First things first, this is not a religious debate. It doesn't matter, for the purposes of this thread, why people do or don't believe in biblical prophecy. We have a place for such discussions, and this isn't it.

There is also no need for hostility. We don't need to be posting in all caps, we the word "moron" does not have to be flying around, etc etc.

I implore you, don't waste your time creating the kind of post that will have to be deleted.
Now on to the topic.


If I've said it once, I must have said it a thousand times, the law is on our side.

Tyranny22
Congress would likely not be allowed to overturn an executive order under normal circumstances, as a matter of separation of powers, however that is balanced by the fact that the president has no constitutional authority to do anything but carry out the law, therefore if an executive order violates or ignores the law or the constitution, then that order isn't worth the paper its printed on.

It all comes down to which side is obeyed by the men with the guns- the military, federal agencies, state agencies, national guards, militias, local law enforcement, etc. Will men who have sworn themselves to the defense of our constitution follow Bush, or will they follow the overwhelming will of the people, the congress, and the SCOTUS? I'd say we've got a pretty fair shot at winning that one.

DGTempe
Bush dictatorship? Surely you jest. Bush putsch maybe (and you KNOW that will be the name they give it in the history books- it just clicks- it has the sound of immaturity and hopelessness to it), but it would explode in his face and he'd never consolidate enough power to be considered a proper dictator. He'd be up against a very large, very angry population with an understrength, undercommitted military, and almost no national infrastructure that isn't ultimately controlled by the people he would be trying to oppress. Fuggetaboudit.

Alpha Grey
Crazy as Bush might be, he doesn't have the luxury of disobeying orders. He's small potatoes, and the people who pull his strings are more calculating. They'd kill him in a heartbeat if he got it in his head that he was really in control.

Frankly I'm not sure they really intend to install a dictatorship under Bush- it's too simple, too obvious, and way too risky. Other possibilities could be to use him to trigger a civil war, use him as a "Hitler" to make us change our ways much as Germany has- to get the nationalist and militarist tendencies out of us, or perhaps put him up as a dictator with the intention of letting him fail- just to create the excuse for the international community to come to our aid, and voila, UN or NATO troops in our country, responsible for our reconstruction?

I'm just someone on the outside lookin in, and it seems that with the present administration there aren't any checks and balances. They are just steamrolling over congress and it looks like anyone in a position to stop them is already in their pocket. (scary)

With the amount of guns in public possession i would rule out a quick martial law crack down. That would be a bad risk on the present administrations part. Even if they tried to lay the groundwork by stemming the flow of personal firearms they would still be out-gunned with what is in public hands now.

"You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hand" lol

(Not sure if that's the exact quote but i wonder how many hands that would be if they tried) lol

I don't really see trying to remain in office as something Bush or any other President would attempt. If this NWO is for real, they have to much invested to risk bringing the whole thing down around their heads just to keep one person in a particular office. I would think they would instead find a way to insure the next election went in their favor. Or even more likely, they would make sure all viable candidates were on board. In deference to Revelmonk, Lightseeker and Justin Oldhams contribution here and on other threads, I think this is a far more likely scenario. Democrats and Republicans keep arguing instead of paying attention and they get what they desire no matter which one wins.

If there were a way to find out who IS allowed to see this information, that might be a way to see which people on both sides of the aisle are in the Inner Circle of Government? I have serious doubts that which Party they belong to has ever meant anything. I don't think people who could pull this off would align with people that foolish.

I personally don't think any Conspiracies involving more than a handful of individuals and families could succeed anyway. The Human Animal is far to selfish for a multi-generational plan to succeed. At least some of those involved would spill the beans on a regular basis. I think the argument that a secret of this magnitude could not be kept is a valid argument.





[edit on 7/25/2007 by Blaine91555]

Originally posted by Unit541

...anyone who thinks the "hard times" began with G.W. Bush,

Our problems began before GW Bush took office. I think the current political climate, the lack of concern for everyday people, the corruption, the lobbyists, took root way before the 2000 (s)election.
I'm going to pick the 1992 (s)election, but only because that is the first (s)election where they were NO good candidates running for office.
It's been getting worse ever since.

I shudder to say this, but Michael Moore got this one right!
The gene pool is so diluted there are NO good options for national public office.

So, whatever evil you think Bush has planned, think about those behind the power, those pulling the strings. Think beyond Cheney.
And then think how THEY may be playing us and that we should NOT play into their hands.

Control basically fell into the hands of Bush (or whoever is controlling him) on September 11, 2001. The fear and patriotism that the attacks instilled created the perfect atmosphere that the government needed to pass the laws that would lay the ground for the coming revolution.

It was brilliant. First, the government plans and executes the destruction of the World Trade Center towers.

Mass groups of people tend to behave like sheep, and the gov't knew that these attacks would scare the people; make them feel vulnerable to attack from the Big Scary Terrorists hiding everywhere. The people would want to take drastic, immediate action. They would want to feel like something was being done to fix the problem; they would want to feel safe... and they would want revenge.

Up to the pedestal steps President George W. Bush, a decisive man of action. And he's willing to do whatever it takes to eradicate the terrorist threat.

It is only under conditions like these that he would have been able to pass the Patriot Act, eliminate habeas corpus, and grant himself the powers of a dictator during a national emergency. After all, on the surface it appears to be working directly towards the goal- the goal that they themselves created- of destroying all terrorists while, in actuality, every law passed can serve the alternative purpose of creating and eliminating internal threats to a military state. The Dictatorship order can create the martial rule, while the habeas corpus and patriot act orders can be used to maintain it and legally destroy a resistance movement.

The War on Terror has probably only gone on as long as it has because they couldn't justify laws like this in a time of peace, 6 years after the WTC attacks. Doesn't it seem strange that although we've had the world's most powerful and advanced military combing a relatively small area for 6 years we've never even been close to capturing Bin Laden? If the man is even still alive, I have to believe it's possible that the CIA knows where he is, but is running the investigation in circles so that all the things they've been using the War on Terror for can come to pass.

I think we may be able to expect some sort of drastic change in the War on Terror when everything is in place, because they may no longer need it.

Originally posted by Horusnow
by Medadeth

So chew on that for awhile and feel free to bitch and moan about it. It is healthy for us to discuss these thinks and yes even complain. Its better than denying ignorance. So i would ask again to HORUSNOW, what is it you think we conplainers should do about it? I would love to here your plan.

You know I can't tell you that in this public place since it's swarming with gov.officials

Did you mean, by Megadeth?
I never said this, I do not get it.

It seems from that warning posted by the moderator that I will be censored and by post deleted if I bring the truth to this thread anymore.
I guess I should expect nothing less. I just wanted to defend myself from that odd post that looks to put words in my mouth.

With topics like this becoming more and more common on alternative sites such as ATS and less common from traditional news outlets, things seem to be heating up. I think anyone can see that a major event, or series of events, is heading our way.

How exciting!

Cant wait to see what happens. Will we stand up to "the man" or will we, in spite of our protests here, just sit back and adjust? Are we like frogs in the pot of boiling water who know they are in the pot? Will enough of us jump out, or will a few scattered incidents provide enough fear for us to stay calm?

I do have a prediction. I predict that Americans will, in general, just take it and I will either be dead or very hungry and lonely sometime within the next 10 years.


[edit on 25-7-2007 by cavscout]

Originally posted by tyranny22
I have this feeling of underlying dread. I'm constatly checking the news to see if today is the day that Bush will wrap his blood soaked hands around the neck of America. When the steam pipe ripped through the city streets last week the only thing I could think is, "Is this it? Is this the event that will crush our remaining freedom?"

It's a large concern for me. Is there anything that Congress can do to counter-act this threat to America before it becomes a reality? Can congress revoke a Presidential Order? Or at least put limitations on the Order? Sure, our troops are over seas "protecting our freedom" from those who "hate" it, but who's to protect us here in the states?

I am worried that you are losing a significant amount of sleep/sanity over this. It isn't going to happen (martial law.) It will never, ever happen. And the other thing that you should keep in mind is that Bush isn't really competent enough to enact nefarious plans against the American people. He just isn't that smart. Most people who believe in conspiracy theories ascribe almost infinite amounts of ability, intelligence and competence to a few individuals. Nobody has that much central authority and enough wherewithal to orchestrate plans like this. So please, please rest and regain some sense of sanity because you are going to be okay. And I don't mean that in a patronizing way.

Originally by Megadeth

Did you mean, by Megadeth?

Whoops, I meant 'rus1969'. Sorry



EDIT: typo

[edit on 26-7-2007 by Horusnow]

Originally posted by observe50
Let's face it we all know what needs to be done, who's going to be the hero. Thought so

i think we all need to get a pair like the boy's from the oldsko0l!


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.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--The Declaration of Independence

Could martial law be enforced in America if the force that enslaves us comes from somewhere else?
The President and administration would need to be working with this force, and I do not see that being such a far stretch.
The fact is that for over the past 50 or so years, Americans have reported alien abductions to which sexual acts are done to them, resulting in hybrid children. Daniel told King Nebuchadnezzar the explanation of a dream the King had, in which he saw a figure made of different elements that represented the kingdoms of the earth.
The final kingdom of earth was described as follows:

And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with THE SEED OF MEN: but they SHALL NOT CLEAVE one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.

"They" shall mingle themselves with the seed of man?

This might seem off topic but listen, can anyone explain why aliens have been doing what they have been doing? I will attempt to, and it will explain Martial Law in America and how the NWO will take over.
Aliens are fallen angels, who cant live on the earth and survive here. But, hybrid combinations can and these hybrids also have no human soul. Therefore these hybrids have nobody to answer to in death, have no conscience and no remorse.
These hybrids would be a part of humanity, a part of our mothers and sisters, fathers and brothers. We would still be betrayed by our own.

I don't think we need to worry about the US Military forcing Martial law upon us, but it will still come from our corrupt administration.

Originally posted by Unit541
Any statement to the effect that those that voted for Bush are responsible for the current state of affairs sets a new bar for the Most Ignorant Post award.

Oh please....so who is responsible for the state of affairs for the US ?? if no one voted for the boob then we would be in far better shape then we are now......hence the ones who voted for him ARE and WILL be responsible for putting him in office. Clinton is NOT responsible for Iraq in any way so who is ?? BUSH and his henchmen are !!

The People ARE responsible for who they vote for ! you saying that my post sets some mythical bar for the most ignorant post shows your own ignorance....the voters are the ones who put him there.....maybe you voted for him and now fell ashamed and defensive about it ???

Alpha Grey, how do you explain Bush losing the popular vote and still winning the election then? This is NOT a democracy in the sense the the President is the one with the most votes. The president is elected by the Electoral College, not the people.

Originally posted by The Vagabond




DGTempe
Bush dictatorship? Surely you jest. Bush putsch maybe (and you KNOW that will be the name they give it in the history books- it just clicks- it has the sound of immaturity and hopelessness to it), but it would explode in his face and he'd never consolidate enough power to be considered a proper dictator. He'd be up against a very large, very angry population with an understrength, undercommitted military, and almost no national infrastructure that isn't ultimately controlled by the people he would be trying to oppress. Fuggetaboudit.

Well, i value your opinion and i know you're a very intelligent poster-but- you really dont think if there's Marshall law, police state, whatever that they could not subdue the public and do whatever they want up to and including a dictatorship? Look what's transpired already and nobody has done a darned thing about it. All we get are empty promises from the Democrats, and that Pelosi promising no impeachment and still promising it even after a Martial Law plan that they cant see???
I personally dont think its out of the question for Bush to force himself on us in the event of another "emergency".
Anyway, i certainly hope you're right and i'm wrong.

...
And what do you think "us people" should do. You say we should do something about it but you offer nothing except complaints about the people posting here. So you are here on this site just like us. What are you doing about it? The fact is there is nothing we the people can do about it. And the person who said that it is not the people who voted for bush's fault, I beg to differ. They should have done there homework on the bush clan.They voted for a C.I.A president and halliburton ( cheney) vice president. Here is something for all to read on our friend Cheney.
...

I believe I agree with the original poster that you have taken umbrage with. It is ok, I guess, to have an emotional ire that really requires no action. It's ok, I guess, to sit safely behind a keyboard and vomit forth vitriole, and pander to fear "And what do you think "us people" should do."

You know the answer... Y0u didn't even pose it as a question. The real question is, "Do you have enough balls to get out and do something other than rhale and whine about the governement"? I suspect, and it feels like you and others who post in the same vein want to be merely remembered for being "correct" and not "corrective". Kind of like Chicken Little.

Whose your senator, your congressman, your mayor, your county, city and state reps? If you feel as you claim to and aren't in constant communication with them, and trying to direct their efforts, then YOU are the problem... Not some lame duck yo-yo like the President. Not even Cheney! But YOU

I think that if the Founding Fathers had taken the same, lame, attitude that you have, that very little would have occurred that made the USA a reality. We'd all still be drinking tea, and eating Welsh Rarebits.

All the poster was saying was, make a decision to take an action and quit mentally masturbating in public. It does no one any good, and can be seen to be a bit pornographic, and just slightly disgusting.

`````````````````
fixed quote


[edit on 29/7/07 by masqua]

Bush Paves Way for Martial Law

“Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single leader—a dictator—willing to use those dreaded 'extraordinary measures,' which few know how, or are willing, to employ."

Michael Ledeen : White House advisor and fellow of the American Enterprise Institute.

In October 2006, Bush signed into law the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Quietly slipped into the law at the last minute, at the request of the Bush administration, were sections changing important legal principles, dating back 200 years, which limit the U.S. government’s ability to use the military to intervene in domestic affairs. These changes would allow Bush, whenever he thinks it necessary, to institute martial law—under which the military takes direct control over civilian administration.

Plans for massive detention centers are already being prepared. Pacific News Service reported that in early 2006, Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR) received a $85 Billion contract from the Department of Homeland Security to build detention and processing facilities to be used for anyone who does not agree with Bush's vision of a Gestapoland"

Welcome to the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave.

Originally posted by Alpha Grey


Oh please....so who is responsible for the state of affairs for the US ?? if no one voted for the boob then we would be in far better shape then we are now......hence the ones who voted for him ARE and WILL be responsible for putting him in office. Clinton is NOT responsible for Iraq in any way so who is ?? BUSH and his henchmen are !!

The People ARE responsible for who they vote for ! you saying that my post sets some mythical bar for the most ignorant post shows your own ignorance....the voters are the ones who put him there.....maybe you voted for him and now fell ashamed and defensive about it ???

I must agree with you since the PEOPLE put him in office- unless he stole the presidency, which btw, makes Republicans real mad. If he didnt steal the presidency, HE WAS VOTED IN.

Thank goodness i have nothing to regret, since i knew he was a loser and we were s@#$% the first day he and his cohort were in office.

Its certainly NOT my fault- AND ITS NOT CLINTONS EITHER

Some of you crack me up.

DG, thanks for the compliment. I enjoy your posts quite a bit as well.

The reason that current apathy towards Bush's assaults on the constitution don't trouble me is because I believe the offenses so far have been too abstract for the average American to get worked up about.

Most of us have not lost anything that we're used to having in a noticeable way. We've lost some right to privacy, but we don't even know if our stuff in particular is being read/tapped. We've lost some legal recourse that at present we don't need to use and thus don't fully realize to be gone.

That would change if Bush attempted to remain in office, if he sent federal agents to get our guns, if he shut down a major news outlet that wasn't dancing to his tune, if he threw friends and neighbors of ours into a prison camp without habeus corpus just for a peaceful protest, or did some other serious martial-law sort of move.

We all expect it to be over soon, so why fight? But if when he crosses the big line, a lot of people will be willing to fight. I grant you that we will be very sorry that we allowed the earlier offenses, which will strengthen his position considerably compared to what it would have been in 2000, but never the less we will be able to win.

I distinctly remember raising my right hand and taking an oath which began, "I (Joe Bullet-sponge), do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."

I do not consider that oath a justification to resort to violence whenever there is a political mess. But when the constitution goes from being violated to being placed in jeopardy, that's another matter. I think that same question confronts every member of the military, and that many of them would eventually choose the constitution over the president when it goes from violation to suspension of the constitution.

I'm not going to talk tough- yeah, I have a good idea of what would need to be done to weaken federal power in my area, but this is the internet and everybody's a hero here until push comes to shove. I'm just gonna say that it doesn't take a lot of resources or imagination to set fire to a building, shoot at someone, etc, and I think a large number of people would have the means and the willpower to resist, and most of them would probably draw the line at pretty much the same point.

I'd be very surprised if America went quietly in the event of suspended elections and other more tangible denials of constitutional rights.

Originally posted by Megadeth
Book of St. Luke
21:12

But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name's sake.

21:16


And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.

If the military was used to enforce martial law on American citizens, would people not be betrayed by their own? I believe Jesus told us of these days and it looks like the things he described are coming true.

A christian into Megadeath? Interesting. Ermmm...nope - actually all the quotes you refer to in the bible were re: the current political mileu of the time: ie. ancient Israel, and have nothing to do with modern history. They also came to pass as well: as Israel was indeed destroyed by the Roman army after a botched Jewish uprising. Nice try though

J.