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.



page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 10:05 AM
For the life of me I can't figure out the angle they are trying to play here...


If anything, this is a destabilization campaign. But who is waging it? I doubt it is the greedy f-s in D.C. If they wanted this, they would send their own troops down there. Unless they are desiring the U.S. split up. That may be the case, but I doubt that also. I don't think they would be so quick to lose their power. Especially considering they are trying to keep this crippled economy afloat with debt.
The responsible thing to do, in the long-term, would be to let it fall and rebuild it. They are trying to keep their power.

It is someone else.

Dick Cheney. The more and more I think about it, I'm falling firmly on the side of the argument that Prof. Emeritus pointed out earlier in the thread with Cheney's links to Brown and Root.
But why?

I mean, if my suspicions are correct, that basically confirms Dick Cheney as the largest terrorist on the Planet.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:06 PM
my take on the situation is this..

let it boil to the point were there is an obvious national security risk..Meaning hundreds if not 10's of thousands of mexicans jump the border...If a ''tidal wave' of border jumpers are seen by americans due to the media,the american public will give there blessing to send troops into mexico..There will be a total reform of there government,placed by the white house..After the regeim is set in place the PTB will pull a bait and switch with the usa and call it national security that we are now taking mexico into us controll..Basicly recievership....It is very beneficial to the U.S. to gain there natural resources to pay back the bail outs..
kinda far fetched but possible..

[edit on 22-2-2009 by Redpillblues]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 12:08 PM
i can envision a scenario where mexico collapses and it spills over the border. our national guard troops and law enforcement will be over whelmed because a lot of them are in the middle east with more to be sent very soon. so who is going to defend america? thats right your average patriot who has had enough of these illegal immigrants coming over the border for years now and exploiting this country instead of embracing it. but there is one problem, the millions of illegals who are already here who will defend the other illegals trying to make it over the border. everybody talks of another civil war but i think its going to be another mexican/american war 2. tptb are trying to push a n.a.u on us but it isnt going to happen. think about it for a second. they just passed a 1 trillion dollar spending bill which promotes updates to infrastructure and public works projects. as of right now im not aware of any money to be allocated to building a better southern border. the government admits that mexico is a threat but they do nothing about it. why? whats the angle here? they have no problem allocating 70 million of the spending bill to build better golf courses but the southern border is an absolute joke,period. just look at google maps along the border. hundreds of miles of wide open border with an overwhelmed border patrol agency watching it. # is going to hit the fan very soon and if that means i have to choose sides to defend my country from an enemy from the south than ill be there.

*please correct me if im wrong about any $$ from the spending bill being spent on improving border situations im just not aware of any.

[edit on 22-2-2009 by middleclasssoldier]

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:00 PM
Heard on the radio the other day that $$ from the stimulus thing is going to hire more Border Patrol and to upgrade their facilities and equipment

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:06 PM

Originally posted by David9176
We have troops all over the world and Mexico is on the verge of collapsing yet NOT A DAMN THING IS BEING DONE ABOUT IT.

What the hell are they waiting for? DO SOMETHING OBAMA!!


We have to wait for it to become a clear and preset danger before we invade and take over tocoville.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:09 PM
reply to post by Redpillblues

Yea thats right. And there are probably CIA operatives running those gangs down there.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 02:34 PM
reply to post by middleclasssoldier

The problem with Patriots taking up arms against the illegals is twofold, vis: Moral and Political.
Moral: Is it really your intent that a human being guilty of simple trespass is of so little value in your humble estimation that the merit being slaughtered because the Powers that be on both sides of the fence have so little regard for the Patriot American and the refugee Mexican as it is. Hence, it is easier for you to kill someone who is so scared to death they would flee the home of their ancestors to enter a strange world which is increasingly hostile to them, because, it is less hostile than the alternative of remaing in their home, the place of their birth. Are you so ingrained with Media Propoganda that you can't see this is an immoral supposition you are making?
How do you determine just who is the bad guy exactly? The one with the gun? Which one with the gun? You? Them? Me?

Political: Unity during a time of great division is the truest recourse. Think of Gladiator, ficticious a work though it may be: No matter what comes through that GATE we all have a greater chance of survival if we all stick together. It would be politically advantageous for the Citizen's to unite on both sides of the fence, so what if we join the US, Mexico, and Canada as one Country for our own mutual defense, isn't that why we have governments in the first place? If not? Why are we governed? If they all want to rush to America so badly, doesn't it make sense to just let them all in, so, a few bad apples get in, we deal with it in unity and we can all overcome it. If your constitution and laws are as strong as you believe, it will work, and one ideaology will not trump another. And, as the need for more land and resources increase, we take possession of more and more of the land they fled to accomodate for this. Immoral? No. Such is life. If the land were worth being held by the other Country, we wouldn't have an influx of their people in the first place, that alone is prima facie (on it's face) evidence that it is a righteous and justifiable land grab.

Now, as to the political concerns facing our country, the real reason we fear a demographic change will alter our history of law and transfer power to the new class of citizen, is grounded in the realities we see before us in our own political parties. Our government was designed to be neither a Monarchy (as none are above the law); nor an Oligarchy (as heredity and nepotism were cast aside for lottery and limited influence equal to that of all others opportunities) were also rebuked by the founders, nor a Republic, contrary to popular Propoganda, (that is, the few were not to dictate to the many); and as for democracy, it was intended to be just that. It would appear to the mislead that by reading the founding documents, such as, the Federalist, the Elliot hearings, the Declaration of Independance, the upheld Laws and Treaties, and later work's by Curtis and Blackstone, et al (and others), that democracy was held in a negative light and referenced little. That it would appear as though we were founded on Liberty and a Republic, however, that would be to entertain half truths.
The founders frowned on pure democracy, realizing that rule of the masses would favor the interests of the majority and trample the minority (as Slavery has thus proven, despite the 13th Ammendment allowing for in in cases of crime, still, to this day). You have to read past snake oil lawyers and their Propoganda to see the writing on the wall. They wanted neither a pure democracy, nor a true republic. It was determined by checks and balances, tendered with limits, that an everchanging political landscape would satisfy democracy, functioning as a republic. That is, America is first and foremost a Democracy (of the People by the People) and Government is democracy functioning in a style like a republic for ease and efficiency ONLY. But, whereas one party may limit the abuses of another, where common interests lie, they will not use the tools available to them to do so. That is a republic's weaknes, the one the founding father's feared most. To alleviate this condition, the Citizen's were presumed to be as well armed as the military, if not better, as the Militia and military were to be conscriptions of the People. One for a permanately standing, with fresh rotations of the Citizen's, the other drawn up and maintained at a moment's notice for support, or, to hold the military at bay. They weren't meant to have their own budget, beyond an administrative one. All the arms were assumed to have been provided by the individual soldiers. With budget arming them in the event they were ill equipped. That the army can buy a tank or the air force a jet or the Navy a carrier or sub, yet, the common individual cannot shows the weakness inherant in the system of today vs. the intentions of the framers.
That there is not a flat tax were all, regardless of station or finances pay an equitable percentage and that that percentage go not to private business but directly to the treasury for Congress to apportion for nothing more than the essential fees of Government to function administratively, and if it go broke, therefore downsize until it can recoup it's loss and continue, shows that none have a clue how to govern properly as the framers intended. I can do this all day, but, if you don't overthrow your government and set it straight as the founder's intended, it won't add up to a hill of beans whether you assault someone else, because deliberate or true incompetance, you will be under oppressive rule soon enough, the repulic, the democracy, will fall.
One of the biggest signs of it's demise, it's guaranteed doom is the matter over Liberty. Most only understand that it means that within reason you are free to do as you please. That is Civil Liberty, and, most understand it well. Where they falter is their failure to understand political Liberty. It is in that sense that Communist Russia and China, etc. have our populace beat, hands down. Political Liberty is the measure of how much influence the World has on your own political freedom of movement within those politics. In Russia, the citizen's excel at political Liberty, in that, while they are oppressed of their civil Liberties, they are in no way influencable or answerable to Non Russian Politics.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:14 PM
I have never understood why the US has never built a ''Berlin Wall'' along the Texas/Mexico border. I know it would cost billions, but think of the overall savings in the long term plus the job creation.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:29 PM

Originally posted by Wotan
I have never understood why the US has never built a ''Berlin Wall'' along the Texas/Mexico border. I know it would cost billions, but think of the overall savings in the long term plus the job creation.

ive been saying this for years.

it really is simple. the berlin wall worked so well for east/west berlin. it would work

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 03:44 PM

Your Preachin' to the Choir...

I can tell. there's a reason for that. It is to maintain fluidity and discussion in generalities rather than specific assaults. That is, I am not attacking your position, or, you. I am using your position and expanding on it. It's like when a drill instructor repeats the statement of the soldier. It is not whether he agrees with the soldier that is important. It's that all can hear it. By expanding on your point, it means that it is open to interpretation, as clearly I interpreted from it that which it was not originally intended to address. Since, I am preaching to the choir, then I am singing the same song, but, rather than my portion resulting in a duet, it became a solo within the main body of work. If their were dissent with the solo, I am sure you would have enumerated as such and a healthy debate of interpretations would have ensued. However, as I am preaching to the choir, then, it can be presumed their is no dissent, rather, approval with my assertions. That means, that when others read along they will see that it is not the opinion of one author or another, but rather, a common thread shared by several sources. Such things are healthy to a forum such as this, as it lends credence an authority to the suppositions made vs. standing alone in a myriad of alternative conjectures.

Therefore, I am glad to be preaching to the choir, it merely reinforces my sermonizing and proselatyzing.
Conversely, it lends support to your position as well.
Above all, it is a small reminder that We are not alone.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 04:38 PM
If Governor Perry does indeed issue an order to deploy to the border then he has more nerve then I thought!
I wonder how the Feds will react if it does come to having the NG at the texas- mexico border?

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 06:46 PM

Originally posted by David9176
S & F Prof

This is what FREAKING happens when we ignore PROBLEMS.

Damnit it's all going to hell.

Keep watching American Idol everyone and keep wishing this crap doesn't show up on your doorstep.

It's been coming for a awhile, thank you great grandaddy Bush.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 07:28 PM
In considering the reaction I have seen here in our little microcosm I get a sense of what could come.

Americans must always remain true to what we know it means to participate in this experiment. I fear the use of deadly force, in whatever guise, justified or not, will simply lead to the institution of federal powers we - under any other circumstances - would not welcome. All of the states in our Union will support Texas without hesitation. It's the federal government and it's corporate bride I fear most.

It is the MO we are seeing at work here that is most indicative of the agenda behind it.

I for one, do not fear a global union. I feel that it is inevitable if mankind is to ever reach beyond this 'life' we have built for ourselves. But such a manifestation of human culture must be 'grown' not 'imposed.' We are not yet ready to release our own identities as sovereign nations; and that should matter to these 'manufacturers of the future'. My resistance is to the manner in which it is manifesting itself, and the purposeful exploitation that accompanies it.

Those in power now have it set in their minds to 'manipulate' the inevitable; accelerate it to their advantage, while ensuring a Utopian future for their posterity; damn the rest. They operate through subterfuge and intrigue. They generate conflict and contest while controlling the reach of those excluded from the process. They wish to create "Order from Chaos." And when we are thrust upon each other - we must not conform to their script.

I urge those gleefully considering armed confrontation to pause and consider who's mother, father, son, or daughter you might end up killing. I am no Ghandi, as much as I admire him, I can't say that I am prepared to simply receive blows born of abuse. I admit I'm no puritan of pacifism. Killing another person for 'political' reason is no reason at all. I don't think killing out of 'principle' is really an American value. Killing a fleeing refugee much less so.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 07:28 PM
reply to post by Genfinity

#1 Dan Patrick~Dan Patrick is a US Senator?

Dan Patrick is a STATE Senator for District 7. He is from Houston, which according to your avatar space, is where YOU are from.
You don't even know your OWN State Senator- State as in TEXAS, not the US?
Something doesn't make sense here.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 07:51 PM

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
If the alert was issued this evening, then right now it is being briefed to the individual unit comanders. The regular Joe's will get the notice over this weekend...
In all likelihood, they will be deployed to the region.

This isn't an alert like our BS terror alerts that Bush used to scare people into buying duct tape at Target. Military Alerts are the prerequisite to deployment.
The only thing stopping that from happening would be someone deciding to call it off.

For the life of me I can't remember the alert sequence (all the crappy details of military life seem to have been wiped from my memory
but anyhow, the sequence is now set in motion. We'll see troop movements next week. I'd bet money on it.

From what I can remember being in the NG, we had 12hr & 24hr schedule to meet if we were put on alert. We had to submit complete detail on where we would 'most likely' be on a given weekend, friends contact # ect....the list goes on and on and i can't remember 3/4 of it.

Shortly after we got the notice that the NG would be the first to deploy because there were 1/3 more of us than the RA or AR (was the official story) my time was up. 18 months later, the US invaded Iraq.

I still feels for all those NG's out there...

As for calling up the NG in Texas, hmmmm....I don't think there will be enuf to stop the onslaught, being that most might be overseas; the true minutemen will have to fight as well.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 09:55 PM
I'm posting the Foxnews Video, courtesy of one of our ATS participants' site, so that anyone that couldn't find the full foxnews video, can see it again.:

Scroll down the blog page a few inches to see the foxnews video. It starts off with Bill Hemmer showing a map of the border, and some background, then goes to Dan Patrick and the interview/

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 10:16 PM
We Texans need to take care of our homeland Texas not the USA is our homeland. Texas is my home and always will be. The federal government will not help us. Thats fine, then Texans should'nt help them with our tax dollars, that could be used for our state. After all I'm Texan before I was ever American. I'm all for Texas and our Independence. Elect Leo Berman for Gov.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 10:33 PM

Originally posted by ProfEmeritus
I'm posting the Foxnews Video, courtesy of one of our ATS participants' site, so that anyone that couldn't find the full foxnews video, can see it again.:

Scroll down the blog page a few inches to see the foxnews video. It starts off with Bill Hemmer showing a map of the border, and some background, then goes to Dan Patrick and the interview/

just watched it. amazing stuff.. i said years ago that we need the troops on the border, not in iraq because we cannot even handle our own borders let alone iraqi borders.

we are in a very bad situation now, not only because we have to keep these people from getting in, but there are about 20 million of them right now ALREADY IN THE COUNTRY! little by little for a very long time now they have been infiltrating this country and putting themselves into almost strategic locations around America. this problem needs to be dealt with RIGHT NOW.

Glenn beck should have this senator on, hes going on his civil war rants last week, this senator should have been on that show.

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:29 PM
I believe that I may have found the smoking gun that CONNECTS what is going on in Mexico, the BANKING CRISIS, and the Chandra Levy murder. I have documented these connections in a new thread, I just created, because I didn't want to derail the main topic of this thread.
The new thread is here:

posted on Feb, 22 2009 @ 11:33 PM

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in