Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2020 ENERGY CONFERENCE - PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!!

2020 Energy Science & Technology Conference
PRE-REGISTER NOW!!!
http://energyscienceconference.com


Go Back   Energetic Forum > >
   

Renewable Energy Discussion on various alternative energy, renewable energy, & free energy technologies. Also any discussion about the environment, global warming, and other related topics are welcome here.

* NEW * BEDINI RPX BOOK & DVD SET: BEDINI RPX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #4051  
Old 03-06-2013, 04:22 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by aljhoa View Post
The Billionaire
Made public by John Spritzler
February 21, 2013

Chapter 1: Know That You Ought To Rule Over the People
Chapter 2: The People Are Your Enemy
Chapter 3: Turn the People Against the People
1. Wage War
2. Divide and rule the people along race lines
3. Divide the people along cultural lines
4. Make the People Compete Against Each Other
5. Cause Mass Migration (But Pretend to Oppose It)
6. Turn the People Against Themselves

Chapter 4: Make Sure The People Follow Your Goals, Not Theirs
Chapter 5: Lower the People's Expectations
Chapter 6: Use Fake Democracy
Chapter 7: Teach the People to Be Nonviolent
Chapter 8: Assassinate Dangerous Leaders
Chapter 9: A Problem that Remains Unsolved
There remains a problem that you must learn to solve without help from this Owner's Manual. The problem is this: How can billionaires defeat a revolutionary movement in which the rank-and-file members all exibit the warning signs that, in a leader, would mark him or her as very dangerous? Killing its leaders would accomplish little. Your forebears never solved this problem. Fortunately the problem has never arisen yet (or else you would probably not be a billionaire today) but it could happen. Everything in this Manual is about how to prevent it from happening, but the savvier ordinary people become, the less effective all of the strategems in this Manual are. This is a serious problem! You are on your own. Good luck in solving it.

The Billionaire
l
Lindsey Williams - Secrets Of The Elite Video - Mar. 2012 - 3 DVD Set - YouTube


Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote

Download SOLAR SECRETS by Peter Lindemann
Free - Get it now: Solar Secrets

  #4052  
Old 03-07-2013, 03:01 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Early this morning Rand Paul finished a 13 hour filibuster of Barry's Brennan nomination as CIA director. Of the 100 senators who sit on Capitol Hill, Rand was the lone wolf when it came to standing up against the nomination. Rand used much of the 13 hours in talking about the unconstitutional and tyrannical planned use of drone aircraft, within the United States, against American citizens. Rand blasted Eric Holder for his remarks in a letter sent to Rand on March 4th, which said, "It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the president to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States." Rand made it clear that he was not satisfied with Holder's response, because he had asked Holder for a clear statement that would rule out the possibility that drones would ever be used against American citizens on US soil. Rand said, "The U.S. Attorney Generalís refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening, it is an affront on the constitutional due process rights of all Americans."

This filibuster, of course, was a tactic Rand used to enable him to get the word out, and on the record, concerning the Obama administration's plans to use drone aircraft to spy on the public and target citizens for assassination who have been placed on a "hit list," thus denying Americans their constitutional due process rights. Rand correctly noted that leaving such options open to possibility of being used would put Barry in the position of judge, jury, and executioner, which is neither allowed by the Constitution, nor can be thought of as acceptable under any circumstances. At the very beginning of his speech, Rand said, "I will speak until I can no longer speak, I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your right to trial by jury is precious, that no American should be killed on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court." You can watch Rand's opening statements here.

In reporting on Rand's 13 hour speech, TV newscasters made light of what this was all about, and painted Rand as simply attempting to delay a Senate vote on Brennan's appointment. Newscasters showed video clips of Rand speaking, but played at high speed to make it look humorous, and also showed clips of Rand drinking water and eating a messy Snickers candy bar which had partially melted. Very little of what Rand actually said was reported, and what was reported was countered by statements such as Holder having said that a situation where such a strike may occur were "entirely hypothetical" and "unlikely to occur." Yeah, right, like we should believe that.

__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff

Last edited by rickoff; 03-07-2013 at 03:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4053  
Old 03-07-2013, 04:15 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Actually

According to the newscasts I saw, (NBC nitely news, and ) several other Senators DID 'assist' RP with his filibuster. They showed a brief clip of the 'new' hispanic Senator from Texas (can't recall his name).

And, they DID show him making the statements you quoted, word for word, and not speeded up. So, he DID get SOME coverage, and it didn't SEEM 'derogatory' to me. I suspect this may be because the 'libertarian' view DOES 'cut across' the so-called 'idiological divide'.

I have found many times, I can 'find common ground' with Liberals, by talking about 'libertarian' ideas/principles. Next time your talking to a Liberal, give it a try, Rick. I think you will find much to agree on.

Granted, 'they' (liberals) are completely 'wacked out' when it comes to promoting the 'naany state', etc. (at least you and I think they are 'wacked out', and they think the same about us, LOL) but, based on my experience, you WILL find Liberals that are strong supporters of the 2nd amendment, and that are very upset with o'bummer for his expansion of Presidential powers.

Just as I am very 'upset' with many of the things Bush did. Libertariansism really IS a 3rd way of looking at politics, and there are Libertarian Democrats/Liberals, just as there are Libertarian Repubs/Conservatives.

I THINK that is part of what 'explains' the 'Reagan Democrats'; he appealed to there Libertarian 'leanings', and THAT is probably the way Repubs SHOULD go, rather than the way they are thinkng they need to 'rebrand'.

And I'm hoping Rand MAY be the one to clearly articulate a conservative/libertarian message, that will have the reagan appeal. But, as with Goldwater and Reagan, (and Rands Dad) the 'party regulars' will do everything they can to marginalise him, so I'm not THAT optimistic,... Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4054  
Old 03-07-2013, 09:02 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
According to the newscasts I saw, (NBC nitely news, and ) several other Senators DID 'assist' RP with his filibuster. They showed a brief clip of the 'new' hispanic Senator from Texas (can't recall his name).
I believe that would be Ted Cruz. Mike Lee was the first person to assist Rand, and Ted Cruz stayed until the end, reading supportive 'tweets' to his colleague, among other contributions. It is said that CSPAN did carry the live broadcast, but I missed that. Several other Senators were willing to at least go on record as standing with Rand Paul, including Senators Barasso, Chambliss, Cornyn, Flake, Johnson, McConnell, Moran, Rubio, Scott, Thune, and Toomey, although apparently none of these thought the issue was important enough to stay through the whole process. So Rand really was pretty much a 'lone wolf' when it came to the actual speaking. I was surprised, though, that even Democrat Senator Wyden was willing to put aside political party loyalty to consider what is best for all Americans, and spoke in support of the questions Senator Paul was asking of the White House. Wyden is a libertarian minded Democrat, which no doubt explains his support. The thing that is troubling, though, is that this is such a small group of Senators. How can the rest distance themselves from these moral, ethical, and legal questions without showing that they have absolutely no regard for the American public or the Constitution? In fact, the entire group of establishment Republican Senators was in absence, with several of them choosing instead to attend a dinner party put on by Barry Soetoro. Disgusting, don't you think?
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff

Last edited by rickoff; 03-07-2013 at 09:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4055  
Old 03-07-2013, 09:46 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
I don't know if any others have read about this, but it appears that a breed of giant mosquitos, known as "gallinippers" is expected to invade central Florida this summer. These are said to be up to 20 times the size of a normal mosquito, with a body about the size of a quarter, and are said to be "notoriously aggressive," packing a very strong bite. Here's a University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences photo, taken by Marisol Amador, comparing one of these gallinippers to a regular mosquito:


Apparently these mega mosquitos occur after tropical storms, and there were high numbers of these voracious bloodsuckers last year after tropical storm Debbie caused extensive flooding in many parts of Florida. About the only good news is that so far these mosquitoes are not known to be disease carriers. I wouldn't put it past some government research facilities, though, to be experimenting with possible uses for these giants to strike fear among the public, perhaps developing their use as a biological military weapon to unleash a deadly virus against an "enemy."
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4056  
Old 03-07-2013, 10:38 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Just another example of a worthwhile citizen action

We have often repeated here what the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution says about gun rights. Today I was reading the Maine Constitution, and found that its wording on this subject is even more compelling:

Article 1, Section 16 of the Maine Constitution is crystal clear: "Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned."

As clear as this is, there are some Maine legislators who think it is acceptable for them to be scheming ways to introduce intrusive regulations and unconstitutional prohibitions on gun ownership. What part of the word "never" do these morons not understand? To let these errant legislators know that Mainers won't stand for such shenanigans, a gun rights activist rally sponsored by the Maine Gun Rights Coalition will be held at high noon on Saturday, March 9th, and I'm sure this rally will lead to other citizen actions.

I suggest looking at your own state constitution to see what it says about your gun rights, and taking similar action if your state legislators are going astray.
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4057  
Old 03-07-2013, 11:52 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
No Duty to Protect: Two Exceptions

Law enforcement generally does not have a federal constitutional duty to protect one private person from another. For example, if a drunk driver injures a pedestrian or a drug dealer beats up an informant, agencies and their officers usually would not be liable for those injuries because there was no duty to protect.

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids the government to deprive individuals of life, liberty, or property without "due process of law."2 In 1989 the U.S. Supreme Court stated, "Nothing in the language of the Due Process Clause itself requires the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors."3 Generally, the Due Process Clause does not provide an affirmative right to government aid, "even where such aid may be necessary to secure life, liberty, or property interests of which the government itself may not deprive the individual."

When considering whether law enforcement has a duty to protect, first ask if a special relationship exists. If a suspect is taken into custody by law enforcement, a duty to protect -be it at the scene, during transport, or at the jail-exists.7 The majority of courts require a person to be in physical custody of police before that person has a special relationship with police.

Although police generally have no constitutional duty to protect private persons from third parties, there may be such a duty if a special relationship exists or if the state increased or created the danger to the harmed person.

Police Chief Magazine - View Article


Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4058  
Old 03-08-2013, 01:03 AM
gene gene gene gene is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Northern Wisconsin
Posts: 257
Hi Rick,
A list of all states constitutional right to keep and bear arms provisions can be found here. State Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions

In looking at the wording for Maine, and it is as you stated. I noticed some states such as Maryland and Minnesota have NO PROVISION !!!

I very much like Maine's wording (NEVER!!!) It is strong and would be very hard to debate.

Our provision here in Wisconsin reads.
The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose. Art 1, Sec 25 (enacted 1998)
[self-defense right protected, State V. Fisher, 714 N.2d495 (Wisc. 2006).]

I am wishing good luck to you Mainers on Sat. and I hope it peacefully accomplishes all that your coalition is striving for. I would like to see some media coverage.

Best Regards, Gene

I think I forgot to insert the link. State Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions
__________________
 

Last edited by gene gene; 03-08-2013 at 01:18 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4059  
Old 03-08-2013, 05:31 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Rick Post 4054

Wydens responce to RP's fillibuster, is an example of what I was posting about, earlier. There are a LOT of Democrats, and even LIBERALS, who have libertarian 'leanings'; next time you encounter what you THINK is a 'hard-core' liberal, 'feel them out' on Libertarian issues, and I think you will be SURPRISED at the areas where you can find agreement!

The Liberal press (again, NBC news) actaully pointed out the difference between the way 'mainstream' repubs and 'tea partiers' responded very differently to the fillibuster. THEY were pointing it out, to chortle about the 'split' in the Repubs, cause they LIKE the 'fact' that such a 'split' is seen as 'weakening' the Repubs, and therby 'strengthening Dems, and they LIKE that, of coarse!

But, there RIGHT in that this is an example of the SPLIT; the statements 'on the floor' made by Lindsay Graham and McCain were particularly reprehensible, as was their 'schmoosing' with B.O.

One hopes this 'split' will ultimately STRENGTHEN the party, by boosting the influence of the Libertarian aspect of the Repub party, as Reagan did, rather than having the barstuds that pushed Romoney, and torpedoed 'anyone else', and earlier torpedoed Goldwater, remain in 'control' of the party! Like they've done such an excellent job, so far!!!!

I HOPE that Rand Paul will be the next 'white hope', and will lead the party back to the right KIND of Victory, rather than someone Like Christie, Jeb Bush, etc. who, even if they win in 2016, will be ALMOST as bad as having a Democrat win! Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4060  
Old 03-08-2013, 08:28 PM
DrStiffler DrStiffler is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickoff View Post
Early this morning Rand Paul finished a 13 hour filibuster of Barry's Brennan nomination as CIA director. Of the 100 senators who sit on Capitol Hill, Rand was the lone wolf when it came to standing up against the nomination. Rand used much of the 13 hours in talking about the unconstitutional and tyrannical planned use of drone aircraft, within the United States, against American citizens. Rand blasted Eric Holder for his remarks in a letter sent to Rand on March 4th, which said, "It is possible, I suppose, to imagine an extraordinary circumstance in which it would be necessary and appropriate under the Constitution and applicable laws of the United States for the president to authorize the military to use lethal force within the territory of the United States." Rand made it clear that he was not satisfied with Holder's response, because he had asked Holder for a clear statement that would rule out the possibility that drones would ever be used against American citizens on US soil. Rand said, "The U.S. Attorney Generalís refusal to rule out the possibility of drone strikes on American citizens and on American soil is more than frightening, it is an affront on the constitutional due process rights of all Americans."

This filibuster, of course, was a tactic Rand used to enable him to get the word out, and on the record, concerning the Obama administration's plans to use drone aircraft to spy on the public and target citizens for assassination who have been placed on a "hit list," thus denying Americans their constitutional due process rights. Rand correctly noted that leaving such options open to possibility of being used would put Barry in the position of judge, jury, and executioner, which is neither allowed by the Constitution, nor can be thought of as acceptable under any circumstances. At the very beginning of his speech, Rand said, "I will speak until I can no longer speak, I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important, that your right to trial by jury is precious, that no American should be killed on American soil without first being charged with a crime, without first being found to be guilty by a court." You can watch Rand's opening statements here.

In reporting on Rand's 13 hour speech, TV newscasters made light of what this was all about, and painted Rand as simply attempting to delay a Senate vote on Brennan's appointment. Newscasters showed video clips of Rand speaking, but played at high speed to make it look humorous, and also showed clips of Rand drinking water and eating a messy Snickers candy bar which had partially melted. Very little of what Rand actually said was reported, and what was reported was countered by statements such as Holder having said that a situation where such a strike may occur were "entirely hypothetical" and "unlikely to occur." Yeah, right, like we should believe that.

BS. Paul was just grandstanding for his own positioning. Who would accept such a stupid answer as given by the AG? Who makes the decision on what allows the King to make a decision as stated.

Here is what the Dictionary says;

Definition of COMBATANT

: one that is engaged in or ready to engage in combat
ó combatant adjective


Definition of COMBAT

1: a fight or contest between individuals or groups
2: conflict, controversy
3: active fighting in a war : action <casualties suffered in combat>

So what makes it of concern from Barry? Silly grandstanding only.

A man and wife involved in a heated disagreement;

Combatants in Combat.....
__________________
 

Last edited by DrStiffler; 03-08-2013 at 08:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4061  
Old 03-08-2013, 09:45 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Hey Doc

How you doin? And yeah, he's broken so many 'promises', whats one more?

If you make less than $250,000, your taxes won't go up!

If you like your Dr., and your health insurance, nothing will change for you (under O'bummer care).

And HONEST! If your a 'law abiding gon owner', you have nOTHING to fear., from us! So,.....WHY don't I BELIEVE him?

Maybe cause he's a,....Politician, and they ALL lie??? Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4062  
Old 03-09-2013, 03:54 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by gene gene View Post
Hi Rick,
A list of all states constitutional right to keep and bear arms provisions can be found here. State Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms Provisions

In looking at the wording for Maine, and it is as you stated. I noticed some states such as Maryland and Minnesota have NO PROVISION !!!

I very much like Maine's wording (NEVER!!!) It is strong and would be very hard to debate.

Our provision here in Wisconsin reads.
The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose. Art 1, Sec 25 (enacted 1998)
[self-defense right protected, State V. Fisher, 714 N.2d495 (Wisc. 2006).]

I am wishing good luck to you Mainers on Sat. and I hope it peacefully accomplishes all that your coalition is striving for. I would like to see some media coverage.

Best Regards, Gene
Tanks for the list link, Gene. That makes it a lot easier for people to see what their state constitution says about gun rights. Yes, the "NEVER" wording in Maine's constitution would be tough to argue against. Let's look at the wording again:

Quote:
Article I, Section 16. To keep and bear arms. Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned. - Maine Constitution, in current form
Notice that it says "Every citizen" of Maine has this unquestionable right. Therefore, it is fully understood that this right has nothing to do with an organized or unorganized militia. Furthermore, the first two sections of Article I make it very clear that the right guaranteed by Section 16 can be used to defend life and liberty, protect property, or abolish a tyrannical government in favor of new government when safety and happiness is dependent on such change:

Quote:
Section 1. Natural rights. All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.
Section 2. Power inherent in people. All power is inherent in the people; all free governments are founded in their authority and instituted for their benefit; they have therefore an unalienable and indefeasible right to institute government, and to alter, reform, or totally change the same, when their safety and happiness require it.
Both Section 1 and 2 are worded the same as in the 1820 Maine Constitution, but Section 16 was originally worded differently:

Quote:
Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms for the common defence; and this right shall never be questioned.
The change in wording from the original version was brought about in 1987 when the legislature sought to clarify this right and referred the proposed change to a ballot question. The public voted favorably on the proposed change in the following manner:
  • Yes: 216,013
  • No: 159,226
In this instance, the change of wording was a wise thing to do, as it was far more in line with what the Founding Fathers intended than the original wording was. "Common defence" could be misconstrued to mean that arms could only be kept and borne by a citizen in the instance when it is necessary to defend the public against a common enemy or threat, and did not expressly fortify one's individual right, although Section 1 and 2 did offer some clarification.

While individual gun rights here in Maine are now adequately protected by the wording of Section 16, it is likely that some legislators will from time to time attempt to place a new revision on the ballot that would weaken the wording or change the meaning entirely. That's why it is especially important at the present time to partake in rallies aimed at getting the word out and unifying people against any such gun control initiatives.

I myself had planned to attend the rally being held today, but threw my lower back out of whack a couple of days ago while working on my tractor, and can barely move about today. I'll keep a close watch on what happens, though, and will report back on this event.
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4063  
Old 03-09-2013, 04:21 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrStiffler View Post
Who would accept such a stupid answer as given by the AG? Who makes the decision on what allows the King to make a decision as stated.

Here is what the Dictionary says;

Definition of COMBATANT

: one that is engaged in or ready to engage in combat
ó combatant adjective


Definition of COMBAT

1: a fight or contest between individuals or groups
2: conflict, controversy
3: active fighting in a war : action <casualties suffered in combat>

So what makes it of concern from Barry? Silly grandstanding only.

A man and wife involved in a heated disagreement;

Combatants in Combat.....
I'd be quick to agree that Holder's response leaves a lot to be desired, and was not exactly a victory for Rand Paul. It was not the clear cut response that Rand was seeking, which should have been that drone strikes would never be authorized in the USA against an American citizen
without that citizen's due process rights having been granted and exercised as guaranteed by the Constitution's Bill of Rights. For Holder to say such a strike would not be carried out against a non-combatant citizen offers little reassurance. What about those who would combat tyranny and oppression by planning and attending peaceful rallies, or distributing written words that call attention to such tyranny and oppression? Holder made no specific reference to armed combatants, or to insurrection.

I'd still say, though, that Rand Paul did the right thing in standing up against an out of control government and bringing the drone issue to the forefront, and I commend him for that effort. It's good to know that there is someone in Washington who listens to our concerns and is willing to go to bat for us. There aren't many in D.C. who would do that.
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4064  
Old 03-09-2013, 04:30 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
How you doin? And yeah, he's broken so many 'promises', whats one more?

If you make less than $250,000, your taxes won't go up!

If you like your Dr., and your health insurance, nothing will change for you (under O'bummer care).

And HONEST! If your a 'law abiding gon owner', you have nOTHING to fear., from us! So,.....WHY don't I BELIEVE him?

Maybe cause he's a,....Politician, and they ALL lie??? Jim
Dr. B.Carson's Amazing Speech at the National Prayer Breakfast with Obama Present - YouTube

Obama Reacts to Dr. Benjamin Carson's Damning Speech - YouTube

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4065  
Old 03-10-2013, 03:50 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Curious, Rick

Given the wording, how does Maine handle possesion of firearms by convicted felons? Are they not still citisens? And are they then not 'entitled' (?) given the wording, to own firearms for th reasons stated?

Oh, and hopiing your back gets better, been there, had that! Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4066  
Old 03-10-2013, 07:26 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
"Estate" of the Union

Published on Mar 6, 2013
The Military is out directing traffic during public events, armed drones are set to fly over America with direction to track and trace law abiding gun owning citizens. The globalist police state grid has been slowly tighten its grip around the American public for decades. Now, as the control grid reaches its final stages and with the Bill of Rights almost completely destroyed, the globalists are playing the same card that mass murdering tyrants have always played: disarming the public.

Gun Confiscation has Begun: Gun Owner Alert! - YouTube

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4067  
Old 03-11-2013, 12:43 AM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
Given the wording, how does Maine handle possesion of firearms by convicted felons? Are they not still citizens? And are they then not 'entitled' (?) given the wording, to own firearms for the reasons stated?
A felony conviction in Maine requires that the felon be stripped of some constitutional rights, including the right to bear arms. Violent convictions, such as rape or assault, permanently bar the convicted person from regaining the right to bear arms, but those convicted of non-violent felonies may apply for restoration of rights after being released. Restorations are seldom denied.
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4068  
Old 03-11-2013, 01:11 AM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Maine gun rally update

The Maine Gun Rights Coalition held its rally at Wiscasset, Maine yesterday, with about 175 supporters in attendance. Most all of those attending carried handguns or rifles with them, and the rally remained peaceful. Here are some photos of the event:



The above gun toter is pastor of a church in Windsor. He also brought along a knife and a semi-automatic rifle.



In other news, a "Constitutional Carry" bill (LD660) has been introduced in the Maine state legislature that would restore the right of every law-abiding citizen to carry a gun to protect themselves and their families - WITHOUT going through a bunch of bureaucratic rigmarole!

In short, any Maine citizen legally able to own a firearm would also be legally able to carry it. Period.
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4069  
Old 03-11-2013, 04:10 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Rick

I am fortunate enough to live in Arizona. Initially, they instituted a 'concealed carry law, which required a 'background check' and taking a class, in order to get a 'concealed carry' permit, though any adult (no felony convictions) could open carry. And, once you had the permit, since it required the B.C, you didn't have to go through a B.C. for subsequent gun purchases.
THEN, they rescinded the requirement for the class, or the CC permit, in order to CC. So, any 'law abiding' adult in Az. can concealed carry; they STILL have the CC permit process in place, and it enables you to not have to go through a BC for each gun purchase, and is also 'handy' if you are going to another state, and want to CC there.

Seeing the poster being held by the young gal in the picture, I AM wondering why there isn't MORE talk, about repealing the STUPID 'gun free school zone' Fedreal law. It was a gross distortion of the Commmerce Clause, to begin with. And, after 25 years its pretty obvious it isn't doing what it was intended to do! ANY jurisdictions which wish to retain the law could easily enact it at the state or local level, whereas those jurisdictions where the citisens, local police, school boards, etc. felt it was counter-productive, and wished to try alternatives, would be 'free' to do so.

I HAVE seen SOME news stories, of some jurisdictions where alternative proposals are being suggested, (arming teachers, etc.) but NO real discussion of repealing this law.

I BELIEVE its unconstitional, but the SCOTUS can't detirmine constituionality, without a case, and even in order to HEAR a case, they have to first detirmine STANDING. So, I suppose a school district wouldhave to bring a lawsuit, alleging that they had detirmined that the Law was actually making it more difficult to 'protect' their students; probably unlikely to happen.

But, Congress COULD repeal the Law, and someone ought to make the effort. Its a perfect example of what happens when laws are passed because 'We gotta do SOMETHING', which we hear a lot right now, as justification for MORE gun control legislation. Doing SOMETHING, as a 'knee jerk' reaction, is ALWAYSa bad reason for passing legislation, as its possible to make matters WORSE, and the Gun Free zones is a perfect example!Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4070  
Old 03-11-2013, 06:23 PM
IndianaBoys's Avatar
IndianaBoys IndianaBoys is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 577
"Don't Try an' Take My Guns Away"

"Don't Try an' Take My Guns Away" :
Don't Try an' Take My Guns Away - YouTube
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4071  
Old 03-12-2013, 12:24 AM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,351
Here's a photo of one of the illegal alien criminals released supposedly because of the sequester. Looks like Barry is this one's hero.




And in other news, perhaps this incident will be the cause of a push to ban all handguns, or at least the "carrying" or "concealment" of handguns.
__________________
"Seek wisdom by keeping an open mind to alternative realities, questioning authority, and searching for truth. Only then, when you see or hear something that has 'the ring of truth' to it, will it be as if a veil has been lifted, and suddenly you will begin to hear and see far more clearly than ever before." - Rickoff
Reply With Quote
  #4072  
Old 03-12-2013, 12:46 AM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
Ida Corr - What Goes Around Comes Around - YouTube
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndianaBoys View Post
"Don't Try an' Take My Guns Away" :
Don't Try an' Take My Guns Away - YouTube


The official motto of the Ludwig von Mises Institute is Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito, which comes from Virgil's Aeneid, Book VI; the motto means "do not give in to evil but proceed ever more boldly against it." Early in his life, Mises chose this sentence to be his guiding principle in life. It is prominently displayed throughout the Institute's campus, on their website, and on memorabilia.
Ludwig von Mises Institute - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Published on Feb 25, 2013
Presented by Judge Andrew Napolitano at the 2010 Mises University. Includes an introduction by Mises Institute founder and chairman, Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. Recorded 29 July 2010 in Auburn, Alabama.

"What Ever Happened to the Constitution?" by Judge Andrew Napolitano - YouTube

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4073  
Old 03-12-2013, 03:58 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Ha, Rick

Reminds me of a case I heard about, (don't KNOW if its true); Dr.'s had to surgially remove a handgun from a mans lower intestine, which had apperently been 'placed' (shoved!) there using the closest body orifice.

Just re-affirms the old adage; "NEVER 'pull' or 'point' a gun at someone, unless you are fully prepared to USE it; otherwise,they may take it away from you,and use it on you!" or,...in this case stick it where the sun don't shine!

I believe it was also a relatively small revolver, LOL.

Of the many illogical positions of the GC advocates, there strong opposition to allowing 'law abiding' citisens to 'concealed carry' is one that baffles me.

But then, ALL the positions they advocate make no sense to me, anyway.

Its hard not to come to the conclusion that there is a 'they' that has an agenda of dis-arming the populace, and that there are a bunch of nanny state sheeple scared of GUNS, (mere inannimate objects), and the people who LIKE guns, and are being sheep led to the slaughter, buying into all the obvious lies being used to justify 'gun control'. And/or that this is a calculated political maneuver, by O'bummer et al., to callously manipulate this issue, and others, for political gain. Screw it! Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4074  
Old 03-13-2013, 02:29 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
As of 10 AM March 5th, 2013 Inteligentry, LTD is closed until further notice.
At this time 12 or 14 FBI agents entered our building with Guns drawn and at gun point herded us into the front room and sat us down. Then they explained they were not there to arrest anyone but a "Search Warrant" And Confiscate Engines, complete and partially built, All documents records, computers and IP.

Inteligentry, Plasmic Transition Process (tm) Technology HOME Page


In yet another illegal raided by forces loyal to Pres Obama another Alternate energy Production Facility was destroyed.

On 6 March FBI walked into the Intelligentry Office in Las Vegas, Nevada, and seized documents, equipment, and anything else they could carry away.
Apparently 14 FBI Agents with Bullet Proof Vests and Guns Drawn entered the facility with NO warrant and just rounded up the workers and ransacked the factory.
These Freaks just walked uin and destroyed the factory.
The factory was working on Plasma Energy Driven Engines that use almost no energy to operate.
We have seen the US stop the following, and I have seen all of these:

1) Lutec Technologies (Australia), Tacheon Generator. A double set of Neodine magnets that require 100 watts in and put out 600 watts.
2) In 1979 a man in Sacramento put out a Carberator that gave a VW Bug 128 MPG. I went to find him a week later and he and his family had disappeared. They killed his entire family.
3) Head of the Constitution Party was building a factory that put out a large truck that got 78MPG. The Rothschild's shut them down.
4) India has an N-1 Generator, look it up. It just sits there and generates electricity.
5) If you recall way back in 1999 German Motor Works advertised a car that ran on water. A month later the factory was bought out and shut down.
6) I watched a guy make a Chevy 350 water powered. He is now about 90 years old and is not about to market it. Once you get your enginse hot the motor will run on 1/300th the amount of gas. You simply put the water through many small filters nd it runs.
7) The P-51 Aircraft that was Water Powered in 1945 nad had a range of over 3,000 mils.
8) Try looking up the P-47 Water Powered Engine.

APFN - FBI DESTROYS ANTHER ALTERNATE ENERGY FACTORY



As of October 10, 2012, none of the manufacturers have witnessed a running engine. "It seems to me that what is happening is that by claiming to have run engines before, in undisclosed locations, John Rohner has lured 'manufacturers' to do his research and development of yet un-tried designs." -- Sterling D. Allan, October 10, 2012 Plasma_Energy_Controls'_Plasma_Expansion_Motor

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4075  
Old 03-13-2013, 09:14 PM
FuzzyTomCat's Avatar
FuzzyTomCat FuzzyTomCat is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 620
Send a message via Skype™ to FuzzyTomCat
Quote:
Originally Posted by aljhoa View Post
As of 10 AM March 5th, 2013 Inteligentry, LTD is closed until further notice.
At this time 12 or 14 FBI agents entered our building with Guns drawn and at gun point herded us into the front room and sat us down. Then they explained they were not there to arrest anyone but a "Search Warrant" And Confiscate Engines, complete and partially built, All documents records, computers and IP.

Inteligentry, Plasmic Transition Process (tm) Technology HOME Page

Al
Howdy AL, members and guests

What you have posted is a prime example of what many of us in the Open Source Community has been warning members and guests for years what can happen to your intellectual property through a United States PATENT process.

If everyone looks at the red underlined text of Inteligentry, Plasmic Transition Process (tm) Technology Documentation you'll see a PATENT application notation.




Here is a link to a posting of mine HHO Forums - Trying to facilitate the production of HHO for the common folk. 01-04-2013 that explains it all ....

Quote:
There is some information on "PATENTS" and why the explosion of open source forums such as this and here is why .....

I normally let the members do what they want and sometimes throw them a bone like this one posting of mine ... http://www.hhoforums.com/showpost.ph...&postcount=158 (members only can view images)

If you look closely the photos were taken in the late fifty's or early sixty's of a actual working Oxyhydrogen (HHO) device from a well funded lab that ran a motor ... it was shelved because of a US patent law that was adopted in 1958 for the US government employees responsible for the reviewing of all patent applications.

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac...dated_laws.pdf (PDF file - 103 pages - Revised January 2013)

Appendix "L" Patent Laws

CHAPTER 17 - SECRECY OF CERTAIN INVENTIONS AND
FILING APPLICATIONS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES


35 U.S.C. 181 Secrecy of certain inventions and withholding of patent.
Page Number L-44


When president Bush came into office in 2001 there were (approx) 3200 patents that were taken by the US government, when Bush left office eight years latter there was 4200 patents taken. Now since Obama came into office the total (approx) is near or over now 5000 patents taken by the US government .... and president Obama has announced he's streamlined the patent application process to promote inventors with clean green energy devices and guess where most of them went.

If tomorrow there was a motor that ran on water was announced how many "oil" jobs would be lost? How much "TAX MONEY" for state and local governments would be lost ... they can't tax water for revenue can they?

The above is just one example of "NATIONAL SECURITY" that can make your invention go away .... possibly for a long time.

There are many of us with the passion of "open source" forums because here you can make it happen if what your doing really works, you may not get rich in the process but there is a thing called "Intellectual Property" first to publish rights that gives you a piece of the action using copyright laws that can't be taken away from anyone who uses it.
Elections for leaders of nations has it's consequences and laws change because of agendas. There is a Constitutional Bill of Rights Amendment 13 - Abolition of slavery - we Americans have befallen to .... by willful neglect from our Executive and Congressional Branch Leaders "slaves of a nation" for a convicted crime of wanting freedom, our god given right.

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce these article by appropriate legislation.

Glen
__________________
Open Source Experimentalist
Open Source Research and Development

Last edited by FuzzyTomCat; 03-15-2013 at 09:14 AM. Reason: repaired Appendix "L" Patent Laws "link"
Reply With Quote
  #4076  
Old 03-14-2013, 03:00 AM
Mad Scientist Mad Scientist is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 563
Quote:
There are many of us with the passion of "open source" forums because here you can make it happen if what your doing really works, you may not get rich in the process but there is a thing called "Intellectual Property" first to publish rights that gives you a piece of the action using copyright laws that can't be taken away from anyone who uses it.

Iím not so sure about that. Letís say you develop a 10KW generator for home use that is cheaper to use then grid power. If you open source it, then obviously anyone and the brother can build and sell your design.
But so what!
Consider the number of homes in just your state and if you could build and install your generator in just 1% of them do you think that might be able to supply you with a very comfortable income?
There maybe some prestige in having a patent hanging on you wall but if the government takes it over for "security reasons" then what good is it to you or anybody else?
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4077  
Old 03-14-2013, 03:21 AM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Scientist View Post
Iím not so sure about that. Letís say you develop a 10KW generator for home use that is cheaper to use then grid power. If you open source it, then obviously anyone and the brother can build and sell your design.
But so what!
Consider the number of homes in just your state and if you could build and install your generator in just 1% of them do you think that might be able to supply you with a very comfortable income?
There maybe some prestige in having a patent hanging on you wall but if the government takes it over for "security reasons" then what good is it to you or anybody else?


Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4078  
Old 03-14-2013, 05:49 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
One only has to look

at the Governments responce to even modest attempts or ways that have developed for individuals to 'make their own energy' etc.

For may years, it was possible and practical to convert your car to run on Propane; cleaner (greener) fuel, engine lasts MUCH longer, and cheaper.

Then, the environmental Protection agency gotinvolved, and put such onerous regulations on conversions, that only commercial fleets can afford to have such conversions done, by EPA 'approved' shops.

State Governments want to collect 'fuel tax', along with having you comply with all SORTS of regulations, if you want to convert waste oil to fuel.

"Follow the $", its all about the TAX. There are 2 ways the government can attempt to effect the behavior of the citisenry; Laws, and tax/regulatory policy. Laws have very limited effect; stand on any busy street corner, in any major city for any time, and it is obvious the real limits Laws have, on effecting peoples behavior. Prohibition and the 50 year long (lost) drug war are other obvious examples.

But how much of the 'housing crises' was a DIRECT result of tax and regulatory policies; virtually ALL! Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4079  
Old 03-15-2013, 04:20 AM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,261


follow the dollar- CEE ROO (feat CNN) - YouTube


Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #4080  
Old 03-15-2013, 09:08 AM
FuzzyTomCat's Avatar
FuzzyTomCat FuzzyTomCat is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 620
Send a message via Skype™ to FuzzyTomCat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Scientist View Post
Iím not so sure about that. Letís say you develop a 10KW generator for home use that is cheaper to use then grid power. If you open source it, then obviously anyone and the brother can build and sell your design.
But so what!
Consider the number of homes in just your state and if you could build and install your generator in just 1% of them do you think that might be able to supply you with a very comfortable income?
There maybe some prestige in having a patent hanging on you wall but if the government takes it over for "security reasons" then what good is it to you or anybody else?
The problem of home built electrical items of this type are the applicable codes (NEC) and regulations on installing a electrical device inside any residence or commercial establishment and requiring a mandatory Underwriters Laboratory (UL) listing for occupation life safety or other approved testing agency for insurance purposes. This can be done through the electrical contractor possibly in the state of which the installation was done at a huge cost but the insurance liability for any electrical contractor for a inspected and approved installation could be near impossible. This is not even considering the owners liability fire insurance for the structure being the installation needs the UL type listing without this listing would invalidate the fire insurance if the device caused a fire.

Once the patent has been confiscated by the US government through Apendix "L" - Chapter 17 the penalty for the inventor of disclosing ANY information on their filed patent application can be huge fines or even jail time.

Appendix "L" Patent Laws
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac...dated_laws.pdf (PDF file - 103 pages - Revised January 2013)

CHAPTER 17 - SECRECY OF CERTAIN INVENTIONS AND FILING APPLICATIONS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES
35 U.S.C. 181- Secrecy of certain inventions and withholding of patent.
Page Number ** L-44 **


Glen
__________________
Open Source Experimentalist
Open Source Research and Development

Last edited by FuzzyTomCat; 03-15-2013 at 09:31 AM. Reason: added corrected Appendix "L" Patent Laws "link"
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Please consider supporting Energetic Forum with a voluntary monthly subscription.

Choose your voluntary subscription

For one-time donations, please use the below button.


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v1.4.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
2007-2015 Copyright - Energetic Forum - All Rights Reserved

Bedini RPX Sideband Generator

Tesla Chargers