How to Build a Police State While No One Notices

A few weeks ago I wrote piece enti­tled,The Unwar­rant­ed Pur­suit of Per­fect­ing Soci­etal Men­tal Health is the Tro­jan Horse Ush­er­ing in the Amer­i­can Police State.This Sub­stack is a sequel of sorts, which I wrote as a com­pre­hen­sive look defin­ing the sequence of events orches­trat­ing the autho­riza­tion and imple­men­ta­tion of police state capa­bil­i­ties in Geor­gia, paid for by Geor­gia tax­pay­ers, under the guise of pro­mot­ing the pub­lic wel­fare. The enslave­ment of men has always been a spir­i­tu­al con­ver­sa­tion, and so I treat it that way. I offer my thoughts bas­ing them on a spir­i­tu­al foun­da­tion, but also an his­tor­i­cal one, not­ing the extent to which slav­ery infest­ed our nation from incep­tion through the cul­mi­na­tion of the Amer­i­can Civ­il War. So, this is not a light read, pur­pose­ly. I want it to be both mean­ing­ful and fac­tu­al, such that the read­er will leave with mat­ters to con­sid­er, as well as an assign­ment to con­tem­plate.

Part 1‑Spiritual Influences at Work Defining World Events

I have heard it often repeat­ed, Those who do not learn from his­to­ry are doomed to repeat it. That is because a close exam­i­na­tion of his­tor­i­cal records regard­ing var­i­ous events and cir­cum­stances of the past, when com­pared to our own, often rhyme, as if they might relate in cer­tain ways, per­haps dri­ven by sim­i­lar caus­es. Were that not true, axioms such as I bring for­ward above would nev­er have been authored. But a ques­tion remains, how might events and cir­cum­stances relat­ing to dif­fer­ent peo­ples, of dif­fer­ent cul­tures, in dif­fer­ent areas of the world, dur­ing dif­fer­ent epochs, demon­strate the kind of con­gru­ence the axiom sug­gests?

My guess, and I sup­pose its only a guess, derives from my world view. Your guess may dif­fer based upon yours.

My world view informs me that the uni­verse in which all phys­i­cal­i­ty resides is craft­ed from pow­er, knowl­edge and inten­tions so incon­ceiv­able that the only term I might find to char­ac­ter­ize it is to express that the mea­sure of each is, for all prac­ti­cal pur­pos­es, infi­nite. No one, ani­mat­ed with­in a state of phys­i­cal exis­tence, appears capa­ble of ful­ly com­pre­hend­ing what phys­i­cal exis­tence even means, much less be able to sat­is­fac­to­ri­ly express what it means to oth­ers, giv­en our van­tage points liv­ing with­in the sys­tem. My world view, how­ev­er, does inspire faith that one day we might more ful­ly under­stand these mat­ters, trans­port­ed to a realm of exis­tence out­side of time and out­side of the phys­i­cal con­straints defin­ing our present cap­tiv­i­ty. My faith assures me that there is exis­tence out­side of time and phys­i­cal­i­ty, housed with­in a cer­tain realm in which only ones soul and spir­i­tu­al inten­tions reg­is­ter, inten­tions which I expect shall bear heav­i­ly on the ques­tion whether we will be wel­comed, or not, into the pres­ence of our Cre­ator.

And this dis­tinc­tion between mutu­al­ly exclu­sive spir­i­tu­al inten­tions, label­ing those, say, good or evil, there­by serves to define that which our Cre­ator, God, con­sid­ers accept­able, or unac­cept­able, with­in His midst. Because cer­tain quan­ti­ties of both, serve as con­stant con­trib­u­tors to the spir­i­tu­al make­up of men, and because it is that spir­i­tu­al make­up which deter­mines the pur­pos­es of mens phys­i­cal pur­suits, the per­pet­u­al pres­ence of those spir­i­tu­al sub­stances, good and evil, in vary­ing pro­por­tions, may explain why human events and cir­cum­stances in this world, influ­enced heav­i­ly by them, while they may not per­fect­ly repeat, do at least seem to rhyme. That his­to­ry repeats, or rhymes, appears there­fore of a design so intel­li­gent that the human mind can bare­ly scratch the sur­face of its extents, a fac­tor so lim­it­ing that it makes rec­og­niz­ing these uni­ver­sal truths dif­fi­cult, espe­cial­ly when accom­plish­ing mere sur­vival in an envi­ron­ment forc­ing us to com­pete for lim­it­ed resources, more often than not, cap­tures the bulk of our lim­it­ed atten­tion. In short, because the spir­its of good and evil, essen­tial­ly sub­stances of a non-phys­i­cal dimen­sion, tran­scend time and space, con­stant­ly influ­enc­ing mens pur­pos­es, events of the world large­ly influ­enced by those com­pet­ing sub­stances, notice­ably rhyme as his­to­ry pro­ceeds.

Conditions Leading Up to the American Civil War Analogous to Conditions today

So, why did I go there, dis­cussing spir­i­tu­al influ­ences at work defin­ing world events as a pro­logue to a main dis­cus­sion? I did it to build a case that in order to bet­ter deter­mine our gen­er­a­tions place in his­to­ry, and bet­ter relate to future events we expe­ri­ence in this life, a healthy dose of his­tor­i­cal per­spec­tive could become a most valu­able tool.

Scrip­ture informs the believ­er, A house divid­ed can­not stand. To the believ­er, that prin­ci­ple, as record­ed in all three syn­op­tic gospels, is an immutable truth, impart­ed by Christ into the phys­i­cal world. Scribed with­in the 12th Book of Matthew, in order to counter the argu­ments of Phar­isees attempt­ing to dis­cred­it his works as works of Satan, Jesus spoke the fol­low­ing:

26 If Satan casts out Satan, he is divid­ed against him­self. How then will his king­dom stand? 27 And if I cast out demons by Beelze­bub, by whom do your sons cast them out? There­fore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out demons by the Spir­it of God, sure­ly the king­dom of God has come upon you.

In express­ing this argu­ment to the Phar­isees, Christ spoke con­cern­ing the very same spir­i­tu­al sub­stances I ref­er­ence above, good, which Jesus por­trays as the Spir­it of God, ver­sus evil, which he por­trays as the spir­it of Beelze­bub, also Satan. Waged since the dawn of human exis­tence, in these pas­sages Jesus refers to a per­pet­u­al war being fought among human inhab­i­tants of earth, not only between and among them­selves sev­er­al­ly, but also cen­tered with­in the minds of each. It is that spir­i­tu­al war tak­ing place in each human mind, which influ­ences each of us to under­take the actions and pur­pos­es we seek to accom­plish, moment by moment, each next pur­pose ulti­mate­ly decid­ed by spir­i­tu­al influ­ences inclin­ing our behav­ior, forces which we have along the way invit­ed to live with­in our hearts. Because we invite those spir­its, both good and evil, God and Satan, into our hearts, the prin­ci­ple that men should live by free will can­not be thwart­ed by either. Only men them­selves, choos­ing inten­tions aligned with the will of one or the oth­er, God or Satan, moment by moment, can do that. And that is where a dis­cus­sion of cer­tain men pur­pos­ing to enslave oth­er men, and the rea­sons for those pur­pos­es begins.

Lincolns House Divided Speech as a Pattern for Understanding Our Place in History

The role of spir­i­tu­al forces per­pet­u­al­ly influ­enc­ing human events now hope­ful­ly estab­lished, I would like to direct your atten­tion back to June 6th, 1858, report­ed­ly around 8 PM, when, as a pri­vate cit­i­zen, Abra­ham Lin­coln entered the Illi­nois State House in Spring­field hav­ing ear­li­er that evening received his par­tys nom­i­na­tion as the Repub­li­can can­di­date for US Sen­ate. Lin­coln would run against the present hold­er of that office, Demo­c­rat Stephen Dou­glas. That evening, Lin­coln offered per­haps the most con­tro­ver­sial speech of his pre-pres­i­den­tial polit­i­cal career. That speech is know as Lin­colns House Divid­ed Speech. The rea­son I bring this speech up is that, know­ing well the con­tent of Lin­colns remarks that evening, and pos­sess­ing, I believe, a fair grasp of the events and cir­cum­stances of our polit­i­cal world today, while the events Lin­coln describes may not repeat ver­ba­tim at any time dur­ing the future, they do appear to rhyme with those with which we con­tend today. And because the con­tent of Lin­colns remarks to the Illi­nois gath­er­ing cen­ter around the ques­tion whether one man can jus­ti­fi­ably enslave anoth­er, you might sense whith­er this dis­cus­sion is tend­ing.

Lin­coln began his speech utter­ing a line which should catch a patri­ots atten­tion today,If we could first know where we are, and whith­er we are tend­ing, we could then bet­ter judge what to do, and how to do it.Well, patri­ot friends, isnt that state­ment as true today as it was then? Do not the cir­cum­stances about which Lin­coln spoke in 1858 rhyme with those about which we strug­gle to decide our cur­rent paths?

For the next twen­ty min­utes, Lin­coln attempt­ed, in his own way, to pro­vide insight for the crowd assem­bled to bet­ter under­stand,where they are and whith­er they are tend­ing,such that they might bet­ter judge,what to do and how to do it. Would that Lin­coln could advise us today. Although that can nev­er hap­pen, we can take note, rec­og­niz­ing sim­i­lar­i­ties between the cir­cum­stances with which Lin­coln dealt in 1858, and those with which our gen­er­a­tion con­tends today.

In his next para­graph, the future 16th Pres­i­dent of the Unit­ed States alleged to the crowd,

We are now far into the fifth year, since a pol­i­cy was ini­ti­at­ed, with the avowed object, and con­fi­dent promise, of putting an end to slav­ery agi­ta­tion. Under the oper­a­tion of that pol­i­cy, that agi­ta­tion has not only, not ceased, but has con­stant­ly aug­ment­ed. In my opin­ion, it will not cease, until a cri­sis shall have been reached, and passed.

The pol­i­cy to which Lin­coln referred was the pas­sage of cer­tain leg­is­la­tion spon­sored by his polit­i­cal oppo­nent, Sen­a­tor Dou­glas, theKansas-Nebras­ka Act, which became fed­er­al law in 1854. That law dealt pri­mar­i­ly with the ques­tion whether west­ern ter­ri­to­ries mov­ing toward state­hood would enter the union as free states, or as slave states, the law pro­vid­ing that ques­tion to be decid­ed by a vote of pop­u­lar opin­ion in each ter­ri­to­ry (a vote of white men, of course) as it moved toward state­hood. Accord­ing to the laws pro­po­nents at the time, pass­ing the the Kansas-Nebras­ka Act would effec­tive­lyput an end to slav­ery agi­ta­tion.But accord­ing to Lin­coln that night, since its pas­sage, slav­ery agi­ta­tion had not ceased, but instead gath­ered momen­tum. Lin­coln offered his opin­ion that under that pol­i­cy, agi­ta­tion would not cease,until a cri­sis shall have been reached, and passed.To my friends and read­ers I ask, does not Lin­colns appraisal of the polit­i­cal cir­cum­stances, as he por­trayed in 1858, describe a des­ti­na­tion we appear to be head­ing today? Are we not tend­ing toward some ulti­mate cri­sis of sorts? Here again, we see one of his­to­rys rhymes unfold­ing.

Lin­coln then offered a most con­tro­ver­sial theme for his speech, begin­ning by quot­ing Scrip­ture,

A house divid­ed against itself can­not stand.” I believe this gov­ern­ment can­not endure, per­ma­nent­ly half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dis­solved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divid­ed. It will become all one thing or all the oth­er.

Either the oppo­nents of slav­ery, will arrest the fur­ther spread of it, and place it where the pub­lic mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ulti­mate extinc­tion; or its advo­cates will push it for­ward, till it shall become alike law­ful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South. Have we no ten­den­cy to the lat­ter con­di­tion?

I dont know about you, but the sen­ti­ments Lin­coln expressed fit my appraisal of polit­i­cal events in our coun­try today. While names cer­tain­ly change as gen­er­a­tions go and come, glob­al forces at work enslav­ing the Amer­i­can peo­ple today appear more than will­ing to force their pur­pos­es through­out the fifty states. As a mat­ter of course, either those forces will be suc­cess­ful,till it shall become alike law­ful in all the States,or Amer­i­can patri­ots will place the spread of glob­al­ism where the pub­lic mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ulti­mate extinc­tion.That is the present cir­cum­stance I see, friends. That is the issue. That is the war we are fight­ing today. Were I to start from scratch to describe our present real­i­ty, I could not do it bet­ter than Lin­coln did in June of 1858, again, demon­strat­ing the rhyming nature of his­to­ry.

So, lets dri­ve a stake in the ground, secur­ing our gains of insight, and pro­cee­da lit­tle deep­er into Lin­colns speech. Next, and I think, quite inter­est­ing­ly, Lin­coln dons the man­tle, per­haps claim­ing title as Amer­i­c­as first true con­spir­a­cy the­o­rist, rais­ing the specter to his audi­ence that over the pre­vi­ous four years, with hard­ly any­one rec­og­niz­ing the machi­na­tions involved, indi­vid­u­als among them, specif­i­cal­ly Stephen (Dou­glas, Demo­c­rat Illi­nois Sen­a­tor), Franklin (Pierce, 14th Pres­i­dent), Roger (Taney, Chief Jus­tice US Supreme Court), and James (Buchanan 15th Pres­i­dent), con­spired to bring about con­di­tions under which a fed­er­al Supreme Court case (Dred Scott) would decide Dou­glas Kansas-Nebras­ka Act not only applied to ter­ri­to­ries enter­ing state­hood, but also to exist­ing states, pre­vent­ing those states from out­law­ing slav­ery, all in an attempt to push [slav­ery] for­ward, till it shall become alike law­ful in all the States, old as well as new — North as well as South.The ques­tion whether the advo­cates of slav­ery would pre­vail, mak­ing the pecu­liar insti­tu­tion legal in all states, would become the issue over which the Amer­i­can Civ­il War would soon com­mence. The Civ­il War would become the cri­sis Lin­coln described dur­ing his speech that day.

Today, even non-believ­ers would find it dif­fi­cult to deny that the enslave­ment of men, by oth­er men, is an act of pure, spir­i­tu­al evil. Look­ing back at those times, how do we ratio­nal­ize those liv­ing in that day could not see enslave­ment for what it is, an act of evil inten­tions? Again focus­ing our sights on the present, we see the rhyme of his­to­ry at work. Why cant peo­ple around us rec­og­nize sim­i­lar efforts to enslave men, by oth­er men, for what they are, acts of evil? One answer, I believe, is that men, caught up in the day-to-day activ­i­ties of life, have oth­er mat­ters to attend, putting food on the table for one.

But anoth­er answer, I believe, is that evil works in dark­ness. Evil nev­er tells what it is doing. Evil sub­verts the truth to per­fect its pur­pos­es, aspir­ing not to be dis­cov­ered until those pur­pos­es can be accom­plished. Evil fab­ri­cates cov­er sto­ries, per­pet­u­al nar­ra­tives to hide its activ­i­ties from the pub­lic, effec­tive­ly erect­ing scaf­fold­ing on which to sus­pend it pur­pos­es until they become ripe, explain­ing to ques­tion­ers that the sup­ports erect­ed for those pur­pos­es are for future soci­etal improve­ments, pure­ly to pro­mote the pub­lic good.

That evening, Lin­coln tes­ti­fied as to cer­tain evil plans and adap­ta­tions exe­cut­ed by the four men to whom he refers, Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James, who dur­ing the pre­vi­ous four years, he alleges to have exe­cut­ed a plan which would bring Amer­i­ca to the point of cri­sis. Lin­coln illus­trates his alle­ga­tion using the fol­low­ing metaphor:

We can not absolute­ly know that all these exact adap­ta­tions are the result of pre­con­cert. But when we see a lot of framed tim­bers, dif­fer­ent por­tions of which we know have been got­ten out at dif­fer­ent times and places and by dif­fer­ent work­men — Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James, for instance — and when we see these tim­bers joined togeth­er, and see they exact­ly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons and mor­tices exact­ly fit­ting, and all the lengths and pro­por­tions of the dif­fer­ent pieces exact­ly adapt­ed to their respec­tive places, and not a piece too many or too few — not omit­ting even scaf­fold­ing — or, if a sin­gle piece be lack­ing, we can see the place in the frame exact­ly fit­ted and pre­pared to yet bring such piece in — in such a case, we find it impos­si­ble not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James all under­stood one anoth­er from the begin­ning, and all worked upon a com­mon plan or draft drawn up before the first lick was struck.

Part 2- A Defining Look at the Events Necessary to Build a Police State While No One Notices

The rea­son I offer the con­tent of Lin­colns House Divid­ed Speech to you today, in the con­text of an ongo­ing spir­i­tu­al war between good and evil, is for you to have the oppor­tu­ni­ty to gath­er suf­fi­cient men­tal aware­ness, and fur­ther­more, the per­spec­tive nec­es­sary to rec­og­nize that the cir­cum­stances about which Lin­coln spoke in 1858, when com­pared to those of today, expose the very real pos­si­bil­i­ty that those many trust in elect­ed office at state and local lev­els, right here in Geor­gia, while hard­work­ing Geor­gians toil to make a liv­ing and place food on the table, are in fact work­ing in con­cert erect­ing a phys­i­cal and tech­no­log­i­cal sys­tem of enslave­ment, anal­o­gous to the one erect­ed by Stephen, Franklin, Roger and James, its many parts man­i­fest­ing almost iden­ti­cal­ly to the struc­ture Lin­coln describes, built under a cloak of dark­ness, under the guise of pro­vid­ing future soci­etal improve­ments, designed to pro­mote the pub­lic good. The sys­tem to which I refer I allege is present­ly, like­ly being built by Geor­gia elect­ed offi­cials, some who work under the cov­er of dark­ness, such that the enslave­ment machin­ery can be leg­is­lat­ed, autho­rized, fund­ed and installed with­out the peo­ple notic­ing. The pub­lic good this enslave­ment mech­a­nism is tout­ed to pro­mote, is the per­pet­u­al pur­suit of achiev­ing a per­fect­ed state of behav­ioral health among the inhab­i­tants of Geor­gia. A series of enabling events lead­ing to my present con­cerns began more than a decade ago:

In 2008 and 2009, the Unit­ed States Depart­ment of Jus­tice (DOJ) began an inves­ti­ga­tion of Geor­gias sev­en state-oper­at­ed psy­chi­atric hos­pi­tals.

In Jan­u­ary of 2009, the DOJ filed alaw­suitagainst the State of Geor­gia alleg­ing state hos­pi­tals were vio­lat­ing patients con­sti­tu­tion­al and statu­to­ry rights in mul­ti­ple ways.

In response to the DOJ law­suit, soon the first ele­ment of scaf­fold­ing arrived on the job. That occurred whenGov­er­nor Son­ny Per­due signed HB228 (2009), estab­lish­ing the Geor­gia Depart­ment of Behav­ioral Heath and Devel­op­men­tal Dis­abil­i­ties, and Addic­tive Dis­eases. The task of the new depart­ment would large­ly involve con­cerns of the fed­er­al inves­ti­ga­tion, the law­suit, and the require­ments of a set­tle­ment agree­ment being planned by the lit­i­gat­ing par­ties.

In Jan­u­ary 2010, Geor­gia offi­cialsannounce the Cen­tral State Hos­pi­tal in Milledgeville would be down­sized.

Lat­er that year, the Unit­ed States Depart­ment of Jus­tice, in the per­son of Sal­ly Yates, US Attor­ney for the Dis­trict of North Geor­gia lat­er fired by Pres­i­dent Don­ald Trump for insub­or­di­na­tion, filed a new com­plaint against the State of Geor­gia for vio­lat­ing the Amer­i­cans with Dis­abil­i­ty Act.

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/01/10/US_v_Georgia_ADAsettle_10-19–10.pdf (page 1, sec­tion I, let­ters A‑C)

In Octo­ber of 2010, rather than fight the case in court, the State of Geor­gia set­tled with Pres­i­dent Oba­mas Depart­ment of Jus­tice, the DOJs Office of Pub­lic Affairs announc­ing that theagree­mentwould, Trans­form the State of Geor­gia’s men­tal health and devel­op­men­tal dis­abil­i­ty sys­tem.

By July of 2011, the State of Geor­gia agreed to stop all State Hos­pi­tal admis­sions of indi­vid­u­als with a pri­ma­ry diag­no­sis of a devel­op­men­tal dis­abil­i­ty (read the def­i­n­i­tion in the set­tle­ment) andbegan releas­ing indi­vid­u­als from the State Hos­pi­tal.

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/01/10/US_v_Georgia_ADAsettle_10-19–10.pdf( page 5, num­ber 1, sec­tion a)

From 2011–2015, Geor­gia was giv­en a spe­cif­ic num­ber of indi­vid­u­als it had to release from the State Hos­pi­tals.https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/01/10/US_v_Georgia_ADAsettle_10-19–10.pdf(page 6, let­ters A‑F)

Under the agree­ment, those released would be pro­vid­ed state and fed­er­al sub­si­dies for com­mu­ni­ty hous­ing, med­ical, edu­ca­tion, trans­porta­tion, nutri­tion, and oth­er ser­vices.

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2011/01/10/US_v_Georgia_ADAsettle_10-19–10.pdf(page 5–10, sec­tion III, num­ber 2)

The 2010 set­tle­ment required Geor­gia to pro­vide hous­ing for an esti­mat­ed 9,000 indi­vid­u­als with seri­ous men­tal ill­ness and a foren­sic sta­tus (a.k.a. crim­i­nal record). The set­tle­ment described these indi­vid­u­als as fre­quent­ly read­mit­ted to the state hos­pi­tals, emer­gency rooms and/or being chron­i­cal­ly home­less after being released from jails or pris­ons. (page 11, sec­tion B, num­ber 1)

These esti­mat­ed 9,000 peo­ple (in 2010) were required to receive Assertive Com­mu­ni­ty Treat­ment (ACT). ACT ser­vices includecase man­age­ment, hous­ing, cri­sis ser­vices and abuse ser­vices. These com­mu­ni­ty ser­vices must bepro­vid­ed 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. (page 12–13, num­ber 2)

Because the indi­vid­u­als released into the com­mu­ni­ty all bear sig­nif­i­cant men­tal health diag­noses, that fact gave rise to the need that they beelec­tron­i­cal­ly mon­i­tored and/or tracked.

The need to receive and store elec­tron­ic monitoring/tracking data gave rise to HB227 in 2019, cre­at­ing GDAC, theGeor­gia Data Ana­lyt­ics Cen­ter, a bill signed into law byGov­er­nor Bri­an Kemp.

MeanwhileBack at the Ranch

At this junc­ture, I want to stop, take a breath and back up for a moment. Speak­ing now of Bri­an Kemp, in 2017, because of an report­ed breach in the com­put­er sys­tem of theGeor­gia Cen­ter for Elec­tions Sys­temsat Ken­ne­saw State Uni­ver­si­ty, thenSec­re­tary of State,Kemp was able to gain con­trol over the oper­a­tion of Geor­gias statewide elec­tion sys­tem, the alleged breach hand­ing him the per­fect oppor­tu­ni­ty to can­cel the states con­tract with Ken­ne­saw, and bring con­trol and over­sight of Geor­gia elec­tions direct­ly under his office, and under his peo­ple, just in time for the 2018 mid-terms, an elec­tion in which he would chal­lenge to become Geor­gias Gov­er­nor, and in which can­di­date Brad Raf­fensperg­er would take Kemps place. Thus, in 2018, Bri­an Kemp would per­son­al­ly super­vise both his elec­tion as gov­er­nor, and also the elec­tion of Brad Raf­fensperg­er to become Geor­gias Sec­re­tary of State.

The com­put­er breach was not as seri­ous as any­one claimed, pos­si­bly even a ruse. We know that because, with­in a week of pub­licly humil­i­at­ing the oper­a­tion of elec­tions at the KSU Cen­ter for Elec­tions Sys­tems, and announc­ing an inter­nal inves­ti­ga­tion of the breach, vow­ing that heads would roll, instead, Sec­re­tary of State Kemp turned 180 degrees, placed a smile back on his face and hired CES Direc­tor Michael Barnes, the indi­vid­ual most respon­si­ble for the alleged breach, to run his new in-house elec­tion sys­tem at the Sec­re­tary of States Office, Voter­GAreport­ing,

As it turns out, thereck­less behav­ior, inex­cus­able con­duct, gross incom­pe­tence and unde­ni­able inep­ti­tude,which accord­ing to Kemp, was the rea­son for clos­ing CES and mov­ing its func­tions direct­ly under his per­son­al con­trol,accord­ing to Kemps new attor­ney of recordRyan Ger­many, turned out to be cer­tain elec­tion work­ers sim­ply fol­low­ingstan­dard oper­at­ing pro­ce­dure.Thus,Bri­an Kemp got what he want­ed, per­son­al con­trol of the Geor­gia elec­tion sys­tem while main­tain­ing con­ti­nu­ity in oper­a­tion.

As Kemp and Raf­fensperg­er took their respec­tive offices, the old, tried and true vot­ing sys­tem, one that had nev­er caused any sig­nif­i­cant prob­lems, was thrown on the ash heap of his­to­ry, replaced by a new vot­ing sys­tem the use of which over the last two elec­tions has result­ed in enu­mer­able alle­ga­tions and cita­tions of elec­tion fraud, the ben­e­fi­cia­ries, if true, being the estab­lish­ment Repub­li­cans elect­ed to statewide office in 2018 and 2022, Kemp, Raf­fensperg­er and Attor­ney Gen­er­al Chris Carr, along with two Demo­c­rat US sen­a­tors present­ly occu­py­ing seats in the US Capi­tol, and, lets not for­get, of course, Joe Biden. Thats a pret­ty equi­table deal, Repub­li­cans in charge of the state, and Democ­rats in charge of the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment. Every­one got what they want­ed, along with a new elec­tion sys­tem that could be used to over­rule any objec­tion to gov­ern­men­tal pol­i­cy the pub­lic might voice at the polls. Any Amer­i­can wit­ness­ing the events I bring to your atten­tion today, if seen occur­ring in a 3rd world coun­try, would nat­u­ral­ly con­clude they were orches­trat­ed as a means to fur­ther imple­ment a police state. But, of course, this is Amer­i­ca

Resuming the Narrative of Events

With Bri­an Kemp Geor­gias Gov­er­nor, with Geor­gias elec­tion sys­tem under his and SoS Raf­fensperg­ers con­trol, and with GDAC approved, its facil­i­ties fund­ed and under con­struc­tion, a man­ner in which to gath­er and trans­mit data asso­ci­at­ed with men­tal heath patients who, by virtue of the 2010 set­tle­ment between Geor­gia and the DOJ, must be mon­i­tored 24/7/365, became a front burn­er item. That data, includ­ing pro­pri­etary data ana­lyt­ics, once begin­ning to flow, would be housed, main­tained and dis­trib­uted by GDAC.

In 2022, Geor­gia Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Todd Jones (R‑25) intro­duced HB1013, the Geor­gia Men­tal Health Par­i­ty Act. Men­tal health par­i­ty sim­ply means health insur­ance providers must cov­er men­tal health and sub­stance use dis­or­der ben­e­fitsthe same way they cov­er phys­i­cal health ben­e­fits. Thus, if an insur­ance com­pa­ny choos­es to cov­er phys­i­cal health ben­e­fits, it is fed­er­al law that it also cov­er men­tal health and sub­stance use dis­or­ders. That is a con­ve­nient require­ment in fed­er­al law, which cre­ates afund­ing mech­a­nism for men­tal­ly ill indi­vid­u­als, no longer con­fined in state hos­pi­tals, now required to be tracked 24/7/365, the data con­tin­u­ous­ly col­lect­ed to be housed at GDAC. HB1013, as pro­posed and passed by the Geor­gia House of Rep­re­sen­ta­tives, includ­ed com­men­tary on the pro­posed neces­si­ty totrack com­pli­ance out­comesof the men­tal­ly ill released under the DOJ set­tl­ment.

HB1013, as pro­posed by Jones, estab­lished a new office of Health Strat­e­gy and Coor­di­na­tion, under the Gov­er­nor, empow­ered to,

Thus, once again, we see leg­is­la­tion being pro­posed at the Geor­gia Gen­er­al Assem­bly requir­ing thetrack­ing of men­tal health patientsliv­ing among the gen­er­al pop­u­la­tion, and the hous­ing and shar­ing of the result­ing data, which would be accom­plished at GDAC.

Fur­ther down in the bill, addi­tion­al pro­vi­sions requiredtrack­ing met­rics for indi­vid­u­als with men­tal ill­ness.

For­tu­nate­ly, due to a firestorm of pub­lic out­cry, in the final draft, which passed into law, the only ref­er­ence left autho­riz­ing the track­ing of indi­vid­u­als with men­tal ill­ness are the fol­low­ing six lines:

Thus, as we speak the only author­i­ty giv­en the State of Geor­gia to track and col­lect data of indi­vid­u­als with men­tal ill­ness, is to explore strate­gies to do so.

HB520 Is Introduced in 2023

Stymied regard­ing an obvi­ous attempt to autho­rize the track­ing and col­lec­tion of data of indi­vid­u­als with men­tal ill­ness, dur­ing the 2023 Gen­er­al Assem­bly Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Jones went to the well again, intro­duc­ing HB520, which unlike HB1013, the Geor­gia Men­tal Health Par­i­ty Act, bears hard­ly a title at all, its cov­er page mere­ly call­ing it, An Act.

There are two inter­est­ing sec­tions of HB520, which regard (1) the col­lect­ing and trans­mit­ting of data and pre­dic­tive ana­lyt­ics from an unde­finedEXTERIOR DATA SOURCE, and (2) the receiv­ing and shar­ing of the same across all exec­u­tive agen­cies, lines 969–971 propos­ing the fol­low­ing author­i­ties:

Coin­ci­den­tal­ly, as you may know, in 2020, short­ly aftere GDAC became a real­i­ty, Rep­re­sen­ta­tive Jones found­ed a com­pa­ny mar­ket­ing a prod­uct that tracks and col­lects GPS and bio­met­ric data from indi­vid­u­als sub­ject­ed to it, uses pro­pri­etary busi­ness intel­li­gence to per­form pre­dic­tive ana­lyt­ics on the data, and which could obvi­ous­ly fill the roll autho­rized under line 971, becom­ing an EXTERNAL DATA SOURCE. As such, the prod­uct could sup­ply both data and pre­dic­tive ana­lyt­ic com­pli­ance reports to gov­ern­men­tal offices using the sys­tem. The result­ing out­put would, of course, be housed at GDAC for all state exec­u­tive agen­cies to gain access.

Under part (2) above, once HB520 stalled in the Geor­gia Sen­ate, lines regard­ing those pro­vi­sions were extract­ed, pass­ing both hous­es on the last day of the ses­sion under SB23. Accord­ing to those pro­vi­sions, GDAC would become an AGENT TO ALL EXECUTIVE AGENCIES upon the gov­er­nors sig­na­ture. That pro­vi­sion con­ceiv­ably meant GDAC would act as a seam­less, fric­tion­less cen­tral node in the sys­tem, RECEIVING data and pre­dic­tive ana­lyt­ics from not only any and all exec­u­tive state agen­cies, but also fromEXTERNAL DATA SOURCES, and TRANSMITTING the same to any and all oth­er exec­u­tive state agen­cies upon request, hard­ly a con­sid­er­a­tion giv­en regard­ing a gen­uine need-to-know, or a rea­son an exec­u­tive state agency may make such a request. Once infor­ma­tion would be received by ONE state exec­u­tive agency, under these pro­vi­sions it could con­ceiv­ably belong to ALL exec­u­tive state agen­cies. Appar­ent­ly, GDAC could func­tion as a mind­less robot, receiv­ing gov­ern­ment infor­ma­tion from both inte­ri­or andEXTERNAL DATA SOURCES, and trans­mit­ting that infor­ma­tion upon request. There­fore, upon the gov­er­nors sig­na­ture of SB23, once both of those parts of HB520 would pass into law, data and pre­dic­tive ana­lyt­ics col­lect­ed and trans­mit­ted from a monitoring/tracking enti­ty, becom­ing an EXTERNAL DATA SOURCE, would be acces­si­ble by all state exec­u­tive agen­cies, pos­si­bly with no ques­tions asked. That unbri­dled prac­tice would be egre­gious, and the unchecked pow­er of GDAC to receive and trans­mit infor­ma­tion, regard­less of rea­son, is an accute dan­ger to the per­son­al free­dom of indi­vid­u­als unfor­tu­nate­ly liv­ing under the sys­tem.

But Kemp did not sign SB23, issu­ing a state­ment that parts of it were uncon­sti­tu­tion­al.

No Prob­lem! Rather than sign­ing a bill Kemp described as uncon­sti­tu­tion­al, on Sep­tem­ber 1 of this year, Geor­gias chief exec­u­tive signed anexec­u­tive orderpro­vid­ing many of the same author­i­ties to GDAC con­veyed under SB23, pre­vi­ous­ly con­veyed under HB520, and which he vetoed.

Problem, Reaction, Solution

At this time, before tak­ing you down the last rab­bit hole, I think it impor­tant to sum­ma­rize all that we have learned.

First of all, we saw the def­i­n­i­tion of a PROBLEM. That prob­lem was spelled out in a fed­er­al law­suit ini­ti­at­ed by Sal­ly Yates, US Attor­ney for North Geor­gia. Specif­i­cal­ly, the prob­lem Ms. Yates alleged in her case was that the treat­ment of men­tal­ly-ill patients at Geor­gia State hos­pi­tals was not in accor­dance to fed­er­al law.

Antic­i­pat­ing the PROBLEM, the State of Geor­gia cre­at­ed an entire­ly new Geor­gia Depart­ment of Behav­ioral Health and Devel­op­men­tal Dis­abil­i­ties (DBHDD), that depart­ment hand­ed the respon­si­bil­i­ty of admin­is­ter­ing the require­ments of the set­tle­ment agree­ment to come.

The states REACTON was not to fight Ms. Yates in court, but instead to work out the set­tle­ment. The set­tle­ment would require Geor­gia to release 9000 men­tal­ly ill patient then housed in state facil­i­ties, over time, and devise a plan to mon­i­tor their activ­i­ties 24/7/365, for their own pro­tec­tion as well as the pro­tec­tion of oth­ers with whom they might come in con­tact.

The state SOLUTION began with the cre­ation of GDAC, the Geor­gia Data Ana­lyt­ics Cen­ter, assigned among oth­er tasks the respon­si­bil­i­ty to receive, house and trans­mit both data and data ana­lyt­ics com­ing to it from var­i­ous state agen­cies, to include EXTERNAL DATA SOURCES.

Next, the Geor­gia leg­is­la­tor referred above start­ed a com­pa­ny equipped with read­i­ly-avail­able, patent­ed tech­nol­o­gy, qual­i­fy­ing the com­pa­ny to become a viable EXTERNAL DATA SOURCE, sup­ply­ing both data track­ing ser­vices and busi­ness ana­lyt­ics to GDAC. An unknown num­ber of addi­tion­al Geor­gia leg­is­la­tors, some who would be empow­ered to vote on leg­is­la­tion affect­ing the states SOLUTION, are recruit­ed and joined the enter­prise.

Next, leg­is­la­tion, HB1013, pro­vid­ing author­i­ty for the track­ing of men­tal­ly ill indi­vid­u­als, was intro­duced by the same Geor­gia leg­is­la­tor and part own­er of the com­pa­ny whose patent­ed ser­vices are as described above, the bill dropped in the hop­per dur­ing the 2022 Geor­gia Gen­er­al Assem­bly. Thank­ful­ly, most ref­er­ences direct­ly autho­riz­ing track­ing ser­vices were removed before pass­ing due to pub­lic out­cry.

Final­ly, a sec­ond attempt to autho­rize the col­lec­tion of data and busi­ness ana­lyt­ics pro­vid­ed by EXTERNAL DATA SOURCES was intro­duced by the same leg­is­la­tor spon­sor­ing HB1013 dur­ing the 2023 Geor­gia Gen­er­al Assem­bly. The bill was passed in the House and present­ly sits in a Sen­ate sub­com­mit­tee.

So, I want you to notice some­thing, that these events and cir­cum­stances are all brought about by your gov­ern­ment find­ing a PROBLEM, your gov­ern­ment REACTING to the PROBLEM it found, and your gov­ern­ment devis­ing a SOLUTION to the PROBLEM to which it REACTED. None of these con­cerns arose from con­cerns of the peo­ple of Geor­gia.

PROBLEM- The DOJ law­suit, men­tal­ly ill indi­vid­u­als are not being treat­ed as per fed­er­al law

REACTION- The set­tle­ment, Geor­gia agrees to release and mon­i­tor the men­tal­ly ill indi­vid­u­als it releas­es, 24/7/365.

SOLUTION- Imple­ment­ing the set­tle­ment by cre­at­ing the author­i­ty for track­ing men­tal­ly-ill indi­vid­u­als, col­lect­ing, ana­lyz­ing and stor­ing the data at GDAC, and dis­trib­ut­ing the result­ing infor­ma­tion to exec­u­tive state agen­cies at their request.

Should your gov­ern­ments SOLUTION be ful­ly imple­ment­ed, a ver­i­ta­ble police state would only lack one item.

Multi-State, Police Jurisdiction Laws Already on the Books

The item to which I refer is the abil­i­ty to arrest and trans­port indi­vid­u­als sub­ject­ed to the police pow­ers cre­at­ed to con­trol any­one sub­ject­ed to the sys­tem. For a tru­ly effec­tive police state to oper­ate to its utmost, not only must indi­vid­u­als cho­sen for sur­veil­lance be tracked, the result­ing data being stored or archived, but should those indi­vid­u­als leave their per­mit­ted geo­graph­i­cal bound­aries, the sys­tem must cap­ture and return them, even across state lines. To accom­plish that pur­pose, a mul­ti-state legal juris­dic­tion must be agreed and become law in each state.

State laws and inter­state agree­ments cre­at­ing a mul­ti-state seri­ous men­tal ill­ness juris­dic­tion­al drag­net are already on the books of Geor­gia, along with prac­ti­cal­ly every oth­er state in the nation. The Geor­gia law is Ga. Code 37–10‑2, enti­tled, Geor­gia Inter­state Com­pact on Men­tal Health.

The com­pact autho­rizes the fol­low­ing:

Thus, accord­ing to this agree­ment among the states, dan­ger­ous, or evenpoten­tial­ly dan­ger­ouspatients, hav­ing vacat­ed their orig­i­nal juris­dic­tions of con­fine­ment in one state, when tracked to any oth­er state, shall be appre­hend­ed and returned to the orig­i­nal juris­dic­tion with no for­mal extra­di­tion pro­ceed­ing nec­es­sary. Once that would be accom­plished, all that would be required to close the loop cre­at­ing a police state would be to have qual­i­fied indi­vid­u­als on-call autho­rized to diag­nose and issue such orders. Those laws and mul­ti-state juris­dic­tion­al agree­ments are also already on the books, and can be found under Ga. Code 43–10A-51, the Pro­fes­sion­al Coun­selor Licens­ing Com­pact.

Pro­vi­sion O. defines the term Licensed Pro­fes­sion­al Coun­selor as an indi­vid­ual autho­rized to diag­nose behav­ioral health con­di­tions.

Once an indi­vid­ual might be labeled a famil­iar face, and diag­nosed with a behav­ioral health con­di­tion, a Licensed Pro­fes­sion­al Coun­selor in one state would be autho­rized to sign an order for such an indi­vid­ual to be arrest­ed and returned across state lines to his or her orig­i­nal juris­dic­tion, where one can rea­son­ably expect he or she would be con­fined until such time as the coun­selor believes the indi­vid­ual would no longer be a flight risk or a dan­ger.

On May 21, 2021, Geor­gias Bri­an Kemp became thefirst gov­er­nor in the nationto sign on to the Pro­fes­sion­al Coun­selors Licens­ing Com­pact. Are you sur­prised?

Dots All Connected

Once all of the require­ments list­ed above can be imple­ment­ed, a ver­i­ta­ble police state would be com­plete. For the police state to oper­ate, an indi­vid­ual must be found seri­ous­ly men­tal­ly ill, becom­ing what state author­i­ties would con­sid­er a dan­ger, either to him or her­self, or to oth­ers, at which time a track­ing device such as is described in recent leg­is­la­tion would allow his or her speedy appre­hen­sion and a return to con­fine­ment, hav­ing been found non-com­pli­ant accord­ing to cer­tain pro­pri­etary data ana­lyt­ics pro­gram­ming, pow­ered by arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence.

You dont believe any of this?

Thats fine. But whether you or I believe an Amer­i­can police state will short­ly become a real­i­ty, I sim­ply remind you of Lin­colns remarks in June of 1858, when he spoke the fol­low­ing:

We can not absolute­ly know that all these exact adap­ta­tions are the result of pre­con­cert. But when we see a lot of framed tim­bers, dif­fer­ent por­tions of which we know have been got­ten out at dif­fer­ent times and places and by dif­fer­ent work­men — Stephen, Franklin, Roger, and James, for instance — and when we see these tim­bers joined togeth­er, and see they exact­ly make the frame of a house or a mill, all the tenons and mor­tices exact­ly fit­ting, and all the lengths and pro­por­tions of the dif­fer­ent pieces exact­ly adapt­ed to their respec­tive places, and not a piece too many or too few — not omit­ting even scaf­fold­ing — or, if a sin­gle piece be lack­ing, we can see the place in the frame exact­ly fit­ted and pre­pared to yet bring such piece in — in such a case, we find it impos­si­ble not to believe that Stephen and Franklin and Roger and James all under­stood one anoth­er from the begin­ning, and all worked upon a com­mon plan or draft drawn up before the first lick was struck.

The flow if his­to­ry is such that events and cir­cum­stance, viewed from a cer­tain per­spec­tive, con­sis­tent­ly rhyme. We have seen how events unfold and ulti­mate­ly resolve, many times, stem­ming from the time of Lin­coln to the present. Our times are no less treach­er­ous than Lin­colns as we seek to under­stand what is hap­pen­ing to our coun­try and what we can do about it. I do not expect our gen­er­a­tion will escape an anal­o­gous cri­sis, com­ing at it over the hill. The nature of the cri­sis, I can­not say. But one thing is cer­tain, and that is that only an alert and knowl­edge­able cit­i­zen­ry can com­pel our gov­ern­men­tal to respect the author­i­ty of the peo­ple. How the peo­ple force that respect is the ques­tion of our time.