Password Protected Pages


EoP language is not meant to offend; please consider it within the context of Ecology of Peace cross-cultural intensive educational communication practices.
— Excerpt: EoP MILED Clerk Request for Assistance of Council to Former International Court of Justice: Judge: Christopher Weeramantry [PDF]

Password protected pages on Tygae; contain non-violent Ecology of Peace root cause problem solving orientated information — word/s, images or concepts — that some individuals may find offensive; possibly as a result of their lack of ecological and/or egological literacy.

Typing the password — provided further below — to access the Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty page; legally implies your fully informed consent to:


The Ecology of Peace culture grants you access to reading their non-violent Ecology of Peace root cause problem solving orientated information.

Factual or Interpretation disagreements:

In the event of any disagreement regarding any alleged factual or interpretation errors in the Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty information; you agree to:

Engage in Honourable Discourse — as detailed at Ecological and/or Egological Literacy — and notify the Ecology of Peace culture in writing of your factual and/or interpretation disagreement information.

If the issues in dispute cannot be resolved by means of Honourable Discourse processes; requiring the issues in dispute to be resolved by mediation, alternative dispute resolution and/or court proceedings; you typing of the password to access the particular page; confirms your written fully informed consent to such mediator, alternative dispute resolution arbitrator and/or magistrate or judge; that you consent to Ecology of Peace culturally based arguments and evidence to be submitted to such conflict of cultures mediation, alternative dispute resolution or court proceedings.

A Conflict of Cultures court or arbitrator would consider culturally based evidence from any individual whatever their culture; even if none of the courts judges or arbitrators were members of one or both of the parties cultures; in order to reach a win-win compromise. A Monoculture court will consider only culturally based evidence from a particular culture; which could be racial, religious, class or ideological.

In this case an EoP and WiP court or arbitrator would consider both EoP and WiP cultural evidence; even if none of the courts judges or arbitrators were members of one or both of the parties cultures. A WiP only court would consider only WiP cultural evidence; denying access to the court’s arbitration proceedings, from individuals who are not members of a WiP culture.
Ecology of Peace Alternative Dispute Resolution: 27, 28 October 2016 correspondence to Advocates Group 621: Jeremy Gauntlett.

If you agree to the aforementioned reading and non-violent resolution of factual and/or interpretation principles; the current password to access the Ecology of Peace Radical Honoursty pages is: [Iconsent2EoPRHCIQOP].  Highlight and/or copy and paste, space between brackets to make visible and/or access the password.

If you do not agree; and have a reasonable opinion or legally based argument for your disagreement; contact the EoP MILED Clerk to explain what your opinion or legally based argument is. Acting EoP Clerk’s honourable discourse policies are available at EoP Radical Honoursty Culture Info: Egological & Ecological Literacy. In accordance to EoP RH Culture honourable discourse policies, if your argument is reasonable; Acting EoP Clerk has no problems changing legally based argument to reflect your newly providing legal information.


Ecology of Peace IQO: Re: TNT Words & Censorship:

More info on Ecology of Peace culture’s Information Quality Operations Policies; with specific reference to using TNT-like words; refusal to censor possibly offensive words:

How using TNT-like words can save impartial truthseeking readers time & energy:

Do you know what the difference is for a special forces soldier in using 5 grams of gunpowder; 5 grams of TNT; or 5 grams of nuclear grade plutonium?

Put simply the latter is more concentrated, wastes less time and can kill a much larger number of people in a quicker space of time. If you cannot bring your enemy to the buck stops here honourable problem solving negotiation table by means of conventional false flag justifications for culling warfare – such as collapsing World Trade Center Towers false flag to start a War on Terror – then you can deliver a nuclear knockout blow; as per President Truman’s 06 and 09 August 1945 Little Boy and Fat Man nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Sort of like the difference between hiring ten persons to push your car or filling your car with petrol. With a gallon/2.2 liter of gas at a cost of R25.00; you could drive 50-70 km in about half an hour. If you had to pay ten people to push your car 50 to 70 km; how much would it cost you in resources and time? Still think petrol is expensive?  VHEMT; Fat Cat Watch.

Similarly when a communicator uses TNT-like words; such words can save the readers time; by avoiding dozens or hundreds of pages of gunpowder tealeaf grains reading; by concentrating the communication into concentrated TNT-like words; that focus the readers attention; so the reader knows exactly where he stands.

If the reader is an adult; and appreciates ‘buck stops here’ in your face clear communication that does not waste his time; such communication can enable quick resolution of disagreements and misunderstandings. If time is money; or if time is valuable for any reader or listener; then the TNT speaker saves his listeners or readers allot of time and money.

Furthermore if the speaker uses TNT words that are easy to understand or explain the meaning of; or where more than one inter-intra cultural meaning for such word exists; if the word is accompanied by a clear and simple language definition that leaves no doubt about the meaning of the TNT-like word; then an impartial truthseeking reader can quickly understand – by reading less than a page or maybe even a paragraph — what that person is saying; and you don’t have to go and hire a lawyer or a judge for a few hours; or few weeks court proceedings; to explain to you what the person is saying. You know where you stand with that person.
— EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations: 28 Oct: A General Theory of Love .. Lew Rockwell.


Problems can only be solved by honest — if required brutally honest — discussion focused on the root causes of the problem. If two or more people decide that any issue is a problem; the problem solving of that issue is similar to a ‘problem solving discussion commons’; no different to a commons where farmers graze their cattle; or any other metaphorical commons.

As shown by Garrett Hardin in Tragedy of the Commons; a village of farmers can live in sustainable abundance of the resources provided to them from the commons; if they all take personal responsibility for refraining from consuming or procreating above the ecological carrying capacity of the commons. If that means all farmers are only allowed four sheep; they can live sustainably in abundance if they all take responsibility for (a) personally only having four sheep each on the commons; and (b) holding each other accountable by evacuating any farmer who cheats wanting more sheep on the commons; causing the Tragedy of the Commons spiral of resource depletion and resource war conflict.

In a problem solving discussion commons: If one of the individuals in that problem solving commons; says ‘you can’t use this or that word cause it offends me’; what the farmer is saying is: ‘you can’t use this or that word cause I am too gutless to go and tell the human sheep on my cultural, religious, racial, class, ideological, tax etc farm; to maintain their procreation and consumption below commons carrying capacity limits.

EoP PoW Rendulic Rule Military Necessity Private Prosecution Complaint to International Criminal Court:

EoP PoW  –v–  Norwegian Nobel Committee et al:


[209]    The Tragedy of the Commons is an ecological concept that refers to the depletion of a shared resource by individuals, acting independently and rationally according to each one’s self-interest, despite their understanding that depleting the common resource is contrary to their long-term best interests. Ecologist Garrett Hardin famously explored this social dilemma in “The Tragedy of the Commons”.  Hardin concluded that in the absence of restricting the consequences of the ‘tragedy of the commons’, by reducing the rights to consumption and procreation, to below carrying capacity limits, they would eventually be restricted by nuclear war.

[210]    Social Trap is a term used by psychologists to describe a situation in which a group of people act to obtain short-term individual gains, which in the long run leads to a loss for the group as a whole; such as for example overfishing, energy “brownout” and “blackout” power outages during periods of extreme temperatures, overgrazing on the Sahelian Desert, and the destruction of the rainforest by logging interests and agriculture. Social fence refers to a short-term avoidance behavior by individuals that leads to a long-term loss to the entire group.

[211]    For a culture to avoid the Tragedy of the Commons consequences, they must establish a system whereby the individuals who choose to cheat to exploit the commons (in Ishmael language: the ‘takers’) by breeding and/or consuming above ecological carrying capacity limits, are easily exposed, and given the opportunity to follow their social trap behaviour, by removing their genes from the genepool. In the absence of eliminating the cheater takers from the genepool; the overbreeding social trap behaviour of the ‘takers’, will overpopulate the ‘leavers’ (living in harmony with the commons), eventually forcing the ‘leavers’ to either become takers to survive; or to over consume natural capital to convert to economic and military capital for the purpose of protecting themselves and property from the overbreeding cheaters.

[212]    Hardin concluded that in the absence of restricting the over breeding and consuming consequences of the ‘tragedy of the commons’, by restricting citizens to breeding and consuming below carrying capacity limits, those behaviours would eventually be restricted by nuclear war.
EoP NWO SCO: 12 Oct 2015: EoP Axis/Intnl Law/EoP Applicants; partially quoted in: EoP v WiP NWO Negotiations: 18 Oct: Intercept … Wikipedia.