Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content

Theseus

Members
  • Posts

    3,245
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Theseus

  1. More Christians other Christians in the world just plain ignored and forgot about long ago. How many others are out there like the Yazidi Christians that Christians ignore their existence? Ah it's good to be a Christian believing in a faith standardized by man so man can become rich off of other men. Man's magical sky fairy is going to solve all.
  2. I guess they missed the part of the article that stated (in red): The "one to four years" fits in with Iraq's White Papers almost to the tee. The White Papers, a five-year plan, were implemented in 2020/1. Do the math. Their vision is clearly spelled out in the White Papers. The RV won't happen until at least 2025, according to this article and according to the White Papers. We continue to remain in a holding pattern until at least 2025 at the earliest possible outcome for an RV.
  3. Another case might be you voice your thoughts of killing/murdering your wife to a hitman which turns out to be an undercover cop. At that time you can be arrested and tried. Howver most DAs will want evidence beyond a shadow of a doubt so they will wait until you follow though. The point is you can be arrested for just voicing your thought of hiring a hitman. Another case which recently made news was the case of the guy who did not follow though with his thoughts to kill Justice Kavanaugh. While he did follow through with some of his thoughts he did not follow through with all of them. He intended to kill the Justice but called the police instead. You might argue he was in the process of acting upon his thoughts but he didn't act upon all of his thoughts. He was charged with attempted murder. Another case would be threatening POTUS. You don't need to follow through just need to voice your thoughts. Another case would be a death threat against someone. While you may not have acted upon the death threat, you thought it and voiced your your thoughts. Police then consider if it is a credible thought or someone just trying to intimidate another person. Thus if it is just a voced thought but no action, you can still be held criminally liable. A threat is not an action until it is acted upon. Until it is acted upon it is still a thought of what you might intend to do and the legal system takes this into account. Any more?
  4. Never said you were. However in some cases, yes. In other cases, no. For example, Red Flag laws are a prime example of intention before action. There have been several cases recently in which Red Flag laws have not been enforced and the outcome was catastrophic. Red Flag laws are solely based off of pre-emptive action by law enforcement which they, law enforcement, act upon intention. If they found something in their investigation which would be deemed illegal on your part, then you would be a criminal after you have had your due process. Red Flag laws are enacted based off the intention of the individual before they might or do take action. How do you like your Red Flag laws now? You thought you might do something, haven't followed through at that time and the police come and raid your house, even though you may have no intention to act upon your intentions. The law books are full of cases where people though and voiced their thoughts (this is not the action based on your thoughts for the intended action) but did not act upon those thoughts and can be held liable for those thoughts. Red Flag laws are not just about confiscation as an individual can be detained, arrested and tried. Nice try though.
  5. Here's a novel idea: Let's say someone wins the lottery and is paid monthly but that monthly amount could change at any time. Then we go into a Buggati La Voiture Noire dealership and tell them our monthly salary is the new amount we just started to receive and we want to finance the Buggati La Voiture Noire. We would be laughed out of the dealership for trying to finance a Buggati La Voiture Noire. Now if Iraq had a history of sustainable income equal to what they are receiving now, things may or may not be different. A good economist would tell Iraq this oil revenue is temporary and to spend the money wisely. Meaning continue with their long term vision as if there was no windfall and put aside the difference or invest that money back into their long and short term economic plans. A steady breeze will always be better than short bursts of wind as it makes for better sailing.
  6. Actually the terminology is correct. The HCL refers to the Kurds and their autonomous region and oil. The Oil and Gas Law refers to the oil from ALL of Iraq, including the Kurds not just the Kurds, and creates a new national Oil Company among other things. It would be like the US Federal Government has and regulates your driving through the Department of Transportation (DOT) and each state has their own version called the Bureau/Department of Motor Vehicles. While they appear the same, they are not. The Bible quote is "Money is the root of evil" as the word "all" does not appear anywhere in the verse that everyone attributes to the Bible. Look it up. If you do look it up and the word "all" appears in the verse, throw that Bible out because it has been modified and not genuine. If it doesn't matter what you think, then why does it matter in the legal sense when a criminal act is tried on intention AND what you do. It does matter what you think in every sense of the word and intend to do and how you follow through with what you think (action). You have to think of something before you can follow through with it. The charge of murder and the degree of which someone is tried is based on intention, did you or did you not intend (premeditated or not) to kill that person. Not saying your father is wrong, but some of the old ways have been known to be wrong time and time again. But hey whatever gets you by.
  7. Funny, how not too long ago that person was saying we are waiting on the HCL to pass which is the reason a good majority on this site keep rooting for the HCL. It is also funny that I stated at the time a while back that the Iraqi Oil and Gas Law was needed not the HCL. Funny that. The HCL deals with the Kurds and the Oil and Gas Law (aka the flatulence law) deals with ALL of Iraq. So many red dots from this concept alone way back when. But then agin I don't run this site nor did I dismiss the person(s) running this site for their opinion when asked about them because who the hekk knows what will trigger the RV. No one (outside of those in the know), not me nor the person running this site, caught wind of the devaluation in Dec of 2020. Nuff said.
  8. Nope. True Americans that believe in the Constitution will actually rise up but then again that is what those on the far alt-left want the True Americans to do and have been setting up for decades now. Right now history in the making is following so closely to what happened before the first Civil War it is not even funny. It took 80 some odd years for the development of the first one and we are on 150 plus odd years for the second one. The push from the top down is forcing the bottom to push up and the middle is getting squeezed out. America is about to change, the winds of war are beginning to pick up.
  9. The ascension to the WTO will follow the the trade of oil to the European countries. Once Iraq starts sending the oil to Europe, the WTO will follow suit. The HCL has nothing to do with the ascension to the WTO and as long as Erbil and Baghdad keep negotiating oil and placing it in the budget, the HCL will not get passed. And because of Baghdad's animosity towards the Kurds the HCL will not get passed before the Iraqi Oil and Gas Law (which is not the HCL as the HCL only deals with the Kurds and the Iraqi Oil and Gas Law deals with ALL of Iraq).
  10. Careful Sadr, they might put you up for treason and convict you in a sham trial/committee so you can never run again; even though you are innocent and they are the corrupt ones.
  11. This revenue is nothing more than the equivalency to winning the lottery. It is not long term nor is it sustainable. You can liken this to being a windfall. What is more important, is what they do with the revenue they receive from this windfall. Can Iraq turn this windfall into more revenue generation for the country? Think investment. You wouldn't change your lifestyle if after you "blow your wad" you could not keep up with that lifestyle. Okay some would. You might even be worse off than you were before you bought all the cars and fancy stuff. Which is why most winners of the lottery are not just broke but declare bankruptcy within five years of winning the lottery.
  12. DOD, if you have not checked out SCOTUS ruling on EPA, I suggest that bit of reading. For the last four or five decades the left has relied on the Courts to push their agenda onto the American people. SCOTUS' epic ruling regarding the executive branch agency, EPA, removes the left's dependence on the Courts to pass their agenda which could not be done through the legislative process. Again we return to the founding of this country, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and George Washington to understand why political parties cannot pass legislation and codify it into law. The Founders knew that gridlock would happen. Heck, the US Constitution was the earliest gridlock in our Country. The US Constitution was not ratified easily as there were those against the Constitution and several states would not ratify it without consolations being met, example The Bill of Rights,. The last state to ratify the US Constitution was Rhode Island in 1790 and the Bill of Rights was not ratified until the end of 1791. But wasn't the US Constitution written in 1776? Why then did it take over 5 years to be adopted? Many many factors and one word "gridlock". The authors knew that people are people and everyone has their own beliefs and ideology. Getting 400 plus people to agree is like pulling teeth with a pair of tweezers. Next time people say that Congress is not doing their job because they aren't passing laws, just remember that is how the Founders envisioned the Legislative Branch to actually work. They envisioned gridlock because they knew not everyone would agree. Which then brings us back to the topic we are discussing: States' Rights to create, pass (or not pass), and enforce law for their state. Congress was not created to micromanage citizens' daily lives. Rather Congress was envisioned to create and pass law which were major issues for the Country. However the dilemma this poses is that Congress has the authority to create legislation that would change the US Constitution with the caveat that 2/3rds of the states also agree to the proposed legislation. That is how Amendments are passed aka known as the ratification process. If the politicians in Washington were so enamored with and passionate about protecting and forming Abortion rights, they had 50 years to create and pass an Amendment to the US Constitution to do just that. Instead all those for abortion rights were used as pawns so that the left could stay in power. The people were used (and tossed away after each election). These people were filled with promises and lies and when each election cycle came around the left played the proponents of Abortion like a fiddle while the city (nation) burned. Instead of being mad at the Jurists of the top court, these people should be angry at their politicians for not doing anything but putting money in their pockets. This goes for issues on the right as well. The Jurists that were nominated to the top court during Trump's Presidency are called Constitutional Originists for a reason and that reason became apparent as they followed the US Constitution rather than saying that the court ruled so it is "settled law". Got a hint for anyone who tows the party line on "settled law", ain't nothing settled, including science. Saying something is "settled" is just another form of saying "shut up". I don't need to be a aeronautical engineer to tell you how an airplane flies or build an airplane. I don't need to be a doctor to do research and make a conclusion/opinion on medical research. All that I need is good common sense and the ability to understand or the ability to find out what something is that I don't understand in that research. Too many just want to tow the line rather than be self-informed for whatever reason or excuse they give. And I understand this as we are all guilty of this, including myself. The SCOTUS rulings (and even the Florida law DeSantis signed), not just Roe v Wade, were misrepresented because people want the Cliff Notes of the ruling/law. And those Cliff Notes were spun in such a way that is was a total misrepresentation of the "stupid decision". That's like getting Cliff Notes to Catcher in the Rye and being told it was the same story as The Old Man and the Sea. Both from great writers (and the former banned) but totally different stories. The lamestream media has been doing this from the beginning of this country. And it is one of the reasons The Federalist Papers were penned, at first anonymously, in the newspaper The Federal. Hamilton, Clay, and Madison were all Federalists in their political affiliation. Hamilton's Christianity was also questioned at the time, which was a much bigger issue back then than it is now (e.g. Pelosi and Communion). The answer to SCOTUS ruling on abortion is to codify it into law. The reality is it won't get done because it is a divisive tool for the left to be elected and seize office. "Stupid decision" be damned!
  13. First, the Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton, John Clay and James Madison, two of the three actually penned the US Constitution. So no, the Federalist Papers were not the influence for the Constitution as the Federalist Papers were written to explain the US Constitution after the US Constitution was written and before it was ratified. Getting your timeline straight would be the first in understanding why the Federalist Papers were written. SCOTUS did NOT rule on abortion, they actually ruled on State's Rights to make and codify law for their state. The United States is made up of 50 unique and semi-sovereign states, that have borders, and a central government. Each state is tasked with creating those laws specific to their state about rights and laws not found within the US Constitution. And that is where so many miss on the recent SCOTUS ruling overturning Roe v. Wade. SCOTUS' decision had nothing to do with abortion at all rather it had to do with returning the right to make laws about things not found within the US constitution to the States. A topic well discussed in the Federalist Papers, penned by authors of the US Constitution. And yes the United States has already had a Civil War because of State's Rights. So this is a heavily contentious topic. Lately the push has been towards more Federal power than States' power. The recent ruling on Roe v. Wade was the returning of that power back to the states. Federal versus State has long been a contentious subject not just in the cases of Roe v. Wade or the institution of Slavery. Currently there is an ongoing power struggle happening that is not concerned with either of these two topics and that topic is whether or not the States have the authority to legalize the recreational use of marijuana. The position here is not the actual legalization of the drug for recreational use but the Constitutional position is whether or not the states have Constitutional authority to legalize marijuana for recreational use. It doesn't matter whether you are for or against the legalization, rather it has to do with State's Rights to govern and legislate and create associative laws regarding the use and legalization of marijuana. Another recent example has to do with 0bummercare and the interstate commerce clause found within the Constitution. Both the States and the Federal Government have both regulated and created laws in the forming and regulation of insurance, nationally and for each individual state. Now the Federalist Papers discusses this in depth in Federalist Paper No. 45 and I will quote a little here (Federalist PAper Number 45 was authored by Madison): Notice Madison's use of ancient cultures to support his argument. Why is this important? If it were Judaic-Christian principles the country was founded upon and Madison being a learned man would know the Bible well enough to draw inferences from the Holy Book, especially in a much more religious society back then versus today. The use of ancient cultures is peppered through the Federalist Papers as two of the three were the authors of the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution. The Federalist Papers were the guidebook to the US Constitution rather than be used as an interpretative work.
  14. I do believe that "American oligarchs", politicians, and a vast majority of the lamestream media members (not just TV anchors) are considered US citizens, hence the "US Citizens are doing it to ourselves". In addition, it is the people (general population) that are doing the majority of the voting which is putting US Citizens into US Government offices (except in a some cases). There is a long history since before the founding of the United States of people believing in one particular political ideology that has despised the Constitution and this country. Part of this history actually has to do with President George Washington refusing to become King (as those people believe it would be easier to control the masses and make laws through a monarchy than through a Constitutional Republic, citing the Roman Parliament as their main reason at the time of founding) and instead becoming an elected official who only held office for eight years. If you. do not know about the ongoing campaign, to this day, from within and from those who want to destroy what the Founding Fathers built up in the beginning of the United States, you need to read the history of the Federalist Papersand the articles that debated each of the Federalist Paper that was published in the newspaper (of which those Federalist papers describe and explain many things on how the United States Government was founded and run AND the papers make no mention of any particular religion having a part in the founding principles of the country rather they cite former empires like Rome and Greece, to name two, cultures having a larger role in their decisions of writing the US Constitution. Meaning the country was NOT derived from Judaic-Christian principles as many claim And if you want to debate this we can but read the Federalist Papers first.) If you thought today's lamestream media is bad, you should read the politicized articles that accompanied the Federalist Papers and articles around each national election. What people don't see can and does hurt them.
  15. The biggest roadblocks going into Article 8 is the expansion of the non-oil sector and Iraq's MCP (multiple currency practice) which also includes the banking sector. Corruption falls on that list too but no country has ever done away with corruption in the highest offices of the land. S Something worth noting, the White Paper says 3 to 5 years to implement short term goals. That leaves a little glimmer of hope for an RV sooner than later but my bet is on the later (2025). However, if Iraq has not done away with MCP by the end of 2025, don't expect an RV to happen in 2025. The IMF is adamantly, and I do mean very strongly, against MCP for countries in Article 8. There was talk back in 2019/20 about the 2% rule as to removing this aspect for a country going into Article 8 (not currently in). I have not found anything to determine whether or not that rule was still in effect for Iraq. Assume the rule is still in effect. Again I have said it before that the HCL refers to the Kurds and is not the Iraqi Oil and Gas Law. As long as the conclusion of the negotiations of Erbil and Baghdad fall under the purview of the annual Budget, this is not the HCL. The Annual Budget is law only for that year and expires at the end of that year. If an Annual Budget is passed for 2020, on Jan 1 the law is expired and no longer legally binding, which is why Baghdad and Erbil are seemingly always in negotiations on oil. The HCL ends this endless cycle of negotiations whereas the Iraqi Oil and Gas law includes ALL of Iraq, not just the Kurds. RV requires both. One other thing that is not affected by the IMF and those are the sanctions still levied onto Iraq by the UN and other countries. These must be removed as well. Until the IMF is satisfied with the non-oil sector of Iraq and Iraq removes its MCP policies (this includes the banking sector), there will be no RV at a rate higher than a US penny.
  16. The issue with the HCL is that the IMF has continued to stress the importance of improving the non-oil sector of Iraq's economy. And since the IMF is the final arbitrator on whether Iraq can finally go into Article 8, the HCL will not push Iraq to pull the trigger on the RV. Is the HCL still needed? Yes. Will the RV happened after this legislation is passed (HCL is not the same as the Oil and Gas Law)? No, according to the IMF. Why? Too many other factors that will not allow Iraq to gain entry into Article 8, for example MCP and the non-oil sector and banking sector lacking in sustainability according to what the IMF is looking for.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.