It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


OMG is it true. nine striped flag behind bush. A return to constitutional rule?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 10:52 AM
I am unable to understand the entire story but i think it is either the shadow govt accepting defeat or totally opposite.

[edit on 8-7-2005 by warthog911]

[edit on 8-7-2005 by warthog911]

[edit on 8-7-2005 by warthog911]

Mod Edit: to remove ALL-CAPS title.

[edit on 8-7-2005 by kinglizard]

posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 05:04 PM
My gut feeling is that is a ruse, a ploy. Just another varity of snake oil. Continue with the assault.............


Its not over till they are in Jail.

[edit on 8-7-2005 by All Seeing Eye]

posted on Jul, 8 2005 @ 08:16 PM
It wasn't an actual flag behind Bush. It's more of a artsy background. Someone who doesn't understand the implications of what they made, likely some hippy art student lol, designed what they thought was a pretty background for the President's speach. Not too many people would think to count the stripes, or even realize the significance of 9 stripes. and if you want to be really picky, it wasn't 9 stripes... it was more along the lines of 8 1/4 stripes as some were partially cut off!

Campaigns always use portions of the American flag in their signs and their backdrops. Question on a related note: Isn't there a law banning use of the entire American flag in campaign advertisements? I remember hearing something along those lines a long time ago. Anyone who knows, please post it!


posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:43 AM

You are on the money with this thread. Definitely some kind of signal sent to the private army with this backdrop. Do not think for one second that it is unintended hippy art, especially in light of recent developments. If you ever saw "Highlander", you will know exactly what I mean when I call it the 'quickening'. Rasputin13, sloppy attempt at spreading disinfo. Didn't the RNC get sued over the design of the W campaign bumpersticker? Complete American flag attached to the W on that one. Nice try, traitor. I know, you're just staying true to your avatar and screen name.

Everyone should go to the last link posted above, and read what it says. Our only hope for survival is self-sufficiency. Get out of the cities and off the grid. Get that cell phone unstuck from your ear and turn the damn thing off!

George Bush sued over "W' logo

Edit to supply link that shows bumpersticker. The link from the aol article I supplied with my original story about the lawsuit here on ATSNN is no longer functional. What do you know about that?

[edit on 9-7-2005 by Icarus Rising]

posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 09:51 AM
CAn you tell me more about the 9 striped flag.What purpoes cuz i am confused.

posted on Jul, 9 2005 @ 11:24 AM
I think it is meant to be confusing. This is where I'm going with it.

"Why... because the original flag of protest... the Sons of Liberty Flag, had NINE VERTICAL stripes!!"

"When you compare the flag of the British East India Company to "Old Glory", it kind of makes you wonder if the original protest by the Sons of Liberty was somehow subverted. What do I mean? I mean that to me it looks like they "mocked" the British East India flag by turning the horizontal stripes vertical. One of the articles I read while doing the research for the US Civil Flag, said the vertical stripes represented the blood flowing into the earth from the Patriots who were willing to sacrifice their lives to live free.

When you see our present flag, "old Glory"... it looks to me like someone, back in the "Revolutionary Days", returned the stripes back to the horizontal ones that were used by the British East Inda Company. If the Revolution began with The Sons of Liberty who flew a vertical striped flag, who changed the stripes back to horizontal stripes... and why? See why I wonder if our revolution was subverted before it began?"

To me this means either Bush has had a change of heart, and is truly going to pursue the interests of the American people, or (more likely) he is preparing to try and overthrow the government of the U.S.A. and institute a police state. Either way, with him for us or against us, we are in for a big fight on our home soil, and it is coming sooner rather than later.


posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 10:09 PM
I only see 5 stripes in the flag behind him in his speech. Not 9.

And I dont think Bush is dumb enough to make a speech to the entire country waving a flag saying "SCrew the US im taking over and this is my new flag, like it or die by my hitmen Al QUada".

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 10:26 PM

Originally posted by warthog911
I am unable to understand *SNIP* (the nauseating number of non-ATS forum links and miscellaneous edits)

Nothing like plundering the wealth of another forum, especially one the caliber of Terms and Conditions #6 ring a bell?

Besides, if it's not Gamespot, it's not worth the poo it's written on...

Flinging Monkeys, not just for tossing other forums anymore...

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 10:44 PM

Sons of Liberty Flag. Pre-1775. The history of this flag began in about 1765, when protests of the duties and taxes and stamps required by Parliament began in the colonies. Liberty trees and liberty poles were erected. After a particular protest of the Stamp Act was held under a particular Elm tree in Boston, known thereafter as "the Liberty Tree," a group known as the Sons of Liberty was formed. The Sons of Liberty met under this tree. Later, the British cut the tree down, and the Sons replaced it with a Liberty pole. Their flag of nine alternating red and white vertical stripes was flown from this pole. The Sons of Liberty used a flag originally of 9 vertical stripes to represent the unity of the New England colonies. Later this flag was modified to 13 horizontal stripes to represent the unity of all the Colonies. Its red and white colors derived from the British merchant ensign. Indeed, this flag was used as a United States merchant ensign in the period from c.1776-c.1800.

Since this flag predates the Constitution, I don't see how it could signal a "return to Constitutional rule"...anyway last I checked we're still under Constitutional rule.

I agree that this was just artwork and some of the stripes weren't shown, it wasn't meant to be any different than a normal U.S. flag.

posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:04 PM
even if it was 'art work' is an improper display of the flag not appropriate for the pres to be speaking in front of... a flag may as well been burning behind him or hung upside down. why is ther no outrage about the 'new' flag?...everybody has a hissy fit when others burn the flag but not when a false flag is purposly drawn for the pres to stand in front of and give a speach!?!?! anybody in the military knows that you do not stand in front of the 'colors' and give a speach.!!! you should be to thier side............

was it a mesage, funny that the england bombings just happened...


'you are either with us or against us'


posted on Jul, 10 2005 @ 11:08 PM

This is very interesting I always knew their was more to our flags than some simple exlanation.Good find my friend,if you find anymore info let us know.

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 01:48 AM
Just another possibility...I can't explain the 9 stripes, but they don't look "vertical" to me. Rather, they look like horizontal stripes...but the entire flag has been rotated ninety degrees. Look at the shape and orientation of the flag. Curiously has been rotated and flipped as well. The way I'm looking at it, what we're seeing is the back of the flag,

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 02:13 AM
This is just a glorified advertisement for that sells altered U.S. flags that are supposed to represent a protest to the rightful U.S. government.

The first link is deceptive and deceitful as there was never any 9-stripe flag with a Union (the blue field with the stars) as it seems to suggest. Plus the Sons of Liberty flag was expanded to 13 stripes when the southern colonies joined the northern colonies in rebelling against Great Britain -- again way before the union was added.

Sons of Liberty flags:

Northern rebellious colonies:

Addition of the Southern colonies:

Continental Colors, 1775-1777:

Betsy Ross Flag 1776:

15 Stripe flag after the first addition of states:

Later switched back to 13 with only additional stars added for new states, giving the current flag:

In conclusion, I don't think Bush is sending a message he wants to go back to a nation with 9 states in the Northeast since none of them voted for him!

It was ART...:shk:


[edit on 7/11/2005 by djohnsto77]

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 04:06 AM
OK, here comes my lunatic fringe side. Most of you know that I'm a quasi-intelligent person and more or less a conservative, though not a Republican. Never the less, I'm gonna get a little nuts on your right now, and I'm being completely sincere.

Symbols mean things to the people who institute them.
One of George Noorey's guests on Coast to Coast AM had an outstanding point about symbolism. To you and I, gang tagging may be just scribbled words on the wall, because we don't belong to that part of the social structure, we don't speak the language, and it's not directed at us. But to a gang member, someone who speaks the language, it's a message intended for his eyes. It tells him who's running this area, and who is allowed there. Sometimes, an outsider who doesn't read the language can get caught up in something he had no idea he was getting into and end up dead because he didn't understand the symbols.

When I see an admiralty flag in a court, I see a symbolic reminder to the initiated that the civilian court system is still only for show. If I saw the admiralty flag removed from our courts, I would see a symbolic indication to the initiated that there had been a changing of the guard.

When I see the flag of a British Company adopted over the designs of the common men's organizations which really brought the revolution into being, I see a symbolic indication to Great Britain that the revolution has been subverted and that we are under control- that they no longer have to insist on quelling the rebellion because the men in power now are loyalists.

When I see the British Union on the flag of Hawaii, which was taken by the United States for the benefit of the Dole Fruit Company, I see a clear symbol that America remains loyal and colonizes, by proxy, for Britain.

When I see a desecrated flag behind president Bush, which has been altered in clear violation of flag etiquite (a true flag can not be displayed as decoration and the respectful cutting or destruction of a flag begins with the removal of the blue field, so that you are destroying or altering two seperate and individually meaningless patterns- and look at the flags on the wallpaper behind him- they are all the same- those flags weren't just trimmed or folded to fit- it's consistent and quite possible intentional) When I see all of that I see an intentional and meaningful alteration of symbols indicating SOMETHING to those who can read the signs.

Why are 4 3/4 of the stripes removed from the US flag, with specifc care taken to remove only 2 and 1/4 from the top with the remaining 2 coming from the bottom, I don't see the elimination of stripes as the sole issue- I see the intentional removal of a specific number of stars as well- 22 stars to be specific. Coincidentally, the folding at 1/4 of a stripe on top ensures that there is a clean break after the 5th row of stars, further supporting my view.

Now here is the really amazing part. Look at the fold in those flags which cuts 6 stars in half, making them 3, reducing the full stars visible here to 25. This is present in both flags. (look at the second star from the top on the left, and proceed down and right along the crease in the flag). These flags are missing half of their stars- they represent exactly half of the country. There are nine visible stripes- guess how many of the original colonies John Kerry won, not counting states created by the sub division of those colonies? 9.
That non-admiralty flag (at an address given on a military base as I understand), missing half of its stars and representing only the colonies which Bush lost, means something about the blue states. What is the only acceptible reason to dishonor a flag (by flying it upside down)? To signal an emergency.
If I'm reading the language correctly, this is a sign to those in the know that Blue State America is out of control. The question to me is this- who is it for? Is this a cry to Britain for help? Is this a shout to elite Democrats who won't speak to Bush that they have gone too far? I don't know.
All I know is that I firmly believe that symbols mean things to the people who create them.

Supporting links:
The flag of the United States- check the position of the stars for yourself and compare to the pictures to prove my numbers.

The thirteen Colonies and the election results, to prove that there are as many colonies represented here as voted for Kerry.

The picture I keep referring to:

Hawaii's British Flag:

[edit on 11-7-2005 by The Vagabond]

[edit on 11-7-2005 by The Vagabond]

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 04:23 AM
I really think you guys in the US should return to this one:

I like this one best. Heh.

The different flag behind your pres is actually a signal to the Queen of England to ready her Shock Troops for the invasion of America. While you guys are busy messing around in Iraq we are going back in to take over again. Bush has done a deal with the Queen, and he'll be made King instead of Charles once she kicks the bucket. Princess Diana isn't dead but has been working for the special forces hunting Taliban leaders in Torra Bora. Apparently she will return and marry Bush.

Actually this last part sounds a bit far fetched to me - everyone knows the aliens took out Diana in Paris. But the rest must be true as I read it on some website.

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 04:31 AM

So Vagabond, I'd like to get your interpretation on what the symbolism from the Democrats was in 2004 judging by their depiction of the flag:

I see a bunch of misshapen, miscolored and cut apart flags there, but I still don't think it's there's a symbology to it. Americans love using flag motifs on everything sometimes distorting the flag in myriad ways...

[edit on 7/11/2005 by djohnsto77]

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 05:19 AM
To answer your question on interpretation of democrat graphics:
Possibly just horrible artwork, but if I wanted to be a real pain I could point out that the color symbolizing loyalty- white- is almost completely absent from the first flag image. I'm sure you love hearing that analysis- and it's not that far off either, is it?

You say you see mis-shapen flags.
You see flags? I see graphical representations of flags.
Behind president Bush on the other hand I see real live flags which have been very specifically altered in a completely unacceptible and disrespectful way, That's what I see. After seeing that, what I think is that it could be symbolically meaningful that they have so carefully taken a real flag and contorted it into something else.

We love using flag themes, but I've never seen it done like this though. You never see a flag improperly displayed at a campaign rally or convention- you see red white and blue decorations which are not actually flags. But here, I see a carefully altered American flag, which has been altered to look like exactly like the graphical representations on the wall behind Bush.
The LEAST conspiratorial angle I can come up with is that Bush is so insane that he asked for the flags to be altered so that nobody would notice that the pictures of flags behind him were wrong.

Self-Edit to correct quoting violations.

[edit on 11-7-2005 by The Vagabond]

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 05:22 AM

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
I really think you guys in the US should return to this one:

I like this one best. Heh.

Correct me if I'm wrong father, but wasn't that adopted by the continental congress to symbolize rebellion (while maintaining the St. George and St. Andrew's Crosses to represent that we had so far not declared independence)?

I'd think you'd be more inclined to want us back under the Union Jack proper.

As always, dog bless you father

[edit on 11-7-2005 by The Vagabond]

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 05:37 AM
I see where you're coming from Vagabond, but I just can't really see it as a conspiracy.

Probably just some graphic designer with an overactive imagination....but I agree that the President, especially when talking to the military troops, should use the flag in a proper fashion.

posted on Jul, 11 2005 @ 06:02 AM
somehow i doubt they let some hippie design the backdrop. it is rather kaleidescopic and trippy - but its also very uniform, and intentional. if they wanted to do the patriot thing, they coulda hung a normal fabric flag behind Bush. but no, somebody put real time into arranging this image.

i do not claim to know what is symbolized therein, but I agree with the vagabond - those in the know will understand. btw, i write graffiti (for fun - not gang related) and your analogy is exactly on point. my parents think it ALL looks like garbage, but i cant keep my eyes off the underpasses out here on the autobahn - it is absolutely fascinating to me.

this hidden disrespect for our flag was intentional.

also, i agree that the US never really broke away from England. The whole independence thing was a ruse. Those who have since weilded the power in our country answer to the isle.

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in