The U.S. Congress Trades as Ron Paul!

reply to post by badmedia

Nothing of the original post was based on fact outside a listing was there. Not a single thing outside that was actually true. It is filled with misinformation and false accusations towards a person. The only thing that keeps it from being slander is your complete ignorance towards what any of it actually means.

Yeah, when the thread started out, all we knew was the Ron Paul thing. Through the efforts of everyone we've discovered that all of them come up like that. So, it's not really about Ron Paul so much as it is about finding out what this all means.

Nobody is slandering Ron Paul. Actually through the research on this thread, I've found a lot of good information that I already used in other threads. I like the guy, I believe he says what he means and means what he says.

That isn't going to stop me from looking into it though. I mean what if we find out that all the congressman are programmed MK projects? Just kidding, but you know what I mean. I think.

reply to post by mryanbrown


This thread wasn't pimped anywhere. It was picked up though by a lot of other websites by people who come here looking for content for their sites.

The Daily Paul picked up this issue from this thread. Even David Icke picked up this issue from this thread.

I don't post on any other website but ATS.

My posts from ATS do show up though on websites around the world.

An alert fellow member (a Ron Paul fan and supporter) tracked how it spread across the web from here.

It's pretty sad people see this only as a political personality issue and a left/right divide issue.

It's a conspiracy issue as to whey our politicians are incorporating and doning business as our government institutions.

The very thing that upset Ron Paul supporters set out to prove that he is not alone in this practice is what in part caused this thread to travel so far and wide as other people in other countries began to search and see if their politicians and institutions were incorporated too and indeed they found out they were.

That has caused a lot of people to ask a lot of questtions about why our politicians are incorporating.

The sad thing is that some rabid posters are more concerned about a beloved politicians stature than they are a very shady practice.

Its pretty sad that those types of people miss the much bigger underlying issue and will literally dig the world's own grave just to make excuses for political personailities that they love.

Political cultism should not be getting in the way of investigating and discussing conspiracies on forums like ATS.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by mryanbrown

 

This thread wasn't pimped anywhere. It was picked up though by a lot of other websites by people who come here looking for content for their sites.

The Daily Paul picked up this issue from this thread. Even David Icke picked up this issue from this thread.

The U.S. Congress Trades as Ron Paul!
posted on 4-3-2010 @ 08:33 PM

^^ Thats you.

Take 10 sec. and see for yourself U.S. Govt. ALSO traded as OBAMA
Submitted by juliusbragg on Mon, 10/26/2009 - 11:21

^^ Thats The Daily Paul. Obviously they time traveled to steal it from you.

The U.S. Congress Trades as Ron Paul!
Edit: Link Removed
Yesterday, 08:21 AM

(Steal source much?)

Edit: Link Removed
submitted by
conna
1 day 18 hr ago


This issue with the samesingle flaw from multiple outlets first leads me to believe this was nothing you stumbled across by yourself. Secondly that you aas well as everyone else are sensationalizing it to whatever name they want. Building immense amounts of disinfo and arguments.

I don't care which branch it is, whose name it is. All these people ignore the corporate law portions. And the fact it isn't a single name.


[edit on 7-3-2010 by mryanbrown]

This needed to be posted again. Because everyone is ignoring the fact that these individuals are operating under their incorporated names doing business AS the government.

Yes, you must be incorporated in some aspect to do business.

That would be funny if Ron Paul actually controls Congress.

I really do have to add I think its rather hysterical too that some of the posters to this thread are in fact earnestly doing what they are actually accusing others of doing.

Taking out of context information and deliberately reengineering it to slander, discredit and defame.

I have displayed in the thread where I came by the information yet others chose to question that and suggest something else.

I have displayed in the thread with the help of another member how people were picking up on this thread and spreading it across the internet all on their own accord, while they have tried to suggest it was pimped as some part of smear campaign.

I have displayed on this thread that it was posted in the general conspiracy forum and not a political forum, yet some want to claim it’s not about a conspiracy while doing what ever they can to twist and distort and take things out of context to get away from the very real conspiracy here.

The fact that our politicians are incorporating along with the institutions they are elected too.

I have displayed that it is a conspiracy forum and the OP was nothing but a series of questions and hypothetical questions and scenarios and attempt to investigate.

While all the while some select posters have tried to put that into absolutes actually for the very purpose to slander and discredit while decrying what they foolishly and pigheadedly want to say is an effort to slander and discredit on my part.

Are these posters doing this interested in the truth?

Evidently not, nor could they really legitimately claim to be offended by the Original Post based on some notion that conspiracies shouldn’t be discussed unless they can be absolutely proven because most of their own genuine slanderous attempts to discredit can’t be proven either.

The minute a conspiracy can be genuinely proven it ceases to exist and instead becomes history and history is full of conspiracies.

Conspiracies get discussed here on ATS people who can’t tolerate that really shouldn’t be on ATS, they should be on the divide and conquer left/right political sites that cater to those who want to be divided and conquered.

All I can see them doing here on ATS is what they dry to do everywhere, ignore the real issues for partisanship and political parties and attempt to divide and conquer through the very tactics they claim to imagine others are using that they then decry all the while doing it in earnest themselves.

There is a very real conspiracy here, there is a reason why these politicians and our institutions are incorporating to become seamless entities and it doesn’t favor the American people, not even when a beloved politician is doing it too.

And this thread keeps going... and going... and going. Oh, most benevolent and omnipotent SuperMod, please step in with thine infinite wisdom and mercy and either sort things out or close the bloody thread...PLEASE!

reply to post by mryanbrown


Actually you didn't post the link, ATS sends out a Twitter and RSS Feed.

I don't, ATS does though.

Show the link from the daily paul that has someone discussing this before it was put up here. All the evidence of how it originated is actually here on ATS.

Do a little research.

I sure didn't pimp the thread, I don't even pimp threads to fellow members, ask anyone on my friends list.

So if you can show a link to a time before this thread got posted, go ahead, but you haven't.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Originally posted by timewalker
WOW !!!!! How did you come across this? You don't have to answer that. I tried to search D&B with no results. I have wondered how he gets away with what he does.

Perfect wolf in sheep's clothing if this is true.

You might want to hide now.

I can't take the credit a fellow member tipped me off after doing some unrelated research on the Birth Certificate Thread here

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Don't use the search feature in Dunn and Bradstreet use the Credit Report Search and type in U.S. Congress or House of Representatives and select D.C. as the state from the drop down box.

I checked to see if other members of Congress might come up by doing that but only RON PAUL!

From the front page, links directly to the post where I first came across the information.

Originally posted by greenovni
The reason I ended up in Dun & Bradstreet and found this is because i was doing some research about the birth certificate thread and that I have an upcoming traffic court case coming.

I was looking for proof that the US as well as the state of Florida are corporations so I can show the court that I broke no "law" but a corporate statue.

I want to go to court and say that "I do not plead to courts of contract" but want to make sure that all my ducks are in a row.

If anyone feels like helping with links, information etc I'll be more than grateful.

I might even end up buying those reports from D&B and see what they say.

If I decide to buy them, I'll post them here for all.

This is the person who turned up this information originally on the thread I linked too above.

It's all a sequential series of events that establishes itself as fact.

Why anyone would want to twist that is beyond me.

reply to post by mryanbrown


The Daily Paul you are referencing is about Barack Obama
Back at that date...

Take 10 sec. and see for yourself U.S. Govt. ALSO traded as OBAMA

Daily Paul

So what we are seeing is why so many ATS members confided to Skeptic Overlord they don't like to post on anything to do with Politics because it just brings out the left/right political snipes and hacks, trolls and derailers.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I checked to see if other members of Congress might come up by doing that but only RON PAUL!

From the front page, links directly to the post where I first came across the information.

And yet, you didn't actually check to see if other members of Congress came up. Because all I did was take 3 random names from my state and all 3 came up.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by mryanbrown

 

The sad thing is that some rabid posters are more concerned about a beloved politicians stature than they are a very shady practice.

Its pretty sad that those types of people miss the much bigger underlying issue and will literally dig the world's own grave just to make excuses for political personailities that they love.

Political cultism should not be getting in the way of investigating and discussing conspiracies on forums like ATS.

Read what you wrote. You are the one that is attacking Ron Paul. Not so much directly, but the insinuations they make have NO basis in reality. None. Can you find a single fact, clue, or ANYTHING that relates this to RP? I have not seen any thus far.

I am all for investigating and discussing conspiracies. Even the issue of why are our congressmen/women "incorporated" or whatever. It seems like a minute issue to me with all the other millions of issues we deal with nowadays but nonetheless it has importance. However, for some reason you feel the need to continue to try and drag a good mans name through the mud.

IMHO, start a new thread about congress/our government being full of incorporated people. That is a good subject to discuss the ifs/whys/etc. I just honestly see no point in keeping this thread open which clearly points to RP as being some sort of puppet-master. Not only that, you keep attacking people that are "defending him" (aka people that take 30 seconds to do a bit of research into the original premise of the thread.

My 2c.

Originally posted by mryanbrown
That aside. This exact issue was brought up by The Daily Paul previoulsy as seen at: www.dailypaul.com...

It's still wrong to do and only done with a lack of information. That site is only going to lose credibility by doing that. It highlights that people only care about the who's instead of what things actually mean.

In many cases it's likely an honest mistake, but the effects carry on anyway. I think we've all done it before, jumped the gun with something we thought was credible, but then it ended up not being.

If you want to know about entitlements? The company takes liability from the individual. So the entitlement and priviledge would be an invisible wall of the government sheilding individuals from liability. As they are doing business as an entity and not a human being.

But the real business the government does is in the form of contracts with companies. The real issue here would be politicians who are CEO's and board members of companies, come do politics for awhile, and then go right back into their corporations. While they are in office, they give their buddies the deals and so on. Dick Cheney is a prime example of someone who goes in and out of the private sector over the years. That is how such things really happen, not in this.

When it says "traded as", it's not referring to the stock market or anything like that. It's in reference to "trade credit accounts". Let me explain how those things work, and I'll use my company as an example.

Ok, so when it comes to other companies, we do many many individual transactions per day. Each of these transactions are pretty small, but they build up to big numbers over the course of a month, 6 figures easily.

So, rather than paying for each and every transaction as we get them, we instead pay them in bulk every 30 days(30 days behind the actual month being paid, called Net 60).

When a company wants to do business with us, they will ask us for our DUNS number. I really didn't know why until this thread, but the reason they do is to check my companies credibility. Because they don't want to do 6 figures worth of business with us, only to end up being stiffed. Thus the DUNS number gives my company credibility and the other company can be at ease in doing business with us in this manner(common practice in my industry), because there have been a few companies who have screwed people over, we've been screwed by such people. They end up going bankrupt while owing you thousands and thousands of dollars.

And that is basically the entire purpose of the DUNS number. To open accounts on credit with businesses. It doesn't mean they are doing "business" for profit directly, it means they have a need to make business transactions on credit. Like running a tab at a bar. You can give your CC, but if you are a regular and known, then you can probably get it on your name alone(credibility).

And publicly you can only see particular information for free.

True, but the information is available and the kind of information that would be there is also available. Gotta pay for the service somehow.

I was never claiming you had bad intentions. I admit the op was incorrect in the assumption. But there is still something incorrect about the way they handle 'business'.

Oh there are many legit complaints, but this isn't one of them. Take regulations for example. The big companies push for regulations. Meanwhile, they give off the public image they don't, because it's "going to hurt them". Yet the truth of the matter is the big company can easily take the extra costs. The reason they push for them is because the smaller competition can't handle the costs. Thus while they end up spending a little money, in the end they increase things because they end up with a bigger customer base as their competition goes under. Then in a few years, they get the regulations relaxed once they have much less competition.

If you want to talk about how they game the system, I can do that all day. Take the general welfare clause, that is all part of the "game", but it's a manipulation of the constitution.

So the OPs opinion aside, names aside. The fact these individuals do business under a corporate entity entitles them corporate protection as they were doing business as the entity and not themselves. Furthermore the government shouldn't require a credit rating. Nor should these individuals even be conducting business.

But they don't. The government is way above any corporation in that manner. But again, the real money making is in the contracts that are given to private companies. Ask someone in the military about contractors and how badly they are overpaid and so forth. It pisses people in the military off.

And you surely aren't looking at tiny office budgets that are basically nothing, you are looking at billions and billions of dollars.

That is the true constitutional mentality. We do not elect these people do do business in the economy. Their business is amongst each eother ensuring our rights are kept so that WE may do business.

But what this thread is looking at isn't the business. The D&B number has nothing to do with the business of DC. It's done in contracts that are added to bills, earmarks and those kinds of things. But even with earmarks they pretty much just make a pie and take the money, and then they all take a piece of the pie and use it all up. And in doing so, they throw money at companies and things in their local areas.

You don't need all these double meanings to things or whatever to see the scam of it all. It's all done in the open. No, it's not constitutional and it's the general welfare clause loophole that enables them to do it.

The general welfare clause is in Article 1, Section 8. It says that congress has the power to "provide the general welfare". And so all this money being passed around is being done in the name of "the general welfare". All they have to do is claim it is for the "good of the people" and it's "ok".

But the general welfare is mentioned 2 times in the constitution. The other time is in the preamble. The preamble defines the purpose of the constitution, and it says part of the purpose of the constitution is to "promote the general welfare". Well the part of the constitution that is to "promote the general welfare" are the amendments. And article 1, section 8 is the part of constitution that gives congress the power to uphold the amendments. Because congress is only allowed to do the specific jobs and powers listed as per the 10th amendment.

Because what is needed to promote the general welfare may change in time, you can add to the amendments. Take the civil rights movement of the 60's. It was the general welfare clause that gave the federal government the power to go in and make sure people were allowed to vote. That is the proper job of the federal government.

What about an issue like healthcare? Well under the general welfare clause loophole, they only give special rights to special people, thus the rise of special interest groups and people wanting to be the "middle man". So you get all these special programs and contracts and so on.

Now, the proper and constitutional way to handle the issue is to pass an amendment. By default and design it automatically would apply to everyone equally. It's either universal or nothing. Everyone is treated equally no matter what when it's added as an amendment. But it is hard to pass amendments because it takes 2/3rds majority and the states have to ratify it and so on. So it has to be something people actually want, and overwhelming majority. I'd be against such an amendment, but that is the proper and constitutional way to handle the issue should that be what the people decide.

There are plenty of legitimate things that go on that can be shown, proven and so forth. But it really doesn't matter if the people do not hold the politicians responsible. The people have no clue how this stuff works, and the only way to fix that is to educate them on the real stuff. All this stuff can be shown and proven to anyone who takes the time and effort to learn it.

I haven't even gotten into the 2 party fallacy. What do you get when you combine the government the democrats want with the government the republicans want? Soviet Union. And if you notice, all they ever do is add their stuff, they never get rid of a program that the other side puts in, they only ever increase the funding. Did Obama get rid of the programs GWB put in? Nope, and he isn't going to either.

So much real stuff, the D&B number or to think they are acting as a corporations is at best a distraction from the real stuff. Stack the false accusations on the 1 person who actually addresses and says these kinds of things and points them out, and yep I'm going to get pretty vocal.

reply to post by badmedia


"Do you know how fractional banking works? I don't know what you know, but if you are unsure about that, then I can explain it. Banks are by law allowed to create money. The are allowed to loan out(create basically) more money than they actually have. And not just a little, 90%.

So if you go and you put $1000 in savings, the bank can turn around and loan out $9000(at interest). So, they basically just made $8000 on your $1000, not counting the interest. People think the bank is just going to get the interest they collect, but such is far from the truth."

I know this reply is somewhat off-topic however I would like to clarify what I understand to be inaccurate information in the statement above. This is by no means the first time I have seen this explanation on the internet and it is certainly not an attack on your intelligence. I do believe corrupt international bankers are a major cause for the woes of the world we live in today. Notwithstanding this point, if we are to be taken seriously in our efforts to change the way things work we should certainly strive to use only facts.

To my knowledge, banks don’t create money out of thin air in exactly the way you describe and they generally cannot make loans for amounts exceeding their total customer deposits (Checking & Savings Accts., MMA’s & CD’s ). The fractional reserve part is not that banks can loan out multiple amounts of what you deposit; it is that they are only required to keep a percentage of what you deposit in reserve (cash and highly liquid securities) for customer withdrawals. They could possibly use 90% of their customers’ deposits to invest in business loans, real estate loans and long-term securities, but that would depend on their capital requirement (amount of shareholder equity). What they really do is use/invest your dollars/deposits to hopefully make a higher return than the amount they have to pay you for its use. (i.e. arbitrage). Now where the “creating money out of thin air” process really comes from is that fractional reserve banking inherently can lead to a money multiplier effect as the customer deposit, bank investment/loan process continues on down the road for a piece. Also I suppose that people can look at the bank being able to leverage themselves by approximately 90% and using other peoples money as kind of creating money out of nothing (but again they are paying for the use of it). Keep in mind that in the world of business bank customers are very often depositors and borrowers at the same bank.

Again, the global money/banking system is at the very root of so many of our past and present problems (the law society is right there with them), but let’s make sure the fight to reform the system maintains credible narratives based on factual foundations.

If my understanding turns out to be wrong, then I will certainly give you an apology and stand corrected. I did however pull up the wiki link below as I was typing this and appears to generally match up with my statement.

Link: en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by badmedia
reply to post by Chevalerous

 

Actually, the handling of money is a job that is specifically designated for congress to handle. This is in Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution.

www.usconstitution.net...

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

The bank stuff didn't start happening until 1913. And that was when Congress gave up that power to the Federal Reserve. To which all currency is then created from debt.

No need to find any "double meanings", the truth is right there plain as day. Most people just can't understand it.

Do you know how fractional banking works? I don't know what you know, but if you are unsure about that, then I can explain it. Banks are by law allowed to create money. The are allowed to loan out(create basically) more money than they actually have. And not just a little, 90%.

So if you go and you put $1000 in savings, the bank can turn around and loan out $9000(at interest). So, they basically just made $8000 on your $1000, not counting the interest. People think the bank is just going to get the interest they collect, but such is far from the truth.

And it's 100% legal for them to do. If you or I did that, it would be counterfeiting. But this element of society is allowed to do it legally.

In the past if people heard that a bank did such, that is what caused bank runs. But they just went ahead and legalized it completely and came up with a "reserve bank".

Lets say in the entire world there exists $100, and for a market there are only 10 apples. You have $10 of the wealth. Supply and demand says that each apple has a value of $10. So now in comes a bank, creates another $100. Now supply and demand says each apple has a value of $20. Well now you can't even afford 1 apple, and nobody touched your wallet. You just had half your purchasing power/wealth stolen from you.

And this is what banks do every day legally. It's a constant transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich. Because guess who gets that newly created $100? The big corporations. They get the loans, and then they buy stuff up. Including the labor they pay(trickle down economics).

As such, through only economic means the banks are able to decide who and what succeeds. Who gets the new money and so on.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg, we haven't included interest. Because they have to pay back the bank not just $100, but $105. But guess what? The extra $5 they have to pay back is never created. Make 11 of those loans, and everything is now owed to the bank - even the original $100. There is more debt than money exists. It is IMPOSSIBLE for the debt to be paid off.

So they keep creating new money to cover the interest. And that is what has been going on really. If they do not create new money, then the economy tanks as people go bankrupt. Which is fine for the banks, because then they get the property and everything of value, and then they will just turn around and resell it and do it again. But if you keep creating money, then eventually the money becomes worthless. The prices keep going up(remember the apple doubled in price) to the point where it takes a wheel barrel of cash to buy a loaf of bread. So eventually it has to stop because the interest payments get to be impossible to pay and then bankruptcy sets in.

So it's a constant transfer of wealth and it turns people into slaves. There is no double meanings in it, it's straight forward, 100% transparent and 100% legal. Because the people simply do not understand the scam of it all.

It's stuff like this that really matters.

Well! You unfortunately seem to get stuck with a narrow-minded view regarding conspiracies in general?

This isn't about the fine gentleman R.P anymore and you shouldn't be hung up on that even if the unfortunate OP actually said so. Please try to be the better person and look beyond that for a moment please!

This isn't about defending or trashing your political guy or bickering partisan politics or Divide et Impera tactics from the OP - that wasn't his intention - we look for clues to WHY Governments are incorporated in many parts of the world.

In my point of view, Governments should not be corporations nor should the corporations be able to run Governments - BECAUSE THAT IS FASCISM!

This isn't a thread about Right vs Left, or politics in general - we are looking for other more important answers here!

But you unfortunately don't seem to get that? - you just keep going on about the OP's unfortunate choice of using your political guy in an example to ask the question IF these people are incorporated, and if so, why are these public people incorporated? - and if you just keep bickering about your favourite political guy - you're missing the point & greater picture and issues here! - this isn't a thread about Right vs Left! or trashing a political figure!

Nevertheless! I thought is was funny that you were trying to give me a very simplified lesson about fractional banking, supply & demand and Inflation affected apples! - that was just hilarious!

It was very cute! and I will give you a star for that, because I like your laxed somewhat pedagogic writing style & simplified explaination about fruit and Inflation damaged apples in general!

Thanks for the effort though! it was sweet of you!


You know! I can also be thick headed at times, like some other people on this thread, but please try to forget about the fine gentleman Ron Paul for a moment - and help us instead to find the answers and evidences we seek & need about worldwide Corrupted, Incorporated, Governments and their henchmen.

PLEASE! help us in our quest to show that International Banks own our Governments in many parts of the world, instead of getting stuck on some Petit problem with un-intentional badly chosen OP about R.P!

I like your R.P - he seems to be a fine gentleman! we are not out to get him I promise! - with all respect!

Some of us are trying to solve a much more complicated problem here - we like to expand our knowledge about the connection between our incorporated Governments and their relationship with International banksters. some of us feel uncomfortable knowing that public offices and Governments are controlled and can be bought by International Banks & Corporations - because that my friend, is the defintion of Corporated Fascism!

And please forgive this European for his poor English, since I'm not a native English speaking person!

My poor English writing skills may have wrongly given you the impression that I'm twelve years old, because I write as one lol!

Peace! and since I discovered that you are a lady - I'll throw in some hugs & kisses as well!


[edit on 7-3-2010 by Chevalerous]

reply to post by badmedia


Badmedia, you obviously have the smarts and know how to really sink your teeth into this one. I know if you looked at it differently we could get to the bottom of it. I for one see some serious talent being directed at defending your favorite guy. When he doesn't even need it. Everybody loves the guy.

There are other sites on the internet that have a very different view of him and try to purposely slander him. That's not what we're doing. Anyway I don't care if your the Messiah here on earth, if your in politics, your name is going to get slandered somewhere. Do you think Ron Paul cares? No way, he knows the deal.

Focus your efforts where we can actually come up with some answers badmedia and for the love of pete, we all like Ron Paul. The opening post is the opening post, big deal. I believe you, me and everyone else has the wherewithal to see what needs to be looked into here. Ron Paul does not need anyone to defend him. Do you think he got where he is by being thin skinned?

Has anyone ever seen their favorite political figure portrayed in a less than flattering way? You bet. It doesn't matter. At this point in the thread we are way past Ron Paul now.

reply to post by InterestingRide


Hi, but you are forgetting that the loans themselves become an assets which can be lended against. That is where/how you get into increases beyond 100%.

Which is why all those "toxic assets" killed the banks. They say "Asset A" is worth $100, so they lend against that asset as if it's value is $100, and then it turns out Asset A is only worth $10, and suddenly they are unable to meet their requirements.

So when that happened, suddenly the banks went bankrupt and didn't have enough money to cover their debts. The banks that were bailed out were given enough money to cover that difference, while the banks that were not bailed out when bankrupt because they were unable to meet their requirements once the "toxic assets" true value was determined.

So does the bank literally take the $1000 and turn it into $9000 off the bat? No, not exactly. But that is effectively what they are doing, and the effects of that process are exactly as I described, as well as teh fact that the interest money itself is never created and thus it is impossible to get out of debt.

If the banks had done as you say and if that were true, they wouldn't have all went bankrupt or needed to be bailed out. They would have been solvent and within the required reserves.

It is economic slavery. If you want to get into the actual laws and specific process of it all then we can. I don't find many people that are actually up for such, and so I usually stick with the general explanation so that people can at least see what it does.




[edit on 3/7/2010 by badmedia]

reply to post by Chevalerous


reply to post by jackflap


Gonna hit 2 birds with 1 stone on this one.

The topic of this thread, and the entire OP is directed specifically at Ron Paul. Every paragraph in the OP mentions "Ron Paul", along with all the false accusations.

The ONLY paragraph in the OP that does not mention Ron Paul, does not make accusations against Ron Paul or isn't directed solely at that is the paragraph that says "discuss the above", and the "above" is about Ron Paul.

If you want to discuss these topics without the "Ron Paul" factor, then I will be more than happy to do such. But if you think I am going to ignore what the OP has done, then you are in for disappointment.

If the topic was not about Ron Paul, then Ron Paul would not be mentioned in every paragraph and the title along with false accusations. I did not write the post, I did not set the direction of the thread and I'm not going to entertain the idea that I am the one in error because I won't overlook those things.

Am I more inclined to spend time on the topic itself because Ron Paul is being attacked in it falsely? Yes. But that is besides the point.

Why? Because I care and because I can.

[edit on 3/7/2010 by badmedia]

reply to post by badmedia


That is awesome badmedia. I know once we take the political blinders off and look at what is going on from an investigative perspective, we can get somewhere. Look, I see my favorite political figure bashed all the time. It doesn't bother me whether people like Jesus or not. I know what I know, and I know He isn't bothered about what others think of Him as well. He doesn't need me defending Him either.

That's just an example. It's just meant to show you that I know what you mean.