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.

 

*Revolutionary War Watch* USA

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I’m all for that, I just think a group of people that do not represent the majority view of the population have no right to act in my name and try to overthrow the government.


I concur




posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

That's why people have to watch their government. Our Founding Fathers knew that government cannot be trusted.


I’m all for that, I just think a group of people that do not represent the majority view of the population have no right to act in my name and try to overthrow the government.


The sam could be said about the other side as well.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:55 PM
link   
>Answers to these questions are very important.

...but I think the perspective from which you're asking them is extremely awkward.

>But who decides if the government is not working?

You, me, the guy down the street. Anyone. Or at least...anyone who's willing to act on it. It's not like there's a committee. Anyone who succeeds in overthrowing a government becomes the new government, and thus makes the rules.

>How large does the group of people have to be for it to
>be considered a revolution and not treason?

Considered by whom? If you win, it wasn't treason, no matter how many people did, or did not agree with you. If you lose, it was treason, again...no matter how many people did or did not agree with you. The "founding fathers" were treasonous revolutionaries...until they won the war. Had the American Revolution failed, they all would have been executed as traitors.

>Does it have to be an overwhelming majority of the
>entire population of the US?

Well...no. Let's take a couple examples:

10 people. One is "in charge." The other 9 revolt, and attempt to take over. They fail. According to the guy in charge (the "official government") it was an illegal insurrection. Doesn't matter how many people were involved.

10 people. 5 are "in charge." One attempts to take over, the other four don't care. If he succeeds, he is now the government, and so it was a legal revolution. If he fails, it was again, an illegal insurrection. Treason.

>Does a group of individuals count as the entire population?

If the rest of the population does nothing, then for all practical purposes, yes.

>Just because you as an individual think government isn't
>working it doesn't mean you have a right to try and over throw it,

I don't think you understand what a "right" is. All a "right" is...is a privilage or "choice" that an agreement or precedent states is available.

That's all.

So...if you happen to live in the United States, there is an agreement (in this case a legal document called the US Constitution) which states that should you be accused of a crime, you shall have the privilage of being tried by a jury. (Amendments six and seven.)

If you don't happen to live in the US, that legal statement may not apply to you. You may not have that right.

But...let's consider a less popular example.

There is a legal precedent in this country that "the government" can take your land and property from you and do anything it wants with it. It is called eminent domain. Look it up. There is an "agreement" (in this case, individual state and city laws) which state that the state and city government may do this. Therefore they have that right.

Now, let's take a fun one. I'm sure you'll recognize this quote:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. "

Now, the Declaration of Independance is not, properly speaking, a legal document. It does nicely illustrate my point, however. "Inalienable right." "God given right." What are those?

Those are simply "rights" which are stated to exist by an agreement or precedent established by, you guess it...God. They are no different. There is no such thing as a "fundamental" right. A right is simply somethikng that someone or something says is so. Whether it's God, an official governemnt, or your local parent-teacher association makes little difference.

>if you do, than the government has every right to arrest you.

Only because the government says it does, thus establishing that "right." And, only if you fail to overthrow it. Remember, if you succeed, you are now the government.



[edit on 17-9-2005 by LordBucket]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by LDragonFire

The growing number of deaths to citizens by the police using "Non-leathal weapon"



That is a incorrect term for those weapons. They are correctly called "Less Lethal weapons'', theres a big difference. They can and do kill , There is no such thing as non-lethal force when talking about these weapons All of them can be lethal if you use enough at the right spot on the right person.


I cant stand when people use that term.


[edit on 17-9-2005 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Everyone didn't want to revolt against England and they fought against the revolution. But it was still the only thing left to do in the eyes of the founders. There is no number when it comes to this thing. Some will fight for one side because they feel its the right thing to do and others will want to maintain the status quo because they have something to lose.

Everybody is right in these situations. Maybe the government works for you and maybe it doesn't and if it doesn't you have an obligation to stand up and fight for change. That doesn't mean armed conflict in most cases but in the extreme...it doesn't matter if you are one person or 280 million people strong...you're obligated as a citizen to stand up and protect your rights.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:12 AM
link   
>They are correctly called "Less Lethal weapons''

...I think that's why he put it in quotes and pointed out that they killed people...

[edit on 18-9-2005 by LordBucket]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Who said you are on the majoritys side?...are you the 62% of Americans that no longer trust this administration? or are you on the 38% of Americans that still support this administration?


quote-A stun gun is the most effective non-lethal weapon. Have you been attacked by criminals on the road or threatened by a vicious dog? Don’t panic. You only need to touch an attacker with one of our stun guns for three to five seconds. The high voltage shock will immobilize them for five to ten minutes.

tazer.com


quote- ABOUT TASER
TASER International’s products save lives every day, providing non-lethal devices for use in law enforcement, corrections, private security and personal defense market.

tazerinfo.com


The suit by Jacob "Pete" Herring joins more than 30 others from around the country that claim Tasers caused or contributed to injuries or deaths. More than 7,000 law enforcement agencies worldwide use the devices as a nonlethal alternative to firearms, according to company numbers.

stltoday

This is the first time i have heard the phrase less than leathal....

129 deaths due to tazers, I agree tazers should be used when its a 1 on 1 situation...all others should be procecuted for excessive force.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:13 AM
link   
On my grandmother's side I had an ancestor who fought in the Revolutionary War on the American side.

On my grandfather's side I had ancestors who were loyalists and had to flee to Canada. Some of them have that UE after their name (for United Empire). My great-grandfather's parents went from Ontario to Michigan...half their children were born in Canada, the other half in America.

Interesting how that shook out....



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
I'm trying to imagine what would happen if Ex CIA director Tenet were to reveal INDISPUTABLE evidence that the Bush administration did not only allow 911 to happen but actually planned it.

Imagine if this implicated not only Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld but also members of congress
and the joint chiefs of staff?

Then imagine if someone caught Bush on videotape blatantly revealing that he's just playing up to
the " faith based faction " because he needs their votes.

Then imagine indisputable evidence beyond any doubt that the voting machines were in fact
fixed to throw the election and those who made it possible snitched on the people who paid them
to do it.

Then imagine a population so divided and so blinded to truth that they did nothing



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Who said you are on the majoritys side?...are you the 62% of Americans that no longer trust this administration? or are you on the 38% of Americans that still support this administration?


And are you part of the .002 percent of the population that would actually revolt against this government? Because that is how much support you would have for one.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 02:47 AM
link   
I Never said I would revolt, I have stated here i have 2 boys that within 5 years will be of draft age....You think I want my kids to fight in Any war...your crazy for implying that.

I believe the best why to change our government back to "by the people for the people" is to be active in local and state government...when the states regain more right from the Federal Government, we the people will gain more rights.....

But I have little hope of that happening


BTW if you had the balls to call me a traitor to my face, you would be eating out of a straw for about 3 weeks. I would defend the Constitution till death Against All Enemys Both Foriegn and Domestic"[You]



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 03:32 AM
link   
This administration has deliberately designated many documents as' classified" that would not normally
warrant that designation.

This President has envoked executive privledge to hide so much dirt that you could use it to backfill NewOrleans up to sea level.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 06:06 AM
link   
>BTW if you had the balls to call me a traitor to my face,
>you would be eating out of a straw for about 3 weeks.

Why such a strong reaction?

Remember: Thomas Jefferson? George Washington? Benjamin Franklin? These people were traitors. They conspired together in secret, and committed treason against their government.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 01:49 PM
link   
LordBucket Its a honor to be mentioned together with our founding fathers, Thanks. But I feel you over reacted as I did.

Westpoint23 I over reacted, and Im, sorry. We can agree that we disagree. I just wish that I/we still lived in the USA that I was taught about growing up, but we have changed into a militaristic empire with no honor, but I guess thats what happens when we are lead by a military deserter/lier war monger.

In regards to Iraq I say let the presidents fight the war.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 02:38 PM
link   
There would have to be a revolution of the mind before there could be any kind of physical revolution in this country. If you asked most any Americans today if this is the greatest country in the world, we'd say, HELL YEAH! It aint Haiti, my friends. You wanna see a 1st world turn 3rd, add a lil brother against brother violence and stir. We're talking a total collapse of infastructure. No food or clean water--endless poverty and death as far as the eye can see. This aint the 1700's. We don't grow our food and piss in the backyard. Revolution means giving up your right to the comforts most Americans take for granted.

Even if the people did revolt there would have to something to replace the thing we found so intolerable and there aint nothing like that. Think this thread is premature, but interesting all the same. There'd have to be chaos before there would be a revolt, and we aren't there yet. No one is ready to dump the status quo.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 03:46 PM
link   
I can name the event that will most probably trigger a “revolution” in the United States. It’s called the collapse of the dollar. We are VERY close to this happening. If the dollar collapses then the general population WILL be stirred. This is because their savings and buying power of a majority of our citizens will be wiped out. Probably wiped out in a very short period of time.

The federal government and those who run the banking/investment oversight offices in particular, will come under very close scrutiny. I would not be surprised if a few bankers don’t get the death penalty, as the bureaucracy attempts to save itself.

I’d expect that the millions of retirees that are expecting to get a pension large enough to support themselves will form the backbone of this revolution. The baby boomers and their children will be the ones to pull down this government, not the hip hop gen.

The youngest members of our society, the ones who don’t have any savings to be wiped out and are able to join the armed forces / police forces / other secure areas of employment will be the ones who actually fight FOR the existing order. The ones that try to fight back do not have the resources to effectively oppose a military response.

However, the young folks will work as a nice spark and absorb some of the 1st response. But like I stated above, these guys will mostly end up in the draft that follows economic chaos.

I expect a precursor to this event to be shown in a large stock market drop sometime before the end of this year. Watch silver and gold, they are the meters of real wealth in this world (contrary to what banks want you to think).

Once Silver and Gold rise to really crazy levels you’ll know that’s your cue…the fed and central banks will have lost control of the currency markets (it’s slipping now…hence the $450+ gold). Once the currency markets collapse it’s only a month or two before things get nasty. I personally expect the fed to attempt to hyper-inflate out of the mess but the new chairmen is being handed a massive can of worms by Greenspan. Whoever is running the fed will probably lose control of inflation rather rapidly.

I’d expect some major economic mini-quakes after Greenspan retires in January 2006. I would predict the dollar collapse sometime in late 2006 / early 2007. Probably early 2007 since 2006 is an election year.

Outcomes:

1 – United States balkanizes quickly and military prevents federal government from stopping it. Little bloodshed, multiple currencies, banks probably banned forever. Expect mostly friendly relations between governors and the end of the U.S. as a world power.
2 – Military takes control (Actually pretty good thing for us in the short term, our military is honorable and fairly well run). However fascist or communist state runs down this path and both are known to end horribly.
3 – Chaos - States rebel piecemeal. Urban centers become war zones. Food Riots. Bank Riots. Marshal Law attempted to be imposed (fails in most places). Infrastructure fails in many places. Military engaged in many many hotspots. Draft (only partially enforceable). Mexico invades Texas and California (getting their ass handed to them in the process), China tries to exert influence by tackling Tawain, Japan and Indonesia (their beautiful oil reserves) and loses several major cities and all sea-ports…good bye Hong Kong. (U.S. Federal Government, with backs to wall will consider loss of a few west-coast cities no longer under their direct control to be well worth the exchange). Several states cede, constant warfare for 5-10 years until borders stabilize. Almost every major inner city in the US is in ruins. Either from constant urban warfare or nuclear exchanges.

Unfortunately my prediction is that in 2007 we’ll start to see #3 unfold. By 2008-2009 things will be VERY bad.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   

BTW if you had the balls to call me a traitor to my face, you would be eating out of a straw for about 3 weeks. I would defend the Constitution till death Against All Enemys Both Foriegn and Domestic"[You]


I can say the same to you, I would also “defend the constitution till death Against All Enemy's Both Foreign and Domestic” (You). Does it mean that you’re right and I'm wrong? Nope, it just means that depending on the way we view things were both right, and wrong at the same time.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst

Originally posted by LordBucket


I suppose I'll also point out that while I'm having a difficutl time finding clear law or case histories, I was under the impression that merely conspiring to overthrow the government may be considered treason, and is punishable by execution.



Actually, according to the Declaration of Independence, the citizens do have the right to overthrow/get rid of the government if it's not doing its job. In that case it's not treason.




You do realize that the Declaration of Independance bears no weight on our laws don't you? It gives us no rights and other than being a sentimental document is relatively worthless.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 07:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skibum



You do realize that the Declaration of Independance bears no weight on our laws don't you? It gives us no rights and other than being a sentimental document is relatively worthless.


It doesn't give us rights, it enumerates our God-given rights. Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.



posted on Sep, 18 2005 @ 09:01 PM
link   
>I would also “defend the constitution till death Against
>All Enemy's Both Foreign and Domestic”

Even if those enemies were, hypothetically...the president, Congress and Senate of the United States?




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join