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.

 

US Troops deployed to Washington D.C.

page: 4
59
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Wow Skeptic OverLord I had not read your post before making mine above. I appreciate the kudos from you ! It is a bit scary for you to come out and speak like this in light of all of the recent confusion surrounding your above mentioned scenarios. I especially resonated with "Deny Manipulation!" I would love to see you start your own thread with some of these similarities in mind. You know, I am as prepared as can be, but what would devastate me if and when the bleep hits the fan, is losing the ATS information network and most of the truth seekers of like mind I have connected with. Hearty post thank you for your opinions. P.S. Can you imagine ATS underground on Ham Radio?




posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   
While I don't disagree that there is a certain, unnerving feeling in the air, it seems to me that many here are graping at anything even resembling a straw.

I should also state that I am new to this Forum and have been pleasantly surprised by the intelligence of the posting population here. I find many thought provoking posts and I hope to continue doing so. It's just that too many are looking for and finding boogey men behind every door.

Now, to get on topic, it seems to me that it has been established that this story reports what is essentially a troop rotation. Why on Earth would that alarm anyone or cause them to believe it is a precursor to an attack and or the imposition of martial law in our country????



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   
Has anyone thought about the 2005 North American Union Agreement that Bush Signed back in 2005?

Lou Dobbs also covered this topic and was the only one who did.

Basically, if you can picture Mexico, US and Canada on a map and erase all the borders. Meaning, we have basically merged as one. It's a hot topic that the news did not pick up on for obvious reasons.

Basically, I heard the plan is to due away with the American Currency and introduce the "Amero" like the Euro.

So I would guess that another attack would occur that changes policy or our rights once again. Or maybe the stock market will crash and people who have money deposited in there bank accounts will not longer be able to with draw. This will draw an angry mob of people to storm the steps of Capital Hill or the White house.

Which is just one guess I have about needing troops there.

Anytime there is a catastrophic disaster or an attack on our country, the current administration seems to take advantage of it and changes policy to benefit them. Then we have the need to go to war and the Central Bank or the Federal Reserve lends more money to the government at interest to fight more wars. So basically, the bankers gets richer. Just picture the bankers like the man behind the curtain pulling all the strings.

So this war on terror is basically just like the war on drugs.

It will never end.

If you have the patience to watch a movie that can explain it all. Go here and stomach the awful truth. There is even a part in there with a Aaron Russo explaining his conversation with one of the Rockefeller's that was exposed. If you're a bible thumper, then I advise not to watch as I would not want this not to offend you.

Source



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 07:55 PM
link   
The speculation in this thread is spinning wildly out of control,.... I like it
it's how problems are solved.

I'll add to the speculation and say that I think that the troops will help protect Bush and company when the recession/depression becomes so sevier that people will look to storm the US capital, perhaps a foreign government looking to take advantage of the US weakend condition, and attack!

Okay, I'm through speculating. I dont really know why those troops are needed there.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11 11
I think this move indicates that the government has successfully installed FEAR into you.


Interesting, fear has proven to offer this administration better approval ratings, and gain more support for the military actions it controls. Maybe you are right.


Since we are speculating, think about this... If you were Bush, just for a moment, and thought about the hatred the WORLD has for you, maybe in the paranoid moments that followed you would order in extra defense measures as well.

Then again, if you were going to stomp on Iran, and were not totally sure of their capabilities to strike back, these would also seem like prudent measures.

Wait and see, all we (the people) can do!



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

Then again, if you were going to stomp on Iran, and were not totally sure of their capabilities to strike back, these would also seem like prudent measures.


Exactly, what we need to do is check what else has been moving around in mayor cities, at least if some security has been boosted lately.

Because if this administration is planning on attacking Iran it will have to secure itself and key cities around, not necessarily having the rest of the population at hart.


Time will tell if its just the feelings of conspirators paranoid Americans or is a real something cooking as we write in this board.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Yeah I have a gut feeling too about this, seems like they(Bush and puppet masters) made a plan to be put in action soon and the ones that didn't want to get involved resigned as we are seeing lately.

It all seems to connect to something that is going to happen but I have no clue or sense, it doesn't feel like war to me that is going to happen though..yet at least, kind of feel like it might be another 9/11 type event; that could possibly lead us to war? and everything we've been talking about for a long time..nwo, etc..



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by UM_Gazz
 


I don't usually think of John Titor, but something in this thread brought him to mind.

From the Titor files: after the US Civil War on his worldline (taking place at the present moment in our world timeline), they changed the Constitution to create a Presidency of 5 regional presidents so no one President would arrogate to himself the powers that led to the Civil War in his world.

Watching Bush write incredible Executive Orders and moving troops hither and thither and laughing at those who protested the SPP meeting in Montebello, Quebec, I have come to the conclusion that even if John Titor was a fake and a hoakster, the idea of a 5 person Presidency over 1 President makes an enormous amount of sense and provides for the continuity of government in an open and above board fashion.

(Is everyone ready for Montreal to be the capital city of the new Union of North America (UNA)?)



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pellevoisin

(Is everyone ready for Montreal to be the capital city of the new Union of North America (UNA)?)



Yeah I'm ready to see our new capitol city since I never like seeing Washington D.C. as our capitol since its originally a swamp.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
P.S. Can you imagine ATS underground on Ham Radio?


It's funny you would say that... I was a rather active "ham" back in the day. A great deal was learned about what was going on in the Soviet Block from other hams over there. There were also a lot of South American hams talking about the US "operations" using secret troops. Some areas of the 40-meter band was reserved for regular updates from three or four english-speaking hams in Nicaragua -- which turned out to be everything Olie North was doing and Regan didn't recall.


-.. . -. -.-- .. -.- -. --- .-. .- -. .



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by uberarcanist
I think we need to also bear in mind that Bush's term is almost up, he may be setting the stage for a justification to claim "emergency powers" and serve beyond his term.


Thinking about that, you may be right. I know they want to stay in power, but they're not showing any sign of worry that the Dems may win. I wonder what's up with that?

Let's hope that's not their plan, though.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 09:40 PM
link   
not to discourage thinking outside the box by any means, but i do have to ask a question of all those who feel a police state is imminant,

do you guys really think that everyone in the US mililtary is a mindless automotan? cuz they (we? i was in 12 years...) are sworn to protect the constitution and if its void so are their contracts. and with a decent size portion of our combat troops overseas that puts it in the hands of national guard troops and reserves, who are just avg joes like the rest of us.

do you think that the government and the military forgot about the 75 million or so registered firearms? if even 5% of those people stood and fought, it wouldnt turn out pretty for the new "dictator" at all.

not to mention, ive said this before, once we're all "slaves" who's going to buy the SUV's and Plasma TV's? the world economy goes to hell and our new dictator is the next little kim...who wants that?

for bush to SUCCESSFULLY take full control and KEEP IT....they would have to set up a situation where we WANT him to stay, nay...BEG HIM TO STAY, and with his current ratings, is that even possible?

The members of ATS are a representative slice of the american population. sure, we all have some pretty fringe ideas, many of us are considered whacko's, but surely we're not the ONLY americans (sorry, i am addressign this to the US members of ATS, no slight intended to the non US members here) that would have a problem with W just doing away with 200 years of US culture and tradition.

sorry, i just dont see the military backing him up on this, he tries to stay in power and not only will a large portion of the population "express thier displeasure" in him, with guns, but i think that the "rebellion" will suddenly have an influx of armored vehicles and heavy artillery when the milltary decides that this isnt what they signed up for either.

im not saying anyone here is wrong, im saying i HOPE you are...and i would love to be right on this one.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Interesting timing on this...

www.msnbc.msn.com...



We Are Going to Get Hit Again


The head of the National Counterterrorism Center speaks out on Al Qaeda's plans, America’s readiness—and the nature of the war on terror.

We have very strong indicators that Al Qaeda is planning to attack the West

Aug. 27, 2007 - Al Qaeda has an active plot to hit the West. The United States knows about it but doesn’t have enough tactical detail to issue a precise warning or raise the threat level, says Vice Admiral (ret.) John Scott Redd, who heads the government’s National Counterterrorism Center. In an interview at his headquarters near Washington, D.C., Redd told Newsweek’s Mark Hosenball and Jeffrey Bartholet that the country is better prepared than ever to counter such threats. But he also believes another successful terror attack on the U.S. homeland is inevitable.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by esdad71
 


I live in the DC area and ill post any new things I see. I frequent the crystal city area and the city itslef so ill keep my eyes open.

I would like to think that this could be a proactive move but who knows.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Damocles
 


Dam a star buddy, Your post was right on IMO. I dont hold to the police state CT at all. And I hope those that do are wrong to but i dont see millions of us just rolling over on a dictatorship in any form. I do think some sort of world government would help in a lot of ways, but it would have to be agreed to by every nation and we are a long , long way from being that peaceful a species.

But Bush will go next nov and someone else will be up to the plate.

Take care



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Infoholic
Could someone with military background enlighten us all...

Since when is it legal to deploy military troops within the United States borders? Doesn't the Posse Comitatus Act forbid "police" duty for the troops within the US? This seems to be nothing more than police work for the troops.

However, H.R. 5122, Sec. 1076 allows the President to use military forces inside the U.S. upon major public emergencies... but I fail to see where the emergency is?

This bill was passed into law just last year, so I have a hard time buying the "this has gone on since 9/11" rebuttal.


Well, I like Vixen am a former military officer (although Vixen was one paygrade above me), and the PCA prohibits the military from assisting in or conducting domestic police or law enforcement operations. It does not prevent the military from defending the homeland against outside threats. It's really no different than a missile silo in Kansas, just smaller and more temporary. You may be thinking of EO 12333 which prohibits any intelligence agency from collecting information on US citizens inside the United States for any reason at any time. That falls within the JD of the FBI and no one else. If any MI activity is found operating inside the US it would immediately be a huge Congressional deal...but that was before 911 too. Rules have changed since then (warrantless wiretapping program anyone?)

Anyway, this is an interesting thread.

However, what concerns me about this is the timing of the news release. It has not been reported on about troop rotations in US NORTHCOM before. Previous information about troop rotations has not ended up here, or on prophecies, or oroborus or pipatalking or any of the other websites for the 1st Bn 322nd Tin Foil Hat Intelligence Group. Other things that have emerged this week are the 6.28 billion invested in a global stock market crash by Sept. 21st, the Federal Reserve Board of Governors meeting on Aug 31swt in the DoD/FEMA C.O.G. facility at Jackson Hole, WY (where they have never met before) and Chertoff's 'gut feeling,' coupled with the false flag terror wartning from Cynthia McKinney et al this afternoon. Lots of things are going on, and while this event is unremarkable when standing alone, when standing next to all these other events, it seems that the news release is geared to induce mild panic responses and higher anxiety.

Maybe something is going to happen, and this is the media's way of warning us, maybe something else. I don't know, the information is coming in almost too fast to effectively analyze by myself. I don't have a team of junior enlisted folks under me anymore to help me out on this, nor do I have access to any of the fun info stuff I did before, so my analytical capabilities are slower than normal to say the least.

But, as an answer to your question, no it has never been illegal for the military to set up air-defensr artillary in the US, we have had it since we have had airplanes in war (just post WW-1).



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Damocles
 


Thank you Damocles for your insightful post.

I think that a lot of people fall short of trusting the military, forgetting or not understanding that our first and foremost allegiance it to the Constitution and NOT to the preservation of the executive office.

The military is bound to follow orders, however when the orders contradict the founding principles of the U.S. Constitution, I have faith that most will make the right choice.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I live here in Maryland near Fort Detrick. My spouse works on the base and I drop her off every morning. I noticed recently that the soldiers based there have stepped up their training early in the morning. I'm used to seeing them in their running gear and doing early morning jogs. Recently they were in full battle gear, rifles and everything and they actually marched of base and began a slow run away from the base. This may not mean anything at all but then again it could be a sign.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   
high tech weapons, air defence

thats sounds like the new bradlys m2a3 and the m3a3 , plus I wouldn't doubt if the bring some of the new patriot missles systems. Both are known to the puplic but everything about them is classified. If you live in the DC area it wouldn't be hard to to miss neither if they are put on location. And if thats the case.. I hope your ready?!?!



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Lol i would not be worried about iran in any way, if they decided to mount a serious attack on the US they would be bombed back to the stone age and i do not think that would help there long term cause in anyway. You should be looking elsewhere, somewhere more close to home!



new topics

top topics



 
59
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join