In an effort to improve time management allowing the necessary time for research and sharing, please consider this a standard form letter response to any further inquiry:

Dear Mr./Mrs. XXXXXXXX, prudence and necessarily instilled manners dictate that all correspondence deserves the full weight of polite response.

Allow me to thank you with earnest of appreciation for all you do. Thank you from a simple voice amid a national citizenry; of which I am a proud and insignificant member.

If our paths were ever to cross in person, we hold no disposition that you, as a person of consequence or influence, would ever afford calloused and well worn hands the time of day. We are, like many, comfortably invisible.

That said, and with the utmost respect for your professional endeavors, I hope you will consider this correspondence carefully: It is not our “goal” to raise our profile by highlighting injustice. It is our goal to shine light upon that injustice…

When we see that justice is measured, not by due process, but by compulsion – when we see that in order to invoke our fourth or sixth amendment right to privacy and due process, we need to obtain permission from men who rebuke the constitution – when we see that justice is determined by those who leverage, not in law, but in politics – when we see that men get power over individual liberty by graft and by scheme, and our representatives don’t protect us against them, but protect them against us – when we see corruption holding influence and individual liberty so easily dispatched and nullified – we may well know that our freedom is soon to perish.

You present an opportunity for an interview as if it is reflective of some courageous or magnanimous endeavor on your behalf. Alas, the disconnect, and innocent naivete’ of those only partially immersed in the battle shines through.

I’m almost certain that you hold the best of all intentions. However, in viewing a goal to be getting a story of such consequence ‘advanced‘ you miss the entire point.

My honest and respectfully intended question to you would be: What is it that makes media folks always want to “get an interview” when the information is there for the taking?

Perhaps, by training, by habit, or by unintended consequence you have developed your professional outlook to endeavor for the process itself as an end result. Is it logical to believe that journalism is the interview; the conversation is the point; the smoke is the fire?

Please forgive my poorly worded suppositions, but apparently journalism has evolved into reveling in the process and, as a consequence, it completely ignores the end point, misses the bottom line, doesn’t actually SEE the subject matter and never actually applies what might be discovered.

In fact, I’m led to believe that sometimes those within the corporate media complex avoid the subject matter deliberately, because if they actually get their heads around it and nail it home, they won’t have anything to talk about any more – because they will have exhausted their stash.

Not attempting whatsoever to lump your intention into such a fray; however, many have gotten into the habit of milking each situation for “so many leads,” “so many interviews,” “so many column inches,” and “so many angles” that problem-solving does not appeal to them at all. They oddly, and frustratingly, appear to favor the endless process.

So when there’s an approach like what you are encountering with our significant site research, and my reluctance for self involvement, I don’t fit –because I don’t give a flip about “the process.” And therefore, I do not fit into the rationale of the box or the PERT chart.

If you want to make the truths upon these pages known, they are free for the taking; and they are by no matter or consequence dependent on my advancement. The truth exists regardless of our potential for discomfort as a result of discovering it.

We research, provide, share and discuss information so that we are not drawn by inaction toward that bloody collectivist good night. We wield truth as our defiance – for it carries a sound most are forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing about it.

In many ways our discussions are an assembly of scattered free survivors hiding in the ruins of our once-cherished freedoms, while simultaneously doing our part to support the restoration of them. We are comfortably invisible hands, and we are deaf to voices purposed for self-advancement and financial influence.

With profound appreciation for your time and attention, and the most warm of regards.

Truly,

Sundance