It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

H.R.5859 highlights the sickness of US government

page: 2
58
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 8675309jenny

So Putin invades his neighbors, threatens NATO and boasts that he is not afraid to use nuclear weapons, and it is three US Congressmen who have started a new Cold War. I get where you're coming from.


Let's not derail this like the other thread....

Russia isn't squeaky clean, neither are we.




posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
And.. (also from the OPs link)


earlier that same day in Kiev, the Ukrainian parliament approved a security plan that will:

1. Declare that Ukraine should become a “military state.”

2. Reallocate more of its approved 2014 budget for military purposes.

3. Put all military operating units on alert.

4. Mobilize military and national guard units.

5. Increase military spending in Ukraine from 1 percent of GDP to 5 percent, increasing military spending by $3 billion over the next few years.

6. Join NATO and switch to NATO military standards.

Under the guise of democratizing, the West stripped Ukraine of its sovereignty with a U.S.-backed coup, employed it as a foil to advance NATO to the Russian border and reignited the Cold War, complete with another nuclear showdown.


The drum roll is loud and clear
edit on 18-12-2014 by Tucket because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I think people are too fixated on the 3 congresspeople in this.



You can't honestly think if all 425 members were there it would have had a different outcome...


This was just to shorten the time of the pass.
Rather than count 425 yes votes it's easier to have just minimal input for a done deal.


The Anti-Russia brigade span across the Left & Right.




I'm not saying its the right thing to do.
Just explaining protocol.


That's like the kid who cheats on entrance exams because he knows he would ace it anyway, so why bother with a formality???

Or rather; why risk not getting what you want when you can just steal it...

I get what you're saying, but the method used was "unanimous consent" so actually all it would have taken was one objection, and it wouldn't have passed...

One single objection out of 425 people....

Congress is going to remain in session until January too, so Obama can't pocket veto this....
edit on 18-12-2014 by 8675309jenny because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: 8675309jenny

I don't see the comparison in that analogy.


All I'll say is, if anyone really wanted to contest this decision, all it would have taken was 4 congresspeople to stay behind for the No vote.


The fact that not even 1 did tells me this was a unanimous decision and saved the vote counter some time.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




Like I said, it doesn't make this right..


And therein lies the issue, for me. There is a reason why (in theory) only three people are not given the power to make the laws of the land.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:58 AM
link   
Well folks, bad news. While it has been much speculated that we seriously have a bunch of psychos running this place, now

LET THERE BE NO DOUBT.

Yup, you're right. Getting nuked is a WHOLE lot easier than another civil war. Just sit back, watch the fireworks, and hope the pain isn't too bad when the flash comes.

Ahhhh, yes. Mr. Death. So NICE to finally see you. Better than repeating all the blood and gore of the civil war. We were couch potatoes all the way until the bitter end. How proud our forefathers must be.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: new_here

I think you're missing my point, pal.


It's common in political arenas, including here in the UK, for a large number of representatives to abstain from a vote that is guarunteed to go through.
It's a time saving decision.


3 people didn't create a Law...
It would have been widely acknowledged throughout Congress that this bill would be passed no matter the numbers.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: 8675309jenny

All I'll say is, if anyone really wanted to contest this decision, all it would have taken was 4 congresspeople to stay behind for the No vote.



You are assuming they all knew it would be put to vote on that day. Can you say that for sure? It is a well-known tactic to push a bill into law when opposers will not be in town to vote against a bill.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




3 people didn't create a Law...


Why yes, yes they did.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: new_here

& it would also be an assumption to say that the majority didn't know, would it not?



It is also well know that this is not a topic in which divides the Left & Right...

Look at it like this my friend...
Aside from Ron Paul, who out of all your representatives do you honestly feel would have voted no?



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: new_here

I think you're missing my point, pal.


It's common in political arenas, including here in the UK, for a large number of representatives to abstain from a vote that is guarunteed to go through.
It's a time saving decision.


3 people didn't create a Law...
It would have been widely acknowledged throughout Congress that this bill would be passed no matter the numbers.


There should be a debate in the house and an explanation of why this is necessary in order to benefit the people of the U.S ( and more broader, the West). A couple of fake objections and slight amendments isn't good enough imo.

This is a monumental decision, with far reaching ramifications, yet the representatives choose to treat it with disdain.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: new_here

I owe you an apology, my friend.

While they did know about the bill, it was only introduced that day and they had little time to debate & review the ideology.


It is said to be identical to a bill that Congress had voted on earlier that day.

Information here.


Thank you for pushing me to look further into the situation, pal.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Yeah, I've looked into it, my friend & I agree.


This should definitely have been given more time for debate & review.


imo things like this should be put to a Referendum so the people of the Country can decide.

It's dangerous for such a small amount of people to decide decisions like this that could have drastic ramifications.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: 8675309jenny

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: 8675309jenny

So Putin invades his neighbors, threatens NATO and boasts that he is not afraid to use nuclear weapons, and it is three US Congressmen who have started a new Cold War. I get where you're coming from.


Let's not derail this like the other thread....

Russia isn't squeaky clean, neither are we.


Why is my post off topic and this one isn't?



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: Cobaltic1978
imo things like this should be put to a Referendum so the people of the Country can decide.


As I stated earlier. The Fed Act of 1913 was done the same way..
The people really have no say in what goes on.. Do you actually think that.. The only way people have a say in things is when sh*t gets crazy.. Like womens rights and civil rights.. or something happens with a gun(No i dont like the idea of limiting weapons, just saying..)

The fed act Wilson stated afterward that he sold the American people up the river with the signing of that bill..

We have not had a say in anything in this country.. Do you really think the people of the US wanted all these wars we have been thrown in? Hell we didnt even want to get into WW II really.. That was pushed on us like the War in Iraq and Afghanistan because of 9/11..

Like i said People are consistent and idiots who dont not learn history are doomed to repeat it.. And the ones who do learn history, well we are drug down by sheer ignorance and called kooks.
edit on 12/18/2014 by ThichHeaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs


This should definitely have been given more time for debate & review.


I think it is safe to assume that it had been discussed at length and perhaps heatedly outside the chambers, probably before the bill was originally introduced in the House. At least three quarters of the Senators approved, because if the President signed the bill it could be overturned by that three quarters majority. It's in the Constitution. I will admit, however, that Congress has been keeping the proceedings out of the public eye... the Tea Party would kick up a firestorm. As it is, the bill will certainly be a bone of contention between neo- and paleo- cons, and the Tea Party, as well as left versus centrist Dems in the coming primaries.
edit on 18-12-2014 by DJW001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Democracy is a hollow sham for the oligarchs to control the masses....nothing more.....
This is all Bull ship and bafflegab for idiots who believe the propaganda anyways....
It painfully obvious that democracy is long dead.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: stirling
It painfully obvious that democracy is long dead.


That would be 1913 when we used to be a Republic. See we can not even get our own form of government right.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
a reply to: 8675309jenny

I don't see the comparison in that analogy.



My analogy was, someone who wants into Harvard, but doesn't want to take the SAT for fear of failure.

They didn't want to risk anyone saying "I object", so they went the backdoor route. You may think it would have passed all 425 members approval, but prove it. They never bothered to put it the test; disgusting, slimy cheaters.



posted on Dec, 18 2014 @ 12:11 PM
link   
I for one absolutely agree with the bill. Russia has stepped out of the comfort zone many months ago, and needs to be confronted with the consequences of its mindless and provocative actions. I have zero tolerance for the current Russian foreign policy nor do I have any tolerance for their internal politics. The lack of independent media sources, the funding of right wing groups, the sheer amount of propaganda being thrown out... it needs to stop!

I hope that some Russian's see the severity of their governments actions and act accordingly to, once and for all, nullify Putin's influence on the nation.




top topics



 
58
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join