Sunday, December 23, 2018

The Freedom to Pursue Justice

The Freedom to Pursue Justice
By Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

As a victim of child abuse, sodomy, sexual abuse, and institutionalized abuse, I have pursued justice.  When sodomized at age 6, the crime was reported.  The perpetrator was 17 and his file was sealed.  That perpetrator went on to become a police officer in Washington State.  As a teen, I reported abuse to my school and they notified social services who sent a social worker to my home.  The social worker advised that she could place me in foster care.  I knew a girl in foster care at my school who told me she had been sexually abused at most of her placements, including her current placement.  So, I felt foster care wasn't the best option.  I didn't think to report it to the police as the authority figures in my life thought social services was the right agency to contact.  But, I had the right to do so.  To escape the abuse at home I attempted suicide and voluntarily received brief inpatient care at a psychiatric hospital.  They knew I was being abused and did not advise I call the police to report the crimes nor did they report it as mandated reporters.  Instead, they suggested I go to a boarding school in Utah where I was abused and had no way to contact authorities at that point as my communications were restricted and monitored.  But, I was able to write home and extended family who rescued me from Utah after a few months.

Being relieved to be free from Provo Canyon School and suffering compounded trauma from that experience, my abusers at home and the professionals they chose recommended I not pursue legal action for my own well-being because testifying may trigger my trauma.  Being a teen, I didn't feel I had the support needed to pursue justice further.  But, the reality is that the individuals who suggested I not pursue justice were most likely in the eyes of the law to be co-conspirators or co-defendants to cover up child abuse, sexual abuse, and false imprisonment/kidnapping by fraud.  The hospital I was at has changed ownership along with the program in Utah, both are now owned by the same parent company which has been in trouble with the Department of Justice for fraud.[1][2]  So, maybe we need a stiffer penalty than fines for fraud.  That would be worthwhile legislation.

The issue we as victims of childhood abuses have is that sometimes trauma makes us overlook the obvious or suggestions that we write congress rather than pursue available remedies at law seem like a good idea.  If something is already a crime or even tort, then, remedies exist such as filing criminal complaints in the proper jurisdiction and regarding specific crime(s), filing consumer complaints with your home state's attorney general (which you can do at by clicking on appropriate link on that page), and filing a civil suit before any statute of limitations has expired on your cause(s) of action.  Failing to do this in a timely fashion is a forfeiture of your right to justice in the eyes of the law and reasonably so in many cases.  So, while trauma is very upsetting and being a victim of crime is very traumatizing, the remedies remain filing criminal complaints, consumer complaints, and/or filing a lawsuit within the statute of limitations.  Regulation doesn't work and just allows for pretense and cover up of crime in most cases.  So, everyone should encourage victims of crime, regardless of age or infirmity, to report crime to the authorities as soon as humanly possible.  And, if you choose not to do so for any reason, the public is likely to ask why you didn't and whether you knew that was an option leading to some embarrassment and/or defensive response about your personal circumstances and why it didn't happen in your case.  But, that's not a basis for a movement.  This is why HEAL will likely be shifting our priorities in 2019 and ask individual survivors to support each other who need emotional support but are not interested in pursuing justice or can no longer do so as a result of the statute of limitations on their cause(s) of action.

Thursday, December 20, 2018

The Role of Men as Providers and the Exploitation of Tradition by Modern Women

The Role of Men as Providers and the Exploitation of Tradition by Modern Women
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

Regardless of historical gender roles and all the arguable inequities and legalized oppression of women, including pay gaps for equal work, we as women should not degrade ourselves by engaging in passive prostitution by using sex as a means to additional income or gratuities (i.e. gifts).  And, we do ourselves a disservice by engaging in such conduct, manipulating men out of vindictiveness while rationalizing it as a way to force equality in areas of finance, while failing to take responsibility for our own finances or recognizing that when you love someone you don't manipulate them.

For the sake of gender equality and to avoid anyone being unnecessarily hurt by unmet expectations, it remains the best idea to go Dutch/split expenses equally or proportionally rather than engage in passive prostitution by demanding or expecting more financial or gratuitous rewards than one offers in exchange.  Those who place importance or particular value on their own body over the body of those they may date or love, are engaging in self-objectification and if in exchange for financial or gratuitous rewards, suggests consciously, or even subconsciously, that you see yourself as a prostitute.  If you do not wish for others to see you as a prostitute, consciously choosing not to engage in such conduct would aid in correcting that impression.

As a woman who doesn't engage in that conduct and enjoys sex, I find that I don't expect payment or gratuities from a man when I love him and want to be with him because I love him so much.  So, it seems many women might use the idea of love and proving love to withhold sex when payment or gratuities are not happening at the preferred frequency for passive prostitutes.  And, I find the conduct degrading to women and causing a setback in women's true liberation. 

Men see it as being hypocritical.  You act like a woman who wants a provider and understands traditionally that entails you provide too in your own way.  If you are in love, then everyone should be happy making each other happy in all ways to the best of your ability.  And, if you love someone beyond reason, then you might be happy just making the one you love happy.  But, if you want independence and don't need a provider, then you should cover your own expenses at least proportionally.  If not, then you are being a hypocrite.  Because, you either like patriarchy or when men are the providers and women don't have to contribute financially or you want gender equality and understand that contributing proportionally to all expenses is reasonable given the goal of gender equality.

It remains unfair to blame an entire gender for historical inequities at law given we now have resources and access to remedy any such inequities through diligent advocacy where the law needs amending.  Taking your frustrations out on a man you love or should love by demanding payment or gratuities for your company, is passive prostitution.  And, if you don't want men to see women as prostitutes, you'll stop doing this immediately out of respect for all womankind, if not your own self-respect.

In addition, if you support modern slavery or don't bother to help the poor in any material sense, you ought not suggest you deserve better when you clearly don't effectively act to demand or address the oppression of others worse off than you.  So, it would seem this form of passive prostitution may involve some narcissism in thinking only of what you want rather than what is best for everyone involved or how your own actions in life don't reflect your supposed commitment to equality or economic survival.

Excited about your designer clothes made by enslaved people around the globe?  Did your husband or boyfriend buy it for you?  Was it a reward for a "nice evening" of your company?  Where's his reward.  His company should be as enjoyable to you as your company is to him or it likely isn't anything close to love.  So, when promoting gender equality we must consider whether our own individual commitment is leading by example and establishes we are equal and that love is about love, not financial or gratuitous rewards from either side.

Compromise is great.  But, it should be done reasonably and with everyone being honest with themselves and each other regarding expectations.  Women are often dishonest or fail to disclose we want a commitment and expect one prior to engaging in intercourse.  We rationalize that men should just know that's the expectation.  But, that's unreasonable and lends itself to delusion, denial, and heartache.  Women must be assertive and state our intentions upfront as well as our expectations.  If we rationalize or concede that doing so might hinder the potential relationship, we are starting the relationship without the foundation of trust established by being honest and direct which dooms any relationship to misery or utter destruction.

Men expect everyone knows that until you know each other well you are not in love and any sex is based on infatuation or a biological drive unless you know each other well enough to say you truly love each other and feel the love while knowing reasonably it is mutually shared.  But, the men's biological drive coupled with women's proclivities to engage in intellectual and emotional dishonesty for financial or gratuitous rewards in exchange when love is uncertain, results in serious disharmony.  So, to avoid that, being honest helps even though most appear to be conditioned to do it the vicious way rather than the virtuous way which is why progress on women's liberation hasn't progressed further.

So, men can help by demanding that expenses be split at least proportionally until both are prepared for a commitment and even then responsibilities must be split equally regardless of proportional sharing of expenses dependent on income.  And, women can help by demanding that too.  If you are attracted, feel love (even with a good friend), and want to have sex, it should be alright as long as money isn't involved.  But, if you lack any of that criteria and expect compensation of any kind, you are a passive prostitute and not acting in a manner respectable or that will result in lasting joy.  And, men will treat you like one too even if initially everyone is so infatuated and conditioned to it they don't realize until later that it is passive prostitution and the relationship was doomed because it was founded on falsehood.

We all have to be responsible, reasonable, and as virtuous as possible which includes being honest.  Failing to do so results in a lot of heartache and disharmony.  We can do better and men and women should commit to it.  And, "honesty is the best policy" has been a well known phrase for quite some time and choosing to ignore the suggestion while engaging in vice is why you get so upset if you ignore it.  See, sometimes when we ignore virtue it is at our own peril even if we engage in self-righteousness (another vice) regarding the issue of women's liberation in light of historical inequities and oppression.  We can't reasonably demand more of others than we are willing to give ourselves, even proportionally to the best of our ability.  Otherwise, it is hypocrisy and leads to unhappiness when the infatuation wears thin and the annoying stuff coupled with feeling used or disillusioned comes into play.  Being reasonable and responsible ourselves, we can help prevent our future suffering as long as we remain honest and reasonable enough to recognize when someone else isn't being honest.  In such an event, we must remain reasonable and understand that if someone isn't honest, it's best not to be in a relationship with them.  And, if everyone's honest, a great foundation of trust for friendship and much more. 

It's up to you and your ability to reason, discern fact from fiction, and be honest.  Otherwise, no one cares about your relationship woes and if you engage in passive prostitution, don't expect any sympathy from those you adversely effect that experience the continued objectification as a result of your refusal to be reasonable and responsible.  If you do expect it, you are a narcissist and not worthy of the time or consideration required for sympathy.  But, extremely virtuous people may advise the same as this article if they feel particularly inclined to be generous enough to listen.  And, if you don't, you likely want to find yet another person to talk to about it next time as you've been given quite a few examples for how to be happier through honesty and decided you'd keep trying vice instead.

Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Justifying Government Authority

Justifying Government Authority
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

In order to promote and protect the liberty interests of all US citizens, regardless of age, gender, orientation, heritage, faith, or disability, we must respect each other's liberty on the same grounds.  This includes the liberty interests of vulnerable populations such as children, the elderly, and the disabled.

False imprisonment and kidnapping are federal offenses and prosecutable as such if the crime crosses state lines involving commerce.  Commerce involves the sale of goods or services.  Services include boarding schools, treatment centers, and all forms of segregated congregate care.  Kidnapping can be committed by force or fraud.  False advertising in sales materials may be enough to prove fraud.  Parents can be charged as co-conspirators and may be able to mitigate charges by claiming ignorance. 

Youth who are kidnapped and falsely imprisoned in such a fashion often distrust the government as believing this wouldn't be happening if it were illegal.  But, whether the victims of crime or perpetrators of crime know it is a crime, doesn't change the fact that it is a crime.  And, when victims of crime don't get justice, often they become activists and sometimes turn to crime themselves seeing that leadership involves criminal activity at "leadership academies".

So, I believe the most reasonable thing to do is have law enforcement raid every single youth facility that accepts youth, without a court order via due process, where the youth are held against their will to let youth know that heroes exist and the law is on their side.  Otherwise, I'm the voice of reason in the teen liberty movement and sometimes I hit a rough patch.  I always respect the law and expect it to be enforced particularly when individual liberty interests and national security are involved.

See, anyone raised believing people in authority get away with crime or don't have to obey the same rules or laws, may follow the example set by those in authority which is why we need to be virtuous and respect each other's liberty interests to avoid being hypocrites and criminals or inspiring others to become such.

Monday, December 10, 2018

Solution-Based Activism

Solution-Based Activism
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

I've been an activist arguably as long as I've lived and been aware of the need to exercise virtue over vice.  I co-founded HEAL in 2002 at the University of Washington.  Through my years as an activist and advocate to stop institutionalized abuse, I've learned that to be effective a movement must be solution-based.  Raising awareness about atrocities is not enough and does not result in solving problems.  We must, therefore, as activists, be willing to provide a solution or recommend a feasible and reasonable one based on empirical data with virtuous change to vicious circumstances being our end regardless of cause or issue.  In the United States, we can present solutions through private enterprise or public policy reform suggestions depending on best course for particular issue or cause. 

With the #MeToo movement, reporting crimes of harassment, rape, assault, battery, or the like is the number one and primary legal remedy available for justice.  This must be done in a timely manner so prosecution remains likely to succeed.  In the event there is not enough evidence for a conviction meeting the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, then victims in such a situation may wish to join a support group or file a civil suit if there is enough evidence that it meets the civil standard of being a preponderance of evidence.  If there is not enough evidence to meet either the civil or criminal standard, one who makes such allegations against an individual may find themselves legally liable if unable to support their public statements to the satisfaction of the courts.

Depending on jurisdiction, and in New York specifically, you can press criminal charges under various statutes for the following: any unwanted forcible touching for personal gratification or to degrade or abuse the victim regardless of whether over or under clothes (TSA is guilty), any other unwanted physical contact such as pushing or hitting, physically threatening or menacing without making contact but placing one in fear of such and must involve threatening body language and be more than verbal, and unlawful imprisonment even if only briefly prevented from freedom of movement (as in blocking a door and not letting one leave).  So, if you've been a victim of such activity in the workplace or elsewhere, please report it to law enforcement immediately and press charges.  Doing so in a timely fashion is your best chance at justice. 

Now, the issue may be with getting more funding for particular law enforcement units so they can better investigate and more quickly solve crime.  You'll want to check your state's current funding of law enforcement, particularly special victims' units or the like and request more funding and personnel for that unit in the event there is a backlog of cases or the department is overwhelmed and under-funded.  In Orange County, California the department you would want to see expanded and funded more is Special Victims Detail.  Right now, there are eleven total officers in that department with a known 5,000 sex offenders living in the county.  So, it would seem demanding more funding and officers to handle the caseload would be the best solution coupled with timely reporting of such crimes regardless of where the crime may have occurred or the parties involved.

This is just one example of how to focus on solutions in activism and I hope the #MeToo movement and all victims of crime report it in time for justice to be feasible.


Thursday, December 6, 2018

Sadism in Modern Human Development and Social Organization

Sadism in Modern Human Development and Social Organization
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

Do you wish for a world without freedom, reason, and mutual respect for all humankind?  Do you demand freedom, reason, and respect from others?  If you answered "yes" to both questions, then there is a flaw in your reasoning and you need to work on that to avoid hypocrisy and misunderstanding.

People tend to follow examples set for them by their primary caregivers in childhood and authority figures in adulthood.  So, regardless of whether your position in all relationships, business or personal, is "Do as I say, not as I do", your own actions or "doing" are naturally to be adopted by those that see you as an authority on how to live or achieve leadership positions.  If your actions should not be adopted by everyone else, you do not belong in a leadership position.  If your actions should be adopted by everyone else, then, absolutely others may benefit from the example you've set.  And, a job worth doing is worth doing well, including leading by example. 

Now, the issue we are facing in the 21st century boils down to this, current trends in human development and social organization are towards imposing ignorance while focusing on emotional stimuli to manipulate and control the majority while the law remains steadfastly in position to protect freedom by requiring reasonable and well-reasoned decisions that exhibit mutual respect for fellow citizens.  Our education and employment training methodologies result in fear of reason, rejection or fear of freedom (i.e. when I suggest an improvement I am dismissed or scolded), and loss of respect for self and others over time with fear being the conditioned response to authority.  This leads to individuals distrusting authority or government resulting in further exploitation and abuse where the law would intervene if victims were not conditioned to fear rather than trust the government.

Since manipulative and aversive behavioral controls are currently being widely used in public and private education settings, the youth so subjected are being conditioned to be subservient and obedient to handlers or perceived authority figures.  This puts them at risk of exploitation, including sexual abuses that go unreported out of fear.  They are also discouraged from reasoning as such may lead to questioning authority.  So, by promoting such conditioning we are as a result ending up with individuals afraid to think for themselves out of fear of punishment while the law demands they take full responsibility and treats their actions as autonomous.  It would seem that on its face all of this is inherently unjust and unfair and that the spirit of the law bends towards freedom which is why our education, human development, and social organization should promote and encourage that, not set everyone up for failure.  And then, those claiming leadership, engaging in intellectual dishonesty, show examples of those who somehow manage to overcome such horrifying conditions to claim that it isn't the system, it is the exceptionalism of the individual. 

Granted, everyone has different talents, skills, and flaws.  And, we'd all like to be accepted based on our individual abilities and contributions to society as they may be.  We might achieve a utopia of sorts if we could embrace universal ethical standards while refraining from intellectual dishonesty.  But, such is arguably unrealistic.  However, it is possible and my PapaSam would say, "If you put your mind to it, you can accomplish anything." 

It seems to me that for the sake of, what I believe are American values, we should promote justice and liberty for all.  And, that such requires we not have education or training systems that condition our fellow citizens to respond solely to emotional stimuli, shut down or fear reason, and then blame them for not being reasonable so we can send them to prison where slavery is still legal under the constitution. 

Can we reform the schools and employee training systems so that we encourage reason and the development of such over basic animal-training methods of reward and punishment depending on whether someone pleases the "trainer"/"authority figure"?  If not, that's the problem most adversely affecting the quality of life and upward mobility for the majority of Americans right now and until it is solved, everything will continue to suck.

Please see the free e-books "It's All The Rage" (Particularly chapter 2, please see page 9 regarding what is done with exceptionally intelligent children) and "Activism 101: How to Succeed In Peaceful Revolution" available via hyperlink pdf at  And, you may also find the Congressional Hearing report of interest available here:
This is the bottom line and why everyone is so frustrated with each other and overly emotional about it instead of reasoning things out and actually solving problems.  When you try to stop people from questioning your authority and beat them, drug them, and demand obedience while claiming they are fully responsible for everything they do and should reasonably know better, you are the problem.  Pick a lane.  Lead by example. And, if people act erratic or unstable as a result of living under such conditions, don't create an entire new field to label and control them under the guise of healthcare, address the root cause which is poor social organization and failed human development strategies that have promoted totalitarian authoritarianism in a free country.  Fight for freedom!  HEAL's fighting for freedom and we're with you if you are too!

Monday, December 3, 2018

Debate and Dialogue

Debate and Dialogue
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

For the purposes of helping to further the cause of reasonable discussion on controversial issues, this particular article will be looking at abortion and climate change.  With abortion, I'll be revisiting and adding commentary regarding the Abortion Debate between Kelsey Hazzard and Peggy Loonan hosted by The HEAL Report and reviewed in an earlier post found here:  Regarding climate change, I'll be providing information on arguably deceptive marketing practices regarding the environmental benefits of available fuels for automobiles.  It is my sincere hope that this commentary aids all reasonable people in having a thoughtful and productive discussion regarding how to resolve some of the issues raised when meeting with apparent adversaries or zealots.

In the Hazzard v. Loonan debate, I found both made some compelling arguments for each side of the abortion issue.  However, I also found evidence of ignorance and/or intellectual dishonesty in regards to certain points made by both sides.  I will leave it up to you to decide whether to give the benefit of the doubt and believe the issue was more with ignorance than intellectual dishonesty on the part of the debate participants.

Hazzard argued during the debate that animal welfare laws are stronger than the laws protecting the unborn.  The issue here is that it is legal to kill animals for food, sport, and because they've become a nuisance or inconvenient in the United States.  Even in the case of a healthy family pet, the owner can have the pet euthanized.  And, that's a born animal.  See:  Even if a vet refuses, the article shows that an owner can still legally take the pet to another vet to have their healthy but no longer convenient pet euthanized.  In addition, another example is that dogs can be forcibly given abortions at the mercy of their owner's whims.  See:  So, both unborn and born animals are not better protected than unborn and born humans in the United States.

A question I would ask Pro Lifers is: Given the fact that natural spontaneous miscarriages occur and Vanishing Twin Syndrome exists, both which show nature sometimes aborts whether the mother wants it or not, why is it okay or accepted if unplanned and not okay if intentionally scheduled?  (For information on Vanishing Twin Syndrome, see:

Loonan argued during the debate that fetal pain could not be proven and therefore was not something she considers when discussing abortion.  She mentioned that they couldn't be asked if they feel pain so there is no way to know if they do without that confirmation.  There were a few issues with this and one is that there are mute people, such as Helen Keller historically, that I believe all would agree was able to feel pain.  So, being unable to verbalize a confirmation to such a question is not indicative or conclusive regarding whether pain is possible or actual.  In addition, nonhuman animals cannot verbally be asked if they feel pain and respond, but, everyone would likely agree animals are capable of feeling pain even if unable to verbalize it.  Regardless, the science shows that at 26 weeks a fetus can feel everything and they begin feeling at 23-25 weeks.  So, I'm going with the scientific studies on this one and therefore fully support a ban on abortion after 24 weeks.  I'd prefer it to be at 20-22 weeks just to be sure the fetus felt no pain as a result of the procedure, but, I think the 24 week ban is a compromise some seem to feel necessary.  Source on Fetal Pain Studies:

A question I would ask a Pro Choicer is: Would you support a ban, similar to the ban in the Netherlands, on abortions after 24 weeks gestation, knowing fetuses can feel pain as early as 23 weeks, sometimes sooner, but fully feel everything by 26 weeks gestation?  (See original blog post linked in first paragraph above for source on Netherlands.)

I hope everyone enjoys those conversations.  Now, the truth is that we have three options to fuel our motor vehicles right now.  Those options are coal, fracked gas, and gasoline.  The electric car is powered by coal.  Hydrogen Fuel Cells are made with natural gas from fracking.  Gasoline is from traditional oil drilling and refining.  Coal is by far the dirtiest of the three options according to Obama's EPA.  So, the electric car appears to be twice as bad for the environment as a traditional gas-powered car based on Co2 emissions of power source.  Hydrogen Fuel Cells are made from natural gas and emit slightly less Co2 emissions in use than traditional gas when used.  However, it becomes an issue on whether traditional drilling and gas is better or worse for the environment than fracked natural gas.  Do you know?  If not, maybe find a real solution to fueling cars and electricity rather than introducing alternatives while hyping claims that they are far more environmentally friendly than competitors.  The electric car powered by coal, appears to be the most misleading but was sweet to think people just don't know where the electricity comes from even after the hit show "The Office".

Sources for Climate Change and Automobiles:

Hoping this is helpful to everyone in pursuing more thoughtful dialogue and more honest debate.

Thursday, November 22, 2018

Can You Imagine?

Can You Imagine? 
By Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

If you are incapable of using your imagination, then, you likely are not intelligent enough to read further and understand what is written usefully.  If you can imagine, then, bear with me and open your mind.

Imagine, if you will, being a child with parents who are functionally illiterate and were pushed through school with poor grades showing they never understood but the teacher wanted them to go through the facade of pretending to have been educated in order to support the status quo and delusions regarding efficacy of education services whether publicly or privately provided to those with limited resources.  Now, imagine there were no books in the home and your parents didn't place any importance on literacy or were too ashamed or afraid of being challenged by a better educated child.  It is possible that they thought they could read and write well enough and may have even taught you incorrectly prior to entering school. 

For the above situation and prior to going into the extended trajectory or potential trajectory for such an individual, what would you do to solve the problem?  Hillary Clinton would suggest removing the child from the home with the illiterate parents and putting the child in a behavioral work camp so they learn to be productive citizens.  Of course, this is horribly short-sighted and results in further exploitation rather than advancement of literacy and human rights.  But, it is one option.  Others might suggest doing away with education altogether or full privatization.  But, more ignorance and illiteracy is not going to lead to a safer, more harmonious, and more enlightened world.  So, what's the answer?

It seems addressing the failures in educating earlier generations by offering free basic education even to those the system pretended to educate while not doing so, particularly in the case of parents or parents-to-be who clearly need help, would address part of the issue.  While there are a number of free literacy and basic education services available throughout the US, it seems those who need the help are least able to navigate the system or even begin to know where to go for help as a result of illiteracy.  In addition, they may be in exploited job positions and working 60+ hours per week and have no time for pursuing basic education unless their employer requires and/or authorizes it.

In addition, even with homeless populations, job services and training offered often do not include literacy, civics (basic navigation of government services for aid, redress, etc.), or math, and are run by people looking to profit off the continued exploitation of the populations to be trained without also being informed of their rights or legal remedies in the event of exploitation. 

So, the facade of barely passing every grade with D's or worse and graduating without actually being educated creates a scenario in which people have the diploma without the value of an education.  Exploitative employers accept it and are polite enough not to suggest someone could use additional academic services since a better informed employee might report illegal or unconscionable practices of the employer or be able to figure out swiftly what remedies exist for the exploitation.  And, with behaviorism as the primary tool in US schools teaching obedience, unquestioning response to positive or negative stimuli, and acceptance of token rewards never to be expected but always accepted with appreciation, the employee is prepared to compete in the race to the bottom on quality of life in modern global imperialism.  So, people like Hillary Clinton will say that's working for Wall Street and good enough for her.

Now, still imagining you're the child with overworked, functionally illiterate parents who own no books and didn't prepare you for school in any way other than obedience training, you start kindergarten without the benefit of even any home-schooling for pre-school.  And, your parents can't help with homework.  No one considers hiring a tutor and the school doesn't offer tutoring supports.  Even if the school does, the parents who are functionally illiterate don't understand the option exists.  You do your best but are found too far behind to be with your peers and put in special education where basically warehoused until graduating if you make it.

You get a job like your parents and continue life as usual.  You don't know any other way of life and even though you see people living different and arguably better lives, you attribute it to luck or a fortune of birth.  Now, what if you lost your job or never found one?  Imagine you end up homeless due the circumstances as described thus far.  What do you do and how do you want to be treated?

Most people in the above described situation have no idea where to start to get help or get what they need going forward.  Most of society (including supposed do-gooders) assumes they are equally educated and choosing poverty or too lazy to get a real job.  This is denial of the reality of the disparity in academic resources and practices between affluent and impoverished community schools as well as the historical reality of said disparity and the resulting generations of ignorance and exploitation resulting from said disparity. 

We can blame the victims of generational exploitation as a result of historic and modern failures in distribution of basic resources to provide for truly equal opportunity from an equal position in regards to understanding the basics of reading, writing, math, and civics, or, accept that as a society we are failing our most vulnerable in not simply making sure everyone has equal opportunity and a basic understanding of how to protect themselves from fraud, abuse, and exploitation.

Perhaps all public schools should offer parents basic reading, writing, math, and civics lessons who may otherwise not be equipped to assist their children with homework or effectively demand redress if exploited by their employer.  Another option would be for those with time and resources to offer in-home tutoring for the whole family in these areas for free or through a non-profit in which the families in need don't have to pay for help, but, society contributes for the greater good.  See, if a kid sees his parents taking learning seriously, struggles with them to learn certain things, and is a better student as a result, everybody wins!

Otherwise, the alternative...  Imagine you never get the academic support or education needed to even begin to navigate life responsibly as an adult.  You are abused and exploited and have no idea who to call for help and are under the impression based on the behaviorism in schools that no one cares what happens to you anyway.  You try to get work, but, people say you are unqualified.  So, you go to a farm and see if you can do manual labor and find out you actually need some skill for that too.  And, your asthma and allergies due to being from a neighborhood with toxins in the water and air from industrialization make any real physical labor, especially in the outdoors, untenable at best.  Maybe you end up on the street and get hassled, abused, or even locked up a few times for "loitering" when you just needed to sit for a minute.  You might feel the world is against you and intentionally making your life miserable.  Do you think you may become violent as a result of systemic failures in addressing the historical imbalances of opportunity for socio-economic mobility as a result of what appears from some perspectives to be an intentional perpetuation of that inequality masquerading as mandatory education?  If so, is your solution to criminalize anyone who didn't have the luxury of your upbringing and academic resources?  In that case, you have it coming.

Now, if you believe the answer is to fight ignorance with true comprehension, critical thinking, and understanding of the basic skills everyone needs to succeed or even have a legitimate chance at success, then who do we trust with the task?  The public schools have been failing in this regard for some time and the private/charter schools are often fraudulent and fail to educate effectively as well.  Is it how teachers are trained or the schools themselves?  Well, having prepared some in college for a career in teaching, I must say it wasn't the college or university materials that were the problem.  During my time as a student teacher, I saw what was going on in the classroom and school.  In history class it was an episode of Oprah, no books at all, and an assignment to take notes on the episode to write a paper on it later.  Nelson Mandela was the topic of that Oprah.  But, the assignment didn't suggest any library work or further exploration on the topic or historical significance.  The teacher I "shadowed" told me I would be a great educator, but, the school wasn't about that.  This was a public school in a middle class neighborhood.  So, maybe if we make public school about actual education, where true comprehension, critical thinking, and understanding of the basics, including how to navigate the government for redress and to enforce individual rights and liberties, we can honestly say that we provided all the basics and encourage people to use existing and available resources to effectively engage in upward mobility.

And, continuing to blame victims and tear apart families while institutionalizing and basically enslaving the youngest family members is really evil and likely to result in more violence and social unrest.  But, hey, that's how we keep prison slavery a thing, right?  More money, more problems.  But, having basic reading, writing, math, and system navigational skills, is truly priceless.  Knowledge is power.  Power to the People!

Sunday, November 11, 2018

Los Angeles Measure B and The Public Banking Solution?

Los Angeles Measure B and The Public Banking Solution?
By Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

I had the opportunity last night to catch up on some of The Jimmy Dore Show on Youtube and saw the segment (available here on Los Angeles' Measure B.  One of the first things I noticed was that Madeline Merritt was well composed and had prepared talking points.  I read the poster describing the measure shown in the background of the clip.  And, it said the measure would permit the city to explore the creation of a public bank and remove one of the impediments for setting up a public bank in the city.  See segment linked above to view the poster.

Initially, I was excited.  I support making the Federal Reserve a public utility, but, that was as I understood it and perhaps not as Ellen Brown meant it.  See, Ellen Brown has set up the Public Banking Institute and supported the Los Angeles Measure B efforts.  And, historically and to this day I support my understanding of the intended or stated purpose of a public bank, but, remain concerned that bankers and not the public or those holding deposits would retain a say in how the funds generated through such a bank would be distributed and invested.  With a credit union, the funds would go directly back to the members (i.e. any and all account holders) and as members they would have voting rights, elect the board from their own members/account holders, and be non-profit.  See:  The difference between a credit union and a bank is that a credit union gives control to the people and a bank gives control to bankers.  It would appear that the solution for better democratizing the economy, as is the stated goal of the Green Party,  would be to establish credit unions at the local level which would do all the good of any proposed public banking solution without creating another loophole for exploitation and corruption by those who claim to be the "new and improved" banking elite.

Now, the Public Banking Institute claims that a credit union is not lawful for cities or states to create, or implies as much, and that a credit union couldn't handle the transactions of a large city or state.[1]  The largest credit union in the world, Navy Federal, has 5 million members.[2]  Los Angeles has 4 million people.[3]  So, a city credit union would work and be a more democratic solution.  And, 27 states in the United States have less than 5 million as their whole population.[4]  So, both states and large cities could run an effective non-profit credit union that would help further democratize how funds are spent and give the people the power to elect the union board and control how union funds are used through a representative process and direct voting rights.  This is a much better solution than any public banking option if the goal is to expand freedom and power to the people.

Measure B was fairly stupid as was the promotional poster for it.  For one, apparently the council had already been discussing the possibility (exploring the creation) of a public bank for at least a year when they voted on the ordinance to get the measure put on the ballot.[5]  Now, the ordinance just says to put a question on the ballot to Los Angeles voters and doesn't explain anything about what type of bank, who would run it, who would pay for it, or who would control it.  And, the voters voted no for the most part as they should.  And, the question was, "Shall the city charter be amended to allow the City to establish a municipal financial institution or bank?"  The city charter does not need to be amended to establish a non-profit credit union.  Any purely commercial enterprise, like a sports arena (my guess), requires approval by popular vote of constituency.  But, there appears to be no rules in the city charter against the city establishing a credit union or non-profit community bank.  And, cities around the country have established credit unions.  And, even Washington State has a statewide credit union that is non-profit and a cooperative of those who choose to become a member.[6]

So, states and cities can and legally do establish credit unions.  And, these are better for the people than any public bank option.  So, for everyone who wants to start fixing this shit, moving to a credit union or establishing one, is the smarter and better choice.  It would also seem a plan the Green Party would support.  At least Republicans respect our troops and my family is all four branches.  Navy Federal wins.

Friday, November 9, 2018

Going Dutch? Advice for Dating on a Budget

Going Dutch?  Advice for Dating on a Budget
By Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

Referenced in previous posts, "going Dutch" means to split the cost of the check, typically when speaking about dating.  In the event you or your date are on a tight budget, you may need some suggestions for having an inexpensive interaction that is enjoyable for all.  Again, to avoid promoting gender inequality, it is best to "go Dutch" until everyone is comfortable having an adult conversation about personal physical boundaries and delights.  It is unfair for one party to a date to cover the entire cost while the other party's only responsibility is as an escort.  And, when that is the standard it leads to misunderstandings regarding what to expect out of the encounter.  To avoid injustice on all sides, it is best when starting new relationships or even going out once or twice that everyone split the check.  This will show both people are truly interested in spending time with each other and getting to know each other rather than some form of passive prostitution or a situation that could be understood as such given historical and socio-environmental factors.

Even if you and/or your date are not on a tight budget, you may wish not to spend a lot to avoid setting up expectations for continued expensive outings early on in any relationship.  And, in the event your date likes to spend beyond their means or expects you to do the same, it will likely end poorly.  The double entendre is intended there.

Now, when two individuals find that splitting a check may require a more frugal approach to chosen activities for the first few dates (or more), what activities might be best on a budget?  Below are a few suggestions:

1.  Go for a Walk or Hike Together  (FREE Depending on Location and Time of Year)

2.  Go on a Picnic  (INEXPENSIVE: You bring food, date brings wine/beverages, etc.)

3.  When Comfortable Enough, At Home Activities (i.e. Your or your date's home split food and entertainment costs.  Such as ordering delivery and watching a film or playing a game already available without further expense.)

4.  Volunteer Together  (Lots of ways: Soup Kitchens, Beach Clean Up, Animal Sanctuaries, just to name a few direct care and service options for volunteering.)

5.  Free Events (i.e.  Run a search for free events in your area on or your favorite search engine and see what you find.  If in the Seattle area, you might find this page:  (Includes free and up to $10 live music and free dancing, inexpensive international film festivals as well.)

6.  Going for a Drive?  (If so, split the cost of gas.  That's true regardless of whether you are carpooling to a chosen activity or simply going for a drive as the activity.)

7.  Going for a Train Ride or Boat/Ferry Ride?  (Split the cost or everyone pays for their own fare.  This is fun.  Under $10 for adults for Ferry Ride in Puget Sound area.  You could bring a picnic with you depending on the rules of the particular venue.)

8.  Take A Class Together Of Interest to You and Your Date  (Seattle Central College offers short courses on a number of things including gardening and basic home repair and maintenance, crafts, food and wine, and more.  The gardening course I checked was only $29/person.  Home repair and gardening are skills most should have if planning to be self-reliant or share responsibilities at some point.  See:

9.  Library or Bookstore Challenge  (You and your date go to a bookstore or library and try to pick out each other's favorite author based on what you know.  Could be fun and tell you and your date how well you know each other at the given point.)

10.  Museum or Gallery Visit (Depending on the museum/gallery, it might be free to view the art.  Many museums and galleries offer free admission days, so, check the schedule.  And, even Seattle Art Museum is only $17-$25/per person depending on exhibits.  But, given location there may be parking and transportation costs.)

So, ten ideas or more for things you can do on a date that are respectable, fun, and inexpensive.  The above are less expensive than even most dinner and theater dates.  One might say they are even less expensive than a night of bowling, depending on alcohol consumption and venue.  Some alleys in Seattle cost $30+/hour per lane, plus shoe and ball rentals (for those without their own).  If you add on alcoholic beverages, snacks, or other costs, you might be looking at $75+ for the night.  But, not too expensive depending on your budget.

I sincerely hope this helps everyone who is making plans with new love interests and that everyone exercises a true commitment to equality in romantic relationships by going Dutch and truly showing an interest in your date as a person and not a prop, dupe, or some sort of passive paid escort. 

Tuesday, November 6, 2018

My Learning Curve

My Learning Curve
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

I understand most people, even when they care deeply about an issue, do not have the time or desire to invest in honing their advocacy skills to the point of efficacy.  And, that most people expect raising awareness about a problem is the entire purpose of any activist or advocacy group.  I believe that is faulty and based on ignorance and a lack of study.  But, not everyone has the same experience or opportunity I have had to go to college and become as informed or skilled as I am and therefore I do not lay fault entirely at the feet of those who mimic what they see on television as effective activism.

I've found that the rhetoric of achieving a "critical mass" to demand change is inaccurate and flawed.  If you are unfamiliar with this concept, it was touted by activists in Seattle as achieving 10% of the population supporting a specific cause or issue to help pressure government officials to take action on that specific cause or issue.  And, "raising awareness" is the tool used to garner support to build a movement to the point of reaching "critical mass", arguably, in order to create the public pressure needed to influence or effect change. 

I have spent many years trying to build this elusive "critical mass" and rally people to effective action by creating petitions, letter writing campaigns, and reports which provide opportunity for action and greater understanding of the issue if approaching government officials independently or writing letters with the need of facts to support any recommendations for legislators.  And, I've found that "critical mass" isn't necessary for creating real change and you really just need a few dedicated people who can understand politics, policy, existing law, and how to navigate the legislative process.  Bills I've supported or assisted with getting introduced, have often passed and been made law.  There is still work to be done, but, if it is a good idea based on sound information, often you can get the job done working with your legislators.

It is great if people who support your issue or cause will write letters to support legislation and participate.  But, it isn't absolutely necessary and building a "critical mass" can in fact be a distraction from efficacy.  The same is true for organizations that focus on fundraising over advocacy and legislation.  The issue appears to be that most people don't really want to do the research and work to find out where the loopholes or issues exist in current laws resulting in injustice or harm and seem to just want to complain and blame legislators for not getting it right in the first place.  But, finding out the actual problems and providing solutions that legislators can work with so the issues can be effectively addressed is the responsibility of the constituency in a participatory republic. 

But, there are systemic issues of oppression that result in people being conditioned by Machiavellian authoritarians that result in many parts of the constituency suffering learned helplessness and feeling hopeless regarding change because of institutionalized abuses.  And, that coupled with propaganda and "fake news" results in making building a "critical mass" very difficult.  See, people misled by misinformation and disinformation while being overworked, underpaid, generally disrespected and disregarded, and then told they better participate (whether by voting or joining a cause), tend to not have the time or energy to do the research or be effective in addressing the areas of the law needing redress for them to experience any real justice or relief via reforms.  And, people who avoid looking at the suffering caused by their own exploitative practices and greed, tend to focus on issues their friends are into like Animal Rights, rather than helping the less fortunate in their own society. 

There are really only two ways to solve problems legally.  One is to provide direct care or service to the victims of the abuses you want to see addressed.  For example, animal sanctuaries for abused animals and soup kitchens for the hungry count as direct care and service.  Unfortunately, running such establishments require funding and most of the fundraising charities don't focus on or even provide direct care or service. And, if fundraising with tax-exempt status, they are not able to effectively work on addressing issues through the legislative process, so, really nothing more than glorified tax havens and likely or arguably astroturf groups regardless of claims made or praise received. 

If donating, pick a charity that provides direct care and service ethically (check requirements for services to make sure those being served are not being further exploited) or support an advocacy organization that may not be tax exempt but is effective in creating legislative reforms that effectively address the issues you care about as a supporter.

I encourage everyone to participate, check out our videos and legislative efforts that may aid you in creating real change on any issue you care about, including animal welfare/rights, at  Be sure to get involved locally and at the state level on your issue and don't be fooled by hopes of solving all your problems by focusing on federal legislators and legislation.  And, if you are a victim of systemic oppression, HEAL cares and we understand you may not be in a place to offer any help as a volunteer or supporter.  But, we are fighting for you and will keep fighting!

Saturday, October 27, 2018

Removal of Posts

Removal of Posts
By Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

Because the Green Party has aligned with the most corrupt, that being the Democrats, I no longer support the Green Party, but, still like their platform best.  So, I deleted an article critical of the Libertarian Party, whom at this point, if taken at their word, is the best party for ending war, cleaning government of corruption and waste, and returning the economy to a free market in which consumers will reportedly have rights restored to quality over quantity.  But, there is some debate about that too.

That being said, I took down some movie reviews and some other posts that I felt had served their purpose.  And, I left posts that may require knowledge of things you may never read to understand.  But, you can always pick up a copy of any of my books available (some for free, some not) at  And, if you do so, you may run across a post that disappeared.

I may not be able to edit or change my entire internet history or protect what has already been shared from data-miners and private/public surveillance partnerships and interference in the daily lives of any and all Americans, apparently, but, I can delete posts and here that means something.

So, I've deleted some posts and I plan to leave certain social media sites while primarily using any I remain on for public comment only as it is public or used to manipulate the public regardless of said in private messages, secret groups, or posted on a page hosted by a popular social media site.

I will leave up the youtube videos available at and suggest you watch the ones about Twitter and the Tribute to Seattle Reign to understand (or not) the performance art piece that was sparked by a temporary ban on Twitter resulting from a joke tweet made about Wendi McLendon-Covey to raise awareness about modern slavery and human tracking I posted on the 4th of July.

Fighting institutionalized child abuse and human trafficking is difficult and stressful.  Having a sense of humor and enjoying the arts while knowing a bit about how to perform can result in merging art with life and create a spectacle intended to make a point that everyone has a bad moment and celebrity or not, we all deserve acceptance, forgiveness, and a second chance.  This goes especially for Roseanne Barr and Drake as well as Oliver Stone and Russell Crowe (and Alec Baldwin).  I think it is shameful that one bad moment or a string of them, possibly induced by personal or professional stress, results in public shunning and humiliation of people who deserve compassion, respect, and at least to have their side heard before anyone rushes to judgment or bandwagons against them.

This has been the overall point of my entire performance art piece up to this moment and I explained it in other ways here on this blog and elsewhere.  If you want to see any of the articles that are missing, buy the books or e-mail me if you can figure out how.

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

A Look At Personal Responsibility

A Look At Personal Responsibility
by Angela Smith, HEAL National Coordinator/Co-Founder

Have you ever been to a restaurant where families, couples, or friends were all on their devices checking social media while ignoring "wait staff" and each other for the entire duration of your meal, including service?  Well, I've experienced it and I'm pretty sure most of society has devolved into button pushing idiots, including government officials.

Should we blame RAND Corporation?  Well, I believe their "market research" and manipulation of public opinion to reinforce every evil imaginable, including war and modern slavery, is at the crux of the issue.  Everyone looks for approval and RAND Corporation, with their influence, either encourages or discourages based on whether or not an individual supports a pre-selected role by the authoritarians at RAND Corporation.  Why would I say this?

"In the electronic age, he once wrote for RAND, the role of masses in elections will be a “programmed response to a previously selected alternative . . . To use electronic media well requires ‘market research’ into habits, desires and tastes of the target audiences,” and success will depend on “the level of analytic competence in utilizing the electronic media of mass communication.”"[1]

So, are our opinions being tracked and manipulated in a manner that induces the "manufacturing of consent" as Noam Chomsky has suggested?[2]  And, is our participation in social media making it easier or more difficult to persuade or manufacture consent for war, modern slavery, or any evil you can name?  Might modern counter-intelligence operations involve tracking such interactions and using analytic data to manipulate or trigger individuals, including those with known trauma triggers such as survivors of institutionalized abuse or human trafficking?  And, does RAND Corp handle analyzing social media for the government and Wall Street?  Yes.[3][4]

Now, considering the above coupled with the "surveillance state" in which most, if not all, of our movements individually and collectively are tracked, does that make us more free from undue influence or subjects to undue influences like manipulation and the manufacturing of consent?  Beyond this question, how isolated do you feel even when surrounded by supposed loved ones who don't understand you and would rather be on a device than acknowledge you exist?  And, do you accept any responsibility for choosing to isolate while pretending to be social?  If the majority are engaging in this "Brave New World" by supposed choice (undue influence is certainly at play here), then what is left for anyone who still remains sentient enough to question the status quo and demand respect, truth, freedom and justice?  Perhaps, only the art world can save us now.  And, expect more performance art of which this may or may not be an example.

I refuse to be enslaved by ignorance, stupidity, and apathy and that includes anyone exhibiting such characteristics be they individuals or organizations.  My hope is that enough people agree that we can stop the forcible drugging (which leads to apathy, amnesia/memory loss, drops in IQ, and more) and exploitation of all American citizens, particularly school children who are not given a choice and whose parents may be unduly influenced by profiteering charlatans masquerading as experts in any professional field.  The children deserve a hopeful future of social acceptance, upward mobility, and respect for individual privacy and free thought.  This is what I dedicate my life to achieving and hope very much anyone reading this understands where the undue influence is coming from and what may need to be done to set things right.

I will continue to work on legislative efforts and publicly share the findings of my independent research in hopes to enrich the public discourse by providing factual information that is not manipulated or skewed to support anything but objective truth and reasonable ethical standards.  How I determine if something is a reasonable ethical standard?  I ask, "Would I want everyone to be treated this way, including myself?"  If the answer is "no", I do my best to avoid treating anyone in a manner I would not wish to be treated.  Golden rule.  Kindergarten or pre-school, typically learned by then. 

Everyone has a bad moment and may exhibit a crisis of conscience from time to time, but, that's where forgiveness and open communication helps.  Nobody is perfect, including me.  And, I admit that.  However, I'm always willing to correct myself and apologize if that will restore harmony.  I find that RAND Corporation has influenced the majority to accept being medically disabled by pharmaceuticals and adversely influenced by their manipulation of the marketplace of ideas.  As an activist who cares about human rights and civil liberties, I feel RAND Corporation is treasonous and a threat to national security.  I have no idea why the Department of Defense is letting RAND Corporation do this or funding them to the tune of hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars annually,[5] but, it seems like a good time for another Tea Party.  It is wholly unacceptable to enslave, tax, and control the entire economic and political system while claiming we are in a democracy or even a legitimate republic as opposed to a Banana Republic.  RAND Corporation's CEO is the editor of the Wall Street Journal.  See previous articles for more information on RAND Corporation or check out:

Personal responsibility?  Yes, we are all responsible and often unduly influenced by factors beyond our control leading us to the downfall of civilization.  But, knowledge is power.  And, if we choose to know we can reclaim our power.  Will you choose to be more informed, think for yourself (rather than parrot RAND Corp prepared talking points) or continue to be manipulated?  Freethinkers and Light Warriors unite!  Question more.