The Proof That N.W.O. Progressive Elitists Are SOON Coming For ALL Americans., page 3


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 40 times


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 04:44 PM by cbianchi513
reply to post by Floating thru Reality


Let me put this into very simple terms so we can put this little disagreement to bed. It's off-topic anyway...

From the tone of your posts, it sounds like you are more interested in being part of the problem, not trying to help fix it... I'm probably wasting my time.

Sadly, you're not the only one that feels the way you apparently do, so I'm not singling you out... Consider this a group lesson in reality.

Those of us who have "been there, done that" can relate, but in that instance, I'm preaching to the choir.

Let's go back to Mogidishu, Somalia, circa 1994-5...

It is a dirty city, torn and ravaged by years of gang warfare, food shortages, and corrupt politicos and warlords. The smell is almost unbearable, and the conditions are unlike anything found in even the worst slums in the US. It is truly an alien environment.

To make things even more surreal, bands of pubescents, male and female prowl the streets carrying Kalashnikovs, and even M16's... along with the certainty that they are bulletproof and invincible. It's really truly sad, because in reality they are just looking for a feeling of belonging, as well as trying to feed themselves and family. It's a true injustice, but it is what it is.

Here's the question, and I'd like you and all others of similar opinions that military members are irrational robotic murderers...

If one of these "innocent kids" opens up on you and your fire team from all directions, do you return fire? Do you try to reason with a hostile individual that may or may not even speak your language? Do you offer quarter to them, due to their age, or lack of life experience?

Welcome to my world as a 19 year old "green" Marine.

As you can tell, I'm here to type this question, so you know what choices I made, and would again without hesitation. I suppose that makes me a bad person, or worse, in your eyes.

I think however, if you were there, or a similar situation, your innate survival instinct and training would have taken over.

NOBODY wants to kill, but NOBODY wants to die even more.

It's quite simple really.

Now kindly get back on topic.



[edit on 9/7/09 by cbianchi513]


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 05:38 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by Floating thru Reality

When you are in someone elses country attacking them it's irrational to claim selfdefence. You are the problem, not them.


Not necessarily. Depends on why one does it, whether they can plead self defense or not. That's an idealistic generalization on your part, with little to no foundation in the real world the rest of us have to live in.


It is their right since they are defending themselves agianst the invader which happens to be you in this case.


See above about 'self defense'. Further, the term 'invader' is in the eye of the beholder. If everyone in a country decided that I shouldn't be there, I don't suppose I'd go. Pretty simple.

If the above were true, AND they posed a threat anyhow, I'd just bomb the bejesus out of them. Why risk my neck for a bunch of ingrates?

Ain't ya glad I don't have any bombs?


And this makes you a very efficient murderer. There is no honor in going to a forign country and slaughtering and destorying it. You are the one who causes all the death and suffering.


'Murder' is a touchy term. Common law defines it as 1)the intentional killing 2)of a human being 3)without justification. All 3 elements must be present to define a 'murder'. If they're shooting at you, or an imminent threat of it, you're justified, so no murder.

A country, as a non-corporeal entity, cannot be "slaughtered".

And again, If I'm the "one who causes all the death and suffering", I'll do it from a distance, thanks, so as not to risk my precious self. Of course if I were the only one doing that, I don't guess I'd be doing it at all. No reason to. No threat present. Why is that so difficult to understand?


The more you kill, the less to shoot at you.

There it is. The revelation you never fully realized, nor fully appreciated. And no one had to brainwash you into learning this.

I'm very aware of this concept and that is why I speak against it.


That confused me. You speak against eliminating threats that are shooting at you? How quaint.


Spitting on you is violence that is a fraction of the violence you visited on others. Your reaction reveals that you understand about the injustice of violemce, and yet you cannot see it when you so far worse to others.


There is no 'injustice' of violence, per se. The 'injustice' would be in the rationale behind the violence, whether it's justifiable or not.


Your flippant brushing away of innocent death and suffering shows a complete lack of empathy and humanity. These words give truth to Henry Kissingers famous quote about military men.


Lack of humanity? Now who is dehumanizing who?

Somehow, I thought you were probably a Kissinger man. You should ask old Hank sometime what he has planned for you all when he's finished with you.

Do you like ice with your kool-aid?



[edit on 2009/7/9 by nenothtu]


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 05:44 PM by daddyroo45
Originally posted by Floating thru Reality
Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by Floating thru Reality

Floating, that simply isn't true. Our military is being "used" to commit atrocities?

They're on a bug hunt.

I've been on bug hunts, and I suppose some of the things I did could be considered barbaric, BUT I DIDN'T BRING IT HOME!

I actually knew the difference between my enemies, and my countrymen. Uncanny.

I'm very talented that way.

Not to say I didn't get sideways with one who spit on me at the San Francisco International, and I confess, before I could think, I popped the heel of my fist down right on top of her head.

Another threw a beer can at me, but I caught him at the redlight. He came right out that window too, although I don't think he recalls that part.

You may not like what our military does, but many in the military probably don't like what you do. You may not like their attitude in combat, but they probably don't like yours.

Not a problem.

But what I DON'T see, is them slamming you for being an "unaware pantywaist," a "slack-jawed girly-boy without guts," a "pussy-fied civilian,", or "dirt-road pacifist."

So, pretty much, your assumption is based not on fact, but on a personal aversion to violence.

You better hope they keep it over there.

You make my point better than I do. The military have been brainwashed into believing violence is the answer to problems. They are also programmed to believe they are good people and the protectors of all good things. Thats why you dehumanize your victims. In you post you first claim that what I say isn't true and then you start telling stories about how you did those very things yourself. You dehumanize people who disagree with you and try to intimidate them.

As to the soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan not committing atrocities, I don't think those people are killing and torturing themselves. The military kills people and breaks things and they do it well. It's certainly true that they are unthinking drones but that doesn't mean they aren't responsible for what they are doing.


My guess is that you have never witnessed a child fitted with a bomb,blow up a few american soldiers.In Iraq just as it was in Vietnam,the enemy depends on the empathy shown by our troops.They understand that,for the most part, American soldiers treat civilian populations with as much respect as they possibly can,and still maintain a vigilant posture.
I just can't help but believe you are blowing smoke sir!!

It is nearly impossible to preach about getting burned when you've never been tested by fire!!!!

[edit on 9-7-2009 by daddyroo45]



reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 05:53 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by Floating thru Reality
reply to post by Anonymous Avatar


If our government gave me a gun and ammo to kill people with the only people I would consider killing would be them. I don't believe violence is the answer and therefore I wouldn't be using it to kill anyone though.


You understand the inherent dichotomy in the juxtaposition of these two statements, right?

That's called an 'oxymoron'.


The only way to end this evil is by young men and women no longer listening to cowardly old men when they tell them to kill others. If they want people dead then they can do it themselves instead of sending others to do it for them.


You err, son, in thinking that old men can't do their own killing. Further, you err in applying a blanket statement like 'cowards' to all of your elders. Age will show you the folly of that. Lastly, you err in thinking that young folks can't decide all by themselves to kill. Newspapers around here are full of such incidents.


It's time to stop buying into the propaganda and standing up to these monsters.


Indeed, there ARE real monsters in the world. Your elders HAVE stood up to them, and will continue to do so, for as long as they draw breath. Perhaps one day you will too.

One day when your old enough to recognize them.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 06:03 PM by really
reply to post by SGTChas


Hey Sarge, While I don't always agree what you write, I always am impressed at your research and ability to reason. It's good to see someone post threads on ATS that are well thought through. Whether you end up being correct or incorrect in your beliefs, thank you.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 06:20 PM by nenothtu
reply to post by cbianchi513


With all due respect, I'm afraid you forgot to address one of their concerns. Indulge me, please, and refresh my memory.

The US was there to begin with on a humanitarian mission to provide food for the innocents that these folks think they are defending, weren't we?

That doesn't qualify as an 'invasion', does it?

Who were the 'monsters' err... bad guys err... opposition again? It was the warlords stealing the food from the innocents at gunpoint, wasn't it? I'm pretty sure it wasn't the US troops.

How would these folks feel about their 'innocents' if we'd just left 'em to fend for themselves? How would they feel about the 'callous', 'dehumanizing' soldiers they denigrate if we'd been content to let the 'innocents' starve?

That's right, boys and girls, there are more ways to look at a thing than just the knee-jerk, kool-aid drinking view. Not everything is so black and white as you may think.

But some things are. Someone shooting at YOU is one of them.

Especially when someone 'invited' you there.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 06:39 PM by nenothtu
Originally posted by daddyroo45
Well this thread has gotten way off track. Let us get back to the business at hand.


I'm game. I'm through venting anyhow. Until another one of these youngsters comes in and kicks my rocking chair, anyhow


These executive orders that Bush and Obama have stowed away are of grave concern to me. It is the belief of Eric Holder that the Constitution does not prohibit Presidential executive orders from being law.
We have real problems ahead if they can pursuade people to believe executive orders are law.
Ignorance is the NWO mainstay.The less people undersand what is being done to them,the easier it is for them to meet their purpose.
Sarge, Your posts have illuminated much. Keep up the good work!!!


Indeed! 'Tis true! Not only the Executive orders are viewed as carrying the force of Law, but so are gazillions of 'regulations' decided upon by bureaucratic agencies, who none of us voted into office. Somebody appointed or hired them. How do they get to make 'law'?

Can someone point out where 'executive orders' or presidential 'signing statements' are Constitutionally authorized to carry the force of law, in perpetuity without judicial or congressional review?

Ignorance really IS the enemy, and it's up to us to get the word out to the streets, since I doubt the NWO goons can be trusted to do it. I'm not really up to trusting ANYONE else to do it, unless I'm chipping in and spreading the word wherever I can. We gotta do our part too.

Sarge DOES do his homework, doesn't he? Once he gives us the info he's dug up, it's up to us to spread it wide as we can.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 07:23 PM by daddyroo45
reply to post by nenothtu


The way I understand proceedure,Executive orders should only pertain to D.C. and the several territories,as they are not states. Our Constitution allows for the House of Representatives to write the laws.Not the Senate,the President or The Supreme Court.

Why then are they pushing so hard to get people to believe that Presidential orders are law? Why are they pushing acceptance of bureaucratic mandates as law?

Are our elected officals oblivious to these actions,or are they complicit?
If they are oblivious,they should be promptly replaced!! If they are complicit...They should be tried for high crimes and treason!!

Treason....TPTB are desperatly trying to redefine the meaning of treason. They want people to believe that treason is an act against the Government by it's citizens. Soon enough I expect to hear patriots called treasonists,because they disagree with the direction the country is taking.

The speed at which these "changes" are moving is astounding. They pass bills with such speed as to disallow the reading of said bill before a vote is called. People need to wake up and smell whats cooking,I think it's our A**es.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 07:34 PM by dooper
reply to post by flysse


Flysse. I fear I'm not the one who is naive. I'm not even arrogant. As for those guys you assume lived in their own country - actually, most of those I popped were from another nation too, but they were doing the invading.

I know it's a very small point, but it does kind of give you a higher moral basis when you're helping defend ones being invaded.

Your next question was, "how do you think you were protecting your country by going to someone else's and try to kill them?"

You're probably not going to like this two-part answer.

A. I did not go to kill the natives.

B. At the time, we were still facing the Soviet Union, which had multiple divisions in Europe, with a hungry look on their face. The Soviets at one point soberly concluded that if the Americans would fight that hard, and spill that much of their blood over a * hole country that America really cared nothing about, then how much harder would the Americans fight the Soviet Union if they attacked or came pouring through the Fulda Gap?

So, don't look through the wrong end of the telescope just to support your personal aversions to violence. I don't like violence myself, and hoped when I got home I'd never see it again.

Still do.

The very first time I went out on patrol, there were twelve of us that morning, and only two of us left come dark. I told myself after this, "After today, you'll never, ever have a bad day again."

And I haven't. Some are just better than others.

War, fighting, battle - whatever term you prefer - is nothing more than two sides killing each other until one side is incapable of killing further, or unwilling to get killed further.

It's not pretty, certainly not pleasant. It is what it is.

Wishing won't change it.

When a fight to the death is forced on you - you have two choices.

Your problem is you think somehow you can select a THIRD choice. That just doesn't exist.

Don't wait until the shooting starts to think it over.

Things at that point happen really, really fast.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 07:44 PM by dooper
reply to post by Floating thru Reality


Floating, I would suggest you really, really look around at what's happening in the rest of the world.

Fighting everywhere. Starvation is massive. Crime syndicates are destroying entire countries and the people therein. Lawlessness is rampant. There are civil wars, fighting between tribes complete with regular massacres, and every sort of evil man can devise.

The only reason . . . the ONLY reason you have the luxury of your pampered, righteous, don't-have-a-damn-clue concepts, and can nurture that attitude safely, is because of SOB's like these other guys who can actually go toe to toe with these evil SOB's the world over.

A man with a firm reputation for rising early may on occasion, sleep in.

Most nations don't really want a piece of our ass for one very good reason.

Men like are posting here. Men who have seen the varmint.

Men who have gotten their hands dirty and bloody.

So folks like you can hold onto whatever nebulous concepts of the good of man, brotherhood, and world peace you wish to embrace.

I WISH I could be that naive. I WISH I hadn't seen things to prove you so very, very wrong first hand.

But you keep on thinking as you're thinking. Hard times are coming. Right here in America.

And when the few gatekeepers can no longer hold back the barbarians, find yourself one or more of the far-archers.

You will, or you will watch everything you love, die.

It will get that bad.

[edit on 9-7-2009 by dooper]


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 09:15 PM by SGTChas
Lost in the exchanges over the necessity war (dooper, you took a happy pill before you answered, didn’t you bro? That, or either your genteel side has emerged!) was a point I had wished every one had picked up and commented on, had they noticed it there would have been less question as to whether or not all soldiers were mind numbed robots that blindly follow orders. The first and major case in point was the high-ranking generals that stood up to Bush and kept him FROM DECLARING MARSHAL LAW AND ATTACKING IRAN. It came VERY close, as that was what was planned, save the patriotism of brave men.

Just look at the dates on President Bush’s anti-war protester executive order and remember when all of the talk about Bush’s imminent plot to bomb Iran leaked out from Washington; we were close, very close. FEMA was kept at a very high level of alert during that whole time and we just missed the proverbial balloons’ bursting then.

There have been numerous times that units, officers and men have refused unlawful orders, which is exactly why they have altered the law through executive orders while praying no one would test their constitutionality. Their being ignored with continued observance has given them the weight of Constitutional Amendments by default, as it is the US Constitution those orders pervert.

The bright side of all this is the willingness of even high ranking staff officers that will not follow orders that they know are unconstitutional and that will have the immediate effect of placing the American people in danger. As one Lt. Col told me, “You pick your battles VERY carefully; you have to let the assaults on the constitution pass for now that are not of immediate danger, as when you stand you and your usefulness are finished.” Indeed, to save your rear end you HAVE to demand a General Court-martial to keep them from covering it up; this also serves to let them just allow you to resign your commission without a fuss.

When the time soon arrives, there will be more standing with us then you think.


reply posted on 9-7-2009 @ 11:23 PM by dooper
reply to post by SGTChas


Well Sarge, by the time I got back on, Anonymous and Nenothtu had ripped somebody's butt so thoroughly, I could only find a tendril left. And that was with my reading glasses!

Some don't get it, some won't get it, some refuse to get it.

But - with what's coming - they WILL get it.

Too bad.

There's so many of them.


reply posted on 10-7-2009 @ 03:02 AM by Anonymous Avatar
reply to post by dooper


Hahaha... I always try not to respond after a long night of drinking but you are straight and to the point. Kudos.

[edit on 10-7-2009 by Anonymous Avatar]


reply posted on 10-7-2009 @ 05:32 AM by network dude
reply to post by SGTChas


so with the information you have gathered, do you think that the airman who broke the Nuke on a plane story from Barksdale, stopped or at least delayed the Iran thing?

I still think that one event was much more monumental than anyone gives it credit for.


reply posted on 10-7-2009 @ 07:06 AM by cbianchi513
reply to post by nenothtu


You're correct in your assumption that there was no "invasion" of Somalia. Actually, my unit was deployed twice, (ironically) as part of a multinational UN force. In fact, when the UN needed a "taxi service" to haul their sorry butts out of the fire, they gave the usual suspects a call:

(Taken from external source)

In mid-November the 13th MEU (SOC) became the principle rapid response force in the region and executed two humanitarian assistance operations. The first, Operation Show Care, took place in the cities of Marka and Qoryooley from November 11-14. From December 1-3, Operation More Care was conducted in the Old Port of Mogadishu. Both operations provided needed medical and dental assistance to Somali citizens.

The 13th MEU (SOC) continued its presence mission through January 1994, providing aircraft for the “Eyes Over Mogadishu” missions as well as sniper support at the United States Embassy compound. The 13th MEU returned to the United States March 17.

The MEU deployed again October 25, only seven months after returning to Camp Pendleton. Following a scheduled exercise on Okinawa, November 11-13, the MEU sailed to the Persian Gulf. During this period the MEU conducted a Maritime Interdiction Operation/Visit Board Search and Seizure (MIO/VBSS) mission aboard the Honduran-flagged merchant vessel Ajmer, which was in violation of United Nations sanctions on Iraq.

In January 1995, the 13th MEU (SOC) was ordered to conduct Operation United Shield - the withdrawal of UNOSOM forces from Somalia. The MEU sailed to Africa and conducted operation rehearsals in Kenya. On February 28, the 13th MEU (SOC) conducted an amphibious assault onto Somali soil and executed a relief-in-place with UNOSOM forces. By March 2, the withdrawal of all UNOSOM forces was complete, and during the first hours of March 3, the final Marine forces departed Somali soil. The 13th MEU (SOC) returned to Camp Pendleton April 24.


So, for clarification purposes, you are correct sir.

An interesting note: While in Kenya, I passed up on the opportunity to visit the birthplace of our (then) future CinC.


Last post off topic from this guy.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



Amazing Bloodline - Mitt Romney Is Related To Obama & Bush
  Posted 2 days ago with 40 member flags
I have come to break the news to you..
  Posted 8 days ago with 18 member flags
No Longer To Serve and Protect
  Posted 17 days ago with 12 member flags
I beheld Satan falling as Baraq “O” Bamah
  Posted 13 days ago with 11 member flags
Chinese global government aspirations
  Posted 18 days ago with 8 member flags
The Power Behind the New World Order
  Posted 17 days ago with 8 member flags