more immigrants flooded American soils, and populations increased--the population of New York alone went from 13,000 in 1820 to 1,000,000 in 1860 (Zinn, 1995)—there became an increasing need to stabilize the American economy in order to quell an economic turbulence that caused such devastating conditions of destitution and filth-ridden living conditions that spread disease to the lower class masses. It was crucial for politics to appeal at least to the rhetoric of Democracy in order to raise a civilian sense of worth and recognition in the labor class, while the Capitalist class held the power of wealth and property, and, therefore, the power of law through political influence. Politicians’ interests lay in the welfare of the economy because the Capitalists were the financiers of American growth and held territorial power, and only landowners had the right to vote. This gave the police the compulsory role of being the governmental “thugs” who acted as strong-arm enforcers of laws that would benefit the wealthy materialists who possessed interest in the welfare of nothing more than their purses. Laws were created first and foremost to protect the assets of the wealthy and to prevent sedition, whether this discontent was natively incited or suspected of activist immigrants, such as the French, who had just come from their own revolution abroad.
Further, as prices for basic necessities, such as food and housing were increased, wages were offset in favor of industry by either lengthening labor hours or quotas for productions. It was not uncommon for entire families, including children around four years of age, to be working in poor factory conditions for sixty and seventy hours per week, earning livings in ghettoes of disease-ridden buildings, while wealthy landlords and factory owners were living in luxurious homes in the country.
Strikes and riots ensued in the names of numerous causes, such as the Flour Riot of 1837 in New York, because of these conditions, and police, although not yet organized into formal departments, were employed by the government authorities—i.e., governors, mayors—as muscle to overcome and disperse (often with military assistance) the thousands of people who would participate in these protests and inhibit industrial or trade function. This “order maintenance” was the standard of policing during the political era, and it was not uncommon for the police to exercise a certain promiscuity of employment, even working in league with the criminal element if the bribe or corruption, e.g. blackmail, was effective. It was the era that the Watchman, the civilian guard, used discretion based upon personal interests, hearsay, or circumstantial evidence to handle the more traditional crimes, while serving the political and economic rule as a foot-soldier in the mitigation of what the powerful defined as seditious acts or behavior. The Department of Justice even backed up a sprawling organization of “upstanding members of society,” such as bankers, railroad men, and the like, numbering nearly 100,000 across six hundred cities and towns to act as agents under the heading of American Protective League, akin to others such as the American Defense Society, formed in 1917, which enlisted patrols to put an end to sedition. As America was entrenching itself in the first world war, lack of enthusiasm in citizens and outright opposition of Socialists caused the government to bear down hard on “treasonous attitudes” in order to push for the war that would enhance the economy, a much needed boost at the time. Their method of mitigating treason would be sending these “agents” to investigate the personal lives of suspects in order to establish seditious behavior. (Zinn, 1995).
Police became more necessary than ever to deter uprisings and activism; however, because of their close ties with the civilians in their neighborhoods, they were often of little efficacy, so the military would be employed by the government to intervene, thus, the creation of the Posse Comitatus Act in 1878, Sec. 15 of which states: “From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress; and no money appropriated by this act shall be used to pay any of the expenses incurred in the employment of any troops in violation of this section And any person willfully violating the provisions of this section shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction thereof shall be punished by fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding two years or by both such fine and imprisonment.” According to an article written by John W. Probst, Lieutenant Colonel and Commander, 90th Missile Security Forces Squadron, F. E. Warren Air Force Base, U.S. Air Force: “The provision created by "except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress" allowed the use of federal forces against the 1919 rioters in Chicago, the so-called Bonus Marchers in Washington, D.C., in 1932, and the railroad workers who went on strike during the administration of President Truman, who temporarily nationalized the railroads under the Army Corps of Engineers (Baker, 1999).” Just as with most other regulations, the government imposes a compulsory double standard, so there are loopholes to the act making it viable for congress to utilize military intervention in civilian matters, e.g.: the Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Officials Act in 1981. Probst (2004) goes on to say: “Congress passed the Military Cooperation with Law Enforcement Officials Act in 1981 to clarify the Reconstruction-era Posse Comitatus Act statute in key areas, particularly with regard to the use of the military to train civilian law enforcement personnel and to provide such personnel with military equipment and facilities to assist civilian police in enforcing drug laws.”
The terrorists that founded and formed America were facing their own internal terrorism, and the existing powers were determined to push their economic growth beyond any point of return no matter what the “necessary costs” of doing so.
This method of the Watchman style of policing carried on for decades, into the sixties, especially during times of rebellion from civil rights and equal rights activists. Minorities were beginning to gain an activist foothold, and they wanted to be seen and heard, treated as equals to everyone else, and to pursue the spoils of their labor, as well as the rights to which the rest of society was obliged. The martial Watchman style of policing has been effective--especially as it is influenced by military structure and technology, thus, imparting a militaristic mindset which is a tenuous application to citizens versus enemies of the country (Weber, 1999)--in suppressing the desires for substantial civilian uprisings, particularly with the advent of sophisticated weapons of mass impact, sheer numbers of officers, as well as advanced technologies that are not available to the public. The initial tyrants took quick hold of the reigns and effectively annihilated and pacified opposition, subduing the public with force and a powerful grip of territories, while further mollifying them with vices, i.e., cigarettes, alcohol (which would lead to escalated public drunkenness, prohibition, then a predictable abrogation), moving pictures, and advancements in technology to make life “easier,” to mitigate resentment.
This style of policing is still evident today, and it is my opinion that it would be logistically predominant in neighborhoods and regions in which strong social bonds exist between police and communities, mirroring the earlier days of corruption and bias. I can also see this mode of operations prevailing where strong unanimity or subcultural cohesion exists within a region regarding its political, social, or religious predisposition or preference, which then influences the community policing principles. For example, an officer who patrols the neighborhood in which he was raised, or lives, or has strong familial or social ties may very well exercise a Watchman-like discretion when dealing with “hoodlums” who disturb the relative peace of the officer’s community. As well, officers, perhaps even more readily found in the bonds of Team Policing, may be prone to elements of mob-mentality in their neighborhoods or districts toward any outsiders who enter their territories. Much like a gang defending its turf, officers may very well justify martial law against anyone who violates or opposes their community’s dominant beliefs, even supplementing Watchman policing with unyielding black-and-white Legalistic technicalities, leaving no margin of error for unfavorable outsiders, in order to “keep the peace.” In fact, the community may also encourage such order maintenance. A predominantly white, wealthy community may conveniently “look the other way” while officers “educate” a minority for violating societal expectations.
I can see the logic in the integration of the Legalistic policing style in the early twentieth century, particularly as we moved into a century of foreign wars. Masses of young men were being enlisted—routinely by conscription—and were emigrated from society to fight battles in other countries or at sea as the United States sought opportunities for international profiteering, if not major global clout, and intervened in foreign political situations. Large numbers of young men, the predominant demographic of criminal acts, were being exported from the community. Wars stimulate economy, as well, and this was much needed after the stock market crash (Great Depression) in 1929. The generation born into the poverty of that era, destined for the compulsory criminal tendencies suspected to arise from such conditions of deprivation and desperation, would find themselves a “ticket” so to speak, to an opportunity of salvation through either joining the war effort directly, or benefiting from the pick-up in the economy created by it.
In the 1930s, the Reform or Progressive Era for the police, at the threshold of World War II, America was shifting focus from warring internally, as it was becoming relatively unified in directing its elicited indignation at “the enemy” entities overseas. Police departments were left the charge of American soils, and justice was in need of tempering while scientific policing was not yet significant for inter-social/community-oriented strategies. Thus, by-the-book Legalistic style and an at least more professional approach to policing develops as officers begin to see this line of work as a budding career opportunity (Weber, 1999). As the period progresses, wars would continue to bring work to the public, but a greater rift in the dichotomy of active protests and a new wave of Jingoism throughout the country increase. This growing concern for constitutional rights in America would reasonably give the local police an opportunity to direct efforts toward reform and exercise a more professional crime-fighting approach. With the progress of scientific management, advancements in technology, and a broadening understanding of human behavior, police have been able to turn their attention toward figuring out the how and the why of crimes while becoming more effective at solving the who and making more arrests.
Organizational structure of police rank-and-file emulated military chain of command and new roles within began to develop, creating a working division between line operations and staff operations. Diane Cecilia Weber, a writer on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, in her 1999 report titled: Warrior Cops: The Ominous Growth of Paramilitarism in American Police Departments states: “To gain control of the rank and file, police chiefs assigned military ranks and insignia to personnel, and some departments required military drills.” (p. 6) She also states: “State and local police departments are increasingly accepting the military as a model for their behavior and outlook.” (p. 1) I would tend to speculate that this sophisticated and professional new approach in policing would be seen as a potential deterrent to would-be criminals. However, other conditions such as subcultural loyalties, the pros of jail-time versus living in the streets, and the potential exponential pay-offs of crime for the effort involved, may very well have offset any deterrent properties of the new Legalistic style.
I view the Legalistic style as kind of a house-cleaning style—a step toward tying up loose ends from the political era—sweeping out the cobwebs and organizing the inventory, so to speak. Legalistic departments seemed to want to lose the image of the corrupted thugs of the political era by implementing a concise method of strict rule enforcement. Military image was sharp and clean, for example, the State Trooper “Smokey bear” caps resembling the Drill Sergeant caps of the military, along with uniform design, decoration and chain-of-command, so the clinical Legalistic style seemed to follow suit. Technically, according to this style, the slightest variance from the law on the books would constitute justification for legal consequences. I would imagine that the young liberal generations of the fifties, sixties, and seventies would have considered this form of Fascism totally “uptight” and unfair; a passive aggressive form of being monitored and controlled by “big brother.”
In this era, the police did not erase the poignant contextual image of being abusive and racist from the war periods, and now they donned an Authoritarian hat; the younger generation would consider them to be bullies who supported wars that America shouldn’t be fighting, particularly during the sixties and seventies. The police still served a political lord, but they were not military, and they needed to find new ways to fight crime in society, or face the potential for the rebirth of vigilantism or revolt by a public that feared for its safety and welfare as crime rates were still rising in spite of the professional policing. The police needed to develop skills necessary to interact with people that were used to the distant and disconnected police organization.
It was later in this era that the image of the police officer would begin to take on the more hero-like crime-fighter to the young generation. This is the image that we came to know on television shows; the westerns made heroes of nuggets of truth from the vigilante days of Charles Lynch and Wyatt Earp--stereotyping the once honorable Native Americans as ruthless, murderous savages--and the new shows, such as CHiPs and Adam 12, turned the police into action/adventure supermen of the modern age.
In comes the Community era of policing. This would be the foundation of the Service style of police working in league with the community to try to prevent crime through an active maintenance of mutualism. The same operational strategies that have been used for decades still apply in this new era, although methods have evolved in many ways. Police still patrol beats or districts by foot, horse, bicycle, motorcycle, car, or even boat or ORV in some cases, in order to establish a presence that imparts a sense of security to the general public. Routine incident response is becoming more apparent in the PCR practices—except in the Legalistic style that doesn’t like to bother with minor infractions and disturbances that they figure can either be resolved without their intervention or overlooked as trivial, not worth legal attention until a crime is actually committed, most likely thriving in middle- to upper-class districts with relatively low crime rates.
The integrations and applications of all three styles may function in a rotational manner, the prevailing factors of crime and civil pressures in society at any given time determining which style to apply and to what degree. Otherwise, community input, political influence, and officer discretions will determine the predominance of any particular style. I can see them overlapping one another quite easily.
In the community policing model, response times to routine incidents and emergencies are going to be considered as a measure of responsibility and efficacy of the police by the public who, in this case of the “business” of policing, are the clients who retain the services of the organization. This is also where we begin to see a tentative tether to political influences in contrast to public service in this PCR relationship, which I see as a risky line for the police to walk.
The delineation of community service relative to politics is blurred when police seek tactics to implement crime prevention programs and service in their communities. I would think that the police must become liaisons of sorts between their communities and the government in order to vie for strategies, monies, or sanctions for crime prevention. In order to execute programs such as DARE, Project Identification for children, community/neighborhood renovations, and other campaigns, the police departments need to appeal, particularly on a local level, to the government for funding and equipment at the very least.
Community Oriented Policing is a fantastic public relations move, gaining the favor and admiration of the public by making officers more approachable, not unlike social workers with badges--and functioning more as a service industry rather than an Authoritarian chaperone in the community. However, paramilitarism is an inevitable by-product of police-military interactions and cooperation, especially in this era of national security. Unlike the Native American form of national security, which was attempting to create a peaceful coexistence with Europeans, the modern form of national security is based upon paranoid restriction of civil liberties, heightened oppressive scrutiny, and integration of more military tactics and technology. According to an Eastern Kentucky University study of SWAT teams, performed by Peter Kraska and Victor Kappelar in 1997: “…nearly 90 percent of the police departments surveyed in cities with populations over 50,000 had paramilitary units, as did 70 percent of the departments surveyed in communities with populations under 50,000.” (p. 5-6)
What this tells me is that the war on drugs and gang violence, and now the war on terrorism, is just that: war. Our police are precisely expected to be fighting battles on a daily basis to combat issues with which they’ve been charged by an increasingly fearful society. Further—and possibly the more poignant influence of paramilitarism in police function—is the protection of assets that the government has established. Wars are truly sponsored by economics, and the government seeks to preserve the functioning of the economy, as well as the fealty of an ignorantly blissful people to do so. It is proven and obvious that the government is lustful of power and greed, as are most modern people, which is why it is willing to send hundreds of thousands of citizens to their deaths in order to satiate those desires—deaths for otiose concepts of “freedom” and “peace” that the soldiers will never enjoy. The propaganda of Jingoism is powerful, however, and the public is impressionable—particularly so considering the limited scope of reality and regulation we are provided by those who rule our world.
In light of this mentality of preserving the peace by enforcing law and warring against crime, the decentralized levels of policing become centralized once again as their efforts coordinate and training, information and intelligence, and tactics are shared. Now, the federal police work on an international level, the state police function regarding statewide transactions or occurrences, and the local police maintain community relations and order. Although the decentralized surface delineations are relatively clear, they still function as an increasingly focusing centralized unit that is more deeply imbedding itself, as seeds taking root in soil, in the social lives of the citizenry. Those personal ties in the more unprofessional era of the police in the early 20th century are now re-established but in a more professional manner. Instead of (or along with in many cities now) cameras on the streets, police are installed as chaperones in the community under the intention of being as helpful and community oriented as the Boy Scouts, with the charisma of low-level politicians, and with the disposition of soldiers. And in light of recent acts of terrorism, much of the public seems to welcome the intervention with open arms. If the police happen to violate the newly earned trust or the civil liberties of the public, especially on the local level, this effort has the potential to quickly turn in an unfavorable direction.
The major weakness of this structure and function is: thanks to the coercion of all levels of police and military forces by corrupt politics and industry, and to the lack of knowledge and care for the welfare of the natural world, our society continues to create laws and regulations that directly and indirectly harm the environment and all species on this planet in order that we satiate our wants and desires at further expense to our spirits. Humans no longer measure effort at a cost of energy crucial for survival; we now measure worth of effort to cost in comfort. Economically-centered law enforcement has facilitated the ability for humans to continue to expand their range and numbers, wiping-out and harming critical habitats for wildlife and eliminating species. Laws protect the wealthy from any real accountability for destruction of habitat in the name of progress (remember Jimmy Pflueger and the Kaloko Dam, for instance?), and laws protect the weak, fostering propagation of poor genetics and evasion of natural selection and natural laws, thus, impacting the natural world in a negative way with overpopulation and resulting by-products of pollution, stress, fragmentation, and depletion. This country was founded upon false principles of materialism and greed, and it is in large part credited to police and military acting in the name of political justice that our society has become ignorant to the value and necessity of protecting the natural world in a more substantial way than only preserving its economic value as economics are not real. The police and military industrial complexes support the institution of these laws and maintain, through force and violations of natural freedoms, the destructive momentum for the decadence and false pretense of the human society.









References:
1. Zinn, H. (1995). A People’s History of the United States: 1492-Present (Rev. and updated ed.) New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc.
2. Probst, J. (2004, July). The Posse Comitatus Act: What does it Mean to Local Law Enforcement? The Police Chief Magazine. (Vol. 71, No. 7). Retrieved Aug. 3, 2007, from http://policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=print_display&
article_id=335&issue_id=72004
3. Baker, B. (1999, November 1). The Origins of the Posse Comitatus. Air and Space Chronicles. Maxwell Air Force Base.
4. Weber, D. (1999, August 26). Warrior Cops: The Ominous Growth of Paramilitarism in American Police Departments. CATO Institute Briefing Papers (No. 50). Retrieved Aug. 3, 2007 from http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37d86efe2982.htm
5. Kraska, P., & Kappeler, V. (1997). Militarizing American Police: The Rise and Normalization of Paramilitary Units. Social Problems, 44, 5-6

Restorative Justice Article

You Probably Follow Satan in the Name of God

Considering all that has been said and written about these topics of nature, spirit, and our roles as Caretakers--which ultimately facilitates finding our true purpose and true selves by following the natural laws--it becomes easier to see the meanings of other religious doctrine through the unbiased eyes of simple, universal truth and unconditional love.

Many of us are familiar with the teachings and parables of the bible. The truth of the words that have been passed down by many hands and many interpretations and influences can be easily deciphered against the level of the only reality, which is the natural world made by God.

Instead of imbuing the writings of religions with magic and myth—oddly, the very heretical facets that these religions claim as blasphemies of the earth-based belief systems—use the level of the simple truth to see that the reality of the messages gives us guidelines that are more logically and realistically applicable to our purpose and place in the natural world. In other words, understand the meaning of the words and stories instead of simply taking someone else’s subjective interpretations as truth. Prove it wrong or prove it right, but don’t believe simply for the sake of: “that’s how it’s always been done,” as if you’re one of the chimps in the primate experiment.

Science helps us to understand more of the reality of the writings, as well. Science is a language we have designed in order to understand, or de-code natural processes. In fact, the more we use science to understand nature, the more we see that the practices of the old, Aboriginal cultures worldwide made sense, thus, the more we integrate the concepts of those practices. Unfortunately, as I’ve thoroughly proven already, it is not possible to live with modern technology and modern concepts of ethics while simultaneously preserving the integrity of the natural processes and God’s creations.

We know that God created the universe in a manner of compressing unfathomable amounts of energy into an infinitesimal point, which exploded and gave us the universe, then, ultimately, our mother planet after billions of years of processing or evolving. We know that “seven days” was metaphorical. We know that Jesus was a real person, but was no more a “god” or the embodiment of God than we are. Jesus simply understood what God really desired—to have us live as Caretakers of His creation and to live in the luxury of the natural world by reaping what we sew, and by taking only what we need without compromising the welfare of other species, nor the function of natural processes. We know that Jesus didn’t actually turn water into wine, nor did he turn a few loaves of bread and some fish into a plethora to feed the masses. Instead he divided what was available and taught the masses to appreciate what they’ve been given, to see that all should share in a tribe—and “tribe” is not solely composed of humans--and that all should get equal, and that when given the blood of the Earth, provided by God, it should be savored more than the finest wine. Jesus performed magic of spirit, of nature, because he was in touch with the cycles and signs that were part of the processes that God created. He was in tune with the natural world of reality, just as the Aboriginals of all other continents.

This real world of nature is the base, or the foundation of it all. It is the default place to which all creatures should be able to return should they so choose—and we should all choose. For our own species to, in the form of a governing entity, tell us that we may not live in the old ways in the natural, real world, is a blasphemy. It is a sin to deny us our natural rights and freedom. It is a sin to live in a manner that violates or opposes natural law.

Our species, however, given the gift of free will, has chosen to deny natural law. We have used our free will to oppose God by violating natural cycles in order to cater to our greed and comforts. We ignore the natural cycles because we fear death, and because we strive to learn the language of science in order to understand God’s mind and purpose so that we might be as smart as God. We certainly strive to control God’s creation, and we destroy pieces of it as a rule.

By living this way, it is clear that we have succumbed, as a species, to the will of Satan. But because humans live in the fantasy world of modern technology, in an artificial existence, we have given ourselves the luxury of denial, and we ignore the messages that have come from those who are the most connected to the reality of God’s nature. By living in the artificial world of money and material desires, by setting our ideals of comfort and mortality far higher than is ethical, and, in fact, by making our concepts of ethics and justice subjective, we have strayed directly into the hands of Satan, who now sits back with the smuggest grimace, knowing that we are too far gullible and gone to turn back. We are so captivated by Satan’s whims of artificial living and defying death and discomfort that we willingly avert our attention from the truth, bending God’s words to fit our greed and mollify our fear, in order to maintain the lifestyle that Satan has cultivated in our species.

I have proven this again and again for decades in all of the writing and speaking I have attempted to disseminate. You are perpetuating the will of Satan if you follow the literal interpretations of religious doctrine, and I can prove it. You are violating natural laws by following the materialistic and selfish practices of our modern cultures, by striving to gain money, by assigning lives monetary values, by allowing yourself to give-in to the artificial luxuries of technology. You are living exactly how Satan wishes, and you are defying what Jesus taught, and no amount of superficial church-going or tautology can repair that as long as you choose to ignore the truth.

Fight Satan’s grip by giving up money, artificial technology, cultural eugenics and idolatrous empowerment. All the things that your modern priests and religious leaders teach you about God and spirit and our place and purpose in the real world are typically misinformed or misled concepts, if not outright lies, influenced by political forces and trends for thousands of years. These people who preach and teach are at the forefront of Satan’s plan, living with artificial amenities and still violating the natural laws that God created for us in order to maintain balance as the Caretakers who were charged with dominion of God’s creation.

Reality is not what we make it. Reality exists whether we do or not. Reality has always existed, and we have a chance to be an integral part of it again in a productive way, instead of being the cancer that destroys it. By following the ways of modern society, you are a part of the self-serving cancer that will destroy your progeny. If you are willing to be part of the destruction of the natural world, then you are serving Satan, and God will have those who choose ignorance eliminated. Consider whether you are prepared to deal with the spiritual ramifications of your lack of temperance and selflessness.

Aikido & Indisputable Truth

A beautiful element of Aikido is that it facilitates the resolution of conflict without compromising free will. In other words, it does not force another being—mentally, physically, or spiritually--into a position of oppression or duress. Aikido is a Martial Way that represents a philosophy that is not merely applicable to everyday life, but is the foundation of all life in the real world.
The natural world is reality. The natural world is directly created by something that has allowed processes to develop over time (evolve), establish, and give us existence. All parts of the natural world are real, because they contribute to the cycles and conditions that make it possible for all life to exist on the most fundamental level. Anything that is not found in the natural existence, does not contribute to the natural cycles and conditions, or is a detriment to natural cycles or conditions, is, therefore, not real. Even tangible things are not necessarily real. A car is tangible, but it is not real. A telephone, a book, an mp3 player, and a plastic cup . . . all tangible but not real.
Aikido channels reality in a way that neutralizes influences and anomalies to real cycles and conditions. These influences can either be positive or negative in essence, and Aikido will resolve them accordingly—in other words, positive and negative influences exist because of one another in the productive/destructive cycle, and the principle of Aikido is of being a catalyst that maintains a harmony in their co-existence. (The manmade concepts of “good” and “bad” however, are simply embraced by unconditional love and resolved to truth, not unlike crystals of salt or sugar being dissolved in a container of water.) As Aikido is governed by unconditional love, it, as all of nature, seeks an equilibrium that contributes to the welfare of all natural beings and conditions; this is the premise of natural law. There are infinite fluctuations of chaotic events, positive and negative, that create a net equilibrium of life, existence, or processes because nature seeks neutrality. Mountains erode over time by giving way to gravity and weather. Oceans crash against the shore by influences of gravity, temperature, weather, and the moon, while water seeks level and stillness. The cycles of nature perpetuate by random events, i.e.: a seed dropping, the wind blowing, rain falling; that facilitate a relative balance of biodiversity and function, which contributes to the holistic health of the entire Earth as an organism, and therefore to the Universe as part of nature. This applies to both the physical and the spiritual.
All life is conditional—if the sun shines, then plants will eat; if the water dries up, then animals will suffer--but the temperance that governs the equilibrium is unconditional, and must remain that way or there will be imbalance. In other words, nature is not biased; it simply is. The oceans, for example, are influenced by random conditions, but the results of these conditions resolve to create an opportunity for life. For instance, the ocean may crash against the rocky shore and create conflict, but the rocky shore embraces the conflict and dissolves to be the very foundation upon which the ocean exists. Aikido is everywhere, always.
To be unconditional means to be based upon indisputable truth, otherwise there exists compulsory subjectivity. Aikido is a response, whether mentally, physically, or spiritually, to any influence in a way that it strives to maintain harmony within all natural cycles based upon what benefits all of nature. If a positive influence is applied to me, as an Aikidoka, then a productive result would occur. If a negative or destructive influence is applied, then that must also be resolved to maintain a productive course that benefits the natural world. If my actions, however, were subjective or based upon beliefs that are not derived from indisputable truth, then I become a tyrant. I become a disruption.
If a person attacks an Aikidoka with words or fists because that person is angered by something, then it is the Aikidoka’s responsibility to make sure he is responding based upon a truth that benefits all life; otherwise, he is attempting to alter the free will of another with subjective influence. Likewise, if the Aikidoka attempts to change another’s actions or decisions based upon subjective emotions or beliefs, then he is again creating conflict by compromising another’s free will. Aikido neutralizes subjectivity in the real world. Our modern society, for example, exists in a way that compromises the welfare of the natural or real world. The natural world is subject to the ramifications of how our species lives, how we feel, what we believe, what we fear. As an Aikidoka—as a natural being--it is one’s responsibility to inform our species so that everyone can see the common, indisputable truth, which will allow everyone to make decisions that benefit all existence. The Aikidoka has no business spreading personal or subjective beliefs, as those beliefs cannot work for or include all of us.
If the truth that is represented by the Aikidoka is ignored or denied, however, then conflict still must be resolved based upon objective reality. In other words again, if the Aikidoka tries to sway one’s beliefs or manipulate one’s perspective with deceit or other questionable methods, then he would be attempting to control one’s actions by subjective means, thus contradicting Aikido. The principles must stand-up to the scrutiny of reality or nature as a frame of reference, not unlike a carpenter’s level.
Further, it seems to be a common belief that the philosophy of Aikido and peace is obtained through passivity or indifference. But if measured against the reality of nature, we can see that this is fallacy, and can be as dangerous as a direct aggression.
If, for example, a man throws trash on the ground, then I, as an Aikidoka, have a responsibility to the welfare of the natural world and all things to respond:
I can pick up the trash and throw it in his face, and then I can yell at the man and tell him never to litter again. However, this is an aggression that creates conflict, which will most likely escalate. This is not Aikido.
I can take what many mistakenly label as a “Zen” approach and do nothing but “embrace and accept the action as nothing more than a small ripple in a pond that will ultimately find its stillness as the universe unfolds as it should.” Meanwhile, especially if many of us adopt this approach of relative indifference, that man and many others will continue to litter because there are no ramifications applied and no spiritual resolution. Our trusting that “it all comes out in the Karmic wash,” and merely resolving to “let things be as long as we live our own lives as just and good as we can,” is dangerous and, relative to the truth of the natural world, it is irresponsible. We become enablers and deny accountability for being Caretakers not only of the physical world, but the spiritual, as well. This is not Aikido.
I could also very deliberately pick up the trash and make my disapproval blatant to the man as I throw the rubbish in a proper receptacle, in the hope that he may learn from this action and choose to take a more responsible path of etiquette in the future. However, there is no connection obtained, and it this passive-aggression is still passivity and enabling. As well, we humans tend to depend upon society to pick up the slack in many cases. Further, we tend to disregard what we do not see or feel directly unless it concerns us in a more empirical or tangible way. “Just leave it; someone will get it eventually,” right? This is not Aikido.
What I also could do, however, is represent that carpenter’s level or frame of reference by simply embracing the man, who has initiated a movement into my space as a part of nature, with all the unconditional love I give to my own child and all beings, and I can offer genuine concern, compassion, and empathy so that I may gain insight to his perspective. I can utilize this as an opportunity for both of us to grow. Then I may attempt to intimate why this action is something that disrupts the natural world. In discussing this thing, I may help to reveal a deeper trouble with this being that shares life with me, or I may open a proverbial doorway into seeing reality. First, I must see his perspective, because that is the Aiki Way. Then, I can be the central frame of reference for the real world and bring the disruption to resolution. (Keep in mind that “I” is a restrictive term that only applies to illustrating a point, as there is no separation of self from the natural world.) If, however, the man becomes aggressive, then I can also bring the physical confrontation to resolution. In any case, I must be absolutely tempered and grounded in indisputable truth, otherwise, I become unbalanced and ineffective. This would make me biased, and my actions would become subjective. Again, it is the responsibility of the Aikidoka to offer information so that others may see that there are options, after which they may make their own decisions—even with some assistance or guidance--relative to indisputable truth. It would not be fair, just, or responsible for the Aikidoka to try to change anyone. However he or she must be the center by which all actions may be resolved to the productive benefit for all life.
The Aikidoka also has a responsibility to try to preserve the safety and free will of others. In other words, a person may attack at their will, but the Aikidoka can only embrace the movement and bring it to a productive solution so that growth may be facilitated. Escalation would defeat the principle. Similar to jumping into a pool: the harder one jumps, the bigger their splash. Yet the water does not attack, it embraces. The more one thrashes, screams, or fights, the more likely one is to drown, but the water remains neutral. However, if one begins to accept that the water is a truth of the natural world, one may learn to stop attacking and become calm. Then they may float. Truth may be found through Aikido.

Neutral Center

One man's good is another man's bad. If there are many different belief systems, then there will always be many perspectives of what is just and what is not. What I have learned is that no matter what beliefs you may follow, there are indisputable truths in the universe that frame a viable foundation for justice. Universal truths apply to all of us, no matter what our layers of differences may involve over the core truth.

In other words, religions, politics, cultures, and even sports fans all have differing beliefs and loyalties based upon the ways they are conditioned and taught. Since, however, we are all natural beings, all literally of the same composition and subject to natural laws, we have a common thread of truth that runs through all of our lives, no matter what beliefs or rituals we otherwise integrate.

Justice in America is based upon several elements of religions and philosophies and laws that we choose to accept. Justice defined in other cultures we may see as inadequate or even over the top. True justice and morality cannot be subjective, otherwise the intentions between parties become swayed, and it then boils down to who is more powerful, more deceitful, and even better armed.

I, as a natural being, cannot afford to be swayed by subjectivity of my personal beliefs, desires, strengths or I become a hypocrite when I impose my intentions upon others. I must function from a center of indisputable truth, something to which we all must adhere. That truth is found in the natural world. To learn this, I spent a year living in the natural world with no tools, no equipment, no gear--only me and what the Creator provided. This taught me that I am not independent, and I am not separate, but that I have the option to temper myself and be a useful tool for the natural world. I am an extension, just as we all are.

So, I agree that it would be unjust to affect anyone's particular "brand" or perspective of what they believe justice to be. And the only true carpenter's level we have available to us is the natural world because it is the foundation of all life. Natural laws and predetermined cycles govern what the parameters of our justice really is, and it has no connection to emotional bias nor to fabricated belief systems and doctrines.

Free will, which follows here logically, is a whole other element, but it is important to recognize that it is also a gift that comes with responsibility and conditions to follow. Aikido, in any case, as it emulates the natural world in movement and philosophy, is emulating truth, using us as channels and advocates of that truth. To truly "do" Aikido, is to be the center of the universe while embodying the universe all at once. This must manifest in our actions and words, and we become the focused center of unconditional love that others can trust and lean on in order to repair a sick world.

Self

There are so many self-help workshops and self-discovery books and self-awareness exercises out there that one might reason we have developed a meme of being a self-absorbed bunch of people. Where did all of this need for self-discovery come from? Is it because we need to find purpose? Is it because we need to find place? Is it because we have lost perspective of our personal appreciation? Perhaps we have lost our spiritual connections with…something.
I honestly believe that we possess issues that involve more than any single one of these above ideas. I also believe, however, that we tend to seek guidance through this mysterious journey into the self on the bows of boats going to no particular port. In other words, our self-this and self-that courses take us so far on this journey but only create within us a sense of stability relative to the world in which we function. In other words again, we have created an existence that ties us up with so much stress, burden, and scheduling that we become unbalanced and compromised. Our immune systems suffer; our minds are battered with a fireworks display of responsibilities. We find ourselves losing track of fundamental joys, and many adopt crutches that make everyday existence bearable, such as alcohol, smoking, video games, and such.
Eventually we can see that our spirits suffer and crave something more fulfilling, so we might seek some kind of stable and firm center from which to function. Thus, we enter the self-this and self-that world, and we learn how to slow our paces down and appreciate ourselves more. But is that really finding your true self? Is it true spiritual awareness and satiation? Or is it a relaxing pastime, like model airplane building or reading?
I submit that there is something much deeper and essential required in order to explore the place in this journey that the boat does not travel. It begins with this idea: In order to truly know your fundamental self, you must know the fundamental frame of reference by which you are defined. (I’m going to attempt to put what amounts to several chapters of this concept into a “nutshell” and get to the point.)
We exist on a planet that has at least two different worlds. One world is that which has been here since the inception of Earth and has created a process of evolution and life-sustenance based upon billions of years of chaos and order working together. We can call this world: Nature. It is, for all intents and purposes here, our fundamental reality. The other world is very new; it is an infant world. This is the world by which most of us define ourselves. It is the world of dreams—creations brought to physical existence from the mind. This is the world of artificial things that are tangible, but not real. This is the world that has given rise to amazing creations but also less virtuous traits, and, within which we seek money, fame, beauty, luxury, and power. This is the world that compromises our spirits, makes us lose our footing and center. We are born of the natural, real world, but we are born into the dream world. So, again, do you define yourself by human ideas of your wealth and status, your fashion sense, your company title? If so, are you defining your true self, or are you merely defining your place in society? Defining yourself by memes and fluctuating, subjective societal ideas is only describing your relative worth and position in the manmade world. This is not a true definition of your inherent essence, however. That must come from a fundamental reality. That reality is the natural world. When we define ourselves against the frame of reference or the ‘level’ of the natural world, we can then begin to know our natural place and purpose. Then we can use that level as a foundation for temperance and awareness, based upon a very simple universal truth. Further, it becomes clear that in order to find our true selves, we must let ourselves go. In other words, all of the self-this and self-that is just the boat, but the real understanding means disembarking. It is at this place we can recognize that we are more than ourselves, more than part of a people, but that we are part of everything. I know—that statement is almost hackneyed. It’s something you hear a Zen master telling the pupil in martial arts movies. However, there is a very big difference between appreciating its entertainment value versus experiencing what it really means.
I only write this as an invitation for you and the children to go outside, to step out of the rut and change perspective. I used to operate a martial arts school in Peterboro many years ago. I tried to teach nature awareness as part of my martial arts curriculum, but most people seemed only to want to practice the self-defense portion, so I ultimately closed the doors. But it hasn’t changed the fact that I’ve been trying to disseminate this information for over twenty years now, and I believe we have a responsibility to ourselves, our world, and our children. Going outside and enjoying nature—and I’m not really talking about four-wheeling and shooting things, so much as just taking walks and observing, truly taking it all in—fosters a like for the natural world. The more we learn, the more we like it, and, eventually, we rediscover our inherent love for nature. What we understand, we come to love; what we love, we protect. It’s springtime; play with the kids outside. Ask each other questions about anything to which your hearts lead you in nature. Sometimes it’s fun to find the answers in field guides, but it’s not a requirement, and it shouldn’t be. Sometimes the answers don’t come to you for a year or more, but that’s okay. It’s when we lose the desire to discover more, that we know our spirits need to find center once again.

Living in the Dream World

My religious beliefs are not categorized in any particular doctrine aside from Pantheism and Animism, to an extent; a shade of Shinto in its earliest form. Regardless, the concept is all about Total Prosperity, or living in a manner that benefits all life, not only select species. But where many doctrine and dogma emanate from translations of stories and morals based upon interpretations of God’s word—or whatever such name one might assign to the Creator—my beliefs stem directly from the Creator’s autobiographical work itself, with no intermediate filters. It comes directly from the reality of the natural world, where the authority is natural law—something which none of us can really expect to conquer or avoid. My beliefs dictate, through the predetermined cycles of nature, that participation in a system of economics directly opposes natural law. In other words, I would be compromising my beliefs if I were to contribute to any kind of materialistic or artificial existence that does not purely preserve, or which compromises, the proper, pre-established function of the natural world. This is something that I’ve had to do for far too long, and existence has been miserable, living in hypocrisy and participating in a destruction that I unconditionally oppose.
Now, with a foreclosure, and with the extreme lull of my business (I’ve never claimed to be a good businessman—I’m about the least qualified--in spite of being quite skilled at the labor), my family is faced with the discrimination of “non-viable credit.” And we’ve heard every pitch there is to rebuild, recondition, and reintegrate, but it all severely misses the accompanying matter. This form of prejudice eliminates opportunities for living and for employment. Our foreclosure has happened as a result of many factors—none of which, by the way, are laziness, complacency, or lack of skill, in spite of the compulsory connotation associated with such labeling—but it seems the proper catalyst toward finally establishing that there is some need of reform in our society even beyond economy.
As an expert survivalist of the Aboriginal methods of living, and in consideration of my convictions, not to mention simply being a creature born on this planet, I would expect that the option to live primitively in the natural areas of the state and country would be a given. In other words, if anyone chooses not to participate in the modern system, how can there not be an option to live according to the Original Instructions of the natural world? Along with the violation of 1st Amendment rights, according to the doctrine of this government, eliminating anyone’s birthright as a natural being to live naturally is an outright injustice.
So the result is that my three children are homeless because authorities are saying that we cannot exercise our birthright of freedom to live purely with the environment while not contributing to the destruction of it. My skills only have worth in our society if I use them to oppose my beliefs, which makes existence worthless and wholly wretched, or because someone is actually trying to insist that living freely as the Aborigines who were all but eliminated and oppressed is not an option. Why is it that a vast variety of religions can be brought to this country to be observed and practiced here, but the native beliefs that support the welfare of the natural world cannot be without contradicting them? I know I’m nearly alone in this mindset, but seriously, when nobody listens or even cares, and the highest point to which one can take an injustice is the very source of the injustice itself, something needs to change. Inherent freedom can’t just be dissolved, and this concept of land being owned by everyone except for those who live the most closely with it is kind of absurd. There need to be options and tolerance.