Oh, you didn’t think I meant that this would apply TO me? I’m sorry for the confusion.
Buffett’s Northern Powergrid Holdings Co. is working with Siemens AG (SIE) to test a so-called smart grid that has the ability to control when consumer appliances will be used in the home.
How does that sound to you? Do you remember hearing about this when you “agreed” to have your smart meter?
Utilities worldwide are already using smart meters to collect data on customer behavior, and some notify consumers about optimum times to use power. The 54 million-pound ($85 million) trial by Buffett’s U.K.-based system goes a step further. It gives people a choice, allowing them to either use appliances themselves at optimum times, or to let the system decide that for them.
Honey, You didn’t flush the toilet without calling again did you? Because I think the nice men from the government are here about that.
lol, they always do the same stuff. Make it appear voluntary and “helpful”, then they transition it into mandatory and controlled and well, at some point, you will have to go down the urine smelling government office and beg them to let you use your own stuff. But it’s because they are trying to help.
“Customers can work with us to use their energy in a different fashion, by a range of techniques,” said Ian Lloyd, head of network technology research at Buffett’s Northern Powergrid Holdings Co. The program encourages people to use power in a way that “complements the running of the distribution network.”
See, never force, it’s voluntary. Well, until we “just can’t afford” to do that anymore and we need, “minimum requirements that everyone must follow”. So minimum, “nobody could object to these “REASONABLE minimums”. And then they continue to morph and morph and then, you have the same systems they have now in so many other areas. It is ALWAYS THE SAME SYSTEM.
Now that he doesn’t have to get elected, Al Gore is free to be himself. I think the look works on him.
It is all a game to them. Because the rules only apply to you and me, the plebes, get it? They tell us what we can do. And they always use the same creeping “voluntary” to minimum mandatory, to maximum control system. Smart meters, they’re what’s for dinner.
That’s all for now my brainwashed Brethren. Now go tell someone about the truth about the law and don’t be down, live in the light.
Frank, are you saying you don’t think we live in the greatest cleanest fish tank in history? Well love it or leave it baby.
We are all creatures of our surroundings. Learning how to question the most fundamental things is not easy. Being a good lawyer means making someone Prove their case. And if you’re the one making a case, well you better be damned sure you can actually PROVE your ENTIRE case. Otherwise you can get caught with your pants down.
They kept raising the dues so I just let mine expire.
Your honor I object to the defense exhibit being shown to the jury without the necessary expert testimony to understand it.
Proof of these FACTS in a coherent way should be part of the basic case that is made available to everyone UP FRONT. But instead the person acting rationally and merely asking for basic facts and information is presented as a kook. This strange situation is not an accident. It is a creation of the power structure itself. And certainly you can see why they would want to create a climate where asking fundamental questions is something done only by “kooks”and “conspiracy theorists”.
This technique of making someone appear to be a kook or labeling them a “conspiracy theorist” for merely asking questions is just a variation of the same PR trick that politicians use when asked whether they have done such and such or said such and such, or met with so and so, when the underlying issue would be very damaging to them. They often pull out the “I’m not going to dignify that question with a response.” Do you see the similarity?
The man is a liar. He can’t deny the fact being asked about without being caught, and he can’t offer you facts to prove what he wants you to believe, because it is impossible to have facts to prove something happened when IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. Can you have made up information? Of course, but you can’t have a FACT. Facts can be checked because they represent something that actually exists or existed. If what he wants you to believe, didn’t actually happen, then all he can hope to do is create an impression that it did, by innuendo. He can’t have facts. Do you see?
That is an excellent question. I appreciate you asking it. I believe the American people are entitled to an answer to that question. That said, I believe I have already answered that question. Next question.
So when asked, the politician uses a public relations trick to give the impression he is taking the high road to deflect FROM the facts. He acts as though giving any substantive response would be below him because the question ITSELF is absurd. And what are people who ask obviously silly or absurd questions if not fools? Poof, the attention is refocused away from the issue and the facts to the PERSON asking the question.
This type of trick answer is just a different version of the same deflection that occurs when they “ignore” the “conspiracy kooks”. They can’t produce basic facts to substantiate the story they have cooked up, so they act as though only a fool or a nut would even ask for such facts. The urge to conform and be part of the crowd is extremely strong in people. People want to be accepted. They are not comfortable feeling they are “not accepted”. Being seen as a kook or a nut is a strong disincentive. So the system works amazingly well.
They have used yet another PR technique to brainwash the people in this country about what selfless geniuses our “founding fathers” were. Many people can’t even think about those “great men” with any objectivity. In fact many get angry and have an emotional response to what is nothing more than asking questions about them. You’re “questioning Amuurica” and that is not allowed. Love it or leave it. Get it?
I have reproduced some of Hamilton’s private diary here to bring the convention “alive”: Holy crap did you see what Kim had on? You could see right down her top. Wow, that is some rack. Okay, let’s get back to work guys. Hey, George who’s a guy gotta bl** around here to get some coffee?
I think one of the reasons for this is that those wig wearing power grabbers seem so distant and disconnected from us. They wore knickers and wrote on paper with a quill. They don’t look like anything we can RELATE to. People have a hard time seeing them as just men. No different than you or me, or Barack Obama.
Would you hold in the same high esteem, some bogus bill that Pete Sessions and Harry Reid produced? I doubt it. You can relate to them. You know they are JOKES. But they are government men just like the political operators who founded our “country”. They just had different systems to operate in. The people and their type ARE THE SAME.
Of course I support Sharia. I believe it is everyone’s right.
Let me ask you. Do you honesty think that if Bill Clinton or Mitt Romney had been born in Iran that they would profess to believe what they profess to believe? Of course not. They would rage against the great satan, be on one side or the other of the whole jihad deal and be all for Sharia law. Politicians are the same throughout time. They are self seeking people who want power and seek to use the government’s authority to use force as THEIR means to achieve their own goals. THAT is the reality. Not the imaginary fairy tale you have in your head.
Think about it. Even the very name “founding fathers” sounds important and it piggy backs on the warm and trusting association that is already there for the term. What if we called them the “original plotters”? Leaves a pretty different impression. But isn’t it just as accurate a combination of words? Yes. They were plotting to create a political entity that they would benefit from were they not?
Does that mean that they ALONE would benefit? Of course not, but benefiting their own interests was PART OF THEIR MOTIVATION. We know that. Every one who plotted to create this “country” believed they would benefit from its creation. That we can KNOW.
WE HAVE BEEN TOLD by those who have come after them in GOVERNMENT that the original plotters BELIEVED that posterity would benefit and that IT HAS IN FACT BENEFITED. But we don’t KNOW that. They could have been acting quite selfishly, and, we don’t have a control “country” to which we can compare the results. But we can be damned sure they didn’t support something they thought would be bad for THEM personally. That is fundamental human nature.
No no it’s no trouble. She can just stay in my room tonight until her friend gets here. I’m happy to do it.
The idea that they did it for the “good of mankind” etc. may or may not have ANY validity. They could have been simply clever plotters. Do you see that being told your whole life that they WERE these selfless geniuses doing it for posterity etc. immediately places you into a mindset. By being in a mindset you see certain things. I want to show you something. Take 10 seconds to look around the room and identify as many blue items as you can right now. Did you do it? Well go do it then before you go on. Now tell me, how many green items can you identify?
See, the mindset is key. Making people assume that our founding fathers, and really EVERY SINGLE GOVERNMENT FIGURE they ever want to put forward, were acting in this selfless way COULD just be a laughable load of crap that is put in your head to benefit the subsequent government operatives. It makes people easily and naturally accept what they are told about what the founders wrought.
They use this same technique for all murdering meglomaniacs they like to refer to as “leaders” throughout history. They are lionized and shown as “helping whole nations”, they make sure that people have a laughably romanticized view of this type of psychopath. Some images of these people move way beyond romanticized going “full retard” as they say. My point is that the original plotters COULD be nothing like what you IMAGINE. YOU HAVEN’T LOOKED INTO THAT POSSIBILITY.
Okay okay you got me, I did have sex with that woman. But I didn’t enjoy it.
Though not a founding father, Lincoln is the most obvious historical figure to benefit from this trick. It is essential that the people see him as a wise and moral man etc. in order to PROMOTE the idea that the federal government is a good thing. That really is laughable to me. He was certainly one of the biggest and most outrageous liars to ever hold the office. The types of lies he would tell might make Bill Clinton or George H. Bush blush. But because we are TOLD he was a certain kind of person with certain motivations etc. therefore he is thought of that way and his actions are seen in a light to support that concept. And because he wore a giant stove top hat and had a weird beard, he seems quite distant once again.
If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. — A.LIncoln. The great emancipator..
Sausage fest? what? no no dude, c’mon over this party is kickin.
Do you see how absurd his reputation is in light of the facts? He “freed” people in areas he didn’t control. Is that really freeing anyone? Is it “heroic”? no. it is a laughable PR gimmick, nothing more. Yet he is PROMOTED, no different than a rave party is promoted, as a certain type of man and you accept that idea without looking into it BECAUSE IT IS SO FUNDAMENTAL to accepting the control they want you to GIVE them.
My point is not to plead my case about Lincoln being the worst murdering freedom destroying president ever, though he clearly was, my point is that the same type of slant is embedded in your head about the “founding fathers” and you at least need to do some OBJECTIVE investigation into the area to see if the current view you have is justified or if it is just a fairy tale.
Oh yeah, now I see it. You’re right. I am a hypocrite.
My belief is that even just 15 minutes worth of objective investigation with a jaundiced eye instead of the rose colored glasses you have had strapped to you head, will show you that a fairy tale was intentionally placed into your mind about our “founding”.
That meme is drilled into everyone’s heads 24/7 and it is so deep virtually nobody questions it. Think about this. The legislation that creates Obamacare is called the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”. That SOUNDS great. But is it? No it is crap. How will that legislative p.o.s. be “perceived in 200 years? Well that depends on who “succeeds” and who gets to write the history books. Get it?
How do we KNOW the holy “constitutional convention” and the “legislation” that came out of it was any different than the Obamacare example I just gave you? Oh, well, we were told by the people who benefited from it of course. How is that any different than reading Nancy Pelosi’s Memoirs, “Dreams for a Better World, the Creation of the Affordable Care Act”? it isn’t.
They do it for our own good you know.
The only actual difference is that I made up Pelosi’s book and one is obvious bs to you and the other is not. How do you know what you have thought about the constitutional convention, the constitution that came out of it and the holy founding fathers, is any different than what I just described about Obummercare? You don’t. You have simply accepted what you WERE TOLD about the constitutional convention and those men based upon the records THEY gave you and what the people who want you to believe that version TOLD YOU.
They give the impression that the founding fathers are “fully vetted” in modern history because they make a big deal out of some personal scandal details. I laugh at such a transparent and juvenile attempt to deflect. But it WORKS on the people. The reality is that the only “scandals” that are “allowed” in main stream history surrounding any founding fathers are strictly limited to personal issues, such as affairs, personal finances, etc. We’ve all heard about Jefferson’s love child etc. But how many of you knew that Patrick Henry was opposed to the constitution because he “smelled a rat in Philadelphia”? Wonder why you didn’t know that? Hmmm?
I agree, it is outrageous that he doesn’t have a choice about the glove color they use. I’ll bring that up at the next meeting.
The important issues are never discussed, because the power structure that controls it all doesn’t want them discussed. They need people mindlessly believing the fairy tale about what the country is. That way the people are controlled. People actually voluntarily die to keep the power structure in place.
Think about that. The people are convinced that a government, which claims a right to tax every cent you make at whatever rate they choose, is this beneficent thing that “keeps them free”. The people are so convinced of this fantasy that they actually fight and die to maintain it. And those same people have not spent even 15 stinking minutes actually investigating and questioning the facts surrounding the fundamental concept for which they are ready to die. And if you suggest otherwise, they attack you as a kook or an “America hater”.
For me the objective mental state that the masses live in is as close to insanity as you can get. They actually fight and die to protect and defend the very power structure that imprisons and steals from them, and they attack anyone who even asks them questions about the situation. That is the power of early and often brainwashing.
I hope you at least now see that perhaps you do not see what you thought you did see. Lol. Next time I want to make “the case for the defense” when it comes to the constitutional convention. I want to show the other side of the they did it for us and it produced so much freedom story. Give you some information and some facts and have you look at them in a new light. A light outside the fishbowl you’ve been mentally swimming in for so long. That water….is disgusting dude, you need to change it. lol
In the meantime, remember this piece of advice.
Whatever they TELL you… is the only thing you can be sure ISN’T the truth. — Legalman
That’s all for now. Be well my brainwashed Brethren. Don’t be down, live in the light.
As for the lawyer/individual who brought the case and won it to the jury? Well he was coincidentally disbarred. Oh and the case findings? they were “nullified” on procedural grounds because well, “that’s the law”. And now of course, any lawyer who attempts to cite the case, well, they too face sanctions and possible disbarment by the “licensing” system the government runs that “allows” them to operate in the “legal system” the government runs. Remember, it is all just “following the law”. What, do you not “support law and order”? You probably hate kittens too then.
So what in the world could the case have stood for that made the system react so violently? Simple. It exposed the truth about the banking system in a simple and straightforward way that allowed anyone to understand the fraud that it is.
And, just as importantly, it showed how the people could defend themselves.
Before I tell you about “The Credit River Case” I want to make sure you understand the legal issue. In order to have a contract even the NSA admits you need the following. At common law, the elements of a contract are offer, acceptance, intention to create legal relations, and consideration.
This just means the parties have to discuss terms, come to agreement on the terms and then we both have to be OBLIGATED to exchange something of value. The something of value is called “consideration” in the law. Here, from the same NSA link, is what they say about that.
Consideration is something of value given by a promissor to a promisee in exchange for something of value given by a promisee to a promissor. Typically, the thing of value is a payment, although it may be an act, or forbearance to act, when one is privileged to do so, such as an adult refraining from smoking. This thing of value or forbearance from some legal right is considered to be a legal detriment. In the exchange of legal detriments, a bargain is created.
It’s so beautiful isn’t it? Here is an excellent example of a legally binding contract where it can be difficult to determine whether the “consideration” was valid, and what the exact terms were.
So not only do we have to agree to the exchange, but you have to each exchange something of value that is considered a “legal detriment”. It must be real. If you pay me with counterfeit money, well, the contract “fails for lack of consideration”, in legal terminology. You “gave me” something that “was not real and not what we discussed” so I didn’t get the “benefit of the bargain” That is really all contract law is, a formal discussion of agreements between people.
So now with that legal understanding, let’s look at the “Credit River Case”. I encourage you to go look at all of the paperwork yourself if you are interested go to page and search the link for credit river docs mid page.
The case is straightforward. The Bank/Plaintiff was trying to foreclose, and the property owner/Defendant was defending the action claiming that there was no valid consideration given by the bank under the contract because it simply created the “money” that it “gave” by making a bookkeeping entry. Here is how the court described it.
Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff (Bank) and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf. Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession …by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed….
Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged failure of the consideration for the Mortgage Deed and alleged that the Sheriff’s sale passed no title to plaintiff.
The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.
Mr. Morgan (the Bank’s only witness) admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this.
“Owned”, hmmm, exactly what did they use to buy it with again? I’m a bit unclear on that.
So a straightforward simple case with very straightforward allegations. The case was tried to a jury. They found against the bank. Basically finding that the bank WAS NOT ENTITLED TO POSSESSION because it hadn’t given ANY CONSIDERATION when it made the mortgage!!
Here is the short memorandum opinion that the court entered into the record with the order after the trial. The order the powers that be did everything they could to prevent the judge from entering.
MEMORANDUM The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve. Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry.That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it.Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found that there was no consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing….
Plaintiff’s (Bank’s) act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful right can be built….
Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit. No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury.
Banker’s are hardly man’s best friend.
And that is the case and the opinion that quite literally set off a sh**storm. Why? Because it very simply explained the fraud that is Banking. And when given the undisputed facts, the jury had quite RIGHTLY found that there is no actual consideration given by the Bank because the bank just creates the money out of thin air. It doesn’t actually LEND MONEY IT HAS so the contract is not valid!
Do you see how dangerous this case is? Under no circumstances can these ideas become known or discussed openly as anything even POSSIBLY legitimate. It Had to be “erased” and found to be “kookery”.
Think of the implications otherwise. A jury of regular people had been told the truth about what banks clearly do EVERYDAY and they saw that it is nothing but fraud. Nobody has agreed to allow banks to create money out of thin air. The mortgages and other loans the bank’s make do not have any actual consideration!
Most people in the country assume that when someone borrows money from a bank that the bank is actually lending you some of the money that it has on deposit. But that is just not true under the fractional reserve system we have. And if people understood this undeniable fact, as Henry Ford said, there would be a revolution overnight. And so those in charge make sure nobody does find out.
“The process by which money is created is so simple the mind is repelled.”—John Kenneth Galbraith
The law quite literally gives a protected class of private individuals, “central bankers”, (and their facilitators) the right to create money out of thin air, and then to “lend out” the made up money and collect interest on it. You have to work. They do not.
An honest thief, Josiah Stamp
“The bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take away from them the power to create money and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create money.” — Josiah Stamp Former Director of the Bank of England
The poor soon to be dead judge in this case clearly was a man of principle. He believed the big lie he had been told about our country and the founding documents and our supposed “freedom”. He believed the system was what he had been taught. He was sadly mistaken and apparently paid for that mistake with his life in the form of a fishing accident.
The modern banker plying his craft.
There are two basic types of control systems. Overt systems, meaning openly with force or threats, and covert systems, enforced, by way of disguise or in secret. In an OVERT system of control, the people CAN SEE the force used to keep them down, like in North Korea. Therefore they KNOW that the legal system is rigged against them. In a covert system the people are tricked into imagining they are in control and that therefore the legal system is “fair”. That is the key difference.
Our system is a covert system. Therefore the ENTIRE system relies upon the people believing that they are in charge of the system, that the system works for them and that it is fair.
One of the most difficult concepts for people to grasp and accept is that the legal system is not there to dispense justice. It is there to control you under the GUISE that it is there to dispense justice.
The only obstacle that any covert system faces, such as ours, is making sure the people don’t find out the TRUTH about the system. Like the truth that this case exposes. And that is why so much time and money is spent brainwashing people very early on in government schools under government curriculum about justice and liberty and pledges of allegiance, etc. etc. And that is why the media tells us nonstop about how just and wonderful a country we have our whole lives.
So now that you see the reality of the system, let’s recap what happened in this case. The BANK filed the case in the court. The BANK looked to the Court to take the property. The bank did not complain it didn’t get a fair trial. The bank did not complain it was not allowed to put on its evidence. The evidence used by the jury was the BANK’S own witness’ admissions. The facts of this case were not in dispute!
And what was the result of all this after the jury found against the bank? The bank ended up winning “later” on procedural grounds after the judge ended up dead, and the lawyer ended up disbarred. Do you see the real system yet?
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when I see people who are so deluded. They actually think that they have to WAIT for 9 guys and gals to GIVE them their RIGHTS.
What more does it take for you to see that the Constitution prevents NOTHING! It is not part of the solution, it is part of the problem. Continuously talking about “getting back to it” and “enforcing it” and “its principles and limitations” just drains off energy that could be used to create REAL change.
If the constitution or the system actually did anything that people imagine, then outcomes like THIS could never happen. And if they did, the people would know about them and those responsible would have been brought to justice. But none of THAT ACTUALLY happened because that is not what the system ACTUALLY does.
The system is there to control you, but its success depends entirely on you never finding this fact out.
P.S. Can you help a brother out? It’s ALL about the “LIKES”. Don’t hate the playa, hate the game. If you like my site then take a second and hit the LIKE button! Then SHARE it. You can do it. I have faith in you. It is much appreciated.
The news on this entire Ebola thing just makes no sense. I stick with my original statement. When the senior security apparatus of the STATE and the leaders of the STATE start getting sick and dying, then I will start thinking there is something to be concerned about. Until then, I’m not buying it. Ebola Update: I have done earlier posts than this last one so if you want to see them just search Ebola under the categories.
A lot of weird inconsistencies on this Ebola thing. Looks like the nurses who “got ebola” are doing pretty well. Whew, that was a close call.
If you want to catch up on some previous episodes of this “ebola show” here’s an article that show’s the other nurse is also fine.
Then there is this story with the cops putting their stuff in a TRASH CAN on the street?! lol you can’t make this stuff up.
And what about this? go to paragraph 7 on the link. IF THIS is true, why is everyone soooo worried? They have something that works. Well whatever is happening, I know I can trust the government to be looking out for me.
Relax, he’s a Inspector from the Ministry of Safety.
Licensing and Regulation update:
Despite how hard they try, the government never seems to get it right, yet there is never any actual punishment for those involved. So strange.
I want to show you that almost every type of oversight the government does under the guise of “protecting you”, is a fraud. It isn’t there to protect you. It is there to grow government in order to control you. It is, in fact, just a crappy version of anything you might get from the private sector. My proof is simple and undeniable, Once you see it, you won’t be able to UNSEE it. It is hidden in plain sight. That is the preferred method of the “QUO”.
First let’s go over the basics of what I am talking about. In this post I will concentrate mostly on the ability of people to work and earn a living. But the concept applies to all of the QUO’s handywork in controlling us.
Here are some of the methods they employ.
Licensing, Regulation, Certification, Accreditation, Inspection, Permits, Reviews, Oversight panels, Committees in charge, Departments, Chief investigators. This may not be a comprehensive list, but it includes the bulk of the ways that the QUO uses government to control us.
I maintain that everyone is AT BEST, one degree removed from any of these items. And most people are not even that removed. They are ENGULFED.
Is this the line to get a permit to go to the bathroom?
Think about it, you have to have a license to open a business. A license to cut hair, manicure nails and even give a massage! You have to be licensed to be a plumber, an electrician, a lawyer, a doctor, an engineer. To drive a car, to be a court reporter, to run a towing company, to give financial advice. I could go on and on.
Products are licensed, and approved and certified and regulated as well. They are controlled and doled out only if the government allows it. Say you’re dying and you want to just stay high on LSD all day because, well, because YOU JUST WANT TO. No no no, you’re not allowed. Why? Because your master the government said so. It is absurd. Yet people accept it as “the law”.
The schools you go to have to be accredited to then GET your license. That means they control who can teach (certified), in a school or the school loses its accreditation. The people then have to do yearly updates to maintain their license. Pay a fee to a board to oversee them. The people are then subject to “rules” and fake investigations as a result.
If you do work inside your house you need their PERMISSION, you need a “permit”. Like you’re a child. What you are, in reality, is their SUBJECT. They are our rulers They are the mighty QUO. Get it?
All of this is enforced by a series of panels and boards and committees with obscure rules.
Next. Please state your name and tell us why you are here. Whoops, just kidding, we’ve already been told what to do in your case. Psyche! Next.
You have basically ZERO control over any of it. They are easily corrupted and there is no independent oversight of them either. The only “oversight” that even exists is conducted by other government officials and committees and boards and panels. It doesn’t ever end.
People are told that these are all necessary for their protection and safety and to be sure that “unqualified” people are not doing the work. OH and to have “uniformity”. Really, well then where is the independent oversight of the overseers to be sure they are “qualified”? It doesn’t exist and it never will.
At least these dogs KNOW they are NOT free and they clearly want out.
The purpose of all of these items is just control. At anytime your way to make a living can be threatened or ruined by the government. That is why these things exist. NO other reason. If you don’t tow the line, well, a “complaint” may get filed. An investigation could occur. You could be ruined. Even if you eventually “win”, you will be broke. People will only remember the charge, not the acquittal. And on and on people.
Why in the world should you have to get a permission slip from a “licensed” doctor from an “accredited” school, to get a “controlled substance” that is “approved” by the government and then dispensed and recorded by a “licensed” pharmacist from an “accredited” school? Why can’t you put whatever you want in your body? You take the risk. Not the government.
Why? Simple, it is not about protecting you. It is about controlling you.
Why can’t you hire someone who just has a lot of experience in filing divorces? Not licensed, not certified, not educated at some “school”. Just someone who knows what they are doing from having learned from someone else who knew what they were doing and then the person just did it themselves? Why? It is a fair question. You could pay them less. You could be apprised of their “qualifications”, you could make your own mind up whether they will work out for you.
Why? Because you are not free. You are a subject of the QUO my friends. Only they get to decide. That way, everyone is subject to their boards and reviews and could at anytime be ruined. Got it?
Well Legalman, the FDA and other agencies do a lot of good! They do? How do you know that? Who TOLD you that? Oh, the government told you that. And the big pharma companies who love the FDA because it makes sure they control the entire game and any competition. Gotcha.
How do I know it’s true? Ummm, because I read it. I wrote it down and then I read it. That’s how. DUUUH. Next question.
How about doctors Legalman, that stuff is really complicated, surely licensing there makes a lot of sense. Really? I’m glad you brought that up. I want to now prove to you that all of these things the government engages in are not there to help you.
If you go to a doctor and he commits malpractice can you sue the state licensing board for your damages? No.
If you have a plumber that screws up your plumbing and floods your house with waste can you sue the licensing board? No.
How about the city that issued the permit? No.
How about when a pilot crashes a plane do the passengers sue the FAA? No It never ends.
I promised you a simple test to show you that the government agencies etc. are not doing what they claim. When something goes wrong with anything they have overseen or approved, they are NOT LEGALLY LIABLE. Product screws you, out of luck. Person screws you. Out of luck. Well what the f… good are they then? Ahh, perhaps now you can answer your own question…. And the truth shall set you free my friend.
You can’t sue any of these agencies and boards etc. etc. for the result of their rules. They are not responsible to YOU or anyone else except…. You guessed it, the government and its other boards and overseers.
All the boards etc. ever do is take the license or certification or accreditation away AFTER the fact. Or maybe fine them and KEEP the money for the government. Wow, a lot of help that is.
Relax, Relax people, the government agents are here they are going to handle this. After many months, they will probably take the contractors license away. And a couple of years from now they may collect a fine for themselves. So…. we good? or what?
In a private setting, if someone “inspects” something and “approves something”, they are LIABLE if they screw up. If a private firm, guarantees something they can be sued if they don’t do their due diligence and people rely on their “seal of approval” etc. The government runs around claiming they are “setting standards” and inspecting and “overseeing licensing” and accreditation, but when any of their stuff fails, well too bad so sad.
THEY can not be sued, let alone made to pay. But they will “get right on it” and “look at their rules” to “make sure this never happens again”. And the poor brainwashed masses say thank your oh great QUO for protecting us. It is sad and funny at the same time.
How about the actual individuals in these agencies, and on these committees, and boards? They are TWICE removed from any possible liability. ZERO. Most never even lose their jobs
Your cover is blown. We must move you to a new department. Thank you for your service.
when stuff happens. They get promoted or moved and get a nice retirement package. AT worse they “get fired” or have to “step down” and they are immediately picked up by the large industries who love the whole arrangement with the QUO because they are part of the QUO and the QUO keeps the competition down. Get it?
Look, the entire claim the government makes to justify the existence of this laughable control over every aspect of your life is that they are there to “make you safer” or better or healthier or on and on. All of these rules supposedly do something like that. So the government is CLAIMING to in effect warrant that the service or product or whatever, meets a certain standard. There is no other thing they even claim t be doing.
But if the people or items or services or whatever, then “don’t meet that standard”, or fail to perform as expected, the agency just washes its hands of the whole thing because YOU CAN’T hold them accountable.
Look this is a federally licensed crew. They followed all the rules here. I don’t think there’s going to be much we can do. Good luck.
Think about it, you hire a “licensed” contractor. Why? Because it sounds like he is more qualified. Why do you think that? Because surely there are some requirements to get licensed. And whoever is licensing that person or industry etc. better be sure that it or he is IN FACT qualified. The entire reason to have the “licensing” as far as the public is concerned is to have confidence in their ability. It is a seal of approval. It is a warranty of merchantability for a purpose in a way.
If a private entity “licenses” or gives some form of a “seal of approval or of qualifications” and the person screws up. That entity gets sued, because it isn’t immune like the government. Get it yet?
There is yet another thing in private business that is similar. It is being “bonded”. And what is the difference between somebody who is bonded versus someone who is licensed, or accredited, or certified etc. by the government? Simple, if the person who is bonded screws up, you look to the bond to pay your damages. There is a BOND to secure performance. Money sitting in a pile that is earmarked to reimburse. It isn’t complicated people.
So when can we get our money back?
If they are just “government approved” well, good luck.
It just can’t be made any simpler people. If the government was there to help the PEOPLE and they were actually going to do something you could rely on, then the governmental entities that made the rules and the people who sat on the boards and commissions would be liable. But they aren’t. What they do is provide people with a false sense that something is being done, when in fact the “solution” provides no REAL protection for you. It only provides for more government.
You can’t “choose not to use” the “approved” or certified version. You can’t affect the qualifications for any of them, they are all done by giant government agencies. And if the rules are violated, YOU get nothing. The Government, might sue or fine the entity, but that money goes to the government, so how does that help you? It doesn’t. It is just another way the government pretends to help you.
With a private system there is a choice. With a private system the ones that don’t do anything fail. With a private system, if the rules are violated you can go after the entity that promotes the system. Get it? This is all you need to know to see what the real POINT of the government systems are. They are a con, a lie. Like virtually all other aspects of government. These systems do not help you. They only control you. They are hidden in plain sight. That is the QUO’s preferred method. And the people are so brainwashed they actually do the work for the QUO on this issue as well. Actively DEMANDING more government
Whoa dude, please tell me you AT LEAST went to a LICENSED barber. I mean, otherwise you may have a problem.
regulation and oversight of more and more industries. Because they think they are getting something (protection) which they are not.
The reality is that people would be MUCH better off with NO oversight at all rather than the government oversight. But Legalman that doesn’t make any sense, surely we’re better off with even a bad version? Really? It makes more sense to give people a FALSE sense of something happening than for them to KNOW that nothing is being done? That makes no sense. If people KNOW that nothing is being done then they can take precautions. They can watch out for themselves, and they will. If they know there is no current oversight then a PRIVATE system may arise, that provides REAL protection. And finally of course, once the government is there, you can’t get rid of it, can’t control it, and it will be abused by the QUO over time. That is why they are always trying to whip up concern about “unregulated”industries. The QUO is always making sure the people “focus on” those rascally “unregulated” industries.
How many is too many? Join the campaign to “Take back the sidewalks”. Regulate dog walking now. Go to thetruthaboutdogwalking.com today.
No my fellow inmates, government oversight and licensing is NEVER the answer. If you think it is, then just let me know which agency is doing a GOOD job and how why we are better off with it as opposed to a private version. It is a pretty simple challenge in light of the scope of government oversight. Good luck with that.
It is always the same game, it just takes many forms. Government is power. Power over you, not for you. Once you really start to see that, then you will be able to start making sense of many many things.
Case closed my friend. Now you see the truth about the licensing and regulation scam, and you will never UNsee it. The Plaintiff rests your honor. “Anything from the defense?” “No defense your honor, but the state moves that Legalman be taken into custody. Under State bar rules, the people are to be kept in the dark at all times about the genuine nature of the proceedings. Legalman is well aware of this.” “Bailiff, take Legalman into custody.”
Update 12-22-14 yet another story. Note how there are no complaints from patients. No allegation of harm. There is a tremendous prejudice against non drug or chemical radiation treatments. How do they attach? With licensing. Go to my fascinating other stuff pages lots of stuff about how they attack doctors with new treatments that are healthy and might work without drugs etc.
Since this whole Ebola thing is clearly not going away for a while, I guess I will wade in yet again. A Czar is born! Yes, we are now in Act II of the “Ebola Outbreak”. Get some popcorn ready, I’ve heard it is a real thriller, great fun for the whole family. Here’s a great article on this “breaking news”.
All hail the “solution”. Yay.
Legal man is wading in again. No choice. This thing has so many constantly changing parts. People, please, if you’re curious about what I think is happening go to my first audio post on this. I saw it coming when Dallas “won the bid“, and nothing has changed my mind so far. This thing is a show people. And sometimes people may actually have to “be sacrificed for the greater good”. And of course the “good” means the “good of the QUO“.
How much higher will the Ebola hysteria meter go? Hard to say at this point. Let me just say this, when people are already starting to wear these suits in public, which they now appear to be doing, we may have just scratched the surface of the ridonkulousness that will be on parade soon.
Excuse me sir, Sir, Sir, you’re not allowed to wear a condom here. You’ll have to change or you need to leave. Thank you.
The fear just seems so out of proportion to the KNOWN risk.
Since the Ebola outbreak began in February, around 300,000 people have died from malaria, while tuberculosis has likely claimed over 600,000 lives. Ebola might have our attention, but it’s not even close to being the biggest problem in Africa right now. Even Lassa fever, which shares many of the terrifying symptoms of Ebola (including bleeding from the eyelids), kills many more than Ebola – and frequently finds its way to the US. Link here.
I’m just saying, maybe there is another side to this panic.
Yes that is a guy without a hazmat, but he DOES have a clip board so relax.
In light of this article in the UK Mail and its accompanying pictures, ask yourself which is more likely, that Legalman’s suspicions are justified about what they are telling us about the actual “disease”, or that these “protocols” make sense?
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you. We have all heard it a million times. It is everywhere in our culture. We are told it is a universal principle. The highest principle. It is so driven into our heads. I don’t even have to finish the sentence and you will still KNOW exactly what I mean. Well, you know what they say, do unto others…
And of course it is a wonderful MORAL and religious principle. But the sleight of hand that those in charge engage in is telling us that this principle is used to create the foundational structure of our political/legal SYSTEM. What a f’ing JOKE.
“Top guys”, in what the state describes as “science”, tell us that man HIMSELF actually EVOLVED in certain ways because of this fundamental concept. This golden rule was “necessary” to survive, and it actually helped people to “weed out” those who didn’t follow it, in their primordial “cooperation” allegedly taking place in caves.
Then, even more supposed “top guys” who are “political scientists”, geniuses who “have studied and written on these issues for 30 years”, “Constitutional experts” appear on our television to opine about how it is a fundamental part of “our” country and our very Laws! And thus this “truth” comes to be “enshrined” into our text books and into our government indoctrination that runs all the time. In school, movies, T.V., magazines etc. etc. So the people start to believe it.
All my life I have laughed whenever anyone tried to tell me this nonsense because it is so patently NOT true. Our system is clearly NOT built on this principle, and it is clear that it is not the best system to get what you want in this world. The “best” way to get what you want is to convince everyone ELSE that you are completely on board with the whole golden rule thing, while you secretly screw them over to get what you really want. That is actually the “BEST” system.
Trust me, I’m a man of peace, violence doesn’t solve anything, so just put down your bat and let’s talk. Such is the way of our overlords.
People assume I’m kidding when I tell them this. Lots of people reflexively parrot back another saying they have unknowingly memorized, “that’s silly Legalman, that could never work and it is WRONG to do that.” I always just laugh. Really? It could NEVER work?Of course it can and it does work all the time. Selfish people use exactly this technique… Exactly.
In fact people see this in practice all the time in their personal relationships, but refuse to believe it is operational at the highest levels. Pretending to believe in the golden rule publicly while acting privately in a manner that only helps the individual and screws everyone else IS highly effective.
But but but Legalman, if it’s wrong it’s wrong! Oh, it is? I see, and EVERYONE agrees with you, right? Keep believing that my naïve fellow inmate.
Remember,we are NOT talking about morals. We are talking about what would be the most effective, especially in a political/legal arena. So I am talking about power people, imposing your will on others. And what is the greatest system devised to impose your will over the most number of people??? Come on now, you know this answer. That’s right, our friendly neighborhood governments.That is all government is. It is power. It is the authority to coerce if someone doesn’t agree. And the real masters who use it to control things will do and say whatever it takes to continue to maintain that control.
Well he seems like such a nice young man. Now why would he lie?
Take a very close look at the following quote from Plato. It holds the key to why those in power have no problem lying to you and sleeping like a baby. I suggest you read it closely several times.
They say that to do injustice is, by nature, good; to suffer injustice, evil; but that the evil is greater than the good. And so when men have both done and suffered injustice and have had experience of both, not being able to avoid the one and obtain the other, they think that they had better agree among themselves to have neither; hence there arise laws and mutual covenants; and that which is ordained by law is termed by them lawful and just. This they affirm to be the origin and nature of justice; —it is a mean or compromise, between the best of all, which is to do injustice and not be punished, and the worst of all, which is to suffer injustice without the power of retaliation; and justice, being at a middle point between the two, is tolerated not as a good, but as the lesser evil, and honoured by reason of the inability of men to do injustice. For no man who is worthy to be called a man would ever submit to such an agreement if he were able to resist; he would be mad if he did. Such is the received account, Socrates, of the nature and origin of justice.— Plato’s Republic, Book II.
Do you see this? Do you understand it? Do you comprehend what this means? You might want to read it again. Any and all conduct is justified to get what you want under POLITICAL theory. That is the BASIS of real political theory.
Learning this is all part of a “classical education”. But the government has taken over your education and the curriculum. And guess what? none of this is taught anymore. And that is not an accident.
Now who here thinks Legalman is a “bad man” for saying all these things?
It is clear to me that people don’t know and don’t want to know how FUNDAMENTALLY and intentionally mis-educated they are.
But look again at the mindset that those in charge teach their own children with a classical education. To give in to another when there is no necessity is “MADNESS”! That cooperation in the political arena is born from NECESSITY because of the inability to coerce another. The lesson being taught in that quote is that each man will resist, and if he can inflict harm on you, then you may need to cooperate. Not that it is BETTER to cooperate if you can MAKE others go along, by whatever means are at your disposal!! Do you understand how important that distinction is?
Oh, and there is a LOT more in there, and that is just ONE tiny book. There are discussions about “justice” and what it is. “Justice” was generally accepted to be whatever was in the interest of the ones IN POWER. Yes that was a commonly understood and discussed theme. Think about that one. Imagine having discussions about THAT in school. How differently might the people think? Do you see why that is all washed away by the state in its curriculum of nonsense and meaningless fake fact memorization that has replaced LEARNING HOW TO THINK?
Now instead of still using obvious force, those in power discovered a long time ago that creating an illusion of cooperation through “democracy” is more effective. So those in charge pretend to submit to the whole system, and thereby get the citizen/inmates to submit through deceit. Privately, they think YOU are crazy to go along with this laughable system of “waiting to vote” while a teeny tiny group run it all. They obviously and openly rig the system and yet nobody ever says, hey, the emperor has no clothes. And those in charge believe that if the people are stupid and docile and crazy enough to submit to this system, well, then THEY HAVE IT COMING! They feel justified. Do you see this now?
My god he is so brilliant he has actually improved on the golden rule. Surely that is something I need to obey!
People are led to believe that their governments and the people in the world who truly own and run it all, are just smarter and work harder, etc. etc. That is laughable, they are all cheating!They tell you lies to convince you to keep playing by the rigged rules they have set up and which they ignore. They don’t confuse social political theory with Religious and moral theory. They use them against you. They don’t submit.
Why is it so difficult for people to accept this when the evidence is so in their face? Why do they endlessly make “excuses” to explain away the lies that they see everywhere? Why do they always always assume that things are accidents, or “one bad apple” or a “one off situation” or the result of incompetence, or bungling or bureaucracy? Why?
First and foremost, is the natural psychological tendency in humans to “project” their own “golden rule” mindset and world view into others. Most people are decent honest people. And that works against them. Those in power are not decent honest people like YOU. Projection is a very fundamental and powerful force. If you are not on guard for it, you will do it naturally.
Second, those in power do everything in their power to reinforce the notion that they are like you and that our political and legal system is BASED upon the golden rule. That way you think it makes sense and, so you assume it is a mistake or one off, etc. etc. Then they follow this up by making sure to laugh at any person who suggests that maybe it isn’t all an accident. They are “conspiracy kooks”.
Everyone is just like me. Everyone is just like me. Those in power are just like me.
The real beauty of it is that once the system is up and running, the duped people become confused because they are constantly confronted with obvious lies and treachery, and instead of seeing them as a window into the real system, the people ACTUALLY NATURALLY do the work to continue to cover up the reality! The people themselves start coming up with excuses and explanations to make the observed facts fit with the projection they are doing. The people do this to avoid the crippling cognitive dissonance that occurs when they start to see the reality. It is too much for them to handle. Those in power know all about cog/dis’s effect on people. And they use that knowledge to continue the game.
That is why when confronted with the obvious systemic lies that exist the people mindlessly parrot back more lies they have been TAUGHT to avoid the simple explanation that it is all basically planned. They say things like “if any of this was true” that “everyone would know”, and that “you could never keep it secret” and on and on. The power structure has been sure to PUT those thoughts into the peoples’ heads. Do you see that?
People who begin to become aware of the “game”, become angry and start flailing around to find an answer to explain how “normal” “people”could ever do “this”, i.e. they seek an answer that makes sense with the projection they are doing. Those in charge anticipate this and they are waiting with their controlled opposition. They make sure to offer every kind of theory, except the real one, to “explain” how those in charge could “be so bad”.
Some people even start to believe those in charge must be “reptilian shapeshifters” or some other alien. The cog dis is so great that they can’t make sense of how any actual PERSON could engage in such a fraud. Now Could they be shapeshifters? sure. I’m not even going to say that some might not be shapeshifters and psychopaths. They very well MAY BE, lol. But the important thing to see is that you don’t have to come up with outrageous theories in order to explain “how someone could do this?” There is a very simple explanation. Those in charge don’t believe what you believe because they were taught a different theory of political power. They PRETEND to believe what you believe, and thus they control you.
Here you go honey, have some more freedom. And don’t forget to do as your leaders tell you because they are doing it for YOU! Now eat your “checks and balances” to be sure you grow up nice an dumb.
Are you finally getting it? The golden rule is NOT how the world of political/legal power operates. Whatever validity it has in a moral realm, it does NOT apply in high level business and politics or the LEGAL system they require you use.
Do you now see why it appears that the system never punishes the “wrong doers” at a high level? In their world they are not deserving of punishment! Are you starting to see how this foundational principle UPON which THEY ACTUALLY OPERATE, forms the basis to EXPLAIN, why things are all a lie? They lie to maintain control. That way they get you to submit. They use your own good moral conscience against you.
The reality is that the system ITSELF is designed to be unfair to YOU. Please take a moment to open your eyes and your mind to this truth. It can change your entire world view. You need to wake up to the reality of what is right in front of you.
‘You have eyes–can’t you see? You have ears–can’t you hear?’ — the Nazarene.
It isn’t complicated. They are lying to you because they can get away with it. It doesn’t bother them because they feel justified. Your confusion won’t end until you wake up and accept reality. Then it will all start to make sense for you. Probably for the first time.
I will leave you with this little extra. It is not a legal or political clip, but it is a nice expletive filled rant by a guy with real passion! He is a director going off on hollywood and the fools who support it. This same type of clip could be made about any industry, any political party, and on and on. This is the world. A complete conjob on the average person. I love this guy’s passion. He is fed up.
Who hasn’t been right where he is? Just total frustration at the whole stinking system of lies and fakes! lol Fair notice, he does a lot of cursing, but it is damned funny.
That’s all for now. Take care, live in the light and tell someone the truth about the law.
Mr. Spicoli has something he TOOOtally wants to add to the debate.
Should the federal government allow states to legalize pot?
I laugh whenever I hear the “experts” debate this point. Let me make it very simple for you. The federal government has absolutely no legal authority whatsoever to say what type of drug you can or can’t have or take. None. It isn’t about how dangerous it is. It has nothing to do with running it through the laughably UNconstitutional FDA. There is really NOTHING to argue about. It is about the simplest argument in the world to understand. And that is precisely why you have never heard it. They don’t let it circulate because they can’t defeat it.
The constitution says Zero regarding any type of regulation or outlawing of “drugs”. Alcohol is a drug. Nicotine is a drug. Pot is a drug. Heroin is a drug. The feds needed a constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, and they need one for every other drug. They have no authority without one. If they don’t need one for pot, then why did they need one for alcohol? Why? There is no “constitutional exception” for dangerousness or anything else. That isn’t law, that is made up nonsense. Laughably absurd in your face foolishness. Case closed. Thank you, I’ll be here all week, don’t forget to tip your servers.
Now that looks a bit wasteful. I’m seeing a lot of burn and smoke there.
Think about it. When “the people” were supposedly “clamoring” for alcohol to be outlawed by the all powerful Oz back in the early 20th century, why didn’t the federal government just outlaw it? Oh yeah, the inmates weren’t completely brainwashed at that point. The people KNEW the feds didn’t have the legal authority to do that without an amendment. So what did they do? The overlords waited till the whole world was immersed in a giant war they caused and that’s when they went around and got their Constitutional Amendment passed. Here are the pertinent provisions of that amendment. Note the date.
Passed by Congress December 18, 1917. Ratified January 16, 1919. Repealed by amendment 21.
Section 1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.
Section 2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
When the people had had enough of this utter absurdity, which I suspect was foisted on them like every other supposedly “organic movement by the people”, and they were on the verge of revolt, the overlords took a step back and reversed the decision with ANOTHER constitutional amendment. Here it is.
Passed by Congress February 20, 1933. Ratified December 5, 1933.
Section 1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.
Prohibition did have one lasting effect, the rise of the FBI. I’m sure that’s just another coincidence.
Back then, the government AND MORE IMPORTANTLY the inmates knew the feds couldn’t even outlaw HEROIN, much less alcohol or pot. Here is a link to some history of these old drug “laws” if you care to start looking into it. It isn’t complicated. And, no, you don’t “have to be a lawyer” to understand it.
So what did our owners do in order to be sure they could have the control they wanted? They incrementally and illegally took the power over time. The feds cooked up a bunch of bs laws about manufacturing and transportation and “taxes” and the “FDA”, they were all crap. But their very existence proves that the government knew they couldn’t just outlaw it.
Confidential picture I obtained of the FDA’s file room. I think it’s pretty clear they know what they’re doing.
Then they used the power of slow brainwashing in schools and media to “re-frame” the argument in the inmates minds. People now actually believe that the whole issue revolves around whether the FDA “finds” the drug dangerous. What did I miss? When did they change the constitution? Oh right, they didn’t bother. So the government’s employees now get to decide whether the government can do it. And of course the “ultimate” legality of all of this is “decided” by yet more government, called, “courts”. And of course those are completely “independent”. How do we know this? Well the government tells us so. Do you see how it works?
Cartman asserting the same legal authority the feds have over drugs, zero. Of course he can’t put you in a cage.
Of course now we are a long long way passed needing any actual authority on any and everything, not just drug laws. My god they can come rendition you. They just tell the inmates what they are going to do. Give the illusion of a “debate” and then implement.
“The illegal we do immediately; the unconstitutional takes a little longer.” – Henry Kissinger
Remember, he is smarter than you or me, so I guess we should listen to him.
The arguments that are ALLOWED to be made in “public forums” are always in the same limited box. Red team/blue team arguments. Always keep the people distracted from the real game. And of course the KoolAid distributors in the media are there to “bring it home” for a nice price.
He’s right 98.666% of the time! Or maybe he’s more like Maxwell Smart, “missed it by THAT much.”
It is amazing. It is so simple. So in your face. And yet, nobody ever brings it up. Watch the debates. Listen to the fake arguments. Get people asking, or arguing about THE WRONG question and you don’t care what the answer is. That is the way the game is played on you my fellow inmates.
Now you know. And the next time you hear someone talking about it, you too will laugh, just like Legalman. Because you’ll hear about safety, and danger and rights etc. etc. But you won’t hear Mr. Spicoli’s argument. Even the esteemed members of the bar don’t dare raise that one if they want to keep their “government issued license” to make a living. The control is endless.