stoopid North Americans

[antiaristo]

I absolutely hate to be a hypocrite. But this I just cannot resist...<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>My gut tells me that the ripples of "Who is really in charge?" are going to keep making some waves. The Newsweek article has a few telling jabs -- but I'm not able to tell if they are coming from Rove or Andy Card in a couple of places. Either way, though, those jabs wouldn't be there if there weren't some concern that the President comes off looking less than in charge and less than engaged...<br><br>SNIP<br><br>But it's going to take a lot more spin than she's shoveling out to put this genie back in the bottle. Who is in charge? I'm not even sure the President knows at this point.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://firedoglake.blogspot.com/">firedoglake.blogspot.com/</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>And from the comments...<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> The two are elected seperately, no?<br><br>It also seems the VP may not take the oath of office as the Prez does.<br><br>Cheney obviously knew his constitutional prerogatives. Bush the Ignorant didn't.<br><br>I think Gomer Pyle said it best........<br>Zappatero | Homepage | 02.19.06 - 10:29 am | #<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--> <br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.haloscan.com/comments/firedoglake/114035928446061183/#269994">www.haloscan.com/comments...83/#269994</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br><br><br>Let's see now.<br><br>Shadow Head of State.<br><br>Does not swear the Oath.<br><br>Controls the Freemasons.<br><br>Pulls all kinds of shit behind the scenes.<br><br>Omerta.<br><br>Wherever might they have learned THAT trick, eh?<br><br>Do you think even the stoopid North Americans might be able to figure it out for themselves?<br><br>Nah.<br>Go back to whatever it is you "rigorous thinkers" do with your time. Probably telling others how to "think".<br><br><br>Added on edit<br><br>Silly me! I left out the money quote;<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>There are powers at work in this country about which we have no knowledge.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>GW Bush, to anyone that will listen. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antiaristo>antiaristo</A> at: 2/19/06 5:44 pm<br></i>

[slimmouse]

<br><br> Welcome back.<br><br> I assume you got my IM ? <p></p><i></i>

[antiaristo]

Thanks, slim.<br><br>Hadn't twigged.<br><br>I wouldn't say I'm back as the old antiaristo.<br>You know, the antiaristo that would patiently explain in the face of ignorant abuse.<br><br>I just intend to rub their noses in it. <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

dang anti, I hate to see you so bitter. Don't let disagreements here on the board ruin a good forum for your ideas. <p></p><i></i>

[antiaristo]

sunny,<br>If it were simple disagreements I would agree with you, and be ashamed of myself.<br><br>But it's not disagreement.<br><br>It's something far worse. <p></p><i></i>

[*]

<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"If it were simple disagreements I would agree with you, and be ashamed of myself.<br><br>But it's not disagreement.<br><br>It's something far worse."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><br> Be that as it may, please don't allow the rantings of the terminally self-referencing, self-absorbed drive you off.<br><br> In that event, <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>they've</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--> won!<br><br><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[*]

<br><br> <!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"It also seems the VP may not take the oath of office as the Prez does."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Vice President of the United States (Executive Branch)</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br> The Vice President also takes an oath of office. Until 1933, the Vice President took the oath of office in the Senate. Today, both the President and Vice President are inaugurated in the same ceremony. The Vice President's oath is administered immediately before the President's. The Vice President's oath may be administered by the retiring vice president, by a member of Congress, or by some other government official, such as a justice of the Supreme Court. The Vice President's oath is as follows:<br><br> "I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same: that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."<br><br><hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://bensguide.gpo.gov/3-5/symbols/oaths.html">link</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><br><br><br> <p></p><i></i>

[antiaristo]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Be that as it may, please don't allow the rantings of the terminally self-referencing, self-absorbed drive you off.<br><br>In that event, they've won!<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Fair enough.<br><br>This is how the protection racket works.<br>When someone is taking heat for doing her a favour, she showers them with awards.<br><br>Lord Puttnam was one of the directors of Anglia Television.<br>Look at my letter to Patricia Hewitt on the Vampire of Finance thread.<br><br>I NAME PUTTNAM as one of the fraudsters.<br><br>Same thing happened a couple of years ago when I last went after Hollick.<br><br>The Old Cow made him Chairman of the South Bank Board.<br><br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr><!--EZCODE FONT START--><span style="font-size:small;">Puttnam will outshine stars on Bafta night</span><!--EZCODE FONT END--> <br><br>David Smith<br>Sunday February 19, 2006<br>The Observer <br><br><br>Starstruck fans will gather tonight at the Orange British Film Awards to glimpse big-name actors and directors vying for prizes. But the Bafta Council's highest honour has already been decided - and will go to a producer.<br>David Puttnam, whose credits include the Oscar-winning Chariots of Fire, is to be awarded the Academy Fellowship in recognition of outstanding contribution to world cinema. It will be presented by the Bafta president, Lord Attenborough.<br><br>Bafta chairman Duncan Kenworthy said that Lord Puttnam - who turns 65 this week - is one of the few producers whose name is known to audiences. He added: 'His extraordinary reputation rests as much on the inspirational appeal and intelligence of his films as on their production values - one suspects audiences come away changed as well as entertained.'<br><br>After starting his career in advertising, Puttnam spent 30 years as an independent film producer. His credits include The Mission, The Killing Fields, Local Hero, Chariots of Fire, Bugsy Malone, Memphis Belle and Midnight Express. He was chairman and chief executive of Columbia Pictures from 1986 to 1988 - the only non-American ever to run a Hollywood studio.<br><br>He retired from film production in 1998 and, while still involved in the industry, his focus is now primarily on education.<br><br>The Orange British Academy Film Awards - known as the Baftas - is to be televised in Latin America for the first time, taking the global audience up to one billion. Just six years ago they were shown only in Britain.<br><br>Britain's hopes are pinned on the adaptation of John le Carré's thriller The Constant Gardener, which has been nominated for 10 Baftas.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1713071,00.html">observer.guardian.co.uk/u...71,00.html</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

[sunny]

____________________________________________________<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>It's something far worse</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END-->. <br><br>____________________________________________________<br><br>Please explain. <p></p><i></i>

[Floyd Smoots]

....anti-John, here's what I find sad about your situation. I'm being honest with you here with no attempt at humour or disparagement. The Untied States citizens who come to this board are just about "The Best of THE BEST". That said, if we (including me) have failed you, then, I can reach no other conclusion than this, that you are most likely correct in your appraisal of US. We very likely are "stoopid".<br><br>We haven't figured out yet, that ALL of our so-called personally-owned real estate, when one actually "reads" one's "deed of ownership" on one's so-called "property", are merely allowed to control said real estate at the suffrage of "The Crown". Thanks to you, and other www posters, I awoke a few years ago, to the fact that what I just posted above is the truth, The Whole Truth, and nothing BUT THE TRUTH.<br><br>Not only has NO ONE ALIVE OVER HERE ever read the "Treaty of Yorktown (Virginia)" between Lord Cornwallis and George Washington, we don't even KNOW WHERE to find a true, unedited copy of said treaty, nor what it REALLY SPECIFIES!!! Does THAT tell any of you supposed Non-Sleepers out here anything at all???<br><br>I AM a true believer here that our so-called beloved American Revolution is just a hollow sham, and that legally, under international law, we are still under the control of "The Crown", not to be confused with the also so-called government of The British Isles. Am I on the "right track" here, John, my comrade-in-arms, or am I "barking up the 'wrong' family tree??? Feel free to weigh in here on my posits.<br><br>Verinoid Floyd<br> <p></p><i></i>

[antiaristo]

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Traditionally, the Vice President-Elect takes office just before the President-Elect. Unlike the President, the Constitution does not specify an oath of office for the Vice President<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vice_President_of_the_United_States">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vic...ted_States</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>We watch the president sworn in by the Chief Justice.<br>Don't remember Cheney.<br>Isn't that worth clarifying NOW, while the subject has captured the Nation's attention????? <p></p><i></i>

[slimmouse]

<br> A couple of Bonus points here.<br><br> Look at the missing 13th amendment in several US states, and ask yourselves why ?<br><br> Secondly, look at the gold braiding surrounding the US flag in your 'Courts of law', and then go figure.<br><br> Look meanwhile at a few of the official "knights" - Bush sr, jr, Clinton, Greenspan, Guliani - need I go on ?<br><br> Im with you John. My SOUL aint for fuckin sale.<br><br><br> On edit and FWIW.<br><br> I was talking to someone whom I trust incredibly these days, and this person was telling me about a vision this person experienced just recently.<br><br> It was QE2 choking.<br><br> Make of that what you will. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 2/19/06 8:33 pm<br></i>

[Floyd Smoots]

....I have been well aware of the "fringed flag" deal for about two years, (old farts take longer to wake up), but I confess to knowing nothing about "the missing 13th amendment in several US states". Please educate (NOT Illuminate) me concerning this phenomenon.<br><br>I DID, however, escape "jury duty" recently in November of 2005. I merely went into the judges chambers, upon invitation to those who hoped to "opt out", and told the judge that, if he required my attendance "under law", that I would appear every day that I was called upon, but only in order to remain jail free. I promised him my perfect attendance, but also warned him that I no longer believed in the so-called American justice system, and could NEVER guarantee an unbiased verdict, as a juror, no matter WHAT case was under consideration. I was immediately excused for the next three-year period of jury calls and selection.<br><br>The truth sometimes (often?) hurts, but, in this case, it did its job, because I lost faith in the LEGAL system long ago. the PTB love to call it the "justice system", but, like anti-John on the "other side of the pond", I have found no justice in the "system" AT ALL!!!<br> <p></p><i></i>

[slimmouse]

<br> Doesnt it say that any person appointed some official title, such as lord or Sir, or any of that bullshit , should be disallowed from office ? In fact doesnt it go on to say that they shouldnt even be allowed US citizenship ?<br><br> Or am I throwing snowballs at the moon here ?<br><br> At least youre with me on the "maritime law" deal vis a vi the gold braiding.<br><br> Which in itself should speak volumes right ?<br><br> It is at this point that I personally love Anti's legal definitions. Which of course goes a long way to explaining how some of the more incredibly intelligent in our midst "cant buy it "<br> <br><br> How is it meanwhile that such "incredibly intelligent" folks cant deal with such issues ?<br><br> Answers on a dollar bill. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=slimmouse@rigorousintuition>slimmouse</A> at: 2/19/06 8:52 pm<br></i>

[Floyd Smoots]

Slimmie, I'll not read your reply until tomorrow at work, but send me the info about the "missing 13th amendment" if you would, so I will understand that to which you are referring.<br><br>Verinoid Floyd<br> <p></p><i></i>