RE: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

[Guest guest]

<<<It's about putting very experienced older men that are connected to biased

financial sources like politicians.>>>

I meant to say " aren't " connected.

Dan Holt

________________________________

From: Holt <danthemanholt@...>

Sent: Tue, November 3, 2009 12:45:35 PM

Subject: Re: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

I disagree with your definition Chris. Switzerland is an Oligarchy and look how

well they are run. Obviously our Oligarchy branch wouldn't quite be like their

government. This version would work well with our own constitution. I don't

know what Oligarchy you seem to be referring to. It's about putting very

experienced older men that are connected to biased financial sources like

politicians. It would be like how the people in the judicial branch are chosen.

Older men without corruption and bias. One thing their Oligarchy represents is

tradition like our own government.

We don't have many men at the top that are going out of there way to make

selfless decisions that would massively benefit our country. These men can take

the time to listen to our concerns and act on them. It's the politicians that

are more likely to support GMO crops, not selfless statesmen. It would better

organize our government. There would be more positive communication with the

governors therefore better communication with the people so people can act

accurately with their freedom of speech and voting.

Our country and maybe even the whole world seems to be surviving on the

backwards conventional concepts that were introduced in the 20th century.

Poor quality farming, poor quality hospital care, etc. etc. etc. While an

Oligarchy won't fix all the problems it will certainly be a step in the right

direction to connect the people with the Government without all the diarhea

politic bullshit.

Right now our current government and most of the governments in the world are

already working for the intentions of these rich select few. I would see an

Oligarchy as a step to being able to spread more financial opportunities to the

common man and given the people more power.

The Oligarchy I am thinking of the the Greek term of it and what Switzerland is

currently using. What gives you the idea that the Oligarchy supports such

corruption? List some countries that ran by an Oligarchy like the ones you are

listing.

So yes, an Oligarchy will produce benevolent qualities such as ian and

Constantine. They too will be held by the law and are held accountable by the

people and their peers. This form of government will influence a higher

integrity out of people.

My take on population control: If we continue to consume as we do there will be

overpopulation and our resources with dissipate. This will lead to many

problems, loss of control of our own people, leading to massive chaos, death,

and the beginning of another dark age.

We have two choices: Limit the amount of children people are allowed to have,

and perhaps we still risk the " NWO " unleashing a plague that will kill off

2/3rds of mankind, or choose to consume less like Native Americans, Chinese, and

East Indians. The entire world's standard of living would have to go down in

order to support a higher population for the future without major issues

arising. That would mean giving up the shallow wasteful over consuming American

lifestyle. I don't know how our economy could work that out... So a higher

population can thrive with a lower standard of living. I like how educated

college people like to bend the truth to fit their daisy view of how the world

and make these rich guys out to be pure evil who have no logic. We have to look

at what they are doing, why they are doing it, and then see if we can work out a

better solution. Most college people are liberals and they don't seem to

realize just how meek and

vulnerable we all are if we don't make the necessary choices.

If we reduce our population down to 90-95% our standard of living would all rise

to rich status. If we reduced it to two billion everyone in the world would

live by middle class standards. If we increased it to 10-20 billion everyone

would become lower class with a rich select few in charge proportionally.

Dan Holt

____________ _________ _________ __

From: Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@ gmail.com>

Sent: Tue, November 3, 2009 7:20:43 AM

Subject: Re: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

,

> We should develop a type of oligarchy that would work with our constitution.

> Based on the description I gave that shouldn't be too hard. Our government

> wouldn't be an oligarchy, it would just have an oligarchy branch attached to

> it. Voting and rights would still be allowed. Communication with the

> people would improve and more positive stuff would get done.

> I define success as low crime, human rights, more and better quality job

> opportunities, no poverty, affordable better quality education, better

> healthcare, better health and farming quality. I'm sure I can put together

> a much bigger list. We have much to learn from Switzerland and Singapore.

> We can even learn from a good quality dictatorship like from Emperor

> ian and Emperor Constantine. We also have much to learn from a

> benevolent Soveriegn. We need to learn what works and what doesn't work,

> instead of repeating the same mistakes we have been for the past hundred

> years because our culture is stupid and lazy and don't like to think.

This is exactly how the current shadow-government type oligarchy came

into being. All of the modern scientific establishment, especially

fields like psychology, sociology, genetics, and molecular biology,

were based on the idea of " social control " promoted primarily by the

Rockefeller Foundation, with the purported aim of benevolently

bringing the science of controlling people up to par with

technological science so that crime and poverty could be reduced while

opportunity, healthcare, and better food could could be produced.

I would recommend on this subject reading the book " The Rockefeller

Foundation's Molecular Vision of Life " by the respected science

historian Lilly Kay, which I've reviewed here:

http://www.choleste rol-and-health. com/Rockefeller- Foundation- Social-Control-

Eugenics. html

I would also recommend viewing how this oligarchic control of American

and international institutions has differed in theory and practice.

" Better food " has brought us genetic engineering, which destroys

health and increases direct oligarchic control of the food supply.

The benevolent vision of social control was initially associated with

eugenics, and, after Hitler, switched to overpopulation. To see the

potential consequences of this concern among the scientific elite, see

my review about the extremist Pianka, who got a standing ovation

from the Texas Academy of Sciences for his speech about how 90% of the

world's population must be destroyed for the sake of such benevolent

care about living standards:

http://www.choleste rol-and-health. com/FBI-Anthrax- Terrorist- Army-Insider.

html#Pianka

I think you are missing something when you refer to Constantine and

ian. Whatever the faults some may identify in their practice as

benevolent rulers, they held themselves to a law above themselves. In

the so-called " Byzantine " (Christian Roman) Empire, political

philosophy of the time held that even the rulers are subject to the

law, and that man discovers the divine law and only creates decrees to

imperfectly adhere to that law, rather than creating law himself.

Constantine and ian sought advice from holy ascetics in the

dessert who believed that every individual had the ultimate destiny

of, while remaining completely an individual, nevertheless

participating fully in the divine nature. They sought the advice of

ascetic bishops like Basil the Great, who invented the hospital (as a

charitable and non-profit institution) and the orphanage.

In the ancient world, the Greek word for person was prosopon, meaning

" mask. " Thus, like the Asian religious traditions, they held the

individual was an illusion. The Trinitarian theologists who advised

Constantine and ian brought a new word to the table for person,

hypostasis, meaning underlying principle, thus holding that each

individual had a real, true, indepedent existence.

The current science Czar, JP Holdren, co-authored Ecoscience, a policy

textbook. In this book, Holdren and the Erlichs state that the

question of when life begins is meaningless to the biologist, because

to the biologist, life began only once when it spontaneously developed

billions of years ago, and there is no distinction between individual

lives that have resulted from it, but merely a continuum.

According to the highest scientific authority in this land, you carry

the same meaning as a bacterium, and I carry the same meaning as a

bacterium.

This is according to the molecular biology developed by the benevolent

Rockefeller Foundation, who sought to create a ruling oligarchy that

would benevolently increase opportunity and healthcare while

decreasing crime and poverty.

Do you really think that an oligarchy born out of this philosophy will

produce whatever benevolent qualities you see in Constantine or

ian?

Chris

[Guest guest]

Not democracy, but the lack of organization our government has because the

politicians are too distracted by fulfilling the goals of their affiliates.

That the there's not enough communication with the Government and the people of

what needs to be done. There's no plan. Nothing. The best idea the Government

has is to make money off of the swine flu.

________________________________

From: Bill <lynchwt@...>

Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 5:26:59 AM

Subject: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

Switzerland is not an oligarchy (except perhaps in the sense that modern

democracies devolve to oligarchical control in practice, subverting democratic

constitutions, as argues for the U.S.). Here's the wikipedia summary:

" Politics of Switzerland takes place in the framework of a multi-party federal

parliamentary democratic republic, whereby the Federal Council of Switzerland is

the head of government. Executive power is exercised by the government and the

federal administration. Federal legislative power is vested in both the

government and the two chambers of the Federal Assembly of Switzerland. The

judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. For any change in

the constitution, a referendum is mandatory; for any change in a law, a

referendum can be requested. Through referenda, citizens may challenge any law

voted by federal parliament and through initiatives introduce amendments to the

federal constitution, making Switzerland the closest state in the world to a

direct democracy. "

Why do you trust old men so much? Elected politicians are not old men? When

people use words like benevolent and enlightened to describe oligarchical or

monarchical political systems, they are putting a pretty gloss on ugly

power--it's not a job requirement. What do you have against democracy?

Bill

--- In , Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

wrote:

>

> I wouldn't call these statesman that have been running our country

" enlightened " . I think money can become a burden to rich men influences them

to make greedy decisions at times. Look up the terms enlightened and

benevolent, they don't match how you are placing them. Benevolent terms those

that do things for the greater good. Enlightened refers to a heightened state

of highly positive awareness. You must mean to say manevolent and forceful.

You are definately twisting my words around.

>

> It will be interesting to read these books to learn more about the " NWO " . You

have not answered my question of how you would remedy the dillema of our current

population problems and of the reality that we may run out of resources...

>

> It's not hard to imagine that they used science to control the masses.

Science, psychology, and nutrition in farming are all backwards in their current

approaches. All it takes though is our people to fight and raise awareness of

quality produce and for people to buy it. Ultimately it's supply and demand

that wins over dark agendas, and that's how people should fight.

>

> Because it's the job of the judicial branch to interpret laws and not to meet

the demands of corrupt elites they are less corrupt. They too may do wrong at

times, but because it's not their job to do so they likely are doing that nearly

at the same rate a politician is. They are also all older men so they what

motivates them is far different than what motivates a politician. And so would

be the same nature of the Oligarchy branch. They would likely be older men with

years of experience who are not affiliated with corruption. There may be issues

of corruption, but they have to hold themselves accountable if they get caught.

Their job would be to make decisions that are better for the country. Perhaps

it would be better to communicate with them rather than politicians for what we

need because the politicians and the presidents are too busy following there

agendas. The Oligarchy council on the other hand would not. It would be their

job to serve

> the people. Like the judiciary branch, if the common man calls to be heard,

he can make it public and get his point across. It's the Oligarchy's job to

listen. If you had actually read my description this Oligarchy would be

different than a cabinet or whatever you may be terming an Oligarchy. In the

description of this Oligarchy it is said that these men in particular aren't

affiliated with the rich select few or corruption. Go and study Switzerland' s

Oligarchy before comparing it to the NWO which I have never heard in the same

sentence until talking to you.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Just look at the signs of the times. Look where we are headed. I'd rather kill

myself off than to produce such a future:

http://tiny.cc/6loAE

________________________________

From: Holt <danthemanholt@...>

Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 11:09:35 AM

Subject: Re: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

Not democracy, but the lack of organization our government has because the

politicians are too distracted by fulfilling the goals of their affiliates.

That the there's not enough communication with the Government and the people of

what needs to be done. There's no plan. Nothing. The best idea the Government

has is to make money off of the swine flu.

____________ _________ _________ __

From: Bill <lynchwtgmail (DOT) com>

Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 5:26:59 AM

Subject: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

Switzerland is not an oligarchy (except perhaps in the sense that modern

democracies devolve to oligarchical control in practice, subverting democratic

constitutions, as argues for the U.S.). Here's the wikipedia summary:

" Politics of Switzerland takes place in the framework of a multi-party federal

parliamentary democratic republic, whereby the Federal Council of Switzerland is

the head of government. Executive power is exercised by the government and the

federal administration. Federal legislative power is vested in both the

government and the two chambers of the Federal Assembly of Switzerland. The

judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. For any change in

the constitution, a referendum is mandatory; for any change in a law, a

referendum can be requested. Through referenda, citizens may challenge any law

voted by federal parliament and through initiatives introduce amendments to the

federal constitution, making Switzerland the closest state in the world to a

direct democracy. "

Why do you trust old men so much? Elected politicians are not old men? When

people use words like benevolent and enlightened to describe oligarchical or

monarchical political systems, they are putting a pretty gloss on ugly

power--it's not a job requirement. What do you have against democracy?

Bill

--- In , Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

wrote:

>

> I wouldn't call these statesman that have been running our country

" enlightened " . I think money can become a burden to rich men influences them

to make greedy decisions at times. Look up the terms enlightened and

benevolent, they don't match how you are placing them. Benevolent terms those

that do things for the greater good. Enlightened refers to a heightened state

of highly positive awareness. You must mean to say manevolent and forceful.

You are definately twisting my words around.

>

> It will be interesting to read these books to learn more about the " NWO " . You

have not answered my question of how you would remedy the dillema of our current

population problems and of the reality that we may run out of resources...

>

> It's not hard to imagine that they used science to control the masses.

Science, psychology, and nutrition in farming are all backwards in their current

approaches. All it takes though is our people to fight and raise awareness of

quality produce and for people to buy it. Ultimately it's supply and demand

that wins over dark agendas, and that's how people should fight.

>

> Because it's the job of the judicial branch to interpret laws and not to meet

the demands of corrupt elites they are less corrupt. They too may do wrong at

times, but because it's not their job to do so they likely are doing that nearly

at the same rate a politician is. They are also all older men so they what

motivates them is far different than what motivates a politician. And so would

be the same nature of the Oligarchy branch. They would likely be older men with

years of experience who are not affiliated with corruption. There may be issues

of corruption, but they have to hold themselves accountable if they get caught.

Their job would be to make decisions that are better for the country. Perhaps

it would be better to communicate with them rather than politicians for what we

need because the politicians and the presidents are too busy following there

agendas. The Oligarchy council on the other hand would not. It would be their

job to serve

> the people. Like the judiciary branch, if the common man calls to be heard,

he can make it public and get his point across. It's the Oligarchy's job to

listen. If you had actually read my description this Oligarchy would be

different than a cabinet or whatever you may be terming an Oligarchy. In the

description of this Oligarchy it is said that these men in particular aren't

affiliated with the rich select few or corruption. Go and study Switzerland' s

Oligarchy before comparing it to the NWO which I have never heard in the same

sentence until talking to you.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dude!! Just walk outside and look around. We're surrounded by them.

Dan Holt

________________________________

From: Bill <lynchwt@...>

Sent: Thu, November 5, 2009 5:55:47 AM

Subject: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

That's a very funny movie. You do know it's fiction, right? Step away from the

ledge, it'll be all right...

--- In , Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

wrote:

>

> Just look at the signs of the times. Look where we are headed. I'd rather

kill myself off than to produce such a future:

>

> http://tiny. cc/6loAE

>

>

>

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> From: Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

>

> Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 11:09:35 AM

> Subject: Re: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

>

>

> Not democracy, but the lack of organization our government has because the

politicians are too distracted by fulfilling the goals of their affiliates.

That the there's not enough communication with the Government and the people of

what needs to be done. There's no plan. Nothing. The best idea the Government

has is to make money off of the swine flu.

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> From: Bill <lynchwtgmail (DOT) com>

>

> Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 5:26:59 AM

> Subject: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

>

> Switzerland is not an oligarchy (except perhaps in the sense that modern

democracies devolve to oligarchical control in practice, subverting democratic

constitutions, as argues for the U.S.). Here's the wikipedia summary:

> " Politics of Switzerland takes place in the framework of a multi-party federal

parliamentary democratic republic, whereby the Federal Council of Switzerland is

the head of government. Executive power is exercised by the government and the

federal administration. Federal legislative power is vested in both the

government and the two chambers of the Federal Assembly of Switzerland. The

judiciary is independent of the executive and the legislature. For any change in

the constitution, a referendum is mandatory; for any change in a law, a

referendum can be requested. Through referenda, citizens may challenge any law

voted by federal parliament and through initiatives introduce amendments to the

federal constitution, making Switzerland the closest state in the world to a

direct democracy. "

>

> Why do you trust old men so much? Elected politicians are not old men? When

people use words like benevolent and enlightened to describe oligarchical or

monarchical political systems, they are putting a pretty gloss on ugly

power--it's not a job requirement. What do you have against democracy?

>

> Bill

>

> --- In , Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

wrote:

> >

> > I wouldn't call these statesman that have been running our country

" enlightened " . I think money can become a burden to rich men influences them

to make greedy decisions at times. Look up the terms enlightened and

benevolent, they don't match how you are placing them. Benevolent terms those

that do things for the greater good. Enlightened refers to a heightened state

of highly positive awareness. You must mean to say manevolent and forceful.

You are definately twisting my words around.

> >

> > It will be interesting to read these books to learn more about the " NWO " .

You have not answered my question of how you would remedy the dillema of our

current population problems and of the reality that we may run out of

resources...

> >

> > It's not hard to imagine that they used science to control the masses.

Science, psychology, and nutrition in farming are all backwards in their current

approaches. All it takes though is our people to fight and raise awareness of

quality produce and for people to buy it. Ultimately it's supply and demand

that wins over dark agendas, and that's how people should fight.

> >

> > Because it's the job of the judicial branch to interpret laws and not to

meet the demands of corrupt elites they are less corrupt. They too may do wrong

at times, but because it's not their job to do so they likely are doing that

nearly at the same rate a politician is. They are also all older men so they

what motivates them is far different than what motivates a politician. And so

would be the same nature of the Oligarchy branch. They would likely be older

men with years of experience who are not affiliated with corruption. There may

be issues of corruption, but they have to hold themselves accountable if they

get caught. Their job would be to make decisions that are better for the

country. Perhaps it would be better to communicate with them rather than

politicians for what we need because the politicians and the presidents are too

busy following there agendas. The Oligarchy council on the other hand would

not. It would be their job to serve

> > the people. Like the judiciary branch, if the common man calls to be

heard, he can make it public and get his point across. It's the Oligarchy's job

to listen. If you had actually read my description this Oligarchy would be

different than a cabinet or whatever you may be terming an Oligarchy. In the

description of this Oligarchy it is said that these men in particular aren't

affiliated with the rich select few or corruption. Go and study Switzerland' s

Oligarchy before comparing it to the NWO which I have never heard in the same

sentence until talking to you.

> >

> >

>

>

[Guest guest]

> We should develop a type of oligarchy that would work with our

constitution.

Dan, if nothing else, you win the prize for creative thinking.

Suze

[Guest guest]

Here is a blunt article that feels resources will run out if population

increases:

http://tiny.cc/DZJQv

Here are two articles that feel resources aren't a problem but rather the

organization and care of resources are the real issues:

http://tiny.cc/OFtbT

http://tiny.cc/JMvzq

I can't see a shortage in water. I don't feel water needs to be consumed by

people directly, as we can get it from raw milk, meat, and the vegetation we

eat.

It is apparent that there are issues with the resources our economy promotes.

While oil won't be necessary in the future the issue is how to shift to other

resources when it runs out. It's apparent we can switch oil with a more

abundant and efficient resource in the future that won't run out.

I personally look around and see things getting worse. What will it take for

our world to turn around from the chaos that is multiplying.

So perhaps all it will take is an attitude change from the people of what they

value, just what class means, and what they want to invest into. Hard to say.

I'd like to hear a well thought out argument for both sides. This is what I

have so far.

A very relevant question is " Under the optimal conditions can mankind thrive

with an expanding population with unlimited resources for centuries to come " ?

Many researchers are obviously short sited because they aren't knowledgeable

enough on more optimal management of resources and more efficient alternative

resources.

I think the biggest problems that attribute to the world's condition today are

Greed and Ignorance.

Dan Holt

________________________________

From: H <danthemanholt@...>

Sent: Wed, November 11, 2009 6:27:42 AM

Subject: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

Hey I thought I'd continue this topic with a couple web-sites that raise

questions...

I also thought I'd share with you more of where I stand with this. I'll start

with this topic and then share the web-sites and my other opinions.

Try reading Dr. R. Hawkins book " Truth vs. Falsehood " for a very

interesting view on politics. It's a good alternative to the diarhea

regurgitated and absolutely annoying lamebrain shit of Mr. O' Reilly and all the

other influential members of society that brainwash their bullshit on to us.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm crazey and I'm just not correctly interpreting their

valuable information.

Also, if you're interested in subjects such as alternative governments, a better

ran society, and the different concept of ruler's opinions, their

positionalities, and the pros and cons of their ideas watch this series,

especially episodes 36-42 of this " cartoon " . This helped mold my opinion.

Sounds immature huh? Although I see fact in this fictional fantasy, I don't

completely agree with the series viewpoints. It does a decent job of covering

soveriegns, dictatorships, democracies, population control, and " utopian

societies " with their " superior race " .

http://tiny. cc/TZWGz

I am for a democratic oligarchy republic that has the other branches that hold

it in place with a " checks and balances " system, all classes and ranks of people

have the ability to interact and make this government work more efficiently with

the best of their interests and to maintain balance with humanity and nature.

Everybody needs the ability to freely questions eachother and work out issues

such as economy, laws, etc. Lately though there's too much selfishness and one

sidedness. A Presidency is like a soveriegn, but there's too much corruption,

opposing viewpoints that don't work together, and the fulfilling of parties

interests rather than what's best for everybody in the long run. Why if there

really is an optimal answer and approach to everything our world leaders are so

divided? I think then if their is an optimal way of doing things then we need

to combine the best of everyone and turn it all into one cooperative movement.

Let's kill a

hundred cajillion birds with one stone rather than one at a time, while 2

billion other birds muliply and multiply. Metaphor: bird/issues kill/resolve.

We really need to put a system in place where integrity is a high priority, a

business like government where you get demoted for incompetence and someone more

fit for the position takes that person's place. By all this I don't mean to

increase Government.. .with more competent people in power there would be less

people running it overall, as a very competent person can literally do the job

of 10 less competent people. Especially with a reorganization it's hard to

imagine how much more efficient any government can be ran. For example: I can

do the job of 5 less competent workers at my job, and in fact I even played the

role of my manager. Obviously I worked with very devolved people so my

competence threatens their job, thus I don't belong there. However, with

running our country such theoretical

competent people are necessary and important while it is not for a white trash

backwater crimelord company.

So here is a very interesting link that simplifies the population subject and

includes an insightful chart:

http://tiny. cc/Z5W1P

Here's a couple other links that may be of interest:

http://tiny. cc/FOBwZ

http://tiny. cc/BdUZp

http://tiny. cc/ZybrN

People need to stop doing what they want to do that goes against the big picture

of what will maintain the balance and prosperity if they would instead do what

has to be done.

So there may be a chance our world population could grow. In a perfect world I

wouldn't mind being stuck with 100 billion people, but in reality this creates

problems. Lower standard of living, less education, more crime, more injustice,

loss of tradition. If we all had a higher level of awareness there could be 1

trillion Buddhas on this planet, perfectly happy in their nirvana sitting 1 foot

away from eachother in a meditation therefore no need to eat and no need to work

out any problems as their is none. That is not the reality of what will happen

and I would hardly call the standard of modern day China or India as ideal. If

we could all co-exist in peaceful harmony with eachother and climb up our

spiritual ladder with just as much opportunity of today if not more I am all for

a ginormous population.

We seriously need to work out resource organization. It's apparent fish are

running out. From what I've seen you can't really run out of cows, chickens,

potatoes, so let's really look into changing what we market. If we enforced

better standards we may cure most illnesses. So much meat gets wasted. With

any resource period we would need to work out how it gets distributed. It would

be nice to shift from money to having a money free society that works to share

resources with eachother freely, peacefully, and abundantly. Star Trek style.

Everyone seems to be ignoring the problems and it's going to come back and

painfully bite our asses off.

I hope I don't sound like Adolf Hitler, after reviewing his work I really don't

feel like he had any true resolutions, and was a very forceful and destructive

person. Like all war mongering oppressive dictators. Very strategic, very

effective with application, but for all the wrong reasons and with out humanity

or true positive solutions.

It's so annoying when there is so much biased information out there you can't go

to a definitive source for truth. I don't believe Dr. Phil, Lance Armstrong,

Bill O' Reilly, Oprah Winfrey, with all of their influence in the world are

doing it justice. Where are the straightforward teachers that offer something

good? The most unbiased source I could find was R. Hawkins. I don't

trust college or most people.

While I like Ron and Kennedy I find flaws in them. Therefore I

would prefer Mitt Romney or Huckabee for their conservative principals, but

can't say if they can successfully carry it out in office. Maybe the above

individuals could do a better choice. I know there is a way of going about

things and when JFK attempted something different he got assassinated, so I will

say you are useless if you are dead, so accomplish what you can instead of dying

for a dream you can't pull off. Work with the system, transform the system, but

don't work against it as that never works. No matter how messed up the system

is you have to play the game right or you lose.

Dan Holt

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

--- In , Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

wrote:

>

> I disagree with your definition Chris. Switzerland is an Oligarchy and look

how well they are run. Obviously our Oligarchy branch wouldn't quite be like

their government. This version would work well with our own constitution. I

don't know what Oligarchy you seem to be referring to. It's about putting very

experienced older men that are connected to biased financial sources like

politicians. It would be like how the people in the judicial branch are chosen.

Older men without corruption and bias. One thing their Oligarchy represents is

tradition like our own government.

>

> We don't have many men at the top that are going out of there way to make

selfless decisions that would massively benefit our country. These men can take

the time to listen to our concerns and act on them. It's the politicians that

are more likely to support GMO crops, not selfless statesmen. It would better

organize our government. There would be more positive communication with the

governors therefore better communication with the people so people can act

accurately with their freedom of speech and voting.

>

> Our country and maybe even the whole world seems to be surviving on the

backwards conventional concepts that were introduced in the 20th century.

Poor quality farming, poor quality hospital care, etc. etc. etc. While an

Oligarchy won't fix all the problems it will certainly be a step in the right

direction to connect the people with the Government without all the diarhea

politic bullshit.

>

> Right now our current government and most of the governments in the world are

already working for the intentions of these rich select few. I would see an

Oligarchy as a step to being able to spread more financial opportunities to the

common man and given the people more power.

>

> The Oligarchy I am thinking of the the Greek term of it and what Switzerland

is currently using. What gives you the idea that the Oligarchy supports such

corruption? List some countries that ran by an Oligarchy like the ones you are

listing.

>

> So yes, an Oligarchy will produce benevolent qualities such as ian and

Constantine. They too will be held by the law and are held accountable by the

people and their peers. This form of government will influence a higher

integrity out of people.

>

> My take on population control: If we continue to consume as we do there will

be overpopulation and our resources with dissipate. This will lead to many

problems, loss of control of our own people, leading to massive chaos, death,

and the beginning of another dark age.

>

> We have two choices: Limit the amount of children people are allowed to have,

and perhaps we still risk the " NWO " unleashing a plague that will kill off

2/3rds of mankind, or choose to consume less like Native Americans, Chinese, and

East Indians. The entire world's standard of living would have to go down in

order to support a higher population for the future without major issues

arising. That would mean giving up the shallow wasteful over consuming American

lifestyle. I don't know how our economy could work that out... So a higher

population can thrive with a lower standard of living. I like how educated

college people like to bend the truth to fit their daisy view of how the world

and make these rich guys out to be pure evil who have no logic. We have to look

at what they are doing, why they are doing it, and then see if we can work out a

better solution. Most college people are liberals and they don't seem to

realize just how meek and

> vulnerable we all are if we don't make the necessary choices.

>

> If we reduce our population down to 90-95% our standard of living would all

rise to rich status. If we reduced it to two billion everyone in the world

would live by middle class standards. If we increased it to 10-20 billion

everyone would become lower class with a rich select few in charge

proportionally.

>

> Dan Holt

>

>

>

>

> ____________ _________ _________ __

> From: Masterjohn <chrismasterjohn@ ...>

>

> Sent: Tue, November 3, 2009 7:20:43 AM

> Subject: Re: Re: POLITICAL: Obama's Agricultural Sec Vilsack

>

>

> ,

>

> > We should develop a type of oligarchy that would work with our constitution.

> > Based on the description I gave that shouldn't be too hard. Our government

> > wouldn't be an oligarchy, it would just have an oligarchy branch attached to

> > it. Voting and rights would still be allowed. Communication with the

> > people would improve and more positive stuff would get done.

>

> > I define success as low crime, human rights, more and better quality job

> > opportunities, no poverty, affordable better quality education, better

> > healthcare, better health and farming quality. I'm sure I can put together

> > a much bigger list. We have much to learn from Switzerland and Singapore.

> > We can even learn from a good quality dictatorship like from Emperor

> > ian and Emperor Constantine. We also have much to learn from a

> > benevolent Soveriegn. We need to learn what works and what doesn't work,

> > instead of repeating the same mistakes we have been for the past hundred

> > years because our culture is stupid and lazy and don't like to think.

>

> This is exactly how the current shadow-government type oligarchy came

> into being. All of the modern scientific establishment, especially

> fields like psychology, sociology, genetics, and molecular biology,

> were based on the idea of " social control " promoted primarily by the

> Rockefeller Foundation, with the purported aim of benevolently

> bringing the science of controlling people up to par with

> technological science so that crime and poverty could be reduced while

> opportunity, healthcare, and better food could could be produced.

>

> I would recommend on this subject reading the book " The Rockefeller

> Foundation's Molecular Vision of Life " by the respected science

> historian Lilly Kay, which I've reviewed here:

>

> http://www.choleste rol-and-health. com/Rockefeller- Foundation-

Social-Control- Eugenics. html

>

> I would also recommend viewing how this oligarchic control of American

> and international institutions has differed in theory and practice.

> " Better food " has brought us genetic engineering, which destroys

> health and increases direct oligarchic control of the food supply.

> The benevolent vision of social control was initially associated with

> eugenics, and, after Hitler, switched to overpopulation. To see the

> potential consequences of this concern among the scientific elite, see

> my review about the extremist Pianka, who got a standing ovation

> from the Texas Academy of Sciences for his speech about how 90% of the

> world's population must be destroyed for the sake of such benevolent

> care about living standards:

>

> http://www.choleste rol-and-health. com/FBI-Anthrax- Terrorist- Army-Insider.

html#Pianka

>

> I think you are missing something when you refer to Constantine and

> ian. Whatever the faults some may identify in their practice as

> benevolent rulers, they held themselves to a law above themselves. In

> the so-called " Byzantine " (Christian Roman) Empire, political

> philosophy of the time held that even the rulers are subject to the

> law, and that man discovers the divine law and only creates decrees to

> imperfectly adhere to that law, rather than creating law himself.

> Constantine and ian sought advice from holy ascetics in the

> dessert who believed that every individual had the ultimate destiny

> of, while remaining completely an individual, nevertheless

> participating fully in the divine nature. They sought the advice of

> ascetic bishops like Basil the Great, who invented the hospital (as a

> charitable and non-profit institution) and the orphanage.

>

> In the ancient world, the Greek word for person was prosopon, meaning

> " mask. " Thus, like the Asian religious traditions, they held the

> individual was an illusion. The Trinitarian theologists who advised

> Constantine and ian brought a new word to the table for person,

> hypostasis, meaning underlying principle, thus holding that each

> individual had a real, true, indepedent existence.

>

> The current science Czar, JP Holdren, co-authored Ecoscience, a policy

> textbook. In this book, Holdren and the Erlichs state that the

> question of when life begins is meaningless to the biologist, because

> to the biologist, life began only once when it spontaneously developed

> billions of years ago, and there is no distinction between individual

> lives that have resulted from it, but merely a continuum.

>

> According to the highest scientific authority in this land, you carry

> the same meaning as a bacterium, and I carry the same meaning as a

> bacterium.

>

> This is according to the molecular biology developed by the benevolent

> Rockefeller Foundation, who sought to create a ruling oligarchy that

> would benevolently increase opportunity and healthcare while

> decreasing crime and poverty.

>

> Do you really think that an oligarchy born out of this philosophy will

> produce whatever benevolent qualities you see in Constantine or

> ian?

>

> Chris

>

>

>

>