Dragon Family lawsuit against the United Nations - Page 8

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by ngc6205

NO!

If you cannot understand a two paragraph, seven sentence post, what makes you think you can analyze anything?

Oh yes! Me being initially wrong doesn't change the fact that a conspiracy theory is needed to claim I'm wrong.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

To claim that requires a conspiracy theory. Ha ha. A belief that there can be fake people or people with fake roles in the lawsuit.

Yes, it is likely that Bosco and at least one other person conspired to commit fraud and wire fraud.

ETA: That is to say if Bosco and others made the claims alleged in the filing.

Tomtomkent · 4th January 2012, 09:33 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Oh yes! Me being initially wrong doesn't change the fact that a conspiracy theory is needed to claim I'm wrong.

No it isn't.

Neither is it required to claim you are wrong for stating this.

ngc6205 · 4th January 2012, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

To claim that requires a conspiracy theory. Ha ha. A belief that there can be fake people or people with fake roles in the lawsuit.

NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

I never said that any people were fake. I never said that there were people in the lawsuit that had fake roles. I STATED that KEENAN BELIEVED that Zagimi represented to Keenan that Bosco was a Vatican banker. That is it. You keep reaching conclusions that are not supported by the statements.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by Border Reiver

No, it is not a conspiracy theory. It is a belief that someone people may be lying.

If my kids tell me that the cat knocked the vase onto the floor and I suspect they are not telling the truth that is not a conspiracy theory, it is a belief that I can (possibly) prove or disprove.

Keenan may have had an honest belief that this Basco character was a Vatican Banker and a P2 Freemason. I suspect that this was not a well founded belief. If it comes out in court that Mr. Basco is employed by a Vatican based banking establishment and can give the correct handshakes then I will have been shown to be wrong, alternately if it comes out in court that Basco is an alias for a conman that can spin a story then my beliefs will have been shown to have been correct and Mr. Keenan mistaken.

The conspiracy theory would come when you or someone else declines to accept the evidence and maintains an incorrect position because "somebody manipulated the evidence."

A conspiracy theory is about two or more people having been manipulating things in an illegal way. If Zagami has been lying and only him, then it's not a conspiracy. However, also Basco must have been lying since in the lawsuit it says on page 41:

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

This means that for my initial statement to be wrong at least two persons must have been lying, which is a conspiracy theory.

The only exception as I can see is if the persons in the lawsuit don't exist at all and have been made up by only one author, in which case it's fraud but not a conspiracy (since only one person would then be involved).

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Tomtomkent

No it isn't.

Neither is it required to claim you are wrong for stating this.

Yes, it is.

I said that some poster(s) here were accusing the Vatican of fraud. To claim that I'm wrong requires a conspiracy theory. Because the lawsuit claims that Bosco is a Vatican banker, and Bosco even claimed that himself in person to Keenan (page 41 in the lawsuit):

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

ngc6205 · 4th January 2012, 09:44 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

A conspiracy theory is about two or more people having been manipulating things in an illegal way. If Zagami has been lying and only him, then it's not a conspiracy. However, also Basco must have been lying since in the lawsuit it says on page 41:

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

This means that for my initial statement to be wrong at least two persons must have been lying, which is a conspiracy theory.

The only exception as I can see is if the persons in the lawsuit don't exist at all and have been made up by only one author, in which case it's fraud but not a conspiracy (since only one person would then be involved).

Actually, what you have in the lawsuit is KEENAN's BELIEFS about what he was told and who told him what. It doesn't require for anyone to have lied.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 09:46 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

A conspiracy theory is about two or more people having been manipulating things in an illegal way. If Zagami has been lying and only him, then it's not a conspiracy. However, also Basco must have been lying since in the lawsuit it says on page 41:

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

This means that for my initial statement to be wrong at least two persons must have been lying, which is a conspiracy theory.

The only exception as I can see is if the persons in the lawsuit don't exist at all and have been made up by only one author, in which case it's fraud but not a conspiracy (since only one person would then be involved).

No. The two people mentioned in the lawsuit would have committed a conspiracy if they, in concert conspired to defraud Keegan.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by ngc6205

NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO!

I never said that any people were fake. I never said that there were people in the lawsuit that had fake roles. I STATED that KEENAN BELIEVED that Zagimi represented to Keenan that Bosco was a Vatican banker. That is it. You keep reaching conclusions that are not supported by the statements.

It was Zagami who told Keenan that Bosco was a Vatican banker:

"At that time, Zagami introduced Fulford through SKYPE conversations to DAL BOSCO whom Zagami represented was a trustworthy Vatican Banker and also associated with the P2 Masonic Lodge."

Keenan not only believed Zagami but also believed Bosco himself:

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

So a conspiracy theory is needed to claim I'm wrong. Without such conspiracy theory, the statements in the lawsuit are taken as being true and then my initial claim about people here accusing the Vatican is true.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:50 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

No. The two people mentioned in the lawsuit would have committed a conspiracy if they, in concert conspired to defraud Keegan.

No, Keegan could have been a part of the conspiracy.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 09:53 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

No, Keegan could have been a part of the conspiracy.

Then why is he suing? He's the victim of the scam.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by ngc6205

Actually, what you have in the lawsuit is KEENAN's BELIEFS about what he was told and who told him what. It doesn't require for anyone to have lied.

Yes, it does since Keegan later on met Bosco in person:

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

And Bosco himself claimed to represent the Vatican (or at least being connected to the Vatican).

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

Then why is he suing? He's the victim of the scam.

Multilayer conspiracy.

ngc6205 · 4th January 2012, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Yes, it does since Keegan later on met Bosco in person:

"During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

And Bosco himself claimed to represent the Vatican (or at least being connected to the Vatican).

I swear that trying to explain something to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing.

What you have there is KEENAN'S BELIEF that BOSCO represented to him that BOSCO was a Vatican banker.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Multilayer conspiracy.

So who was Keegan trying to defraud?

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by ngc6205

I swear that trying to explain something to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing.

What you have there is KEENAN'S BELIEF that BOSCO represented to him that BOSCO was a Vatican banker.

We need to look at both claims. Both Zagami AND Bosco himself told Keenan. So both Zagami and Bosco would have to be lying for Keenan's trust to have been misplaced.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

So who was Keegan trying to defraud?

You mean Keenan? I believe Keenan is telling the truth. What I said was that he could (hypothetically) be a part of a conspiracy. Not that he necessarily was.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 10:02 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

We need to look at both claims. Both Zagami AND Bosco himself told Keenan. So both Zagami and Bosco would have to be lying for Keenan's trust to have been misplaced.

Obviously they were lying. That's the point of the scam.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

Obviously they were lying. That's the point of the scam.

Ha! So you believe in a conspiracy theory then.

ngc6205 · 4th January 2012, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

We need to look at both claims. Both Zagami AND Bosco himself told Keenan. So both Zagami and Bosco would have to be lying for Keenan's trust to have been misplaced.

Not necessarily. Zagimi MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was representative of the Vatican. Bosco MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was a representative of the Vatican or a Vatican banker. All you have in the lawsuit is a statement that indicates KEENAN'S BELIEFS. That is all.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 10:14 AM

Originally Posted by ngc6205

Not necessarily. Zagimi MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was representative of the Vatican. Bosco MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was a representative of the Vatican or a Vatican banker. All you have in the lawsuit is a statement that indicates KEENAN'S BELIEFS. That is all.

But then the claim in the lawsuit that Zagami told Keenan is untrustworthy, and then Keenan must possibly have been lying! And since Zagami hasn't objected to the statement in the lawsuit, Keenan most likely was telling the truth.

Keenan most likely really was told by both Zagami and by Bosco himself about the Vatican connection.

TheRedWorm · 4th January 2012, 10:15 AM

Originally Posted by ngc6205

I swear that trying to explain something to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing.

What you have there is KEENAN'S BELIEF that BOSCO represented to him that BOSCO was a Vatican banker.

You do realize that AL is just a troll, and the lack of learning is an act, right?

ngc6205 · 4th January 2012, 10:32 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

But then the claim in the lawsuit that Zagami told Keenan is untrustworthy, and then Keenan must possibly have been lying! And since Zagami hasn't objected to the statement in the lawsuit, Keenan most likely was telling the truth.

Keenan most likely really was told by both Zagami and by Bosco himself about the Vatican connection.

No.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 10:45 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Ha! So you believe in a conspiracy theory then.

Obviously. How would two people work together to defraud someone by pretending to be representatives of the Vatican and this family thing without conspiring?

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

Obviously. How would two people work together to defraud someone by pretending to be representatives of the Vatican and this family thing without conspiring?

In this case it's me who does NOT have a conspiracy theory. lol. I believe the lawsuit is correct. I chose to post it in the conspiracy section because the lawsuit is really outrageous at face value plus I wanted to be able to add conspiracy theories if need be.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 11:12 AM

Those who proclaim nonduality in the sense of nobody being a doer are often EXTREMELY adamant. As I described earlier my guess about that is that this is how the Advaita meme has managed to spread itself from person to person. The meme attaches itself to the subconscious of the seeker and since it's a false belief in enlightenment, there will be a hidden doubt in the mind of the seeker making him or her work very hard trying to convince others that the state of 'enlightenment' is real.

And that's why I sometimes am almost rude in my replies, because the nonduality people can be so extremely stubborn. On the other hand I may be the one who am mistaken, so I will relax my 'attacks' on the nonduality teachings a bit.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Those who proclaim nonduality in the sense of nobody being a doer are often EXTREMELY adamant. As I described earlier my guess about that is that this is how the Advaita meme has managed to spread itself from person to person. The meme attaches itself to the subconscious of the seeker and since it's a false belief in enlightenment, there will be a hidden doubt in the mind of the seeker making him or her work very hard trying to convince others that the state of 'enlightenment' is real.

And that's why I sometimes am almost rude in my replies, because the nonduality people can be so extremely stubborn. On the other hand I may be the one who am mistaken, so I will relax my 'attacks' on the nonduality teachings a bit.

You don't have to relax your attacks. No one is taking you all that seriously. You're just a chew toy.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

In this case it's me who does NOT have a conspiracy theory. lol. I believe the lawsuit is correct. I chose to post it in the conspiracy section because the lawsuit is really outrageous at face value plus I wanted to be able to add conspiracy theories if need be.

It's amusing that when confronted with an actual conspiracy you don't see it.

ETA: It's sort of clutching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

You don't have to relax your attacks. No one is taking you all that seriously. You're just a chew toy.

Ha ha. Advaita conspiracy theory.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Ha ha. Advaita conspiracy theory.

No, it's just that your work is so bad it's kind of a joke.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by Craig4

It's amusing that when confronted with an actual conspiracy you don't see it.

ETA: It's sort of clutching defeat from the jaws of victory.

The lawsuit certainly looks unbelievable on the surface I must admit. And also the people involved, like Fulford and Zagami appear unconvincing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqPg-mc1CIQ

Still, who knows. I'm willing to believe the lawsuit is true.

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

I'm willing to believe the lawsuit is true.

Yeah, that's the part where you held onto defeat.

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 12:44 PM

Here is a strange fake bank paper: http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/f...nisto-scan.jpg

Looks like some kind of joke with ridiculously large sums of money mentioned at the bottom of the paper.

From: http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/b...3%82%A4-x.html

Mojo · 4th January 2012, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

I believe the lawsuit is correct.

Why?

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 03:01 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

Why?

Maybe it's wishful thinking to believe that the claims in the lawsuit are true but the fact that the lawsuit was accepted is remarkable I think. And it fits with the conspiracy theory I have about the Eastern powers having fooled the Western powers by very long term plans that can stretch over a whole century.

In the case of the lawsuit, China shipped a lot of gold to the U.S. and is was on a 60 years lease basing if I remember correctly (from the mid 30s to the mid 90s or something like that). The Chinese powers knew that the U.S. would not be able to give back the gold when the leasing period ended. They tricked the U.S. to accept the gold, and in the short run it looked like a good deal. Today however, the leasing period is over and gold has to be given back (similar to how Hong Kong had to be given back), or money for it paid plus interest. The 1 trillion dollars is only a small part of the amount that has to be payed. The total amount is something like hundreds of trillions of dollars.

If the U.S. is a corporation then it can file for bankruptcy and in that way the payment to the Asian powers can be avoided. Ha ha.

Mojo · 4th January 2012, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Maybe it's wishful thinking to believe that the claims in the lawsuit are true but the fact that the lawsuit was accepted is remarkable I think.

You've already been told that all sorts of bizarre lawsuits get filed. Why do you still think this is remarkable?

Quote:

And it fits with the conspiracy theory I have about the Eastern powers having fooled the Western powers by very long term plans that can stretch over a whole century.

So not because of any actual evidence, then? Just because it fits your preconceptions?

Anders Lindman · 4th January 2012, 03:59 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

You've already been told that all sorts of bizarre lawsuits get filed. Why do you still think this is remarkable?

So not because of any actual evidence, then? Just because it fits your preconceptions?

I saw some examples of those lawsuits and they didn't look nearly as outrageous as the Dragon Family lawsuit. The amount of money involved and the accusations etc.

The actual evidence will be things like the bonds. The bonds could be real!

Craig4 · 4th January 2012, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

Maybe it's wishful thinking to believe that the claims in the lawsuit are true but the fact that the lawsuit was accepted is remarkable I think. And it fits with the conspiracy theory I have about the Eastern powers having fooled the Western powers by very long term plans that can stretch over a whole century.

In the case of the lawsuit, China shipped a lot of gold to the U.S. and is was on a 60 years lease basing if I remember correctly (from the mid 30s to the mid 90s or something like that). The Chinese powers knew that the U.S. would not be able to give back the gold when the leasing period ended. They tricked the U.S. to accept the gold, and in the short run it looked like a good deal. Today however, the leasing period is over and gold has to be given back (similar to how Hong Kong had to be given back), or money for it paid plus interest. The 1 trillion dollars is only a small part of the amount that has to be payed. The total amount is something like hundreds of trillions of dollars.

If the U.S. is a corporation then it can file for bankruptcy and in that way the payment to the Asian powers can be avoided. Ha ha.

The US is not a corporation of course so this idea is nothing. Also, the lawsuit has only been filed. No action appears to have been taken. There's nothing to indicate the lawsuit was "accepted".

Cl1mh4224rd · 4th January 2012, 09:27 PM

Originally Posted by Mojo

Why?

He found something new to troll about. You'll notice that, since starting this thread, he's completely abandoned "arguing" his fantasy about nuclear weapons. He was spewing a good dozen posts per day in that thread then all of a sudden, nothing.

Mojo · 4th January 2012, 09:45 PM

Originally Posted by Anders Lindman

The actual evidence will be things like the bonds. The bonds could be real!

But you don't know that.

4th January 2012, 09:31 AM	#282
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman To claim that requires a conspiracy theory. Ha ha. A belief that there can be fake people or people with fake roles in the lawsuit. Yes, it is likely that Bosco and at least one other person conspired to commit fraud and wire fraud. ETA: That is to say if Bosco and others made the claims alleged in the filing.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Last edited by Craig4; 4th January 2012 at 09:33 AM.

4th January 2012, 09:33 AM	#283
Tomtomkent Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Kent, United Kingdom Posts: 5,213	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Oh yes! Me being initially wrong doesn't change the fact that a conspiracy theory is needed to claim I'm wrong. No it isn't. Neither is it required to claim you are wrong for stating this.
	__________________ @tomhodden No animals were harmed in the making of this post.

4th January 2012, 09:35 AM	#284
ngc6205 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Here. I used to be there, but I moved. Posts: 303	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman To claim that requires a conspiracy theory. Ha ha. A belief that there can be fake people or people with fake roles in the lawsuit. NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! I never said that any people were fake. I never said that there were people in the lawsuit that had fake roles. I STATED that KEENAN BELIEVED that Zagimi represented to Keenan that Bosco was a Vatican banker. That is it. You keep reaching conclusions that are not supported by the statements.
	__________________ "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, while attempting to convince the school board to introduce creationism into the public schools.

4th January 2012, 09:44 AM	#287
ngc6205 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Here. I used to be there, but I moved. Posts: 303	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman A conspiracy theory is about two or more people having been manipulating things in an illegal way. If Zagami has been lying and only him, then it's not a conspiracy. However, also Basco must have been lying since in the lawsuit it says on page 41: "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami." This means that for my initial statement to be wrong at least two persons must have been lying, which is a conspiracy theory. The only exception as I can see is if the persons in the lawsuit don't exist at all and have been made up by only one author, in which case it's fraud but not a conspiracy (since only one person would then be involved). Actually, what you have in the lawsuit is KEENAN's BELIEFS about what he was told and who told him what. It doesn't require for anyone to have lied.
	__________________ "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, while attempting to convince the school board to introduce creationism into the public schools.

4th January 2012, 09:46 AM	#288
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman A conspiracy theory is about two or more people having been manipulating things in an illegal way. If Zagami has been lying and only him, then it's not a conspiracy. However, also Basco must have been lying since in the lawsuit it says on page 41: "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami." This means that for my initial statement to be wrong at least two persons must have been lying, which is a conspiracy theory. The only exception as I can see is if the persons in the lawsuit don't exist at all and have been made up by only one author, in which case it's fraud but not a conspiracy (since only one person would then be involved). No. The two people mentioned in the lawsuit would have committed a conspiracy if they, in concert conspired to defraud Keegan.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 09:26 AM	#281
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by ngc6205 NO! If you cannot understand a two paragraph, seven sentence post, what makes you think you can analyze anything? Oh yes! Me being initially wrong doesn't change the fact that a conspiracy theory is needed to claim I'm wrong.

4th January 2012, 09:39 AM	#285
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Border Reiver No, it is not a conspiracy theory. It is a belief that someone people may be lying. If my kids tell me that the cat knocked the vase onto the floor and I suspect they are not telling the truth that is not a conspiracy theory, it is a belief that I can (possibly) prove or disprove. Keenan may have had an honest belief that this Basco character was a Vatican Banker and a P2 Freemason. I suspect that this was not a well founded belief. If it comes out in court that Mr. Basco is employed by a Vatican based banking establishment and can give the correct handshakes then I will have been shown to be wrong, alternately if it comes out in court that Basco is an alias for a conman that can spin a story then my beliefs will have been shown to have been correct and Mr. Keenan mistaken. The conspiracy theory would come when you or someone else declines to accept the evidence and maintains an incorrect position because "somebody manipulated the evidence." A conspiracy theory is about two or more people having been manipulating things in an illegal way. If Zagami has been lying and only him, then it's not a conspiracy. However, also Basco must have been lying since in the lawsuit it says on page 41: "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami." This means that for my initial statement to be wrong at least two persons must have been lying, which is a conspiracy theory. The only exception as I can see is if the persons in the lawsuit don't exist at all and have been made up by only one author, in which case it's fraud but not a conspiracy (since only one person would then be involved).

4th January 2012, 09:44 AM	#286
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Tomtomkent No it isn't. Neither is it required to claim you are wrong for stating this. Yes, it is. I said that some poster(s) here were accusing the Vatican of fraud. To claim that I'm wrong requires a conspiracy theory. Because the lawsuit claims that Bosco is a Vatican banker, and Bosco even claimed that himself in person to Keenan (page 41 in the lawsuit): "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami."

4th January 2012, 09:49 AM	#289
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by ngc6205 NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! I never said that any people were fake. I never said that there were people in the lawsuit that had fake roles. I STATED that KEENAN BELIEVED that Zagimi represented to Keenan that Bosco was a Vatican banker. That is it. You keep reaching conclusions that are not supported by the statements. It was Zagami who told Keenan that Bosco was a Vatican banker: "At that time, Zagami introduced Fulford through SKYPE conversations to DAL BOSCO whom Zagami represented was a trustworthy Vatican Banker and also associated with the P2 Masonic Lodge." Keenan not only believed Zagami but also believed Bosco himself: "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami." So a conspiracy theory is needed to claim I'm wrong. Without such conspiracy theory, the statements in the lawsuit are taken as being true and then my initial claim about people here accusing the Vatican is true.

4th January 2012, 09:50 AM	#290
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 No. The two people mentioned in the lawsuit would have committed a conspiracy if they, in concert conspired to defraud Keegan. No, Keegan could have been a part of the conspiracy.

4th January 2012, 09:53 AM	#291
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman No, Keegan could have been a part of the conspiracy. Then why is he suing? He's the victim of the scam.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 09:54 AM	#292
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by ngc6205 Actually, what you have in the lawsuit is KEENAN's BELIEFS about what he was told and who told him what. It doesn't require for anyone to have lied. Yes, it does since Keegan later on met Bosco in person: "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami." And Bosco himself claimed to represent the Vatican (or at least being connected to the Vatican).

4th January 2012, 09:56 AM	#293
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 Then why is he suing? He's the victim of the scam. Multilayer conspiracy.

4th January 2012, 09:57 AM	#294
ngc6205 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Here. I used to be there, but I moved. Posts: 303	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Yes, it does since Keegan later on met Bosco in person: "During the course of those discussions, DAL BOSCO represented to KEENAN not only that he was the financial advisor to Zagami, but also to the Vatican, Vatican City, Rome as well as the Treasurer of the P2 Masonic P2 Lodge in Rome and Monte Carlo working directly with Zagami." And Bosco himself claimed to represent the Vatican (or at least being connected to the Vatican). I swear that trying to explain something to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing. What you have there is KEENAN'S BELIEF that BOSCO represented to him that BOSCO was a Vatican banker.
	__________________ "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, while attempting to convince the school board to introduce creationism into the public schools.

4th January 2012, 09:58 AM	#295
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Multilayer conspiracy. So who was Keegan trying to defraud?
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 10:00 AM	#296
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by ngc6205 I swear that trying to explain something to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing. What you have there is KEENAN'S BELIEF that BOSCO represented to him that BOSCO was a Vatican banker. We need to look at both claims. Both Zagami AND Bosco himself told Keenan. So both Zagami and Bosco would have to be lying for Keenan's trust to have been misplaced.

4th January 2012, 10:02 AM	#297
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 So who was Keegan trying to defraud? You mean Keenan? I believe Keenan is telling the truth. What I said was that he could (hypothetically) be a part of a conspiracy. Not that he necessarily was.

4th January 2012, 10:02 AM	#298
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman We need to look at both claims. Both Zagami AND Bosco himself told Keenan. So both Zagami and Bosco would have to be lying for Keenan's trust to have been misplaced. Obviously they were lying. That's the point of the scam.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 10:06 AM	#299
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 Obviously they were lying. That's the point of the scam. Ha! So you believe in a conspiracy theory then.

4th January 2012, 10:07 AM	#300
ngc6205 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Here. I used to be there, but I moved. Posts: 303	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman We need to look at both claims. Both Zagami AND Bosco himself told Keenan. So both Zagami and Bosco would have to be lying for Keenan's trust to have been misplaced. Not necessarily. Zagimi MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was representative of the Vatican. Bosco MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was a representative of the Vatican or a Vatican banker. All you have in the lawsuit is a statement that indicates KEENAN'S BELIEFS. That is all.
	__________________ "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, while attempting to convince the school board to introduce creationism into the public schools.

4th January 2012, 10:14 AM	#301
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by ngc6205 Not necessarily. Zagimi MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was representative of the Vatican. Bosco MAY or MAY NOT have represented that Bosco was a representative of the Vatican or a Vatican banker. All you have in the lawsuit is a statement that indicates KEENAN'S BELIEFS. That is all. But then the claim in the lawsuit that Zagami told Keenan is untrustworthy, and then Keenan must possibly have been lying! And since Zagami hasn't objected to the statement in the lawsuit, Keenan most likely was telling the truth. Keenan most likely really was told by both Zagami and by Bosco himself about the Vatican connection.

4th January 2012, 10:15 AM	#302
TheRedWorm I AM the Red Worm! Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Body: Michigan, Heart: Chicago Posts: 3,886	Originally Posted by ngc6205 I swear that trying to explain something to you is like trying to teach a pig to sing. What you have there is KEENAN'S BELIEF that BOSCO represented to him that BOSCO was a Vatican banker. You do realize that AL is just a troll, and the lack of learning is an act, right?
	__________________ See I'm not a monster, I'm just ahead of the curve. -Joker Working them to death is murder. Making them live like pigs and dying from disease is murder. Shooting them next to a ditch is murder. Digging them up and burning them to hide your murder, is extra credit evil. -beachnut

4th January 2012, 10:32 AM	#303
ngc6205 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Here. I used to be there, but I moved. Posts: 303	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman But then the claim in the lawsuit that Zagami told Keenan is untrustworthy, and then Keenan must possibly have been lying! And since Zagami hasn't objected to the statement in the lawsuit, Keenan most likely was telling the truth. Keenan most likely really was told by both Zagami and by Bosco himself about the Vatican connection. No.
	__________________ "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." - Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, while attempting to convince the school board to introduce creationism into the public schools.

4th January 2012, 10:45 AM	#304
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Ha! So you believe in a conspiracy theory then. Obviously. How would two people work together to defraud someone by pretending to be representatives of the Vatican and this family thing without conspiring?
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 10:52 AM	#305
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 Obviously. How would two people work together to defraud someone by pretending to be representatives of the Vatican and this family thing without conspiring? In this case it's me who does NOT have a conspiracy theory. lol. I believe the lawsuit is correct. I chose to post it in the conspiracy section because the lawsuit is really outrageous at face value plus I wanted to be able to add conspiracy theories if need be.

4th January 2012, 11:12 AM	#306
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Those who proclaim nonduality in the sense of nobody being a doer are often EXTREMELY adamant. As I described earlier my guess about that is that this is how the Advaita meme has managed to spread itself from person to person. The meme attaches itself to the subconscious of the seeker and since it's a false belief in enlightenment, there will be a hidden doubt in the mind of the seeker making him or her work very hard trying to convince others that the state of 'enlightenment' is real. And that's why I sometimes am almost rude in my replies, because the nonduality people can be so extremely stubborn. On the other hand I may be the one who am mistaken, so I will relax my 'attacks' on the nonduality teachings a bit.

4th January 2012, 11:33 AM	#307
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Those who proclaim nonduality in the sense of nobody being a doer are often EXTREMELY adamant. As I described earlier my guess about that is that this is how the Advaita meme has managed to spread itself from person to person. The meme attaches itself to the subconscious of the seeker and since it's a false belief in enlightenment, there will be a hidden doubt in the mind of the seeker making him or her work very hard trying to convince others that the state of 'enlightenment' is real. And that's why I sometimes am almost rude in my replies, because the nonduality people can be so extremely stubborn. On the other hand I may be the one who am mistaken, so I will relax my 'attacks' on the nonduality teachings a bit. You don't have to relax your attacks. No one is taking you all that seriously. You're just a chew toy.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 11:34 AM	#308
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman In this case it's me who does NOT have a conspiracy theory. lol. I believe the lawsuit is correct. I chose to post it in the conspiracy section because the lawsuit is really outrageous at face value plus I wanted to be able to add conspiracy theories if need be. It's amusing that when confronted with an actual conspiracy you don't see it. ETA: It's sort of clutching defeat from the jaws of victory.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 11:36 AM	#309
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 You don't have to relax your attacks. No one is taking you all that seriously. You're just a chew toy. Ha ha. Advaita conspiracy theory.

4th January 2012, 11:41 AM	#310
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman Ha ha. Advaita conspiracy theory. No, it's just that your work is so bad it's kind of a joke.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 11:43 AM	#311
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Craig4 It's amusing that when confronted with an actual conspiracy you don't see it. ETA: It's sort of clutching defeat from the jaws of victory. The lawsuit certainly looks unbelievable on the surface I must admit. And also the people involved, like Fulford and Zagami appear unconvincing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqPg-mc1CIQ Still, who knows. I'm willing to believe the lawsuit is true.

4th January 2012, 11:46 AM	#312
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman I'm willing to believe the lawsuit is true. Yeah, that's the part where you held onto defeat.
Craig4 Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 5,363

4th January 2012, 12:44 PM	#313
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Here is a strange fake bank paper: http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/f...nisto-scan.jpg Looks like some kind of joke with ridiculously large sums of money mentioned at the bottom of the paper. From: http://benjaminfulford.typepad.com/b...3%82%A4-x.html

4th January 2012, 02:35 PM	#314
Mojo Mostly harmless Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Nor Flanden Posts: 22,089	Originally Posted by Anders Lindman I believe the lawsuit is correct. Why?
	__________________ "You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield "The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky

4th January 2012, 03:01 PM	#315
Anders Lindman Philosopher Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 9,289	Originally Posted by Mojo Why? Maybe it's wishful thinking to believe that the claims in the lawsuit are true but the fact that the lawsuit was accepted is remarkable I think. And it fits with the conspiracy theory I have about the Eastern powers having fooled the Western powers by very long term plans that can stretch over a whole century. In the case of the lawsuit, China shipped a lot of gold to the U.S. and is was on a 60 years lease basing if I remember correctly (from the mid 30s to the mid 90s or something like that). The Chinese powers knew that the U.S. would not be able to give back the gold when the leasing period ended. They tricked the U.S. to accept the gold, and in the short run it looked like a good deal. Today however, the leasing period is over and gold has to be given back (similar to how Hong Kong had to be given back), or money for it paid plus interest. The 1 trillion dollars is only a small part of the amount that has to be payed. The total amount is something like hundreds of trillions of dollars. If the U.S. is a corporation then it can file for bankruptcy and in that way the payment to the Asian powers can be avoided. Ha ha.