Energetic Forum  
Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest LinkedIn Delicious Digg Reddit WordPress StumbleUpon Tumblr Translate Addthis Aaron Murakami YouTube 2019 ENERGY CONFERENCE - ONLY 150 118 99 71 63 SEATS AVAILABLE!

2019 Energy Science & Technology Conference
ONLY 150 118 99 71 63 SEATS AVAILABLE - LIMITED SEATING
Get your tickets 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
  #1471  
Old 04-13-2011, 03:52 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrStiffler View Post
@rickoff Okay, so [if] it is at last found that he [Barry Soetoro Obama] is not a valid president and maybe an illegal, what do you feel this will accomplish? What would be done and by who?
First of all, Barry is the one who should have been required to prove his Constitutional eligibility to serve as POTUS. The responsibility should not have fallen on the people of the United States to prove his ineligibility. When people wake up and realize that neither of the major 2008 Presidential candidates were qualified to be placed on the ballot, everyone who voted for either of those candidates should rightly be angry as all hell. Since the ballot choices were fraudulent, and neither Obama nor McCain's votes can be counted as viable, it would seem logical that there are only two remedial resolutions available:

1. Throw out all the votes that went to Obama and McCain, and declare that the next runner-up is by default the actual winner in the election. That would be Ralph Nader. While Ralph did not receive any elecoral college votes in the 2008 election, the electoral college votes received by Obama and McCain would have to be redistributed to all of the candidates who were Constitutionally eligible. Obama would leave office in disgrace, Joe Biden would go with him, and Nader would be sworn in to office without delay to serve until the 2012 election. This would be the simplest solution, with the least disruption, and would on the face of it be fair according to the vote tallies. What wouldn't be fair is that the runner-ups in the Democrat and Republican primaries (Clinton and Romney) should have been on the 2008 ballot, and either of these people would probably have received way more votes than Nader if they had been included.

2. It could be ruled that solution #1 might be unfair since it is unknown how the people who voted for Obama and McCain would have voted had those candidates not been on the ballot. People might well have opted to cast their vote for Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party candidate, or Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate, or Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate. So to be fair, a new election could be called for. To actually be fair, though, only the remaining candidates listed in the 2008 election should be listed in the new ballot, along with the runner-ups in the Republican and Democrat primaries. The question under this solution, though, is how long it would take before a new election decides the result, and who would take the helm while the decision is awaited. Normally that would fall to the Vice President, but in this case where the election results were invalid it would be prudent, and I think demanded, that Biden could not stay. Next in line of succession, as Jim rightly pointed out, is House Speaker Boehner, followed by President Pro Tempore of the Senate Daniel Inouye, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Secretary of Treasury Tim Geithner, and 13 more cabinet members. Boehner has proven to be a lousy Speaker of the House, so it is hard to imagine him acting as President, but it couldn't be worse than what we have now and would only be for a short term.

Rick
__________________
 

Last edited by rickoff; 12-22-2011 at 08:17 PM. Reason: sp
Reply With Quote

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

  #1472  
Old 04-13-2011, 07:04 PM
DrStiffler DrStiffler is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizzy View Post
Hi Dr Stffler
Although I dont trust the courts or congress to do the right thing, I am still an American and believe in our Constitution. And we as Americans have to believe that our Constitution will protect us, so I would rather give the congress and the courts the opertunity to correct itself before more drastic measures are used.
Unfortunately the career politicians don't have the stomach to do what is right, if they did, social security would be fully funded and there would be no national debt. So when the actual proof surfices that Obama is the fraud we all know he is and when Congress and the Courts fail to act, that will be the time for the military and or the militias to act.
It is the sworn duty of the military and the malitias to up hold and protect the Constitution.
Bizzy


P.S. I just realized how ironic that statement is coming from a guy who uses a Swiss flag as an icon.
@Bizzy

Well I am an American also and do indeed believe in the Constitution we once had and were governed by, yet there are only those in our government that will even give lip service to the truth, 'that it has been circumvented' and no longer applies. How do they back this up? Well its all about 'interpenetration'. They run by their interpretation and that drastically differs from a TRUE Constitutionalist.

Here is my view and I will eat my words if I am wrong. Mr. O will get back in office, one way or another. Our Second Amendment Right will be stripped and the 3%-5% that are not RECEIVERS will make an effort to correct the wrong and the RECEIVERS will turn against them so the end game will fail.

It's line up folks and take your medicine, want it or not, we have been conditioned and prepared from the late 1700's for this final take over.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1473  
Old 04-13-2011, 07:54 PM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrStiffler View Post
@Bizzy

Here is my view and I will eat my words if I am wrong. Mr. O will get back in office, one way or another. Our Second Amendment Right will be stripped and the 3%-5% that are not RECEIVERS will make an effort to correct the wrong and the RECEIVERS will turn against them so the end game will fail.

It's line up folks and take your medicine, want it or not, we have been conditioned and prepared from the late 1700's for this final take over.
Dr Stiffler,
Unfortunately I agree with your view. I am afraid that he will be re-elected and in his last term the Constitution including the amendments will be gutted in the name of "security" or whatever the buzz word of the day may be.
It is then that I will hand over my guns... when they pry my cold dead fingers from the trigger.
There is one glimmer of hope. About 1998 there was a study in military which asked soldiers "would you enforce a measure to gather weapons and eliminate the 2nd Amendment if marshall law was declared?" I dont recall the exact numbers but approxametly 85% of the soldeirs said they would NOT support such a measure.
Another question in that survey asked "would you fire upon US Citizens to enforce martial law?" Again the exact number fails me but the same persentage said no.
Finally they asked "would you fight against a US malitia if martial law was declared?" This was more disturbing, The number who would not fight a US matlia under martial law was only 50%
Of course this was taken before 9-11 and much could have changed in the mind of our trooops since then, but it gives some hope when faced with the elimination of the Constituion.
Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1474  
Old 04-13-2011, 08:00 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Rickoff

I don't think there is any legal or constitutional basis for re-hashing the results of the last election, or scheduling a new election.If, and its a big IF, Obama were to be found 'unfit' for office, the 2 most logical, legal and constitutional ways to resolve are as I stated; either Biden takes over, or, because he was 'on the ticket' with Obama, and is tainted by association, he steps down, as well. In which case Boener as Speaker takes over. There is no Constitutional basis for then holding a new election. He simply serves out his term (actually, the remainder of 'Obama's' term) as President.
That is how the line of succession works; we didn't have an election when Johnson took over after Kennedy, (mores the pity), or even more applicable, when Nixon resigned and Ford took over.
Given the quality of those in Congress, could do a lot worse, and quite frankly, I don't see a lot better, REALISTICALLY. I know some might point to others they would prefer, like Ron Paul, but Ron is not the Speaker.
Anyway, I started by saying Big IF.Anyway, thats my take on what would happen, IF.Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1475  
Old 04-13-2011, 08:05 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,932
coincidence?

Not too long ago, Japan, France, China and Russia met secretly, the U.S.
was not invited of course, to discuss getting out of the U.S. Dollar as the
reserve currency. This would be one of the biggest threats to the
establishment.

Is it a coincidence that Japan's earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster happened
about the same time we go into Libya for a "humanitarian" project?
France gets about 17% of their oil from Libya, China gets about 7% from
Libya. If we completely control Libya's oil and if China has to go elsewhere,
would it put Russia and China against each other for resources?

There is of course a chance to have China or France come up in any
other oil producing country, but it is interesting.

Basically, between the disaster in Japan the Libya WAR, all four
countries, Japan, France, China and Russia are getting stirred up
economically - IF, France and China's oil from Libya are at risk.

It wouldn't surprise me if there is some connection there and I don't
rule out man made earthquakes as the cause of the Japanese disaster
caused by our govt in order to preserve the US Dollar as
the current reserve currency.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #1476  
Old 04-13-2011, 09:11 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
It wouldn't surprise me if there is some connection there and I don't rule out man made earthquakes as the cause of the Japanese disaster caused by our govt in order to preserve the US Dollar as the current reserve currency.
I wouldn't rule out anything either, but would tend to think that if the earthquake and resultant tsunami was indeed planned then the more logical reasoning behind it is massive worldwide population reduction due to high and extended atmospheric radiation contamination. As you can see, the situation is only getting worse and there is no end in sight. It's no secret that they would like to see an 80 to 90 percent population reduction, and see it as a necessity to preserve scarce resources. The high government officials and NWO folks will be safely hiding out in their well stocked bunkers until it is safe to come out again. As far as the dollar goes, every nation and individual who can is dumping it, and that was always a goal of the NWO plan along the road to initiating a one world government and one world currency. The Fed already owns over 50% of existing treasury debt notes, and with countries that previously purchased treasuries now wanting nothing to do with them, the FED is currently buying up close to 80% of new securities. It won't be long before they own 75% or more of the total US debt obligations. The fact that Congress has allowed this, and is still allowing this to occur, speaks volumes about their willingness to destroy the dollar and sell out the nation in return for their own security under a NWO system.
__________________
 

Last edited by rickoff; 04-13-2011 at 09:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1477  
Old 04-13-2011, 10:37 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
I don't think there is any legal or constitutional basis for re-hashing the results of the last election, or scheduling a new election.If, and its a big IF, Obama were to be found 'unfit' for office, the 2 most logical, legal and constitutional ways to resolve are as I stated; either Biden takes over, or, because he was 'on the ticket' with Obama, and is tainted by association, he steps down, as well. In which case Boener as Speaker takes over. There is no Constitutional basis for then holding a new election. He simply serves out his term (actually, the remainder of 'Obama's' term) as President.

That is how the line of succession works; we didn't have an election when Johnson took over after Kennedy, (mores the pity), or even more applicable, when Nixon resigned and Ford took over.
Yes, but those examples are for Presidents who were Constitutionally eligible to serve, and who were duly elected. If Obama and McCain are recognized to have been ineligible to have been placed on the ballot in the first place then the election results are obviously invalid. Since Obama was in fact ineligible, everything done as a result of his acting as Presidential candidate, and President, would be null and void - his appointment of Biden as running mate, cabinet appointments, tsar appointments, staff appointments, Supreme Court appointments, all laws enacted or vetoed by his signature - everything null and void as if it had never happened. Therefore, no one in his administration would even be qualified to take the helm in succession. It would have to go to Boehner temporarily. Holding a new election would be a historical first, but due to the facts involved it would be essential in order to restore the rights of the individual candidates who were cheated out of their rightful place on the 2008 ballot, and the rights of voters who were cheated by allowing the fraudulent candidates to be placed on the ballot. Having a new election is the only solution that could possibly remedy the injustice that was done.
__________________
 

Last edited by rickoff; 12-22-2011 at 08:19 PM. Reason: sp
Reply With Quote
  #1478  
Old 04-14-2011, 02:25 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Beg to disagree

Same argument could have been made about Nixon; without his 'dirty tricks', never would have been re-elected, therefore should be a 'do-over'. Or, "if American people had known what 'plumbers' and Nixon were doing, never would have re-elected him, have to have do-over". But, although American politics can be very childish, there are no 'do-overs'.
We are supposed to be a nation of laws, and pre-eminent among them is the Constitution.Framers could have said if a President is found to be unfit for office, well, obviously people wouldn't have elected him if they had known what they know now, therefore schedule a 'do-over' election; they didn't.
All the Constitution provides for is the line of succesion.My crystal ball is very fuzzy and out of focus, and none of us can 'see the future' with absolute clarity, but I'm pretty confident that this is the way the 'We' would have to proceed, 'IF'. Perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.
One thing I can't help thinking, after seeing soundbite of Trump, on National news; Whoever wins Republican nomination, this time around, they are going to HAVE to say what Trump said; "If there is 'nothing there', why doesn't Obama simply release his birth certificate? That would put an end to the speculation." And, of coarse Obama and his people have NO ANSWER for that.
I can't see any way for him to go thru another election cycle without this coming up.But, as I said, my 'crystal ball' is pretty fuzzy,....Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1479  
Old 04-14-2011, 02:59 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
I wonder if George Soros is really behind wikileaks:
Bretton Woods 2.0: Soros New World Order Conference

In any case, interesting to see if the July 14th movement
makes the mainstream news:
Prepare For Revolution: The Empire State Rebellion Begins on June 14th | The Public Record

"So on this Flag Day, as we once again confront tyranny, let’s all stand up for ourselves in a decentralized manner and launch our own revolt. We’ve been talking with several organizations about turning the “Empire State Rebellion” into a reality by organizing a peaceful mass demonstration throughout New York’s Financial District – from Wall Street to the NY Federal Reserve, to the corporate offices of the six big banks and the ratings agencies. On June 14th, we will launch a massive display of non-violent force with this list of demands: End the “campaign finance and lobbying racket,” “break up the banks,” “enforce RICO laws” against the “organized criminal class,” and order “Ben Bernanke to step down.”

June 14th will also be a day when people who haven’t already moved their money out of the big banks finally withdraw their funds. The silver movement will have a “Buy Silver Day.” There will be many different actions from many different people."
If the UN financial branches have their way, we will have a one world economic order, which is synonymous with one world government. The fact that they manipulate financial tragedies to so consistently work out in their favor shows that they are only interested in one thing: power over all aspects of world finance. If they are permitted to succeed, it will be economic slavery.

As it stands right now, the Federal Reserve loans every dollar to our Government with interest. Ultimately, the only logical result is default. Because we are having our money printed for us with interest by the Federal Reserve, we are paying for every dollar that has ever been in circulation, burned or not.

Pay close attention in the coming week. Whatever the new economic order reveals, we should all be as alert and as thoughtful of the scope of its proposals as we can. Notice that there is little room to breathe in the legal language used thus far. I am sure we can count on more of the same.

Campaign For Liberty — The conclusions coming from Bretton Woods II

Government monopoly and control over money has been an economic and social disaster. Wealth has been squandered and misinvested; the savings of millions have been destroyed through inflation; and the social fabric of societies has been weakened at various times during periods of monetary debauchery.

Money must be separated from the State. The Federal Reserve System must be abolished; all legal tender laws prohibiting individuals from using and contracting in whatever money they desire must be eliminated. The market — which means all of us in our roles as consumers and producers — should be left free to decide which commodities shall be selected as the most advantageous mediums of exchange. Also, the market should be left free to determine the economically most useful forms of banking and financial intermediation.

Free Market Money - Instead of Political Manipulation

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1480  
Old 04-14-2011, 03:41 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
Same argument could have been made about Nixon; without his 'dirty tricks', never would have been re-elected, therefore should be a 'do-over'. Or, "if American people had known what 'plumbers' and Nixon were doing, never would have re-elected him, have to have do-over".
I understand your position, however this isn't a question of dirty tricks, which both the major political parties and candidates have always used to their advantage whenever possible. This is about eligibility. Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon was Constitutionally eligible to be placed on the ballot, whereas Obama and McCain were not. Therefore, placing their names on the ballots in both the primary and Presidential elections was unconstitutional. If that fact is recognized, the election results are null and void, as the Constitution is the supreme law of the US. With the results thrown out, no one in the Obama administration could qualify to act as President in succession, and therefore Boehner would take the helm until the next election. If it were early on in the game (like April 2009, for instance) it is quite likely that a new election would be demanded and scheduled. As things currently go, being much farther along and unlikely that Obama could be unthroned any time soon, it is far more likely that Boehner would simply serve until the 2012 election.

In my honest opinion, I don't see this as ever getting to the point where Obama is thrown out before 2012. Congress realizes that if Obama's Presidency is declared unconstitutional then it opens a veritable Pandora's Box of dilemmas. I think that is why Clarence Thomas made reference to the Supreme Court avoiding the eligibility question.

Realistically, I think the best we can hope for is that all of the candidates opposing Obama in his 2012 reelection bid will make a huge issue of his eligibility, and that the 13 states currently working on legislation to ensure that candidates are eligible, before adding their names to ballots, will follow through and enact such legislation before November 2012. Actually, if just one state disallows Obama's inclusion on the ballot for the reason that Obama fails to offer valid proof of eligibility, other states will have to either drop his name also or answer to eligibility challenges made by other candidates - before the election can move forward.

Rick
__________________
 

Last edited by rickoff; 04-14-2011 at 03:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1481  
Old 04-14-2011, 04:09 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickoff View Post

In my honest opinion, I don't see this as ever getting to the point where Obama is thrown out before 2012. Congress realizes that if Obama's Presidency is declared unconstitutional then it opens a veritable Pandora's Box of dilemmas. I think that is why Clarence Thomas made reference to the Supreme Court avoiding the eligibility question.

Realistically, I think the best we can hope for is that all of the candidates opposing Obama in his 2012 reelection bid will make a huge issue of his eligibility, and that the 13 states currently working on legislation to ensure that candidates are eligible, before adding their names to ballots, will follow through and enact such legislation before November 2012. Actually, if just one state disallows Obama's inclusion on the ballot for the reason that Obama fails to offer valid proof of eligibility, other states will have to either drop his name also or answer to eligibility challenges made by other candidates - before the election can move forward.

Rick
Natural born or foreigner, where is the beef?
YouTube - Pitbull - Blood is Thicker Than water
Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1482  
Old 04-14-2011, 04:38 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,932
eligibility organization

Someone should start an organization to track the eligibility of every
state representative and post that in an online chart. Although natural
born isn't required for many positions - Governor, mayors, etc... in case
they ever do try to run for president, it can ensure anyone that runs is
eligible. Should be pretty simple and there are people who are passionate
enough to put something like this together.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #1483  
Old 04-14-2011, 04:53 PM
cody cody is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 407
Quote:
Also wondering whats going to happen to IRA's and the companies that manage them.Have one where I can put $ in physical gold; supposedly they actually buy gold and 'hold onto it' for you.Or, should I just take the $ out, pay the penalty, and invest in gold I can hold onto, my own self. If I could be confident of getting the timing right, I could take the $ out, invest in gold, and then pay the penalty in hyperinflated (worthless) dollars! Hmmmm,..Jim
I would have much more piece of mind personally holding physical when/if things fall apart. If it dosnt break your bank, I would say take possession of your gold/silver, and get a gun.


On hyperinflation:

I think its obvious that our money is loosing value as we see prices going up on everything. But we are not seeing the same scenario as Germany or Zimbabwe had. As their prices went up, so did their wages. Im not getting paid more money. Are any of you? No one is giving me wheelbarrows full of cash to spend. So unless something fundamentally changes very soon you can see that our situation is a bit different. What exactly will the outcome be? I guess only time will tell but its not looking good for the dollar.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1484  
Old 04-14-2011, 05:00 PM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
In extreme times, lead and gun powder are more valuable than paper gold or siver. Those should be the main precious commodities that should be stock piled
Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1485  
Old 04-14-2011, 05:52 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizzy View Post
In extreme times, lead and gun powder are more valuable than paper gold or siver. Those should be the main precious commodities that should be stock piled
Bizzy
Does that mean you would convert your retirement savings to bullets? I guess it all depends on how much (or how little) savings you have socked away. For those of us already retired, and with sizable retirement assets, it wouldn't be a very practical solution. After all, what would you do with say $100,000 worth of bullets? And where could you even amass that much ammo without that purchase or purchases being "red flagged?"

Certainly you should do whatever it takes to assure that you and your family are going to be secure against predatory attacks by those who failed to provide for their own needs, and if some of those assurances include bullets then you want to realistically have enough on hand, and maybe some extra that you could use for barter if you don't need them, but converting your entire retirement savings to bullets seems like, pardon the expression, "overkill," would you not agree?

Rick
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1486  
Old 04-14-2011, 06:09 PM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickoff View Post
Does that mean you would convert your retirement savings to bullets? I guess it all depends on how much (or how little) savings you have socked away. For those of us already retired, and with sizable retirement assets, it wouldn't be a very practical solution. After all, what would you do with say $100,000 worth of bullets? And where could you even amass that much ammo without that purchase or purchases being "red flagged?"

Certainly you should do whatever it takes to assure that you and your family are going to be secure against predatory attacks by those who failed to provide for their own needs, and if some of those assurances include bullets then you want to realistically have enough on hand, and maybe some extra that you could use for barter if you don't need them, but converting your entire retirement savings to bullets seems like, pardon the expression, "overkill," would you not agree?

Rick
Hi Rickoff,
I actually try to balance between the two. I figure since my wife and I both hunt, we will still use our ammo even if nothing happens. If things do start to happen we are ready. Either way we would be ready. We try to keep a certain level of ammo at our house. The amount may seem extreme to some, but may also seem not enough to others.
We are not close to retiring so we keep balanced 401k and a balanced portofolio from stocks to hard gold. The only thing i meant by my statement that "lead is more valuable than paper gold or silver" is that lead/bullets are more practical when you are trying to survive.
Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1487  
Old 04-14-2011, 07:05 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron View Post
Someone should start an organization to track the eligibility of every state representative and post that in an online chart. Although natural born isn't required for many positions - Governor, mayors, etc... in case they ever do try to run for president, it can ensure anyone that runs is eligible. Should be pretty simple and there are people who are passionate enough to put something like this together.
Good idea, Aaron, and it probably is being done already, even though we may not be aware of who is doing it. After all, attorney Leo Donofrio originally brought suit to seek a court order to stop the Nov. 4, 2008 Presidential election. When that was denied, he amended his complaint to stop the Electoral College from certifying Obama as the winning candidate. Leo recognized, and stated early on, that not only was Obama ineligible to be included on the ballot, but that John McCain and Roger Calero were ineligible as well. Calero, you may remember, was the Socialist Workers Party Presidential candidate on the ballot in several states, both in 2004 and 2008, but was born in Nicaragua, and to parents of that country. What's more, he wasn't even a US citizen at the time of his inclusion on the ballot, let alone a "natural born citizen!" Calero was a legal alien resident at the time, but should never have been issued a permanent resident "Green Card" in 1990, because he was convicted of a felony drug sale in 1988. Just shows how easy it is to get into the US, gain legal status, and get your name placed on a Presidential ballot in violation of the Constitution. What if Calero had been as adept as Obama at fooling the masses, gathering up a huge grassroots following, and had won the 2008 election?

I'm really glad to see that some states are now getting serious about eligibility and enacting standards of acceptable documentation. Knowing what lies ahead for him in the 2012 campaign, and getting onto the ballots, it is amazing that Obama has already announced he will run for reelection. I suppose, though, that at some point he will produce a long form birth document that looks authentic enough to pass muster. After all, there are some really good forgers out there, and perhaps Hawaii still has some of the 1961 blank certificates, and official seal on hand, that were used at that time. The typed information, using an old typewriter, would be no problem, and the forger would only need to write in the necessary signatures to match authentic signatures of those persons. How could the document (actually a certified copy of the forgery) be proven false if the forgery is placed in the Hawaii vital statistics files and said to be the original record? I really think that is exactly the scenario Obama is counting on pulling off. The fact remains, though, that while the existence of a long form certificate of a Hawaiian birth could purport to validate a claim to US citizenship, it still would not qualify Obama as a "natural born citizen," and that is the point which most people in this debate on eligibility are failing to acknowledge.

Rick
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1488  
Old 04-14-2011, 07:16 PM
rickoff's Avatar
rickoff rickoff is offline
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maine, USA
Posts: 3,343
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizzy View Post
The only thing I meant by my statement that "lead is more valuable than paper gold or silver" is that lead/bullets are more practical when you are trying to survive. Bizzy
That's what I figured you really meant, and just wanted to clarify it. Yes, when you can't just go to the grocery store any more, those who have the equipment and ability to hunt for food to put on the table will be in a far better position than those who do not. Is the hunting good in your area? What state are you in, Bizzy? I'm in Maine, a state that is still 90% forest land, and the fishing and hunting here is excellent, but I wonder how long that would remain true if suddenly everyone had to do that just to survive. What are your thoughts on that? To my thinking, it is a rather short term solution that might get people through a few tough months, but it will be adequate canned and dry food stocks, and a good seed bank and gardening skills, that assure survival in the longer run.

Rick
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1489  
Old 04-14-2011, 07:34 PM
DrStiffler DrStiffler is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickoff View Post
Does that mean you would convert your retirement savings to bullets? I guess it all depends on how much (or how little) savings you have socked away. For those of us already retired, and with sizable retirement assets, it wouldn't be a very practical solution. After all, what would you do with say $100,000 worth of bullets? And where could you even amass that much ammo without that purchase or purchases being "red flagged?"

Certainly you should do whatever it takes to assure that you and your family are going to be secure against predatory attacks by those who failed to provide for their own needs, and if some of those assurances include bullets then you want to realistically have enough on hand, and maybe some extra that you could use for barter if you don't need them, but converting your entire retirement savings to bullets seems like, pardon the expression, "overkill," would you not agree?

Rick
@Rick
Quote:
And where could you even amass that much ammo without that purchase or purchases being "red flagged?"
This is an interesting statement. How would you be red flagged? I was told that if you buy in bulk from say CheaperThanDirt in 500 to 1000 round quantities that one could expect a visit from BATF, although I know of a number of people that are stock piling and have far exceeded that so called door knock limit. Strange indeed, some report this in a serious way and the ones I know in Texas have had no problem. Granted they could be building a database of who has what, yet are they obtaining this info from sellers without a court order?

Anyway I also heard that (rumor as can't verify) that Wal-Mart might start asking for ID when they sell ammo. If that is true it becomes another reason to boycott them and their DHS links via their big sis broadcast monitors.

I can speak from the LE side (xLE to clarify) also and see no reason other than the feds for seeking ID from someone. See the BATF arbitrarily determines what they call an arsenal, no such law, just their policy!.

It is not uncommon in my state for vast numbers of the 3-5% of keep our constitution individuals to have in excess of 100K rounds and many of them are in LE and indeed one happens to be from one of those three letter groups.

Strange world and getting stranger every hour.
__________________
 

Last edited by DrStiffler; 04-14-2011 at 07:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #1490  
Old 04-14-2011, 07:44 PM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickoff View Post
That's what I figured you really meant, and just wanted to clarify it. Yes, when you can't just go to the grocery store any more, those who have the equipment and ability to hunt for food to put on the table will be in a far better position than those who do not. Is the hunting good in your area? What state are you in, Bizzy? I'm in Maine, a state that is still 90% forest land, and the fishing and hunting here is excellent, but I wonder how long that would remain true if suddenly everyone had to do that just to survive. What are your thoughts on that? To my thinking, it is a rather short term solution that might get people through a few tough months, but it will be adequate canned and dry food stocks, and a good seed bank and gardening skills, that assure survival in the longer run.

Rick
Hi Rick
We are in Pennsylvania that land of potholes and taxes. On the state lands the hunting is terrable thanks to our antler resistriction, but on private land it is excellent. We both got our limit of deer last year. We also get plenty of rabbit and squirrel and could eat opposium if I had to although I think my wife and kids would complain. We also garden(including harvesting our own seeds), can, smoke meat, fish and make home made wine. I know my family and I would survive and I know my close freinds would be cause they are alot like me.

If everyone had to to hunt to survive?...They wouldn't ...most people would starve to death because most dont know how to provide for themselves. Which means once the stores run out and the goverment trucks are late people would either starve or loot.

Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1491  
Old 04-14-2011, 07:52 PM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrStiffler View Post
@Rick


This is an interesting statement. How would you be red flagged? I was told that if you buy in bulk from say CheaperThanDirt in 500 to 1000 round quantities that one could expect a visit from BATF, although I know of a number of people that are stock piling and have far exceeded that so called door knock limit. Strange indeed, some report this in a serious way and the ones I know in Texas have had no problem. Granted they could be building a database of who has what, yet are they obtaining this info from sellers without a court order?

Anyway I also heard that (rumor as can't verify) that Wal-Mart might start asking for ID when they sell ammo. If that is true it becomes another reason to boycott them and their DHS links via their big sis broadcast monitors.

I can speak from the LE side (xLE to clarify) also and see no reason other than the feds for seeking ID from someone. See the BATF arbitrarily determines what they call an arsenal, no such law, just their policy!.

It is not uncommon in my state for vast numbers of the 3-5% of keep our constitution individuals to have in excess of 100K rounds and many of them are in LE and indeed one happens to be from one of those three letter groups.

Strange world and getting stranger every hour.
Hi Dr Stiffler,
I know the ATF watches me and I am certain they have a file on me. LIKE THEY DO EVERY GUN OWNER.
We buy ammo regularly, around here that is common. We even have ammo figured into our monthly budget.
My wife and kids and i take turns buying ammo to keep any notice down to a minimum. We always pay cash and never show ID unless we are asked. If you can get a young guy on a late shift at a store they rarely ask for id.
The key is not to draw attention to yourself and not to keep all of your ammo together and avoid looking like a stock pile
Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1492  
Old 04-14-2011, 07:58 PM
DrStiffler DrStiffler is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizzy View Post
Hi Rick
We are in Pennsylvania that land of potholes and taxes. On the state lands the hunting is terrable thanks to our antler resistriction, but on private land it is excellent. We both got our limit of deer last year. We also get plenty of rabbit and squirrel and could eat opposium if I had to although I think my wife and kids would complain. We also garden(including harvesting our own seeds), can, smoke meat, fish and make home made wine. I know my family and I would survive and I know my close freinds would be cause they are alot like me.

If everyone had to to hunt to survive?...They wouldn't ...most people would starve to death because most dont know how to provide for themselves. Which means once the stores run out and the goverment trucks are late people would either starve or loot.

Bizzy
@Bizzy
Hey I hear you as I lived in the State of Washington for almost 40 years and around that area and into Idaho, not to leave out Montana the hunting was very good. But aren't you all missing the point with the hunting bit? Only those that are in states that have open lad suitable for hunting and indeed have game could consider such an option. What about the city folks (SOL) I guess? Hey when you have restricted travel imposed they will not be able to leave town and you will have to sneak to the woods. I must disagree and consider this as an option to be just a remote option. Think about it, your out in the woods blasting away and they are looking for you to take your weapon. No! Stocked food, hunting will be a small if at all viable option.
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1493  
Old 04-14-2011, 08:11 PM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrStiffler View Post
@Bizzy
Hey I hear you as I lived in the State of Washington for almost 40 years and around that area and into Idaho, not to leave out Montana the hunting was very good. But aren't you all missing the point with the hunting bit? Only those that are in states that have open lad suitable for hunting and indeed have game could consider such an option. What about the city folks (SOL) I guess? Hey when you have restricted travel imposed they will not be able to leave town and you will have to sneak to the woods. I must disagree and consider this as an option to be just a remote option. Think about it, your out in the woods blasting away and they are looking for you to take your weapon. No! Stocked food, hunting will be a small if at all viable option.
Hi Dr Stiffler
Yes if they are in the city they are SOL. Pure and simple. That is why we live in the country. My wife and I enjoy it. We want to retire here and we can survive here. I used to live in various cities around the world and can speak three languages fluently but that life is not for me.
With the food we have now... smoked meats canned wine etc... we can actually survive for over six months. We use the food regualrly and just replenish our stock so we know it is always fresh and never wasted. There is no sence stock piling something you'll never use.

As far as them looking for me while I am hunting... Only shoot once or you can use a bow.
Besides when everything goes south there will be so much disruption and chaos they will be too busy to worry about some dumb hillbillie like me.
Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1494  
Old 04-14-2011, 09:32 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,333
Nite Ops:

YouTube - Long Range Thermal Imaging
YouTube - Army - Insurgents Elminiated After Planting IED
YouTube - "Gunship strafing run" FULL part 2
YouTube - Anti-Nightvision camouflage

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1495  
Old 04-15-2011, 12:10 AM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Rickoff

I agree with your overall assesment, i.e. too late for a new election, etc.On faking a birth certificate, the ? is why didn't he do this by now, or even before running? O.k., he 'thought he had it covered', and DID get away with getting elected. But, this has continued to hound him.Yes, was able to discredit the 'birthers' as a bunch of nuts, to the sheeple.But, as I say, its continued to hound him, and now Trumps getting it into mainstream media, and thats just a taste of what he's going to get during re-election.

I'm wondering if its not as easy as you say, when your under a microscope of public scrutiny.Maybe he can't produce a viable, able to pass muster copy?

On the stockpileing, 1 thing to consider.During times of scarcity, little luxuries assume value in excess of their intrinsic value. Thats what I was talking about earlier, with tobacco.Other items you can easily stockpile now, chocolate bars.Also whiskey.We've all heard what US soldiers were able to 'barter for' during WW2, with stockings and chocolate bars.Seriously, little luxuries have extra value, because they remind you of the time before scarcity.These are the things to stockpile, for bartering with later.I buy a case of chocolate bars every so often.Also whiskey, even tho I and wife don't drink, and as I said, tobacco in airtight cans. Things that are the 'spice of life'.Whiskey I don't stockpile a lot, cause people will be able to make their own.Making your own chocolate bars is more difficult. And, I believe its illegal to possess tobacco seeds, so growing your own would initially be difficult.
Anyway, just something to consider, as barter items.

On people in the cities, they'll eat cats.There are bunches of them. Koreans did, during their famine.Maybe stray dogs, as well. And then each other.Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1496  
Old 04-15-2011, 11:39 AM
Bizzy's Avatar
Bizzy Bizzy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 485
Arizona

Good morning
It looks like Arizona took the first step and will now require all presidential candidates to show proof of birth and citizenship before they can be on the ballot.
I bet Obama already has a team of lawyers looking for loop holes.
Bizzy
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1497  
Old 04-15-2011, 01:54 PM
aljhoa aljhoa is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 2,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizzy View Post
Good morning
It looks like Arizona took the first step and will now require all presidential candidates to show proof of birth and citizenship before they can be on the ballot.
Bizzy
Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
Yes, was able to discredit the 'birthers' as a bunch of nuts, to the sheeple.
Neither birthplace nor citizenship makes US corp.’s candidate the "natural born".

Al
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1498  
Old 04-15-2011, 03:42 PM
Aaron's Avatar
Aaron Aaron is offline
Co-Founder & Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Washington State
Posts: 10,932
tobacco seeds

Quote:
Originally Posted by dutchdivco View Post
And, I believe its illegal to possess tobacco seeds, so growing your own would initially be difficult.
You can buy tobacco seeds all over the place online.
__________________
Sincerely,
Aaron Murakami

Reply With Quote
  #1499  
Old 04-15-2011, 04:34 PM
dutchdivco dutchdivco is offline
Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,000
Thanks, Aaron

I'll check that out. I was just repeating something I had heard, years ago, and never verified.There are some things on the I-net like that.Can't get Lugols solution, (iodine) in more than 1/4 oz., from a pharmacy. Can get 4 oz. bottles on the I-net. Can buy Rx. meds without a Rx., online, so long as they aren't 'get highs'.
So, I will look at getting some tobacco seeds, to add to my collection.Thanks. Jim
__________________
 
Reply With Quote
  #1500  
Old 04-15-2011, 06:41 PM
DrStiffler DrStiffler is offline
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizzy View Post
Good morning
It looks like Arizona took the first step and will now require all presidential candidates to show proof of birth and citizenship before they can be on the ballot.
I bet Obama already has a team of lawyers looking for loop holes.
Bizzy
@Bizzy and All

Bizzy I may be all wrong and if so just ignore what I say because I am not trying to contradict or say you or anyone are wrong.

In a few posts back you say you have a six month supply of food and I assume water. What I question is from your posts about how you feel and are preparing that you with hunting and all should have far more than six months. Now here is what I mean by that statement.

Talking with people that are concerned I have been lead to understand that most of them are thinking of preparing in kind to their present life. What that means is they may now have a 4,5 or six course meal and a soda or two along with it. I about fall over when I hear this silliness. When the SHTF you will be in a good position if you have supplies to just (maintain) life and a moderate amount of energy reserve to enable responses that may be called for.

When I explain that a total daily intake may be a couple of crackers for breakfast, a few canned sausages or sardines or tuna for a lunch (if you can indeed have a lunch) followed by a small portion of say beans or rice or oat meal for the final meal of the day, I get this crazy old man talking stare from them. This is where we are, we are so complacent that the thought of ruffing it is that, just a thought. How in the world they answer can someone change a life style and live like that? When I respond that you do or die, the conversation ends as they know for sure I have lost all reality.
__________________
 
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 10:12 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