One or multiple of these options are true- 1- I have bad eyesight
2- attorney general Pam Bondi is mossad so she removed name of Barak, mileikovsky, olmert and Israeli businessmen from this 'list' /''compilation', also known as 'flat earther muddying the water attempt'
3- i got it from right wing deplorable trolls so maybe catturd edit out name coz mossad
I don't understand. Barak (2nd column of OP) and Netanyahu are among the 305 names. Why should the omission of Olmert be an issue?
It is clear that these names were selected by self-defined criteria in accord with the text of the EFTA, which allows a number of dodges and omissions while remaining legally compliant. For instance, the list is ambiguous about whether George H. W. Bush is intended to be included or not, because it only refers to both "George W. Bush" and "George Bush Jr."; this is a prima facie fault. Also a couple names are misspelled and a couple are alphabetized arbitrarily, which is also a prima facie fault. These indicate that the list is not defined by number of appearances but by secret, unpublished scoring methods that can be considered compliant with the law. Presumably by these criteria Olmert, and many others of many nations, didn't rise to the sufficient level of making the "official" list.
Is there statistical or situational evidence that omissions of names of one nation or category (other than US) are imbalanced with respect to their appearance in the files? It should be a simple matter for noticers to compare occurrences of unique names versus their inclusion or exclusion in the 305 names, which means your proposition is easily testable for truth or falsity. But is anyone doing this?
Presumably by these criteria Olmert, and many others of many nations, didn't rise to the sufficient level of making the "official" list
How could that be? why don't you ask the question of why is Ehud Olmert linked to Epstein instead. Even The Jerusalem Post raised the issue a year ago in the article "Former PM Ehud Olmert mentioned as one of Jeffrey Epstein's associates in case documents": https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-844177
And in your opinion who determines the 'sufficient level of making the "official" list'?
Obviously Bondi interprets the law administratively.
I have no problem with all kinds of world leaders being linked, Norway already arrested their leader. I have no problem exposing all degrees. Feel free to focus on Olmert et al. with public revelations. But a list has to have a cutoff or else a million occurrences of "Donald" will be held probative. Evidence that Bondi's list is imbalanced is easy to come by, as is evidence that it's balanced, I'm surprised nobody's published such an analysis yet.
Obviously Bondi interprets the law administratively
This may be obvious to you, but not to many others. Others may dare to believe a foreign entity, or a Jewish Cabal is behind what is or is not being released regarding Epstein. At the very least, why wouldn't you question if perhaps Pam Bondi is the puppet on the end of the strings held by an evil entity?
Colonel Edward M. House, adviser to President Woodrow Wilson, wrote a book showing how easy is to leverage a scandal, or dirt, on any politician and influence the outcomes of decision making. This was way before Epstein was even born.
wouldn't you question if perhaps Pam Bondi is the puppet on the end of the strings held by an evil entity?
I do question it. Yet, legally she is responsible and accepts that responsibility. If she chose that responsibility as the lesser of two evils, she is responsible for not seeking the good. Evidence for the puppetry is worth considering on all sides.
My extended theory is that the Trump administration is not 100% unfriendly to the former or latter cabal, with a combination of proper and misplaced mercy. The current steps often play into the hands of the latter cabal and require us to be more diligent than we were in exposing the former. They will be recognized by greater pattern matching, for which we now have much greater capacity as sovereign individuals. A quibble about 2 names out of 305 will be too small a pattern to be important.
I started warning people about House's work about 20 years ago; I just named him earlier today (click my name). Here I added that his father got rich off Civil War profiteering with Jewish bank assistance so he was well placed, and continued to be so into the 32nd-degree administration. Certainly the cabals in all ages contribute patterns to be matched. But most of the pattern matching we do here is epicentral rather than central.
At any rate, (1) Christians serve Jesus, (2) within that Americans serve the Constitution that names him Lord of the year 1787, (3) within that Bondi is "bond" of/by the EFTA and interprets it administratively. No cabal, spirit, exousia, or confederacy can gainsay that because it is authorized straight from Jesus. It can only be twisted or driven off course. For instance, objective data might falsifiably show that Bondi cheated in her interpretations and spin-doctored the results. But evidence indicates this administration put many man-years of labor into preventing that from happening, i.e., the list is objectively defensible. If one is going to pin more Epstein linkage on Olmert or anyone beyond what the files show, it'll need to be frog research rather than admin evidence.
Add: Let's consider the current status as it informs us of the latter cabal. The former cabal invested trillions in control and has had billions in losses since. The amount of effort required to unmask it led a powerful state actor (presumably the US military) to determine that its best path was to allow a selected leader to be exiled for 4 years for the plan to succeed. If we were to question that datum, the alternate idea would be that the actor and the cabal cowrote a narrative where it only looks like progress on unmasking is happening but the actor eventually releases 3 million pages of evidence and yet nothing earth-shaking is really in the works. In that complicity narrative, the arrests and executions would be perfunctory and minimal and would merely be bit-part sacrifices where the cabal allows its own to be eaten while it carries on business as usual. In the actual war narrative, the difference would be that the arrests and executions clearly demonstrate the end of a cabal and not a transference, that the behaviors such as trafficking are markedly abandoned, that American individual dedication to justice contributes to a continuing state of self-maintenance against the risks of abandonment of potential victims by the community via its overcompensating oscillation toward individualism.
That would give us a test rubric for what actually happens and how much it favors either of two poles of a scenario. More important, it informs our role as sovereigns in contributing to the prevention of satanic abuse in the future in local and global settings. Between America's actions as government and its actions as sovereigns, we must be Jesus's hands and feet to the abused. When he returns he will show which of us have been his adopted body in the absence of his natural body. So part of "occupying until he comes" involves testing admin pronouncements with some capacity for criticism; but defeating the cabal complex for all time requires committing to pursue truth at all costs, and an imbalanced focus on one or two details, especially those already naturally imbalanced by prior trends, is much less helpful than direct propagation of testable truths via facts and logic.
One or multiple of these options are true- 1- I have bad eyesight 2- attorney general Pam Bondi is mossad so she removed name of Barak, mileikovsky, olmert and Israeli businessmen from this 'list' /''compilation', also known as 'flat earther muddying the water attempt' 3- i got it from right wing deplorable trolls so maybe catturd edit out name coz mossad
Which mileikowsky are you referring to, Benjamin or Javier?
I don't understand. Barak (2nd column of OP) and Netanyahu are among the 305 names. Why should the omission of Olmert be an issue?
It is clear that these names were selected by self-defined criteria in accord with the text of the EFTA, which allows a number of dodges and omissions while remaining legally compliant. For instance, the list is ambiguous about whether George H. W. Bush is intended to be included or not, because it only refers to both "George W. Bush" and "George Bush Jr."; this is a prima facie fault. Also a couple names are misspelled and a couple are alphabetized arbitrarily, which is also a prima facie fault. These indicate that the list is not defined by number of appearances but by secret, unpublished scoring methods that can be considered compliant with the law. Presumably by these criteria Olmert, and many others of many nations, didn't rise to the sufficient level of making the "official" list.
Is there statistical or situational evidence that omissions of names of one nation or category (other than US) are imbalanced with respect to their appearance in the files? It should be a simple matter for noticers to compare occurrences of unique names versus their inclusion or exclusion in the 305 names, which means your proposition is easily testable for truth or falsity. But is anyone doing this?
How could that be? why don't you ask the question of why is Ehud Olmert linked to Epstein instead. Even The Jerusalem Post raised the issue a year ago in the article "Former PM Ehud Olmert mentioned as one of Jeffrey Epstein's associates in case documents": https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-844177
And in your opinion who determines the 'sufficient level of making the "official" list'?
Obviously Bondi interprets the law administratively.
I have no problem with all kinds of world leaders being linked, Norway already arrested their leader. I have no problem exposing all degrees. Feel free to focus on Olmert et al. with public revelations. But a list has to have a cutoff or else a million occurrences of "Donald" will be held probative. Evidence that Bondi's list is imbalanced is easy to come by, as is evidence that it's balanced, I'm surprised nobody's published such an analysis yet.
This may be obvious to you, but not to many others. Others may dare to believe a foreign entity, or a Jewish Cabal is behind what is or is not being released regarding Epstein. At the very least, why wouldn't you question if perhaps Pam Bondi is the puppet on the end of the strings held by an evil entity?
Colonel Edward M. House, adviser to President Woodrow Wilson, wrote a book showing how easy is to leverage a scandal, or dirt, on any politician and influence the outcomes of decision making. This was way before Epstein was even born.
I do question it. Yet, legally she is responsible and accepts that responsibility. If she chose that responsibility as the lesser of two evils, she is responsible for not seeking the good. Evidence for the puppetry is worth considering on all sides.
My extended theory is that the Trump administration is not 100% unfriendly to the former or latter cabal, with a combination of proper and misplaced mercy. The current steps often play into the hands of the latter cabal and require us to be more diligent than we were in exposing the former. They will be recognized by greater pattern matching, for which we now have much greater capacity as sovereign individuals. A quibble about 2 names out of 305 will be too small a pattern to be important.
I started warning people about House's work about 20 years ago; I just named him earlier today (click my name). Here I added that his father got rich off Civil War profiteering with Jewish bank assistance so he was well placed, and continued to be so into the 32nd-degree administration. Certainly the cabals in all ages contribute patterns to be matched. But most of the pattern matching we do here is epicentral rather than central.
At any rate, (1) Christians serve Jesus, (2) within that Americans serve the Constitution that names him Lord of the year 1787, (3) within that Bondi is "bond" of/by the EFTA and interprets it administratively. No cabal, spirit, exousia, or confederacy can gainsay that because it is authorized straight from Jesus. It can only be twisted or driven off course. For instance, objective data might falsifiably show that Bondi cheated in her interpretations and spin-doctored the results. But evidence indicates this administration put many man-years of labor into preventing that from happening, i.e., the list is objectively defensible. If one is going to pin more Epstein linkage on Olmert or anyone beyond what the files show, it'll need to be frog research rather than admin evidence.
Add: Let's consider the current status as it informs us of the latter cabal. The former cabal invested trillions in control and has had billions in losses since. The amount of effort required to unmask it led a powerful state actor (presumably the US military) to determine that its best path was to allow a selected leader to be exiled for 4 years for the plan to succeed. If we were to question that datum, the alternate idea would be that the actor and the cabal cowrote a narrative where it only looks like progress on unmasking is happening but the actor eventually releases 3 million pages of evidence and yet nothing earth-shaking is really in the works. In that complicity narrative, the arrests and executions would be perfunctory and minimal and would merely be bit-part sacrifices where the cabal allows its own to be eaten while it carries on business as usual. In the actual war narrative, the difference would be that the arrests and executions clearly demonstrate the end of a cabal and not a transference, that the behaviors such as trafficking are markedly abandoned, that American individual dedication to justice contributes to a continuing state of self-maintenance against the risks of abandonment of potential victims by the community via its overcompensating oscillation toward individualism.
That would give us a test rubric for what actually happens and how much it favors either of two poles of a scenario. More important, it informs our role as sovereigns in contributing to the prevention of satanic abuse in the future in local and global settings. Between America's actions as government and its actions as sovereigns, we must be Jesus's hands and feet to the abused. When he returns he will show which of us have been his adopted body in the absence of his natural body. So part of "occupying until he comes" involves testing admin pronouncements with some capacity for criticism; but defeating the cabal complex for all time requires committing to pursue truth at all costs, and an imbalanced focus on one or two details, especially those already naturally imbalanced by prior trends, is much less helpful than direct propagation of testable truths via facts and logic.