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.

 

Police state, only way to be safe

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   
what i want is a general consensus that we should do something. id like some of the people here with incredibly high intellect to start the project. ats has some incredible writers and minds, and i feel the people here could figure out how to reach out to the people who cant see through the smoke.

just imagine people on myspace spamming our message to everyone else on myspace. we could reach 50-100 million people in just a matter of months. i think just telling the myspace crowd someday in the near future they wont have myspace would get them scared and get them talking. imagine these people discussing the issue at stake with their family and friends in real life.

a police state/goverment wouldnt want the internet to be what it is now, and wouldnt want myspace or anything else like it because it would give the masses the opportunity to get their ideas out. give them an opportunity to stop what they have planned.

with legal chain emails, and taking advantage of sites such as myspace, we could reach 250 million people in a year maybe. people of earth need to wake up . it starts with americans waking up. all throughout human history , a very small % of people have controlled everyone.

we can not wait until were slaves of the elite with their massive war machines. lets do something. i could see both sides of the fence here working together on
such.

if it ever got to the point where the humans on the planet were controlled by a police state or police type UN , i think it would take 100s of years for us humans to overthrow such a world goverment.

LETS DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT BEFORE IT HAPPENS. it would be easier and less bloody. do it for your great great grandkids.

may peace be with us all.

[edit on 20-8-2006 by elitegamer23]




posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23

if it ever got to the point where the humans on the planet were controlled by a police state or police type UN , i think it would take 100s of years for us humans to overthrow such a world goverment.

LETS DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT BEFORE IT HAPPENS.

[edit on 20-8-2006 by elitegamer23]


I think it would be a lot easier than you think. Especially with 90% of the polulation not liking what is going on. People are getting tired of the status quo. They are also waking up. This forum has helped a lot of poeple to wake up and see what is happening right now right in front of our faces. When we stand up and voice our concerns, those who thought it would be easy have to backpeddle and try again later.

You can make a difference by informing others and not going along with policies just because others are. We must be true to who we are and say enough is enough. the best part is that violence is not needed. We only need to disobey illegal commands. We all have the right to Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Freedom. These are inalienable rights. Each man, woman and child was born with these rights.

Once you stand up for yourself, others will follow. Do not become violent or resort to violence because then you will fall into their trap. You will be labeled and carted away. No one will have sympathy for you at all and no one will come to your side.

We are a people of compassion and must never forget that. That is what makes us great. Do not fall for the crap that they spew out every day making us afraid to go outside into the world anymore. They want us separated and fearful of each other. This is what they want. this means we should be doing the EXACT OPPOSITE. We should be coming together and going out into the community to build bridges and reduce the hatred.

It is easy to hate when you don't know someone. It is easy to dehumanize people you don't know. But when you come together, you realize that we all want the same things, regardless of race or nationality. We all want a better life for ourselves and our children. It is a big world and we can ALL have better lives by coming together.



posted on Aug, 21 2006 @ 03:46 PM
link   
majic said this


Originally posted by Majic
Politics Without Activism



However, I'm exploring ways we can allow and even encourage certain kinds of activism on ATS -- though I still want to make sure we're careful to avoid having outside entities gather personal information from our members.

Both ATS and PTS are neutral on the issues, but I think there has been a pent-up demand for the ability of members (and heck, even politicians) to advocate and campaign for various causes in our community.

We may not end up doing it, but I thought I would mention that I'm interested in the possibility of doing it.




lets start the activism with this.


i searched myspace a site with 200 million potential ears (100million members) and i found this

groups.myspace.com...


the 9/11 truth group has almost 20000 members . they are potential soldiers to help us get the word out on myspace alone. could this become a project or what people. do you care enough about your freedoms, or would you rather die for them in 20 years. peace



[edit on 1-1-2007 by intrepid]



posted on Dec, 29 2006 @ 03:54 AM
link   
Hey all - I have an Update for you! For all of those out there that still don't believe that the U.S. is actually ALREADY a Fascist Police State (someone on ATS stated that I was over-reacting in regards to this issue) - well then Feast your eyes on THIS:

www.buzzlife.com...

Make sure that you read that CAREFULLY!

Hey cool - wikipedia has VIDEO Clips:

en.wikinews.org...

More Video:

www.drugpolicy.org...


So Mr. Bush - were is this "Freedom" that you speak of so much? Is it not a Fundamental Right for us to be able to "Assemble Peacefully" in this Country? Does the Government feel that they have the Power to Beat Up people gathered at a Peaceful & LEGAL Event (& Shut it Down)? Why - I guess they didn't like the Music?!


I am sorry but this is UNACCEPTABLE!


P.S. You know that little fantasy I had in a previous post about a Political Ad in which a Republican Pol calls a Democratic Pol "Pro-Terrorism" - well guess what I was watching plenty of TV during the final Run Up to the 2006 Election & YEP - my fantasy became REALITY! A DISGUSTING Political Commercial - just like the one that I envisioned - was actually Created & Aired!!! I am so GLAD that the Republicans got their Rear Ends handed to them in the 2006 Election!


[edit on 29-12-2006 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 29-12-2006 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 29-12-2006 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 29-12-2006 by Seraphim_Serpente]



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Still no response/comments? Well I have MORE for you:

everything2.com...

"The Soldiers (Swat Police) proceeded to attack anyone with Cameras or Camcorders, obviously wanting to restrict the film getting out. This was not a legal attack, it was a ***Blatant Violation of our Constitutional Rights as American Citizens***. That is why "they" (the Swat Police, National Guard & the politicians who authorized this attack) were removing Potential Evidence. We were treated as TERRORISTS!" -attendee


[edit on 30-12-2006 by Seraphim_Serpente]



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23
we need more cops and less guns in the hands of the people. imagine if we had a camera on every corner and every alley in american cities . it would be a great deterent. if the goverment could wire tap everyone we would have less crime. jsut build more prisons. its cheaper then wellfare. crime in america is on the rise. remember us americans want saftey more then education and a clean planet. we need a bigger brother watching us.


More cops are fine ... especially out here in the West where we typically have much smaller police forces per capita than our back east counterparts. I have no issue with the current gun laws and they should be left as is. People should have the right to have guns in their homes, since there is no legal guarantee of police protection in any emergency. If someone is breaking into my house while I'm home then I'd like the opportunity to protect myself.

Go ahead and place a camera at every street corner in the city ... who in the world is going to effectively monitor all those cameras?? I have no qualms about being recorded while walking around in public.

As far as the wiretaps go that would be an obvious constitutional problem .. that's why the Bush administration had so much egg on their face when it came out before that they were doing wiretaps san search warrants.

And yes we do need more prisons. When our prisons are so crowded that someone who has stabbed another person does about a year before getting out on parole ... then there is a problem. If we can't rehabilitate the criminals than I would rather they be locked away for reasonable amounts of time.

Educations is important, right up there with safety and both of those are before a "clean" planet. What's the point of saving the ice caps if I get shot in the back during a robbery? What's the point of stopping global warming if our children can't do basic math?



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 10:58 PM
link   
I vote yes to a Police State.

I dont mind they need to issue moving violations to fund the damn thing.

I most times have to just talk to em for a few minutes and they dont write me up.

Its all you guys out there that will pay for it.

When they need to have curfew it will be all of YOU that has to stay home.

Not me.

So what the hell, I vote YES! Gimme a Police State.

:shk:



posted on Dec, 30 2006 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by elitegamer23
considering the uk has stopped four terrorist attacks since 7/7 they must know what they are doing. Its no secret that big brother is more attentive in the uk , and they more closely resemble a police state. so i now ask, would it be better for the usa to move towards more control by our goverment and the law. maybe a patriot act 3.[edit on 13-8-2006 by elitegamer23]

.
I see your point, but I feel compelled to clarify that there is no Patriot Act II, therefore, your referernce to PA III is inapplicable



posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 01:56 PM
link   


there is no Patriot Act II


No - but there is something just as bad (you honestly didn't expect the Republicans to use the same "Patriot" Language - did you?)! Its called the "Military Commissions Act of 2006". It was passed by the Congress & Bush just signed it into Law. Here it is:

en.wikipedia.org...

www.msnbc.msn.com...

I know - here is a GREAT IDEA! Lets Suspend "Habeas Corpus" & hold "Suspected Terrorists" *INDEFINITELY* without a right to Trial. Foreign National or Domestic Citizen - ah who cares, its a blurry line anyway. Lets just declare Marshall Law when ever we feel like. Whats next - lets use the Military inside of our own country (got to stop those pesky kids from listening to their Music & Dancing at their Parties somehow)? That would be the suspension of "Posse Comitatus Act" BTW.

en.wikipedia.org...

That is probably next. As a matter of fact many are pushing for it (looking for loopholes) & advocate it:

www.worldnetdaily.com...

I find this very disturbing my friends. This is really happening! We better Wake Up before it is too late!



posted on Dec, 31 2006 @ 03:21 PM
link   
LoneGunMan: your a lovely individual. But what you are obviously not is an american. You want a police state, something that goes against what every human want, liberty, freedom of expression and thought, and noone to tell them what they can do or not.

Edit: Removed direct insults for which the warning was given.

[edit on 1-1-2007 by intrepid]



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente


there is no Patriot Act II


No - but there is something just as bad (you honestly didn't expect the Republicans to use the same "Patriot" Language - did you?)! Its called the "Military Commissions Act of 2006". It was passed by the Congress & Bush just signed it into Law. Here it is:


The Military Commissions Act bears absoultely no resemblance to PA II which was draft legislation.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:31 AM
link   

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
First, I'm not in favor of a police state.

There are a number of laws that are common other countries, that I wonder how Americans would feel about them. . . .


-when you turn 18, you either go into the military for two years, or you join the police auxiliary. You assist the police in crowd control, traffic tickets, ID checkpoints etc. (Germany, Switzerland, a number of other nations have a set-up like this)

-you're allowed to own any firearms you can legally buy; but you have to let the govt have a spent round they've fired through your gun. That way, when a bullet is found at a crime scene, the police can narrow down the search quickly. (proposed legislation in NY)

-when you move into a house or apartment, you must inform the local chief of police. (many european states have this.)

-outside your home, you are expected to have national ID with you. When you get a hotel room, you have to provide positive ID.

-to enter the downtown, you have to show ID. Common in Israel, as well as many Arab countries. Designed to reduce terrorism.

-random highway checkpoints. (practically every nation on earth EXCEPT the USA has some form of this)


What about those? Are there some that could be instituted, without precipitating a "police state?" Would any of them be worth the effort???

all the best.
.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft

First, I'm not in favor of a police state.

There are a number of laws that are common other countries, that I wonder how Americans would feel about them. . . .


-when you turn 18, you either go into the military for two years, or you join the police auxiliary. You assist the police in crowd control, traffic tickets, ID checkpoints etc. (Germany, Switzerland, a number of other nations have a set-up like this)

-you're allowed to own any firearms you can legally buy; but you have to let the govt have a spent round they've fired through your gun. That way, when a bullet is found at a crime scene, the police can narrow down the search quickly. (proposed legislation in NY)

-when you move into a house or apartment, you must inform the local chief of police. (many european states have this.)

-outside your home, you are expected to have national ID with you. When you get a hotel room, you have to provide positive ID.

-to enter the downtown, you have to show ID. Common in Israel, as well as many Arab countries. Designed to reduce terrorism.

-random highway checkpoints. (practically every nation on earth EXCEPT the USA has some form of this)


What about those? Are there some that could be instituted, without precipitating a "police state?" Would any of them be worth the effort???

all the best.
.


Those really don't sound bad. But what I don’t want is tyrants running America. I agree with a lot of the laws you have posted, but I will not hand over liberty for a little bit of comfort. Look at the back of the 1940's and up dime. Notice something familiar? Why its symbols from Mussolini’s fascist police state. So which is it fellow Americans....liberty and freedom or security? The NWO is coming and bush senior said it will COME if its not already here.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SmallMindsBigIdeas

And yes we do need more prisons. When our prisons are so crowded that someone who has stabbed another person does about a year before getting out on parole ... then there is a problem. If we can't rehabilitate the criminals than I would rather they be locked away for reasonable amounts of time.



You need to think of the big picture. Your entire post was like this
little snipets from the mosaic without ever seeing the picture.

I will uese the above snipet as an example.

We have more of our people in prison than any country in history. Period.

This is a free nation? Do you know what is clogging the prisons?

Prohibition, it never works and it only feeds big governement. We dont need
bigger prisons. We need less laws. We are some of the best people in the
world, we dont need all these prisons.

We need to get rid of "The War On Drugs"


Have you ever heard of Leap? Its Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. Here
is a link. LEAP

Expand your scope of understanding.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 04:37 PM
link   
If you want to stop crime, do not get rid of laws, get more laws but not the beurocratic kind like we have now:
1. Go after gangs they are a root
2. Get people homes, homeless people steal to live
3. Get the poor the food they need and treat them like humans not animals, treat a person like an animal they will ACT like an animal to surive.
4. If they are jailed for life throw them on a deserted island in the pacific and let NOTHING near the place unless it is to drop off others. Cut back on prison costs.
5. Get tough on law like Japan, but once out treat them like humans not criminals, give them a second chance and offer them a future. Currently they serve time and are then thrown back on the streets, no future, no one wants to hire a person convicted of a crime, change that and you change them.
6. Provide real jobs for people, Mc Donalds does not cut it anymore. Outsourcing wiped out a good junk of jobs for the nation, not everyone can get a "high paying job" like the elite would want you to believe. There is a large hunk of the population that will never want those jobs to begin with, variety is the fruit of life, stop forcing people to either go for being rich or die broken and homeless. That negates what the USA stands for.



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:12 PM
link   


The Military Commissions Act bears absolutely no resemblance to PA II which was draft legislation.


OK - In Patriot Act "I" - the thing that offends me the most is the fact that the Federal Government (or any manner of Police) can now search your Private Residence merely on "Suspicion" & WITHOUT a Search Warrant to boot!

Here is the Forth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (just incase you forgot):

"***The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.***"

So what is so bad about the "Military Commissions Act"? They have Suspended "HABEAS CORPUS"! Do you realize what this means? The Government has to merely "Suspect" that you are a "Terrorist" or involved with "Terrorist Activities" & they can throw you in Prison FOREVER - *Without giving you a Trial*! It doesn't even matter if you are an U.S. Citizen! That is the very DEFINITION of Fascism my friend!


Now here the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (again - just in case you forgot):

"No person shall be held to answer for a Capital, or otherwise infamous crime, ***unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury***... nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, ***nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law***; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."

I am not too familiar with the "Patriot Act II" because I know that was a Speculative Draft Legislation that was not put up for a Vote in the Congress.



[edit on 2-1-2007 by Seraphim_Serpente]



posted on Jan, 2 2007 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente


The Military Commissions Act bears absolutely no resemblance to PA II which was draft legislation.


OK - In Patriot Act "I" - the thing that offends me the most is the fact that the Federal Government (or any manner of Police) can now search your Private Residence merely on "Suspicion" & WITHOUT a Search Warrant to boot!


So what is so bad about the "Military Commissions Act"? They have Suspended "HABEAS CORPUS"! Do you realize what this means? ! It doesn't even matter if you are an U.S. Citizen! That is the very DEFINITION of Fascism my friend!


First..I'm dubious regarding your reference to me as "friend".

Second...you are incorrect in saying:


The Government has to merely "Suspect" that you are a "Terrorist" or involved with "Terrorist Activities" & they can throw you in Prison FOREVER - *Without giving you a Trial*


The gov't must suspect you of these things....AND..... the suspect must be an ALIEN unlawful enemy combatant.

The Act does NOT apply to US Citizens, It does not apply to lawful enemy combatants (i.e soldiers of other governments) it applies to non-US citizens who are not associated with any foreign army, that are suspected of conspiring to commit acts of terror intended to harm US Citizens or US national interests.

This is very simple.



posted on Jan, 3 2007 @ 09:35 PM
link   


the suspect must be an ALIEN unlawful enemy combatant.

The Act does NOT apply to US Citizens... it applies to non-US citizens


Oh Yeah - well then PROVE it. Has it occurred to you that even an U.S. Citizen could (and HAS already been BTW) be declared an "Unlawful Enemy Combatant"? Look up the Definition of "Unlawful Enemy Combatant" as it appears in the Military Commissions Act itself - here it is:

"The term "unlawful enemy combatant" means: (i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or (ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."

Notice that it says a "PERSON" & not an Alien!

Here are some links to back me up.

Link Quote: "Empowers Bush to declare not just aliens, but also U.S. citizens, "unlawful enemy combatants":

www.legalnews.tv...

www.thenewamerican.com...


Oh yeah - if you are correct then please explain the case of Jose Padilla to us. Don't get me wrong Jose Padilla is def a bad guy - but that does not negate the fact that he is STILL an U.S. Citizen - NOT an Alien!

www.washingtonpost.com...

en.wikipedia.org...é_Padilla_%28alleged_terrorist%29

[edit on 3-1-2007 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 3-1-2007 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 3-1-2007 by Seraphim_Serpente]



posted on Jan, 4 2007 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente

Oh Yeah - well then PROVE it.

SS, The topic of the Military Commisons Act has been debated at length.

This Link takes you to a thread that inlcludes links to the "Act" You can read for yourself in the applicability clause that the entire act applies ONLY to alien unlawful enemy combatants. I made numerous posts to this thread that address all the points you raise.




Has it occurred to you that even an U.S. Citizen could (and HAS already been BTW) be declared an "Unlawful Enemy Combatant"? Look up the Definition of "Unlawful Enemy Combatant" as it appears in the Military Commissions Act itself - here it is:

"The term "unlawful enemy combatant" means: (i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al-Qaeda, or associated forces); or (ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the president or the secretary of defense."

Notice that it says a "PERSON" & not an Alien!


Yes, but before it defines an unlawful enemy combatant, it defines an alien, and before that, it states that the act applies only to alien unlawful enemy combatants.


Oh yeah - if you are correct then please explain the case of Jose Padilla to us. Don't get me wrong Jose Padilla is def a bad guy - but that does not negate the fact that he is STILL an U.S. Citizen - NOT an Alien!


The MCA was drafted and passed as law by both houses of congress after the Supreme Court ordered Rumsfeld to charge or release Padilla. The MCA was a direct response to Padilla's and Massoui's cases. Also I believe both of these men are naturalized citizens. Naturalized citizens can have their citizenship revoked for many reasons. native born US citizens can NEVER have their citizenship revoked.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join