The American Ruling Class

[aljhoa]

In this video Jesse talks about:
- The CIA implanted in State Government.
- His interrogation by 23 members of the intelligence agency when he was the Governor of Minnesota.
- Finally, he talks comically about how he was tailed by the CIA when being escorted around Cuba by Castros security guards.
Jesse Ventura talks about CIA implanted in State Government, his CIA interrogation and trip to Cuba! - YouTube

Al

[dutchdivco]

"Importing" Rx Drugs

Most people think its illegal to do this; they are wrong. In the US, you can LEGALLY order up to 3 months supply of Rx. drugs from 'foriegn' pharmacies, legally. The only restrictions are on 'controlled substances' i.e. Oxycontin, etc. (narcotics).
Their are many people who DEPEND on this, in order to get their medications; firstly, because of economics.Such medications are much less expensive than their US counterparts; often 1/10th the price.
Secondly, there are a # of medical conditions which the medical community has developed 'blindspots' for, and relies on flawed testing for diagnoses, and so Dr.'s refuse to Rx. drugs, even tho the patient, (out of frustration at the inability of the Dr.'s to effectively treat) has done the research, and figured out on their own whats 'wrong' and what medication they need.
Big Pharm, for years, has been attempting to 'close this loophole', by having (usually) Sen. John McCain introduce legislation making such import, for personal use, illegal. Fortunately, every time he introduces it, a 'grassroots effort' of E-mails, letters and phone calls has succesfully beaten it back.
Recently, they've tried another approach; The EU is currently in trade negotiations with India, and, as a condition the EU is pressuring India on "Intelectual property rights", to CLOSE the internet pharmacies in India.
This is ironic on 2 counts.Firstly, 90% of the medications these pharmacies are selling are 'off patent', and therefore are not a matter for 'intelectual property rights'. And, those that are still under patent, are maufactured by the same pharmaceutical companies as the product sold in the US; they are just much less expensive.
Secondly, recently in the news there was a stroy about a problem thats been brewing for a long time; there are a # of medications used to treat cancer, and particularly childhood leukemia. These medications have been around for years, and are 'off-patent'.The generic drug manufactureres in the US have stopped making these drugs, due to profitability, etc. In a # of cases, the US Government required these companies to 'upgrade' their facilities, and the companies decided it was not cost effective.
So, children needing these vital medications were in danger of not being able to get them.The solution; Importing these medications from,.....wait for it,.....India!
Just one more in a long list of ironies, I guess. You got to laugh, cause eventually you run out of tears! Jim

[rickoff]

I am something of a 'TV network news junkie'; Watch the Sunday a.m. political news shows, and evening national news coverage, (PBS and NBC). I DON'T have cable, however. I saw NOTHING regarding the [President's Day rally] in DC by veterans for RP.

That's what I figured. It was certainly a notable and newsworthy event, and with the veterans gathering at the Washington Monument for 2 hours of speeches and then marching to the White House, where they turned their backs on Barry before saluting a folded American flag for as many seconds as the number of solders who have died in Iraq and Afghanistan during Barry's term, this should have been a hot item deserving of live coverage by every TV network, major magazine, and newspaper. It is plain to see that mainstream media is intentionally avoiding any reporting of news that would cast Ron Paul as the people's choice, or the military's choice. If it weren't for the alternative news sources available on the Internet, and efforts by the Veterans for Ron Paul 2012 group to publicize the event and put up posters like the one below, I'd say it is safe to assume we never would have known about the rally.




Incidentally, while hundreds of veterans did show up for the event, there were very few active duty military participating, but it is not because they do not support Ron Paul. Group founder Adam Kokesh revealed that the military had issued a warning to troops encouraging them not to take part in the events, citing DOD directives on participation in political events by active and non active duty military personnel.

[Delegate voting] is all going on 'behind the scenes' in the sense that the 'average voter' doesn't have any idea HOW delegates are actually selected, and the (mainstream) press (where the 'average Joe' gets their news) isn't saying anything about it, either. But you would THINK the Romoney backers, party regulars, political operatives, would KNOW how the system REALLY works, and would be making some attempt to counter what RP's supporters are doing. Just doesn't make sense.

Well yes, the average voter doesn't understand much about how all of this works, and doesn't care about getting involved other than at the voting booth on election day, but those who do show up at caucuses are not average voters. These folks are the most avid supporters of the candidates, and most of those who do get involved and attend caucuses do understand. Also, as I pointed out earlier in post 2584, the mainstream media did in fact report on the delegate process when MSNBC's popular leftist political pundit Rachel Maddow revealed how Ron Paul was winning the lion's share of delegates in several states, and I also pointed out that this was revealed before the Maine caucuses took place. Romney supporters were certainly warned of the need to stay after the Presidential Preference straw poll and vote for delegates, but it was clear that Paul supporters outnumbered Romney supporters by at least 2 to 1 during the delegate voting. I think that also makes it clear that Romney could not have factually won the straw poll, because he simply did not have enough supporters in attendance at the caucuses to accomplish that. The straw poll results were obviously fabricated by establishment Republicans running the show. All of this does make sense if we will understand that the party establishment, and mainstream media, is only interested in convincing the public that Romney, Gingich, or Santorum is a winner, and that Ron Paul is a loser who cannot win any state let alone have a chance of defeating Obama. They know that Ron Paul will rack up delegates simply because he has more grassroots support than any of the other candidates, and they know they can't do anything about that, but they also know they can shape public perception, so they aren't worried. They will do whatever is necessary to ensure Ron cannot get enough state delegates to win the nomination, and will ensure that the nominee is chosen at the national convention, where I believe they will implement the plan I outlined in post 2604.

While the establishment and media would appear to have achieved much success in minimizing Ron Paul's chances of winning the nomination or defeating Barry if he did win the nomination, once in a while a polling result comes back to bite them in the butt. You will remember the exit polling results in Iowa and New Hampshire, as examples. And late breaking Rasmussen Poll results regarding a question of which candidate would win if the election were held today showed that voters do believe Ron would defeat Barry, while Gingrich and Santorum would not. Again and again, voters say that the most important important consideration in choosing a nominee is finding someone who can beat Barry, and this factor should be ruling out Gingrich and Santorum. It should also be ruling out Romney, since voters should understand that the best chance to defeat Barry is to have a nominee that is the polar opposite of Barry, and as George Soros has stated, leftist liberals have nothing to fear from Romney because the difference between Romney and Obama is very small.

As to what the press DOESN'T cover, well, we don't have near enough room here, to list it all. For instance, 'endorsements'; they are for sale. You want a Govenor to give you an endorsement, you contribute $ to THEIR campaign. Why doesn't the press make that clear, and stop even bothering to cover endorsements?

Simply because they are the press, the mainstream media, and owned by the Ruling Class establishment. Educating the public as to how things really work would certainly not be in the establishment's interest.

[dutchdivco]

Rick

Don't question anything in your 2 posts above. Just wondering if its Hubris, or a 'feeling' or knowledge that once it gets to the convention, that they (mainstream republican 'elite; can manipulate the convention, to get the outcome they want.

Just talked to a RP supporter, who went to the Az. debate. She said the # of RP supporters was so large, they had to move several blocks from where they were originally going to ;form up' outside the building where the debate was going to be held, because there was too many of them, and that there were only a very small # of Santorum and Romoney supporters, none for Gingrich.

I'm sure this is common, and yet again, NOT being covered by mainstream media.

I am skeptical of your postulation that "They" are going to bring someone else up, at the convention and that this has been 'their' plan, all along. It MAY WELL happen, but if it does I think it will be a (somewhat desperate) Plan "B". I THINK they are spending a lot of $, and effort, on trying to shove Romoney down our throats, and grossly underestimated just how hard it would be, to do this.

Question to you; is it possible, as a result of the things we've talked about, that RP will actually have enough delegates to secure the nomination? Is there even any way of accurately KNOWING how many delegates he will have, (or the other candidates as well) before the convention? Jim

[blackchisel97]

Goodbye, First Amendment

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal — RT

V

[aljhoa]

Goodbye, First Amendment: ‘Trespass Bill’ will make protest illegal — RT

V

WASHINGTON, DC--In a historic decision with major implications for the future of U.S. participatory democracy, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 Monday that the American people are unfit to govern.

The controversial ruling, court members stressed, is not intended as a slight against the character of the American people, but merely a necessary measure for the public good.

Despite the enormous impact the ruling would seem to have, many political experts are downplaying its significance.

"It doesn't really change anything, to be honest," said Duke University political-science professor Benjamin St. James. "The public hasn't made any real contributions to the governance of the country in decades, so I don't see how this ruling affects all that much."

"I wouldn't worry about it," St. James added. "It's not that important."

American People Ruled Unfit To Govern

Al

[rickoff]

Don't question anything in your 2 posts above. Just wondering if its Hubris, or a 'feeling' or knowledge that once it gets to the convention, that they (mainstream republican 'elite; can manipulate the convention, to get the outcome they want.

If it gets to the convention, and I believe it will, then they will have made that happen through manipulation. There are only two reasons why 3 establishment politicians remain in this race. One is because the establishment Republican party bosses see it as their best chance of preventing Ron from gaining enough delegates to win the nomination, and I believe that tactic will prove successful. The other reason is to ensure that when delegates are divided between the 3, none will have enough to win the nomination before the convention. At the convention, the only way that Romney or Santorum can win the nomination is if either gives up their delegates to the other. I don't see that as likely to happen unless there is a clear winner on Super Tuesday and the non-winner concedes defeat to drop out. Right now there is no clear winner. Romney was reported to have won Michigan and Arizona, but as far as delegates go, either Romney and Santorum will each get 14 delegates, or Romney will get 12 and Santorum 16, and that will depend upon the final tally. I think the Republican establishment is aiming at the two to head to the convention in a near deadlock tie for delegates, and with Ron unwilling to give up his delegates to either of them, the only solution will be to roll out the establishment's real candidate. To answer your last question, no there is no way to know ahead of time who the delegates will actually vote for. In many instances, such as here in Maine, the elected delegates are uncommitted and can vote as they please. So even though the media continues to report on how many delegates have been won by each of the candidates, they really have no idea.

I am skeptical of your postulation that "They" are going to bring someone else up, at the convention and that this has been 'their' plan, all along. It MAY WELL happen, but if it does I think it will be a (somewhat desperate) Plan "B". I THINK they are spending a lot of $, and effort, on trying to shove Romoney down our throats, and grossly underestimated just how hard it would be, to do this.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what actually happens. If I'm figuring it correctly then Palin or some other shooting star will get the nomination. And if that happens then you will probably think it is the result of "plan B."

Question to you; is it possible, as a result of the things we've talked about, that RP will actually have enough delegates to secure the nomination? Is there even any way of accurately KNOWING how many delegates he will have, (or the other candidates as well) before the convention? Jim

I only see that as being possible if Ron wins big time on Super Tuesday, when 400 delegates will be up for grabs. So it's possible, but not that probable, because the establishment will do whatever is necessary to ensure that a Ron Paul landslide isn't the reported result.

[aljhoa]

R.P.MD vs Breitbart (a frequent speaker at “tea parties”) at Mark 0:40-0:60
Andrew Breitbart Comments on The Cubs, Ron Paul and BaBa Booey. - YouTube

Al

[rickoff]

Sheriff Joe Arpaio releases report

Today sheriff Joe Arpaio released a report of his Cold Case Posse's findings regarding the investigation into Barry's Arizona ballot eligibility. The report can be found here.

Artpaio's posse concluded, from their 6 month investigation, that there is probable cause that the document released by the White House last year as President Obama’s birth certificate is a computer-generated forgery. The investigative team has asked Arpaio to elevate the investigation to a criminal probe, and has identified at least one person of interest as likely involved in the birth certificate forgery.

Arpaio said that, “A continuing investigation is needed to identify the identity of the person or persons involved in creating the alleged birth certificate forgery and to determine who, if anyone, in the White House or the state of Hawaii may have authorized the forgery.”

Mike Zullo, the lead investigator in this case, said that, "Officers of the Hawaii Department of Health and various elected Hawaiian public officials may have intentionally obscured 1961 birth records and procedures to avoid having to release to public inspection and to the examination of court-authorized forensic examiners any original Obama 1961 birth records the Hawaii Department of Health may or may not have.” Zullo also said, “That we were able to cast reasonable suspicions on the authenticity of the registrar stamps was especially disturbing, since these stamp imprints are designed to provide government authentication to the document itself.” Five videos outlining the reasons why the Cold Case Posse came to the conclusion that the certificate is a likely fraud were shown to the press members in attendance, and Zullo concluded the presentation by stating,
“Absent the authentic Hawaii Department of Health 1961 birth records for Barack Obama, there is no other credible proof supporting the idea or belief that President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, as he and the White House have consistently asserted. In fact, absent the authentication of Hawaii Department of Health 1961 birth records for Barack Obama, there is no other proof he was born anywhere within the United States.”


A sixth video was also shown which explained why Barry's Selective Service registration is also suspected of having been forged.



Links to the 6 documentary videos shown to the press are found below.


Video 1. Introduction: Characteristics of a normal scan

Video 2. Laters, Stamp, and "Noise" in Barry's certificate

Video 3. Rebuttal to those who say the anomalies in Barry's certificate were caused by Optical Character Recognition software

Video 4. Rebuttal to the Optimization theory as explaining anomalies

Video 5. Summary and Conclusion

Video 6. Evidence of Selective Service registration forgery


Much of the evidence shown in the videos has already been documented here in this thread. Any press members watching these videos would have to agree that they bring forth compelling evidence which casts serious doubt as to the validity of Barry's purported birth certificate. While I don't expect that the lamestream media will run with this report, as they should, it nevertheless is an important milestone in the continuing eligibility saga since this is the first investigation conducted by a recognized law enforcement agency. I suspect, though, that if the media does make mere mention of the report they will also attempt to marginalize the weight of the report by bringing up Arpaio's problems with Holder's inJustice Department, and stating that Arpaio most likely had an axe to grind. If anyone does see any mention of this in the lamestream media, please do post comments as to where you saw it and what was presented.

Hmmm, checked it out myself and do see there has been some mainstream media reporting on this, and, just as I thought, they are definitely marking Joe as the evil one:

ABC news - Arpaio said he decided to undertake the investigation last August after members of the Tea Party asked him to do so. However, some critics say the tough-talking Arizona sheriff is using it as a way to distract from his own legal problems as he seeks a sixth term in office. Arpaio faces a federal grand jury investigation on criminal abuse-of-power allegations; the Justice Department has accused him of racial profiling Latinos. And there has been an accusation that hundreds of sex-crime cases were inadequately investigated by his department.

NPR news - Arpaio and his lead investigator Mike Zullo posted five videos, explaining their investigation. You can find them at the site of the Western Center for Journalism, but essentially the argument they're making is that the date stamp and the registrar's stamp on Obama's long-form birth certificate were imported from somewhere else. Their proof for that claim? They said the stamps were on different layers on the document and could be moved freely when opened in editing software. For the record, we opened the file using Adobe Photoshop and found that it contained only a single layer of information.

CBS news - Arpaio's press conference puts him in league with the 'birthers,' the conspiracy theorists who claim - against overwhelming evidence - that Mr. Obama was not born in the United States and thus is not eligible to be president.

LA Times - The “cold case posse” results were widely mocked on Twitter, and the 90-minute televised announcement of them was perceived by some as pure political theater. There was lots of tech-speak about the birth certificate’s “layers” and whether the use of various kinds of software explained what the posse called “anomalies” in the document.

The Washington Times - Questions about Mr. Obama's birth certificate have been a political sideshow for the past four years, and have persisted despite repeated denials by the White House and the release of evidence he was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961. That evidence included both a certificate of live birth released during the 2008 campaign and the long-form certificate last year. Fact-checking organizations have concluded the certificates are authentic.

U.S. News - Arpaio's probe comes amid a federal grand jury investigation into the sheriff's office on criminal abuse-of-power allegations since at least December 2009, focusing on the sheriff's anti-public corruption squad. Separately, the U.S. Justice Department has accused Arpaio's office of racially profiling Latinos, basing immigration enforcement on racially charged citizen complaints and punishing Hispanic jail inmates for speaking Spanish.

[blackchisel97]

collegegate?

Yesterday during his speech at the Conservative Political Action Conference, Andrew Breitbart gave the audience and C-SPAN viewers a preview of what’s to come during the 2012 general election against Barack Obama. He said the mainstream media refused to vet Obama in 2008 and that he will not go unvetted in 2012. Breitbart says he has videos of Obama in college that nobody has seen. Considering he’s the man who took down ACORN and Anthony Weiner, this could be good.

Sinclair News:

With the announcement of Andrew’s passing overnight we could not help recalling our conversation just 3 weeks ago in Washington, DC. Andrew said on Feb 9, 2012 in Washington, DC “wait til they see what happens March first.”

Via: Los Angeles Times:

Conservative writer and website publisher Andrew Breitbart died of natural causes at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center about midnight, sources told The Times.

The exact cause of death was unclear, said the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the case was ongoing.

It’s also unclear if he was stricken at the hospital or another location. [Updated at 10:13 a.m.: Breitbart’s father-in-law, actor Orson Bean, told The Times he collapsed on the sidewalk near his home while taking a nighttime walk.]

“Andrew passed away unexpectedly from natural causes shortly after midnight this morning in Los Angeles,” Breitbart.com said. “We have lost a husband, a father, a son, a brother, a dear friend, a patriot and a happy warrior. “

V

[rickoff]

Here's an example of blatant vote fraud in Maine, and where you find one such case there are sure to be many more. In the town of Belfast, Matt McDonald was chosen as chairman of the Belfast caucus. State party leaders notified McDonald (and probably all other chairpersons) not to read aloud the results of caucus voting. Reeks, don't you think so? Obviously the reason for this instruction is so that no one at the caucus would know what the actual results were, and therefore cannot challenge a false tally when the "official" results are reported. Well, McDonald didn't like this secrecy instruction and put the matter up for vote. Belfast caucus goers voted unanimously to have the results read after the voting, before being sent to Augusta for recording. Later, after Romney was announced as the Maine caucus winner, and it was discovered that no votes for Belfast had been recorded, McDonald called to ask the recording clerk if she had received the Belfast results. She said she had, but hadn't had time to enter them yet. She read the numbers as Romney having 9 votes and Ron Paul with 2. McDonald told her that was wrong, that Ron Paul had 8 votes to Romney's 5, and the clerk responded saying, "Well, those are the numbers we have." Since those definitely weren't the tally results McDonald had sent in, this means that someone at headquarters had altered the results to strongly favor Romney over Paul. Now I'm wondering just how many towns actually followed the "don't read aloud" order and never realized their vote totals were tampered with to produce the reported Romney win. The stench from all of this is going to linger for quite a while, and will not be easily forgotten.

See more about how the Maine caucus was rigged.

If it happens in one town then you know it happens in others, and if it happens in one state then you know it happens in others as well. This is how the establishment always ensures that the true people's choice never is nominated, and manipulates the outcome of every election.

[jibbguy]

I hope that some people now realize that the true, and REAL problem with elections is Election Fraud... not the red herring of "voter fraud".

[aljhoa]

Is using a forged Social Security Number -- but your own name --
to obtain employment or buy a car an identity theft crime?
Lately, U.S. courts are saying it's not.

the U.S. Supreme Court that a Mexican man who gave a false SSN to get a job at an Illinois steel plant could not be convicted under federal identity theft laws because he did not knowingly use another person's identifying number.

the Colorado Supreme Court, ruled last month that a man who used his real name but someone else's Social Security number to obtain a car loan was not guilty of "criminal impersonation,"

"The SSN is still the keys to the kingdom," she said. "(The judges) don't understand that using the SSN itself is tantamount to ID theft. For far too long, the courts and industry have not taken identity theft seriously and here is but another example."
Red Tape - Courts: Using another's SSN not a crime

Al

[aljhoa]

I hope that some people now realize that the true, and REAL problem with elections is Election Fraud... not the red herring of "voter fraud".

The present corrupt system is completely unsustainable. It cannot last long.

Soviet democracy is democracy by proxy. The theory being that members of the "council", being close to those workers or lower "council" members that they represent, can thereby accurately translate the people's decisions into legislation, and be more responsive than a centralized parliamentary democracy. Ultimately soviet democracy is based on direct democracy, especially with its advocy of recallable delegates.
Soviet democracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Al

[dutchdivco]

Rick

Thought you'd pick up on Sheriff Joe's 'announcement'. For the 'record', it WAS covered here (in Az.)on the local news. And, the local reporters, who actually stayed and watched his presentation, DID say, in their introduction, that he presented "COMPELLING" evidence, supporting his conclusion of forgery.They spent about 2 minutes on the story itself, which is a lot, for local news. They then spent ANOTHER 2 minutes; showing reporters questioning Joes cheif investigator, who stated he IS a "republican", but NOT a "Tea Partier", and stated that he had no political motive. Both he and Joe said that politically, they would have benefitted by NOT doing this investigation. They then showed Joe explaining he had 250 of his constituents approach him and ASK him to undertake this investigation, and he felt he would be derelict in his sworn duties if he didn't.

The local press has to be a little careful with Joe; he has a LOT of supporters here, who love him, as well as a lot of detractors, who HATE him. So, they try to be a little more 'balanced' so as not to piss anyone off, too much.

They did finish with pointing out that Joe is being investigated by Holders Injustice Dept., and leaving the implication that that is his motive.

As you say, this is the first; and i don't think Joe will back down, or be bought off. He IS getting up in years, and a 'natural causes' death is possible, I suppose. However, he has been getting credible death threats for years, (several are in jail for plotting to assasinate him), so I suspect his security is a lot tighter than,....say a conservative blogger.

Here's hoping he moves to a criminal investigation, and can find an attourney willing to take it to court, tho I kind of doubt it. The Previous county attourney, Andrew Thomas, who worked closely with Joe, is being Dis-barred, and the current one is trying to 'restore the good name' of the county attourneys office', and would probably shy from taking the case, regardless of how compelling the evidence. Still, its a start, but the 'discredit' brigades are hard at work, and will PROBABLY succeed with this, as well.

Your earlier post about the Hawaii letter of certification to the Secretary of State, clarfies a ? I had. Apperently, "WE" (The People" ) depend on the political parties to 'certify' (without requiring them to present any evidence, just 'take their word for it') that a candidate meets the Constitutional requirements to serve as President.

Perhaps "WE" should begin an effort, at State legislatures around the country, to CHANGE that. If we are going to continue to leave this up to parties, at least require that they present more than a letter certifying, but include evidence 'proving' what it is they are certifying.

"Honest, Mr. IRS, I really DID spend that much last year. I don't have the reciepts, but I'll sign a letter CERTIFYING that I spent that much. Won't THAT do????",.......I don't THINK so!
Of coarse, it would then be up to the Secretry of State, to examine, (or have a group of 'experts' examine) the documents, to insure their valildity.

An argument that COULD be made, for such changes, would turn the "crazy birthers' argument around. Something like; "We all know how much ?'s of Obamas eligibility 'distracted' from 'more important' issues, and undermined his credibility and mandate to lead. AND, he is not the only President to have such questions raised. It therefore behooves us to insure that in the future, no President, once in office, will have his legitimacy questioned in such a manner. By having 50 Secretaries of State required by legislation to examine and verify a candidates legitimate qualifications to serve, we will avoid such controversies in the future."

As pointed out in previous posts, there are all sorts of ways in which the system is gamed, this would only 'solve' one. What you pointed out in Maine is, as you say, happening in other states, as well. No doubt! I question the results of the Ariz. primary, as well. RP had a HUGE group of supporters show up at the debate, Romney hardly any, Santorum either. YES, there IS a 'Mormon presence' in Az., but there are a lot of evangelical and "Tea Party" types, as well. Very conservative state, over all.And, I find few people who say THEY voted for or support Romoney. I suspect ballot stuffing here, as well,....Jim