The American Ruling Class

[aljhoa]

You correct. However this only applies if the actions were committed for the benefit of or at the behest of the corporation. (States and munis are corporations)

Does anyone really think the sexual assault was for the benefit of anyone except the cop, personally?

Immunity only applies to discretionary official duties.

(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
28 U.S. Code § 3002 - Definitions | LII / Legal Information Institute

The Qualified Immunity Defense Defense attorneys representing a police officer for any of these claims will raise a defense of qualified immunity. This defense exists to prevent the fear of legal prosecution from inhibiting a police officer from enforcing the law. The defense will defeat a claim against the officer if the officer's conduct did not violate a clearly established constitutional or statutory right. In other words, the specific acts the officer prevented the individual from engaging in must be legally protected, otherwise there is no civil rights violation. In order to win a civil rights claim, an individual bringing a police misconduct claim must prove that the actions of the police exceeded reasonable bounds, infringed the victim's constitutional rights, and produced some injury or damages to the victim.
Police Misconduct and Civil Rights - FindLaw

Thus, claims for damages against a defendant who can raise the defense of qualified immunity can take years to come to trial even when the defense is unsuccessful. Accordingly, you must discuss with your clients the advantages and disadvantages of suing public officials for damages so that they can make an informed decision on whether the claim is worth pursuing in the face of almost certain delay.
8.2 Suits Against Public Officials in Their Individual Capacity | Federal Practice Manual for Legal Aid Attorneys

Al

[BroMikey]

Little Boys grow up

There is nothing wrong with those young men watching over their families. The other part about God grinds you I see. Well get over it.

The point is that those young men are more right than their own filthy Gov.

My opinion about the creation is etched in stone dear.

Do try to stay on topic?

Mike

[TheoriaApophasis]

My opinion about the creation is etched in stone dear.
Mike

IN YOUR MIND, yes. And as well all know, the brain is a lump of jello.



Of the two ignorant positions as explanation for the extreme complexity in nature between the model of the Creationists, and that of the Atheists, the positions of the Atheists is far more so the implausible one.

The extreme complexity in nature from macro to micro is not in question by even the lowliest of fools,[/COLOR][/B] however the Atheistic position that this complexity stems from time and random atomic convergence is highly ignoble and unintelligent.

One might equally insanely postulate, from the same position of the Atheists, that random atoms, given a few billion years, will eventually coalesce to the point of creating Shakespearean literature However Atheism in its extreme insanity is working on creating its own Gods, thru perfection of cryogenics and DNA manipulation wherein someday, they erroneously hope, will culminate in bodily immortality.

Atheism and Creationists are both 2 insanities holding onto HALF of the TRUTH each.

[BroMikey]

High Words

Yes very high sounding words. You are entitled to your views but attacking others for their's is not permitted. The point is who is the AMERICA RULING CLASS? Are we back on topic?

My point is that THE RULING BODY has and always will be in full command.

HE IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE. It is a Man thing, you wouldn't understand.

THE Ruling body in America has been high jacked. We used to be a better example for the world and everyone wanted to come to AMERICA.

That is the basis of these debates really because RULES come from some where.

Today THE RULING DOGS think that the people are unable to fend for themselves or unable, so they make their own rules. Rules and RULERS just popping out of thin air.

It comes from the EASTERN MYSTICISM just sit humming with yer legs crossed and imagine yourself as gOd. This is the NEW AMERICAN RULING CLASS. Just believe in yourself and do your thing, forget about obeying other man made laws, make your own laws.

Common Law. Thou shalt not kill. A, B C shall it go on?

These people living today reject the RULING RULER and have abandoned HIS law and exchanged it for the metaphysical, yes.

Or in other words exchanged HIS laws for the "SCIENCE OF THE MIND" "I am gOd" "We are gOd" and so on.

Now that is the most retarded thing I have ever heard

People have to be living in the mire to be so myopic.

Earth dwellers who are nothing more than burrowing salamanders living under rocks to think men ARE gOd. Metaphysical dishonesty.


America use to be an example of praying people, praying to the GOD of HEAVEN. IN GOD WE TRUST right on our money.

OUR God has been with us to help us in time of need to escape the Queens murdering bands.

No More. We have abandoned HIS LAW so our POWER to RULE as THE AMERICAN RULING BODY has changed forever.

Only two Nations in all of history have ever claimed to server THIS GOD I am speaking to YOU about. Those two Nations are the USA and Israel.

The rest of the Nations server Molech and have never tried to hide that, they do not claim any status with Jehovah.

All other Nations throughout time have other gOds. Many many Other gOds.

Now lets stay on topic. The RULING Body is in power only because we acknowledged the RULES or LAWS of a HOLY GOD.

Thats what made AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL what she is today.

The power to RULE has been granted to THE USA in time past but because we have rejected HIS LAWS our power is quickly vanishing, I am afraid.

Beating on drums and praying to a tree won't do for me.

Mike

[TheoriaApophasis]

Common Law. Thou shalt not kill. A, B C shall it go on?
Mike

Unfortunately like MOST, youve confused killing with murder

The two are WHOLLY DIFFERENT.



There is nothing at all wrong with killing (in the correct context). There are NO EVIL ACTIONS, only an evil mind.

Evil, Satan, and "Evil actions"........ are these nonsenses are the mental machinations of Creationists.

Not MORAL, not IMMORAL.......but Amoral. Higher effects the lower, never the inverse.


As against the soccer-mom mentality so commonly found in the West and Europe (especially Britain), there are no evil actions, rather only an evil mind. The often repeated phrase “it is wrong to kill another” is a heinous non-Noble fallacy which belies the ape mentality of the politically correct generation of “live and let live”, even in the face of necessary self defense. As is demonic the slaying of innocents by the hands of a psychopath is the lemming pacifist mentality that one should cower and hope for the best in the immanence of self-defense’s necessity, in the moment of oneself being attacked. It has frequently be the retort by pacifist goons that ‘those who live by the sword shall die by the sword’, therefore those who concern themselves with concealed carry deadly weapons as a means of self-defense in a brutal world are therefore those same who “live by the sword” and are therefore doomed. This misunderstanding however is highly pathetic and most certainly incorrect in that said passage refers to violent men who “live by the sword” from the position of violence, that in turn, “violence will certainly be returned to them”. The innocent man who “picks up and raises the sword (or gun)” when the time has arrived that violence has been leveled upon him is at no fault, for when danger has passed, the Noble man “lays down the sword” and returns to his peaceful life. We however call them evil who “carry in front of them the sword whence and wherever they go”. Those evil men with evil minds who seek out violence and murder, in contrast to them, the Noble who defense self, family and lands is the blameless and noble paragon of virtue, which none can assail, even if a thousand bodies of evil men lay slain at his feet.

Like the gun or the sword, both tools, so too is the body the tool of the mind of man, his spirit (in the case of the Noble) takes charge and is control, of which the body and its deeds are blameless in all instances, but that the laws of man cannot punish the Noble spirit, but rather imprison the body, and that “men see not the minds of others, rather the deeds and actions which are committed by their bodies”, such is the case that men are often judged not in spirit or intent, but in deeds. Whilst some actions could near never be rationally justified as having a noble premise in the mind, such as necrophilia, or pedophilia; killing is certainly nothing near either of such as these. The reductionistic pseudo logic of modern ‘peace-mongering at all costs’ pacifists is that “killing is killing, regardless”; however none of philosophies great-men have held such an ignoble position, this is something found only recently and most commonly in European minds, and that of far left-wing American pacifism. The false view that pacifism is the moral principle that the use of force is wrong for any reason is a metaphysical fallacy in that it sees all actions as reducibly equal, but this is not, cannot be the case, for body as a tool cannot ever be accused of equally reducible deeds in light of the mind, or spirits intent.

The pacifists growing consensus (= profane, non-Noble, low, base) to wit “it is wrong to kill another” cannot be justified or enjoined by any with wisdom, for the mother in her home who has been attacked upon by a madman set upon her demise and that of her sleeping children has no fault to slay to death that very same man; that such a one as her is “equally to blame” as, say a Jeffrey Dahmer or any other crazed murderer, is a reductionistic and fallacious position as held by those with irrational and illogical minds who are driven along solely by their feelings and hormonal emotive bundles. Self defense, by gun or by fist, of oneself and those who are innocent is rationally noble, is Noble; is indeed and undeniably an Noble virtue and necessity. These same sort of non-Noble minded peoples might insanely say that a time traveler who goes back to 1943 and puts a bullet in the head of Adolph Hitler out of the Noble will towards millions of innocent Jews, and Europeans, is “equally to blame” as, say, Jack the ripper. The historical Gotama himself praised the Noble deed of killing by his own hands of another: "I got good merit (in a past life) for killing the evil man"-Gotama Buddha [Jataka 4-197].

Certainly it would be true that many a demented and demonic tyrant or dictator has pathetically rationalized killing (but which is rather murder) of innocents; this ignoble rationalization in no way diminishes the Noble and “blameless”(Digha Nikaya1 and elsewhere: Arhants who “took the knife blamelessly”) who have killed out of love, for either self-defense or love of others in saving the lives of innocents from the insanity and rage of a demented and evil Samsarin (profane worldly, a vile non-Noble). Even the mass-murderer Anguilamala, in the Majjhima Nikaya of Buddhism’s earliest texts, became an Arhant in very short order in the Anguilamala Sutta. This is an important and defining characteristic between Buddhism and Jainist pacifism, which very few make any distinction thereof. Jains themselves ignorantly deny that wisdom can transcend karma (actions) ‘in an instant’, of which Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta do indeed claim. All actions (karma, Pali: kamma) are equivalences to avijja (agnosis, ignorance) in that the atman or soul is ignorantly seen as an agent (karmin) in and of samsara, which it is fact not. The false and common conception that Buddhism is pacifistic is utterly without a basis in its doctrine and rational postulation.

Modern histories famous pacifists (since pacifism is a foreign concept near entirely in the distant past) have themselves been ones to recognize the needs and Noble nobility to kill another in defense of innocents, be that oneself or another. "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." [The Dalai Lama, in The Seattle Times, May 15, 2001]. "Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of guns, as the blackest deed." [Mahatma Gandhi- An Autobiography : The story of my experiments with truth, by M.K. Gandhi, p.238]. Japanese, Italian and Nazi aggression that precipitated World War II often is cited as an argument against pacifism. If these forces had not been challenged and defeated militarily, logically many more people would have died under their oppressive rule. A frequently used quote is from

Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing”.

“Being a pacifist between wars is as easy as being a vegetarian between meals” - Ammon Hennacy.

“Since pacifists have more freedom of action in countries where traces of democracy survive, pacifism can act more effectively against democracy than for it. Objectively the pacifist is pro-Nazi”- George Orwell.

It has been argued by pacifists and unintelligent idiots that no one need carry around with them a weapon as any Noble is ought and in the right to do, given that a 911 call to the police dept. is recourse for such emergencies. Laughably shortsighted as this is, it must be stated that in a dangerous self defense situation the average elapsed time is two minutes from start to end, and the average American 911 response time is fourteen minutes; leaving a mere twelve minutes for one to either bleed to death, or mentally prepare for the passing from this life! In an equal regard pacifists and Leftists have deemed those who carry concealed weapons to be ‘cowards’, in fear of what ‘most likely will never happen’; while this is, regarding the later, partially accurate, the boy scout motto is a worldly truism “be prepared!”. Peoples (including pacifists) don’t own fire extinguishers, buy medical insurance, and elsewise out of being ‘fearful’ or ‘cowardly’, nor still does the Noble who carries a gun with him everywhere fear the unknown, but rather knows the nature of existence and the varieties of evil men who lurk the world, looking to pray upon the weak (= pacifists). You cannot reason with a rabid dog, nor either a rabid and deranged human either hell-bent on rape, murder, etc. To think otherwise is extremely unintelligent; any policeman knows this very well. Dependency is sister to evil itself; the Noble does not rely upon either the govt. or the police when danger is upon him.

The last irrational position by the loony Leftists in their defense (sic) of hatred for justified killing of another is to attack the tools of killing, namely guns. “Those evil guns” as they are wont to say, but it is rather instead true that ‘fools fear guns, whereas the wise fear only a fool with a gun’. These ‘anti-killing’ peoples are the same sort of demented fools who claim a lifeless hunk of steel, a gun, is inherently evil in and of itself, as if a gun has ever jumped up from a table and accosted someone, or killed another. They vociferously claim “there are many reasons to control the use of guns” however gun control is less about guns, than about control, for criminals do not follow the law, to them gun control pertains only to those who obey the law & its controls; to control guns is only to control the normal citizen, not the criminal who cares not for laws. It has been their refuge to blame the tool rather than the handler as a last defense, for they are often to say “guns kill people”, however the Noble cannot capitulate to the insane notion that lifeless steel could jump up and kill a man; only a fool blames the tool rather than the wielder or same. Again, there are no evil actions, only an evil mind. The body is a tool, just as a gun is a tool, used either to murder, commit evil, or in the case of the Noble, to save, protect, defend “those who are most certainly innocent”. There are no rational men who hold to a position of “evil tools”. All tools carry the responsibility that the owner know the manner in which to use it and have the intelligence enough to rationality and correctly use the tool they own or purchase. Just as is necessary here in life are not only guns needed, but also coffins, for all men die, so too medicine for the foul body which is bound to corruption, and all the other necessities of living.

It has been said by those against the killing of another for any reason: “If you want peace, be peace” this sort of pathetic reasoning would assume that a chaste, pure of spirit lovely woman might tread thru cities at night with no worry of the dark and deranged souls who would lurk and pounce upon her. The Noble knows that the Absolute and its metaphysics are “beyond good and evil”, for in the Absolute there is not deed or misdeed by wisdom alone which has caused one to acquire that attainment. To “love peace” and “be a pacifist” are most certainly not the same thing. The Noble who “loves peace” has not “gone against his nature” in either defending himself, his kin, or those innocents who cry out for “the righteous!”

[BroMikey]

Protecting My little Girl

Unfortunately like MOST, youve confused killing with murder

Very good ranting THEORIA

You have my rubber stamp on most of the common sense issues discussed.

I grew up in Metro Detroit so yeah we carry guns to protect one another, no problem. The minister of vengeance will always arise to the challenge when the lawless society is to busy to execute justice.

You are doing well.

Mike

[dutchdivco]

I 'beg' to disagree

You correct. However this only applies if the actions were committed for the benefit of or at the behest of the corporation. (States and munis are corporations)

Does anyone really think the sexual assault was for the benefit of anyone except the cop, personally?

Immunity only applies to discretionary official duties.

At least with private, non-governmental companies, the company can be held responsible for an employee who, for instance is using their position as an employee to perpetrate frauds, which in no way benefit the company.

The legal position is that the employee is acting as an 'agent' of the employer; if themployer had 'no idea' the employee was doing this, they SHOULD have. So all these attempts, after GM ignition switch scandal, etc. for the CO's to say "My subordinates never TOLD me" is just PR; legally, they are liable.

Oh, and Theo, the brain is about 80% FAT, (so we are ALL 'fatheads'), high in cholesterol, too!

One other point; there are several FEDERAL prisoners serving time for murdering someone; even though the only FEDERAL laws regarding murder are of FEDERAL officials, postal workers, etc. Technically, these prisoners are charged and convicted of CIVIL rights violation, in that they 'deprived' their victim of "LIFE, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness".
Actually, "Wrongful death" is generally a CIVIL case, with a monetary penalty, not a CRIMINAL charge, resulting in time.

Anyway, ANY time a bunch of humans get together, and develop an organisation and a hierarchy, (it seems) eventually the effort will become corrupted/perverted, so that the original goals are lost. It just seems like its 'human nature'.

Throughout (recorded) history, there has ALWAYS been some kind of 'ruling class', or elite. And, being in charge, they have always set things up for THEIR benefit. ANY system of Government that can be devised by man, can, given some time, be corrupted. Thats why our Founding fathers said there needs to be a 'revolution every 10 years; hats how long they figured it would take for the schemers and scammers to figure out how to work the system.
And they were obviously right, which means we are WAY 'overdue' for a change. Problem is, even IF you could really 'throw the bums out', they'd be back again, new faces, but same old s*it, within a few years,...."same old wine in a brand new bottle",....hardly seems worth the effort!Jim

[aljhoa]

Conscious Brain-to-Brain Communication
Human sensory and motor systems provide the natural means for the exchange of information between individuals, and,
hence, the basis for human civilization. The recent development of brain-computer interfaces (BCI) has provided an important element
for the creation of brain-to-brain communication systems, and precise brain stimulation techniques are now available for the realization of
non-invasive computer-brain interfaces (CBI). These technologies, BCI and CBI, can be combined to realize the vision of non-invasive, computer-mediated brain-to-brain (B2B) communication between subjects (hyperinteraction). Here we demonstrate the conscious transmission of information between human brains through the intact scalp and without intervention of motor or peripheral sensory systems.


Al

[rickoff]

On September 17th the corporation US House voted 319 to 128 to pass a resolution to arm and train "moderate" Syrian rebels to fight against ISIS. The next day, the corporation US Senate voted 78 to 22 to do the same, giving Barry exactly what he had asked for and thus completing the final step of the problem-reaction-solution agenda. This was done under the guise of responding to public outcry, over Internet videos purporting to show beheadings of Americans, that "something must be done." We have all seen examples, in the past, of how this strategy is played out - examples such as the Gulf of Tonkin incident which drew us into the Vietnam War, the deception that led to the first Iraq war's "Desert Storm", and the 9/11 false flag incidents that took us into further involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, and which have been thoroughly documented in this thread.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which was approved by all but two members of the corporation US Congress, is somewhat reminiscent of the current Resolution to arm and train "moderate" Syrian rebels, in that Congress members either knew the truth and still voted to further the deception, or were easily duped into believing the lies deliberately stated to them (and to the public) by administration officials. It is also interesting that, while 22 Senators voted against the current resolution, only one - Rand Paul - was vehemently vocal in his opposition. As Rand pointed out, previously arming the "moderate" rebels to assist them in fighting against Assad only ended up in providing the US arms which ISIS now controls. Here are just a few things Rand said during his 47 minute impassioned speech on the Senate floor:

• "The biggest group that we give arms to is currently the Free Syrian Army, which currently has three different people claiming to be in charge of the Free Syrian Army. We don’t even know who’s in charge!”

• “Half of them have defected! Half of them are now fighting with the jihadists!”

• “So as we’ve sent 600 tons of weapons, Isis has only grown stronger.”

• “The barnacled purveyors of war should admit their mistakes, and not compound them. Isis is now a threat, let’s get on with destroying them, but make no mistake, arming rebels in Syria will only make that more difficult.”

Rand also pointed out that a year ago, when arms were provided to the "moderate" Syrian rebels, ISIS/ISIL was pretty much non-existent. Without actually saying so, Rand demonstrated that the current and rapidly growing ISIS force of roughly 30,000 jihadists, using American weaponry and American funds pillaged from banks and black market oil sales, was only made possible through the stupidity of arming Syrian rebels. In other words, the US played a major role in creating ISIS/ISIL. That conclusion is also borne out by a statement made byformer CIA contractor Steven Kelley, who goes even further than Rand in stating that the ISIS/ISIL terrorist group is a completely fabricated enemy created and funded by the United States. “This is a completely fabricated enemy,” he said in a phone interview with Press TV from Anaheim, California on Thursday, August 28. “The funding is completely from the United States and its allies and for people to think that this enemy is something that needs to be attacked in Syria or Iraq is a farce because obviously this is something that we created.”


Keeping in mind that the truth about the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Incident was not revealed until released by NSA agency historian Robert J. Hanyok in 2005 - some 41 years later, it will probably be a long time before anyone in our "government" is willing to document USA/CIA connections to ISIS, or to Al-Qaeda for that matter. The Al-Qaeda/CIA connections are widely recognized, however, and have been stated by those who were in a position to know. For example:

Robin Cook, Foreign Secretary in the UK from 1997–2001, believed the CIA had provided arms to the Arab Mujaheddin, including Osama bin Laden, writing, "Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan." Cook, Robin (2005-07-08). "The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means". - London: Guardian Unlimited.

Much of what is known about the CIA's connection to Al-Qaeda comes from investigations of the scandals involving the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI):

• BCCI was the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, a dirty offshore bank that then-president Ronald Reagan's Central Intelligence Agency used to run guns to Hussein, finance Osama bin Laden, move money in the illegal Iran-Contra operation and carry out other "agency" black ops. The Bushes also benefited privately; one of the bank's largest Saudi investors helped bail out George W. Bush's troubled oil investments.

• BCCI was founded in 1972 by a Pakistani banker, Agha Hasan Abedi, with the support of Sheik Zayed bin Sultan al Nahyan, ruler of Abu Dhabi and head of the United Arab Emirates. Its corporate strategy was money laundering. It became the banker for drug and arms traffickers, corrupt officials, financial fraudsters, dictators and terrorists.

• The CIA used BCCI Islamabad and other branches in Pakistan to funnel some of the two billion dollars that Washington sent to Osama bin Laden's Mujahadeen to help fight the Soviets in Afghanistan. It moved the cash the Pakistani military and government officials skimmed from U.S. aid to the Mujahadeen. It also moved money as required by the Saudi intelligence services.

• The money BCCI stole before it was shut down in 1991 - somewhere between 9.5 billion and 15 billion dollars - made its 20-year heist the biggest bank fraud in history. Most of it was never recovered. International banks' complicity in the offshore secrecy system effectively covered up the money trail.

• But in the years after the collapse of BCCI, Khalid bin Mahfouz was still flush with cash. In 1992, he established the Muwafaq ("blessed relief") Foundation in the offshore Channel Islands. The U.S. Treasury Department called it "an al-Qaeda front that receives funding from wealthy Saudi businessmen."

Need more evidence that Al-qaeda was a CIA contrivance? Read this article.

As to Osama Bin Laden, contrary to lies the Bush administration used in promoting the 2003 Iraq War, the CIA knew for certain in 2002 that there was no tie between Osama and Iraq, and this was reported by the Washington Post in a 2006 article. Of course everyone knows now that the "weapons of mass destruction" claims used to promote public fear and a call for war were also lies. The war in Afghanistan, which was promoted as being necessary to root out Al-Qaeda and kill Osama Bin Laden was really about getting rid of the Taliban, who had put a stop to the opium trade in Afghanistan. Putting an end to the Taliban allowed the CIA to resume its immensely profitable opium operation. It was never about Bin Laden, who was well known by the CIA in 2001 to have been very ill with hepatitis and dying from kidney failure which necessitated frequent dialysis treatments. On Wednesday October 31, 2001 The Guardian reported: "Two months before September 11 Osama bin Laden flew to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by the local CIA agent, according to the French newspaper Le Figaro. The disclosures are known to come from French intelligence which is keen to reveal the ambiguous role of the CIA, and to restrain Washington from extending the war to Iraq and elsewhere. Bin Laden is reported to have arrived in Dubai on July 4 from Quetta in Pakistan with his own personal doctor, nurse and four bodyguards, to be treated in the urology department. While there he was visited by several members of his family and Saudi personalities, and the CIA. The CIA chief was seen in the lift, on his way to see Bin Laden, and later, it is alleged, boasted to friends about his contact. He was recalled to Washington soon afterwards.
CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July | World news | The Guardian

Osama was thought to have died in December 2001, either as a result of bunker buster bombings in Tora Bora, or as a result of his serious illnesses. Indeed, on December 26, 2001 the New York Times ran an article titled, "High-Level Murmurings That bin Laden Is Dead" High-Level Murmurings That bin Laden Is Dead - NYTimes.com

On Saturday October 21, 2002 CNN reported: LONDON, England (CNN) -- The editor-in-chief of a London-based Arab news magazine said a purported will it published Saturday was written late last year [2001] by Osama bin Laden, and shows "he's dying or he's going to die soon." "He did write the will as someone saying good-bye," Hani Nakshabandi of the Arab news magazine Al Majalla told CNN. He said one of the magazine's reporters obtained the four-page document, said to be signed by the leader of the al Qaeda terrorist network and dated December 14, 2001, in Afghanistan. CNN.com - Magazine runs what it calls bin Laden's will - Oct. 26, 2002

Even the FBI's counter-terrorism chief, Dale Watson, said in 2002 that he thought Osama Bin Laden was probably dead at that time. BBC NEWS | South Asia | Bin Laden 'probably' dead

If, for some unknown reason, Osama had survived the Tora Bora bombings and managed to obtain a miraculous recovery from his kidney failure, Berkan Yashir, a former CIA agent, stated in an interview with Russia’s Channel One that he personally knew Bin Laden’s three Chechen bodyguards, who had protected him until his death and witnessed his death on June 26, 2006. That's 5 years before Barry announced the killing of Osama in May of 2011. Which of these stories - the 2001 death, the 2006 death, or the 2011 killing, appears to be more plausible is a matter of personal preference. My preference is to give the 2001 or 2006 stories the most credibility, as the 2011 story offered no credible evidence whatsoever to indicate it was true. No photographic evidence released, and the "body of Bin Laden" was rather conveniently said to have been disposed of in an at-sea burial.

[rickoff]

I "corrected" the post above to reflect your sensibilities of you being called out on your speculative subjective conjecture without substantiation

This has nothing to do with my sensibilities, but rather everything to do with Energetic Forum code of conduct, which prohibits personal attacks and calls for polite exchanges when a member wishes to disagree with what another member has posted. You clearly violated the Forum's code of conduct, and your "corrections" were not adequate and are not accepted. Either delete the entire post, as I previously offered to you as a solution, or remove all instances of anything that is clearly intended to serve as a personal attack or insult. Lose the photo of the cat with tin hat and reference to tin hat conspiracy theory, and remove your "In your OBVIOUS IGNORANCE" insult. If you want to post an opposing viewpoint then that is fine, but obey the Forum rules and do so in a polite manner. If you don't understand why that is necessary, or refuse to obey the Forum rules for polite discussion then it is time for you to go.

You have nothing whatsoever to offer but speculative subjective conjecture without substantiation

My post #5404 was written to express my viewpoint, and the conclusions that I reached as a result of research and supportive evidence. Much of that evidence has already been presented elsewhere in this thread, but since you are a newcomer and don't appear to have read any of those posts, I am presenting post #5440 to show how my research substantiates (gives body to; strengthens) my conclusions. If you have done any research that can produce credible evidence showing that my conclusions are unfounded or mistaken, then you are welcome to present that evidence if it is presented politely, with no personal attacks or insults. I always welcome opposing viewpoints when they are presented in a manner that abides by Forum rules.

Rickoff

[dutchdivco]

C'mon,...its not that hard!!

Its like we learned in debate class; you can attempt to refute your 'opponents' argument, without gettig personel; no "Jane, you ignorant slut!" comments.

Many times, I have taken exception to Ricks posts. From my perspective, he tends to see everying as a delipberate conspiracy. I, on the other hand tend to see things as unintentional after effects of certain actions; shortsightedness, if you will.

For instance, I readily concede that the CIA, along with the Saudi's, initially supported Bin Laden, with funding and support. As stated, they did this to support Bin Ladens efforts to fight the Russians in Afganistan. That doesn't neccesarily mean they (CIA) knew or supported Bin Ladens later efforts, or that he was acting on their orders, (911).

See, I managed to express a view contrary to Rick, without in anyway getting into personal attacks;THAT Show how its done!

I've been posted on this thread for years, and (could be wrong) but I don't think Rick has ever asked me to retract a post.

In an attempt to get back 'on topic',...(The American Ruling Class), I'd like to reccomend another site, for readers perusal;
Reports

Firstly, it covers many of the things Rick has posted about, specifically how the FED came into being, and what it is doing and has done, etc.

And yes, its all stuff Rick has posted about, but its all in one place, and there are no distractions from posters, or other topics.

Also, it has some interesting things to say about thinking, specifically "Inside angle" vs. "Outside angle thinking. Its a different way to look at and think about 'critical thinking' and 'outside the box' thinking.

Regretably, for me it ends on a weak note, when it suggests HOW we can all go about 'becoming' sovereigns,...but I DO think there is some valuble information in the reports, that many will benefit from reading. He also lists a # of books for additional reading, and mentions and quotes some people, (particularly when talking about the FED and economics), that I THINK Rick may have mentioned, as well.

Anyway, I found some value in some of it, hope you do to! Jim

[TheoriaApophasis]

remove your "In your OBVIOUS IGNORANCE" insult.s when they are presented in a manner that abides by Forum rules.

Rickoff

its not insult, its a glaring fact.

Your personal expressions of half-cocked conspiracy theories is purely subjective hyperbolic untruths, agnosis, i.e. pure ignorance.

Ultimately your posts, while your own views, are no diff. than the FLAT EARTH thread.


You have every right to your OWN views, but NOT your OWN FACTS.



If however you want to say " I FEEL AND BELIEVE.................XYZ" that is one thing

However stating unsubstantiated hyperbolic untuths as factual is another thing.




A+gnosis, or A+vijja, ie ignorance

presenting personal baseless, groundless, unsubstantiated nonsense as FACT, or trying to convince others of outright untruths as being factual.


Denotatively this is IGNORANCE , or A+gnosis.




Ive seen your post #5440 and the other, they comprise what is called the LOOSE STITCH FALLACY



Heres an example of this ignorant fallacy:::::


Kennedy impelled people to land on the moon

Strange stuff was seen on the moon

Therefore Kennedy was in league with aliens when he launched the Apollo missions.



Yours IS this fallacy

[dutchdivco]

Rick

There is only ONE effective way to deal with a 'troll'; stop feeding him.

Or, pull the plug. Since its your 'dime', (thread) its up to you.

Jim

[5150]

Rick, (and everyone)

Read this link here and let me know what you think. Interestingly right on the mark and if true the American people still sit by and won't do anything to stop "their" government.

WORLD WAR III FOR DUMMIES

[dutchdivco]

The IRONY of this thread

(Does anyone else SEE it?)

"ARC" = American Ruling Class
"AMP" = American People
"Us" = the majoriy of 'regular' posters on this thread, who believe A) the world is going to hell B) ARC is steering it in that direction and pushing on the gas pedal,..(whether out of incompetence or nefarious reasons is open to SOME disoute, and C) The AMP are 'sheeple' who are either ignorant of A and B, or in 'denial', or just too stupid to grasp it.

ARC by its actions and its words, makes it clear that it thinks the 'people' are too stupid or apathetic to govern themselves, and uses that as a justification for its actions and even existence,

Us critisises (sp) ARC for its actions, and questions its motives, but then bemoans AMP, calling them 'sheeple', thereby supporting ARC's initial premise and main justification for its existence and actions.

Ironic,....isn't it? Jim