Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Logic, Search for Truth, Clear Forum Goal, Dialectic Method, Socratic Method, Mental Jujitsu

Posted 5 years ago on Jan. 16, 2013, 5:06 a.m. EST by Middleaged (5140)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Logic, Search for Truth, Forum Goal, Dialectic Method, Socratic Method, Mental Jujitsu: Info from Wikipedia. I am not a lawyer, but the Socratic Method looks like what prosecutors or lawyers do in a cross examination or interview. Sophistic art on the other hand is what politicians are doing (Rhetoric). The end goal is Truth.

So I believe what all forums hope to accomplish is the Socratic Method to Reach the Truth and for men and women to grow But if I am the last one to learn this stuff …well...

Dialectic (also dialectics and the dialectical method) is a method of argument for resolving disagreement that has been central to European and Indian philosophy since antiquity. The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues. The dialectical method is discourse between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter guided by reasoned arguments.[1] The term dialectics is not synonymous with the term debate.

Socrates favored truth as the highest value, proposing that it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo, dialectic. Socrates valued rationality (appealing to logic, not emotion) as the proper means for persuasion, the discovery of truth, and the determinant for one's actions. To Socrates, truth, not aretē, was the greater good, and each person should, above all else, seek truth to guide one's life. Therefore, Socrates opposed the Sophists and their teaching of rhetoric as art and as emotional oratory requiring neither logic nor proof.[4]

One way to proceed—the Socratic method—is to show that a given hypothesis (with other admissions) leads to a contradiction; thus, forcing the withdrawal of the hypothesis. Another dialectical resolution of disagreement is by denying a presupposition of the contending thesis and antithesis; thereby, proceeding to sublation (transcendence) to synthesis, a third thesis.

In classical philosophy, dialectic (Greek: διαλεκτική) is a form of reasoning based upon dialogue of arguments and counter-arguments, advocating propositions (theses) and counter-propositions (antitheses). The outcome of such a dialectic might be the refutation of a relevant proposition, or of a synthesis, or a combination of the opposing assertions, or a qualitative improvement of the dialogue.[14][15]

This is what we want to accomplish in a Salon or Forum

In Plato's dialogues and other Socratic dialogues, Socrates attempts to examine someone's beliefs, at times even first principles or premises by which we all reason and argue. Socrates typically argues by cross-examining his interlocutor's claims and premises in order to draw out a contradiction or inconsistency among them. According to Plato, the rational detection of error amounts to finding the proof of the antithesis.[17]


Logic was studied in several ancient civilizations, including India,[6] China,[7] and Greece. In the West, logic was established as a formal discipline by Aristotle, who gave it a fundamental place in philosophy. The study of logic was part of the classical trivium, which also included grammar and rhetoric.
In medieval universities, the trivium comprised the three subjects that were taught first: grammar, logic, and rhetoric.
Sublation can be seen at work at the most basic level of Hegel's system of logic. The two concepts Being and Nothing are each both preserved and changed through sublation in the concept Becoming. Similarly, determinateness, or quality, and magnitude, or quantity, are each both preserved and sublated in the concept measure.
Trivium was preparatory for the Quadrivium, which consists of geometry, arithmetic, astronomy, and music.
Logic is often divided into three parts, inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.


Mental Jujitsu, Gandhi was doing that to politicians. He was a Lawyer in South Africa (before returning to India), and he became a great speaker for civil rights. He spoke in a way that made him a player, an equal, and put him in the same game as the political leaders. I have a couple of simple examples of what I might say to a politician who brings his talking points to the microphone.

A) Sometimes if we ask questions back to the politician he is caught off guard and he loses support, but that is too much to hope for. Speakers all will try to prepare themselves with simple narratives of what their intension is ... and at least 3 main points to repeat to the camera. Sir, what is your intension and what is your position?
B) Questions can redirect the conversation toward a deeper issue or a deeper truth. Like answering a question with a better question, right. We all want fewer gun murders and gun crimes. Sir, why not hold townhalls or national referendums to get the people solutions, feelings, thoughts, and principals more fully revealed? How many people have really been in touch with your office and what are they telling you and how available have you been to record the peoples feelings?
C) Citing clear and appropriate principals applicable to the issue at hand in response to being questioned or berated. We are all people. We all want the best solutions for the community. Public health, principals, prior legal judgments, changes in technology, appropriate staffing, budget, enforcement, and monitoring are all things we should be carefully looking at.

Sorry not much above in my text that is really instructive for mental jujitsu. But probably Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi can still show us a lot… if we can translate it to our current congress and current culture.



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Puzzling Dialectic Questions:

1) Obama is Commander in Chief and Responsible for 4 years of killing of women & Kids in Pakistan, Afghanistan & Iraq... and it still continues But he is pushing for rifle ban for total of 679 total rifle/shot gun murders in the US while ignoring his global war containing high civilian casualties. Looks like 2011 rifle murders totals 323 that would apply to any assault rifle ban. How many civilians have we killed in Pakistan in 2011 or 2012???


2) US is producing millions of small arms every year, conducting foreign military sales, sales of major weapons, and possibly selling surplus arms overseas.... but we don't hear about attempts to stop US Weapons Sales.... as we address the many news media stories about Gun Control. In fact the CIA and other US agencies can attempt to halt small arms movements from African or Middle East countries to other countries in arms deals AND This Is normal Intelligence gathering activity. But we don't hear about the US trying to capture small arms or major weapons in the Middle East, Africa, or Afghanistan. Why is that?

Aren't #1 & #2 above some kind of character flaw or an omission of convienence??? Often times there are periods where we know a region is heating up and we even have military in the region already. If we could capture or confiscate weapons it could stop regional conflicts like Libya and Syria from being so deep and bloody.

Doesn't it seem like the US permits certain conflicts to happen while preventing or cutting off other conflicts????

See books by Robert Baer to confirm that the CIA monitors or used to monitor and track Weapons Sales and movement in the Middle East. "See No Evil" "How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude"

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Question who can teach us how to change government or what to do as an activist or how to speak to get the message across or to "Deal with Policians"

a) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Sharp
b) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohandas_Karamchand_Gandhi
c) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr.
d) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Haw
e) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_(activist)
f) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jody_Williams
g) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bevel
h) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg#The_Pentagon_Papers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_peace_activists (wow, long list)

I don't know if we want to add to the above list. I have to research this.

Maybe Plato, Socrates, Aristotle have a place here. Maybe there are some Lawyers like Ralph Nader that deserve a look. Maybe some founding father deserves a place. A change agent is not necessarily a guide to activism...


Trust busting

Pro-labor progressives such as Samuel Gompers argued that industrial monopolies were unnatural economic institutions which suppressed the competition which was necessary for progress and improvement.[26][27] United States antitrust law is the body of laws that prohibits anti-competitive behavior (monopoly) and unfair business practices. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft supported trust-busting.[28]

When Roosevelt left the Republican Party in 1912, he took with him many of the intellectual leaders of progressivism, but very few political leaders.[41] The Republican Party then became notably more committed to business-oriented and efficiency oriented progressivism, typified by Taft and Herbert Hoover.[42]

Always dangerous listing either a Lawyer or a Politician as a Progressive, Refomer, or helper for activists....

Here is a list of possible progressives from Wikipedia that you might be able to contact, talk with, or elist in a Progressive Project or Reform Project:

Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold, Al Franken, Debbie Stabenow, Dennis Kucinich, Alan Grayson, Mike Gravel, Cynthia McKinney, John Edwards, Sherrod Brown, Kathleen Sebelius, David McReynolds, Ralph Nader, Howard Dean, Peter Camejo, Al Gore,

I would add Rand Paul as a possible Reformer. Barney Franks is not on the list in Wikipedia and he might still play a role in politics as a retiree with contacts. Bill Clinton is a Retiree with clout. If we have projects .... then we should try to contact our personal heros for support and advise.

Politically Active Third Party Presidential Canidates:

Rocky Anderson, mayor Salt Lake, Justice Party,
Luis J. Rodriguez, California, Justice Party,
Virgil Goode, congressman, Virginia, Constitution Party,
Jim Clymer, Pennsylvania, Constitution Party,
Jill Stein, Massachusetts, Green Party,
Cheri Honkala,Pennsylvania, Green Party,
Stewart Alexander, California, Green Party,
Roseanne Barr, Hawaii, Green Party,
Kent Mesplay, California, Green Party,
Gary Johnson, New Mexico, Libertarian Party,
Jim Gray,California, Libertarian Party,
R.J. Harris, Oklahoma, Libertarian Party,
Carl Person, New york, Libertarian Party,
Bill Still, Virginia, Libertarian Party,
Michealene Risley, Activist, California,
Laurence Kotlikoff, Economist, Massachusetts,
Darrell Castle, Attorney,Tennessee,
Laurie Roth, talk show, Washington,
James Harris, New York, Socialist Workers Party,
Maura DeLuca, Socialist Workers Party,
Peta Lindsay, activist, Pennsylvania, Socialism and Liberation
Gloria La Riva, Socialism and Liberation Edward C. Noonan, Activist, California,
Cindy Sheehan, Activist, Peace and Freedom Party,
Stephen Durham, Ativist, New York, Peace and Freedom Party,
Robert David Steele, Open-source intelligence advocate, of Virginia Jerry White, Michigan Socialist Equality Party, Jesse Ventura, Governor, Minnesota,


[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 5 years ago

The Oregon System remain here in Oregon. Salem, Oregon means Peace Hurricane and is the most democratic ideal location in the world. People come here and we do this...

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

I did a web search on Peacehurrican and it came up on an OWS Post by you where you explain what your name means. Wow, the internet is amazing. Before the Wobblies were Banned in the USA ... workers were very active in Oregon, Washington Areas.... I guess. From what I have seen. Industrial Workers of the World. I guess corporations and conservatives were worried about Communism at the time. Or it could be just part of the Oppression of the worker who had no rights to unionize, organize, no minimum wage, no limit to hours forced to work, no work place safety.


[-] 1 points by gsw (3147) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 5 years ago

Centralia massacre.


Interesting about Wobblies being banned

The IWW's goal was to promote worker solidarity in the revolutionary struggle to overthrow the employing class; its motto was "an injury to one is an injury to all", which improved upon the 19th century Knights of Labor's creed, "an injury to one is the concern of all." In particular, the IWW was organized because of the belief among many unionists, socialists, anarchists and radicals that the AFL not only had failed to effectively organize the U.S. working class, as only about 5% of all workers belonged to unions in 1905, but also was organizing according to narrow craft principles which divided groups of workers. The Wobblies believed that all workers should organize as a class, a philosophy which is still reflected in the Preamble to the current IWW Constitution:

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Yeah, funny the depth of this story, but most of us probably never heard of the IWW.

We can pose that this is close to the orgins of some conservatives feelings

1) conservatives refusal to talk about certain subjects with their kids or other kids.
2) Conservatives total hatred for communism or anything that sounds like socialism
3) Conservatives hatred for Unions.
4) Another reason to keep things out of K-12 History Books

[-] 1 points by gsw (3147) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 5 years ago

Though never developed in any detail, Wobblies envisioned the general strike as the means by which the wage system would be overthrown and a new economic system ushered in, one which emphasized people over profit, cooperation over competition.

The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. There can be no peace so long as hunger and want are found among millions of the working people and the few, who make up the employing class, have all the good things of life. Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the means of production, abolish the wage system, and live in harmony with the Earth. We find that the centering of the management of industries into fewer and fewer hands makes the trade unions unable to cope with the ever growing power of the employing class. The trade unions foster a state of affairs which allows one set of workers to be pitted against another set of workers in the same industry, thereby helping defeat one another in wage wars. Moreover, the trade unions aid the employing class to mislead the workers into the belief that the working class have interests in common with their employers. These conditions can be changed and the interest of the working class upheld only by an organization formed in such a way that all its members in any one industry, or in all industries if necessary, cease work whenever a strike or lockout is on in any department thereof, thus making an injury to one an injury to all. Instead of the conservative motto, "A fair day's wage for a fair day's work," we must inscribe on our banner the revolutionary watchword, "Abolition of the wage system." It is the historic mission of the working class to do away with capitalism. The army of production must be organized, not only for everyday struggle with capitalists, but also to carry on production when capitalism shall have been overthrown. By organizing industrially we are forming the structure of the new society within the shell of the old.[10]

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Yeah, we need to break up a lot big businesses for many reasons. Their lobby, power, ability to influence all levels of government & regulations.

1) The distance brtween the User (worker on the line) and managment is ineffective, inefficient, and leads to people that don't really know the people or community. You get guys at the top that are just unfeeling policy wonks.
2) Corporation can be redefined as something that benefits the community in more than just money flow. The big business impacts people and community and we would be better off if the businesses were broken up with Anti-Trust Law, and the huge expenses that executive compensation packages, jets, limos, free houses, etc ... could be eliminated.

[-] 1 points by gsw (3147) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 5 years ago


And like the Wobblies advised, more general strikes. If one group of workers goes on strike, others groups should join in.

Maybe a strike against congress -- for failing to represent, allowing wars to be waged without authorization of the people, ignoring the constitution, but sending us the bill and austerity

And allowing wall street banksters to gamble with tax payer backed dollars, and the be rewarded for failure

And giving away mineral and oil rights to corporations, along with tax breaks

And if they, congress, doesn't start doing the job representing people, I might have to file an extension for tax filing.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago
[-] 1 points by gsw (3147) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 5 years ago

Well aren't they sworn to uphold the constitution? Seems they have not, but make it into a self serving means of legal corruption.

Yes to class actions, especially when real harm is provable.

Wall street too for trashing my house value and general economy.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

I think it plausible to sue for failure to uphold the constitution and the oath of office to defend the country from foreign and "domestic" enemies ( see economic meltdown - enemy action? see corpoRAT sacrifice zones - enemy action? )

[-] 1 points by gsw (3147) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 5 years ago

And for not representing the people on this? And other issues

ABC-Washington Post poll results. An ABC–Washington Post poll conducted February 4–8, 2010, showed that 80% of those surveyed opposed (and 65% strongly opposed) the Citizens United ruling, which the poll described as saying "corporations and unions can spend as much money as they want to help political candidates win elections". Additionally, 72% supported "an effort by Congress to reinstate limits on corporate and union spending on election campaigns". The poll showed large majority support from Democrats, Republicans and independents.[82][83][84]


[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Exactly - for not representing/supporting the people ( living people ).

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

I think I figured from 2001 -2011 we spent $5.6 Trillion on DOD Military Budget.

I have some more numbers in my post on Big Business.

[-] 4 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Found a Post which seems to warn against Staying in the Dialectic for the reason that this plays into an agenda leading to world government and socialism. So I guess I have to try to understand this Opposing Idea.

Forum Post: Hegelian Dialectic, what is it and why should you care?

Posted 1 year ago on Nov. 4, 2011, 12:15 p.m. EST by uslynx81 (203)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

I don't really like just posting links. However I dislike more having to write a 3 page essay to post on a forum no one will read.

http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/dialectic.htm (THIS IS THE Article that Opposes staying in the Dialectic)

[-] 2 points by niphtrique (323) from Sneek, FR 5 years ago

Dialectic itself is not the problem, but Hegelian dialectic was 'hijacked' by the Marxists to promote their agenda. So Hegelian dialectic has a bad name. Karl Marx thought of class struggle as a dialectic conflict with a predetermined outcome. This means that he did not really believe in dialectic.

This is not only true for Karl Marx. Many people just try to convince others and do not want to improve their knowledge. The main problem hampering the dialectic process is that both sides stick to their views and do not engage in a rational exchange of arguments in order to improve their vision. When the debate rages along fixed lines, it distracts the attention from real issues.

For example, under the rule of President Bush the United States progressed towards a police state. During the reign of President Obama this development continued. Because the police state was not an issue of debate between the left wing liberals and the right wing conservatives, it could be implemented with the consent of the majority of both sides. Glen Greenwald noted:

The 9/11 attack happened more than a decade ago; Osama bin Laden is dead; the US Government claims it has killed virtually all of Al Qaeda’s leadership and the group is “operationally ineffective” in the Afghan-Pakistan region; and many commentators insisted that these developments would mean that the War on Terror would finally begin to recede. And yet here we have the Congress, on a fully bipartisan basis, acting not only to re-affirm the war but to expand it even further: by formally declaring that the entire world (including the US) is a battlefield and the war will essentially go on forever.

For our political class and the private-sector that owns it, the War on Terror — Endless War — is an addiction: it is not a means to an end but the end itself (indeed, 2/3 of these war addicts in the Senate just rejected Rand Paul’s bill to repeal the 2003 Iraq AUMF even as they insist that the Iraq War has ended). This is the war-hungry US Congress acting preemptively to ensure that there is no sense in the citizenry that the War on Terror — and especially all of the vast new powers it spawned — can start to wind down, let alone be reversed.

Essential issues are decided without much debate because the political debate is not concentrated on them. Unresolved Hegelian dialectic guides thoughts and actions. Because this dynamic is not correctly understood, this trend is not effectively countered. The current political debate helps to sustain the oligarchy as it is not concentrated on usury and international finance which are the power base of the oligarchy.


[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Yes, DHS as an agency has little chance of going away ever. I suspect the economic reasons for the Global War on Terror are the belief in an economic boost to the economy starting with Ronald Reagan in 1980. And the federal budgets all support the trend of an increase in defense spending for over 30 years now.

So, no matter what issue is debated regarding the federal budget ... defense spending will continue since it benefits the corporate interests and it does provide GDP, economic activity and technological investment.

There are no National Debates. All politics is wagging the dog. Very good points about the wars reaching an end point, but not ending.

There is an unseen agenda to the Police state. That is very clear.

[-] 2 points by peacehurricane (293) 5 years ago

The want to be police states agenda is not of my concern. The agenda that informs the People that WE are the government and demand our word be upheld. I will continue to pursue defining Freedom how ever I so choose that is our foundation without which there would be no country. No harm intended none done completes the real law of this land and always will...

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

First, Do no harm... is the creed of the healer.

Of course people have been harmed by the policing of people since 2001. Legal Immigrants and immigrants married to US citizens have been held without rights for long periods threatened with deportation. Since they were not treated like US Citizens, they and their families had to pay thousands of dollars to lawyers or courts to get family members released before they were deported.

Certainly the use of warrants agaist US Citizens has curtailed individual rights.... because of a family name, a book from a library, ...Sorry not my expertise here.

Legal immigrants and others harassed by the system will never get redress for the money in fees, lost wages, cost to health, time in detension, stress to family, ....

[-] 1 points by gsw (3147) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 5 years ago

One person has had to put a $twenty thousand bond, for daughters "ileagle" husband, because of this.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Sounds like might be $2000 cash for that bond... Yeah, doesn't matter if the person was legal or illegal. I guess the immigrant's name just comes up on a list... and then the agents come to take the person.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 5 years ago

Yes though setting things right is some sort of repayment. I realize the supposed law keepers are the ones causing the harm. The citizens have little to be concerned with once this is changed, we have enough money to pay for the peoples living in harmony at peace and building each other assisting for all to heal. And providing basic needs rather than jail cells is what is correct. America as it was intended shall be Freedom ring 2013 Thank you

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

No, I think you have to look a little deeper. I go down to a local store run by like only two guys. The owner has a brother in law that was arrested and detained as an illegal imigrant. Both these guys look like they are over 50 years old.

The shop owner paid $4000 dollars to get the guy released. And the guy was in Jail for like 30 days or more waiting to get deported back to Mexico. But he has been a citizen for many years after marrying the woman. I don't know how many years. Say 10-20 years. Maybe it was 25 years. He was picked up as an illegal.

Can you imagine what it means to a grown man working for a living to lose work for 30 days. 50% chance this guy had bills he could not pay and it might have been like $1,200 if we take an average. Did he lose his employment? Can he get another Job? Suppose the guy was working in a place that wanted to lay people off, and he couldn't get another job with benefit while he was entering a time where many people get Cancer, Stroke, heart Disease, Diebetes, whatever.

It is not just a simple loss of 30 days in your life. The government wants you to think it is just 30 days in Jail... But it you have a family that you are paying to put through school, paying off the house, finishing a job waiting for retirement... wow.

[-] 1 points by peacehurricane (293) 5 years ago

The extent of system failure reaches far. Occupy can be credited with standing up for one another regardless of who they are We stand for everyone's injustice and mean to help the people set it straight. I do believe that goodhearted people will find some compensation in knowing it will happen to others no more after the pain of their experiences and once we get the money being spent for violence war and police/jails there will plenty to go round.

[-] 3 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Good Reply. I think I get it. We have seen how OWS took names to help people get out of jail. Nice.

[-] 2 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

Hah! the NYCGA needs to read this thread.

"One way to proceed—the Socratic method—is to show that a given hypothesis (with other admissions) leads to a contradiction; thus, forcing the withdrawal of the hypothesis. Another dialectical resolution of disagreement is by denying a presupposition of the contending thesis and antithesis; thereby, proceeding to sublation (transcendence) to synthesis, a third thesis. "

And end the nonsense, dysfunctional division, or capacity to be divided. Get down to fundamental principles, understand them, use them, because they CANNOT be faked. Use them to expose the fakes, which proliferate here.

User them to escape the confines of the political paradigm we've been forced to exist in. Make a new box! using Socratic product based in laws which exist.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

1 points by RobertHod (29) 12 minutes ago

Principals are deeper than ideals, in fact they are the foundation of ideals. The constitution is an ideal, but carries principals. The principal may not always be exactly enacted, but this is no reason to give up the ideal.

Principals are the best basis for unity, then the ideals based upon them are better defined and shared.

In this nation, the prime principal of our social contract is that the people have a right to their lives. In order to manage the expression of that right, they have the right to share information needed to survive then evolve.

The constitutional intent of free speech is no longer in this nation. When people understand that, they are ready to ignore their differences and begin to sort the false and misleading ideals corporations have promoted.


Robert; Ran out of room below. Wanted to carry your comments forward... Yes, Free Speach is seldom recognized as a Natural Right these days. Maybe in OWS tried to stand for Democracy, but found the US State where ever they were didn't allow Free Speech. We are the same country we were 50 Years ago in the 1960 when war was being pushed and speach was suppressed. Probably it is the same people in charge... Most of politics is the use of Lables and Phrases that Politicians use or shape to the principals of the Creel Commission.

I would love for more people to begin Discussion about what Principals were, are, where they come from, and how they apply as "The" Basis for any Country that is interested in democracy.

Take the Idea of a 2 Party System. I haven't studied the Founders or the Federalist Papers. But it seems to me that the Idea of a 2 Party system versus a many party system is the anti-thesis of democracy. We are damned by the results of our political system now, can't be any worse with multi-parties in Congress Exposing the hypocracy, half truths, and lies other the other political players and the Media.

Here is a Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpXZyhr1Sbg (War Made Easy)

The video in my eyes shows how controlled the media is in this country in both the run up to the Iraqi War and the Reporting Throughout the War. The only question is whether the mangement of the Media is owned by the government powers or controlled by government ... or if propaganda and power are so intoxicating that men and women with strength and education are idiots. It is impossible to believe that men become idiots just to keep a job, strengthen a career shot, or to be part of the team that gets access to power. I will conceed that I think most people will fall down to keep their job with a chance for promotion next year ...

But how can we have dozens of fools in Media ... that think they fool all of America ... and that don't hate themselves. The conclusion is not just that Media is owned by the Government. It is clear that News anchors and reporters are being paid off through some device... Maybe reporters get free use of new cars, get free tvs delivered to their house ... like sports players. I don't know how Americans can sell out their country for Dirty Wars...... Dirty Financial Activity ... Dirty Government .... and Contrrolled Political Process.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

All good, very perceptive, the dynamics are in place.

Yes human principals. The highest is to survive, and that we should allow that to each other. It goes further. Life is a series of challenges, and to ascend through them, it is advantageous and desirable to adapt, to change, to evolve.

In order to survive, when so many people are involved, the societal system needs to robustly accommodate the sharing and understanding of information needed to survive.

There is a hidden corporate agenda that corporate ownership executes decade after decade. It creates the problems you describe by corrupting and disabling humanity.

It is incestuous

And because of social pressures, people go along with even thought hey know it is not right. They only do it because there is no other visible element of unity in the local community around them AND, media neglects our survival, our rights, our freedom, our survival and our evolution.

We let it happen by remaining confused and not anchoring our agreement in the most fundamental principals.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

People should Reflect on this. Divided We Fall. If we don't have Deep Principals to guide the Political and Business Environement ... then the Aggression, Objectives of Corporations, and Corrupting Power of Money .... will always win over democracy. The Proof is that we have a shell of Democracy Today.

Americans love their Illusions: Youth, beauty, Hollywood, TV & Cable, Media News Broadcasts, Political Speaches from either the Left or the Right .... we know there is no Liberal Left today. The democrats have supported war and the loss of constitutional rights since 9-11, and approved Federal Spending beyond any Imaginable Level in History while continuing the Longest Wars in History (what OWS doesn't know we have Mercenaries in IRAQ?)

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

Yes, agreement in the most fundamental principals is the key to unity. And, without that we will fall each generation until we are slaves.

Yes, in the social fears created with 9-11, in the deception and manipulation, people, have been unable to reside with a decision to stand for lawful government and peace.

I read a great saying here relating to democracy. " Democracy depends on opinion, opinion depends on information and info depends on media." Yes, a shell or label.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

People that are outgoing, aggressive and leaders can be hard to talk with. But choosing the right principals to focus on at the right time is also difficult. Everyone needs a set of Problem solving models to go along with their principals... I guess. And a method to get consensus. ANd to me seems like the biggest problems are people emotions and Rhetoric or preconceived idea.

You know like people are positional on issues. You can't really talk with someone if they already made up their mind.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

An open mind and sincere testing of "presupposition of the contending thesis" is a teachers responsibility. When principals as sacred as those founding the constitution we all live under are up for discussion, even the uneducated can agree.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Thanks. I need to look some more at the Constitution and What it means. Lawyers probably make it more confusing and infuriating.

1) Citizens united Ruling that Civil Rights Law was intended to Cover Corporations is bizzar.
2) Anti_Trust Law is newer Law that was Used to break up Standard Oil and Ma Bell (Bell telephone), but now I hear it is being used to break up Union Power.
3) 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms ... Lawyers contend that the 1st 10 Rights which appear to grant rights to Individuals under a Bill of RIghts ... was intended according to Lawyers to grant States the Right to form a Militia. Or as someone Else has Posited that the Amendment only incorporated States to the Federal Government ...stipulating that a later Amendment incorporated the Individual to both the State & Federal Government.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

It's all for the protection of human life. Which includes the preservation of the environment. Ordinary people have to be able to understand it in order to know it is respected. We can, but academia has prevented any who really can describe it from having any authority so few know.

Your point on 1) is well made and factual. That can't happen in America, but did. I'll look into 2) as I'm not familiar with recent legal abuses on the socio/commercial level.

The 2nd amendment does not mention states, nor state militia, nor federal. It describes a capacity and what implies a practice of it.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Thanks. Principal of protection of Human Life sounds like it should be near the top.

I did find this. Fourteenth Amendment (1868) deals with states not abridging the Privileges and Immunities of citizens of the United States.

Also good link on Anti-Trust

"...Enforcement of antitrust law depends largely on two agencies, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which may issue cease and desist orders to violators, and the U.S. Department of Justice's Antitrust Division, which can litigate. Private parties may also bring civil suits..." (nice little history in link)

Makes me think TBTF Banks are Cartels.


[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

Yep, survival in continuity and freedom to choose the best for our futures. Those are the basic principles.

Freedom of speech has the purpose of keeping society informed of these principles and exercising them in practice of reason that can fully match and exceed the courts when it comes to constitutional amendment, if the princlple of the right to alter or abolish is invoked. The right appears established with the Declaration of Independence but it actually originates with the Magna Carta.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Hm... but the Magna Carta is from English Law. Has this ever been used in US Court? And surely the Magna Carta was created as a principal, but was not upheld by courts in England.... ? England had many Serfs in Manors for many years after the Magna Carta.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

No, the MC has not been, but the English common law reinforced by it is, or was, used all the time.

Servitude had civil acceptance but by agreement, not by imposition.

The truth of it was diluted over a few hundred years by the written history which was slowly purged. So when the courts stopped recognizing it, there was no one that knew how to raise the issue and courts provided other remedy to avoid the precedent of the MC to divert any effort.

However the framers of the constitution knew the principles of the MC were very much supportive of everything they did. Indigenous American methods of governance were full congruent and complimentary so were adopted into the Roman law base that England started in America with colonization.


Actually, the Magna Carta IS the original English law.

The MC is a peace treaty and the losers signed. The winners are unidentified but implied as the commoners and Free men with rights and the losers agree to a system of accountability to the commoners or Free men.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Not sure a commom American should ever try to use the MC in court... might look disresectful.

But deeper, who are English people... aren't they a mix of bloodlines and peoples we can no longer trace without DNA analysis. It sounds like you have Angles, Saxons, Flemish, Nordic, Danish, Swedish, people from Roman armies, Franks, Goths, Meditrenean lines, I even heard Basque or Catlan bloodlines were dominant through DNA testing. (Peoples blood is all mixed up all over the world, and people get forced off of their ancestral homes by invading armies, there is no home for people if you look back a millenium or two)

I'll probably sound like a globalist, but if we have had human laws in the West for 4000 years originating in the Middle East ... then why can't the US pursue justice against obviously too powerful corporations and other entities. Why not represent the people since people matter more than money. Why not demand pensions and retirments be protected in LBOs, Mergers, or acquisition of business ventures? Why not use tarriffs to protect US jobs. Why not outlaw futures trading on subsistance items like food, water,....?

Similar (to Hammurabi Law), codes of law were created in several nearby civilizations, including the earlier Mesopotamian examples of Ur-Nammu's code, Laws of Eshnunna, and Code of Lipit-Ishtar, and the later Hittite code of laws.[33]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipit-Ishtar (Good list on this one)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammurabi#Code_of_laws (1st Babylonian Empire) Parallels between this narrative and the giving of laws by God in Jewish tradition to Moses and similarities between the two legal codes suggest a common ancestor in the Semitic background of the two.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

The MC is an unnoticed part of our legal system, but at the very beginning. The idea is that it would become more robust and better known increasing the capacity for the commoner to be involved with its enforcement. If the elite were not working to make Americans ignorant, that would be true.

Basically war has been used to crush the human spirit, even the winners. In the case of the US, the north, after the civil war, was crushed by the debt assimilated from England in order to have the arms and army to prevail.

True, the English are mixed, but the truth of their past is also the truth of Americas past. Accordingly, all missing history included, the truth of who the Saxons were, (written history is not accurate), who the Anglicans were, and the Norse and groups so obscure that no written body of history exists. Only smatterings here and there.

And yes, laws creating ordered societies have been around for a long time. And they were all based on accommodating the better human instincts as far as the people of the time thought, or their leadership.

Today we have the US Constitution and what it accommodates as far as our best instincts. When it was violated by infiltrators, its protections were breached. GATT and NAFTA cause the problems with trade you mention as well as a situation that can really get out of control later on if we fail to defend the constitution successfully.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Yes, in our ignorance, our masses fail to ask what the deeper principals are before a NAFTA type treaty is signed. If the the US is to sign on to the WTO, GATT, NAFTA, and even the UN, ... not only has there got to be a total national dsicussion of what our countries principals are ....BUT more important, with an signature on a treaty of any kind there has to be "Continuous" Education, K-12 & College Level .... of all these past Treaties, and the "USA's Highest Principals".

And I mean not just the US Constition with its Amendments. Citizens vote. Citizenship is important. Being United is important. Having a glue that keeps America together is Important. Today, the US is not only dumb, uninformed, and polarized... Today we have so many factions, so many ideologies, and we could probably list 4-10 gulfs between citizens that can split this country apart.

1) US Constitution
2) Magna Carta
3) Brittish Common Law/Civil Law/Tort Law
4) Roman Law/Civil Law
5) Social Contract
6) Crimes Against Humanities/International Law
7) Geneva Convention/Military Law
8) Administrative Law/Public Law/Congressional Rules
10) Commercial Law/Anti-Trust Law/Conflicts of Interest/RICO

The weakness here is I have never taught kids. Many kids are distracted and learn slow. Many kids are not doing well in the US Education System, ... and the education system fails them in another way by leaving them unprepared for a career. The German system for instance allows kids to chose 1) High School 2) Prep School for University 3) Entrance to Technical training in high school.

Suggestion: All kids would be better off if they knew they had to test out of high school, by passing citizenship based testing which required philosophy, history, world history, Law as described above, basic knowledge of logic & critical thinking etc. Maybe we try to do this today in the USA....

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

Your point about many ideologies is a good one. Particularly when related to Unity.

Without robust freedom to communicate on a mass level, unfettered by powerful special interests, unity is easy. But after 50 years of manipulation by mass media, the ideologies you mention become territory mentally occupied in fearful defensive posturing.

The root principles beyond the hard earned right to "alter or abolish" need discussion, then the right makes more sense. However, this is about the only environment where such can be found in discussion.

Considering there is talk that teaching handwriting may be terminated in public schools, "alter or abolish" is more important than ever.

Seems to me that if Americans don't wake up soon and identify what they share that is vital, give up their differences and unify around constitutional defense; the young are going to be learning survival the hard way. Hopefully we can isolate the best technololgys for independence and teach them.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Perhaps Principals are deeper than ideologies. I think of politics I think of ideologies. I think of teachers I think of ideologies.

Principals have to be selected for the circumstances. But we can debate which principal is more important to the situation. And if we agree on the important principals, then we can look to see who the law is being enforced, funded, staffed, monitored, tracked, adjusted by managers....

We probably agree that when forces set out to aler or abolish laws or rights ... the solution might be the law is fine, but there is some administrative issue that can be better managed.

So, let's pass on principals when we are in a forum or talking with others. That seems to hold a future.

[-] 2 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

Principals are deeper than ideals, in fact they are the foundation of ideals. The constitution is an ideal, but carries principals. The principal may not always be exactly enacted, but this is no reason to give up the ideal.

Principals are the best basis for unity, then the ideals based upon them are better defined and shared.

In this nation, the prime principal of our social contract is that the people have a right to their lives. In order to manage the expression of that right, they have the right to share information needed to survive then evolve.

The constitutional intent of free speech is no longer in this nation. When people understand that, they are ready to ignore their differences and begin to sort the false and misleading ideals corporations have promoted.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

The magnum carta was a predecessor of the USA constitution and was 1st made in trying to regain peace in England.

[-] 1 points by RobertHod (1) 5 years ago

What did the unrest consist of?

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

wiki Historians in the 20th century have suggested the Iroquois system of government influenced the development of the Articles of Confederation or United States Constitution. Consensus has not been reached on how influential the Iroquois model was to the development of the United States' documents.[45] The influence thesis has been discussed by historians such as Donald Grinde[46] and Bruce Johansen.[47] In 1988, the United States Congress passed a resolution to recognize the influence of the Iroquois League upon the Constitution and Bill of Rights.[48] In 1987, Cornell University held a conference on the link between the Iroquois' government and the U.S. Constitution.[49]


I have to plead ignorance of sources or basis of the US Consittuion and the Bill of Rights. Magna Carta & the Iroquois League ...

Scholars, such as Jack N. Rakove and Elizabeth Tooker, challenge the thesis. Stanford University historian Rakove writes, "The voluminous records we have for the constitutional debates of the late 1780s contain no significant references to the Iroquois" and notes that there are ample European precedents to the democratic institutions of the United States.[50] Historian Francis Jennings noted that supporters of the thesis frequently cite the following statement by Benjamin Franklin: "It would be a very strange thing, if six Nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a Scheme for such a Union … and yet that a like union should be impracticable for ten or a Dozen English Colonies," but he disagrees that it establishes influence. Rather, he thinks Franklin was promoting union against the "ignorant savages" and called the idea "absurd".[51]

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Sorry - I said magnum carta - I think that was french & dealing with wine.

The Magna Carta after securing peace in England was instrumental as an exemplar/archetype peace agreement in other situations.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 5 years ago

That was straight up sword to the throat extortion. OG. Original gangsters.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

The magnum? Yeah people have a tendency to get a little wild over alcohol.

OHhhhh - I bet you meant the magna - well yeah that was negotiated ( hammered home ) from a position of strength.

Also why it was not accepted by the revolutionary - states - as it was.

[-] 2 points by GirlFriday (17435) 5 years ago

Sure it was. And 1297, when they did it again. And this http://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/england.asp

I saw you added it. So, I just twinkled ya.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

U - - - R such a sweetheart - f'n historical duress - Hey?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 5 years ago

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (22345) from Coon Rapids, MN 0 minutes ago U - - - R such a sweetheart - f'n historical duress - Hey? ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

4 what? I have a thing - where I must acknowledge truth.

Sweet Heart

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 5 years ago

Magna Carta 1215

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Sorry - my bad - gray matter acting like molasses in January - thick and slow.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

See above - edited.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Wasn't the English Civil War 400 years later in 1642 ...while the Magna Carta was signed in 1215, passed into law in 1225, and the 1297 version is still in Law in England.

I was thinking it was like 1500s, but I was pretty far off as per Wikipedia.

Anyway it says it applies to "Free Men", so Serfs were left out. So all men were not created equal under the Magna Carta. I suppose that was our Constitution also.... Although today, I like to believe all men & women are created equal ... I can't be sure what US Founders Believed about slaves or women... or indentured servants.



[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Magnacarta happened prior to the American revolution and was an exemplar used towards writing the constitution.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

In textual criticism, an exemplar is the text used to produce another text. In the study of the history of a text an especially important exemplar is that which precedes any split in the tradition of that text, that is, before significant textual variations occur in different versions--such an exemplar is called an archetype.

Hm... I didn't know that.


[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

LOL - archetype = Hm... I didn't know that.


[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Question: Why is it that Obama is saying the opposition to the Gun Ban is motivated by Money. But he does see the motivation of money behind the 2008 Financial Crisis and set out to fix the unstructured banking system that is full of fraud, shadow banking, and primed for the next bubble and collaspe?

Answer: It is Rhetoric. It is all Politics if it is a statement from CDC, Department of Health, or any Agency or Political Leader. That is why there is no national debate, few real Townhall Meetings, and why America is controlled by both the 2-party system & Corporations.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Dialectic Question on Termination of the CIA & DHS:

Based on nefarious activities of the CIA, and even US Army 4 Star Lyman Lemnitzer... What conclusions to you reach? Links below.

Background for this are rogue operations planned for the USA by Lemnitzer, operations of terror carried out in Europe, and "False Flag" operations that were designed to propell the US into war Vietnam and Iraq. Easy to speculate that US Actions to promote threats or create threats benefits A) Military Expansion B) Military Careers C) CIA Budgets D) Military Contractors E) Creates defacto tighter Police State either in Europe or in the USA.

1) That there are limits to the usefulness of police powers, that strict limits must be imposed with regulations and multiple layers of oversight, and that periodically perhaps entire agencies need to be cleaned out and dismantled if possible. In the case of the CIA much of their intelligence network would be handed off to military services where hopefully there would be more integrity in uniform in in younger men and women.

2) Out right termination of the CIA and DHS in reaction to violations of foreign sovereignity, domestic sovereignity, and the cultivation of immoral employees with very bad intension against people.

3) The nature of secrets in the military leads us to question what we aren't aware of, can't know, and guess that Congress also is part of the problem since it has always had oversight authority. Compartmentalization is a necessary part of military operations, but the selecting of people willing to do anything in secret is a big risk.

4) The opportunistic seizure of Individual RIghts through the Patriot Act and later NDAA authorization as a result of 9-11 Crisis - smacks of over-reach, a power grab, an economic boom for security contractors, an increase in Military, Intelligence & Police responsibilities and budgets, and really doesn't wash any more after 10 years.

5) The occupation by our military and the presence of bases in over 140 countries is enough to create rebellion and feelings of oppression in peoples around the world. Add to that drone strikes, bombing campaigns resulting in civilain deaths, and blunt force of war ... it is very possible that we have begun to create a generation of future terrorist. All of this due to heavy handed police security actions and policies.

6) Continued Skepticism about wars, reasons for war, fear of other countries, reasons for torture, reasons for interfering with elections in foreign countries, reasons for bribing foreign leaders, reasons for providing money to foregin leaders, reasons for training foreign soldiers, ... and why we need a police state when our borders are wide open and we have very little domestic terrorism. We have to discount the FBI entrapements pretty much also.

7) Domestic Wire Taps and the invasion of privacy has be used more against protestors than any threat prior to 2001 would have been identified. Unresolved is local use of cell phone monitoring to stop flash mobs, flash stealing, flash crime... It is not about if a crime can be stopped in advance or in progress ...rights are given up and principals over ridden.

8) Cold War Threats spanning from like 1945 -1990 resulted in many decisions, spending of federal Tax Dollars, growth of military, and troubling activities of government agencies. Clearly this is reason to suspect and expect abuse of power today by US Agencies. 2001 we started a Global War on Terrorism since investment in the war on drugs wasn't Robust Enough. Question Autority. Question Congress. Question President Obama. Hold on to human & individual Rights. Let's have more national votes on the big changes that Washington DC is trying to justify and push. How about free an open Presidential Debates. Freedom of the Press. Break up Big Media and News Outlets with Anti-Trust Law or Referendums.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyman_Lemnitzer (created Operation Northwood and is responsible for planning operation Gladio in Italy and other countries through out Europe)

An undated NSA publication declassified in 2005, however, revealed that there was no attack on 4 August.[165] It had already been called into question long before this. "Gulf of Tonkin incident", writes Louise Gerdes, "is an oft-cited example of the way in which Johnson misled the American people to gain support for his foreign policy in Vietnam."[166] George C. Herring argues, however, that McNamara and the Pentagon "did not knowingly lie about the alleged attacks, but they were obviously in a mood to retaliate and they seem to have selected from the evidence available to them those parts that confirmed what they wanted to believe."[167]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird (CIA Bribery of Press)
"The CIA currently maintains a network of several hundred foreign individuals around the world who provide intelligence for the CIA and at times attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda. These individuals provide the CIA with direct access to a large number of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets."

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

News Blackout in the USA. Richard Cotrell is an English man who has a new book out and he says "Operation Gladio" is still going in in Turkey today. The exposure in Turkey is causing upheaval. He is saying that the Model for NATO Terrorist actions against their own countries is so good ... they just can't let it go. Most of the Bombing in Germany in the 80s was NATO terrorism. Also he see the Swedish Mass shooting of kids as typical of NATO style terrorism. But check the links for more info.


The point is to Disassemble Military and Police Power since it often starts to become a "Self Perpetuating - Self Sustaining System". Perpetual Terror.

Masquerading as a rear guard against a Communist takeover, NATO's covert special forces are in reality a hideous cancer poisoning European democracy. NATO was behind the Red Brigades and RAF; the murders and attempts on the lives of heads of state: Aldo Moro, Robert Maxwell, Olaf Palme, Pope John Paul II, and JFK; and the false-flag train bombings in London, Madrid and Bologna.

[-] 2 points by Renneye (3874) 5 years ago

O Middleaged ! Great freakin' post!! Rich in content...and I'll listen to anything "Operation Gladio"!!! Thanks again Ma!!

There are those who say 'Operation Gladio' never stopped and is alive and well right here in North America. I'll check later to see if I can find anything on it.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Lots of links today....

The Best Links available on Gladio seem to be from Daniel Ganser who did his Doctorate on it. But RIchard Cotrell is a new guy.

[-] 2 points by Renneye (3874) 5 years ago

Great links Ma! I have to say a little on the dark side...but I likey! I can see that I'll have to spend some of tomorrow and get into the videos on the first link.

'They' don't even care that we know what derelict behaviour they are up to. Crazy!!

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Thanks Renneye. Did you see Gary Nulls Video The Drugging Of Our Children (Full Length 1 hour 43 minutes) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26e5PqrCePk (Talk about Felony Stupid - we should put doctors in Jail, Prosecute Pedeatric Union, and go after the FDA &CDC)

[-] 2 points by Renneye (3874) 5 years ago

Not yet...I'll have to get into Gary Null today with the rest of your great links.

I'm right with you Ma! Lets prosecute these greedy pigs. WHO (World Health Organization) too! WHO is mainly funded by pharmaceutical companies. Duh!!!

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Yeah, they talked WHo in the Seeds of Destruction. hm... now I think I forgot what I was supposed to watch today on seed banks ...

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33526) from Coon Rapids, MN 5 years ago

Society under attack around the world - under attack by those in charge - F'n insanity on display for the world to see. That is if you do not watch MSM but instead gather news off of the internet.

[-] 2 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Well, I haven't heard about the scandal in Turkey yet. I'd have to do a websearch....


The Following are the Code word for NATO Countries Gladio Type operations:
Belgium SDRA8,
Denmark Absalon,
Germany TD BDJ,
Greece LOK,
Luxemburg Stay-Behind,
Netherlands I&O,
Norway ROC,
Portugal Aginter,
Switzerland P26,
Turkey Counter-Guerrilla,
Austria OWSGV,
Italy Gladio,
However, the code names of the secret armies in France, Finland, Spain, and Sweden remain unknown

http://danieleganser.ch/assets/files/Inhalte/Interviews/Zeitungsinterviews/pdf_08/2008-02-turkey-ergenekon.pdf http://www.variant.org.uk/27texts/cause_for_concern.html

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of logic, reason and empiricism and not authority, tradition, or other dogmas.[1][2][3] The cognitive application of freethought is known as "freethinking", and practitioners of freethought are known as "freethinkers".[1]


Driven by the revolutions of 1848 in the German states, the 19th century saw an immigration of German freethinkers and anti-clericalists to the United States (see Forty-Eighters). In the U.S., they hoped to be able to live by their principles, without interference from government and church authorities.[19] Freethinkers tended to be liberal, espousing ideals such as racial, social, and sexual equality, and the abolition of slavery.[19]

Many Freethinkers settled in German immigrant strongholds, including St. Louis, Indianapolis, Wisconsin, and Texas,[19] where they founded the town of Comfort, Texas, as well as others.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

The Baconian method is the investigative method developed by Sir Francis Bacon. The method was put forward in Bacon's book Novum Organum (1620), or 'New Method', and was supposed to replace the methods put forward in Aristotle's Organon. This method was influential upon the development of scientific method in modern science; but also more generally in the early modern rejection of medieval Aristotelianism.


By reasoning using "induction", Bacon meant the ability to gradually generalize a finding based on accumulating data - he advised proceeding by this method (building a case from the ground up). Isaac Newton, a noted Baconian, used such principles in the Philosophy section of his Principia, writing "hypotheses non fingo" (I don't make hypotheses).

Bacon also listed what he called the Idols (false images) of the mind - some are similar to what is now called cognitive bias. He described these as things which obstructed the path of correct scientific reasoning.
1.Idols of the Tribe (Idola tribus): This is humans' tendency to perceive more order and regularity in systems than truly exists, and is due to people following their preconceived ideas about things.
2.Idols of the Cave (Idola specus): This is due to individuals' personal weaknesses in reasoning due to particular personalities, likes and dislikes.
3.Idols of the Marketplace (Idola fori): This is due to confusions in the use of language and taking some words in science to have a different meaning than their common usage.
4.Idols of the Theatre (Idola theatri): This is the following of academic dogma and not asking questions about the world.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Found a World Map with the different Law Systems, Common Law, Civil Law (Roman), Muslim Law, and Mixed Systems:


I actually find this odd. I thought the USA had a mixed system, Criminal Law, Common Law (Civil Court-Tort Law), Civil Infractions (Vehicle Violations), Constitutional Law, and Social Contract... might be stretching the last one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tort_law (Common Law- Civil law, differs from criminal law, which emphasises more upon punishment than on dispute resolution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute (authority that governs a state, city, or county.[1] Typically, statutes command or prohibit something, or declare policy.[1])
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_law (activities of administrative agencies of government - certainly applies if we don't get Investigations & prosecutions of Fraud, RICO Violations, Aiding & Abetting, Conspiracy, Obstruction of Justice, Influence Peddling)

Social contract is a broad class of theories that try to explain the ways in which people form states and/or maintain social order.

In political philosophy the social contract or political contract is a theory or model, originating during the Age of Enlightenment, that typically addresses the questions of the origin of society and the legitimacy of the authority of the state over the individual.[1] Social contract arguments typically posit that individuals have consented, either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their freedoms and submit to the authority of the ruler or magistrate (or to the decision of a majority), in exchange for protection of their remaining rights. The question of the relation between natural and legal rights, therefore, is often an aspect of social contract theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_and_legal_rights (the Debate)

Roman law is the legal system of ancient Rome, and the legal developments comprising more than a thousand years of jurisprudence from the Twelve Tables (c. 439 BC) to the Corpus Juris Civilis (AD 529) ordered by the emperor Justinian I. The historical importance of Roman law is reflected by the continued use of Latin legal terminology in legal systems influenced by it. (latin Countries Still use Roman Law, Latin America, Ethiopia) AND ... If you read the Wikipedia link you see a lot of the tricks used in the US Congress came from Roman Law.

Roman Law Examples that might shed light on Fraud:

Ius non scriptum was the body of common laws that arose from customary practice and had become binding over time. (even if DOJ ignores the written law against Fraud, the custom is to proscute)

Ius singulare (singular law) is special law for certain groups of people, things, or legal relations (No, we don't accept that Bankers have special laws, that government officials have special laws that let them favor industry, then take big career jobs with promotions)

Ius publicum was also used to describe obligatory legal regulations

A peremptory norm (also called jus cogens or ius cogens, pron.: /ˌdʒʌs ˈkoʊdʒɛnz/ or /ˌjʌs/;[1] Latin for "compelling law") is a fundamental principle of international law which is accepted by the international community of states as a norm from which no derogation is ever permitted (Like Fraud, AAA Rated Derivatives that are junk, like selling $700 Trillion in derivatives on a GDP of $15 Trillion, like Sub-Prime Mortagages - all of these are fraud and should be prosecuted)

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Reposting Oldest Laws in Written Records, 4000 years ago, and the first government reform and social reform programs if my information is correct.

Ur-Nammu (or Ur-Namma, Ur-Engur, Ur-Gur, ca. 2112-2095 BC short chronology) founded the Sumerian 3rd dynasty of Ur, in southern Mesopotamia, following several centuries of Akkadian and Gutian rule. His main achievement was state-building, and Ur-Nammu is chiefly remembered today for his legal code, the Code of Ur-Nammu, the oldest known surviving example in the world.


Similar to Hammurabi Law, codes of law were created in several nearby civilizations, including the earlier Mesopotamian examples of Ur-Nammu's code, Laws of Eshnunna, and Code of Lipit-Ishtar, and the later Hittite code of laws.[33]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammurabi#Code_of_laws (1st Babylonian Empire) Parallels between this narrative and the giving of laws by God in Jewish tradition to Moses and similarities between the two legal codes suggest a common ancestor in the Semitic background of the two.

How do we judge an Empire? Biggest Territory... Longest Rein... Both? Creating Laws... Creating culture that is adopted around the world ... creating things that are valued around the world hundereds of years after the empire is gone? Having stone work left after the empire is destoryed...

I think we lost a lot of our history... We have a lot of holes in our history. I think some families might actually work to keep technology and familiy culture hidden within the family. Hidden Dynasties.

Wonder if it is possible that Ocean Traders that Speak many languages can run an invisible empire, a great banking empire, a great technology and education institution by scouring the globle.... would they call that a Tong, Cartel, Zaibatsu, Keiretsu, Chaebol, Private Bank, Trust, Hong, Sogo shosha, investment bank

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Question Authority, Not Trust Financial markets. WSJ found Deutsch Bank made $654 Million dollars betting on LIBOR which was being manipultaed by the big banks including Deutsch Bank. Max Keiser calls this Making a Market and Betting on the outcome.

http://rt.com/programs/keiser-report/episode-393-max-keiser/ (Max Keiser 4:40 minutes into the video)



But the WSJ story does not accuse Deutsche Bank of manipulating Libor to help its own trades, and the bank denies that it was doing that. In fact, Deutsche Bank probed itself last year (don't try that at home, kids) and found that maybe only a couple of bad apples might have been involved in Libor manipulation.

PRESIDENT OBAMA, Stop Sheltering the Wall Street Banks, Your Legacy is one of shared Guilt, Shared Conspiracy, Shared Responsiblity for the "Loss" of Democracy. It is only reasonable and predictable.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

US Pays the Bill for French War in Mali. USA has chartered Aircraft through the Department of Defense to trasnport French Troops to Mali. In general we know the US doesn't have the Ships and Airplanes to conduct wars. Since Desert Shield in the First Gulf War, the US Media has covered this fact very well.

In this article it states that US Flagged Planes are Used. How do you like Paying for French Wars, America?????? Does this seem Logical. This is a NATO country operating outside of Europe, so no support from the USA is indicated by NATO Treaty. Don't mind spending US Dollars do they....

Of course if it is just Air Force Planes used, you pay the bill anyway.


[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Question Authority: Why Don't the Media, all of us, and the government Discuss Short Term Economics, the Failure of Capital Investment in New Production & New Small Businesses. It "Aint" Capitalism if investment is shrinking, we have systemic fraud, and capital is simply used for Casino Banking/ Casino Investment.

Downsize TBTF Banks should have been on the Table in a "Free America" Video on 12 banks that should have been "Down-Sized" just like corporations "Down-Size the Workforce". Hypocricial for Downsizing to go only one way, Right?


Link of Economic Support, Federal Reserve, TBTF, and Corrupt Federal Government.

1) Demand Economist look at the "Short Term" and have Short Term Models for Federal Government, this is where Economics as practiced by Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke and all the rest seem to have failled. In the long term, prices come down and new jobs enter the industry as long as investors are willing to invest in capital equipment for factories or stores.
2) Short Term Economics - Looks at Fraud, Mortgage Fraud, Systemic Fraud, Derivative gambleing, Casino Banking.
3) Moral hazard has to be part of any "Real" economics.
4) Collective Guilt by government & the Federal Reserve has to be part of any look at Economics, or any Economic Model. This is Systemic Risk, Systemic Corruption.
5) Systemic Corruption is a clear Risk that can be found in any Political Model and any Government around the world in any time in History. "This Aint Rocket Science or Nuclear Science"
6) Elections, Referendums, National Debates, Presidential Elections - all must address Collective Guilt of Politicians. FOI Act, Transparency, massive free flow of Information - all are neccessary for a "Free America".

Also, Anti-Trust Law was intended to prevent powerful corporations from controlling prices and becoming Oligopolies. Why is it I have heard they used Antitrust law against Unions???

Has AntiTrust Law become a Citizens United kind of think like the Civil Rights Act????

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Chris Hedges Brace Yourself! The American Empire Is Over - Corpoprate Coup. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zotYU21qcU

About 8 minutes into it he starts talking about the Creel Commision, the Committe for Public Information and describes it as the first US System of Public Manipulation. Chris Hedges States:

People are manipulated by Emotion instead of Reason.

Manufacturing Consent is a Walter Lippman Phrase.

We have become an Empire of Consumption instead of one of Production.

The Left in the USA was ment to be a Center for the Political System - Not a Loberal Left.

NAFTA was implemented by Bill Clinton, and Barak Obama Codifies the terrible policies of George W. Bush. Very Destructive policies to our Democracy. So, perhaps if we have logic, we have to reject the two party system. And we have to consider that the country has been hollowed out as Chris Hedges States.

40 minutes into the Video he addresses some positive points about dumping consumersim, dumping corporation rule, making commitments to the Environment, and adopting humility in our foreign policy. Then he speak a bit about OWS.

47 Minutes into it, Chris illuminate 3 kinds of Capitalism stating that Corporate Capitalism is Super Capitalism and that is the kind he doesn't like.

51 Minutes in, they read from a book of Chris's that we are lead by people which see free markets/capitalism first and democracy second as I take it. This is interesting and maybe a Dialectical Point or Question to those that can't see any problem with corporations, with government, or with Wall Street.

Democracy and the free flow of information, Transparency of Government, freedom of other countries not to be attacked by the USA, should come first. Our media can be so much more than what it is. We could be proud of our democracy and proud of our media and we could stand for deep freedom.

59 Minutes in, Chris says Corporations know only one word, "More". This is why I say any meeting between corporations & government is one where the taxpayer loses (Me, not Chris). Any deal with a super corporation is a losing one. They have the angles already figured out. You lose, they win.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Transformation_(book) (Book about Capitalism)

106 minutes in

"...We watch impassively as the wealthy & elite, the huge corporations, rob us, ruin the environment, defraud consumers and taxpayers and create an exclusive american oligarchy that fuses wealth and political power. We watch impassively because we believe we can enter the club ... It is greed that keeps us silent..."

Chris Hedges seems to believe we have an inverted Totalitarianism government.

Totalitarianism (or totalitarian rule) is a political system where the state holds total authority over the society and seeks to control all aspects of public and private life wherever necessary.[1]


120 Minutes in Chris talks about 9-11.
122 Minutes in he say you can't declare war on terror, you deal with it through intelligence units FBI/CIA.
124 Minutes in Chris talks about Corporate Personhood.
127 Minutes in he says Lloyd Blankfein should be put on Trial.
128 Minutes in he says the Radicals have taken power, conservatives are the ones asking for the return of the rule of law. Therefore, OWS is a conservative movement in this sense. Then he states there is a moral imperitive to report war crimes as Wikileaks did, and possibly as Bradly Manning did.
132 Minutes he talks about the failure of the Crhistian Church to Speak Out about the Lynching of Black men in this Country.
137 Minutes in he talks about Obama the constitutional Lawyer.
142 Minutes in he talks about Smedley Butler, Banana Wars, FDR coup.
145 Minutes in he talks about his respect for the Military.
151 Minutes he talks about Indian Casinos.
152 Minutes he talks about Ron Paul.
153 Minutes he talks about elites running the USA from the Begining and the destuction of Populist movements, MLK, Mother Jones.
154 Minutes he talks Oprah & Magical Thinking.
157 Minutes he talks about the idea that it is your fault that you are not middle class or not rich.
205 Minutes he talks about the trillions that Wall Street has looted from the Treasury without reform.
213 Minutes the conflict in man of Eros & the longing for Death.
218 Minutes the myth of Linear Time, that we advance every year.
220 Minutes the lying left & right in news, telling the truth.
223 Minutes MLK, Malcolm X, OWS picking up the movement, the destruction of blacks and oppression of blacks economically.
230 Minutes Climate Change, Ecology, culture of Illusion, Spectacle.
236 Minutes in Strange Bedfellows, Allies, Jimmy Carter concern for Human Rights and the trouble that caused in Washington. Winning hearts & minds is more effective foreign policy, but corporate interests focus on actions that make populations more amendable to serving corporate interests.
239 Minutes, he addresses why the right is able to reach the working class so effectively, hypocrites on the left, lying on the left. (death of the Liberal Class on of his books).
241 Minutes he talks about Frederick Smith Founder of FEDEX who Obama said he admired, but no ethical system would.
242 Minutes on Voting in Elections & if it makes a difference.
245 Minutes problem with Ron Paul is poverty areas need assistance.
247 Minutes reality TV is just reflecting Corporatism.
248 Minutes People need to be taught to think, Thinking is Subversive, Critical Thinking.
249 Minutes the loss of humanities studies, loss of Classical Education.

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 5 years ago

Denial can be treated like hypothesis or should be.

"One way to proceed—the Socratic method—is to show that a given hypothesis (with other admissions) leads to a contradiction; thus, forcing the withdrawal of the hypothesis."

I see people denying and not being accountable with reason. If the sincere and accountable cannot recognize this, then the unreasonable is not identified for the group.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Your right. People deny many things out of hand. Someone working in the Defense Industry will take on conservative values. They may not think at all on issue important to social reformers. The fact is if you job makes good money and provides you a career... you don't see any problems in the USA. You may not even think war is bad. I met a woman in the army reserves or national guard last year. She was trying to push a little Christianity on me, but didn't have a problem with war at all. I forget what she said now. I asked her to prove that she understood the cost of war. She never answered at all just moved the conversation back to her personal interest. She was in such denial... there is probably a better word for it.

Denial benefits us ...or protects our ego ... the ego defined as the part of us that wants things. I want that. I want Jeagermeister. I want to sleep. I'm hungry. I want money. I want to keep my job.

And if we want strokes... we go where somone will give us compliments and allow us our behavior.

Politics is funny. People can fake political support if they are family of a politician. Politicians probably fake their support for each other. Sometimes the mechanism is just being "Not" something. I am not a republican, so I will vote for the democrat even if I don't know what they will do in office or if they have a plan. I don't like war, so I am voting for Obama. I am not a Cheney fan, so I am voting for Obama.

All of that politics is mindless when you consider that neither side of the 2 part system educate, put out info, describe systems in detail, put out whole domestic policies, foreign policies, Energy Policies, Jobs Policies.....

[-] 2 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 5 years ago

Yea, principles not parties:-)

Middleaged wrote: "All of that politics is mindless when you consider that neither side of the 2 part system educate, put out info, describe systems in detail, put out whole domestic policies, foreign policies, Energy Policies, Jobs Policies....."

Did I hear somewhere that the majority of the framers of the constitution felt a no party system would serve best? Sounds like principles over parties to me.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

I'm not 100% on that. Was that in the Federalist Papers? Hamilton & Washington Opposed Parties. Jefferson was for opposition parties. Found this passage in wikipedia that forces my to ask why Democract & Republicans don't publish their own newspapers and put out detailed info on government systems, enforcement of laws, staffing of regulators, policing of regulations, monitoring of progress to follow up on legilation passed...

Alexander Hamilton felt that only by mobilizing its supporters on a daily basis in every state on many issues could support for the government be sustained through thick and thin. Newspapers were needed to communicate inside the party; patronage helped the party's leaders and made new friends.[26]

Question: Where is the Church on Social and Political Reform, and on Jobs, Job Training, Investment in small businesses, and the disassembly of production, factories, and large employers that used to provide a living wage. The church and the Parties have both failed and shrank back in support.


Oh, Here it is:

Hamilton, and especially Washington, distrusted the idea of an opposition party, as shown in George Washington's Farewell Address of 1796. They thought opposition parties would only weaken the nation. By contrast Jefferson was the main force behind the creation and continuity of an opposition party.[27] He deeply felt the Federalists represented aristocratic forces hostile to true republicanism and the true will of the people, as he explained in a letter to Henry Lee in 1824:

[-] 1 points by redandbluestripedpill (333) 5 years ago

Thanks! Very different from parties today. There were some other less notables that grouped in support of no party. But they seem to be obscure. I'll search more based on this lead.


"The Democratic-Republican Party, founded by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison as the “Republican Party” (not related to the present-day Republican Party) in 1792, was the dominant political party in the United States from 1800 until the 1820s, when it split into competing factions, one of which became the modern-day Democratic Party."

[-] 0 points by rayolite (461) 5 years ago

I've seen denial as a mode of response become acceptable on the internet. When the denial cannot be reasonably supported as a proper action this is destructive to human cognition.

Seems there should be a way to create some accountability. Those working for Article V seem to have a method of creating a proper agreement. It seems to be treated as a hypothesis here when I try it, and there is a form of denial by silence, by unaccountability.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/gunself-control/#comment-896428 http://occupywallst.org/forum/alec-exposed/#comment-902021

The web, the way we use it, enables abuse of Socratic processes.

[-] 1 points by Middleaged (5140) 5 years ago

Dialectic Question experiment:

President Obama is a little pregnant in that he has broken some principals of monetary policy, conservative banking, & individual rights. Now my premise is that you either have principals or you don't. If you run a sloppy ship on individual rights, then you are a little bit pregnant.

1) Conservative banking rules demand that a Soverign Country root out problems and fraud related to financial ratings, financial inspections, financial monitoring, and financial fraud. Obama has not prosecuted fraud for the mortgage scandal or the 2008 Financial Scandal ... in fact William K. Black says Obama actually cut FBI staff that would have investigated financial crimes, and of course Eric Holder has waived prosecution, ... but they also have not fixed A) Financial Instrument monitoring or initiated monitoring & data collection on Shadow Banking (Private) B) they have not fixed ratings agencies, how they get paid, or how they perform duties & form relationships C) they have not designed system changes or regulations to prevent further financial crisis.

2) Monetary Policy has to do with expanding the money supply. I see that we face some inflationary risks as the Federal reserve buys Treasury Bonds and buys toxic mortgages or derivatives. Futher there is a lot of confusion about Federal Reserve Lending, who received loans, and what foreign agents received loans. This all can be used as evidence to Lower the US Treasury Ratings and to justify lower values on the US Currency. And TODAY we have a new story about risk to our Treasury Ratings. The point is systemic Risk is increasing without either plans to shore it up or public statements that reflect high principals are being followed and conservative policies are in place.

3) Individual Rights should guide us in how we treat foreign citizens or prisoners of war. This all came out in WWII and the nation took the lesson that we could be proud of our war time behavior and could position ourselves on the "High Road" in negotiations and diplomatic actions. But even if some aggressive Americans don't want to preserve our Individual rights for foreigners.... It is clear to everyone that President Obama is a little bit pregnant and he has sheltered the George W. Bush Administration and has cut deeper into US Individual Rights and Privacy rights through support of Patriot Act Policies and expanded NDAA laws against privacy and toward Drone Strikes in Pakistan and a "Kill List".

I am just one man and I know the Presidency is a big, big job with very difficult positions, relationships, pressures, and decisions. But President Obama Built his own staff of many people and with many departments, lawyers, and military officers to help him with those deicisons. There is no excuse for giving up American Principals as a kind of compromise for this modern age of technology.