Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship, page 9
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11    12  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 38 times


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 01:38 PM by MrWendal
reply to post by Irish M1ck



I didnt jump to any conclusion. I did make the comparison to this "Civilian Security Force" and Hitler's Brownshirts. The comparison is easy to make that even an "ignorant racist redneck" like myself can see it.

What I did point out by that post (or attempting to) was that Hitler was not recognized for what he turned into. He also had plenty of support. What I was attempting to explain (again) is that we are being sold onto an IDEA. Just like Hitler sold his idea to the people of Germany, we are being sold here. I am NOT saying Hitler and Obama are one and the same. I am saying we are being sold an idea. Does that clear things up for you at all?


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 01:41 PM by ORIPEIA
reply to post by Jenna




A misconstrued paragraph and an angry Republican does not make for any intentions worth preempting. I must admit, that I supported Obama (renewable energy), but my loyalty is to the US. If he gets out of line I will be one of the first contacting my governmental reps. Until then, I would suggest that individuals choose better battles to fight as this one appears to be a non-starter imo.


[edit on 11-11-2008 by ORIPEIA]


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 01:41 PM by Irish M1ck
reply to post by MrWendal


I think we are in agreement that the Executive Branch currently holds a dangerous amount of power. That being said, I cannot speculate on whether or not Obama will abuse those powers yet.

I remain hopeful that he will be the first inspiration of the century, but we'll have to wait and see.



reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 01:46 PM by MrWendal
reply to post by Irish M1ck


I agree with those terms as well, we will have to wait and see... but discussing a plan to start a "Civilian Security Force" is enough to raise a red flag for me. Sorry if anyone disagrees, but that it is what it is. Maybe I just do not hope that our politicians have our best interest at heart. Maybe...just maybe... I have decades of experience to look back on and I can clearly see that our Government can not be trusted and they do not have the best interest of it's citizens in mind.


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 01:59 PM by Irish M1ck
reply to post by gypsy1035


That's fine, as long you join up and fight in the Iraq war (perhaps you already did, just saying that would be a requirement of your argument).


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:04 PM by Clearskies
reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Please, tell us what communism is.
I think you may not know.


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:12 PM by DarkspARCS
Fear the boink! =)

Seriously though, one thing I think some folks aren't taking into consideration about a Civilian Militia (did I just call it that?) instituted by this President is possibly just that, a military order that is established to offset the impositions of an existing military, one that has been established for the protection of this country's interest. This would include branches of that system like the National guard, and your local, county, and state police fraternities that are supposed to "protect" their community - why? because under current laws those entities have government funding at the federal level.

These government sponsored entities have all comitted abuses of power and civil atrosities.

We don't know what entails this military force Obama has spoken of. The way I see it he proposes a civilian military force to watchdog the government's military forces - like Waco - the government steps in, then Obama's military steps in. The government's abuse of their power by use of force against American Citizens has grown to abominal proportion.

However, This idea by me is just speculation as to what he is really talking about. Why would he want a military force to check his power if he has the power over the government's military? My speculation is that it's Constitutional, and thus Constitutionally correct!

He has made the promise to repeal Bush's Executive Orders - like EO 51 - as well as the Patriot Act. Will he go further and re-establish the government as a Constitutional one by repealing the War Powers Act of 1933? THAT, in a big, big way, would prove without a doubt amongst many of America's people, a defining moment of truth.

A move of that nature would recall America's troops home from foreign soil, reducing our military numbers. It would take the yellow fringe from around our Flag and mandate courts once again as Constitutionally bound Judicial bodies, instead of what they exist as now, a system that's governed by Admiralty Law. It would disenfranchise the Federal Reserve, giving America's wealth BACK to America's people. Wow, taxation WITH representation?

Let's all just wait and see, shall we?

[edit on 11-11-2008 by DarkspARCS]


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:12 PM by ClintK
Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Please, tell us what communism is.
I think you may not know.


In true communism, the state owns everything -- the factories, the media, the stores and other types of institutions. Technically, there is actually not any such thing as private property. There is also very little difference in income. Allotments are made for the number of people in the household, and there are incentives for people to do more challenging jobs.

Only one political party is allowed: the Communist party, and you have to be invited to join.

It's ludicrous to think Obama is a communist.


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:19 PM by Clearskies
Originally posted by ClintK
Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Please, tell us what communism is.
I think you may not know.


In true communism, the state owns everything -- the factories, the media, the stores and other types of institutions.

You mean, like the banks, housing markets, because we may be on our way and Mao didn't start seizing private property until he had already been there awhile.
I heard Donald Trump this morning and he said there would probably only be 3 banks in the future.


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:22 PM by greysave
Originally posted by Doomsday 2029


Oh I'm sorry... I watch a lot of Fox News... Too much racial propaganda has gotten to my brain.

And by the way... is this english class?

bathe in my own ignorance? Would that be believeing that 9-11 was nothing more than Inside Job... or I'm sorry should I say a Global Inside Job?

It's not my fault that Whites and Black still have tension (did I spell tension right?)

Yes, I might come off a s stereotyping the race of the black man... But I guess you don't realize that I now understand the term "White Devil".

Luciferians are mostly White weather you believe in them or not (Did I spell Luciferians right?)

We don't what Obama represents... But you obviously do.

He could one of them, or he could be like JFK... I guess we will find out.


As a black American I must first say that your comments are offensive and not welcome. You are obviously generalizing in things you know nothing about. Pull me off of the street and ask me if I know what a fascist is. Yes tension does still exist between blacks and whites, but it is because people like you from both racist making stereotypical comments. For instance, I was reading this thread and felt no racial tension. I read your comment and instantly was insulted, creating a bit of racial tension for my self.

How can you in this day and age assume what you have assumed. Its obvious that not all black people are ignorant. Use Rice or Powell as an example. Heck use me for that matter, a computer science degree from a very very well respected institution. I guess in your eyes we are the exception and not the rule.

How does the term white devil have anything to do with what you are talking about? Are implying that you have been called a white devil, and that is why you have spoken such absurdities? So you are basing your opinions of the black race due to a few comments? Should I think that all white people are racist because I was called N@##er in grade and middle school? Should I think all white people are rednecks because I lived in GA? There is no justification for your comments, and your trying to spin your bigoted response into you are the victim of bigotry is out right luney.


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:28 PM by Jenna
reply to post by Irish M1ck


That would be the problem there wouldn't it. He scrubbed his agenda on change.gov so the info is no longer there. This all started, as far as I know anyway, when he started proposing requiring middle and high school students to volunteer 50 hours a year and college students to volunteer 100 hours a year. Then it changed to encourage or some such nonsense. And now even though the man clearly said "Civilian National Security Force", which by the way has absolutely nothing to do with volunteering, and some of the people in this thread expect anyone who disagrees with it to just roll over and shut up about it.

For your viewing pleasure for those who don't think he actually did say the following:
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."





Moving on.

And I found a screenshot of what his site originally said about volunteering before they started changing it all around here. Making it a requirement takes away the volunteer aspect. You can't volunteer to do something you are required to do. And note that there is no mention of a tax credit until after people started to ask questions.

There is also info floating around the net about how what he meant was that there would be a health corps, education corps, energy corps, security corps, this corps, that corps and the other corps which if you look at how much that is going to cost in addition to him wanting to increase the size of the military (yeah you read that right, increase), peace corps, etc. is going to cost about as much as we already pay for the military alone each year. Oh look I found it still linked to his site as a pdf, and it even says require 100 hours for college students. And yes I see the part about a tax credit. 4k a year doesn't go that far in most colleges so for many people it may not be worth the effort, not that it'll matter too much if they are still required to volunteer. Once again, you are not volunteering to do something if you are required to do it.

National Service Plan Fact Sheet
American Thinker (financial critique of Obama's national service plan)

So hypothetically if we are way off and there is not going to be anything sinister come out of this, where exactly do you all think he's going to get the money to do all of this with? Most certainly won't come from tax cuts for 95% of the population. I will say that on the surface, all of these things he is wanting to do sound really good. But many of these things we already have or have had in the past and done away with, and quite frankly we cannot afford to fund anything at this point let alone new corps for this, that, and the other.

I really hope that we are wrong. I really hope that there is nothing beneath the surface. However, after what we have seen happen in this country we would be fools to just believe whatever words he says to soothe us.


Now are you fully satisfied that since I'm adult and can read I am capable of making up my own mind and opinions on the things he is proposing?


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:32 PM by EarthCitizen07
Originally posted by Clearskies
reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Please, tell us what communism is.
I think you may not know.


Definition of Communism from wikipedia:
Communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless society based on common ownership of the means of production and property in general.[1][2][3] Karl Marx posited that communism would be the final stage in human society, evolving into a classless, stateless society of "pure communism". Leninists have attempted to produce communist societies by setting up political parties, which in some cases have become governments. These attempts have never produced the "pure" communist societies envisoned by Marx, and have led to totalitarian states.


Definition of Social Democracy from wikipedia:
Social democracy is a political ideology of the left or centre-left that emerged in the late 19th century from the socialist movement and continues to be influential in many countries worldwide. The nature of social democracy has changed throughout the decades since its inception. Historically, social democratic parties advocated socialism in the strict sense, achieved by class struggle. In the early 20th century, however, a number of socialist and labor parties rejected revolution and other traditional forms of Marxism and went on to take more moderate positions, which came to form modern social democracy. These positions often include support for a democratic welfare state which incorporates elements of both socialism and capitalism, sometimes termed the mixed economy.[2] This differs from traditional socialism, which aims to end the predominance of capitalism altogether. Social democrats aim to reform capitalism democratically through state regulation and the creation of programs that work to counteract or remove the social injustice and inefficiencies they see as inherent in capitalism.



In my words, communism is a form of government where everyone works for the government and the government plans the economy in advance. There is no free market enterprise in such a system.

Socialism is the middle ground between communism and capitalism. Heavy industry and critical infrastucture is state owned but everything else is private.

P.S: The definition of socialism within the definition of communism was flawed and thus I correct.

[edit on 11-11-2008 by EarthCitizen07]


reply posted on 11-11-2008 @ 02:32 PM by maybereal11
Originally posted by Jenna
Originally posted by maybereal11
A spokesman for Obama indicated that he had been referring to a civilian reserve corps intended to handle postwar reconstruction efforts, such as rebuilding infrastructure. The BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS ENDORSED THIS IDEA.


What postwar reconstruction efforts? We aren't having a war here. And if this is some indication that we are going to have a war here on US soil, that is entirely new can of worms.
[edit on 11-11-2008 by Jenna]


We do not have to have a war on US soil to suffer the consequences to our infrastructure ...or have you not noticed that bridges are collapsing and highways are crumbling and levies are breaking while we spend BILLIONS rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure?

Crumbling nation? U.S. infrastructure gets a 'D'
Engineers' report card covers 12 categories, sees decline vs. 2001
www.msnbc.msn.com...

Governors, Mayor Form Coalition to Rebuild Ailing U.S. Infrastructure
www.ens-newswire.com...
"First, it is very clear that our aging and insufficient infrastructure makes us frighteningly vulnerable to NATURAL AND to MANMADE disasters," said Rodin. "We can do better; we must do better."

LOS ANGELES, California, January 22, 2008 (ENS) - California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican; Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell, a Democrat; and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an Independent, stood beneath a Los Angeles highway interchange on Saturday to announce the formation of a non-partisan national coalition that will lobby for federal investment in America's decaying infrastructure.

www.popularmechanics.com...
The 10 Pieces of U.S. Infrastructure We Must Fix Now
No one can predict what bridge, levee or water main will fail next. But some problems are widely known, and work is long overdue. As PM's new special report makes starkly clear, we need to begin rebuilding the nation's infrastructure somewhere. Here are 10 great places to start.


** We are insanely vulnerbale at home with virtually all of the National Guard depolyed overseas. We need a civilian corps focused on national security...Similiar to the National Guard but strictly focused on security issues on US Soil...a civilian corps ready to respond to disaster relief, terrorist attacks and rebuilding infrastructure...Because the National guard aint here...get it? It's dangerous and irresponsible to let the status qou continue...More bridges will collapse, more infrastructure will crumble and in the case of a terrorist attack we have slim resources to respond.

Like I said the current administration along with most "sane" politicians are looking to have something similiar done.



[edit on 11-11-2008 by maybereal11]
Pages: <<  6    7    8    9    10    11    12  >>    ^^TOP^^