C: "Bush will be president until he dies"

[Mountain Crown]

[quote author=Pinkerton]This could merely be pressure on Obama to conform to what the PTB want him to do.[/quote]

A very interesting insight, Pinkerton.

 

[anart]

bltay, you appear to be quite emotionally invested in this topic and it is affecting how you are communicating.

Are you aware that the U. S. Constitution requires the president to be a natural born Citizen?

There is no need to be confrontational - is there a reason you are so emotionally identified with this topic?

It might benefit you to realize that the United States is NOT a nation that follows the rule of Law - it has not been for quite some time, if it ever was.  You appear to honestly believe that if Obama were proven to not have followed the rule of Law by running for and being elected president that this would change anything.

The Constitution is a piece of paper and nothing more at this point - the Bush/Cheney regime decimated it.

Why in the world would you think that Constitutional Law has anything at all to with how this country is run and by whom?

It seems quite likely that this whole 'Obama citizenship' scandal is yet another distraction designed to occupy those people who still haven't seen the real man behind the curtain.  As part of this forum, it seems that you would have seen that real man behind the curtain by now.

Furthermore, if Obama is not a citizen, and he has taken an oath to uphold the constitution, then that lie negates his oath and he is not president. If he is allowed to be president as a foreign citizen, where do his loyalties lie? I think this is the  most interesting question in this drama, because he has not made a decision yet which is in the best interest of this country.

You have bought into the drama as if it were real - it's not Real, bltay, it is theatre - and as such it will be conducted as those in power see fit - the Constitution has nothing to do with it.  If Obama were ever removed, it would have nothing to do with the Constitution or the rule of Law - it would be more theatre to serve the purposes of the PTB as always and nothing more.

 

[PepperFritz]

If he is allowed to be president as a foreign citizen, where do his loyalties lie? I think this is the most interesting question in this drama, because he has not made a decision yet which is in the best interest of this country.

Obama's loyalties lie with those who set him up as president, and he serves their "best interest"; just as Bush served the interests of those who set him up as president. That both have failed to act "in the best interest of this country" is due entirely to the fact that the best interests of the American people and the best interests of the presidential puppet-masters are diametrically opposed. Where Obama and Bush happen to have been born is completely irrelevant to the question of whom they serve and why.

Surely, as a reader of SOTT and this forum, you realize this by now.

 

[bltay]

bltay, you appear to be quite emotionally invested in this topic and it is affecting how you are communicating.

Are you aware that the U. S. Constitution requires the president to be a natural born Citizen?

There is no need to be confrontational - is there a reason you are so emotionally identified with this topic?

It might benefit you to realize that the United States is NOT a nation that follows the rule of Law - it has not been for quite some time, if it ever was. You appear to honestly believe that if Obama were proven to not have followed the rule of Law by running for and being elected president that this would change anything.

The Constitution is a piece of paper and nothing more at this point - the Bush/Cheney regime decimated it.

Why in the world would you think that Constitutional Law has anything at all to with how this country is run and by whom?

It seems quite likely that this whole 'Obama citizenship' scandal is yet another distraction designed to occupy those people who still haven't seen the real man behind the curtain. As part of this forum, it seems that you would have seen that real man behind the curtain by now.

Furthermore, if Obama is not a citizen, and he has taken an oath to uphold the constitution, then that lie negates his oath and he is not president. If he is allowed to be president as a foreign citizen, where do his loyalties lie? I think this is the most interesting question in this drama, because he has not made a decision yet which is in the best interest of this country.

You have bought into the drama as if it were real - it's not Real, bltay, it is theatre - and as such it will be conducted as those in power see fit - the Constitution has nothing to do with it. If Obama were ever removed, it would have nothing to do with the Constitution or the rule of Law - it would be more theatre to serve the purposes of the PTB as always and nothing more.

anart, Thank you for pointing this out about my tone. It was not meant to be confrontational, I asked this because from the question Pepperfritz asked, I did not know if he/she were aware of this, and my answer could have made a lot of assumptions and not been clear. Sometimes the written word just does not convey the intent properly. I will try to be more careful.

If you go back and read through my posts in this thread instead of just the last one, I have repeatedly said this is a drama, albeit one I have been interested in following. Understanding this drama helps us understand the machinations of the PTB, knowledge which may serve to protect. I do not know if it will, but if you have some reason to believe it will not, I am listening. You could very easily know more about this that I do.

I disagree with you that the Constitution has nothing to do with it. If you study Bramley, he explains that one of the control methods very widely used by the custodian gods is the money/financial system. The U. S. Constitution was set up to keep Americans independent of this control system, and for a short time it did. This country originally was as free of the PTB as any group of people ever were. Just as the Brotherhood of the Snake was infiltrated and slowly turned into something that it was not meant to be by promising people in key positions wealth and power, so has our form of government been corrupted by allowing the establishment of the private Federal Reserve Bank, which is completely foreign owned. The PTB/Custodian gods have stealthily crept back and enslaved us through this money system just as Bramley has described.

The money system is one that is not perfectly obvious on its face and few people have taken the time to understand it, but once you see how it is used, it becomes perfectly obvious how the control system works. If you watch Obama's decisions, they have all served to move more of our wealth, labor, and even our lives deeper under the control of the PTB by creating even more debt, thus ensuring future generations will also be enslaved by the PTB bankers.

Now Laura has stated, and even quite recently, that the direction of our present situation may have been influenced by actions undertaken by QFS, i.e., they may have changed the direction of history from what the PTB have fully intended it to be. This was not done by sitting around and saying if anything happens, it is because the PTB will it; it is because she and others gained knowledge and acted. So I do respectfully disagree with your statement:

If Obama were ever removed, it would have nothing to do with the Constitution or the rule of Law - it would be more theatre to serve the purposes of the PTB as always and nothing more.

As I see it, it could possibly be that if enough people became aware that the Constitution is their protection, however limited this protection is, against enslavement and have decided to take some action these actions could change that situation. If this is not possible, please let me know. However, it seems to me that resigning yourself that nothing happens unless the PTB will it is the same as falling for the old religious trap that it does not matter what you do, have faith and god will save you. It is a mindtrap that lulls you into doing nothing. From what I have gathered from SOTT and Laura's writings, knowledge only protects when it is put to use. And the PTB can be outmaneuvered if enough people decide they want things a certain way and move history in that direction.

If enough people decide they want Obama out, he is out. The trick that the PTB have to use is to keep enough people from eating from the Tree of Knowledge so as to keep them ignorant so they will either not know to do anything or believe that they cannot do anything.

Now as far as Bush/Cheney decimating the Constitution, I disagree with that also. First of all, Congress passes laws, not the executive. So Bush/Cheney may have encouraged violating constitutional provisions, the actual violations were committed by Congress. Secondly, all laws are subject to review to see if they conform to the Constitution. The Constitution is the higher law, and if any law violates its provision, then that law is void. Therefore, any law passed by Congress is void if it violated the Constitution. There have been several provisions of the Patriot Act which have been declared unconstitutional.

Now once again, the PTB know that as long as people fail to stand up for the Constitution as the law of the land, then it does become a worthless piece of paper. If they can convince you that this is true, it is the trap they have set for you and yes, the Constitution does become worthless. Remember the story of the lady who, just after the Constitutional Convention when the original constitution was originally drafted, asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government they had set up? And Franklin's response was "A Republic, if you can keep it." It requires knowledge of what Franklin was referring to, and people acting upon that knowledge for the Constitution to become more that just a piece of paper. As always, this is my opinion, for what it is worth.

 

[bltay]

If he is allowed to be president as a foreign citizen, where do his loyalties lie? I think this is the most interesting question in this drama, because he has not made a decision yet which is in the best interest of this country.

Obama's loyalties lie with those who set him up as president, and he serves their "best interest"; just as Bush served the interests of those who set him up as president. That both have failed to act "in the best interest of this country" is due entirely to the fact that the best interests of the American people and the best interests of the presidential puppet-masters are diametrically opposed. Where Obama and Bush happen to have been born is completely irrelevant to the question of whom they serve and why.

Surely, as a reader of SOTT and this forum, you realize this by now.

I agree with this statement and I have said the very same thing in this thread all along if you go back and read my posts.

I also stated that the intent of the founders was to have a natural born citizen be president because he/she is more likely to serve the interest of the U.S. It is a fundamental law of the land. Our present form of government has become too corrupted to expect birth to determine loyalties now, although I would still expect someone being born here to be more likely to protect national interests than someone who is not. And once again, if you do not force this law to apply, it really opens the door for the Hitlers, MaoTse Tungs, Lennins, etc. to just walk in and say I want to run for president. The foreign interest could take over without any kind of confrontation. Furthermore, the reason it has been corrupted is because the PTB have kept people totally ignorant of what they are doing, or have lulled people into believeing that there is nothing they can do.

I agree that neither Obama nor Bush have protected the interest of this country. It has been a long time since any president has protected this country's interest. But where do you lay the real blame for this, on the presidents or on the people who are supposed to be watching what their officials do and put a stop to those kinds of actions? My opinion is that Andrew Jackson was the last president to actually protect this country's interests because he refused to renew the charter of the national bank, calling the banksters "vipers and sons of vipers.' He knew exactly how the PTB used this money system to control/enslave people.

The citizenship issue is a way of removing Obama from office to prevent him from continuing the actions of enslaving us more deeply than ever. By enforcing this provision, we are more likely to have a president beholden to American intersts, but there are no guarantees. Actually we have everything to gain and nothing to lose by getting Obama out based on his actions to date. But it requires action and knowledge as I stated in the previous post. If people remain ignorant and think they can do nothing, then nothing will change. If I remember correctly, did the C's not instruct us to "take a stand" even here in 3D and use knowledge to protect, not just think there is nothing that can be done? This is from my not so perfect memory and may not be exactly right.

So why don't we the people in the United States take action and be the ones who set the president up in power so that he is beholding to our interest? As for your last statement, what I think I know as a reader of SOTT and this forum, is that knowledge without action is meaningless.

 

[anart]

anart, Thank you for pointing this out about my tone. It was not meant to be confrontational, I asked this because from the question Pepperfritz asked, I did not know if he/she were aware of this, and my answer could have made a lot of assumptions and not been clear. Sometimes the written word just does not convey the intent properly. I will try to be more careful.

Good to know you did not intend to be confrontational.

If you go back and read through my posts in this thread instead of just the last one,

I had read the entire thread, bltay.

I have repeatedly said this is a drama, albeit one I have been interested in following.

The issue at this point is that you appear to be not just 'following it' but to be identified with it, thus you are not seeing things objectively.

Understanding this drama helps us understand the machinations of the PTB, knowledge which may serve to protect.

I don't think so.  This drama is theatre and nothing more - why would you think it helps you understand the machinations of the PTB when it is all smoke and mirrors to distract from what is really going on?

I do not know if it will, but if you have some reason to believe it will not, I am listening. You could very easily know more about this that I do.

See above.  You are taking the theatre as fact - the smoke and mirrors as substance and form that simply is not the case - on the grand scale.  While following the public actions of the world, in politics, news, etc is important to see the 'signs' and get the general tone of what is coming next, this particular little drama is based in rumor and sensationalist rhetoric that taps into people's emotional identification with 'America, love it or leave it, land of the free, home of the brave, the Constitution is the greatest document ever written by man'   --- emotional triggers designed to blind.

I disagree with you that the Constitution has nothing to do with it.

This is evidence of my point above.

If you study Bramley, he explains that one of the control methods very widely used by the custodian gods is the money/financial system.

Yes, I've read Bramley, and while he put together some great information, he has his limits as well.

The U. S. Constitution was set up to keep Americans independent of this control system, and for a short time it did.

No - it kept rich, white Americans comfortable --- it did not keep 'Americans independent' of anything - especially female Americans, Americans of color or Native Americans.  You are confusing myth with fact.

This country originally was as free of the PTB as any group of people ever were.

This statement is only true to the extent that no group of people has ever been free on this planet in the past 309,000 years or so.  So, as far as 'any group of people ever were' - sure, no group ever was - and only the rich, white, landholding Americans were benefited by the Constitution as it was written at the time.

Just as the Brotherhood of the Snake was infiltrated and slowly turned into something that it was not meant to be by promising people in key positions wealth and power, so has our form of government been corrupted by allowing the establishment of the private Federal Reserve Bank, which is completely foreign owned. The PTB/Custodian gods have stealthily crept back and enslaved us through this money system just as Bramley has described.

I think you might be greatly confusing what Bramley wrote. 

The money system is one that is not perfectly obvious on its face and few people have taken the time to understand it

I find it to be blatantly obvious on its face - as do most regular readers of SotT.

, but once you see how it is used, it becomes perfectly obvious how the control system works. If you watch Obama's decisions, they have all served to move more of our wealth, labor, and even our lives deeper under the control of the PTB by creating even more debt, thus ensuring future generations will also be enslaved by the PTB bankers.

This is not news, nor is it about Obama or started by him, though it is being continued by him - do you read the SoTT page?

Now Laura has stated, and even quite recently, that the direction of our present situation may have been influenced by actions undertaken by QFS, i.e., they may have changed the direction of history from what the PTB have fully intended it to be. This was not done by sitting around and saying if anything happens, it is because the PTB will it; it is because she and others gained knowledge and acted. So I do respectfully disagree with your statement:

You misunderstood Laura's statement and mine.   Laura can speak for herself, but basically, the future is open and the actions we take to shine the light of truth on current events and human history and the human condition have an effect - a butterfly effect if you will - because there is power in knowledge and the spreading of knowledge to help others.  This does not mean that the PTB will not do what they will do, especially as it relates specifically to Obama, which is what you are talking about - specifically Obama.

As I see it, it could possibly be that if enough people became aware that the Constitution is their protection, however limited this protection is, against enslavement and have decided to take some action these actions could change that situation.

Are you aware of the legislation put in place by the last administration that limits Constitutional rights - they are, for all intents and purposes, no more.  The only person who could reverse that in the present time is the man you are convinced will be ousted by the application of Constitutional law that is no longer enforced.  Rather convoluted, don't you think?

I also admit to being a bit confused by your main line of force here - are you suggesting that the removal of Obama would change the monetary policy and put things 'right' again in this country?  Certainly you are aware that the problems run much, much more deeply than that.  I, again, have to ask if you read the SoTT page, because it really can clear up a lot of these issues for you.

If this is not possible, please let me know.

See above. 

However, it seems to me that resigning yourself that nothing happens unless the PTB will it is the same as falling for the old religious trap that it does not matter what you do, have faith and god will save you. It is a mindtrap that lulls you into doing nothing.

You've missed my point, again - I must not be writing very clearly.  It is about seeing the situation as IT IS not as you want it to be.  It is about seeing as objectively as possible so that one can then take action (or not) that might actually make a difference.

From what I have gathered from SOTT and Laura's writings, knowledge only protects when it is put to use. And the PTB can be outmaneuvered if enough people decide they want things a certain way and move history in that direction.

So you do read, SoTT - I'm quite confused by your statements about the economy, money and the control structure, then, since they were written as if you have not read SoTT at all.

If enough people decide they want Obama out, he is out.

What do you think that would do?  Do you honestly think this is all about Obama?  Do you think he started all of this? 

The trick that the PTB have to use is to keep enough people from eating from the Tree of Knowledge so as to keep them ignorant so they will either not know to do anything or believe that they cannot do anything.

That's true.  Unfortunately, the American people are so drugged, dumbed down, hypnotized by television and ipods that they cannot lift their heads to see their own reflection, much less the 'tree of knowledge' - and that has nothing to do with Obama, per se.  I think you are generally unaware of how far gone the system really is and of who really controls it all.

And, then there is the segment who has partially awoken and seen that something is wrong, but is so emotionally identified and manipulated that they go running off half-cocked about things that bear no relevance to the greater picture - all in defense of their emotional identification with a system that was never what they think it was.

Now as far as Bush/Cheney decimating the Constitution, I disagree with that also.

Ahhhh!  Now this is all making sense - you are a Bush/Cheney fan - if not a Republican, then one of those 'Constitutionalist' or 'Libertarians' - you totally buy into the system.

First of all, Congress passes laws, not the executive. So Bush/Cheney may have encouraged violating constitutional provisions, the actual violations were committed by Congress. Secondly, all laws are subject to review to see if they conform to the Constitution. The Constitution is the higher law, and if any law violates its provision, then that law is void. Therefore, any law passed by Congress is void if it violated the Constitution. There have been several provisions of the Patriot Act which have been declared unconstitutional.

You drank the Koolaid - big time - let me clarify that:  You are engaging in severe selection and substitution of data to fit your own emotionally comfortable world view.  You are not seeing things as they are and your mental processes are working very hard to twist the facts into a  form that is more comfortable to your 'ego', your emotional world-view. 

Seriously - every shred of evidence points to the contrary of what you've written above (including evidence of blackmail of congressional members via wiretapping) -  and I have neither the time nor the inclination to give you a lesson in recent history or Constitutional Law. 

Now once again, the PTB know that as long as people fail to stand up for the Constitution as the law of the land, then it does become a worthless piece of paper. If they can convince you that this is true, it is the trap they have set for you and yes, the Constitution does become worthless. Remember the story of the lady who, just after the Constitutional Convention when the original constitution was originally drafted, asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government they had set up? And Franklin's response was "A Republic, if you can keep it." It requires knowledge of what Franklin was referring to, and people acting upon that knowledge for the Constitution to become more that just a piece of paper. As always, this is my opinion, for what it is worth.

I think you've clearly proven what your thinking is on this topic and that you are rather unable to see the bigger picture due to your own identification and the selection and substitution of data to fit your own emotional preconceptions.

Unfortunately, this forum deals with approaching an objective understanding of reality - which is impossible as long as one is identified so strongly with an absence of facts.

 

[PepperFritz]

...what I think I know as a reader of SOTT and this forum, is that knowledge without action is meaningless.

And action based on false "knowledge" (i.e. misinformation and propaganda) is called playing right into the hands of the PTB. I have to agree with Anart, that your posts evidence a very strong belief in and attachment to certain American myths, which seem to limit your ability to perceive the objective reality of the current U.S. political system. Clearly, you are not willing to re-examine those beliefs and myths, so there's really nowhere to go with this discussion. You are focussed on and distracted by the "side-show", which you mistake for the real event, and cannot see the man behind the curtain....

 

[dant]

First of all, Congress passes laws, not the executive.

You forget POTUS `Signing Statements (SS)'. These SS become the
"policy" or "law of the land", unless challenged. These SS were not
written by Congress nor the Supreme Court. Unless Congress and/or
the Supreme Court asserts and enforces its rights under the Constitution,
the SS remains in effect.

Isn't it odd, that `SS' reminds us of Nazi Germany?

IMO, the most dangerous SS were written by the Bush administration,
supported by the (Republican) majority in Congress, left mostly unchallenged
and unenforced by the (far right) Supreme Court. And so, it remains.

So, what is the difference between a 'policy' and a 'law'? Is it one and the
same? Semantics? Perhaps it depends on perspective; black is white, up
is down?

Of the many SS, the Bush Administration claimed "Inherent Rights", and
also declared that 'Enemy Combatants' (which includes US Citizens)
have no right to Habeas Corpus, no access to the US Courts, however
this was struck down by the Supreme Court; perhaps to keep that man
firmly hidden behind the curtain?

But even when this specific SS was struck down by the court, did this
stop the Bush Administration? No, not really, they continued on, and
it was `business as usual'?

Unless, `someone' successfully challenges each and every SS in
a court of law, these SS are still in effect.

FWIW,
Dan

 

[bltay]

The issue at this point is that you appear to be not just 'following it' but to be identified with it, thus you are not seeing things objectively.

Please note the key word in that phrase is "appear." You have created an assumption, and it is probably from me not being able to express the written word well enough, which also made me "appear" to be confrontational. I notice if you get too long winded here, you get accused of being preachy. If the post is kept shorter, it sometimes becomes impossible to convey the complete idea, and causes assumptions to be made by those who want to fill in the blanks.

Understanding this drama helps us understand the machinations of the PTB, knowledge which may serve to protect.

I don't think so. This drama is theatre and nothing more - why would you think it helps you understand the machinations of the PTB when it is all smoke and mirrors to distract from what is really going on?

For the same reason you post current event stories on the SOTT page. To analyze them and come to an understanding of how the PTB are woking through the systems to carry out their schemes.

I do not know if it will, but if you have some reason to believe it will not, I am listening. You could very easily know more about this that I do.

See above. You are taking the theatre as fact - the smoke and mirrors as substance and form that simply is not the case - on the grand scale. While following the public actions of the world, in politics, news, etc is important to see the 'signs' and get the general tone of what is coming next, this particular little drama is based in rumor and sensationalist rhetoric that taps into people's emotional identification with 'America, love it or leave it, land of the free, home of the brave, the Constitution is the greatest document ever written by man' --- emotional triggers designed to blind.

Once again you are either misreading or I have not written properly. However, a question for you: Which little drama are you referring to. Because you have not written this clearly, it forces me to assume you mean that Obama not being a natural born citizen is a rumor. That could very well be. I do not know. Do you have objective evidence that this is only a rumor?

I disagree with you that the Constitution has nothing to do with it.

This is evidence of my point above.

No, it is not.

(There now, you see how writing a short statement can be read many ways? You have not shown that the Constitution has nothing to do with it, therefore no objectivity here).

If you study Bramley, he explains that one of the control methods very widely used by the custodian gods is the money/financial system.

Yes, I've read Bramley, and while he put together some great information, he has his limits as well.

Yes of course he does, As do all 3D based on our limited perception. Would it not be wonderful if we all had access to 6th density insight? He wrote from what he could observe at the time, and the C's have validated what he had to say about the Brotherhood of the Snake, and the way it was corrupted.

The U. S. Constitution was set up to keep Americans independent of this control system, and for a short time it did.

No - it kept rich, white Americans comfortable --- it did not keep 'Americans independent' of anything - especially female Americans, Americans of color or Native Americans. You are confusing myth with fact.

Not confusing anything. Read the debates about the money system at the Constitutional Convention and see it was one of the hottest topics at the time. I never said the Constitution was a perfect document. Once again you are either looking to add words to my posts, or my writing is just not what it should be. And you are referring to the constitution in its entirety, while I was referring to the part which was relevant to the discussion. However, if you notice, the constitution evolved as the people took action, and women obtained the right to vote. Blacks took action and obtained equal standing as Citizens these rich white Americans you refer to, as well as all of us poor white Americans. You are trying to label me because I point out certain things about the constitution, but it seems to me you are compartmentalizing it and not seeing the entire picture.

This country originally was as free of the PTB as any group of people ever were.

This statement is only true to the extent that no group of people has ever been free on this planet in the past 309,000 years or so. So, as far as 'any group of people ever were' - sure, no group ever was - and only the rich, white, landholding Americans were benefited by the Constitution as it was written at the time.

This is just plain wrong and I think it is you who are misidentifying, just as you accuse me of. It is true rich white landowners benefited but they were not the only ones. The Native Americans got the shaft, I completely agree with you there, they gained no benefit from it.

Just as the Brotherhood of the Snake was infiltrated and slowly turned into something that it was not meant to be by promising people in key positions wealth and power, so has our form of government been corrupted by allowing the establishment of the private Federal Reserve Bank, which is completely foreign owned. The PTB/Custodian gods have stealthily crept back and enslaved us through this money system just as Bramley has described.

I think you might be greatly confusing what Bramley wrote.

I looked again and he wrote almost verbatim what I wrote.

The money system is one that is not perfectly obvious on its face and few people have taken the time to understand it

I find it to be blatantly obvious on its face - as do most regular readers of SotT.

Wonderful. I do not know what SOTT readers find obvious, but I hope you are correct.

, but once you see how it is used, it becomes perfectly obvious how the control system works. If you watch Obama's decisions, they have all served to move more of our wealth, labor, and even our lives deeper under the control of the PTB by creating even more debt, thus ensuring future generations will also be enslaved by the PTB bankers.

This is not news, nor is it about Obama or started by him, though it is being continued by him - do you read the SoTT page?

I never said he started it. Why do you assume I said that? Although I have read the SOTT pages saying these issues and I applaud them for doing so, they are not the originators of this idea. This particular part of the drama IS about Obama because he is there now, carrying out the plans of the PTB, although I agree, he is not the entire story. It happened to be what this discussion had turned to.

Now Laura has stated, and even quite recently, that the direction of our present situation may have been influenced by actions undertaken by QFS, i.e., they may have changed the direction of history from what the PTB have fully intended it to be. This was not done by sitting around and saying if anything happens, it is because the PTB will it; it is because she and others gained knowledge and acted. So I do respectfully disagree with your statement:

You misunderstood Laura's statement and mine. Laura can speak for herself, but basically, the future is open and the actions we take to shine the light of truth on current events and human history and the human condition have an effect - a butterfly effect if you will - because there is power in knowledge and the spreading of knowledge to help others. This does not mean that the PTB will not do what they will do, especially as it relates specifically to Obama, which is what you are talking about - specifically Obama.

If you have read the entire thread, you will see that I have said exactly the same thing. One of the key words in your response is "action". If enough people take action who want Obama out, then that will happen. I have been specifically talking about Obama because that was the subject of the discussion. I saw no reason to bring anything else in. As you said, the future is open and it will be interesting to see what happens, and what effect this will have. I don't think I misunderstood anything, or at least you have not pointed anything out to make me think so.

As I see it, it could possibly be that if enough people became aware that the Constitution is their protection, however limited this protection is, against enslavement and have decided to take some action these actions could change that situation.

Are you aware of the legislation put in place by the last administration that limits Constitutional rights - they are, for all intents and purposes, no more. The only person who could reverse that in the present time is the man you are convinced will be ousted by the application of Constitutional law that is no longer enforced. Rather convoluted, don't you think?

Nope, I think your thinking is convoluted. The rights exist, it just gives the PTB an excuse to violate those rights until the proper challenges are made. Obama has not changed anything and has continued the Bush/Ceney policies and the policies of enslavement to the PTB banksters. He is in a position to make a change but has not. As I said, I am observing, but right now I see nothing to lose by having him removed and everything to gain by putting someone else in. Now this next president may not be any better, who knows. But right now, Obama has proven that we are still at the bottom of the barrel which is the level set by Bush/Cheney, and we have nowhere to go but up.

Legislation can still be challenged as unconstitutional and the practice has not gone away. Any legislation, once applied and can be challenged thusly. Therefore, any legisaltation passed during the Bush administration is open to challenge, and until you can show where constitutional challenges are never successful, then your statement is wrong.

I also admit to being a bit confused by your main line of force here - are you suggesting that the removal of Obama would change the monetary policy and put things 'right' again in this country? Certainly you are aware that the problems run much, much more deeply than that. I, again, have to ask if you read the SoTT page, because it really can clear up a lot of these issues for you.

I am fully aware that our problems run deeper than Obama, and neither he or any replacement will be a cure all, if they cure anything. This discussion was about Obama and the requirement that a natural born citizen be president. It was claimed that this was a bogus issue because he had been proven to be a citizen, and I pointed out that he had not and the documents that were produced were frauds. This does not make me an Obama supporter or detractor. I was just speaking the truth. And it turned into an attack situation, which makes me wonder whether the postings here are truly based on objective evaluations.

However, it seems to me that resigning yourself that nothing happens unless the PTB will it is the same as falling for the old religious trap that it does not matter what you do, have faith and god will save you. It is a mindtrap that lulls you into doing nothing.

You've missed my point, again - I must not be writing very clearly. It is about seeing the situation as IT IS not as you want it to be. It is about seeing as objectively as possible so that one can then take action (or not) that might actually make a difference.

Is that not exactly what I have said? I still say if you fall into the trap that you can do nothing because the PTB are all powerful, this violates that very statement you have made and I have agreed fully with. You yourself just said the future is open and dependent upon our actions. Bu the subtle difference is that actions have to be based on something, There must be a goal. And that is to shape your environment the way you want it to be. otherwise, why take any action at all? I am not just seeing it as I want it to be, I see it for what it is, to a limited extent. I am sure others are much more aware than I am.

One can objectively see that Obama is doing the bidding of those who want to do harm to this country without knowing all of what is going on in the bigger picture. Knowing the bigger picture does not change the harm he is doing.

From what I have gathered from SOTT and Laura's writings, knowledge only protects when it is put to use. And the PTB can be outmaneuvered if enough people decide they want things a certain way and move history in that direction.

So you do read, SoTT - I'm quite confused by your statements about the economy, money and the control structure, then, since they were written as if you have not read SoTT at all.

That is because you are taking Laura's writings and the SOTT's as infallible; almost to a level of deified worship, and any little point outside or in slight contradiction to that is automatically wrong. And now don't go jumping to the conclusion that I am saying that Laura and SOTT are wrong. They are doing some wonderful work and I am very grateful for that, but nobody is perfect and infallible. Recall how a few of the original C's messages were corrupted. The PTB's are very sneaky.

And I was not commenting on the entirety of the control structure. Once again, this thread was about Obama. His detrimental actions so far mainly deal with the financial control system. Sure you can say I did not talk about the entire picture. I did not see it as being relevant to this particular discussion about whether Obama was a natural born citizen or whether he was doing good or harm.

If enough people decide they want Obama out, he is out.

What do you think that would do? Do you honestly think this is all about Obama? Do you think he started all of this?

Why would you think I would possibly think this. How could you assume from a discussion about place of birth and whether Obama is eligible to be president that I think he started all of this. I said he was continuing the policies which enslaves us. If you were to sit down and figure it out. you could take the debt accumulated from George Wahington through George W. Bush, and in 5 years Obama will double it. Now how does that change anything?

The trick that the PTB have to use is to keep enough people from eating from the Tree of Knowledge so as to keep them ignorant so they will either not know to do anything or believe that they cannot do anything.

That's true. Unfortunately, the American people are so drugged, dumbed down, hypnotized by television and ipods that they cannot lift their heads to see their own reflection, much less the 'tree of knowledge' - and that has nothing to do with Obama, per se. I think you are generally unaware of how far gone the system really is and of who really controls it all.

The Tree of knowledge is a metaphor for all knowledge, including recognizing Obama for what he is. And I think you sit in front of your computer deifying too much. Your statement is partially true. But consider, for example, that one of the Bush plans was to create a superhighway from Mexico to Canada to create the Pan America Union and institute the Amero as a move toward the NWO. This would have bypassed all US ports of entries at the expense of the American taxpayer. This was to be a huge corridor and land would have to be stolen to accomplish it. Enough people took action in Texas to stop it. Enough people in enough small towns held town hall meetings, pressured local reps. who pressured state reps, who pressured national reps, and go the highway killed. Now this would not have happened if these people were too drugged or dumbed down to do anything. This was a small battle on the grand scheme of things, but so far it has put a halt to the Pan American Union plans of the NWO. All because people took action.

Another example is the national ID card. Enough people took action within their respective states to pressure their state reps to refuse to implement the card, forcing the feds to back off. Once again all because people took action. Where were you?

There are many examples of this type of thing which has thrown small monkey wrenches into the plans of the PTB here and there. Another is the attempt to have a constitutional convention which was designed to completely overthrow the present constitution. Once again, action has put a stop to it.

Now imagine if history had unfolded and everyone had fallen into your perception of being too "drugged, dumbed down, hypnotized by television and ipods that they cannot lift their heads to see their own reflection,..." Use your own imagination to see how that future, which is now the present, would have unfolded had there been no action taken by those people mentioned above. And there are many more such examples.

And, then there is the segment who has partially awoken and seen that something is wrong, but is so emotionally identified and manipulated that they go running off half-cocked about things that bear no relevance to the greater picture - all in defense of their emotional identification with a system that was never what they think it was.

Yes I agree you will always have that group somewhere.

Now as far as Bush/Cheney decimating the Constitution, I disagree with that also.

Ahhhh! Now this is all making sense - you are a Bush/Cheney fan - if not a Republican, then one of those 'Constitutionalist' or 'Libertarians' - you totally buy into the system.

There is the old programming kicking in. Just because I say Obama is not doing good, suddenly I am a Bush supporter, or fit in some other class to be identified by your labels. I did not say Bush/Cheney did anything good. You seem to want to twist it that way because... hmmm....why?... possibly because as much as you try to make me think you are objective you want to buy into the Obama change lies and refuse to see him for what he is?

I was not now nor was I ever a Bush supporter. In fact I have not supported any elected or wannabe elected official in a very long time. The closest I have come is Ron Paul, but even he was disappointing when he had the opportunity to reveal the fraud behind 911 and refused to do so.

I stand by what I said about Bush not being able to pass laws, that is Congress' department. If you disagree with that, perhaps it is you who needs a class in constitutional government. maybe they were blackmailed, pressured, etc. That just shows the constitution is still in effect because the PTB had to rely on Congress to pass those laws or they would not exist

First of all, Congress passes laws, not the executive. So Bush/Cheney may have encouraged violating constitutional provisions, the actual violations were committed by Congress. Secondly, all laws are subject to review to see if they conform to the Constitution. The Constitution is the higher law, and if any law violates its provision, then that law is void. Therefore, any law passed by Congress is void if it violated the Constitution. There have been several provisions of the Patriot Act which have been declared unconstitutional.

You drank the Koolaid - big time - let me clarify that: You are engaging in severe selection and substitution of data to fit your own emotionally comfortable world view. You are not seeing things as they are and your mental processes are working very hard to twist the facts into a form that is more comfortable to your 'ego', your emotional world-view.

Seriously - every shred evidence points to the contrary of what you've written above (including evidence of blackmail of congressional members via wiretapping) - and I have neither the time nor the inclination to give you a lesson in recent history or Constitutional Law.

So are you denying that parts of the Patriot Act have been declared unconstitutional? If so, I really don't need your class in constitutional law. I would be interested in a greater explanation of just what "severe selection and substitution of data" has taken place to fit my "comfortable world view". Which facts have I twisted?

You sound like Bill O'Reilly. When he reports he says nonspecific things like "they said", "it has been reported", etc. without being tied to anything specific that can be responded to.

Now once again, the PTB know that as long as people fail to stand up for the Constitution as the law of the land, then it does become a worthless piece of paper. If they can convince you that this is true, it is the trap they have set for you and yes, the Constitution does become worthless. Remember the story of the lady who, just after the Constitutional Convention when the original constitution was originally drafted, asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government they had set up? And Franklin's response was "A Republic, if you can keep it." It requires knowledge of what Franklin was referring to, and people acting upon that knowledge for the Constitution to become more that just a piece of paper. As always, this is my opinion, for what it is worth.

I think you've clearly proven what your thinking is on this topic and that you are rather unable to see the bigger picture due to your own identification and the selection and substitution of data to fit your own emotional preconceptions.

Unfortunately, this forum deals with approaching and objective understanding of reality - which is impossible as long as one is identified so strongly with an absence of facts.

Yes, I have not addressed all the facts of the bigger picture because the bigger picture was not what this thread or discussion was about. So far. I appreciate your responses, but think you have chosen to add words and meanings to words that just were not there. I can see why you are not inclined to give me a lesson in history or constitutional law.

Why is it unfortunate that this forum deals with "approaching and objective understanding of reality"?

 

[bltay]

...what I think I know as a reader of SOTT and this forum, is that knowledge without action is meaningless.

And action based on false "knowledge" (i.e. misinformation and propaganda) is called playing right into the hands of the PTB. I have to agree with Anart, that your posts evidence a very strong belief in and attachment to certain American myths, which seem to limit your ability to perceive the objective reality of the current U.S. political system. Clearly, you are not willing to re-examine those beliefs and myths, so there's really nowhere to go with this discussion. You are focussed on and distracted by the "side-show", which you mistake for the real event, and cannot see the man behind the curtain....

I agree false knowledge is harmful. Exactly what misinformation and propaganda are you referring to? And why is it clear that I am not willing to re-examine those beliefs?

 

[bltay]

Unless, `someone' successfully challenges each and every SS in
a court of law, these SS are still in effect.

FWIW,
Dan

My understanding is that the next president could undo, or unsign, all of the SS. To your knowledge has Obama made any effort to do so? I have not heard of any. Perhaps this was the reference the C' made to Bush remaining as President for life.

 

[Beau]

bltay, at this point it looks like you are completely identified with your view of reality and that those views are at odds with the views of this forum. Perhaps you will be better off somewhere that is more in line with your views? Your continued insistence on being right is not only cause for concern but also a tremendous drain of energy on all those involved. Their are a lot of forums where you can further debate your rightness. This just isn't one of them.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Please note the key word in that phrase is "appear." You have created an assumption, and it is probably from me not being able to express the written word well enough, which also made me "appear" to be confrontational.

Or, maybe it is not an assumption but a working hypothesis, and instead of it being more likely to be a communication error as you so quickly surmise, maybe it really is an issue with identification and mis-conceptions on your part? Why are you so quick to dismiss it and instantly declare to to be improbable? Is that based on data or ego?

As I said, I am observing, but right now I see nothing to lose by having him removed and everything to gain by putting someone else in. Now this next president may not be any better, who knows. But right now, Obama has proven that we are still at the bottom of the barrel which is the level set by Bush/Cheney, and we have nowhere to go but up.

I disagree, I think it won't make a difference. What is there to gain from replacing one puppet by another? But there is something to lose - it perpetuates the illusion that it could somehow make a difference. The problem is not the president, and neither can it be the solution.

For the same reason you post current event stories on the SOTT page. To analyze them and come to an understanding of how the PTB are woking through the systems to carry out their schemes.

I think SOTT often reports on theatre just to point out that it is theatre. The PTB do not really work through the "system" because the system changes a billion times a day to suit their fancy - and even that constant morphing of the system is part of the larger "system" that allows for such morphing, and that larger system is the pathocracy. For example, one day the geneva conventions are there, the next day they might as well not be. What is the purpose of pointing out that the PTB are violating the geneva conventions? Because that helps understand that PTB completely disregard any of their own laws and policies and agreements when it suits them. The problem is not the violation of geneva convention - it's just a symptom and helps us understand the larger problem of psychopathy and the entropic system of lies and control. And the point is not to argue that the geneva conventions must be "respected" - if you start a movement to reinstate the geneva conventions it will really miss the mark. No written agreement or document is without its loopholes, nevermind that it can be subjectively twisted and interpreted in any number of ways to the point of being practically meaningless. The geneva conventions much like the constitution is more important symbolically than literally, as in, what they "intend" to represent. Expecting them to actually work isn't the right approach. Any time a document appears to "work" is because it is allowed to work by the PTB to maintain the illusion that a society can somehow exist unconsciously and mechanically, governed by a system of a billion rules, laws, regulations, and agreements, and that it all can somehow work out and everything is good and dandy. In reality, none of it has ever mattered or worked, and it all changes like the wind throughout all of history, on a daily basis. It all comes down to how the PTB wish to "define reality" today.

So what if we have a document that says "let's all value freedom and democracy"? Yesterday "freedom and democracy" means one thing, today it means the opposite and nobody notices. And you cannot define something objectively without the people to whom it applies being conscious and objective themselves, otherwise it's like giving a calculus book to a turtle. The only way to create a world based on love and respect and knowledge is by each person acting consciously with their empathy and their minds with objectivity, not by making a billion rules and regulations and agreements and laws and then expecting that totally subjective and mindless and sleeping populace can somehow reach some "objective collinearity" and mutual objective understanding - again, it's like expecting that 2 turtles will interpret the calculus book the same way. Nope, not gonna happen. Ironically both Bush and Anart are right - the constitution IS just a goddamn piece of paper! Bush is right because he and his ilk never cared for it anyway. Anart is right because things would not be different even if they DID care for it! Lawyers care about laws and law books, but that doesn't stop them from being scum (in many cases) does it. No, the only way things would be different is if "they" truly cared about *us*, and then we wouldn't need a goddamn constitution, which is ironically (according to popular belief that is) supposed to have been written to protect us from "them"!! It's funny how ridiculous it all is. The fact that anyone ever thought a constitution could ever work, or that making "3 branches of government" is somehow going to protect them, that is the problem. Knowledge protects, never a mechanical system, ever. I think we can liken that to rituals - our "system" is nothing but a big ritual.

 

[Johnno]

Now as far as Bush/Cheney decimating the Constitution, I disagree with that also.

Ahhhh! Now this is all making sense - you are a Bush/Cheney fan - if not a Republican, then one of those 'Constitutionalist' or 'Libertarians' - you totally buy into the system.

There is the old programming kicking in. Just because I say Obama is not doing good, suddenly I am a Bush supporter, or fit in some other class to be identified by your labels. I did not say Bush/Cheney did anything good. You seem to want to twist it that way because... hmmm....why?... possibly because as much as you try to make me think you are objective you want to buy into the Obama change lies and refuse to see him for what he is?

I was not now nor was I ever a Bush supporter. In fact I have not supported any elected or wannabe elected official in a very long time. The closest I have come is Ron Paul, but even he was disappointing when he had the opportunity to reveal the fraud behind 911 and refused to do so.

I stand by what I said about Bush not being able to pass laws, that is Congress' department. If you disagree with that, perhaps it is you who needs a class in constitutional government. maybe they were blackmailed, pressured, etc. That just shows the constitution is still in effect because the PTB had to rely on Congress to pass those laws or they would not exist

Executive orders bypass your American congress.... I am aware of this as an Aussie.

Nevertheless you are quoting your new stories from World Net Daily which I looked up and it is described as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldNetDaily

an American journalism website founded in May 1997 with the stated intentions of "exposing wrongdoing, corruption and abuse of power."[1] According to its homepage, WorldNetDaily is "an independent news company dedicated to uncompromising journalism, seeking truth and justice and revitalizing the role of the free press as a guardian of liberty." and has a conservative christian perspective[1].

And you appear to be taking their Obama line in a fabulous example of sock puppetry.

Claims about Barack Obama

During the closing days of the 2008 presidential campaign, and in the weeks following Barack Obama's election as president of the United States, WorldNetDaily posted numerous articles that advanced conspiracy theories about his citizenship status, alleging he is not constitutionally eligible to be president because he is not a natural-born citizen and that his Hawaiian birth certificate is a forgery. These claims, however, have been disputed by Obama and Hawaii's state health department.[40][41] WND frequently posted articles on its homepage giving updates on numerous lawsuits that questioned Obama's citizenship status and were aimed at postponing the election and, later, the inauguration. These articles featured interviews with the plaintiffs, which included former New Jersey lawyer Leo Donofrio, 9/11 Truth attorney Philip J. Berg, and former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes. WND and Joseph Farah also touted The Obama Nation, a book critical of Obama written by WND staff reporter Jerome Corsi, which repeated the forgery allegations and claimed that Obama was born in Kenya. These claims, like many others in The Obama Nation, were widely disputed by Obama's campaign, progressive bloggers, and news outlets. WND also began an online petition to have Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate released to the public,[42] even though Obama's campaign already posted it on its' website and a hard copy of the document is sealed by state law. The website also unsuccessfully urged Supreme Court justices to hear the Donofrio, Berg and Keyes lawsuits.[43] Several WND columnists frequently revisited the birth certificate allegations, including Farah; Corsi; Christian television host Hal Lindsey;[44] Faith and Values Coalition co-chair Janet Porter[45][46] and talk radio host Barbara Simpson.[47]

In an August 23, 2008, article about Berg's lawsuit, WND claimed it had examined Obama's Hawaiian birth certificate with forgery experts and, "found the document to be authentic," contradicting claims made in other WND articles and in Corsi's book.[48] However, on December 20, after numerous liberal websites, politicians and media personalities touted WND's findings, Joseph Farah claimed in a WND column that the forgery experts had not actually concluded it was authentic and that, "None of them could report conclusively that the electronic image [of the birth certificate on Obama's campaign website] was authentic or that it was a forgery."[49] After MSNBC's Keith Olbermann named Farah the, "Worst Person in the World," on his show, Countdown, for his apparent reversal, Farah defended himself, claiming, "the veracity of that image was never the major issue of contention. Rather, the major issue is where is the rest of the birth certificate – the part that explains where the baby was born, who the delivery doctor was, etc...I can tell you WND has done its part to find out the truth."[50]

In a February 10, 2009, column, Janet Porter further alleged that President Obama was acting as a mole for the Soviet Union. Porter suggested that Obama was raised as an atheist and Communist and was subsequently trained by Soviet agents during the early 1990s, despite the fact that the Soviet Union no longer existed at that time. Porter also suggested that Obama's election as president was the result of a long-term Communist conspiracy. Porter's only evidence for these allegations was a series of uncorroborated claims made to her by an American computer programmer, who claimed to have spoken to a Russian scientist in 1994 who told him that Obama was a Communist and was being groomed by Russian agents to infiltrate the presidency.[51][52]

You are wearing your heart on your sleeve.

 

[bltay]

bltay, at this point it looks like you are completely identified with your view of reality and that those views are at odds with the views of this forum. Perhaps you will be better off somewhere that is more in line with your views? Your continued insistence on being right is not only cause for concern but also a tremendous drain of energy on all those involved. Their are a lot of forums where you can further debate your rightness. This just isn't one of them.

Pinkerton, I respect your opinion but I will say it is not about rightness. I have seen so many assumptions about what I have posted, and not what is actually there, it is actually mind boggling.

However, an interesting question arises, just what is the opinion of this forum? Previously anart stated that Obama is the only person who can change anything. In the next post after yours SAO states that no matter who gets into that position nothing will change. Do you see the contradictions?

Now you may say how petty this is, but the devil is in the details, and believe it or not I followed through with this to learn something.