Friday, July 27, 2007

A Consolidated Government Is A Tyranny

During the period from the drafting and proposal of the federal Constitution in September, 1787, until its ratification in 1789 there was an intense debate on ratification. The principal arguments in favor of it were stated in the series written by Madison, Hamilton, and Jay called the Federalist Papers, although they were not as widely read as numerous independent local speeches and articles. The arguments against ratification appeared in various forms, by various authors, most of whom used a pseudonym. Collectively, these writings have become known as the Anti-Federalist Papers. They contain warnings of dangers from tyranny that weaknesses in the proposed Constitution did not adequately provide against, and while some of those weaknesses were corrected by adoption of the Bill of Rights, others remained. ALL these dangers, including the subversion of the Bill of Rights, have now come to pass!! We The People now live with that tyranny of which they warned!!

No. 9 – A Consolidated Government Is A Tyranny

"MONTEZUMA," regarded as a Pennsylvanian, wrote this essay which appeared October 17, 1787 in the Independent Gazetteer.

We the Aristocratic party of the United States, lamenting the many inconveniences to which the late confederation subjected the well-born, the better kind of people, bringing them down to the level of the rabble - and holding in utter detestation that frontispiece to every bill of rights, "that all men are born equal" - beg leave (for the purpose of drawing a line between such as we think were ordained to govern, and such as were made to bear the weight of government without having any share in its administration) to submit to our Friends in the first class for their inspection, the following defense of our monarchical, aristocratical democracy.

lst. As a majority of all societies consist of men who (though totally incapable of thinking or acting in governmental matters) are more readily led than driven, we have thought meet to indulge them in something like a democracy in the new constitution, which part we have designated by the popular name of the House of Representatives. But to guard against every possible danger from this lower house, we have subjected every bill they bring forward, to the double negative of our upper house and president. Nor have we allowed the populace the right to elect their representatives annually . . . lest this body should be too much under the influence and control of their constituents, and thereby prove the "weatherboard of our grand edifice, to show the shiftings of every fashionable gale," - for we have not yet to learn that little else is wanting to aristocratize the most democratical representative than to make him somewhat independent of his political creators. We have taken away that rotation of appointment which has so long perplexed us - that grand engine of popular influence. Every man is eligible into our government from time to time for life. This will have a two-fold good effect. First, it prevents the representatives from mixing with the lower class, and imbibing their foolish sentiments, with which they would have come charged on re-election.

2d. They will from the perpetuality of office be under our eye, and in a short time will think and act like us, independently of popular whims and prejudices. For the assertion "that evil communications corrupt good manners," is not more true than its reverse. We have allowed this house the power to impeach, but we have tenaciously reserved the right to try. We hope gentlemen, you will see the policy of this clause - for what matters it who accuses, if the accused is tried by his friends. In fine, this plebian house will have little power, and that little be rightly shaped by our house of gentlemen, who will have a very extensive influence - from their being chosen out of the genteeler class . . . It is true, every third senatorial seat is to be vacated duennually, but two-thirds of this influential body will remain in office, and be ready to direct or (if necessary) bring over to the good old way, the young members, if the old ones should not be returned. And whereas many of our brethren, from a laudable desire to support their rank in life above the commonalty, have not only deranged their finances, but subjected their persons to indecent treatment (as being arrested for debt, etc. ) we have framed a privilege clause, by which they may laugh at the fools who trusted them. But we have given out, that this clause was provided, only that the members might be able without interruption, to deliberate on the important business of their country.

We have frequently endeavored to effect in our respective states, the happy discrimination which pervades this system; but finding we could not bring the states into it individually, we have determined . . . and have taken pains to leave the legislature of each free and independent state, as they now call themselves, in such a situation that they will eventually be absorbed by our grand continental vortex, or dwindle into petty corporations, and have power over little else than yoaking hogs or determining the width of cart wheels. But (aware that an intention to annihilate state legislatures, would be objected to our favorite scheme) we have made their existence (as a board of electors) necessary to ours. This furnishes us and our advocates with a fine answer to any clamors that may be raised on this subject. We have so interwoven continental and state legislatures that they cannot exist separately; whereas we in truth only leave them the power of electing us, for what can a provincial legislature do when we possess the exclusive regulation of external and internal commerce, excise, duties, imposts, post-offices and roads; when we and we alone, have the power to wage war, make peace, coin money (if we can get bullion) if not, borrow money, organize the militia and call them forth to execute our decrees, and crush insurrections assisted by a noble body of veterans subject to our nod, which we have the power of raising and keeping even in the time of peace.

What have we to fear from state legislatures or even from states, when we are armed with such powers, with a president at our head? (A name we thought proper to adopt in conformity to the prejudices of a silly people who are so foolishly fond of a Republican government, that we were obliged to accommodate in names and forms to them, in order more effectually to secure the substance of our proposed plan; but we all know that Cromwell was a King, with the title of Protector). I repeat it, what have we to fear armed with such powers, with a president at our head who is captain-general of the army, navy and militia of the United States, who can make and unmake treaties, appoint and commission ambassadors and other ministers, who can grant or refuse reprieves or pardons, who can make judges of the supreme and other continental courts - in short, who will be the source, the fountain of honor, profit and power, whose influence like the rays of the sun, will diffuse itself far and wide, will exhale all democratical vapors and break the clouds of popular insurrection?

But again gentlemen, our judicial power is a strong work, a masked battery, few people see the guns we can and will ere long play off from it. For the judicial power embraces every question which can arise in law or equity, under this constitution and under the laws of "the United States" (which laws will be, you know, the supreme laws of the land). This power extends to all cases, affecting ambassadors or other public ministers, "and consuls; to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; to controversies to which the United States shall be a party; to controversies between two or more States; between a State and citizens of another State; between citizens of different States; between citizens of the same State, claiming lands under grants of different States; and between a State or the citizens thereof, and foreign States, citizens or subjects. "

Now, can a question arise in the colonial courts, which the ingenuity or sophistry of an able lawyer may not bring within one or other of the above cases? Certainly not. Then our court will have original or appellate jurisdiction in all cases - and if so, how fallen are state judicatures - and must not every provincial law yield to our supreme fiat? Our constitution answers yes. . . . And finally we shall entrench ourselves so as to laugh at the cabals of the commonalty. A few regiments will do at first; it must be spread abroad that they are absolutely necessary to defend the frontiers. Now a regiment and then a legion must be added quietly; by and by a frigate or two must be built, still taking care to intimate that they are essential to the support of our revenue laws and to prevent smuggling.

We have said nothing about a bill of rights, for we viewed it as an eternal clog upon our designs, as a lock chain to the wheels of government - though, by the way, as we have not insisted on rotation in our offices, the simile of a wheel is ill. We have for some time considered the freedom of the press as a great evil - it spreads information, and begets a licentiousness in the people which needs the rein more than the spur; besides, a daring printer may expose the plans of government and lessen the consequence of our president and senate - for these and many other reasons we have said nothing with respect to the "right of the people to speak and publish their sentiments" or about their "palladiums of liberty" and such stuff. We do not much like that sturdy privilege of the people - the right to demand the writ of habeas corpus. We have therefore reserved the power of refusing it in cases of rebellion, and you know we are the judges of what is rebellion. . . .

Our friends we find have been assiduous in representing our federal calamities, until at length the people at large - frightened by the gloomy picture on one side, and allured by the prophecies of some of our fanciful and visionary adherents on the other - are ready to accept and confirm our proposed government without the delay or forms of examination - which was the more to be wished, as they are wholly unfit to investigate the principles or pronounce on the merit of so exquisite a system. Impressed with a conviction that this constitution is calculated to restrain the influence and power of the LOWER CLASS - to draw that discrimination we have so long sought after; to secure to our friends privileges and offices, which were not to be . . . [obtained] under the former government, because they were in common; to take the burden of legislation and attendance on public business off the commonalty, who will be much better able thereby to prosecute with effect their private business; to destroy that political thirteen headed monster, the state sovereignties; to check the licentiousness of the people by making it dangerous to speak or publish daring or tumultuary sentiments; to enforce obedience to laws by a strong executive, aided by military pensioners; and finally to promote the public and private interests of the better kind of people - we submit it to your judgment to take such measures for its adoption as you in your wisdom may think fit.

Signed by unanimous order of the lords spiritual and temporal.


Thursday, July 26, 2007

Against Presidential Tyranny

"Do I not hate them, O LORD, that hate Thee?" - Psalm 139:21

This statement as well as scores of others in Scripture no doubt sounds strange to the ears of many modern “Christians.” The idea of a “Christian” hating not only wickedness but wicked people is largely incompatible with the religious sentimentalism pervasive in modern ‘Christianity” epitomized in the expression, "Love the sinner; hate the sin."

A sentimental attitude toward God's enemies does not square with Biblical precedent. If we imitate the example of God and His people as revealed in Scripture, our disposition toward the wicked must be much more austere. For example, the martyred saints in heaven petition God with regard to their murderers, "How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" (Rev 6:10). The apostle John observed that "much people in heaven" rejoiced at the utter destruction of the vile Babylon (Rev 19:1-3). The utter destruction of an evil society, such as Nazi Germany, or the death of a cruel dictator such as Mao or Saddam Hussein, ought to be an occasion of praise and gladness, as it was for the saints as in recorded in Revelation 19.

While Scripture affords clear examples of dedicated believers who remonstrated with God to delay or withdraw impending judgment on His own people (e.g. Abraham for Lot, Moses for Israel), it also shows the obvious and frequent examples of God's children actually invoking God's wrath on the heathen. The imprecatory Psalms 3 contain petitions by David and others for God to harm and destroy wicked individuals. These are called imprecatory Psalms because an imprecation is a calling down of God's curse. Paul's imprecations recorded in Galatians 1:7-9 and implied in 5:12 parallel the psalmist's imprecations. As Revelation 19:2 makes clear, those who rejoice at the demise of God's enemies are impelled by a desire to uphold the righteous judgment of God.

When sentimentalists concede that they yearn for a world in which judgment is the consequence to be delayed until the final judgment, what they are really saying then is that they are willing to sustain all of the evil results of the vile individuals. The pattern of the Biblical saints is different: the prayers of God's saints for His judgment on the wicked implore Him to act immediately, without delay (Psalms 79:5,6; Rev. 6:10).

Therefore, the moral and spiritual plight the Western world is presently suffering is due partially to the sentimental attitude of the “Christian Church.” They hate injustice, mercilessness, faithlessness, but they are too queasy and sentimental to pray for God to judge corrupt judges, corrupt police, and corrupt politicians. Worse, no doubt some of them are reluctant to practice imprecatory praying because they believe that increased evil is a precursor to their belief in God’s return. In other words, they enjoy the spread of evil because it indicates that the God is coming soon - "Yes, things are pretty bad; but praise God for the increased murder of innocents, spread of disease, and robbery, because that means Gods' coming is right around the corner."

If that attitude seems perverse to you, that's because it is.

Here is an Imprecatory Prayer based upon the Declaration of Independence.

Against Presidential Tyranny

By Tim Wingate


Oh Creator of equal people endowed with unalienable Rights, Hear our plea!

We have suffered under a long train of abuses and usurpations that evinces a design to reduce us under absolute Despotism.

Those that were instituted to make those Rights secure no longer derive their just powers from the consent of the equal people, but by threat of violence against them.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned the Usurper and his minions for Redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated Petition have been answered only by repeated injury.

A President, whose administration is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to govern a free people.

We ask that you justly uphold your Laws of Nature and Be not mocked but do unto him as he has done unto others.

May he reap a bitter harvest of his abuses!

May he collect the wages of his transgressions!

May the shed blood of the innocents he has injured be as an abomination upon his head!

Upon your Providence we have firm reliance, and ask you to Protect us, our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor!

May it be So!

Sunday, July 22, 2007

Using Freedom Shenanigan 7A

A new website, makes it easy for anyone to search "DC Madam" Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s phone records. When ABC News producers had exclusive control of the list, they decided it wasn't news.

This is what I'm talking about! Using available technology to force transparency in government.

Find out any of the phone numbers (including cell) that your representatives in Congress use and run them through the database.

Okay, so now I can hear some of our libertarian friends complaining that prostitution is a "victimless" crime. Generally I agree as long as ALL parties involved and potentially affected including family members (STD transfer) have informed consent on the matter. That includes you, the constituency, because your representative could be involved in a blackmail situation as it relates to government integrity and security.

If an intelligence agency wants to "turn" an asset, one of the primary tactics is to employ a "honeypot" - compromising them through sex. An upright & religious individual may trade influence so as to avoid the disclosure of his various fetishes. The masculine super-patriot may be desperate to have his closeted homosexually uncovered. A member of the media may launder propaganda, suspend journalistic ethical standards, and run stories that defy reason & conventional wisdom to avoid their own name in the headlines. A married official may cooperate under threat of the revelation of his mistress. So you see, it really could affect you.

If a person who wants to be elected to Congress, or their staff members want to participate in adult behavior then do it openly so there is nothing to blackmail.

Use this site to search the publicly released phone records of Deborah Jeane Palfrey, proprietor of Pamela Martin and Associates in Washington, DC.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

10 Ways to Build a Cult-Like Following

There are many voices in the world telling you what to believe and how to live. Some are benign and some are malicious. You have to determine which is which for yourself. Some appear benign, however, upon closer scrutiny they are revealed to be as "wolves in sheep's clothing." It is STILL up to YOU to determine the difference. Learning the difference between good and evil, light and dark and the difficult middle ground is part of the maturing process. Some start it and never finish. Others begin and go for awhile until they reach a comfort level and stay there. Some continue on learning and growing until they die. The level of self-revelation, maturity and personal responsibility is up to YOU. The wonderful thing about being an individual (non-legal terminology) is that YOU CAN learn from others and their experiences both good and bad. However, the "trick" is to NOT BE TRICKED by however well intentioned the expert, leader, guru or prophet is. The following is offered for your consideration as a methodology to help you determine if you are being subtly "schnookered."

Hebrews 5:14 But solid food is for the matured, for those who, through their disciplined senses and mental faculties, are trained by practice to discriminate and distinguish between what is morally good and noble and what is evil and contrary either to divine or human law.

Genesis 3:1 "Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made."

10 Ways to Build a Cult-Like Following

By JK Ellis

Author of Mind Control 101

What steps are there for anyone who wants people to want his/her attention and wisdom?

The result are 10 ways to build a cult-like following. Of course each one of them could be a book in itself but here goes.

1. Initiation vs. Instruction

There is a marked difference between learning by instruction and learning by initiation.

Most people give instruction. This is nothing more than stating facts and teach processes. Any good teacher does that as well as most bad ones.

Learning by initiation is about creating an experience that makes the learning personal and visceral to the student. A good example of that is the 1984 movie “The Karate Kid” . On the one hand you have the macho western karate instructor who taught his students by instruction in a skill 'n' drill process. On the other hand you have the character played by Pat Marito who says that he will teach Ralph Macchios' character karate in exchange for doing chores. But the chores must be done in a certain way “This way wax on. This way wax off.” Only later does the young hero find out that there was a method to his instructors madness and when he figured it out it made complete sense to him as if struck by a lightening bolt.

There are many things that you could simply tell someone and they would intellectually understand but they wouldn't “get it” as an insight. They would only see it as information. The result is that they may use it or they may not.

Teaching by initiation means holding back on simply telling what the student wants to know and instead provide an experience where the student “gets it” on their own.

The subjective experience of the student is that the lesson is much more valuable because 1) they had to work for it and 2) it is felt more personally.

2. Being Accessible

Someone once told me that “There are no long lines for the guru at the bottom of the hill.”

Making yourself scarce adds perceived value but it also distances you from the masses. If you want a cult-like following you need access to the masses otherwise you're just an ivory tower wannabe.

There is an ingenious compromise.

Be accessible as a person but present your knowledge and wisdom as being rare, expensive, mysterious, and only for those who are truly ready for it.

This compromise allows you to build deep personal bonds with people yet have them want more or your presence... as well as be willing to pay for it.

Keep in mind that one cult leader, 2000 years ago, would speak to anyone who would listen but he granted his most sacred attention to his 12 closest disciples.

You can add to this compromise by having “special times” when you are not accessible to anyone. You can tell people that you are meditating, or doing your “spiritual practice” but you don't have to say anything. It's the mystery of why you are absent that you want to cultivate.

3. Imply Secret Knowledge

The role of simply remaining calm and silent will recur again in this essay so I can't understate it. Here is where silence is worth a 1000 words. Saying things like “Hmmm... There are 100 possible solutions to that within your own mind.” and nothing else implies things that you know and that they should know.

4. Remaining calm as if all-knowing

Any sharp change in your emotional state, with the exception of joy and laughter, should be minimized. Any leader/teacher who goes on an angry rant is demonstrating their own lack of control. If you truly have control it should be demonstrated by an unshakable calm as if everything is happening just as you knew it would.

I've always remembered that the scariest martial artist are the ones that don't talk or threaten... they calmly do what they have to do and walk away.

5. Create a detached involvement as if “you” are in a “higher place”

In doing this people will look to you as if there is something more to you than your mere physical presence.

6. Connect deeply with the individual

Here rapport is vital. When you are with people you need to put aside all of your distractions, obligations and problems to focus completely on the person or people you to whom you are speaking.

7. “Chunk Up” whenever possible

This may be a bit abstract to grasp but it's important to creating an appeal because it forces people to think in bigger terms. When you do consistently if gives the impression that you are always thinking bigger than them.

“Chunking Up” is an NLP term that means referring to something that contains what is spoken about as a subset . It can also refer to something that controls or has a larger reach than the topic at hand.

As an example when a person asks “Do you enjoy adult beverages?” a chunked up response would be “There are many adult pleasures I enjoy.” Here, “beverages” is a subset of “pleasures”.

Another example : Statement: “I'll go with you if you promise to control yourself.” Response “I have no intention of controlling how much I enjoy myself.” Here “control” is a subset of “Enjoyment”.

8. Always allude to the mysterious

This can be done by doing the opposite of name dropping. Refer to a very skilled person you learned from who doesn't normally take students. Mention an arcane text that describes a mysterious process you went through. Mention it took you ten years of study to read between the lines and find the real meaning to the work.

9. God-Like Confidence

Here is where the work of Blair Warren in “The Worlds Greatest Cult” really comes in handy. He describes what's called “The God Complex” which encompasses many of the concepts discussed here.

The God Complex is a great example of “chunking up” because it's about seeing EVERYTHING that can possibly happen as if it's all part of the plan and being okay with it.

The God Complex is about having such a larger view of the world and your place in it so that what you are doing, this very moment , regardless of what transpires will be as if it was meant to you be.

The bottom line is that people are going to judge and criticize you; you'll have deal with money and security issues; relationships will change... no matter what. The God Complex includes all of that in a philosophy that allows you to deal with it in a healthy perspective.

10. Appeal to peoples needs and wants

A deep understanding about what people truly respond to is vital if you want to influence anyone. Each individual has their own wants and needs that you have keep in the forefront of your mind.

Good NLP training will help you with that.

People will also respond to the same basic needs being fulfilled; the need to be needed, the need for hope in a tough time, the need to feel in control, the need blame something else for their troubles, the need to learn about something they don't know or not supposed to know.


The desire for a cult-like following has many benefits and many responsibilities. The hardest of the responsibilities is simply living up to what you are presenting to people. For that reason I always recommend that you live what you teach.

JK Ellis is the author of Mind Control 101: How to Influence the Thoughts of Others Without Them Knowing or Caring

RELATED ARTICLES: How to Seduce Others with the Hidden Power of Your Mind

Monday, July 02, 2007

Freedom Shenanigan #7A

Make & Publish a List of Public Employees

This Freedom Shenanigan is a two-step process. Part A is gathering the information. Part B is publishing the information. Here is some background information to set the stage.

Back in July of 2003 two researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology celebrated the Fourth of July with a new Internet service that will let citizens create dossiers on government officials. It was called Government Information Awareness The service started offering standard background information on politicians, and then went a step further, by asking Internet users to submit their own intelligence reports on government officials.

The premise of GIA was that if the government has a right to know personal details about citizens, then citizens have a right to similar information about the government. GIA was inspired by the federal government's now supposedly defunct Terrorist Information Awareness, or TIA, program. "Our goal is develop a technology which empowers citizens to form their own intelligence agency; to gather, sort and act on information they gather about the government," said MIT graduate student Ryan McKinley, who developed GIA under the direction of Christopher Csikszentmihályi, an assistant professor at the MIT Media Lab's Computing Culture group.

"Only by employing such technologies can we hope to have a government by the people and for the people," McKinley said. At one time they had over 3000 listings.,,

Today if you try to access that site you get this warning:

403 Forbidden:

We're sorry, you are not allowed to access this URL.

There are several possible reasons why:

§ The page is only accessible by members of the Media Laboratory.

§ The page has to be accessed from within the Lab. Outside of the Lab, either a valid Media Lab user id or password must be supplied to the SSL-enabled equivalent at, or you need VPN client software available at:

It seems that the project is over and unavailable.

Back in 2001 Bill Sheehan a network engineer and libertarian from a suburb of Seattle, published the names, title, and salaries of law enforcement personnel at a number of Seattle-area agencies under the state of Washington's Open Records Act, on a now defunct website Sheehan cross-matched the data he obtained to publicly available records to obtain the home addresses and social security numbers. To find addresses, he used common internet search engines such as Yahoo people search. Social Security numbers were obtained from one of the many services that freely sell such information for as little as a buck. Sheehan also linked an embarrassing number of officers to their bankruptcy and criminal records. It was all legally public available information.

Hooodaddy, did he ever set a brushfire! Hackers attacked the site. Lawsuits ensued; the Washington State Legislature even enacted a specific law targeting this issue. In May of 2003 U.S. District Judge John Coughenour, the chief federal judge in Seattle, ruled the law unconstitutional. The site is still up after changing servers and its name to

There are other sites that do similar work of making government transparent.,,,,

Furthermore, there is more good news. Recently “white supremacists” radio shock jock Hal Turner did a Freedom Shenanigan. This isn’t the first time he has done this kind of thing.

I want to be clear that I do NOT support Hal Turner’s racist views. I do support his right to try to affect policy by this method of “Public Employee” accountability.

According to Turner’s and other’s accounting, his website’s posting of the names, addresses of both work and home of Senators who were voting in favor of the “Immigration bill” caused such a reaction from the public to the senators that they voted against the bills passage.



Turner’s approach had an effect. The legality of what he did appears to be protected by U.S. Supreme Court Decisions protecting “violent” speech:

Brandenburg v. Ohio" 395 U.S. 444, 447 (1969) which ruled that advocating crime is legal as long as the remarks are uttered in a context which does not lend itself to imminent lawlessness.

Virginia v. Black" 538 U.S 343, 359 (2003) which held that doing things like Burning Crosses cannot be considered Prima Fascia evidence of an intent to intimidate and thus are not prosecutable "True Threats." AND;

Watts v. United States" 394 U.S.705 (1969) Id. at 708 which specifically allows and protects talk of killing ELECTED officials (specifically the President of the United States) when there is little likelihood the speech will be acted upon. Such talk is defined by the court as "crude political hyperbole."

So far these techniques have worked as long as the instigator does nothing like what Jim Bell did.

In the late 1990’s James Dalton Bell came up with an idea to combat the rise of political and bureaucratic power, called Assassination Politics. Simply put, people would pay into a betting pool and then would pick when a politician would die. The person closest to the time and date wins. The idea was to encourage people to take an active role into causing the death of the target. (Pros & Cons here for more detail). However, Jim Bell didn’t just talk and publish about it. He got caught for “Interstate Stalking” of government employees, specifically IRS. His example serves as a guide of what not to do.

I DO NOT advocate violence until all peaceful means of influence have been exhausted. The point here is to put our public employees back on the same level of risk that we, their employers, are. They have created databases of our private information. They have legislated levels of immunity for themselves from prosecution and responsibility for their actions against We the people. They have hid behind their walls of delegated power and limited immunity for so long that they believe it is within their power to act with impunity. They need to learn that, just as we are at risk from government employee abuse, they are at risk from the Carl Dregas who have stood all they can stand.

What YOU CAN do is to start making a list of every public employee in your town, township, county, state. Include: their elected office name, office & home address, vacation property if possible, ALL phone numbers, automobiles for both government & personal use, makes, models, colors, license plate numbers, known religious affiliations and local meeting address, memberships including professional and personal like YMCA, health club, country club, fraternal organizations. Who are their family members? Who are their neighbors? Who mows the lawn? Who does the shopping? Who are the money donors to their campaigns? Are they businesses that you can start a boycott against if needed?

Start with all elected officials, then appointed or hired officials like inspectors and POLICE. Then add support staff like secretaries and other office personnel. Much of this information is readily available from government newsletters, public documents, campaign literature, reverse address and telephone number lists, name plaques in government buildings, business cards, etc. The Supreme Court has ruled that garbage on the street is fair pickings. HOWEVER, some states have enacted stronger privacy laws in opposition so check your state first. Early in the morning or late at night when fewer eyes are about, you can dump the contents of the can into a container in your trunk for review later.

So what do you do with “the List?” Firstly, DO NOT make multiple copies on your laser printer. It may be spying on you. Use an inkjet printer. If you don’t have an inkjet printer then take your one and ONLY laser copy to a self-service (meaning YOU make the copies) copy place and make black & white copies of the laser original. Destroy the original. On your computer, transfer the file to a flash drive or disk. Hide that outside of your home. Use one of the many free wipe file programs available to clean the file off your computer.

Secondly, Wait and watch for Part B, How To Publish “the List.”