The U.S. Congress Trades as Ron Paul!

Hey... I not too savvy when it comes to politics. I have a hard time keeping up with whats going on. I know who Ron Paul is for sure, but uh.. can someone kinda dumb this down and explain to me what it means and its significance?

reply to post by badmedia

Yet this evidence suggests Ron Paul may in fact be a Puppet Master who controls the opposition against the corporate establishment by being the one who speaks out against the most often.

sug·gest   /səgˈdʒɛst, sə-/ Show Spelled[suhg-jest, suh-] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1.to mention or introduce (an idea, proposition, plan, etc.) for consideration or possible action: The architect suggested that the building be restored.

]

Dictionary.com

Passionately attacking such things as the Federal Reserve, Big Government, the Foreign Wars, and our carte blanche support of Israel, and many other popular issues what if in fact he is speaking deliberately to them only up to a controlled point.

if   /ɪf/ Show Spelled[if] Show IPAin case that; granting or supposing that; on condition that: Sing if you want to. Stay indoors if it rains. I'll go if you do.

Dictionary.com



Of course reading comprehension and the actual understanding of what words mean becomes a critical part of understanding what a question is and what is a statement.

A question may be either a linguistic expression used to make a request for information, or else the request itself made by such an expression. This information is provided with an answer.

Questions are normally put or asked using interrogative sentences. However they can also be put by imperative sentences, which normally express commands: "Tell me what two plus two is"; conversely, some expressions, such as "Would you pass the salt?", have the grammatical form of questions but actually function as requests for action, not for answers, making them allofunctional. (A phrase such as this could, theoretically, also be viewed not merely as a request but as an observation of the

Wikipedia.org

Learning about ugrading the quality of your questions!

Questions have a number of uses. 'Raising a question' may guide the questioner along an avenue of research (see Socratic method). A rhetorical question is asked in order to make a point, and does not expect an answer (often the answer is implied or obvious). Pre-suppositional questions, such as "Have you stopped beating your wife?" may be used as a joke or to embarrass an audience, because any answer a person could give would imply more information than he was willing to affirm. Questions can also be titles of works of art and literature (e.g. Leo Tolstoy's short story How Much Land Does a Man Need? and the movie What About Bob?). McKenzie lists 17 types of questions in his "Questioning Toolkit" and suggests that thinkers must orchestrate and combine these types in his article "Punchy Question Combinations". Examples of his question types include the irreverent question, the apparently irrelevant question, the hypothetical question and the unanswerable question.

Wikipedia.org

There are many different types and ways to ask questions...

In research projects
Descriptive question, used primarily to describe the existence of some thing or process.
Relational question, designed to look at the relationships between two or more variables.
Causal question, designed to determine whether one or more variables causes or affects one or more outcome variables.[1]
[edit] In surveys (there are a few types of questions)
Dichotomous questions, usually these questions require yes/no answers or require a person to answer by choosing an option(s) from a multiple choice of possible answers.
Nominal questions, these types of questions are designed to inquire about a level of quantitative measure. Usually these questions form correlations between a number and a concept. For example:
Occupational Class: 1= Moderate 2= Severe 3= etc. [2]

Qualifying questions (a.k.a. filter questions, or contingency questions) These types of questions are designed to determine if the individual answering the question needs to continue on to answer subsequential questions.

Wikipedia.org

There are likewise many ways to answer questions...

“ There are these four ways of answering questions. Which four? There are questions that should be answered categorically [straightforwardly yes, no, this, that]. There are questions that should be answered with an analytical (qualified) answer [defining or redefining the terms]. There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question. There are questions that should be put aside. These are the four ways of answering questions. ”

Wikipedia.org

So yes they were questions! Which begs the question to you, why is it you imagine you know my intent and purpose to a greater degree than I do? Why is it you do not trust me when I have already stated my intent and purpose? Why is it you want us to trust absolutely in certain preferred politicians without question but you will question the stated motives and purposes of anyone who does?”

These are all high quality questions being put directly to you as a means to better understand your position.

While you are attempting to “TELL ME” my position even though it runs absolutely contrary to what I HAVE STATED my position and intent to be, I on the other hand am ASKING YOU HIGH QUALITY questions in response to better understand your position and intent.

If you want to upgrade the quality of your life you must first learn to upgrade the quality of your questions.

Of course when you are telling and not asking…then I guess that supposition does become rather mute to some people?


[edit on 5/3/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by bobs_uruncle

 

Thanks that's a good suggestion, still doesn't help us figure out why Dick Cheney is traded as Office of the President though?

Maybe it is like a retirement thing or a board of directors thing with major positions? As the old get booted maybe they remain on the "books" for liability purposes? Like they are going to get charged... ROFL

Cheers - Dave

Or hes just another puppet for those who are in real control and his opposition is an illusion.

This seems logical although it is from the Daily Paul. It is from a commenter on a post there:

Ron Paul, although the best in office, is still a public office known as RON PAUL. His likeness as a congressman has a value, and that value has a bond. ALL public office holders MUST have a bond on record.
If you pay for the report, it will give you a 'cusip' number or a "d-u-n-s" number, (9 digits, just like your ss) and other info about the 'corporation' RON PAUL, such as location, history, etc.

D&B does NOT report ANYTHING about Ron Pauls checks being good, that is ridiculous....boy, you have a hard time believing any of this huh?

What I can't understand, and what I do find disappointing, is why anyone would have a go at the OP for asking questions (however loaded with assumptions you might think those questions are)?

People in public life, how they conduct themselves, how they do business on behalf of the nation, and the structures they create to do so, should be questioned... questioned frequently and in depth.

To put questioning someone, or something, out of bounds because they have always appeared to be 'good and sincere' does no one any favours. Perhaps if the general public in ALL nations started asking probing questions of all their leaders and politicians the world would be a much better, more open, and fairer place.

Good thread, as always PT. I admire the clarity with which you express your views in all the threads I've ever seen you post in. I like the fact you ask questions, and rarely accept the superficial 'mainstream' view on reality. S&F

So here's a question that hopefully hasnt been asked yet!

Don't you think it is just saying Ron Paul OWNS the building?

If you google seach "203 CANNON HOUSE OFC BLDG, WASHINGTON, DC" Ron Pauls office is the first thing that shows up!

Originally posted by surgence
So here's a question that hopefully hasnt been asked yet!

Don't you think it is just saying Ron Paul OWNS the building?

If you google seach "203 CANNON HOUSE OFC BLDG, WASHINGTON, DC" Ron Pauls office is the first thing that shows up!

The Cannon Office Building is one of three office buildings that hold congressional offices that are well over a hundred years old and house hundreds of reps and their staffs each.

reply to post by Dagar


Thanks Dagar I think its so important to ask questions and not be afraid to ask them or afraid of the answers that might come up from them.

Some people really cherish their illusions in life, but ultimately no matter how pleasant the illusion it is, it's still based on a lie, and what real good could come from that?

Thanks for the understanding and supportive and encouraging words!

Maybe Ron is just gearing up for the next presidential election. I think he has spoken to passionatly in the past to be some sort of puppet master. If he is the head of something, that is just to get his name out there and he can build on that until the next election. We also can not forget that he is a politician that is part of politics....poli- meaning many and -tics meaning bloodsucking insects from which there is no escape.

I think the expression goes...."When in Rome..."

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Yet this evidence suggests Ron Paul may in fact be a Puppet Master who controls the opposition against the corporate establishment by being the one who speaks out against the most often.

sug·gest   /səgˈdʒɛst, sə-/ Show Spelled[suhg-jest, suh-] Show IPA
–verb (used with object)
1.to mention or introduce (an idea, proposition, plan, etc.) for consideration or possible action: The architect suggested that the building be restored.

Dictionary.com

I'm well aware of what the word suggest means. All you did here was post the definition while ignoring the point I brought up.

What part suggests the claims that followed?

What part of that which you post suggested that he was a puppet master? It didn't at all.

You said THE EVIDENCE suggested it, not you. I am saying that the EVIDENCE in no way suggested anything of the sort.

What part of the evidence suggested anything you mentioned?

Of course reading comprehension and the actual understanding of what words mean becomes a critical part of understanding what a question is and what is a statement.

You can insult me in response to the criticism all you want. You said the EVIDENCE SUGGESTED it. You were presenting a STATEMENT in which you said the EVIDENCE made a QUESTION.

I pointed out that the EVIDENCE did NOT make that suggestion at all. I said the EVIDENCE suggested he was involved with congress. It suggests that maybe we might want to see why such a thing would be listed, it in NO WAY suggested anything about him being a puppet master or the rest - YOU DID THAT, and as the EVIDENCE doesn't suggest it, then it means you either made a bad assumption, or you have an agenda. Personally, I think you made a bad assumption and I was merely trying to show you why.

Aside from that, all you did was insult me rather than addressing anything I actually said. You accused me of having bad reading comprehension and that is all you did the entire post. In response to that, all I can say is - get bent. And be assured, that is the nice version.


[edit on 3/5/2010 by badmedia]

Get Benjamin Fulford and his team of ninja assassins to investigate this immediately! Can this possibly be real? in any way?

reply to post by badmedia


Still not getting it I see.

If you want to imagine you know my intent better than I, imagine away!

You might want to focus on the issues of the thread instead of me.

Just a suggestion, clearly I am asking questions.

Questions about what it means, and what it could mean.

Thanks!

We can always count on ATS members to make something out of nothing.

This is a non-issue.

[edit on 5-3-2010 by Unplugged]

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Still not getting it I see.

If you want to imagine you know my intent better than I, imagine away!

You might want to focus on the issues of the thread instead of me.

Just a suggestion, clearly I am asking questions.

Questions about what it means, and what it could mean.

Thanks!

It is fine to ask questions, that is not the issue. The issue was that you are basing such questions on what amounts to a bunch of crap, rather than valid things.

Such is actually a normal and widely used tactic by "them". To do these kinds of things. As such, it's disappointing.

I certainly didn't just up and accept Ron Paul for no reason. Such questions are questions I've asked for quite sometime. And such a possibility is even one I am ready to deal with.

I mean, we could say he voted that way all those years and did all that just to be able to stand out at a later date. As it was only 1 vote, it is not a big deal for him to vote against them, because it is going to pass anyway. This isn't far fetched, because it's exactly what the republicans are doing now.

And that may in the end prove true. But I have yet to see any valid evidence to show that. And as long as the man is doing the right thing, and always has been doing the right thing, then I think he is worthy of support. What other choice is there? And I should I allow paranoia over such things prevent me from supporting it? Just because it seems "to good to be true"?

I know the concerns, I share them just like anyone with an open mind should. I'll always be on guard for it. But if I am going to find the truth then I have to be able to distinguish between what is valid and what is not. This isn't valid.

If tommorow, Ron Paul votes for the Patriot Act or comes out in favor of it or something along those lines. Post about it, and then you will get my attention and then I will say - ahh you have very valid concerns. It's not the man, it's the ideas that matter. Ron Paul is only a man who is in a good position to help those ideas, and someone who has proven to stand by those things etc. Nothing more, nothing less.








[edit on 3/5/2010 by badmedia]

reply to post by badmedia


I evidently have both your attention and disaproval nonetheless!

Why put off to tomorrow what we obviously can do today!

If you read the orignal post you would understand it was a series of questions put to everyone asking everyone for a response.

Now so far all I am getting from your response is...

A. You don't like how the Orignal Post was written (subjective opinion)
B. You feel there is no meritt to the Original Post (subjective partially substantiated opinion)
C. That you have failed to appreciate the larger underlying broader questions involved regarding the issue that go beyond Ron Paul (my subjective interpretation)
D. That you are expecting some form of validation from me in regards to to A.B. and C.

All of which I am happy to acknowledge though it does not...

A. Change the fact that the Original Post is structured the way it is and is a question.
B. That it was a broad invitation to others to render opinions and any conclusive facts or knowledge they might have on the issue.
C. Many other people besides you are taking different positions, have different perspectives, different concerns, and different opinions.

I am not sure where you are confused about any of the above, and since you by your own admission don't feel this is the Thread or Time to address such things, you might want to ask yourself some questions as to what your expectations really are!

Thanks for posting.



[edit on 5/3/10 by ProtoplasmicTraveler]

Why? Because we are all traded and incorporated.
Here's one :EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES
Also Traded as EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, WASHINGTON, DC

here Jordan Maxwell explains Maritime Admiralty products and corporations(you are the collateral and product)

video.google.com...#

Not everything is a Conspiracy

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


This does seem to tie-in with the 'Commercial Contract / Birth Certificate' information, and your mentioning this;

So what we are seeing that is causing a lot of people questions is why everything from the nation they live in, to the school their child goes to learn in, to the fire house they call when their cat gets stuck in the tree are fictitional name entities and corporations.

, reminds me of what Walter Burien has been saying for years about the "two sets of books"/CAFR's - Roughly, that all these fictional corporate entities do exist, and they all have large investment portfolio's (seeded with taxpayer monies) held outside the Official Budgets.
cafr1.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Perhaps, as suggested, by virtue of our registration at birth, creating our fictional legal entity; "Person", we all have legally attached to us, an -"also traded as _____"- financial instrument, titled with our given names, but in all-capitalized form, only ours are not listed on D&B.

The following quote seems to be widely attributed to E.M. House. Though I am not completely sure of its authenticity, the idea is clear:

Edward Mandell House had this to say in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson:

“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be non the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor or to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner; every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”

www.gemworld.com...



[edit on 5-3-2010 by FewWorldOrder]

I wonder if Paul even knows about this. What if they set the system up to fall on him if (when) the system crumbles? You know, because they hate him? Just one suggestion. I don't know what to think of it, really. Of ALL of the Congressmen, Representatives, & Senators currently in office, Ron Paul is the one whose name is traded as Congress. Ron Paul, the one guy who stands out from almost every other politician in office. His name is the one that is traded. It is incredibly fishy in here now...