## The best way for change is to make the change quietly and spread the change quietly. If it is a good change..a good idea...it will spread. When the majority is quietly doing thier will, any law that opposes it becomes an unenforceable joke. To pass a law against possessing CS would be akin to outlawing the silverware that graces the lawmakers dinner table. Likewise, outlawing sand below a certain particle size would be like outlawing dust and demanding that everyone wear a dust mask.
I can only say what I do and why, not tell you what you should do. If you do as I do, so be it. Leading by example makes no demands of the followers so every follower is a leader. Force is not involved, so no force can stop it. Vilify not the enemy. There is no need. He is already vile. Instead, quietly attract his resources away from him and he will become a small helpless voice. If he demands lip service, he will only hear the lies he demands. I don't need my lips to speak to myself. KD'Cs manual of quiet subversion and the silent revolution. At 10:20 AM 4/6/00 -0000, you wrote: >Many people do not have the luxury to engage the government in such pursuits >as breaking an established law, then spending years of time and resources >fighting. It would jeopardize their work in the world, and most likely lead >to the discrediting of even non-related works, many of which have quite >profound implications for humanity. It would be blatantly self-destructive >to do so. I would highly suggest anyone considering such an act contact >those who have personal experience to guide by. I would also strongly >suggest consulting a good lawyer, who would inform you that while your >efforts are noble, righteous, and most princely, they would not even be >subject to appeal. It is like building your defense in a murder trial upon >the basis that murder should not be against the law. Even if you proved >your case, it would be irrelevant. A law, if passed legally, is beyond >philosophical, scientific, or otherwise logical judgement. > >In our case, however, I do not forsee anyone going to jail over colloidal >silver. At worst, I expect the FDA will just fine "offending" companies out >of business. The FDA has a history of going after truly dangerous people, >and is not likely to be concerned with laymen who do not have the >credentials or a demonstrated history in an important field necessary to >make a large impact on public awareness. The FDA also is very reluctant to >go after well organized, law abiding organizations who include a standard >sample of the public. 1000 average "Americans" united in the pursuit of an >altruistic aim also pose a dangerous threat. > >Your danger to the system does not lie in breaking the law. It lies in >following it. The power lies not in assertion of Will, but in application >of Wisdom. Freedom is obtained by the strictess observance of natural law. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Ted Windsor <t...@home.com> >To: <silver-list@eskimo.com> >Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 4:29 PM >Subject: Re: CS>Re: Documented CS Successes under Controlled Conditions > > >> The FDA can reclassify any thing, but this does not mean it cannot be >challanged >> in a court of law. You have the God given right to defend yourself from >those >> who try to take your rights away. You are also given the right of choice. >> Blessings >> Ted >> >> "Jason R. Eaton" wrote: >> >> > Greetings! >> > >> > Sadly, Terry, that understanding is not correct. Anything used and >accepted >> > before 1935 is protected under the grandfather clause, provided ONLY >that >> > the FDA does not choose to reclassify it. The FDA ruled that CS is an >> > unclassified drug in September of 1999. However, colloidal silver is >still >> > protected under the Vitamin and Mineral Suppliment Act. And so, the >bottom >> > line: CS can be sold as such without any medical claims. >> > >> > ----- Original Message ----- >> > From: Ted Windsor <t...@home.com> >> > To: <silver-list@eskimo.com> >> > Sent: Friday, April 07, 2000 2:45 PM >> > Subject: Re: CS>Re: Documented CS Successes under Controlled Conditions >> > >> > > My understanding is that anything used pre- 1935, the FDA cannot rule >> > against it, >> > > this does not mean that they won't try to use scare tactics and >> > intimidation, I >> > > would not be afraid to go to court at any time to defend my rights >against >> > any >> > > government. >> > > Blessings >> > > Ted >> > > >> > > rogalt...@aol.com wrote: >> > > >> > > > Ted: >> > > > >> > > > I wonder how your "read" of FDA action (or inaction) with regard to >CS >> > vendor >> > > > claims (or even "non-claims") stacks up against their most recent >> > ruling? >> > > > >> > > > Roger >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal >silver. >> > > > >> > > > To join or quit silver-list or silver-digest send an e-mail message >to: >> > > > silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com -or- >silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com >> > > > with the word subscribe or unsubscribe in the SUBJECT line. >> > > > >> > > > To post, address your message to: silver-list@eskimo.com >> > > > Silver-list archive: >http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html >> > > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <mdev...@id.net> >> > > >> > > >> >> > > >
