Congress KNOWS Eminent marshal law plan, ENDof 08

I remember, oh...about a year or so ago making a telephone call to a local rock station morning show that I listen to daily.

For some reason, a previous caller was trying to bring up Tower 7 and "conspiracy" theories. He was quickly shut up, not allowed to talk and laughed at.

I called up during the commercial break. I happen to actually *know* these DJ's due to my long time listenership and several in-person meetings. When I call up and say who I am, they go, "oh hey man"...

Anyway. I said, "Have you ever heard of REX-84?"

As SOON as I said that, the DJ got very nervous and said, "How do you know about that?" and basically whisked me off the phone.

I believe that the media KNOWS about this, and has been told not to report on it -- for the sheer fact that it might induce/excite panic amongst the masses.

Imagine Matt Lauer telling everyone on the Today Show about internment camps? People that normally are "asleep" would freak the hell out!

Something to ponder.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness


Not really - I mean its not like anything the mass media reports is always the truth, but there is (usually) at least a small chance that it could be true when they report it. The standards for the mass media to report something and make a big deal out of it in terms of proof are fairly low. And since we are constantly told the End is Nigh by the media, this would be an excellent source. If it had even the smallest chance of being true. It does not.

This is absurd. Your threshold for rather or not something is true is if the MSM is discussing it. You still haven't responded to the fact that all MSM outlets intentionally let the CIA place pundits on their networks, and intentionally misled the public into thinking they were independent. Oh wait, despite the thousands of pages of evidence that have been released by the CIA, this must not be true, because the media didn't report on it, right?

Actually its a republican bashing fest on MSNBC and CNN, and a democrat bashing fest on Fox. As all networks employee party spin-meisters, it would be easy to take this and spin it as the democrats meeting in secret to try to save us all from George Bush, who the media tell us is the evil one.

Its easy for you to admit that they are willing to spin to further their agenda, yet you can't see how if both parties were implicated (thereby both of their agendas) they would just shut up about it. If only there were some story that we knew to be true that no station would report on because it affected all of them. Hmm. Oh Wait! How about that story about the media allowing CIA employees to be pundits? Why wasn't this reported. Couldn't the spinmeisters at CNN show this as evidence of Bush's and shadiness?

Kucinich isn't taken seriously because he routinely trys to impeach everyone he disagrees with. He knows hes not going to get anywhere with it, and he only does it to get the left-wing nuts and conspiracy woo-woo's excited. Ron Paul WAS talked about when he was relevant. At some point, when a candidate has no chance of winning or making a dent in the election, he or she is no longer going to be talked about - regardless of his or her politics.

I like how everyone who wants to hear about what Kucinich has to say about Bush being impeached is a nut. Despite the fact that you are just making ad hom attacks and not responding, I will still elaborate. First, the biig claim that Kucinich is making is that Bush was briefed that Iraq had no ties to Al Qaida, yet on the day after he was briefed he told the American public the exact opposite to get us into war. That is a very true statement, and I challenge you to discredit it.

Also, according to you the spinmeisters at MSNBC would jump all over the chance to attack Bush. Are you honestly telling me they find the testimony and research of several congressmen who signed this impeachment bill so uncredible, that even though this information would further their agenda of bashing Bush and stirring controversy, they won't touch it? That is laughable!

On the note of Ron Paul, hes received very limited coverage even when he was a viable candidate. When he was discussed, it was almost always very brief and in a negative light. Even most of the questions directed at him during the debates were garbage, and he wasn't even invited to the Fox debate.

I know you'll claim he got a lot of coverage, so I guess its going to be a stalemate. However, I would ask the readers to be honest with themselves, and see if they remember Paul getting as much coverage as people he was beating, such as Guillianni. Many people do this day don't even know who Ron Paul is despite the fact that when he was running, he shattered every fund raising record.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
Uhh what? Yes every single thing said here is only a rumor, and I'd bet money that its a hoax.

You and I must not watch the same media. I spent hours today listening to the media tell me about how the economy sucks and it is George Bush's fault. These people would salivate with the chance to report on this...

...if they thought it could remotely be true.

www.youtube.com...

Not a hoax tho not sure what is going on but - please please check out this video - a congressional debate over the "Secret Meeting"...supposedly over the FISA bill but listen to Kucinich;s remarks- he is clearly indicating that something is completely amiss about the proposed secret meeting....I wish to hell he had decided to attend it himself - he bows out on principle...but the whole thing stinks....something is going on - Is this what Ron Paul was referring to perhaps...dunno....but my bat channel is buzzing...

I have a few questions: What would happen if a presidential candidate AND his/her running mate both died BEFORE Election Day? Would that cause elections to be suspended? If it is not suspended, what voting choices would the American public have on Election Day?

So what do you do? One side says all is going to hell in a handbasket. I agree there is evidence for this--falling dollar, rising food and gas prices, etc. Then another side says the other side is full of it. So what is it? I know one must think for themselves. I break the population of the United States into groups. A ton of sheeple maybe 70-90%. People who have so much money they don't really care what happens because they think they can insulate themselves (1-3%). Then the 7-27% who realize that there are problems (ie are awake, but continue to work everyday and better their lives), sometimes wish they took the blue pill, and continue on to the next day grinding at what they do. This is my hypothesis of course. I do not have evidence of the real numbers. Really just flying by the seat of my pants.

In general, I really don't like the direction we (the US) are headed. You can use the metaphor of looking west at a wall cloud with a bunch of thunder and lightning. It would be a good time to head for the basement and hopefully ride this out.

Have a good day,
-hoop

reply to post by WhatTheory


Could that not have been asked in a u2u? Troll...

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
reply to post by annestacey

 

Shhh. Its alright. I'm just a disinformation agent. By all means, everyone run for the hills on this one. The evidence clearly shows that we're headed towards dddddddoooooooooooooommmmmm!

Surprise, surprise! You done told the truth.

Now how about fessin' up about which part of the Alphabet Soup is yours or are you just a freelancer?

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness

What are you talking about? I hear this all the time on ATS, but NO ONE is ever to tell us who these "controlling people" are or give evidence to it. There is little doubt that everyone in politics is motivated by the desire for power, but there is no shadow puppet master beyond that common desire. Each party thinks its agenda will be the quickest way to power.

There are a billion threads on this so I won't go into much detail. Suffice it to say that the people in the main stream media and both political parties are working towards the same goal. Who are these people specifically? It could be groups like the Bilderberg group, or it could be just wealthy people and people with power here in the United States.

Your question is a fallacy however. You don't have to know the names of the people to know they exist. What you do know is that congress approval is at an all time low mostly because democrats that were elected as being against the war and wiretapping are now for them, the media is working with the CIA, the media failed to investigate claims leading to the Iraq war , members of Congress are meeting behind closed doors with each other and with foreign powers, the federal reserved is privately owned, and corporations and the rich in this country continue to get richer and richer despite the fact that the American people are getting poorer and poorer.

I could go on. Now I know your saying that doesn't prove a shadow government. Your right, it doesn't prove anything, except the fact that the media is in collaboration with are government (when its original intention was to do the exact opposite) and that the government is shady. But when you combine that info with the fact that almost all of the major candidates have ties to the same groups, Bilderberg, Skull and Bones, oil companies, etc., and the fact that we've had all sorts of experts including congress people and even Presidents, (both JFK and Eisenhower talk about an military industrial complex and the like), on top of the fact that our founding fathers warned us that giving control of the US currency to banks and having political parties would lead to the government being taken away from the people, and you start to see that its very possible.

I know this proves nothing to you, and admittedly its not as explained remotely as well as it should be, but there are literally hundreds of threads on this that you can go to, and are many outside resources you could read.

The bottom line is this, rather or not you believe in a shadow government, you can see congress are at the very least utter failures that will lie to the public, and the media works with the government. That alone should be enough to disprove your argument of, "Well if the MSM didn't report it, it must not be true."

Debate about Secret Session in House of Representatives

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
I am amazed at how people seem to forget reality when it doesn't fit with what they want to believe. The media has always been against the invasion of Iraq, or any invasion by anyone. This is because the media wants to relive the power they had back in the Vietnam era, where they played a large role in the anti-war movement. The media has been declaring defeat in Iraq since before anyone ever mentioned the thought of going over there. They want their power back.

This was the funniest part of your post. This is so blatantly wrong that I'm having difficulty believing you typed it with a straight face. Well, lets begin sifting through this nonsense, shall we?

First when you say the media is always against all wars, I assume you mean all of the mainstream media outlets. I would honestly like you to try to explain to me how an organization like Fox news is against all wars. Not only do I remember them pushing for the war before it happened, but I to this day see them defending it. This alone should be enough to discredit your assertion that you make with no evidence, but I'll continue.

I challenge you to find me a clip of any of the mainstream media outlets vehemently opposing the Iraq war before we went in (or Afghanistan for that matter). You won't find it, because the media was to busy telling us how Iraq had WMD's, and Iraq was connected to Al Qaida. Not only that, but they were EMPLOYING CIA PERSONNEL to spin the war (sorry to anyone reading for bringing that up for the tenth time, but apparently Lightinthedarkness keeps skipping over it). Unlike you, I have posted evidence to back these claims up.

Not only that, but almost every media outlet had themselves admitted embarrassment at the fact that they didn't question the Iraq war enough. Why would they do this, if, like you said, the were against the invasion?

You then say the media has been declaring defeat ever since. Well, again not all media, such as Fox. And the networks that do this only started after it was to late, so the excuse could be made, "If we leave it will get worse". Not to mention most media has been pretty much silent on the fact that Pelosi and her goons did not only not force a withdrawal, but voted to put more money into it. In fact, most media are now claiming that the surge was what was needed and it is working.

The important point is that they were silent leading up to the war, and only changed the opinions when the public started to get angry. If your right that today they are so against the war, then where is all of the media clamoring about not attacking Iran? A few have touched on it, and you'll sometimes hear we should use diplomacy, but almost everyone is saying a hard line approach is needed. Its no where near the level you would expect if your right, especially after not finding WMD's in Iraq. Maybe you'll say that this is because that war would be justified (I disagree), but even if thats the case, you said the media was against all invasions.

I like how you make the comment that people won't listen to things when they don't fit their version of events, because I think this is exactly what your suffering from. The evidence is overwhelming that the media did not oppose the Iraq war (they even admitted it!) and yet you don't believe it. I strongly encourage you to really look objectively at this, and see that you are wrong. I'm not asking you to become a conspiracy theorist, I'm just asking you to not think something is false just because you didn't hear it on the news.

America is in chains already. The problem is much of the American public is ignorant or in denial.

I posted here some years ago about a coming military coupe in the US & at the time was scoffed at. Today this event looks ever more likely.

Many Americans know an Obama or McCain in office will not fix the problems with your country. The disease (the neocons) needs to be rooted out, and like an aggressive cancer, radical methods of combating the disease are required.

Once the coupe is complete, America can start rebuilding. Your government needs to return to godly values. It needs godly men in power, not men who are prepared to murder innocent women & children for money (oil).

There is still hope for America, but that hope now lies with its people. If they have the fortitude, they will act AND overcome the evil that pervades their government.

Originally posted by matth

Has anyone here read about Hans and Sophie Scholl, and the White Rose group during Nazi Germany?

Yes, I have. I read it in my Nazi Germany class in college, while working on a BA in History/Political Science. Some people do not believe it could happen here but it can and it appears that it is.

Time hasn't changed much either. Then, as now there were those who just refused to see it...until it was too late.

I suspect a repeat of that time is soon coming for the U.S.

[edit on 10-7-2008 by ShadowEyes]

reply to post by pluckynoonez


Thanks, Plucky - I posted the link but not sure how to embed the video itself - I would like folks to watch and comment on it - Kucinich and a few others are clearly indicating that something is VERY wrong with the calling of a secret session....to the point where a few congressmen are refusing to attend....I find this extremely disturbing...there have exactly six secret sessions in the history of this nation(one congressman who was asked that question said " oh there were many secret sessions in the early days" - he's totally full of #### - six - only six)....so my take is that something VERY serious was talked about that may have little to do with "FISA" but was related to "intelligence"...was it the info indicated in the OP's audio link? I don't know but somehow it wouldn't surprise me....

Well, this information is being handed out to representative regional elected officials. Is it really some big secret?
How is the Governemnt supposed to respond to a sudden economic crash?
Just throw up their hands and let anarchy rule?
There are plenty of nutjobs out there that would take any national supercrisis as a green light to kill Feds and State officials.
We did alot of odd things in WWII. None of this is secret.
Doesn't really bother me.
How else can an organization charged with the security of a nation and its principle citizens and interests respond to major disruptions?
Yeah, it will probably become a little more dangerous to own firearms and talk about taking down "the man" or the government. So what?

It is stupid for people to live here, enjoy all the frills, benefits and excesses then turn around and totally disrespect and threaten the very institutions that make the leisure and freedom to even consider political philosophy, rather than just gathering food, possible!!
Love that stuff. SMART people. So those guys will be silenced. Wah. Cry me a river. This won't become a dictatorship, but it will become a little more ethnocentric.
There are a few large groups in the US who will probably be denied some of the benefits afforded to others. Illegal immigrants, for example, won't be guaranteed all the rights of actual citizens.
Sadly, the possesion of wealth and class will become more obvious. In essence, if you have no power the governemnt will stop augmenting your influence on affairs.
The Democrats already do this with the superdelegates. The real players don't want ignorant poor people making decisions.
Many social services will be cut and that will cause massive resentment. But you reap what you sew. We have alot of people depending on monies that aren't there anymore.
I just don't know what one can realistically expect in this situation.

Originally posted by Nonchalant[/i

There is still hope for America, but that hope now lies with its people. If they have the fortitude, they will act AND overcome the evil that pervades their government.

Can you give me some examples of where this has been accomplished succesfully?