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.

 

Homeland Security Update: Chertoff Says New Laws Needed

page: 4
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Purduegrad05
 


The incredibly ironic thing about it all is Chertoff is a dual citizen of the US and Israel. IE probably jewish. But, yet speaks like a nazi.

The republicans who used to be against more government are going balls to the walls for more government.

The democrats who used to be for more government are the ones that are saying "wait a minute".

I believe I have stepped into bizaro world.




posted on May, 7 2008 @ 08:00 AM
link   
It is "bizzaro" world or a grownup version of a game children like to play... "opposite day".

When Skeletor speaks people disappear!



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 08:18 AM
link   
I sent that article out to everyone in my addy book, as should everyone here -- and kick in the dual-citizen article from one of my posts here for added measure. Here are a couple of anonymous replies from friends/relatives...


fascism



This is by far the scariest thing you've sent thus far. Thank you... I think... lol

I've passed this along to others.


I think I finally even got my 70+ year old dad awake now too... it only took 6-7 F-bombs thrown on him about his election apathy, followed shortly by vids of Building 7 and articles like the above noted.

And response to skyshow -- please... there is no difference between these parties... maybe some issues here and there, but both are out to get our vote and then continue screwing us. It has been that way for years... maybe the Dems. are just a little nicer and sneakier about it... my suggestion...

THROW ALL THE BUMS OUT

1st off... EVERYONE must vote in November... 2ndly... for any position up for vote, if someone is availble who is not a D or R, vote for that person. If none are available, be sure to not vote for the incumbant. They may be able to rig some of the elections, but they can't fix 'em all. But vote. Don't go in with the attitude of "wasting a vote" or not voting for any because you can say later you aren't responsible for putting an idiot in office. If everyone who thought they were just "wasting a vote" voted, I'm guessing Ron Paul or someone else who may emerge
could actually win... not a wasted vote then, eh? (check Libertarians) www.lp.org...


[edit on 5/7/2008 by RabbitChaser]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 08:29 AM
link   
reply to post by skyshow
 


As Griff pointed out, please don't see this in lines of Democrat/Republican, it really is both. The two parties are nothing more than opposite sides of the same coin.

Really, if it was all the Republicans fault, then why on earth is it that our Democrat Congress is doing nothing to stop it? Why aren't they pulling all the stops in ending this? Because they know what their duty is, and it is not to the people of this country.

I'm not going to tell you to vote Libertarian, but please if you read up on this site about the terrible things both parties are a part of, you will see the need hopefully to vote anything but Rep/Dem.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 08:41 AM
link   
It's not right for America to be Israel's *snip*.



Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.
Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Sorry! I know that's a bad word but I couldn't think of an equally effective "straight" word. How about this: America should not be Israel's flunky. See? Not as effective.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 09:58 AM
link   
I think that what is vital to our survival (as free people) is to never allow the facts to be 're-framed' by media without acknowledgment.

The majority of people of this country live in a media-induced 'fog' of entertainment and disinformation. They are being conditioned to seek 'fulfillment' from voyeuristic ridicule. The outrageous is the norm, the 'extreme' is the focus. New such as the OP seems to be played as dry and mildly noteworthy (at least in my neck of the woods.)

What would be helpful is to influence our local papers and news stations to 'elevate' the dialog by making them believe that it would generate more business for them. Make them understand that it is their prerogative to decide whether their communities should 'participate' in the dialog regarding the evolution of our government under this brand of leadership. We KNOW that the consolidation of ownership of media will make this increasingly difficult. But consider, our local media has enjoyed relative editorial freedom for decades. They might not exactly resist 'pushing' their editorial 'policies' to a point where those who are actually members of their commercial support base locally, get to hear what THEY want to hear. Reinforce that with local advertisers 'nudging' and we could actually get people to hear 'real' news' with 'real' people and not the rehearsed and semi-scripted 'fox-oid' tactics we see almost everyday in virtually every major news venue.

The war has to be against the 'talking heads' now, because it is they who are diluting reality with their policy talk.

The reaction of any editorialist nowadays seems predictable; if the subject calls for a re-evaluation of the principles by which this nations expresses it 'identity.' there is only 'black and white' you are either with us or your against us mentality. Notice how popular something like 'hate' mongering talking heads has become. It seems the only people who get air time are the ones that exemplify 'no room for debate' attitudes. Sniping critics with personal attacks and simply 'cutting them off' if they make any reasoned headway against the hosts 'all or nothing' tirades.

Watch the ones who defend Chertoff in the upcoming weeks. Count how many times phrases are repeated - especially the ones geared towards safety and protection. It is they who are frightened, not of the terrorists, but of having to answer fro what they have done and are doing.

Life, liberty, pursuit of happiness..., why are these words anathema to them?



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   
In my opinion their is no way to stop this. It may take them 3 months or it may take them 3 years but the milk is spilt, the dirty deeds are done and the American goverment looks as if it has hijacked.

I for one have given up all hope. It will not matter who is elected they will get their way.

Even if Obama gets in I beleive he will simply be the next Jack Kennedy.

How in the hell did get this far out of control?



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by whiteraven
In my opinion their is no way to stop this. It may take them 3 months or it may take them 3 years but the milk is spilt, the dirty deeds are done and the American goverment looks as if it has hijacked.

I for one have given up all hope. It will not matter who is elected they will get their way.

Even if Obama gets in I beleive he will simply be the next Jack Kennedy.

How in the hell did get this far out of control?


I believe I understand your grief. But I will state one thing for the record, in defiance against all those mutton-heads out there who like to think that the American people are all fat, lazy, jack-tards who get what they deserve for their arrogant disregard and complacence. This statement is directly intended to answer your righteously indignant and justifiably exasperated question:




How in the hell did get this far out of control?


It didn't 'get' out of control. It was TAKEN out of our control. Outright STOLEN from us by people we were conditioned to trust. It was a grifter-like scam by an elite body of politically savvy operators who used the trust we placed in them to overthrow our government and installed a corporate junta regime. It was a long-term con job that was bought into by those who only lust for wealth and power and have no loyalty outside of that motivation. Their hallmark is self-image, glitz, and hubris. They suck up the vane and shallow few to do their bidding. They make sure the majority of us can't fight back, or can't get enough information to learn how.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Y'all might want to rachet down the outrage and paranoia a few notches and take the time to read and understand what is being discussed. Seems like quite a few of you are going off half-cocked.



If the public limits what the government can do, it must accept that the risk of terrorist attacks may increase, he said. If the public gives the government greater authorities, it should not criticize the government for using those authorities at a later date.


If the public chooses to limit the government, the absolutely we should be ready and willing to accept the consequences of those limitations. If those consequences are increased terrorist attacks, and the public, through their elected representives, decide not to take actions to thwart terrorist attacks, then yes, we should be willing to accept that terrorist attacks may increase.

However, if We the People, GIVE the government authority to stop future terrorist attacks, then we absolutely should not be overly critical when the government uses the authority WE GAVE THEM.

Key word is USES, not if the government abuses, overstepps, or bends the rules we set, but uses.

So if the government uses the authority we gave it, as we intended it to be used, then no, we shouldnt be overly critical.

For example:

If we give the govt the authority to photograph people in airports who are boarding airplanes, and the government does exactly that, then we have no place to complain. If the govt starts photographing people in airports who are not boarding planes, THEN we have something to complain about, as they are overstepping their authority.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by Coshy]

[edit on 7-5-2008 by Coshy]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 11:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by pstrron
reply to post by mybigunit
 


Not to rain on anyones parade but they really do not need any new laws. The laws are already in place and have been before you were even born. In 1933 the US gov was bankrupt, the Constitution was suspended along with our rights. The law of the land is now the UCC and your nothing more than collateral against the national debt.

Sheeple nope, try slave. Slavery is legal in the US as long as it is voluntary. Hate to say it but we all volunteered and signed our servitude over to the gov. The sad part is they never told us. However once done it can not be undone without allot of paper work and you must make sure that every piece is filled out without any errors. Once granted your "freedom" you must accept the consequences of your actions. You will not be able to work, buy or sell anything in the US let alone rent a place to stay or even get any government services. Living in the woods is not an option as it is gov land and you then can be placed in jail for trespassing. Only option leave the country but even that is forbidden since you had to give up your passport and all licenses to include all gov ID's.



Excellent post but rock really began to roll in 1913 when the FED and the IRS was created. The rock was even rolling before that but really started to move after 1913. The nail in the coffin is when the social security act went into play. That is what gave us all a slave number. Great post and I couldnt agree more. There are so many people who feel this way but yet where the hell are the votes...i think there are to many sheeple our there who just refuse to see the truth because it is to hard to accept.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Coshy


However, if We the People, GIVE the government authority to stop future terrorist attacks, then we absolutely should not be overly critical when the government uses the authority WE GAVE THEM.

Key word is USES, not if the government abuses, overstepps, or bends the rules we set, but uses.

So if the government uses the authority we gave it, as we intended it to be used, then no, we shouldnt be overly critical.

If we give the govt the authority to photograph people in airports who are boarding airplanes, and the government does exactly that, then we have no place to complain. If the govt starts photographing people in airports who are not boarding planes, THEN we have something to complain about, as they are overstepping their authority.


The government has all the authority they need now and then some. That is what people like you dont understand...what authorities have we not given the government name one please?



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit

The government has all the authority they need now and then some. That is what people like you dont understand...what authorities have we not given the government name one please?


Then why all the hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth when the government actually uses (not abuses) the authorities they were given?

One authority we have not given the government, I could give you 10, bu here is one ... we have not given the government the authority to conduct illegal searches and seizures.

You asked for one, it may or may not be applicable in this instance and if it doesnt satisfy your question, please reword it and be a bit more specific.

Edit: regarding the 'people like you' comment, dont make this personal. You have zero idea of what I am like. Stay on the topic and debate the topic, not the poster.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by Coshy]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Coshy


One authority we have not given the government, I could give you 10, bu here is one ... we have not given the government the authority to conduct illegal searches and seizures.

You asked for one, it may or may not be applicable in this instance and if it doesnt satisfy your question, please reword it and be a bit more specific.

Edit: regarding the 'people like you' comment, dont make this personal. You have zero idea of what I am like. Stay on the topic and debate the topic, not the poster.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by Coshy]


Yeah actually they were given that authority. Under the patriot act the government can now search your house without a warrant from a judge. They only need 2 signatures from FBI agents. Not only do they have the power to search it without a warrant they can destroy it to look like a robbery so they can bug your place. They also have unwarranted access to library records, bank records, medical records, oh yes believe it or not. Hell they can even tap your phones without a warrant from a judge.

The people like you is not personal but it is people like you who make these comments that there is no abuse and all is well and I would assume if you are making these comments then this is the way you feel. Now if you feel otherwise and just want to be a devils advocate for the thread then I apologize but you should of mentioned that in the forefront.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
The people like you is not personal but it is people like you who make these comments that there is no abuse and all is well and I would assume if you are making these comments then this is the way you feel. Now if you feel otherwise and just want to be a devils advocate for the thread then I apologize but you should of mentioned that in the forefront.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by mybigunit]


Where exactly did I say there is no abuse?

Assumptions are nearly as dangerous as paranoia.

I'm not playing devils advocate, I am reading the OPs link and commenting on what it says. Too many seem to jump the gun and post about what they think it says, that the people should not criticize the govt. When in fact it doesn't say that at all. Read on for more.

What, exactly, do you have a problem with? Is it me saying if we give (or have given) the govt authority to do a thing, we should not be overly critical when they do that thing, within the boundaries we set for them?

We gave the government authority to issue speeding tickets. Should we be outraged when the government does indeed issue speeding tickets?

We gave our government authority to regulate interstate commerce. Should we be outraged when they regulate interstate commerce?

We have given our government the authority to establish Post Offices. Should we be outraged when they do indeed establish Post Offices?

We gave our government the authority to provide and maintain a Navy. Should we be paranoid when the government does in fact provide and maintain a Navy?

My point, in case it isnt clear yet, is IF the people give the government a certian authority, we should not be outraged or overly critical when the government does in fact use that authority within the bounds we have set.

If the authority is taken by the government (as opposed to being given by the people) or the government oversteps the bounds we the people have set for a particular authority, then we should indeed be outraged and critical.

Thats exactly what the OP link says. If we give the authority, we should not be overly critical when that authority is used.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by Coshy]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Coshy
 


But the problem is the people arent giving them the authority its being done in backroom deals by politicians. The right politicians get greased and low and behold mine and your freedoms are taken away. The patriot act (for example) was not even read by most of the congress. Bush just told them this is what he needs to fight terror and they gave it to him....then when they actually read it when it was to late the want to throw amendments on there now...well guess what its to late.

Even if the authority is given we should still be able to second guess. This is AMERICA!!!! Im glad we second guessed the law that was passed to round up the Japanese here in the US during WW2. Im glad we second guessed slavery. Im really glad we are second guessing the FED and IRS which nothing will be done anyways. I can go on and on but on a side note Im one of those people who feel the congress does not speak for you and me. They speak for their own interest and are getting greased left right and center by all the special interests.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Coshy
What, exactly, do you have a problem with? Is it me saying if we give (or have given) the govt authority to do a thing, we should not be overly critical when they do that thing, within the boundaries we set for them?


When exactly did YOU get to vote on the Patriot Act? I know I didn't. So no. I DID NOT GIVE THEM THIS AUTHORITY. They gave it to themselves. If you can't see the difference then join the herd. BAHHHHH!!!!!!!!


If the authority is taken by the government (as opposed to being given by the people) or the government oversteps the bounds we the people have set for a particular authority, then we should indeed be outraged and critical.


Again. When did WE THE PEOPLE vote the Patriot Act in? The authority was TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT not given by the people.


Thats exactly what the OP link says. If we give the authority, we should not be overly critical when that authority is used.


When did we give them the authority? When we elected them on their platform and they turn around and do something against their platform that they were elected by?

And I'll say it again. BAHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


LOL that has got to be the funniest response to a post I have seen ....join the herd and bahhh LOL....with that being said correct that is what I was trying to say in my post above. I dont ever remember voting on the patriot act the people who represent us was supposed to but they were supposed to read it first which says to me the people we elect does not represent us if they cant even read bills they are going to vote on. Then its pushed to all the sheeple as the greatest thing since sliced bread and they go blindly. These people VOTE!!!!
WAKE UP AMERICA!



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Contact him here -

Michael Chertoff
Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by branestorm
Contact him here -

Michael Chertoff
Secretary, Department of Homeland Security
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528


I emailed them and I still have not got a response...sorry mail is to long.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join