It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Spirit of Resistance- An American Civil Revolution

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 01:37 AM
It's kinda hard to "point and shoot" at avian flu or microwave weapons that are cooking your internal organs from a distance or EM weapons making you puke your guts out.

I think the only real resistance available to us is to quit working for them. They want slaves. They want to be rulers and have people subservient to them. They're control freaks without a conscience.

Apparently, after crunching the numbers, they've decided that they only need about 10% of the world's population. It's a nice manageable number. Quit cranking out babies to offer up to them as cannon fodder in their manufactured wars. Quit producing for them. Be independent and mobile.

I'm not a coward but I'm also not suicidal. Getting in a gun battle with an overwhelmingly large number of trained, buff, foreign troops sounds suicidal to me.

posted on Dec, 1 2008 @ 11:40 AM
Will someone please U2U me with any pertinent list of friends to add to my "allies". I think the time has come for some serious organization for reformation, and I have some great groundwork already complete. I'm looking ONLY for true Constitutionalists and Libertarians, please.

Anyone who accepts another man as his superior need not apply.


posted on Dec, 7 2008 @ 09:14 PM
reply to post by roknhrdcor

Just a suggestion, there should be no list.
The people will come together naturally, they know who each other are. All that needs to be done is stay in touch, and continue communication.

We as a proactive people, will organize in due time and when said time is right.

Also it is suggestion, this thread be tied into this one, as they go hand in hand->
True Patriot Reading List

[edit on 7-12-2008 by ADVISOR]

posted on Dec, 10 2008 @ 08:21 AM
Well I emailed Benjamin Fulford to send in the Ninja's. ah, something is not right here... check out Ben's Website...
a lot of this stuff is like crap... wonder whats up... he on drugs or something...?

posted on Dec, 10 2008 @ 05:46 PM
reply to post by BornPatriot

Not sure what you are getting at, could you please explain?

Violence of action is not needed in a successful revolution. Not going to deny that it may come to such, how ever many great changes have been made with out force.

True Patriot Reading List- "Give Me Liberty A Handbook for American Revolutionaries", goes hand in hand with this thread. It was because of my search for a means and way of this thread which caused me to find what was posted in that.

Both sides of the argument, the aspects of we the people are invited. I'm not looking for just members who solely agree with the idea to post here. All opinions contesting or not are encouraged.

Only, let us not forget what options are available. We can still come together as a majority and express the desire to have wrongs corrected. It doesn't take hurting some one to create change, it only takes people willing to be heard.

posted on Dec, 10 2008 @ 07:40 PM
From the OP

"The Sovereignty of the People
The purpose of government is to enable the people of a nation to live in safety and happiness. Government exists for the interests of the governed, not for the governors. As Benjamin Franklin wrote, "In free governments the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns." The ultimate powers in a society, therefore, rest in the people themselves, and they should exercise those powers, either directly or through representatives, in every way they are competent and that is practicable."

I can not agree with the above. Government equals violence always. And people do not forge new governments to ensure domestic peace but to ensure that, those who govern remain above those subject to government.

One can argue that the governor rules by consent of the people but what is always left out of that argument is how that consent is acquired which is normally by violence or manipulation. Our founders knew this and thats why they set up the constitution after the articles of confederation failed.

If you examine the structure of the constitution you can see that it was not designed to give the common man any authority. This was what had to be done back in the day but the amenability of the constitution is what still makes it a practical social contract.

First you must accept this basic truth: If you do not speak for yourself you have no voice. Congress is under no obligation to listen to you or communicate your desires to the fed. So what good is the right to petition a grievance for redress when our petition is ignored? Our police are under no obligation to protect the people but charged with enforcing the law. What does that make them but government strongarms?

If I could recommend a few constitutional changes I would offer the following:

Executive branch elected by popular vote exclusively. In the unlikely event of a draw then we hold an emergency election to settle it.

Keep Senate as is.

Dissolve the house of the representatives and in its place institute a house of the people to communicate with senate as a body of congress via a separate internet with hardlines dedicated to the task.

The supreme court justices to be elected by popular vote for 10 year terms.
No more life time appointments. No more term limits. If we get an elected official we like we should be allowed to re-elect them as we see fit.

And dissolve the federal reserve and IRS and go back to direct taxation as legislated by congress.

With these few simple steps we could eliminate government pork, unjust wars, taxation without representation, unconstitutional laws etc etc


When the next constitutional convention is held I plan to be there and if you are there with me I hope you will remember my words here and support my motion because it is the only way I can see to truly deliver us into liberty.

posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 10:13 AM
well in the event something like this ever happens dont do what these guys did. the attended a meeting fully clothed. look these people can put a camera, microphone into a needle head ... its called nano surveillance.
and it would not suprise in the least that every electronic device sold in the last 10 years could potentially contain some of this nano surveillance electronics..(RFID specks for example). my advice, if you ever have to attend one of these, searching for bugs and the like is a waste of time.. assume every place is bugged even in the middle of a field.
use written word and destroy all notes at conclusion of such meetings.
for high level operations:
eveyone attending should go for a swim - skinny dipping - this will muffle their microphones if any.
this video could have easily have been a set up with a full battalion strength so keep this in mind if something like this happens to you. becasue the devil (NWO) is way more advanced than they let on... after all they have alien technology and what do we have... lead spitters.

posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 11:01 AM
Collin Powell and Joe Biden have both said publicly that Obama will be 'tested' on January 21st or 22nd. Canada's Parliament has been suspended until January 27th. This suggests that the North American Strategic Partnership agreement (SPP) will be activated after the 20th and before the 27th, as a result of some kind of 'incident'.

I propose that we be proactive and start emailing a) Congress, b) the media and c) Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Opposition party leaders and tell them that we are wise to their plans and using an incident to declare Martial Law or bring in foreign troops is not acceptable.

In terms of what kind of incident would trigger activation of the SPP, what if Obama were assassinated during the inauguration? Biden becomes President and if the assassination were blamed on Iran or Syria, then it becomes an international issue which could then be used to bring Canada and Mexico into the fold

posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 11:58 AM
I had just lost a huge reply that took five minutes to type and respond to you guys.

To sum it up, if we have to take precautions to gather and speak we have already lost by allowing it to happen.

Also, it is we the people who are the decision makers, the elected our representatives who hear our voices and act on them in our interests.

In order to correct the issues we feel should be addressed, we have to collectively come back together as was intended and be heard. If we can't do that, then we have lost by default, by allowing ourselves to be complacent.

Town meetings, speaking up at city hall gatherings, starting a petition and getting together at the community level is the best place to start. Change won't be over night by one big sweep. But it starts in the neighborhood and grows from there.

How can any one expect to be heard if they don't try?

posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 05:37 PM
I've given a lot of thought as to when and how we start to fight back. I've tried to set up a network of contacts via offshore email services but that didn't pan out. Here's what I think we can and should do. Use ATS is an early warning system. By this I mean the following:
1) If you see with your own eyes, neighbors, co-workers, family being arrested en masse by army, national guard, SWAT, FEMA or other armed individuals, post this info immediately on ATS under breaking news. Suspicious activity by military helicopters or army truck convoys should not be reported because it's likely that those kinds of activities are happening somewhere all the time and if we report that kind of suspicious activity, the real thing will get lost in the noise of the other activities.
2) If you have guns or hunting archery equipment in your home and you get enough warning before armed men burst through your front door, try to take as many of them as you can with you. I've just been looking at Youtube videos of FEMA death camps(which by the way some have been viewed over 200,000 times) and they're not taking me alive if I can help it. If each one of use takes one or more of them with us, they'll run out of storm troopers before we run out of patriots.
3) If you're a member of the armed forces or national guard AND/OR you know others who are, get them to watch the Youtube FEMA camps videos and make them swear that they will not obey orders to disarm or arrest citizens AND that they will defend citizens if others try to disarm or arrest them.
4) If the ATS site goes down altogether, then use that as a signal that the fertilizer is about to hit the ventilation system and prepare accordingly.

One final comment. I hope and pray (every night) that things will not get to the point where Martial Law is declared, NWO goons start arresting families in the middle of the night and patriots are forced to defend their families by shooting back. But if the NWO elite cross that line then they deserve whatever they get and my feeling is that they should be hunted down like the rabid dogs they are.

posted on Dec, 11 2008 @ 11:58 PM
reply to post by ADVISOR

Iam standing with you..
invisible mom...

posted on Dec, 15 2008 @ 05:09 PM
So much hostility, guess I'll continue to hold out on further comments until more level headed members join in on this discussion.

posted on Dec, 16 2008 @ 10:31 AM
reply to post by ADVISOR

Don't give up on us, Advisor, because of the rantings of a few hotheads.

Many of us like to read, weigh, consider what is being proposed or deliberated before joining the conversation.

I'd be very interested to hear your take on the spirit of resistance and how you feel it relates to any possible forms of civil revolution in America. Thanks for your time (and your patience).

posted on Dec, 16 2008 @ 09:38 PM

I havn't given up, was only looking to stand back and see where this was going.
The sudden drop in conversation caught me off guard as this was moving along quite well.

Originally posted by whitewave
I'd be very interested to hear your take on the spirit of resistance and how you feel it relates to any possible forms of civil revolution in America. Thanks for your time (and your patience).

Oh man, I had hoped this was clear enough in the first post.

Since you asked.

To me, the spirit of resistance is the essence which made America possible and should be maintained by the people as if a machine. Meaning, if we don't take care of it, that it may fail to work when is needed most.

How it relates to a civil revolution is in the very cause this country was founded upon. Liberty of a nation, where the government was not overbearing on the peoples rights.

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

Notice, "consent of the governed", this government has received "their just powers" from we the people. This implies that there should be no action on the part of the government where the people are unaware.

Now from how I see things, the people are not those on capitol hill, they are our elect representatives. Whom were emplaced because the people trusted them to act on our better interests. Not their own.

The current government has done much with out the "consent of the governed", and I know from reading the Charters of Freedom they it is wrong.

As for the forms of revolution, I'm afraid this depends heavily upon the government. They can continue to act as they have, maintaining an absolute disregard for the people who deserve nothing less than honesty and truth. With out obfuscation of what is going on.

Or they will come to their collective senses, and realize the error of being a power unto themselves, when there was no legal or moral justification. In doing so the balance of this government, depends on the people caring enough to ensure those guilty of acts violating the principles written in those Charters mentioned, are reprimanded. We can not break the law, and get away with it, why should they.

I'm not calling for the forceful ejection of the government, but a reversal of what they have done. Just as amendments were made changing the way things were, they can be done to fix those unreasonable changes.

Because as mentioned in the other thread;

Our representatives would be hard-pressed to explain to us why they do not trust the people.
pg 137-138

We trusted them to do the right thing, and they didn't, now corrective action needs to be taken. This action can be completed sooner if the house and congress listen to the people.

We can not afford to allow further abuse of the American dream, our children and their grandchildren must not have that burden. It is ours, because we are here now.

If we want it done right, we will do it ourselves.

As posted in the other thread;
Perhaps it is true, "that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

For me it is not, and we shouldn't have to. Neither should the future generations, that is not what this country is about. Too many have forgotten or are ignorant of the right way. And in my opinion the best form of civil revolution is creating knowledge through public awareness.

Awareness of their rights, and duty to maintaining the America that was created by people looking to get away from controlling government.

[edit on 16-12-2008 by ADVISOR]

posted on Dec, 25 2008 @ 10:52 PM
I just had an strange experience. I was at the movies watching Valkyrie which for those of you who don't know is about the true story of the July 20th, 1944 plot to kill Hitler by members of the armed forces, the intelligentsia, etc. Before the movie started I saw three previews in this order. Defiance is a movie about partisans protecting jews during WW2. The 2nd preview was about one man's fight to expose a corrupt international bank, and the 3rd preview was about Clint Eastwood's new vigilant movie Gran Torino. So what struck me as notable was how Hollywood movies these days seem to be about resistance to established, corrupt governments or corporate entities. If people are looking for inspiration, these movies could provide it.

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 04:44 PM
reply to post by whitewave

What are the options?

Read. Educate yourself. Help me write my "story"....

Thank the lord for the OP. Well done. The charters have found another home!

posted on Aug, 23 2009 @ 05:03 PM
The funny thing is, this, in effect, has happened before, and humans cannot remember. Here are some powerful words to ponder on, We the People gave certain power to the US Government. We did not give them ultimate power.

Here are the facts for you to consider. (most of this we all know so I will not insult you with deep explanations)

1.The Thirteen colonies collectively declared their independence from the Crown in July 1776 (Virginia actually declared her independence in earlier that year)

...That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish
Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.

Thus becoming de facto sovereign nations. They were still outside of the law and in open rebellion but they were the de facto powers in their respective territories.

2. The Thirteen Colonies were granted individual independence from Britain in 1783

Article 1 His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and independent states, that he treats with them as such, and for himself, his heirs, and successors, relinquishes all claims to the government, propriety, and territorial rights of the same and every part thereof.

Thus the Colonies became independent sovereign nations de jure.

3. The United States of America was born in 1781 with the Articles of Confederation via the consent of the independent states. (Independent States were born July 4, 1776, not the United States)

This was a government de jure. The States remained sovereign nation-state de jure under the Articles.

It must be noted that the Articles contained the words "perpetual union", a notion completely ignored in 1787 and absent from the Constitution of 1789

4. February of 1787 a convention was called to amend the Articles. Instead the convention set about crafting a new government. Many criticized the convention for not adhering to their charter and for operating outside of the law. In fact, the convention established by itself new rules by which the states might abolish the government of the Confederation and establish a new government.

5. This is exactly what happened in 1789. The convention, led by the likes of Madison and his "Virginia Plan" constructed a new government and devised a plan by which the new government might be born if only nine states accepted it. The Confederation died officially on July 2 1789 with twelve of the thirteen states joining the new Union (Rhode Island remained a free and independent nation for a year after the death of the Confederation).

Many people "hitch their horse" to this event and proclaim that indeed this is the point that the United States government departed from being of law and embarked upon a course of de facto existence. If in fact this change were forced upon the states, or conducted in dishonest means their point would be valid.

The convention of 1787 was indeed outside of the law and contrary to the provisions of the Articles of Confederation. However, the states did consent. As independent nations they had entered into a contract to form the Confederation. That government no longer served its purpose and the contract was not satisfactory to all parties. An important principle was established. No matter that the United States existed, even under law, the States retained the power to abolish it. Abolish it they did in 1788, to be reborn under the Constitution with the same name, but altogether a different creature and a new government.

The Union formed by thirteen sovereign states in 1789 was no less a contract than the Articles of Confederation had been. In contract law the provisions that bind each party are the understandings each party had when they entered into the contract. It is always amazing to me that rational people accept this notion is civil courts over issues relating to real estate and other matters but are unwilling to accept it when it comes to the Constitution. Imagine if the contract that you signed for your mortgage was described as a living document. Sure it says you are supposed to pay your mortgage by the 15th of each month but that was signed 20 years ago, times change and perceptions change as well. Just ponder that for a moment. It is hard to imagine that a judge would rule that your contract with the mortgage company meant anything other than the exact same thing it meant the day you signed it. Contracts may be revised with consent, but they do not live. The Constitution is not a living document. (I do digress)

So we have established that the states were independent prior to the establishment of the Union and that they had previously abolished a form of government that no longer served the goals of the contract of consent. There were illegalities surrounding the dissolution of the Confederation but a higher principle was at work, which is the right of the governed to choose their form of government and the right of the States to exercise their legitimate sovereignty.

The government of the Union was therefore de facto but also de jure (by relying on Common Law principles) based upon the natural rights of man and the sovereign rights of the states for its existence.

Remember for all time....

de jure means: by right; according to law (Compare de facto.)

de facto means: Something generally accepted or agreed to without any formal decision in its favor: “They never elected him; he became their leader de facto.” From Latin, meaning “in fact.” (Compare de jure.)

One is REAL, the other is FAKE.

posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 06:42 PM
reply to post by ADVISOR

You know I agree with most of your message.

Its just this founding fathers nonsense I always have to address. The founding fathers were nothing special just plain intelligent men, but still think for a moment behind all those amazingly profound quotes lies the festering heart of truth.

That the US was founded with a 10 million loan from the crown. We belong to the crown. They have all the true wealth gold etc. We have paper, dreams and debt.

There were slaves people weren't free they were dirt poor. Essentially the founding fathers were today's CEOs yet people praise them as if they were christ, its insane. But people love their plantation and shackles love their 40% tax burden, etc.

A revolution is a great concept but the problem is people don't want fairness, love, prosperity and abundance. They want greed, exploitation and famine in droves. The media disguises these ends behind words like Communist.

If I am fighting for anything its a more equitable system not one where some men make 2 dollars a day while some make 10 million. Yet most so called revolutionaries would topple the system then install the same pure evil in its place! The book animal farm explains this phenomena well.

You wanna fix things its local local local, starve the beast. People have to become self sufficient. We must be able to support ourselves.

posted on May, 6 2011 @ 05:16 PM
reply to post by ISHAMAGI

I imagine we could debate that topic until the cows came home, and then returned back to pasture, for sure.

The subject is not the founding fathers as individuals, that was the world back then, those were the times and troubles.

Not saying there is not moral value to your comment, which I also agree with. But we can not fault the founding fathers for what they did and who they were, than we could fault Prescott Bush for having direct ties to Hitler during WWII. If that were the case, then the George Bush Sr and Jr, would have been a different story as well.

Those points and topics are best for another thread.

The issue people fail to see, as I addressed in another thread which also mentioned the slave issue. which I will reiterate as follows;

Originally posted by ADVISOR
reply to post by buds84

How ever you forget the the slaves of then would never have been allowed to be free as they became, because of the very documents our founders drafted.

So, mind your history because a handful of very brave black men and woman gained freedom for their people, here in America when the rest of the world, other than Brazil at the time, were against free blacks.

Look it up, check my facts with your own sources. Do the homework, and you will know

posted on Dec, 9 2011 @ 04:52 AM
For those who have not read this thread or the publication mentioned. It is highly advised to do so, especially if today's North American political climate is of particular interest to you.

There are those who know, but to those who do not, there are options and choices. Exercise your freedom of thought and free will, and learn how today.

Because the generations of tomorrow can not afford for us to do otherwise.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in