Dragon Family lawsuit against the United Nations

[Mojo]

Evidence that shows that another group is the (western) world rulers.

What sort of evidence would falsify your hypothesis that there is some group ruling the Western world?

 

[Anders Lindman]

When you questioned you admitted alternatives such as no cabal would also falsify the hypothosis.

I don't remember that. It doesn't sound correct. I have heard that it's not possible to prove a negative, so to prove 'no cabal' is illogical.

 

[Anders Lindman]

I'm sorry, but by attempting to apply logical analysis to other people's arguments, you've now lost the right to make nonsense posts based on nothing but wild speculation. As this covers all your other posts, there'll be someone along soon to turn off your internet. Paper and crayons will be supplies as an alternative. Thank you for you business, please recommend us to your friends.

But isn't it clear? The part of the quote I posted originally talks about big men in business, and the text about monopolies talks about how that prevents people with little money and power from rising up. The big business men Wilson talked with in private would obviously have been a part of the monopolies and that is clearly not the something these 'big' men were afraid of.

 

[kevsta]

so back to the lawsuit, presumably it would be possible for the public to attend this when it goes to court? that would almost be enough to make me visit the USA.

a real live Illuminati CT lawsuit, history in the making..

any NY dwellers tempted?

 

[Border Reiver]

Generally, all court proceedings are open to the public. There are some exceptions made for some family court matters, some matters involving children, and a few other well defined exceptions. The court will generally not do this on its own, but will deal with it as a motion from the parties - the hearing of which is open to the public.

In the US, Canada, etc. the rule is based on the principle that not only must justice be done, but that it be seen to be done.

 

[TheRedWorm]

You have absolutely no ability to tell fact from fiction do you?

It's not that, he's just trolling. Pretending to believe even the battiest conspiracy crap to get a rise out of us.

 

[Mojo]

I don't remember that. It doesn't sound correct. I have heard that it's not possible to prove a negative, so to prove 'no cabal' is illogical.

What sort of evidence would falsify your hypothesis that there is some sort of "cabal" ruling the Western world?

 

[ngc6205]

Is it really obvious? Let's look at it again:

"Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, ... the man with only a little capital is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more impossible to compete with the big fellow."

So you see, there is some organized, interlocked and COMPLETE power that the BIGGEST men are very afraid of. The biggest men would obviously already a be a part of that power if Wilson was referring to monopolies. Just to hammer in my point, here is another part of that quote:

"If they could vote secretly they would vote overwhelmingly that the present organization of business was meant for the big fellows and was not meant for the little fellows; that it was meant for those who are at the top and was meant to exclude those who are at the bottom; that it was meant to shut out beginners, to prevent new entries in the race, to prevent the building up of competitive enterprises that would interfere with the monopolies which the great trusts have built up."

Yes, it is obvious that he is discussing monopolies. You have a reading comprehension problem.

Monopolies of the time were so entrenched and powerful that even established businessmen (hence "biggest men") from other industries could not expand their businesses into certain areas that were controlled by monopolies. Also, some established businesses were being squeezed by monopolies.

 

[Craig4]

Is it really obvious? Let's look at it again:

"Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, ... the man with only a little capital is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more impossible to compete with the big fellow."

So you see, there is some organized, interlocked and COMPLETE power that the BIGGEST men are very afraid of. The biggest men would obviously already a be a part of that power if Wilson was referring to monopolies. Just to hammer in my point, here is another part of that quote:

"If they could vote secretly they would vote overwhelmingly that the present organization of business was meant for the big fellows and was not meant for the little fellows; that it was meant for those who are at the top and was meant to exclude those who are at the bottom; that it was meant to shut out beginners, to prevent new entries in the race, to prevent the building up of competitive enterprises that would interfere with the monopolies which the great trusts have built up."

Maybe you need to read up on the history of the US at that time. You are missing some context.

 

[Border Reiver]

That would get in the way of a "good" CT though, bringing facts and context into the discussion.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I don't remember that. It doesn't sound correct. I have heard that it's not possible to prove a negative, so to prove 'no cabal' is illogical.

Really? So you cant scroll back a page or two to see what you responded when I asked what if there is no cabal controlling the world?

And why would proving some outcome other than a cabal be "proving a negative"? What do you suppose it would mean in you actually gained proper data, rather than watching you tube videos, and found no evidence to support the existence of any cabal, Vatican or otherwise, and instead found an entirely different explanation for the events at hand?

What happens, in short, if you fail to disprove the Null?

 

[SpitfireIX]

So you see, there is some organized, interlocked and COMPLETE power that the BIGGEST men are very afraid of. The biggest men would obviously already a be a part of that power if Wilson was referring to monopolies. Just to hammer in my point, here is another part of that quote:

Wilson said "some of the biggest men." You are misrepresenting his words in an attempt to make them appear to support your theory.

Further, I have a BA in American history (which I got before I became an accountant, and long before I became a mechanical designer). As noted, Wilson is discussing monopolies, or "trusts" as they were known at the time.

 

[tsig]

My theory is that Asia is perhaps not controlled by the Vatican. So we have the Dragon Family vs the Vatican. Let's get ready to rumble!

Another possibility is that there is even a layer of control above both east and west that truly is a world power. My methodology for testing this hypothesis is to do some web searches and watch a few videos.

So it's reptiles all the way down?

 

[tsig]

That is in no way an "ordinary scientific method" it is an "ordinary confirmation biased unscientific conspiracy rubbish".

It is not exactly in the spirit of critical thinking.

The spirit of critical thinking shot herself many posts ago.

 

[Anders Lindman]

What sort of evidence would falsify your hypothesis that there is some sort of "cabal" ruling the Western world?

If the official story of the 9/11 attacks turns out true, then that is evidence that there is no such cabal.

 

[Craig4]

If the official story of the 9/11 attacks turns out true, then that is evidence that there is no such cabal.

So there's no cabal then. I'm glad we settled that.

 

[Craig4]

I don't remember that. It doesn't sound correct. I have heard that it's not possible to prove a negative, so to prove 'no cabal' is illogical.

What are you going for here? It's perfectly obvious you were wandering around the internet looking for someone else to dupe you and lead you around by the nose. You found this Wilcock idiot and decided to be made a fool of by him. Did I miss any salient points?

 

[Anders Lindman]

So there's no cabal then. I'm glad we settled that.

Do you mean you believe the official 9/11 story is true? And the hijackers managed to fly the planes at impossible speeds into the buildings?

 

[Mojo]

Do you mean you believe the official 9/11 story is true? And the hijackers managed to fly the planes at impossible speeds into the buildings?

On the evidence so far produced, yes. And no.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Do you mean you believe the official consensus 9/11 story is true? And the hijackers managed to fly the planes at impossible speeds into the buildings?

Fixed it for you.

Yes, hijackers flew planes at speed into the buildings. This is not impossible, implausible or unlikely. It happened. We know it happened because we look at evidence found in the real world and don't talk about "changing the history books" or gathering data from YouTube.