ZPEnergy.com - Strategic Planning

Berry Carter in the TapTen yahoo list wrote: Dear Friends,

I would like to see some discussion about how we might get some of the technologies we know about into general use in the face of potential opposition from existing structures.

We build structures to serve us. We design these structure to persist as long as possible. Often these structures require a lot of work to maintain.

Some examples of the structures I am talking about are belief structures, corporate structures, religious structures and government structures.

Some of the services that we built these structures to provide are shelter, food, protection from terrorists, germs, communists or red coats. Some other services are "salvation", "vicarious atonement", medical care and so on.

All of these structures have used the basic structuring of belief to support their continued existence. One of the beliefs that each of these structures encourages is the belief that our survival or happiness is somehow dependent on the continued existence of that structure. Thus the oil corporation will tell us that we will freeze in the dark if we don't support drilling in the Alaska wilderness. The government structure will tell us that we must make sacrifices in order to have continued protection from the terrorists (or communists or red coats). The religious structures tell us we will go to hell forever if we don't give a generous offering when the plate is passed. In short, they all use threats and fear to obtain our continued support.

Since the structured belief that people must be threatened in order to part with their money is so common in our society, it is not surprising that people who are trying to build organizations or other structures would use fear to pull in new recruits.

I believe that ORMUS use tends to free us from fear and thus from being manipulated to serve structure. I have noticed that I am much more adept at being in the right place at the right time since I started using ORMUS. This flow happens when I pay less attention to what I don't want (my fears) and pay more attention to what I do want (my connection to All That Is).

Thus, ORMUS may be perceived as a threat to many existing structures because it might help to liberate us from fear. Many of the other technologies discussed on this list might also fit into this category.

For example we may want to consider how to promote the aspect of a new technology which is least threatening to the most powerful structures.
With kindest regards,

Barry Carter

2319 Balm
Baker City, Oregon 97814
Web Pages:
Forest - http://www.subtleenergies.com/ormus/bmnfa/index.htm
ORMUS - http://www.ormus.net/index.htm

The best use of your time is to find a moment that is pleasing and milk it for everything that it is worth.

Abraham-Hicks
-----------

Dear Barry,

I wrote up a research paper a couple days ago addressing you exact question. It is an exact mathematical system designed to accumulate information about an adversarial infrastructure and calculate what parts of the structure need be removed or altered to benefit another given system. The research paper is as follows:

Research Paper
by Edwin G. Schasteen

The importance of protecting corporate infrastructure and inter-department operational perameters

Category Theory

Below is a mathematical conception for Categorical Analysis of an operational infrastructure with direct applications to identifying weaknesses within infrastructures for the purpose of calculating exactly what parts of an adversarial infrastructure need be removed to ensure total collapse of the adversarial infrastructure with the least amount of expenditures using raw intelligence data about infrastructure design and to formulate easy to read geometric representations of the infrastructure design that allows easy-to-identify weaknesses in infrastructure design. Weaknesses within the infrastructure design are analogues to the geometric weaknesses within the geometric representation of the infrastructure. The system is detailed below.

Suppose that one has an enemy operational infrastructure.

Intelligence has revealed that the infrastructure consists of 6 departments.

The departments are labeled 1 through 6 as follows.

Dep 1
Dep 2
Dep 3
Dep 4
Dep 5
Dep 6

Intelligence reveals the following about the Interdepartmental infrastructure.

Department 1 supports Department 2
Department 2 supports Department 1
Department 1 supports Department 5
Department 5 supports Department 6
Department 6 supports Department 1
Department 1 supports Department 3
Department 3 supports Department 4
Department 4 supports Department 1

Intelligence was unable to reveal any information about what any of the departments do, only the number of departments that exist within the infrastructure, that each department supports another department, and what department each department supports. With this information alone it is possible to calculate exactly which departments need to be eliminated or disabled to cause the entire infrastructure to collapse or become in-operable.

The geometric representation of the information above reveals the following:

Department 1 supports Department 2, and Department 2 supports Department 1, but does not support any other department.

Department 1 may or may not need department 2 to sustain its affective operation. If department 2 is eliminated it may eliminate the affective operation of department one, but we cannot be sure. Department 2 on the other hand, is only directly supported by department 1, so if department 1 is eliminated, department 2 will not be supported unless department 2 is a back up for department 1. It is possible that department two has a self-contained self-sustaining internal infrastructure. This leads to the following possible conclusions about the relationship between departments 1, 2, and the remaining departments.

1) If department 2 is not a back up system for department 1, then if department 1 is eliminated, department 2 will be isolated and not supported by any external infrastructure, as no other department's infrastructure is likely to be set up to support department 2. Department 2 becomes affectively disabled.

2) If department 2 is a back up system for department 1, then if department 1 is elliminated, department 2 will take over department 1's operation and will assume support from departments 4 and 6.

1) If department 5 is a back up for department 6, then if department 6 is eliminated, department 5 will take over department 6's operation and will resume supporting department 1 in department 6's stead, and will remain supported by department 1.

2) If department 5 is not a back up system for department 6, then if department 5 is eliminated, department 6 will not be isolated and not supported by any external infrastructure and will thus have to support itself, as no other department's infrastructure is likely to be set up to support department 6. However department 6 will still be tasked with supporting department 1 and will soon become unable to support 1 due to lack of external support and will eventually become affectively disabled.
Department 1 is still supported by departments 3 and 4. Department 1 may be capable of operating affectively with only the support of departments 3 and 4, but we cannot be sure.

1) If department 3 is a back up for department 4, then if department 4 is eliminated, department 3 will take over department 4's operation and will resume supporting department 1 in department 4's stead, and will remain supported by department 1.

2) If department 3 is not a back up system for department 4, then if department 3 is eliminated, department 4 will not be isolated and not supported by any external infrastructure and will thus have to support itself, as no other department's infrastructure is likely to be set up to support department 4. However department 4 will still be tasked with supporting department 1 and will soon become unable to support 1 due to lack of external support and will eventually become affectively disabled.

Department 1 is still supported by departments 5 and 6. Department 1 may be capable of operating affectively with only the support of departments 5 and 6, but we cannot be sure.

If departments 1, 2 ,6, and 4 are disabled, then departments 3 and 5 will be isolated. Department 3 and 5 will be tasked with supporting a non-existent department, and will be unsupported. The overall infrastructure is invalid.

If departments 1, 2, 5, and 3 are disabled, then departments 4 and 6 will be isolated. Department 4 and 6 will be tasked with supporting a non-existent department, and will be unsupported. The overall infrastructure is invalid. Thus to ensure invalidation of the adversarial infrastructure, one need only simultaneously eliminate departments 1, 2, 5, and 3, or one need only simultaneously eliminate departments 1, 2, 6, and 4.

Barry,

Dep 1=Government Structure
Dep 2=Belief Structures
Dep 3=Religious Belief Structure
Dep 4=Protection from Terrorists
Dep 5=Terrorists
Dep 6=Germs
Dep 7=Shelter
Dep 8=Communists and Red Coats
Dep 9=Fear

I worked out the geometric configuration based on the information you provided. The results determined that if you removed Departments 9 and 2, the entire infrastructure would collapse, which is not good. However, if you remove Department 9, and reconfigure department 2 appropriately, it will resolve all the infrastructure problems described in terms of departments 1-9 to the betterment of all man. This includes collapsing the Terrorist regime by eliminating fear from all man kind. This would halt the terrorists because fear is the terrorists' primal tool. As I understand it, it is presumed that ORMUS can accomplish all this.

What are your thoughts about this?

Inquisitively,
Edwin