We believe in empowering everyone,to freely expresswho they are,and to createall of their dreams,even if this means breaking withconvention.
x web address https://x.com/everyoneisgodpp?t=Ppchpgj_k-1J2yKcmJGVmg&s=09
British GDP 2.5 £trillion in 22
In 2023–24, total UK government revenue is forecast to be £1.06 trillion, or 41% of GDP
Population 67 M, in 22
In 2021, there were 32 million taxpayers.
66,000 people work in HMRC collecting tax costing maybe £2.5 billion per year
​
We understand this sounds shocking; our policy may seem contrary to human rights, and inhumane, but please read the entirety of this policy, to understand why we believe this is the kindest possible policy, the correct human rights, and the only humane and functional way of running the prison service. We explain as follows:
​
The right to safety and freedom from violence must be one of the most basic human rights of all, a fundamental component of a civilised society, and one that any responsible government and society should have the strength and authority to uphold in any circumstance. When you compare this right, to the right of someone to live and have the opportunity and likelihood of repeating their violent attacks on others, it begs a simple question. Which right do you give priority to? You are forced to make a decision as it is practically impossible, and extremely expensive, to permanently isolate a human from all other humans, and therefore remove all possibility of violent attack, by this method. We have a very simple, but very stark choice, about who we believe should die, should it be innocent people, or repeatedly violent people, who resist all opportunity to be rehabilitated?
​
It is interesting because in the case of groups of people or countries being aggressive to others, such as a country or terrorist group attacking another country, there is almost universal agreement on the answer to the question above. The overwhelming majority of the world believe that it is right to use deadly force, on a mass scale, when defending a group of people. Furthermore unavoidable collateral death of civilian men, women, and children, will always be part of any defensive military operation of any scale, and this is also considered acceptable when it is reduced to the minimum. However, when the threat to society of violence is from an individual or small group of organised criminals, rather than a large group, many people feel it is not acceptable to use lethal force to defend against this, even when there is no possibility of collateral civilian deaths? To clarify the extreme contradictions in our approaches, would anyone ever suggest that we send soldiers into battle without any weapons, and tell them that they are not to use any lethal force, and when they do confront the enemy, they are to offer them food, and a bed for the night, and say that they will take away the enemies television and exercise rights? Yet this is exactly what we expect prison officers, and society at large to do, when presented by repeatedly violent people, as we refuse to use ultimate force to stop these threats, even when it puts innocent officers, other prisoners, and the public at risk. We believe this contradiction results in a fundamental loss of integrity in society, if a society does not have the will to properly defend its citizens in all circumstances, it will always create the violent attack of innocent people, and the abuse of every human right. Indeed we believe the ability and willingness of a society to use ultimate force, as a last possible resort, in an entirely correct and balanced way, is one of the essential aspects of a civilised society and its integrity. The ultimate choice is therefore: remove unacceptable threat, or have violent crime; Everyone is God will always take all measures to fully protect everyone from violence at all times, and the people that will be most protected from violence, persecution, and abuse of their human rights in our system, is the prisoners themselves.
​
periods of isolation without food, and if they continue breaking rules, the period of withdrawal will increase, ultimately until starvation and death. As explained, in extreme cases, if after going through this process of rehabilitation, prisoners continue to be violent, and present serious violent threat, the safety of others will become the overriding priority, and the death penalty will be used as a last resort, to protect officers, prisoners, and ultimately the public, from their violence.
​
The same applies with the death penalty, when a country defends itself in war, we do not say that the country decided to spontaneously murder or kill others, we say that we are defending ourselves. If the prison service has no options other than the death penalty to protect to protect other prisoners, officers, and the public, then the death penalty has to be used.
​
I think most people will feel that our policy is highly radical, we believe it has far reaching consequences, and the potential for huge positive benefits, although extreme, are as yet completely unproven.
​
This is not easy to do quickly because the answer goes to the root of psychology, but we make our best effort here as follows: We form the basis of our characters in the very early period of our childhood. Babies are unable to discern almost anything, as they have almost no understanding of the basic concepts of life such as work, mortgages, bills, cars, reading, writing, etc. Babies are aware of their immediate care givers, and the experience they have with them. When mum and dad hold and cuddle and kiss the baby, or when mum breast feeds the baby, the baby enters bliss, and learns that life is good and safe, that it is loved by it's parents. In repeating this experience over and over again, the entire foundation for that babies entire life is laid. In feeling loved and safe, the baby develops the foundation for how it feels about itself, and the entire foundation for the babies self esteem for the rest of its life; the baby learns that if mum and dad love me, I must be a good person, and I therefore feel good about myself. This learning process, which we call coding, is inextricably linked with the experience of loving physical contact with the parents. Through this contact the baby also learns the entire basis for its sexuality in adult life, as sex is fundamentally about physical contacts between bodies. The experience of loving physical contact with the parents becomes the model for the adults relationships and sexuality. Psychologically it is impossible for the baby to separate love, sex, physical contact, its own wellbeing, and how it feels about all of life, as it simply does not posses the separate concepts of these things, and therefore cannot distinguish them. The baby has no cognition available to it to make separations between these things in it's understanding. This is the unbreakable psychological link between sex and everything else in life, and there is no human that is immune from it; whether we like this or not, whether we accept it or not, it is the truth of all of us. The coding we carryout in our earliest days goes into the deepest parts of our subconscious, and forms the basis for everything we are in adulthood. For the baby from a psychological point of view, love, sex, physical contact, its own wellbeing, and how it feels about all of life, are one thing, which cannot be separated, and they form the basis for its entire adult character.
​