United People Declaration poll

[Chicodoodoo]

This poll is to gauge support for the Declaration listed below.

If you need background information, or if you have reservations about supporting the Declaration and would like to express those reservations, please do so in the thread United People - an Alternative World Order.


=== United People Declaration ===

When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for all of the common people to organize and unite for the common good, they should declare their reasons and intentions.

Not all truths are self-evident, especially when there are those that want the truth hidden or controlled. The truth is that the common good has not been served by existing human organizations. This truth must be revealed and communicated to all, and it must be remedied. That is the purpose of this Declaration.

There are natural rights that belong to all human beings, and these rights are being denied by selfish individuals and organizations. This must not be tolerated, or tyranny and mass suffering will surely follow. Among the natural rights of all human beings are:

Clean air that sustains health
Clean water that sustains health
Clean food that sustains health
Basic equality
Basic liberty
Basic fairness
Basic privacy
Basic care
Basic peace
Equal access to truthful information

Two rules help determine what constitutes “clean” and “basic”, and they are:

1. The Golden Rule – Do not do to others what you would not want done to you.
2. The Physicians Creed – Do no harm.

There is a very long list of existing actions that violate the natural rights of common people and makes the unification and organization of all human beings necessary and proper. Here are some:

The orchestration of numerous wars for gain and profit.
The poisoning of humanity by way of depleted uranium munitions.
The genocide of people for political, ideological, or economic reasons.
The monopolization of communications to control information and minds.
The manufactured illusion of self-government when there is very little.
The manufactured illusion of freedom when there is very little.
The manufactured illusion of privacy when there is very little.
The manufacturing of illusions for control of various populations.
The deliberate manufacture and release of disease agents and organisms.
The deliberate distribution of “medications” designed to maim, kill, or control.
The suppression of important information regarding non-terrestrial life.
The corruption of systems like money, health care, food production, and entertainment for purposes of selfish gain or control.
The genetic re-engineering of destructive life forms for selfish gain or control.
The clandestine manufacture and distribution of illegal drugs for selfish gain or control.
The destructive manipulation of the natural environment that sustains all life.
The deliberate suppression of “free energy” technology that would improve the world.
Etc.

Those behind these violations of natural human rights do so willfully, criminally, and secretly. They represent but a tiny minority of the human population. The vast majority of humans have been fooled, tricked, deceived, dulled, lulled, purchased, coerced, or otherwise distracted from the truth of these violations against them by this tiny minority.

For these reasons, we, the people of this planet that is our only refuge and life-support system, do declare our intent to unite and organize in support of our natural rights and in opposition to any that would deny them.

=== End Declaration ===

[skippy]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=vaLLxPtmyPI

[skippy]

I feel a lot of people here at Avalon are hesitating to take position. Personally, I think this declaration is one of the most important things ever made by men. I'm not joking. For me, this declaration made by mortal human beings, is like a stargate. It cries out to the infinite other end of the universe. No need for spaceships, ETs, mushrooms or whatsoever. This declaration is the portal for us human beings. With our means, as simple as it might seem, we finally claim our legitimate place between the stars. But, courage is required. Please, post the reason why you are not voting the poll or why you're against the declaration as-is. As far as I can see it, the declaration put forward here, is only a draft and will always stay draft; while we, the united people of the world, are infinite.

Skippy.

[OnyxKnight]

Who the hell is that one person who voted 'No'?

As this poll is not public, I'd like to see the explanation as to why somebody would 'not' support this, in other words, would prefer the old system?

[skippy]

Carefull OnyxKnight, with all my respect, but we're not seeking consensus here. 1000 times more credits for those expressing their disagreement then those staying silently on the sideslines.. However, I agree with you that it would be nice to learn about the motivations of those voting against this initiative. Their feedback is important to improve the declaration of the United People of the World.

[Arpheus]

Wot 2 peopled voted no and didnt even bother posting something LOL,way to go!Not a nice way to start if you ask me ouch!

[skippy]

Posted by Arpheus (here)
Wot 2 peopled voted no and didnt even bother posting something LOL,way to go!Not a nice way to start if you ask me ouch!

Arpheus, we would love to know what makes you voted against this declaration?

[Maria Stade]

Posted by Arpheus (here)
Wot 2 peopled voted no and didnt even bother posting something LOL,way to go!Not a nice way to start if you ask me ouch!

I can see the free will is at stake here ? Hmm something not right here ! Bureaucrats maybe.
I havent polled there is some thing feeling very wrong with all this I cant point my finger on it !

I ll need to think and see what it is !

Be back later !

Maybe just in the force feeld ?

Kind regards !

Maria

[OnyxKnight]

Posted by skippy (here)
Carefull OnyxKnight, with all my respect, we're not seeking consensus here. 1000 times more credits for those expressing their disagreement then those staying silently on the sideslines.. However, I agree with you that we need explanations why somebody would 'not' support this Their feedback is needed to improve the declaration of the United People of the World.

Well, I guess not. But, these people at least owe us a comment on why they voted 'no', we deserve that much I would think?

Maybe its not that they prefer the old system, maybe they didn't like the final version of the 'Decleration', whatever the case, they should voice their opinion and explain themselves.

And now is two....

[skippy]

Posted by Maria Stade (here)

Posted by Arpheus (here)
Wot 2 peopled voted no and didnt even bother posting something LOL,way to go!Not a nice way to start if you ask me ouch!

I can see the free will is at stake here ? Hmm something not right here ! Bureaucrats maybe.
I havent polled there is some thing feeling very wrong with all this I cant point my finger on it !
Maria

Hi Maria, appreciate your feedback. I invite you to read and meditate on the contents of the declaration. Are you with it or are you against it? Both ways are fine with us. This is just an inititiave of human beings trying to defend their home. Please post your remarks and we will update the contents of the declaration accordingly. Don't worry, everything is just fine!
Skip

[Chicodoodoo]

One of the people that voted "NO" sent me a private message to explain their vote. I very much appreciate that, and I would like to share it with you all. I have permission from the sender to do so. I have also included my comments to his explanations. This exchange was slightly edited to allow the sender to remain anonymous. This is essentially my private message back to the sender. The sender's words are those that are quoted.

==========

Great stuff, my friend! You might be surprised to learn that I considered your perspective early on.

Your basic argument is that we are not playing by "their" rules, and thus the declaration is not legitimate. You are correct that we are not playing by their rules, and that is being done by deliberate design. You are also correct that "they" will see this declaration as meaningless, and that too is by deliberate design.

Let me address your concerns in the order that you presented them.

In my replies in other threads I share the proper way to achieve 'independence' from the 'system'.

We do not want to confront the PTB, which is why we are not declaring independence from their system. That will occur anyway through a natural evolution.

The title of your Declaration means nothing to anyone, other than to those who support it; for example, a government official, when first looking at it, will want to know what it is in hand - if and when that happens.

The title is self-descriptive, declaring the intent of the people to unite. To a government official, it is inconsequential. That's good, from our perspective. The intent is not to confront the existing system. The intent is to unite and organize the people so that they can determine the system they wish to exist under. The existing system will simply wither away as support is withdrawn from it.

You are serving the system you wish not to be a part of, therefore the wording used (common to the masses) must reflect the wording 'they' (the ruling class) are already familiar with.

I would argue that by using their language, we would be serving their system, as in playing directly into their hands. The rules of the system are written to serve the system, not the people. It would not make sense to use those rules if we, the people, plan to be successful.

What should be sought is a 'Declaration of Independence' from the state - other declarations, such as the one you have posted, could be something the supporters (members of) can 'sign off' on - as it will only have meaning to them.

Declaring independence from the state is a good way to attract unwanted attention and become a target. That is something we want to avoid. Independence will happen naturally, much like our current dependence on the existing system happened naturally.

Briefing the body of the material, there are no elements or authorities given; there are definitions of sorts, but nothing that supports or gives notice to 'them' (the ruling class). To put it in perspective, that would be like you (as a sovereign) being shown the Highway Traffic Act by 'them' (the ruling class) - what would it mean to you?

From the perspective of a united people, there is only one source of authority, and that is the voice of the people. No other authority is recognized. As I have said, if the bureaucrats shrug off the Declaration as having no meaning (by their rules), that works to our advantage.

The Declaration is written in plain language to convey a clear meaning. This is in direct opposition to how the system writes – in convoluted language designed to obfuscate meaning. That too is by design. This is a document for the people, not for the system.

I chose 'NO', because if anyone uses the material you have posted to be 'free from the state', it would do nothing but potentially cause hardship - something I cannot, in good faith, support – I do support your motives and attempt.

It is important to emphasize that we are not declaring our intention to be free from the state. We are declaring our intention to unite and organize. It may be highly likely that such an action could lead to a new state. There is, after all, a growing sense that people are fed up with the existing situation. Will it cause hardship if the people unite and organize? Why should it? What “state” would publicly oppose such a movement? Certainly not any legitimate state.

The process of actual independence does not have to be complex, as the establishment makes it out to be, or even how others have quasi attempted. When 'you' do it right, 'you' will be 'marked', whether you do it by force (avoid this if possible) or passively by a Declaration of Independence.

Yes, from the perspective of the existing system, if you do it right, you will be marked. We will therefore not do it “right”, according to their system, for we have no desire to be marked. The current system is one of deceit and betrayal. We will not play by their rules, and we will not play into their hands.

I hope this has been helpful - as this has been, here and in other threads, my only objective.

I am convinced that your purpose is to be helpful, and I truly appreciate your efforts.

[Flash]

I find the comments of the "no" voter very interesting. I would like to hear about the other one as well and from those that abstain from voting. 2 no sayers out of 28 this is around 7%. This means that 7% of people may question the declaration, not understand its meaning, and this, in a highly aware group of people. Imagine the numbers in a regular group of ordinary, non conspiracy people. Imagine what it would be once translated in a multitude of languages, with all the mistranslations that always occur in the process, or words that have no true equivalence (just the word people can be translated 2-3 different ways in French depending on the orgininal intent of the author). I would really like to hear all feedbacks, suggestions and commentaries possible, starting with the no sayers.

I seriously agree with Skippy. This declaration is of prime importance, I feel it throughout (but don't consciously know why).

This polls plays the role, to me, of an excellent focus group prior to launching. From this, we could learn how to rephrase, make it punchy yet non attractive for PTB. How to make the title better for example in order to be read in the avalanche of e-mails everyone receives on a daily basis.

Good testing ground Avalon. We are the forbearers of the new world. The spreaders of the light.

Just in teasing, can you imagine Chicoodoo being mentioned as the first writer of the world declaration that led to the constitution (the Jefferson of the new world) lol

[Dennis Jonathan]

This reminds me of something Alex Collier said at the PC conference in '09. It was a comment the Andromedans made regarding our unique ability as humans. He spoke about our ability to create something from nothing, through our intent. The example he gave was the idea that every human was born with certain civil rights, and quoted the civil rights movement.

It's pretty amazing when you think about it. The intent behind this basic truth brought it into existence. This is no different IMO.

[Chicodoodoo]

Posted by Flash (here)
Just in teasing, can you imagine Chicoodoo being mentioned as the first writer of the world declaration that led to the constitution (the Jefferson of the new world) lol

I was talking to a friend a week or so ago, and I mentioned how this Declaration practically wrote itself. It simply flowed through me, the accumulation of a lifetime of writing about my frustrations with the insane world around me. I said maybe someday it will be known as the great work of the ridiculously-named Chicodoodoo, that mysterious writer from the days of the Internet that nobody would ever know.

Much to her own delight, she replied, "I know." And with that we both burst out laughing!

[ghostrider]

anything different than the matrix works for me

[Maria Stade]

I have read it again and I can support it.
I had a negative reaction on the word "basic" as they have been cutting down the basic system here !
It had nothing to do with the writing !
It is also sad that this kind of declaration is ever needed.

The list could be much longer !

Well done Chicoodoo

Maria

[Chicodoodoo]

Posted by Maria Stade (here)
I had a negative reaction on the word "basic" as they have been cutting down the basic system here !

I had a problem with that word, too. What the heck does "basic" mean? That's why the Golden Rule and the Physician's Creed were absolutely essential. Together, they create a "floor", a minimum acceptable standard based on the combined and dynamic standards of the people.

[Zook]

Posted by OnyxKnight (here)
Who the hell is that one person who voted 'No'?

As this poll is not public, I'd like to see the explanation as to why somebody would 'not' support this, in other words, would prefer the old system?

In Saddam's Iraq, I believe 99% voted for his regime. That 2 0f 36 individuals (to date) did not vote for an intelligent declaration ... only means that everyone gets representation, even those who seek no bed with intelligent thought, who seek passage on a turnip truck, who prefer the status quo of madness normalized by inertia.



ps: Be tolerant of the dissenters, even the most vacuous ... for the false patriot's fort is not yet anachronous.

[astrid]

We are declaring our intention to unite and organize

I personally think that this is the FIRST major step in the process.

We are powerful as individuals , but exponentially so, combined, united and organized.

We can discuss details and semantics until the "cows come home" but really we are running out of time.

That is all very left brain, and old paradigm thinking, where as is the right brain that will be really what gets us out of here.

Creative , adaptable, able to shift gears and move in a whole other direction if need be.

Looking at old problems with totally fresh eyes, being random when need be, don't forget its the predictable that makes us easy to program and manipulate.

Personally i think its way more efficient to set the intention, and iron out the details as we are living it,

we are talking about a whole new paradigm here,

so it follows that we will be creating and building new ways of living, relating, communicating,

i'm tipping we don't even have the words yet for some of the concepts and ideas we are going to be

implementing.

To be honest i find the arguing and semantics really frustrating.

You can be very good at logic and arguing a point, but it doesn't mean you are right.

It can just mean one is good at logic and arguing.

Meanwhile nothing gets off the ground.

I commend u Chicodoodoo for taking that big first step for us here.

I hope we don't have another 50 page thread with people tearing it to sheds.


It's the intention that we are in essence voting for anyways,
and i hope people see that.

blessings,

Astrid

[Icecold]

I can see the free will is at stake here ? Hmm something not right here ! Bureaucrats maybe.
I havent polled there is some thing feeling very wrong with all this I cant point my finger on it !

I ll need to think and see what it is !

Be back later !

Maybe just in the force feeld ?

Kind regards !

Maria

Yes, I haven't voted yet. But the above posts say something about freedom of speech.

I'll wait a little while to see how this pans out.

BTW, the list does not address freedom of speech...interesting.