20 votes

Big Lie

I was asked by a relative to offer my opinion of the Sandy Hook crimes in progress. The relative didn't say "crimes in progress", those are my own words: I don't like speaking in lies.

Call a crime something other than a crime and the criminals tend to get away with murder (and torture).

I answered the question with "I don't know."

So I started to look into it.

I am immediately reminded of this:


http://youtu.be/_iCfvhl9NXw

If you are as unaware of that crime in progress, still in progress, then you are where I was before I started looking into the Sandy Hook crime in progress.

http://www.insanemedia.net/mike-powers-sandy-hook-interview-...

Destruction of evidence is done by criminals, that is self-evident.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To learn who rules over you

“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”- voltaire

Reminds me of this courages woman.

Sylvia Stolz AZK - Banned Speech, Banned Evidence, Banned Legal Defence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoJY5cBxmdw

Luke 3:38
Isaiah 43:3-5

Just read these today:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-targeted-assassinations-by-...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/conspiracy-theories-and-media-c...

Thought they kinda fit the topic.

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

((((((joeneesima)))))))

Since I can not post on Mod Box, where you respinded to a post I made.. I'm not worried.. but I am curious.. what's up with it?

(((((((((((joneesima))))))))) Thank you for caring.

(((much care)))

Glad I'm not the only one who finds the whole thing a little...what word would fit?

unnecessary?

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

Ruby Ridge Massacre

Common law

The common law is quite simple. In common law, if you have not injured another party's person, property or reputation, then the "plaintiff" has no cause of action against you. It does not matter if the plaintiff is government or your neighbor. The definition of common law in Black's 4th is "without the aid of statute". And in common law, there are no offenses against the state. Everyone has the right to judicial proceedings in accordance to the common law. When anyone goes to court and does not claim that right, then they acquiesce (meaning to agree). A common law court is also known as a "court of record". And the court is independent of the magistrate(the judge). Any proceedings not in accordance to the common law can be re-tried in a court of record de novo (new trial). A jury IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A COURT OF RECORD. Juries also exist in courts "not of record", but are merely advisory. So, requesting a jury is not the solution. Demanding a court of record in accordance to the common law is the solution. You will see government suddenly remember that an injury is required when anyone sues the government and they claim they have no jurisdiction. Most actions against government only involve an injury that you already acquiesced to because you stood by and allowed a statutory court to do their thing. Everyone needs to know these things, start reading.

Just sayin'

So why aren't there a host of hot shot defense attorneys getting drug dealers off the hook under common law?

Because a drug dealers prime intentions

are to make money (and possibly evade taxes). Not to use drugs on themselves.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Common Law Authority

Who can volunteer to be a common law authority, as a two part question?

1.
According to anyone.

2.
According to the current office holders of authority.

"In common law, if you have not injured another party's person, property or reputation, then the "plaintiff" has no cause of action against you."

To me, being very ignorant about all this, those words above appear to be setting the boundaries between criminals and victims. In other words, there is no cause for a trial in common law unless there is a criminal perpetrating a crime in reality. If there is no criminal perpetrating a crime in reality, and someone begins to volunteer to use common law against someone else, an innocent person since the target of the person using common law upon this person is not a criminal, not someone perpetrating a crime in reality, then that constitutes a crime in progress, does it not?

A person fraudulently, willfully, accessing the power of law, to injure an innocent person, to me, sounds like Legal Crime, a crime in progress, a willful injury of an innocent person, under the color of law.

Fraud at least.

"The definition of common law in Black's 4th is "without the aid of statute"."

What is "statute" according to who, and according to what claim of authority? Is Black's dictionary an example of a "statute"?

Please consider answering factually, I may be ignorant about all this authoritative stuff, but I am not new to the idea of good moral conduct whereby a person does not willfully injure another person, and that includes failure to help someone that could be helped in some way that does not cause undo risk upon the person helping the victim in need.

Martyrdom is a long way from merely standing up and being counted as a person who will not stand for sitting and watching some punk bullying a weaker person. The saying goes that one can live to fight another day.

Political economy works, and that can be accurately demonstrated in fact.

"And in common law, there are no offenses against the state. Everyone has the right to judicial proceedings in accordance to the common law."

That is the basis of justice, of "that which is good for the goose is good for the gander", and "The Golden Rule" and any logical sense of voluntary association whereby volunteers volunteer to help each other according to what other people demand as help. In other words, negotiated agreement upon the meaning of anything, has to be exactly that, defined exactly that way.

I want to rob, rape, torture, and kill you, does that sound like a good deal to you?

No, thanks, I see no way to agree to that, even if you allow me to rob, rape, tortured, and kill you at the same time.

Justice is honest, and JUST US is a way to communicate how deception works for those who willfully deceive their targeted victims.

Example:

http://oll.libertyfund.org/index.php?option=com_staticxt&sta...

_____________________________________________________
The ancient maxim makes the sum of a man’s legal duty to his fellow men to be simply this: “To live honestly, to hurt no one, to give to every one his due.”

This entire maxim is really expressed in the single words, to live honestly; since to live honestly is to hurt no one, and give to every one his due.
______________________________________________________

If I understand the concept of common law, it is ancient, it is genetic, it is real, it exists as a manifestation of human life, and if people access it, then crime won't pay so well for the criminals among us, or within us.

"And in common law, there are no offenses against the state."

What is the definition of "the state" according to who?

According to me "the state" is a fictitious being that is held accountable by criminals for the actions of the criminals, or, it is merely a list of names of people who are held accountable for their own actions and that list of people are hired to administer defensive power against crimes of any measure including petty crimes and aggressive wars for profit, and anything in between.

1.
The State = a legal fiction used by criminals to avoid accountability for their crimes

2.
The State = a list of names of people who are hired as specialists in the field of defending against criminals who seek gain at the expense of their targeted victims.

I cannot know what you mean with the sentence you construct unless you define the terms you use, since the terms you use are duplicitous beyond accurate capacity to communicate.

"When anyone goes to court and does not claim that right, then they acquiesce (meaning to agree)."

I do no such thing. I am anyone, am I not? I think that your words describe the crime of fraud in progress, so why call it anything but a crime in progress?

If there are people who make this claim that a person failing to know better than to be a victim is, by that failure, asking for whatever injury they get, then those people are criminals, they think like criminals, and they act like criminals, blaming the victim for being a victim.

Why lend those criminals any material or moral support of any kind, unless, by doing so, the idea is to make crime pay better?

"A common law court is also known as a "court of record"."

Who knows that a common law court is known as a "court of record"?

I think the question needed is by what authority is a common law court known as a "court of record"? I think the answer is that the criminals who took over common law (natural law), when they feel like it, recognize a "court of record", so named, for reasons that can be made clearer to anyone, without ambiguity, without misleading language, and without error in judgement.

"And the court is independent of the magistrate(the judge)."

So there are two powers at work in this reality being describes, as far as I can tell.

1.
Common law or natural law or genetic human capacity to avoid being victims or criminals

2.
Some other power apparently built upon deception, threats of violence, and violence perpetrated by people upon innocent victims

The later, apparently, recognizes the former as in independent power and a "court of record", so called, and that means what, exactly?

The Legal Crime People, those who are in the Legal Crime Business, recognize a competitive power, as individual people can, if they follow the rules that may, or may not be, followed by the Legal Crime People, avoid being victims to the Legal Crime People?

Can I be a magistrate as well as a juror if enough free people agree that I am one in any case whatsoever, or is this person called a magistrate (judge) one of the exceptional people who claim to justify injuring innocent people if the targeted innocent person fails to know any better than to "acquiesce", so called, to be a victim to these special group of powerful people called magistrates, or judges, according to magistrates and judges?

1.
A human being, no more or less legally powerful than any other human being

2.
A special person having the power to create victims out of the ignorant, because they can.

"Any proceedings not in accordance to the common law can be re-tried in a court of record de novo (new trial)."

I have this exercise in critical thinking on the subject of Political Economy, in our time, whereby bear, a fellow forum member, and a Friend of Liberty IN Liberty, are going to retry a hypothetical case, and we may be agreeing, now, to try a hypothetical new Waco case.

So, these victims of this pogrom in Waco, those that survived the torture, the mass murder, were then "tried" in "court" and are now occupying the over-crowded, and very expensive, residence in the American Gulag, for, apparently, failing to die when ordered.

"Any proceedings not in accordance to the common law can be re-tried in a court of record de novo (new trial)."

Is that true in some places, demonstrably true, and in other places it is demonstrably not true?

"A jury IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A COURT OF RECORD."

There is a lot of caps all lined up in a row, so that indicates some significance to that report of some nebulous fact - to me.

I think there are, demonstrably, at least three groups of people in our world as such:

1. Honest producers, earners, who are now targets and victims of the other two groups.

2. Competitive criminals who are not members of the third group.

3. Legal Criminals whose crimes are made legal for them to perpetrate and any competitors who dare to perpetrate the same crimes are made victims by this most powerful group of criminals.

Who, among those groups, say this:

"A jury IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A COURT OF RECORD."

To who, in any case, is that true, according to them?

It sounds to me like there are these Legal Criminals allowed in our life time, and they make their crimes legal, and they know better than to "kill the goose that lays the golden eggs", so they know not to destroy all the people who produce all the wealth completely, so they make rules that they more or less follow themselves, and this exemplary sentence in view is describing some of those rules that the Legal Criminals sometimes follow themselves.

"A jury IS NOT EVIDENCE OF A COURT OF RECORD."

OK, but what does that mean?

"Juries also exist in courts "not of record", but are merely advisory. So, requesting a jury is not the solution. Demanding a court of record in accordance to the common law is the solution."

To me the problem is crime made legal, so the solution is to demand a court of record in accordance to the common law, because sometimes the Legal Criminals do actually follow the rules they place upon themselves so as to avoid destroying the capacity of their victims to produce anything worth stealing?

"You will see government suddenly remember that an injury is required when anyone sues the government and they claim they have no jurisdiction."

Can I try to make sense of that sentence by taking out the false and misleading words and place more accurate words into the sentence instead?

You will see Legal Criminals suddenly remember that an injury is required when anyone sues the Legal Criminals and the Legal Criminals claim they have no jurisdiction.

What are those people, you call "government," working to gain from whoever they are targeting, in any case where there is a problem of this kind?

"Most actions against government only involve an injury that you already acquiesced to because you stood by and allowed a statutory court to do their thing."

Again, you appear to be the one confused, as there may be actual government, human genetic, real, common law, or natural law, government, in reality, and then there may be a counterfeit version called anything imaginable, so which do you mean, when you, you, not me, when you use the word government in the context that you use the word, the actual sentence you invented, produced, and offered to anyone, including me?

"Everyone needs to know these things, start reading."

I read this:

http://www.lysanderspooner.org/node/35

This:

http://tmh.floonet.net/pdf/jwarren.pdf

How about this:

http://archive.org/stream/secretproceedin00convgoog#page/n14...

This:

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol3/...

"Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a national government, and no longer a Confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the general government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes does, of itself, entirely change the confederation of the states into one consolidated government. This power, being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of control, must carry every thing before it. The very idea of converting what was formerly a confederation to a consolidated government, is totally subversive of every principle which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the state governments. Will the people of this great community submit to be individually taxed by two different and distinct powers? Will they suffer themselves to be doubly harassed? These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the one will destroy the other: the general government being paramount to, and in every respect more powerful than the state governments, the latter must give way to the former. Is it to be supposed that one national government will suit so extensive a country, embracing so many climates, and containing inhabitants so very different in manners, habits, and customs? It is ascertained, by history, that there never was a government over a very extensive country without destroying the liberties of the people: history also, supported by the opinions of the best writers, shows us that monarchy may suit a large territory, and despotic governments ever so extensive a country, but that popular governments can only exist in small territories. Is there a single example, on the face of the earth, to support a contrary opinion? Where is there one exception to this general rule? Was there ever an instance of a general national government extending over so extensive a country, abounding in such a variety of climates, &c., where the people retained their liberty? I solemnly declare that no man is a greater friend to a firm union of the American states than I am; but, sir, if this great end can be obtained without hazarding the rights of the people, why should we recur to such dangerous principles? Requisitions have been often refused, sometimes from an impossibility of complying with them; often from that great variety of circumstances which retards the collection of moneys; and perhaps sometimes from a wilful design of procrastinating. But why shall we give up to the national government this power, so dangerous in its nature, and for which its members will not have sufficient information? Is it not well known that what would be a proper tax in one state would be grievous in another? The gentleman who hath favored us with a eulogium in favor of this system, must, after all the encomiums he has been pleased to bestow upon it, acknowledge that our federal representatives must be unacquainted with the situation of their constituents. Sixty-five members cannot possibly know the situation and circumstances of all the inhabitants of this immense continent. When a certain sum comes to be taxed, and the mode of levying to be fixed, they will lay the tax on that article which will be most productive and easiest in the collection, without consulting the real circumstances or convenience of a country, with which, in fact, they cannot be sufficiently acquainted."

I do not like being fooled, especially when the cost is human extinction.

Joe

If I remember right

I think Vice President Johnson had JFK's car destroyed, at least that is what a documentary I watched said. That spoke volumes to me.

"Destruction of evidence is done by criminals, that is self-evident."

Cutting to the Chase once again!

No.7's picture

There are pictures of the windshield with a hole in it

and many eyewitnesses say a secret service man cleaned up the blood and brains from the crime scene at the hospital.

The doctors who saw Kennedy at Parkland hospital all say the entry wound was on Kennedys front right temple and the exit wound out the back right of Kennedy's skull. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs5f4I5hK-c

The individual who refuses to defend his rights when called by his Government, deserves to be a slave, and must be punished as an enemy of his country and friend to her foe. - Andrew Jackson

Thank You!

I cannot believe I waited until today to watch the link you so kindly attached for me. Thank you, I appreciate the information. This came up in the Q, and I watched it aftward and wondered about all of the "Texas" connections:

http://youtu.be/vnGpYdBVZgE

http://www.amazon.com/Texan-L

http://www.amazon.com/Texan-Looks-Lyndon-Study-Illegitimate/...

LBJ was the greatest ASSHOLE from Texas

Southern Agrarian

I was perusing

I was perusing your link to amazon and this was suggested reading on that page as well. Looks interesting:

http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/dp/14...

Common Crimes

One thing my now gone mother said about JFK while she saw that case of Reality Television while it happened was the fact that there were television reports that were shown once and then those live scenes were never reported again.

The reason I looked for and found the Linda Thomson Waco The Big Lie VCR Tapes reproduced onto the Internet was in reaction to the latest video evidence, and video reporting being done by current journalists/patriots concerning the new LIE called Sandy Hook.

It is sad to have to use the qualifier "patriots" when the profession of journalism ought to be competitive instead of monopolized by deceit/criminals.

Anyway: the current story concerns this Sandy Hook crime in progress.

I was asked about it. I said "I don't know." Now I'm looking into it, and I also said to the person asking me about Sandy Hook: "In about 10 years there will be many people who have done exhaustive research about it, and the story will then be easy to understand from an accurate viewpoint." <---or some such wording.

I am being schooled in this Sandy Hook case since the effort to uncover the facts are bearing fruit much faster now compared to the cases of JFK, Gulf of Tonkin, MLK, Randy and Vicky Weaver, Oklahoma City False Flag, Waco, 911, etc.

The level at which a Free Market works includes the level at which accurate currency (news or money) competes with dystopian fraud made legal (news and money). A Free Market Network of competitive, accurate, higher quality, and lower cost, information is gaining currency, gaining power, and forcing out the fraudulent (but legal) "choices".

Case in point:

youtube sandy hook actors

I type that into a search feature (an accurate search feature, looking for news, or looking for prices, is almost pure capitalism/anarchism/socialism) or Free Market Information Technology GIVEN away (give away the razor to sell the razor blades, and Open Source or "socialistic" in that anyone, anywhere, has this "public" access to this "public service") and I find:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTCawuljVF0

Now, bear, I've told you and you have even responded, so at least I know you have received "my take on gun control" concerning a future (not so far into our future) defensive weapon. I've told you about a Cell Phone sized gun that records an impending attack where the victim shoots the Cell Phone and records the event, uploaded onto the internet, and the attacker is immobilized for 1 hour.

A Free Market (anarchistic/capitalistic/socialistic) Terrorist Attack Insurance Provider could compete to sell the highest quality and lowest cost "benefits" in case of being attacked, and a crew is sent out to help resolve the situation so that the buyer of the insurance policy does not have to deal with the person who attacked once the attacker wakes up - or 911 can be called, or both, but the point was to point out the speed at which defense, documentation, and remedy could occur in real time.

No Despot could sanction or subsidize any such thing. Despotic Power vanishes when the targets are armed with effective remedy against crime.

That was a TEST offered to you, offered to anyone, anywhere, and I do this whenever asked. I take out my Cell Phone, I show it to people, and I explain to them what can be, in our lives. The knee jerk reaction is to shun the idea, to ridicule it, to censor it, to attack it, on the grounds that Men are Evil, and therefore there has to be a Law that keeps such weapons away from Evil people.

"Imagine the carnage if anyone, just anyone, can run amok in Theaters, and in Churches, and in Kindergarten Schools, or on a College Campus (Kent State Ohio), putting people to sleep for an hour!"

Now, the point of that Cell Phone Defense (Idea) against Legal Crime, is to point out how accurate information is the key to exposing the criminals, and make crime pay nothing. Since crime pays so well these days, what you have are "offers you can't refuse" in so many ways, since the Legal Criminals have unlimited money.

The Power to "Tax" without limit (including IRS and The FED/Inflation Tax) makes crime (subsidy/sanction) pay so well.

Who can lie the best?

How can someone lie when they are on camera in real time live?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTCawuljVF0

My daughter is an actress. I don't have to be a professional to see how acting works.

When I saw these latest competitive examples of modern day journalism, exposing the latest crimes made legal, I was immediately reminded of the Linda Thomson Waco The Big Lie VCR Tapes that I purchased during the events, and subsequent to the events that are now knowable as the Waco Massacre.

These again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wUucANBY_8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AFOXMBkQZs

I have those VCR tapes, they were produced while Waco was happening.

I have similar tapes to this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10gBL3PMw7o

That is "news" from inside a place where Legal Crime is being perpetrated real time: Reality Television.

Here is the best of any accurate accounting I've seen so far:

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/

Here is the Alex Jones journalist asking "the government" (Janet Reno) questions about the Waco Massacre (legal crime):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVDBeCT4qkI

What makes Legal Crime Pay so well?

This:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

National DEBT

This:

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/ratification/elliot/vol3/...

"Mr. GEORGE MASON. Mr. Chairman, whether the Constitution be good or bad, the present clause clearly discovers that it is a national government, and no longer a Confederation. I mean that clause which gives the first hint of the general government laying direct taxes. The assumption of this power of laying direct taxes does, of itself, entirely change the confederation of the states into one consolidated government. This power, being at discretion, unconfined, and without any kind of control, must carry every thing before it."

1.
End the FED
2.
End the IRS
3.
Bring the Troops Home (Not to massacre babies for fun and profit)

Look through Waco The Big Lie.

That is happening now. It isn't on Major Media. It is happening around the world, it will be called World War III when the current investments in destruction for fun and profit are consumed. What do you think the Legal Criminals are doing with all that POWER they are stealing?

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

That is the official account. The officials lie. The actual account is what: better for us, better for the targets, not as costly as a mere 16 Trillion dollars?

When is too much too much?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkgx1C_S6ls

Joe

Josf

I was hunting around today and came up with this link:

http://vaticannewworldorder.blogspot.com/

The page is covered with lists of links. They are in the color black so they don't look like links.

There are 15 1993 Linda Thompson interviews (looks like Bill Cooper is interviewer, I don't know who he is) as well as 45 Waco interviews. I thought you might be interested in the link. I haven't listened to any yet except for 1 random one where I think a guy is talking about the Franklin case.

I found the link because I was trying to figure out info on Farrakhan. There is another pro-Farrakhan post on the DP and I am trying to figure out more about him. I found a page where Farrakhan is linked with alot of info about the Jesuits: http://vaticannewworldorder.blogspot.com/2012/10/papal-order...

And I remembered when we had mentioned the Jesuits as perhaps a place for the buck stopping.

...

The name can change

I think it is a good find, and I will post that link on my forum. Unlike the previous events that served as well made lies, like The Federalist Papers, The Whiskey Rebellion, The Civil War, World War I and II, the recent events are recent, and witnesses are still alive, some die, some die suspiciously, heads chopped off for example, and the "authorities" claim the death was by suicide.

Presently, in our time, the well paid liars are still paid very well, but their lies are falling apart at the seams, it seems.

Jesuits go back a long way, and their trail of evidence includes, if I am not wrong, The Inquisition, so maybe the worst evil among us can, again, hire better liars, and we can all have fun burning witches at the stake?

What was Waco?

Joe

The JURY has the right to JUDGE the LAW

per Linda Thompson according to the Indiana State Constitution.

Joe, I think you will find the information in this discussion interesting because you are interested in the law.

This interview takes place 10 days prior to the surviving Dividian trial. Linda Thompson's voice does not have the energy it did in the earlier interviews IMO. It causes me to realize the tremendous burder she is under.

She also discusses Panama and US tanks running over cars with families in them and mass graves dug and discusses the media that the DoD (I think) flew down to video it all. I think she says it is same media as Waco. I have listened 2 times but I cannot relay exact details and I am writing fast as I have to do dinner now.

http://www.hourofthetime.com/bcmp3/260A.mp3

I was thinking also that since you and Mike are doing a Law Dog discussion he may be interested in the info in that interview. I think you will really like it. The 2nd half of the interview is where the law discussion is mostly found.

Also, I did a wiki on Linda Thompson recently to see what it says. I find the last information available on her interesting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linda_Thompson_(attorney)

"Thompson soon cancelled the march.[10] Later she was arrested for blocking a President Bill Clinton motorcade in Indianapolis and several weapons were found in her automobile.[2][3]"

That information causes me to feel concerned for her well-being.

...

Concern for human-kind.

"That information causes me to feel concerned for her well-being."

I have dinner to do too. I can post the link quickly on my other forum and see if Mike bites on it. Mike said he was condensing a report for me, so he may avoid any distractions at this point.

The link will be posted either way.

Joe

I think it may be a treasure trove of sorts

I listened to 5 of the Linda Thompson interviews. Also note that if you go all the way to the right of the page you will find an archive/table of contents section going back to 2011. I didn't discover that till last night. I found this link as well:

http://www.reformation.org/vietnam.html#Contents

Looks very interesting, but would be alot of reading as it is a book. But it is directly linking the Pope to the Vietnam War. Joe, I wonder if we are all looking at Zionists as the culprit, and maybe it is a front, but maybe we are missing a bigger picture? I don't know, I am a dot connector and one thing I heard Bill Cooper (the interviewer of Linda Thompson) say repeatedly was research your facts for yourself. Believe no one. Do your own research. So, I am tossing out connected dots to you that have absolutely no research or validation, but just an theory of mine that has been forming over the last day or so.

The other thing about those Bill Cooper interviews...he talks about the hegelian conflict and that there is NO leader of any patriot movement. I listened to that today here: http://www.hourofthetime.com/bcmp3/212.mp3

I think they are very wary that opposition is always in the process of being lead. He and Linda Thompson seem to be coming up with several "plants" in the Davidian Church.

I found Bill Cooper on wiki...looks like he met his end alot like your friend Bill Foust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_William_Cooper#Death

"As Cooper moved away from the UFOlogy community in the late 1990s and toward the militia and anti-government group subculture, he became convinced that he was being personally targeted by President Bill Clinton and the IRS. In July 1998 he was charged with tax evasion and an arrest warrant was issued but not executed, resulting in his being named a "major fugitive" by the US Marshals Service in 2000.[6]

On November 5, 2001 Apache County sheriff's deputies attempted to arrest Cooper at his Eagar, Arizona home on charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and endangerment stemming from earlier disputes with local residents. After an exchange of gunfire during which Cooper shot one of the deputies in the head, Cooper was fatally shot. Federal authorities reported that Cooper had spent years trying to avoid capture on the 1998 tax evasion arrest warrant, and according to a spokesman for the U.S. Marshals Service, he had vowed that "he would not be taken alive".[1]"

Anyways, I also found this link http://arcticbeacon.com/sound_tidbits/ which came from the link I gave you yesterday about Jesuits. I think the Cuppett interviews sound interesting. But for now, I must get outside on this beautiful day and start cleaning up my winter mess of a yard. I need to prune trees and prepare the garden. Maybe plant some flowers too. Jeff is encouraging me to go tot he nursery. I think he thinks it will be good for me. And he is probably right!

Thanks Joe. I am sorry I have been out of sorts. I did end up with a cough so I think that is why I felt so bad earlier this week. I missed being about to discuss, but I couldn't even think or muster any energy.

Joe, the Farrakhan stuff scares me. When I listen to him I can hear the possibility of an ethnic cleansing. He believes that the white race IS the devil...LITERALLY. I cannot seem to get that thru to Granger. I remember talking to you about white supremists that think that the black race is the devil. Well, I didn't know that there were black people that thought the white race is the devil. Divide and conquer? The criminals getting the races to kill each other? As well as religions doing the same?

...

Yes wealth is abundant

"So, I am tossing out connected dots to you that have absolutely no research or validation, but just an theory of mine that has been forming over the last day or so."

I listened to one Linda Thomson Interview and found a treasure in the advice of knowing that our enemies (foreign and domestic) are fearful of people who have command of their own minds, and at the same time those people having command of their own minds are not fearful of those Legal Criminals.

I fall into that category, more so each day, because I am less fearful, and I am more in command of my own mind.

I have to tell you a story though, and this is personal, but I have to tell someone, and why not tell everyone in a Public Forum?

I was so distracted by seeing my wife's underwear as she got out of the car, she is losing weight, getting back on track, feeling a whole word better, and I just noticed a different pattern on the underwear visible as she get's out of the car. I did not even shut the car off, nor get the keys. We went into the Grocery Store, and on our way out I am fumbling for the keys. The car was in the parking lot, engine running, lights on, all the time we went in to get my wife's new diet food for dinner.

I am now cooking "on sale" T bone stakes for my son and I, and BBQ chicken for my daughter and her boyfriend.

Life is good, and that is another thing that moves Ron Paul so far from any counterfeit version of Ron Paul, if any were to dare to try to counterfeit the example who sets the bar so high.

Not Jesus, not God, no Glory, just Common Sense in Modern Times; despite the depleted demand for it.

"I think they are very wary that opposition is always in the process of being lead. He and Linda Thompson seem to be coming up with several "plants" in the Davidian Church."

I think that the Survivors were all plants of some measure. I actually talked to one of them. I had asked one question. I think I told you about this before.

Cooper dying sounds a lot like my friend Bill Foust dying of gun shot wounds from a gun his taxes paid for, and his taxed paid for the bullets, etc.

"I missed being about to discuss, but I couldn't even think or muster any energy."

Now you have many competitive paths I can go on, offered up for anyone else too. Thanks.

"Divide and conquer?"

Of course. Men against Women is the most lethal, and they are working on that too, for that reason.

Religion, true religion, is like true science, it has to be eliminated because it is in direct competition with the Single Legal Money Power: and all that must go with it.

Joe

Quick

We have soccer games today and will be celebration our 29th anniversary this afternoon/evening...I'll have to let you know if Jeff leaves the car running...that was so funny :)

I would like to see the book cover. Not to approve, but because I am so intersted. I will probably not write again today.

Religion Defining War?

The Link on the Vietnam War reminds me of the same old tactic where the thief yells "Thief" and the thief points in a direction away from the thief as the thief steals something.

There must be a genuine version of the thing being counterfeited, and in the case of the False Front where the thief yells "Thief" the genuine version is a person who is expending the risk, time, cost, energy, and power to warn other people about a crime in progress.

What is the purpose of true religion? Is it a crime in progress if people are being led into miserable lives, and if it is true, then they are also being led into miserable afterlives?

Those doing the leading, I can say the Top Ten leaders of Legal Crime, whoever they are, aught not be followed, and specifically aught not be followed with Absolute Abject Belief In Falsehood Without Question.

So some people have actually stopped following orders without question, such as, for example Martin Luther.

That is one example.

So who are the counterfeiters? If they are really good at it then you won't ever peel away that last layer of the onion they create with all their False Fronts.

Jesuits?

OK, I can entertain that evidence, and some people actually find their names, the name of the worst on the list, according to some people, is The Black Pope, and that position has a person occupying it, like like the high profile Pope, in his glass bubble.

Someone so close to God, supposedly, no longer walks among God's Children, instead this Godly person drives around in a Assassination Proof Car?

If people believe that they owe this National Debt to the Legal Criminals who borrowed that money, then what LIE is too BIG for them to not believe?

What POWER is at work that makes a person believe that War is good for the economy?

Not even defensive war: as if it is always a first choice, at the drop of a hat, to Unleash the Dogs of War (defensive), because there is no alternative but to profit by that choice?

No, the belief now is War for Money is the first choice, and that is called Empire. We are now the Nazis, with a different Flag, and better liars, higher paid liars, and better torturers running the show, and better Serial Killers, the best that money can buy.

What lie will We The People fail to believe on cue, since torture is now legal in America?

Ask anyone, start asking, and do that for going on 3 decades, there are fewer people stone dead to the brutal facts now, compared to the booming days of American Dollar Hegemony; and that is on schedule.

The most powerful among us, employ the power of deception, and they are good at it, look at how much they pay themselves with the earnings they steal.

Simple math, a child can see, so what is in our future if we merely face the facts?

See the facts, discuss the facts, and that is how we win, the curtain is pulled back, and the little weak lying sociopath is right there behind the curtain pulling the strings with the Legal Money Monopoly Power.

As far as The Dollar Hegemony is concerned that little man is Ben Bernanke and he is the King of all the Welfare Queens, leading the way, making slaves of everyone, with lies, just like Abraham Lincoln. You don't like your Master, then send me everything I ask for, and I will solve your slave problem.

Where do I sign?

"The other thing about those Bill Cooper interviews...he talks about the hegelian conflict and that there is NO leader of any patriot movement."

Cooper was a typical, competitive, leader of the patriot movement, so was Linda Thomson, so is Gerald Celente, Alex Jones, Jesse Ventura, and Ron Paul. So is Rand Paul.

We are all connected to the Legal Money Monopoly Power, so we all work for that one small group, in one way or another, it is all connected, in some way. That is the point at which those who no longer can afford to be victims figure out how to follow the leadership, the true leadership, the real deal, is not one person, the true leadership is external to individuals.

You have your way of seeing that true leadership. I have my way, internally, we can't be anything but internal beings, individual human beings, we are, but the path away from Legal Crime is what it is external to each of us, common to all of us, and some of us see it better than others, so what do we do about that fact?

Generously offer a competitive viewpoint.

If it is better, if it is a better viewpoint, then it is closer to the truth, more accurate, and that is true leadership.

What is being counterfeited by the False Leaders?

What is the opposite direction to the direction that the False Leaders are leading the thoughts and actions of everyone connected to those False Leaders with their Legal Money Monopoly Power?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoJY5cBxmdw

A person is found guilty of denying the holocaust, so named, but not defined, and that person is punished with years in prison?

That is in Germany.

This link next is a book I read, and a book worth reading:

http://www.amazon.com/Voices-From-The-Third-Reich/dp/0306805944

I found that book because I have a life long interest in World War II Air Combat, an interest that started when our family of boys began making model airplanes. The Author of the book is a German Air Force Pilot named Johannes "Macki" Steinhoff. The book is a collection of witness testimonies concerning life in Germany while the Political and Economic Power of that False Government (Financed by Wall Street) turned to Empire (Legal Crime) and then was crushed by Empire (Legal Crime).

Human beings speaking their minds, confessing, or deceiving themselves, or deceiving the readers, who knows, I don't. We here in U.S.A. (Legal Crime) have witnessed, live on Television, another example of a specific Holocaust.

Here:

http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum/

I have not gone back through my own copies of Linda (formerly Thompson) Abrams' Waco the Big Lie and Waco the Big Lie Continues to find that part in the video where the church members (targeted as cult members) held out a bed sheet from a second story window in their church (targeted as a compound), and on that bed sheet (if I remember right) there was a warning written that said "you are next".

After an Empire is crushed by the new, better, Empire, on schedule, the former Empire witnesses, tax payers, victims, whatever word works in any individual case, are guilty of a crime if they dare to question the official, well paid, lies, that they finance with their earnings.

Looking ahead, if things proceed along the obvious, accurately measurable, schedule, and the new Empire, which is the new location for The Legal Money Monopoly Power, also known as The World Reserve Currency, that new Empire, moving to China, that new Empire, when National Debt needs to be collected, must be collected, to finance that new Empire, when that happens, which Holocaust must never be denied then, and if anyone dares deny it then, will the punishment be light or heavy for failing to obey without question?

Joe

Common Sense in Modern Times

“Not Jesus, not God, no Glory, just Common Sense in Modern Times; despite the depleted demand for it.”

It concerns me that people do not realize they are fed so much mis-information and distraction to keep them from realizing that Common Sense in Modern Times exists and that the message is being covered up. Joe, “Common Sense in Modern Times” is an interesting book title.
---------------------
“Of course. Men against Women is the most lethal, and they are working on that too, for that reason.”

It was brought to my attention by a Christian speaker, James Dobson, I think, that if you look at TV shows and commercials, most of the time the buffoon is the white male. Perhaps prejudice produces more prejudice?
-------------------------------
“The Link on the Vietnam War reminds me of the same old tactic where the thief yells "Thief" and the thief points in a direction away from the thief as the thief steals something.”

So specifically, the thief is saying the Pope did it, but the thief is someone else? I read some words from your forum this morning “For those reading this it's probably not unexpected, but there is always more to things than meets the eye, more than popular opinion dares to say.” –Jee-Host I wonder if the thief uses a lot of fronts, organized religion being one of them. You know Joe, I am going to give a Bible quote about the thief below. Spiritually speaking, the thief is Satan and Satan has a kingdom and influence in this world

• Ephesians 6:12 KJV
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
-----------------------------
“What is the purpose of true religion?”

The purpose of true religion in my understanding is to have an abundant life. Jesus said he came so that people can have an abundant life. (Joe speaks of abundance too.)

• John 10:10 KJV
The thief cometh not, but for to steal , and to kill , and to destroy : I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

How is abundant life accomplished? Loving God and Loving People.

Matthew 22:37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

If one looks at the 10 commandments the first 4 are about loving God and the second 6 are about loving people. So, love results in true religion (loving people by helping them and loving God by living purely. And the exercise of these things results in abundance.

• James 1:27 KJV
Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
-------------------------
“What is the purpose of true religion? Is it a crime in progress if people are being led into miserable lives, and if it is true, then they are also being led into miserable afterlives?”

IMO, it is the fear of a miserable afterlife that false religions use to bind people into miserable lives on earth. And instead of binding people to their Creator, people are bound to an institution. Bound to do certain things for that institution in order to have a good afterlife.

• Jude 1:16 KJV
These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling [words], having men's persons in admiration because of advantage.

Here is a prophecy about Jesus:

• Isaiah 61:1 KJV
The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound ;

Jesus read that same scripture in the temple on the Sabbath and said that he, himself was the fulfillment of that Scripture: http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/luke/4-audio.html

“Jesuits?
OK, I can entertain that evidence, and some people actually find their names, the name of the worst on the list, according to some people, is The Black Pope, and that position has a person occupying it, like like the high profile Pope, in his glass bubble.”

Joe, did you know the new pope is a Jesuit? I don’t really know what to think about that. John Taylor Gatto was educated in a Jesuit school. It is in that school he was taught to go to original documentation to get the facts. I’ve heard someone else speak positively about Jesuit education lately. I really don’t know much about it.
--------------------------
“No, the belief now is War for Money is the first choice, and that is called Empire. We are now the Nazis, with a different Flag, and better liars, higher paid liars, and better torturers running the show, and better Serial Killers, the best that money can buy.”

I don’t want to believe that. The screws run so deep. Part of me knows some truth, the other part of me wants to believe we are the good guys…because we were the good guys, because we are the good guys, but bad guys are in charge…and we, for the most part, not me and you and some others, but for the most part still believe that the good guys are in charge. I think it is because they have not yet turned us upon ourselves here in our land from sea to shining sea. So, we for the most part, are shielded from the truth, and/or distracted from it. I guess I wrote that for my own benefit because I am not telling Joe anything that he doesn’t know. I just need to reinforce it for myself.
-----------------------------
“See the facts, discuss the facts, and that is how we win, the curtain is pulled back, and the little weak lying sociopath is right there behind the curtain pulling the strings with the Legal Money Monopoly Power.”

But that lying sociopath has so much power. But knowing is power too. My pop knows. His words one time to me were, “I don’t know what we can do about it.” As if had had known for a long time, and as if there is nothing that can be done, but to enjoy one’s own life. Of course he is over 80, so perhaps things were not as acute as they are becoming. He has seen war. Maybe he knows that nothing can be done? Maybe he knows it is better not to provoke that those with the greatest arsenal?
------------------------
“…just like Abraham Lincoln.”

Jeff and I spoke together about Abraham Lincoln. He thinks that if Lincoln had not been killed right after the war, that reconstruction would have been different. He also said that Lincoln insisted that Dixie be played at the cease fire agreement or whatever it was called. Others did not want Dixie played. I want Abraham Lincoln to be a good guy.
-------------------
“Cooper was a typical, competitive, leader of the patriot movement, so was Linda Thomson, so is Gerald Celente, Alex Jones, Jesse Ventura, and Ron Paul. So is Rand Paul.”

I think Cooper was skeptical about the moon landing. Do you think that was all a hoax? The other thing I want to say. You friend Foust and Cooper were both shot down. They stood their ground? I don’t know, but it seemed like it was over taxes? To me, when people are shot down, it leaves a void. What power was forfeited by standing their ground and ending up dead? What power continues when the voice continues? That may be simplistic, but it was just a thought. Perhaps there is great power in “not offending them,” As Jesus said. Because one lives to gain and give power another day?

You gave me Linda Thompson’s name Abrams. Did you know she passed in 2009? http://paulding.com/forum/index.php/topic/208225-attorney-li... I do not need to worry about her well-being. That was somewhat a relief. Though I wish she were still living.
------------------------
“A person is found guilty of denying the holocaust, so named, but not defined, and that person is punished with years in prison?”

I have started watching, but have not yet finished the link as I have to read the subtitles and it will need my undivided attention. The problem I am having is why does anyone want to deny the holocaust? I am listening to holocaust survivor testimonies. They for the most part are the children of the ordeal. I listened to this one Sat & Sun. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd7WKPMcFbA&list=EC1DEE787E74... she spent a year and a half in a sewer in Poland with 10 other people. She and the others were fed by a Polish sewer worker. I cannot understand why people want to deny the holocaust. Some of these people went to Israel afterwards. The reason they went is because they were no longer welcome. This lady’s father had been a grocer. They feared for their lives after they escaped Hitler because they were considered bourgeoisie by the Russians and she was not allowed to go to higher education. Only the children of the Proletariat were allowed higher education. They migrated to Israel, and then later she and her husband came to the US. Joe, things are not so easy, which reminds me back to what you said about peeling back the onion layers that the counterfeiters hid behind. It seems there are onion layers of injustice too and innocents get caught in the crossfire. “Voices from the Third Reich” sounds interesting. It would be another perspective. I also listened to either Croatians or Serbs, I can’t remember which, that were persecuted in WWII as they were not Catholic, but Protestant. It seems to me that there was a lot of divide and conquer going on in that war. Have you ever considered all the possible combinations?

Fascism vs. Communism
Catholics vs. Protestants
Arians vs. Jews & Gypsies, etc.
Orientals vs. Anglos
Empire vs. Empire
bourgeoisie vs. Proletariat

How many ways can people be sliced and diced to keep them confused when the real enemy is evil? And what conflicts did those conflicts set up…as in Zionism vs. Palestinians; Capitalism vs. Communism, etc.? But a New World Order cannot be established until WWIII because there is still too much resident power in individuals? I see danger in the collective grouping of evil. workload How can someone tell Jewish children that they have to sit in the back of the class and even if they have a perfect score they will not receive a perfect score because they are Jewish? And how can someone say because your dad owned a grocery store you cannot go to college because your family was too wealthy before the war?

“…which Holocaust must never be denied then, and if anyone dares deny it then, will the punishment be light or heavy for failing to obey without question?”

I suppose this may not be fair to ask since I have not yet watched the link, but what advantage is it for the criminals to not allow people to deny the holocaust…and why do people want to deny it? I suppose I am on this quest because of all the Jew/anti-Jew posts that are popping up on the DP. Why is it OK to pick either side in the Middle East? I like what Dr. Paul said…let Israel take care of Israel. But that does not mean that we have to be against Israel does it? Can’t everyone just get along? And I don’t mean go along to get along, I mean love in the purest sense of religion to do good to others. Doing good is the opposite of doing bad. So is that why the Bible says

• Romans 12:21 KJV
Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good

I wonder if that is anything like Newton’s law of motion, but in the sense that doing good will have the opposite action of doing evil and can even overcome evil thru the abundance of goodness?

I have rambled on quite abit and must now be about the rest of my day as I leave other replies unanswered for the time being. If this one is too lengthy and there is nothing that inspires a reply from you, please don’t force it. I know you have bookwork and many other conversations. I did not proof as I am going to go plant the flowers I purchased Friday.

...

Waco, you say?

Is "The Big Lie" a good place to begin our work?
---------------
"One way is Trial by Jury based upon Sortition.

Try that out in a few cases, see how it works in any case.

Pick up any case of anyone anywhere where there is a willful criminal making a victims out of someone targeted by the criminal.

Pick one.

We can do the work.

Take any case that can, will, or may happen, and we can try a few angles of view, competitive angles of views, as to which ways can work to solve that crime problem, and which ways work less well."

...

Note words above by Pumpkin

Having someone familiar with common law, or Common Law, or COMMON LAW, may be a good idea. Furthermore, with this common sense, or Common Sense, type concept of common law, in mind, think, please, in terms of what any person, and any second person, third, or 12 people, or 100 people might be required to do, when these individuals actually begin to express their own power of authority over right and wrongs instead of what is so common now: Absolute Abject Belief in Falsehood Without Question.

We can proceed with this exercise in any way that any individual juror, which is you, or me, says, subject to unanimity, even if we have to agree to disagree, and then move on our separate ways, seeking a new agreeable path.

Does that make any common sense to you as we two begin the vital work of rediscovering common sense common law in America where we exist?

We could imagine a current example of Waco beginning right now somewhere between your home and my home and to do so we have to imagine that we are in the same State in the same False Union, and therefore we two are local, we two are peers, in this case.

Suppose we two, for example, are among 100 people, spontaneously gathering, going to the new Waco, and finding a smaller number of perpetrators who are busy torturing babies, children, teenagers, pregnant mothers, babies in wombs, regular adults, and old people.

We overpower the presumed to be innocent people who are caught red handed in the acts of torture and we stop them from doing the ultimate deed of burning down the church, so now there are witnesses alive to question as to the evidence present at the scene of the crime, where the perpetrators have not yet destroyed all the evidence, because our 100 or so volunteers did the right thing in this case.

Is that an agreeable set up? Meanwhile I will try to address the information offered by Pumpkin since now is the first time I have noticed that comment offered by Pumpkin in this thread.

We can proceed in any direction you want, any case at all, we can even retry the actual Waco case as it continues to be a crime in progress, whereby the victims were tried in a Kangaroo Court, and they are now occupying the overcrowded Gulag in America.

Joe

Yes, Let's


http://youtu.be/l1soJAw-XAA
I wonder, can 100 people do anything when crime is in progress? Wouldn't they as soon turn their guns on the 100 as they did those in the compound? Perhaps the lessor of 2 evils persists?

http://youtu.be/E0T1od5dUoA
And then in that case evil still exists in the form of all that has been left undone when one turns and looks back in want of what could have been accomplished if all had been sacrificed.
----------------
After you, Joe, lead the way and let us have a trial in a fiction of union. Perhaps we can discover that which contains no evil, where the choice is only between evil and good.

...

Principles

Here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nzShAxnRhk

My wife once said:

If I do not stand for something I will fall for anything.

She may have actually said "you" instead of "I", but she was speaking from personal experience.

"Wouldn't they as soon turn their guns on the 100 as they did those in the compound?"

A greater power overcomes a lesser power by definition, so the concept here is not to threaten, not to trick, not to bluff, not to "acquiesce" anyone. The idea here is to be the more powerful force that we are when we are united as good people.

One person will certainly fall victim to a more powerful organized crime group.

The idea is not to allow ourselves to become lesser in power than any other organized crime group.

That is the lesson by Shays's Rebellion, that is the lesson by The Athens Tennessee example, which are real, not fictional.

The fictional lesson, in the movie with the one colorful girl in the all black and white film, as you point out, is how much is lost when not enough power is employed, that could be employed, to fight against criminal powers.

None, no one anywhere, doing anything but Absolute Abject Belief in Falsehood Without Question, isn't bad at all if there are no criminals issuing criminal orders to be obeyed without question, yet there they are, in black and white, in history, in the present, and on into the foreseeable future.

That is the problem.

The problem is not that we obey without question, the problem is that there are criminals who know how to perpetuate their crimes and they know enough to make their crimes legal.

The solution is to stop obeying without question, because that begins the process of removing the POWER we earn, since we are in that way not criminals, in that way, our power to earn, we are worthy of being targets, we produce something worth stealing, and in that way, we are much more POWERFUL than any organized crime ring ever to have existed, ever existing now, or ever will exist.

Do we, the earners, the targets, the voluntarily agreeing cooperators competing to out produce each other, working to make life better and less costly constitute a greater power than human cock roaches, human maggots?

If you, anyone, any reasonable person, opens a can of food, and in the can of food you find maggots instead of food, do you feed that to the kids?

So what explains the rate of POWER flowing from all the earners to those few people who borrow that POWER from the earners, and then the earners believe that they owe that money they loaned to the borrowers - with National Interest on top of the PRINCIPLE?

Does this ring true:

It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.
Henry Ford

We can speed ahead in our trial at Waco, if you care to go along, agree, to the fast forwarding.

We ask, and ask, and ask, and we get answer, and answer, and answer, to our mutual satisfaction, beyond a reasonable doubt, and our question is the same question each time.

Who ordered this expense of money taken from The FUND.

Where does the buck stop in this case?

Joe

OK

"A greater power overcomes a lesser power by definition, so the concept here is not to threaten, not to trick, not to bluff, not to "acquiesce" anyone. The idea here is to be the more powerful force that we are when we are united as good people. "

OK, with hope.
----------------
"The problem is not that we obey without question, the problem is that there are criminals who know how to perpetuate their crimes and they know enough to make their crimes legal."

OK, with sorrow.
----------------
"We can speed ahead in our trial at Waco, if you care to go along, agree, to the fast forwarding.

We ask, and ask, and ask, and we get answer, and answer, and answer, to our mutual satisfaction, beyond a reasonable doubt, and our question is the same question each time.

Who ordered this expense of money taken from The FUND.

Where does the buck stop in this case?"

-------------------

OK, I fast forward to a Janet Reno, wasn't she the Attorney General? Didn't she order the tanks and guns to decend upon the home of the people in Waco? And behind her was President Clinton. I had to get that buck in because I don't know where to go after the Office President.
-------------------

OK with anticipation as I wait to hear what you have to say next!

...

The Revolution will not be Televised

The trial will be televised, if not on CBS, then on The Alex Jones Show.

You start first.

You are the juror, a real one, not a counterfeit one run by a Union Judge.

You have the legal power to try this case as this case is on the road to finding the most powerful evil one in this case where so many dead bodies are missing heads, for some strange reason.

There is President Clinton, and as a Juror you demand an answer to your question, so what is your question?

My question is to ask who signed the purchase order for the experts flown in from Russia to use those children for weapons experiments?

If Clinton says me. Then the buck stops. Do you really think Clinton will say it was me?

Joe