Secret Society

[Guest MormonGator]

10 hours ago, mirkwood said:

And stop pretending to be relevant outside of the music industry.  U2 another massively over rated band.

Oh yes. One of the most overrated bands of all time, no doubt. 

[Guest MormonGator]

13 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

Are you asserting that Warren Delano Jr. never was any part of the opium trade with China?  Did Warren Delano Jr ever make any public statements (that you are aware of from your studies of history) about the morality of opium trading and his involvement with such trade?

The statement I made is that there is historical evidence that the grandfather of Franklin D. Roosevelt trafficked illegal drugs in China – and was never legally prohibited for his unlawful activities in Europe or the USA.  I also stated that I have not found any historical evidence that the organization that profited and made him money in the drug trade was ever disbanded or closed down.

I will ask you directly anatess2.  First if I have misrepresented any historical fact?  If so please say exactly what fact.  Secondly – you have stated that we are currently fighting a drug war with China.  – I would like to know how your know that China is our single most important nemesis in this drug war and that the opium “connections” established by that organization Warren Delano Jr used is not at all connected (in any way) with opium problems (epidemic) currently occurring in the USA?

 

The Traveler

Opium wasn't banned until 1909. What the guy was doing was legal at the time. 

https://www.naabt.org/laws.cfm

People have been getting high since the dawn of humanity. What Dealno did back then has absolutely nothing to do with the opiate problems society is dealing with today. 

 

Edited January 25, 2018 by MormonGator

[Traveler]

13 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Opium wasn't banned until 1909. What the guy was doing was legal at the time. 

https://www.naabt.org/laws.cfm

People have been getting high since the dawn of humanity. What Dealno did back then has absolutely nothing to do with the opiate problems society is dealing with today. 

 

Inporting opium was illegal in China and what Dealno did - did indeed break China's laws.  In addition - I would be most interested to know how you were able to establish that the opium trade - specifically the organization utilized by Dealno has nothing at all to do with the opiate problem today.

 

The Traveler

[Guest MormonGator]

6 minutes ago, Traveler said:

Inporting opium was illegal in China and what Dealno did - did indeed break China's laws.  In addition - I would be most interested to know how you were able to establish that the opium trade - specifically the organization utilized by Dealno has nothing at all to do with the opiate problem today.

I'd also be "most interested" in explaining it to you, but what's the point? If you want believe in conspiracy theories there isn't much that I can do about it. 

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

 

Are you asserting that Warren Delano Jr. never was any part of the opium trade with China?  Did Warren Delano Jr ever make any public statements (that you are aware of from your studies of history) about the morality of opium trading and his involvement with such trade?

The statement I made is that there is historical evidence that the grandfather of Franklin D. Roosevelt trafficked illegal drugs in China – and was never legally prohibited for his unlawful activities in Europe or the USA.  I also stated that I have not found any historical evidence that the organization that profited and made him money in the drug trade was ever disbanded or closed down.

I will ask you directly @anatess2.  First if I have misrepresented any historical fact?  If so please say exactly what fact.  Secondly – you have stated that we are currently fighting a drug war with China.  – I would like to know how your know that China is our single most important nemesis in this drug war and that the opium “connections” established by that organization Warren Delano Jr used is not at all connected (in any way) with opium problems (epidemic) currently occurring in the USA?

 

The Traveler

Hello... of course Delano is!  He worked at Russell Shipping Corporation or something like it and climbed up that ladder making him a powerful man in his own right independent from the Delano Boston dynasty!  And by the way, opium was not quite illegal when Delano traded in it.  The war was still unresolved.  Delano and all other commercial interests stopped trading in opium when the treaty was signed.

But to say that he was in a secret gang of 20 global conspirators to siphon Gold out of China is Dan Brown type assertions.  The British government's hand is neither secret nor a global organization unless you call imperialism the global conspirator.  Disbanded organization?  You have to band first to get disbanded!  Delano worked for Russell.  A shipping trader.  Commercial.  There's no "organization" besides capitalism!  Russell does not exist anymore.  We've moved on to airplanes.  Many families in Boston as well as British and Danish families got rich out of opium but after the treaty they moved on to something else.  Boston is full of rich dynasties in the stock and banking trade that had their beginnings in the opium trade.  Delano was just one of them.  You just like targeting him specifically because he's tied to FDR.

China is THE PHILIPPINES' supplier of drugs.  This has been proven by the Duterte administration.  The Chinese supply the product, Islamic jihadist cels and Communist activitists distribute them to fund their war against the government.  No secret globalist organization in sight.  In Afghanistan - the largest opium producer today - the opium fields fund both jihadists and the the people fighting against the jihadists.  So you got American military caught in the middle trying to maintain a precarious balance on what to do with it.  That's no secret organization either.  The drug cartels south of the American border is no secret organization either.  All of these people would rather kill each other for distributor territories than have some global organization control their illicit trade.

Edited January 25, 2018 by anatess2

[eVa]

22 hours ago, anatess2 said:

22 hours ago, Anddenex said:

I would only change one word shown in quote.

Right.  But the preservation of the Constitution presupposes the government succeeded in protecting it.  No?

The U.S. government will not save the Constitution.  It will "hang by a thread" before the brethren are asked to step in and save it.

[eVa]

Speaking of opium, explain how it is possible for production to increase exponentially since 2001?  

[anatess2]

23 hours ago, eVa said:

Speaking of opium, explain how it is possible for production to increase exponentially since 2001?  

It's called War on Terror.  Opium production is mainly in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey.  The war increased the demand for Opium as it is used, together with oil, to fund both the good guys and the bad guys in the war.  So, production increased to meet the demand.

[Guest Godless]

I'm just now catching up on this thread and I just want to say that, having read the "secret society" text message, anyone who is using that as evidence of a deep state conspiracy needs to have their sarcasm meter checked. And OF COURSE Fox is the network that's actually trying to sell this is a legit scandal. Give me a break.

[person0]

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

I'm just now catching up on this thread and I just want to say that, having read the "secret society" text message, anyone who is using that as evidence of a deep state conspiracy needs to have their sarcasm meter checked. And OF COURSE Fox is the network that's actually trying to sell this is a legit scandal. Give me a break.

Most of us on the forum are LDS (obviously).  Therefore, as I posted earlier most of us would presumably already accept the existence of subversive secret societies in our communities and country, based solely on the understanding we have from the Book of Mormon about the Gadianton robbers and the Nehors.

1000 text messages on the subject would not increase my belief in the existence of secret societies, they would merely serve as possible evidence to the unknowing populous.

[Guest Godless]

45 minutes ago, person0 said:

Most of us on the forum are LDS (obviously).  Therefore, as I posted earlier most of us would presumably already accept the existence of subversive secret societies in our communities and country, based solely on the understanding we have from the Book of Mormon about the Gadianton robbers and the Nehors.

1000 text messages on the subject would not increase my belief in the existence of secret societies, they would merely serve as possible evidence to the unknowing populous.

FWIW, I'm not denying the idea that there are powerful forces working to corrupt our government into doing their will (and I'm well aware of the scriptural basis for LDS concerns).  I'm just saying that maybe a single tongue-in-cheek text message isn't the best evidence to use when stating your case.  And personally, I think you should be looking less at the FBI and more at the Koch brothers and their ilk. 

Edited January 26, 2018 by Godless

[person0]

2 minutes ago, Godless said:

And personally, I think you should be looking less at the FBI and more at the Koch brothers and their ilk.

To be fair, if you are going to claim the Koch brothers, you can't leave out George Soros.

That said, I'd say there is a difference between people doing things in secret (even evil things) and an actual secret society.  I am more inclined to believe that members of a secret society are most likely going to be people we have never heard of before, and other people we have heard of but would never suspect, and perhaps only a few we might suspect.  I also think it's entirely reasonable to assume that there would be members of such a society in the FBI, although I would not suggest that the entire FBI would be involved.  Likewise, I would say that there would be both Republicans and Democrats, etc, who in public oppose each other, but behind closed doors are on the same team.

[NeuroTypical]

You know where to look for subversive secret societies?  Your own teen children.  They get together in small groups, in real life or online, and plot nefarious things like sneaking out, making out, tuning out, and faking out.  

It's easy to overlook the furry sitting at your dinner table when your eye is turned towards Rockefellers and the queen. 

Better the trilateral commission you know, than the daughter you don't. 

Dont eat Tide pods, kids!

/relevantsnark

Edited January 26, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[NightSG]

32 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Dont eat Tide pods, kids!

 

[JohnsonJones]

I've yet to determine if this is a fake fad or what one would call something the press has eaten hook, line, and sinker, but it isn't really happening except for a VERY FEW stupid teens.  Overall, that would mean it's just a joke the teens are doing, but the media has taken to it as if it's real.  (talking about this entire Tide laundry detergent pod fad that has had the media in such an uproar).

I'm not sure, but I haven't actually heard of any deaths in this instance (except for one or two, for example one at USU which was a death or serious injury I think, which would be the few who think people are actually doing this from what they read in the media) from this overall...but I have heard a lot of media alarm.  Which is why I'm wondering if this is a fake fad rather than something that's actually happening.

Edited January 27, 2018 by JohnsonJones

[NeuroTypical]

On 1/27/2018 at 6:50 AM, JohnsonJones said:

Which is why I'm wondering if this is a fake fad rather than something that's actually happening.

Why not both?  Yes, that thing is a fake ad, and yes, this is something that's actually happening.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/kids-got-sick-eating-detergent-long-before-the-tide-pod-challenge

Various kids and those lacking maturity, have always attempted to exploit gullibility in others.  Tide pods are just this month's Snipe hunt.  It just so happens that unlike snipe hunting, this one will put you in the hospital.

[anatess2]

On 1/26/2018 at 3:30 PM, Godless said:

FWIW, I'm not denying the idea that there are powerful forces working to corrupt our government into doing their will (and I'm well aware of the scriptural basis for LDS concerns).  I'm just saying that maybe a single tongue-in-cheek text message isn't the best evidence to use when stating your case.  And personally, I think you should be looking less at the FBI and more at the Koch brothers and their ilk. 

What text message are your talking about?  If you're talking about the Strozk, Page text message, that's not just a single tongue-in-cheek text message.  We don't just call them secret societies because somebody literally called it "secret society".

So, let me understand your position... you believe that Obamagate is a farce?  Do you believe that Trump colluded with Russia?

Edited January 29, 2018 by anatess2

[JohnsonJones]

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Why not both?  Yes, that thing is a fake ad, and yes, this is something that's actually happening.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/kids-got-sick-eating-detergent-long-before-the-tide-pod-challenge

Various kids and those lacking maturity, have always attempted to exploit gullibility in others.  Tide pods are just this month's Snipe hunt.  It just so happens that unlike snipe hunting, this one will put you in the hospital.

The thing that puzzles me is that they've had 89 kids die (I think that's the number) this year thus far.  However, comparatively (even to auto deaths and such), that is a VERY small number if this was actually a fad.  In truth, I think the media, by blowing it up, has probably exacerbated it FAR beyond what it originally was, making it seen by foolish teens who then try it themselves. 

If it were a fad I'd think the number would be at least in the hundreds if not the thousands considering that it is a concentrated laundry detergent in those pods (equal to drinking an amount that can wash a full load of clothes).

I'm of the impression some kids posted some joke videos on the internet, and the media picked up on it and thought it was real.  Then with the media blowing it up, kids saw this, read about it and tried to be cool...or something dumb like that, which has created the increased number of deaths from pods this year thus far (I think it was around 57 deaths last year, so it is risen, but only just recently...which correlates to the media explosion on it).

It could be real, but it seems more like one of the media things where they blow things out of proportion...and sometimes create the problems themselves (chicken or the egg scenario/question).

[JohnsonJones]

4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

What text message are your talking about?  If you're talking about the Strozk, Page text message, that's not just a single tongue-in-cheek text message.  We don't just call them secret societies because somebody literally called it "secret society".

So, let me understand your position... you believe that Obamagate is a farce?  Do you believe that Trump colluded with Russia?

I'm not certain on the Russia thing, but my thoughts lean that it is a witch hunt.  EVERY foreign entity that has an interest in the US tries, in some way or another, to influence our elections.  Why they have chosen out Russia rather than China or N. Korea or Saudi Arabia or Germany or the UK (and the UK has it pretty blatant with some UK artists and others stating some pretty publicized items during our election year) in this investigation is a pretty big mystery.  If I had to point to someone who had the biggest foreign influence, I'd actually say it was probably the UK, Australia, or China.

I also think there is a greater threat to the US from influences INSIDE the nation, of those who are willing to corrupt the election process or even cheat it, rather than influences from outside (barring of course, our voting machines being hacked and taken over by a foreign power).

I do think there are some things which are HIGHLY suspect in regards to the Democrats and their handling of things, which I think probably warrant a much closer look than anything that is actually being done.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'm not certain on the Russia thing, but my thoughts lean that it is a witch hunt.  EVERY foreign entity that has an interest in the US tries, in some way or another, to influence our elections.  Why they have chosen out Russia rather than China or N. Korea or Saudi Arabia or Germany or the UK (and the UK has it pretty blatant with some UK artists and others stating some pretty publicized items during our election year) in this investigation is a pretty big mystery.  If I had to point to someone who had the biggest foreign influence, I'd actually say it was probably the UK, Australia, or China.

I also think there is a greater threat to the US from influences INSIDE the nation, of those who are willing to corrupt the election process or even cheat it, rather than influences from outside (barring of course, our voting machines being hacked and taken over by a foreign power).

I do think there are some things which are HIGHLY suspect in regards to the Democrats and their handling of things, which I think probably warrant a much closer look than anything that is actually being done.

The Russia thing is obvious.  How else are you going to explain the FISA warrant that allowed the Obama Admin to spy on Trump...

[Guest Godless]

5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

What text message are your talking about?  If you're talking about the Strozk, Page text message, that's not just a single tongue-in-cheek text message.  We don't just call them secret societies because somebody literally called it "secret society".

The premise of this thread seems very much based upon a single tongue-in-cheek text message. Read my post again. I never denied that there may be secret forces at work to undermine and manipulate our government. Only that this text message business is hardly the best evidence of it. If you want to get me on board with disbanding the FBI, you'll have to do better than that.

On 1/23/2018 at 10:27 AM, Traveler said:

For a long time, I have been concerned about a “secret society” operating within our government.   Though I believed it and thought to see the possibility – I could not conclusively prove it.   According to a testimony (in the news) by Trey Gowdy, texts sent between a high FBI government official and a girlfriend specifically mentions a “secret society” operating and coordinating both within the FBI and the Justice Department among high government officials in those agencies.   Here is a link: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/01/23/fbis-strzok-and-page-spoke-secret-society-after-trump-election-lawmakers-say.html

 

 

So, let me understand your position... you believe that Obamagate is a farce?  Do you believe that Trump colluded with Russia?

I believe that, as far as lawbreaking by US presidents go, it is far more important to learn whether the current sitting US president broke any laws as opposed to the guy he replaced.  I'm not educated enough on the investigations (and I'm pretty sure you're not either) to say for certain whether or not Obama or Trump broke the law. If Obama were still president and charges of corruption were being raised against him, that would concern me greatly. If anything comes of this Nunes memo and charges are brought against Obama, you can consider me on record as saying that the allegations, if true, are highly troubling and that Obama should be held accountable for his actions. 

As it turns out, Trump is the one currently residing in the Oval Office, not Obama. Therefore, his relationship with the law is of far more concern to me at present. And he has not been acting like someone who is innocent and has nothing to hide. Again, I don't know enough about the ongoing investigation to say for sure that there was collusion, but the way Trump has lashed out at Comey and Mueller is enough to raise eyebrows. If he has nothing to hide, then why the hostility? Needless to say I am very curious to see how the Mueller investigation turns out. 

[anatess2]

31 minutes ago, Godless said:

I believe that, as far as lawbreaking by US presidents go, it is far more important to learn whether the current sitting US president broke any laws as opposed to the guy he replaced.  I'm not educated enough on the investigations (and I'm pretty sure you're not either) to say for certain whether or not Obama or Trump broke the law. If Obama were still president and charges of corruption were being raised against him, that would concern me greatly. If anything comes of this Nunes memo and charges are brought against Obama, you can consider me on record as saying that the allegations, if true, are highly troubling and that Obama should be held accountable for his actions. 

As it turns out, Trump is the one currently residing in the Oval Office, not Obama. Therefore, his relationship with the law is of far more concern to me at present. And he has not been acting like someone who is innocent and has nothing to hide. Again, I don't know enough about the ongoing investigation to say for sure that there was collusion, but the way Trump has lashed out at Comey and Mueller is enough to raise eyebrows. If he has nothing to hide, then why the hostility? Needless to say I am very curious to see how the Mueller investigation turns out. 

Ok, let me follow this logic... you believe that there is enough evidence to open an FBI investigation (let alone with a special counsel) on Russia - Trump collusion and your evidence is because Trump fired Comey (whose judgment as FBI director was shown to have been impaired by Loretta Lynch and who he himself said there is no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion) and sought advice on Mueller's suspicious actions that may impair his judgment as special counsel?  You believe that "raising eyebrows" is enough evidence for an FBI investigation?  So you think that FBI investigations are opened for suspicions with the absence of hard evidence?

And you don't think that Obama's FISA warrant that used the Steele dossier (that Fusion GPS has admitted has no verifiable information) that IS used by Rosenstien as the "hard evidence" basis for the hiring of a special counsel for a Trump-Russia collusion investigation is important in unraveling this web?

 

Edited January 29, 2018 by anatess2

[JohnsonJones]

5 hours ago, anatess2 said:

The Russia thing is obvious.  How else are you going to explain the FISA warrant that allowed the Obama Admin to spy on Trump...

I think you misunderstood what I was referencing in regards to the witch hunt.  I was referring to the Trump investigation in regards to Russian interference into the election in which they are trying to show the Russians wanted Trump to win (which is actually kind of ridiculous, they've always been more of a support for the Democrats which anyone with half a brain would remember.  I think it more likely that the Russians have tried to put a Russian mole/spy in his administration than wanted him to win).  My thoughts are more that the threats are from INSIDE more than from the OUTSIDE of the nation in regards to election meddling...otherwise, the UK has been VERY BLATANT (and no one has called them to task for the many UK celebrities that have far more prominence and were almost ALL slated in a campaign against Trump) in it's interference.  Australian celebrities had a few jump on that ship as well.  Far more visible, far more influential, and far more blatant if one wants to call out meddling in regards to trying to sway people's opinion's in a general election.

China probably did far more in hacking and promoting advertisements than Russia as well, but interestingly enough, no one is pointing to their interference either.

There has probably already been far more than enough evidence to investigate the Clinton campaign as well as the Democrats that put her there (against their own party it seems...much less anything else) as well as connections in regards to Russia and other foreign players.  However, they've completely ignored that overall, basically, giving her a FAR bigger pass than I think I've ever seen anyone having gotten in the past...including Nixon. 

This should be FAR more alarming in regards to Mueller and a hidden agenda (I would have expected that if he was actually doing a serious investigation that was not hindered by politics (aka, a hidden political agenda instead of an actual real investigation), he would have done ALL investigations, regardless of party or affiliation) than what I have seen in regards to Trump.  This means there would be a LOT more going on in regards to anyone and everyone including MANY democrats, and probably bringing in investigations in regards to other foreign meddling as well.  We haven't seen that, which indicates that this investigation MAY be more politically driven than a real, true, honest, investigation.

Trump seems to be a despicable human being in many ways, guilty of rape, adultery, and many other things prior to his presidency.  Mocking the disabled, disregarding veterans and putting them down in some instances, and all sorts of other ignoble and dastardly things...but as of yet...I have not seen him any more guilty of an impeachable offense than anything Obama did.  Of course, that does not mean something will not come to light...but thus far I have not seen it.

That said, if the Democrats get a majority in the House and Senate I expect them to impeach Trump for no real reason except that they do not like him, which will probably set a TERRIBLE precedent from then on where each party basically just starts impeaching the president if they are in power in congress and the president is part of another party.

 

PS: The saddest thing about all this is that the Democrats had a very good chance to walk on the high road and gain more favor among the people.  However, after they (and I think many hold this same opinion) became the hypocrites (just like the Republicans became hypocrites did when they did a non-bi-partisan push on their tax plan which shows every indication of exploding the debt...which they had been avidly against prior to gaining power in Congress and the Executive) by being one of the primary causes behind the government shut down (something they had every right to blame the Republicans for in prior years)...they lost a LOT of faith from people like me.

It is because of that hypocrisy and choosing to walk the dark and fallen path instead of the high road that I fully expect they will start the trend of impeaching presidents for no reason (though they'll have some made up stupidity) then they don't like them because they are in the opposing party.  I wouldn't expect it from those walking a high road, but those who demean themselves worse than even those who have shown themselves in bad faith already...I fully expect they would be that petty at this point.

Edited January 30, 2018 by JohnsonJones

[anatess2]

9 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

TLDR

You didn't understand me.

The Democrats used Russian collusion, not China, not UK, not Israel... to try to impeach Trump so they can take COVER for their use of the Steele Dossier in obtaining a FISA warrant and continue to use Russian communications to spy on Trump past the election.

Edited January 30, 2018 by anatess2

[anatess2]

9 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

PS: The saddest thing about all this is that the Democrats had a very good chance to walk on the high road and gain more favor among the people.  However, after they (and I think many hold this same opinion) became the hypocrites (just like the Republicans became hypocrites did when they did a non-bi-partisan push on their tax plan which shows every indication of exploding the debt...which they had been avidly against prior to gaining power in Congress and the Executive) by being one of the primary causes behind the government shut down (something they had every right to blame the Republicans for in prior years)...they lost a LOT of faith from people like me.

This seems to be your hobby horse.

So, let me explore this.  You think that lowering taxes is keeping government big?  And show me the "every indication of exploding the debt"?  And you think this is the primary cause for the government shutdown and not the Dreamers?

I'm not really sure how they can keep faith with people like you.  You're about the only one I know who does not claim to be a Socialist who is against reducing taxes.

So this is your position - "The debt is big because of runaway government so we need to continue to fleece people to pay for a debt their stupid government incurred".

Edited January 30, 2018 by anatess2