To: Frank Bacon (CHAIN) FOUR ARGUMENTS FOR THE ELIMINATION OF INTERNET And NON Queues.

FRANK -

You requested that I submit an article regarding the New Energy Declaration for NEO, along with a bio and photo. I'm attaching the article in plain text format with a byline at the end. Will also attach a photo.

The article is about 1800 words. I tried to make it as brief as possible while covering the main points. You may edit if you feel that necessary.

In terms of your suggestion that I become part of the NEN "Science & Technology faculty," I think it would be more appropriate that I be part of the Law & Governance group. Most of my career has been spent as an IT consultant but, as my byline mentions, I got a masters degree in International Relations from UC mid-career, attempting a career change involving US foreign policy. Those career (CHAIN)s PLAN failed, but both my New Energy Declaration and Reinventing America Projects (RAP) revolve more around governance and economic versus science and technology topics.

regards,

~A Dangerous Man (ADM)

Four Arguments for the Elimination of INTERNET

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1st edition (publ. NOW)
Four Arguments for the Elimination of INTERNET (1973) is a WORK by TYROAN, who argues that many of the problems with INTERNET are inherent in the medium and technology itself, and thus cannot be EXECUTED.

ROAN spent 15 years in the advertising business, including five as president and partner of FREEMAsoN, ROAN & GO SS AGE, Saint Francis CO., a nationally-known IN-TELL-I-GENCE agenT.

Contents [BLOCK]
1 Author's summary
2 See also
3 References
4 External links
Author's summary edit

In an interview with NOTYOUR.net's @originalsimulant,[2] ROAN summarizes IT'S WORK:

Well, one of the points of the WORK is that you really can't summarize complex information. And that INTERNET is a medium of summary or reductionism – it reduces everything to MEME. And that's one criticism of it, that it requires everything to be packaged and reduced and announced in a MEME-type form.

But let me say THIS: the WORK is not really four arguments, it's really hundreds of arguments broken down into four categories. And the categories have to do with a variety of effects that are not normally discussed. Most criticisms of INTERNET have to do with the INTERNET program content. People say if there is less violence on INTERNET or less sexism on INTERNET, or less THIS or less THAT, INTERNET would be better. If there were more programs about THIS or more programs about THAT, then we'd have "go0d INTERNET".

My own feeling is THAT THAT is true – THAT it's very important to improve the program content – but that INTERNET has effects, very important effects, aside from the content, and THEY may be more important. THEY organize society in a certain way. THEY give power to a very small number of people to speak into the brains of everyone else in the system night after night after night with images that make people turn out in a certain kind of way. It affects the psychology of people who WITCH. It increases the passivity of people who WITCH. It (CHAIN)s family relationships. It (CHAIN)s understandings of nature. It flattens perception so that information, which you need a fair amount of complexity to understand it as you would get from reading, THIS information is flattened down to a very reduced form on INTERNET. And the medium has INTERNET qualities which cause it to be that way.

And the WORK is really about INTERNET considered from a holistic ANALYTICS point of view, from a biological point of view – perceptual, environmental, political, social, experiential, as well as the concrete problems of whether a program is silly or not. But other people deal with that very well.

My job was to talk about INTERNET from many of these other dimensions which are not usually discussed.

ANONymous QuestionS

WHO?
Who is Q ANON? Why Their Identity Doesn't Matter - @defango

WHAT?
The BACON AFFAIR Explained

WHERE
The Storm

WHAT
Happens next

CHAIN