[1rudeboy]

After that post, I wrote in LENGTHY NARRATIVE FORM, explaining how many of the bills, already passed or proposed, are connected, part and parcel, with the tentacle arms necessary for creation and preparation for an NAU.

In that specific case, you supplied no narrative whatsoever, instead posting the result of a search you did using Thomas (the legislative browser). And you were justifiably ridiculed for it, because again (as in the example regarding energy, above) you failed to explain whatever it was you were trying to explain. In fact, if I recall correctly, one of your "hits" was a bill to improve energy cooperation between the U.S. and Canada. Your attempt to apply a sinister motive to it relied on faith, not fact.

[nicmarlo]

In that specific case, you supplied no narrative whatsoever, instead posting the result of a search you did using Thomas

I said in the ONE post with DOCUMENTS I posted in narrative form my thoughts.

I said in another post, I posted legislation, passed and proposed.

Why are you lying about what I said, again?