a-gents of the british government have recently claimed that they believe they 'need' to have access to the web browsing history of everyone in britain, to 'protect us from terrorism'. large amounts of evidence already exists that shows that many, if not most, of the terrorist acts that are used as justification for such controls have been orchestrated BY western governments for complex political purposes – with operation gladio and operation northwoods being prime examples that are now matters of public record.
these so-called, 'false flag attacks' and other forms of similar events have often involved western governments planning and carrying out acts of terrorism against innocent members of the public around the world and then blaming them on other groups, creating the pretext needed to justify strict controls on freedom, huge sales of weapons and also various unlawful wars of aggression. more recently there has been testimony from a U.S. military whistleblower that the terrorist group ISIS receives funding directly from the CIA via swiss banks - in addition to other significant evidence pointing in the same direction.
with this seriously denied and longstanding imbalance in mind, combined with the many other whistleblower testimonies that show that western governments have long broken their own laws and abused their position for the benefit of a few that commonly attempt to tyrannically control and manipulate the majority in psychopathic ways; it is apparent that we need to evolve our understanding of what exactly the prime function of government is. such understanding is needed to be made clear so that we can all know what is and what is not appropriate governmental behavior and so that we can finally bring true balance to our beleaguered planet. let us not forget that among the data from the edward snowden files was the message that a-gents of the british 'secret service' headquarters (GCHQ) considers that keeping the discussion about online privacy out of the public consciousness is important, basically because they cannot justify their position in open and honest debate.
balance is accurately defined as 'no aspect is overpowering any other aspect' and in applying this understanding to societal structures, we come to the idea of of balance points, how to find them and how to maintain them. balance points allow for free expression and the alleviation of control, such that no-one is oppressed and conflict is minimised/ended. this is really not so difficult to understand and yet over and over again we have seen this point denied in favor of an approach that causes further imbalance, while claiming to be 'for our own good'.
it is not balance for one group to have intrusive abilities over other groups, nor to be able to control them in any way; such imbalance will always result in the creation of problems, resentment and dysfunction of many forms. for example, in the case of internet privacy – it is not balance for a shadowy group of individuals to secretly monitor the activities of everyone – even down to personal preferences and other aspects of personal life which would otherwise be totally private, yet which are exposed via the convenience of the use of internet services. if such an ability were warranted and desirable, the only balanced way to implement it would be to ensure that everyone has access to everyone else's browsing histories. such a transparent internet would be an amazing evolution in some ways, since we would all know the inner workings of the government/society in depth, which might bring many benefits to society as a whole, since: openness is always superior to being closed (provided balance is present).
however, since privacy is valued by many and we do not collectively have the experience of total transparency against which to make a comparison of the relative value of each option, the chances are that such a level of total transparency is going to be less welcome than the alternative way of balancing internet privacy whereby privacy is enhanced and intrusions into private information are uniformly prevented.
balance requires that nothing is overpowered and that nothing is denied. this means that all wishes must be respected and where there is conflict, balanced choices need to be made that create harmonious results. In the case of the internet, since a strong desire for privacy exists, this means that true privacy must be allowed to exist - without the provocative insertion of imbalance into the system by individuals identifying as 'secret services' who claim to be 'upholding the safety of all', while operating against a known backdrop of extremely unscrupulous behavior that benefits no-one. full safety cannot be achieved while imbalance exists and indeed, total balance is also total safety. therefore, balance requires that all intrusions into online privacy cease by all involved.
as was made clear in an earlier message on ureka.org about tyranny and terrorism, the more serious problem of the two is governmental tyranny, since the government wields far more power and weaponry than any non-governmental terrorist groups usually do. indeed, 'successful terrorist groups' often aim to form governments anyway and so stopping tyranny is a higher priority requirement of finding balance than stopping terrorism is.
with all this in mind, it is apparent that the balance requires the fulfillment of the following objectives:
this might include that all internet browsing histories of governmental a-gents be fully available to public scrutiny. (we need only recall the various reports of large numbers of workers in the U.S. pentagon who were using their computers there to access and distribute child pornography, to know the extreme importance of such transparency). while it will be thought by some that to reveal such sensitive information will be the classic 'threat to national security' – it is ultimately a threat to the security of all people to have all of their data open to scrutiny by groups of individuals whom they allegedly 'pay' for and yet know little about and who have already been shown to commonly be involved in organised rape and abduction of children!
what ends all threats to security is finding and allowing REAL balance in all things. spying on everyone is a form of imbalance and thus can never improve overall security. the potential for abuse of total surveillance is massive and there are so many potential nightmare scenarios that could arise that no single science fiction movie could ever cover them all!
without access to the source-code and designs schemas for the devices and apps being used, there is massive scope for imbalances and subterfuge to be introduced into our internet systems. the topic of the need for open sourced technology in general, is a large one and is beyond the scope of the intent of this message; however, it suffices here to say that such openness is a requirement of true internet balance.
net neutrality means that all internet connections are allowed the same access to transmission rates through the internet infrastructure and that internet service providers cannot cap or boost the speed of websites and other services, based on the amount of money they pay or for other reasons. net neutrality ensures that all voices can be heard and none can be denied due to a lack of 'wealth' and not being able to pay high prices for internet transfer speeds. all voices have some message that is of value and thus we need to allow them to express, be felt and be received. we cannot know the full truth and make the best decisions if we are silencing voices who we disagree with or as a way for us to attempt to further our own power position in society - history and logic shows us that this will eventually cause us serious problems. the captain of a ship does not have a ship for long if his imbalanced ego drives him to silence or disregard the ship's crew's advice and feedback – since he/she has no way to know the full details of the ship without them.
ultimately, the internet is a mirror that provides us reflections of society - from the greatest to the grimmest on earth. if we wish to create helpful change and find true balance, we cannot do so by controlling the mirror - we must go to the causes of what we are seeing reflected in the mirror and cause change with what we find there. if the internet is to be of any real value, we need to ensure that it is a clean mirror for us and that it is not falsely distorted by unseen forces - since this will only result in mistrust of the technology and limit it's use. ensuring that the balance points are found and held online is just one facet of finding balance on earth and it is a significant one, yet it cannot be found without us also allowing balance internally within us as individuals. once we individually heal and balance we can more powerfully change the source of the reflections that the internet is providing for us.
every level of self and society can be balanced, resulting in the unprecedented levels of success, joy and greatness that are needed now if we are to thrive and clean up the environment that we all rely on. as one level is balanced, others are helpfully effected too - so let's not allow the heartless among us to dominate the online world for us, just as they have consistently sought to do through the aeons in the 'offline' world!
ureka.org is specifically intended to facilitate causing balance on earth, both for individuals and within society as a whole. as always, you are invited to view the many media items and ideas that are provided here to help you to help us all by accelerating your own healing, balancing and evolving process. there are so many great ideas for this in the community that it is not easy to point to any one area to begin with, however, here is a list of thoughts from the community that have been tagged with the keyword 'balance', since that is a direct line to some of the greatness.
thanks for being you!