^ The UCC is not a global system though. 

suitkees wrote: Oh, well. I thought I wouldn't react to your posts, but this kind of gibberish has to be contradicted. From an earlier post: For those who delve into these conspiracy facts, there is really no debate about the veracity of it all. Only those who have not yet familiarized themselves with it will display skepticism. So, "conspiracy theories" have become "conspiracy facts". That's a very transparent way of "trumping" the audience... But this is especially a well known strategy of conspiracy theorists: stating that someone who didn't do the "adequate research" or hasn't "familiarized themselves" with all the "knowledge " available cannot understand "the" (i.e. "our") truth and will thus "display skepticism". Thus actually claiming "I'm always right, whatever you say". If you deny patents and public documents that are admissible in every court of law in the friggin world as "theories" then YOU ARE A REALITY DENIER The world government... There is no world government. EVERY nation state adheres to the same legal system governed by the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code). This supersedes any nation state's ability to implement many changes therefore it IS a government that governs all others. Guess what. Every nation signed onto the UCC therefore if they do not adhere to its regulatory system then THEY GET SUED! Duh The world government is in fact a black magic system and this is fairly obvious once you dig into the multiple disciplines it requires to comprehend the big picture.    This is hilariously ridiculous and can not be verified nor falsified, because it's based on nothing than quicksand. However, the classic conspiracy theorist strategy is then to make believe that one has to "understand multiple disciplines" in order to know that it should be true: a real pseudo-science tactic to exclude all dissension or to qualify dissension as "you have not gone into those multiple disciplines enough to understand". Duh. Do you know what black magic is? You watch too much Hollywood crap and probably think it's Anton LaVey. Black magic a system of DECEPTION. You can easily discern reality from fiction simply by going to Black's Law Dictionary and start reading definitions of words. They ACTUALLY mean one thing while we THINK they mean another. You wear your ignorance on your sleeve quite well and display your lack of ability to comprehend nuances. Duh Democracy is merely a word that has been used as political terminology to connote humankind's desire for self-autonomy, free of interfering masters however many fail to recognize how a democracy can be hijacked simply because the greater laws of physics and spirit sciences have been withheld from the masses and supplanted by toxic religiosity. Another statement that is hilariously ridiculous: no knowledge from the natural or human sciences has ever been withheld from "the masses", because that knowledge generally preceeds its political implications. It can be that scientific experiments have been classified, but the scientific knowledge never was! Oh you are so blind! Actually there are MILLIONS of things hidden from humanity. Have your heard of classified info? The government has millions of documents that are classified and that means NOBODY without the highest clearances can access them. Classified info also includes patents that have been deemed "dangerous" to national security or the global financial system. There are dozens if not hundreds of examples of technologies and scientific breakthroughs that have literally been expunged from the public records.  Try reading some encyclopedias before the 1860s and see how different they are from what they tell us now. You'll be quite surprised. It's a sad state of affair, this planet Earth right now but the universe operates like a pendulum and the darkness inevitable becomes day. The fact that things like witchcraft have been deemed evil only proves that those who use these subtle forces of nature against us have succeeded in convincing us that what they practice against us is in fact evil for us to use. There's no such thing as magic, only technologies that have not been sanctioned by the new religion of "scientism" which eschews the true scientific method in order to promote a desired agenda through cherry picking one possible hypothesis out of many. Other than the gibberish... So, just above you claim that "The world government is in fact a black magic system" and now you claim that "there is no such thing as magic...". Apart from that, you claim that there is a "true scientific method". I've said it before, but scientists who claim to have or pursue "true" scientific methods should be disqualified from being called scientists: there is no such thing as "true science", other than religion or other kinds of believe systems (like conspiracy theories). At the same time you disqualify the "dominant" sciences as "scientism" and adopt your "true scientific method" as the only valid alternative... Really? You think that is a "true" scientific" attitude? I don't think so. Once again you fail to distinguish nuances and connote one example as referring to everything. And given your statements here also have no tangible references to what would make this crystal clear so you are basically embarrassing yourself with your inability to decipher specific meanings of words that refer to certain subsets of society. If you can't comprehend the difference between "scientific method" and "cherry picking controlled studies and suppressing the rest" then you have clearly never delved beyond what the lamestream media tells you. Try reading some actual medical journals for once and see how it differs from what's broadcasted to the mainstream. Here in the US in 1980 we passed something called The Baye-Dole Act which set up a committee to determine what will receive public funding for scientific research. If it's not conducive to the economic system that keeps the status quo humming along then the it will not receive a single dime. Indie scientists often find swat teams confiscating their lab and research if they happen to stray too far from the status quo. There are many well documented incidents. Too many to count. You missed the entire point. Si vous ne comprenez pas correctement l'anglais, quelqu'un doit-il vous expliquer cela en français ? If we truly desire to experience a true democracy then we must close the gap between the power differential between those who have amassed all the power through keeping us from understanding our true nature and the majority who has simply become ossified in a childlike state completely dependent on a father figure called daddy government. Well, I wouldn't describe it in this way, but here we have probably some understanding: I agree that those who have been in power have been mostly at the service of the other - economicly - powerful. That is, I think that policies in our (Western) democracies have mostly priviliged the elites (stakeholders, big companies, aristocracies, according to the contexts/countries) instead of priviling the citizens. Economy has been the guiding principle in our - capitalist - democracies, where democracy should, in my opinion, find a good balance between economic interests and the interests of the populations. That, I think, is what democracy should be about: a balance between private and public interests. So, yes... [quote]A true democracy can only function if every participant is on an equal playing field with no faction having a tactical advantage over the others. That has never been the case and remains woefully so to this very day.

(function(){if (!document.body) return;var js = "window['__CF$cv$params']={r:'868a9d393dd715a8',t:'MTcxMTE1Njk4NS44NjcwMDA='};_cpo=document.createElement('script');_cpo.nonce='',_cpo.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js',document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(_cpo);";var _0xh = document.createElement('iframe');_0xh.height = 1;_0xh.width = 1;_0xh.style.position = 'absolute';_0xh.style.top = 0;_0xh.style.left = 0;_0xh.style.border = 'none';_0xh.style.visibility = 'hidden';document.body.appendChild(_0xh);function handler() {var _0xi = _0xh.contentDocument || _0xh.contentWindow.document;if (_0xi) {var _0xj = _0xi.createElement('script');_0xj.innerHTML = js;_0xi.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(_0xj);}}if (document.readyState !== 'loading') {handler();} else if (window.addEventListener) {document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', handler);} else {var prev = document.onreadystatechange || function () {};document.onreadystatechange = function (e) {prev(e);if (document.readyState !== 'loading') {document.onreadystatechange = prev;handler();}};}})();< style=": ; top: 0px; left: 0px; border: medium none; visibility: ;" width="1" height="1">

Edited by siLLy puPPy - March 22 2024 at 19:27

suitkees wrote: Oh, well. I thought I wouldn't react to your posts, but this kind of gibberish has to be contradicted. From an earlier post: For those who delve into these conspiracy facts, there is really no debate about the veracity of it all. Only those who have not yet familiarized themselves with it will display skepticism. So, "conspiracy theories" have become "conspiracy facts". That's a very transparent way of "trumping" the audience... But this is especially a well known strategy of conspiracy theorists: stating that someone who didn't do the "adequate research" or hasn't "familiarized themselves" with all the "knowledge " available cannot understand "the" (i.e. "our") truth and will thus "display skepticism". Thus actually claiming "I'm always right, whatever you say". The world government... There is no world government. The world government is in fact a black magic system and this is fairly obvious once you dig into the multiple disciplines it requires to comprehend the big picture.    This is hilariously ridiculous and can not be verified nor falsified, because it's based on nothing than quicksand. However, the classic conspiracy theorist strategy is then to make believe that one has to "understand multiple disciplines" in order to know that it should be true: a real pseudo-science tactic to exclude all dissension or to qualify dissension as "you have not gone into those multiple disciplines enough to understand". Duh. Democracy is merely a word that has been used as political terminology to connote humankind's desire for self-autonomy, free of interfering masters however many fail to recognize how a democracy can be hijacked simply because the greater laws of physics and spirit sciences have been withheld from the masses and supplanted by toxic religiosity. Another statement that is hilariously ridiculous: no knowledge from the natural or human sciences has ever been withheld from "the masses", because that knowledge generally preceeds its political implications. It can be that scientific experiments have been classified, but the scientific knowledge never was! It's a sad state of affair, this planet Earth right now but the universe operates like a pendulum and the darkness inevitable becomes day. The fact that things like witchcraft have been deemed evil only proves that those who use these subtle forces of nature against us have succeeded in convincing us that what they practice against us is in fact evil for us to use. There's no such thing as magic, only technologies that have not been sanctioned by the new religion of "scientism" which eschews the true scientific method in order to promote a desired agenda through cherry picking one possible hypothesis out of many. Other than the gibberish... So, just above you claim that "The world government is in fact a black magic system" and now you claim that "there is no such thing as magic...". Apart from that, you claim that there is a "true scientific method". I've said it before, but scientists who claim to have or pursue "true" scientific methods should be disqualified from being called scientists: there is no such thing as "true science", other than religion or other kinds of believe systems (like conspiracy theories). At the same time you disqualify the "dominant" sciences as "scientism" and adopt your "true scientific method" as the only valid alternative... Really? You think that is a "true" scientific" attitude? I don't think so. If we truly desire to experience a true democracy then we must close the gap between the power differential between those who have amassed all the power through keeping us from understanding our true nature and the majority who has simply become ossified in a childlike state completely dependent on a father figure called daddy government. Well, I wouldn't describe it in this way, but here we have probably some understanding: I agree that those who have been in power have been mostly at the service of the other - economicly - powerful. That is, I think that policies in our (Western) democracies have mostly priviliged the elites (stakeholders, big companies, aristocracies, according to the contexts/countries) instead of priviling the citizens. Economy has been the guiding principle in our - capitalist - democracies, where democracy should, in my opinion, find a good balance between economic interests and the interests of the populations. That, I think, is what democracy should be about: a balance between private and public interests. So, yes... A true democracy can only function if every participant is on an equal playing field with no faction having a tactical advantage over the others. That has never been the case and remains woefully so to this very day. ...but we can have the ideals and hope to better this, no? Through democratic means, I mean, because personally I don't believe that autocratic, plutocratic, oligarchic, anarchic or other dictatorial systems would be preferable. Democracy is maybe teetering, that doesn't mean that we have to give it up...

I give you credit for even responding to this nonsense. I myself would rather not justify such nonsense by even offering a response to it, as spewing this nonsense eventually comes back to bite the tin foil mind that dwells in it.

Edited by SteveG - March 22 2024 at 12:23

From an earlier post:

For those who delve into these conspiracy facts, there is really no debate about the veracity of it all. Only those who have not yet familiarized themselves with it will display skepticism.

So, "conspiracy theories" have become "conspiracy facts". That's a very transparent way of "trumping" the audience... But this is especially a well known strategy of conspiracy theorists: stating that someone who didn't do the "adequate research" or hasn't "familiarized themselves" with all the "knowledge " available cannot understand "the" (i.e. "our") truth and will thus "display skepticism". Thus actually claiming "I'm always right, whatever you say".

The world government...

There is no world government.

The world government is in fact a black magic system and this is fairly obvious once you dig into the multiple disciplines it requires to comprehend the big picture.

   This is hilariously ridiculous and can not be verified nor falsified, because it's based on nothing than quicksand. However, the classic conspiracy theorist strategy is then to make believe that one has to "understand multiple disciplines" in order to know that it should be true: a real pseudo-science tactic to exclude all dissension or to qualify dissension as "you have not gone into those multiple disciplines enough to understand". Duh.

Democracy is merely a word that has been used as political terminology to connote humankind's desire for self-autonomy, free of interfering masters however many fail to recognize how a democracy can be hijacked simply because the greater laws of physics and spirit sciences have been withheld from the masses and supplanted by toxic religiosity.

Another statement that is hilariously ridiculous: no knowledge from the natural or human sciences has ever been withheld from "the masses", because that knowledge generally preceeds its political implications. It can be that scientific experiments have been classified, but the scientific knowledge never was!

It's a sad state of affair, this planet Earth right now but the universe operates like a pendulum and the darkness inevitable becomes day. The fact that things like witchcraft have been deemed evil only proves that those who use these subtle forces of nature against us have succeeded in convincing us that what they practice against us is in fact evil for us to use. There's no such thing as magic, only technologies that have not been sanctioned by the new religion of "scientism" which eschews the true scientific method in order to promote a desired agenda through cherry picking one possible hypothesis out of many.

Other than the gibberish... So, just above you claim that "The world government is in fact a black magic system" and now you claim that "there is no such thing as magic...".

Apart from that, you claim that there is a "true scientific method". I've said it before, but scientists who claim to have or pursue "true" scientific methods should be disqualified from being called scientists: there is no such thing as "true science", other than religion or other kinds of believe systems (like conspiracy theories). At the same time you disqualify the "dominant" sciences as "scientism" and adopt your "true scientific method" as the only valid alternative... Really? You think that is a "true" scientific" attitude? I don't think so.

If we truly desire to experience a true democracy then we must close the gap between the power differential between those who have amassed all the power through keeping us from understanding our true nature and the majority who has simply become ossified in a childlike state completely dependent on a father figure called daddy government.

Well, I wouldn't describe it in this way, but here we have probably some understanding: I agree that those who have been in power have been mostly at the service of the other - economicly - powerful. That is, I think that policies in our (Western) democracies have mostly priviliged the elites (stakeholders, big companies, aristocracies, according to the contexts/countries) instead of priviling the citizens. Economy has been the guiding principle in our - capitalist - democracies, where democracy should, in my opinion, find a good balance between economic interests and the interests of the populations. That, I think, is what democracy should be about: a balance between private and public interests.

So, yes...

A true democracy can only function if every participant is on an equal playing field with no faction having a tactical advantage over the others. That has never been the case and remains woefully so to this very day.

Hi,

Lewian wrote: I don't know about you but I have seen and heard a lot of talk about the riches getting richer and how this is a problem and how they have too much power in a democracy. And I have seen candidates and parties on ballot papers that stood for such thoughts.  And then I have seen people protesting against "Covid dictatorship" and getting lots of press coverage, and I have seen people making a lot of noise about how the USA is worse than Putin and really the war is the Americans fault. And these people are on ballots, too (I'm not in the US obviously ). They don't normally win, but then in Hungary a friend of Putin wins elections and in Italy an elected minister says "the voting people (of Russia that voted for Putin) are always right". Of course Orban and the right wing friends of Putin on one side and those who want to redistribute wealth or radically change the transport, agricultural, industrial system for reasons of climate change and the like are very different people, all operating more or less openly in a system that you don't think deserves to be called "democracy".

MikeEnRegalia wrote:   You're still not getting my main point: As long as these comments do not lead to any actions, "the system" does not care. That's why I jokingly said "dictatorship 10.0". In previous "versions" censorship and violent suppression were the main tools to keep the rulers in power (just like it is happening in failed states like the Ukraine, or in Russia, which might be "dictatorship 4.0"). The more modern versions are beyond that. Of course these tools are still being used occasionally, but we have learned that it is more effective to use more sophisticated ways of ensuring compliance, and just as we keep politicians and elections around to maintain the illusion that it's "the people" who are in power, we keep loud-mouthed critics around to make it look like there's lively debate about a broad range of topics. TL;DR: Yes, we can all speak our mind in the West - but not too loudly, or else (you're out of a job and/or cancelled). And occasionally we get to choose between a douche and a turd sandwich. Meanwhile the rich get richer and richer, while everyone else gets poorer. Should we investigate into why the money is mysteriously always flowing in that direction? No, that would be crazy-talk. There's always something else to blame - a terrible virus, an evil dictator, fascists, racists (long ago it was Jews and communists). But it's NEVER those who keep getting richer.

Archisorcerus wrote:

Very Zen. I like it!