Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Are we being falsely lead torwards Civil War?

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:25 PM
link   
Well i think all this black vs white and patriots vs unions so on and so on is a good deversion from banks, ceos, wall streeters who are robbing us blind. Seems nobody is mad at them anymore the peeons are fighting each others thank you our paid for by the crooks who are robbing us politicians who will still win there next election with unlimited money from there true bosses the ones who buy there elections for them.




posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
I thoroughly agree with you, OP. It's been in my mind the more and more I listen to those opposing the current administration and the fact that all of there comments come from talking points spouted by conservative talk media hosts.

Here's the thing...If a republican is in the House, then the dems want a revolutions. If a democrat is in the house then the pubs want a revolution.

So why don't the libs care that we're still in this war, that we've even expanded it to Pakistan? Why didn't the conservatives care when Bush passed the PATRIOT Act and pushed the TARP bill through which BOTH Obama and McCain fully supported?

Simple, because either side believes that if their party is not in office they are seen as enemies to the government and they are being targeted. That the laws being passed and the rights being taken away are meant to directly quell the opposition. As long as their party is in power they have no worries because they are seen as "friendlies" so they have nothing to worry about.

To some it up:

"First they came for the Jews..."

That's what this entire situation boils down to.

A revolution isn't going to happen. Only a civil war. Because for a revolution to happen, the people need to be united as one against a totalitarian gov't. We're most certainly not.

Instead, even if there is a revolution and we get every single one of those a-wads out of there, then we'll head into a civil war because you still have two sides of the population fighting over how the government should be rebuilt and the entire cycle will start again.

The first thing the people need to realize is that it's not our opinions that matter anymore. It's the opinion of wall street bankers and multi billion dollar corporations that matter. Once we put a COMPLETE end to this kind of influence in Washington, THEN the people will start to get their gawd dang country back!!!



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ADVISOR
 
Maybe it is not entirely "out of context," but my reading of the quote from Reagan is that it illustrates nicely my point that it is "big Government" that is the target of Reagan's ire. He states:

"You and I, as individuals, can, by borrowing, live beyond our means, but for only a limited period of time. Why, then, should we think that collectively, as a nation, we're not bound by that same limitation?"

and then:

"Well, if no one among us is capable of governing himself, then who among us has the capacity to govern someone else? All of us together, in and out of government, must bear the burden. The solutions we seek must be equitable, with no one group singled out to pay a higher price."

I don't believe this to mean that any Government is the enemy, or that necessarily Democrat/Liberal Government is the enemy, while Conservative/Republican Government is the solution. Rather, I think it leads nicely to your point about personal responsibility.

I agree that children that have not properly raised to understand authority, will lack the requisite fear of that authority to ever question the means by which that authority controls them. Hence, a generation of citizens that was coddled into believing that they could do no wrong, and therefore, that it was/is ok, and even preferable to be ignorant.

Which in turn has lead is to the point we are now facing. "Good" Americans that have never had any interest in politics, or the realities of how society is controlled, have been whipped into frenzy on both sides and their prior lack of interest makes them easy pawns to control.

You say that the "Civil War" angle is unlikely, yet follow that by saying: "Only reason they would do such is to let the people hang themselves. By asking for more protection, and allowing more bills, amendments and alterations to go unread and passed in the middle of the night.
They could falsely lead the people into a false civil war to enact complete martial law, saying a fifth column movement has threatened our sovereignty. But how likely is that?
All I really see is a bunch of people, ignorant and happy being told what do to and how. Getting all worked into a frenzy over things they probably have no clue about. Because they depend on some one else to think for them...
What is there to divide, the majority is happy hiding under their blankets... "

So, if the majority that has thus far been happy under their blanket is now evidently waking up unhappy with the situation at hand, what better way to control that majority than through the manipulation of the media to make it appear as if this has been a left/right struggle all along. When in fact it has been a struggle of the haves and the have nots, the elite/elect and the plebeians.

I do not disagree with anything that you have said, but only question why you are of the opinion that the Government itselfis the enemy, as opposed to the corporate interests that have undue influence over seemingly any and all decisions made by that government?

It appears to me that there is room here to question more than the means by which we are controlled (ie Government) and begin to question the motives of those that are doing the controlling.





[edit on 14-8-2009 by Artephius Abraxas Helios]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


EXACLTY! It doesn't matter who is in power it all boils down to all of them being "in bed" with bankers and corporations. They just give the illusion that our opnions and wants still matter and that if you aren't getting what you want it's the fault of the citizens who support your opposition.

What they need to realize is that all that matters is the opinions and wants of "he who has the most money". So "the people" THINK that they are getting what they want if their party is in power only because they are TOLD that is what they want and they spin it to LOOK like they are getting what they want.

Example: Yes, we're (the gov't) taking your rights away, but it's for your safety from terrorists. [But really they are taking your rights so that when you realize what is REALLY going on, you don't have a leg to stand on. They just call you a terrorist.] Or..

Yes, we're taking your money away but it's going to help the less fortunate. [But they are really just taking your money and giving it to the bankers and the corporations].



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Artephius Abraxas Helios

So, if the majority that has thus far been happy under their blanket is now evidently waking up unhappy with the situation at hand, what better way to control that majority than through the manipulation of the media to make it appear as if this has been a left/right struggle all along. When in fact it has been a struggle of the haves and the have nots, the elite/elect and the plebeians.

I do not disagree with anything that you have said, but only question why you are of the opinion that the Government itselfis the enemy, as opposed to the corporate interests that have undue influence over seemingly any and all decisions made by that government?

It appears to me that there is room here to question more than the means by which we are controlled (ie Government) and begin to question the motives of those that are doing the controlling.


[edit on 14-8-2009 by Artephius Abraxas Helios]


I'm really starting to think we're getting somewhere here.

It's so obvious and in the back of people's minds but is not yet fully realized. THIS is the source of the problem. I have absolutely NO DOUBT that the solution to our troubles--liberals and conservatives alike--is to COMPLETELY sever the influence the banks and industry has over the government.

We will still be left with liberals vs. conservatives but i don't believe it will be anywhere near the severity is at right now.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Artephius Abraxas Helios
reply to post by ADVISOR
It appears to me that there is room here to question more than the means by which we are controlled (ie Government) and begin to question the motives of those that are doing the controlling.


That would be the government, and too much government is never good.

Do I personally feel the government is the enemy, if you read or read my signature quote, such would be evident.

Here are some quotes, you can say they are being used out of context if you wish, the message they are a part of is not.


Abbey, Edward
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government."

Fischer, Martin H.
"Of all the supervised conditions for life offered man, those under U S A's constitution have proved the best. Wherefore, be sure when you start modifying, corrupting or abrogating it."

Lawrence, D.H.
"Men fight for liberty and win it with hard knocks. Their children, brought up easy, let it slip away again, poor fools. And their grandchildren are once more slaves."

Wilson, Woodrow
"Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of it. The history of liberty is a history of resistance."

Henry, Patrick
"Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace--but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"


Adams, Samuel
"The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil Constitution, are worth defending at all hazards; and it is our duty to defend them against all attacks. We have received them as a fair inheritance from our worthy ancestors: they purchased them for us with toil and danger and expense of treasure and blood, and transmitted them to us with care and diligence. It will bring an everlasting mark of infamy on the present generation, enlightened as it is, if we should suffer them to be wrested from us by violence without a struggle, or to be cheated out of them by the artifices of false and designing men."

Kennedy, John F.
"We dare not forget that we are the heirs of that first revolution."



[edit on 14-8-2009 by ADVISOR]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Artephius Abraxas Helios
 


A very interesting discussion.


While I think this political divide could be the first shot sounding in a long battle that could truly turn nasty, I also believe that there will be a turning point where focus is rightly directed toward the government rather than opposing sides in a civil war.

With the current capabilities of the government, they would quash true militia threats with great force, leaving the public to see the true nature of the beast.

I don't think it would be too long before a war between the people saw an example of "disproportionate use of force" on the part of the government, and that this would unify the people against the PTB.

I don't know to what extent the country is divided. But there are an aweful lot of people simply opposing this idea of Health Care Reform regardless of political opinion generally.

I'm a liberal, I'm very left-wing, but I would be in opposition to this idea also. Having lived with the NHS all my life, I see little value in your nation moving down this road.
Admittedly, some things need to be changed to make access to medical services in your country more adequate for those on a low income, but the nationalisation of health provision is not the way forward.

I don't know what is being said in the US in defence of our system in the UK, but I can tell you now it is vastly inadequate; waiting lists are insane, the ability to see a dentist is a struggle, everything has to be arranged around the appointment, results are slow, treatment is often inadequate and the standards of care are low.

One memory remains with me to this day.
My mother was taken into hospital toward the end of her life (she'd been suffering with cancer). And we were beside her in a bed in what should appropriately be called a corridor. We were waiting for hours.
I think eventually my sister went to find someone and asked what was going on (this was six hours later), and within fifteen minutes the doctor was there. They had clearly forgotten about us.

My mother had been shoved in a pile of "case files" on a desk and left there as a non-person.

Do not allow this to happen in your country.
Yes, concede that changes need to be made. But you shouldn't give up your choices and freedom in the care of you and your loved ones to enable a complete change of the system for everyone else.

I gather there are other ways for effective health care to be provided to those on a low income and without insurance, and those are the methods to choose. Some of them may be radical and some may not work, but at least changes are being made and without all of this risk for every citizen.

Personally, I am in favour of the big pharmaceutical companies footing the bill from their grotesquely filled pockets!



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 
I'm of the opinion that the simplest and most effective way of doing just that is by starting a grassroots campaign to not re-elect any of them. If we can get rid of the people who have been unduly influenced by the banks/corporations/military-industrial-complex, and their army of lobbyist, maybe we can start fresh.

The source of all of our Government, The United States Constitution, is still a vibrant and valid document, envied by people less fortunate and that lack the freedoms it provides, the world over. The Courts are still functioning (though I must admit, they have not gone entirely untouched by the poisonous influence of special interest either). Thus, it is the elected officials themselves that seem most in need of a "fresh start."

This only requires people like ourselves to attempt to educate our fellow citizens and campaign diligently for everyone to vote against every single incumbent politician from the Presidency on down to your local level.

Sounds impossible, but even if there was only a 1/10th success rate, it might just send a message to the rest of our elected officials that continuing to ignore the interest of the people, in favor of the interest of lobbyist, is a risk they take at their own peril.

I'm somewhat ashamed to admit i find it much more likely though, that this is a pipe dream, and the real future lies, as I fear, with most of the people finding a way to buy in before those of us with eyes to see and minds to dissent are bought out.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Artephius Abraxas Helios
 


I am talking along similar lines with what you are referring to here, over on the thread below :

Are You "Right-Wing Fringe", or "Left-Wing Fringe" and How Will They Push You

The difference is that you are referring to the larger scale picture, and I am referring to the microcosm of one person's life.

I am someone who looks for both the small details and the larger picture.

I posted your thread in my thread, to point towards it.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by ADVISOR
 
I see your point, but I'm of the opinion that the word "Government" can be used to describe two very different things.

One isthe Form of Government a society structures itself by, i.e. our form being a Constitutional Representative Democratic Republic.

The other is the People that make up that Government by physically manning the positions it creates, i.e. our elected representatives and appointed officials acting in a State capacity.

While I agree 100% with your mistrust of and distaste for the latter definition of Government, I must respectfully decline to agree to disagree when it comes to the former.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas
 
Thanks, I was reading in that thread earlier, and it was one of the inspirations for starting this one. Thanks you for the link between the two. I agree they are reflections of each other on different arms of the spiral - Macro and Micro.





[edit on 14-8-2009 by Artephius Abraxas Helios]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Artephius Abraxas Helios
 


No problem. I also flagged, starred, and "D.I.G.G.'ed" this thread as well.

If mine was an inspiration to yours, feel free to pop in, because you only inspired more of me to go into it, and back to this.


[edit on 14-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Since the United States is a democracy, anyone may write up a bill to be considered for law, but a congress member must introduce it. Congress sees nearly 10,000 bills every year, and almost half are written by special interest groups. Since a member of congress must present the bill, individuals and groups who write it must convince the congressperson to support it. The bill must present the idea in full, how it would be implemented as a law, and a time frame for implementation.


How about a grass root campaign for citizens write there own bill type forum with online voteing of what to present and completely non partisian starting with separtion of lobbyist and politicians bill.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
No that is the problem, people keep thinking the USA is a democracy, it is not. SHOW ME where it says democracy, because I have read nothing in the Constitution that says democratic any f'n thing.

It says Republic, and multiple times.

People are doing it again, get out from under the blankets man.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ADVISOR
 


You are correct, we are a "Republic" who practices "Democracy"

There is a distinct difference between the two.



"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.





[edit on 14-8-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Artephius Abraxas Helios
 


You talk about people being easy pawns. That's exactly what you're being. You try to separate corporations from big government! THEY ARE THE SAME! Big corporations have been in bed with big government FOR A LONG TIME! We've never really had free market capitalism in this country and we sure as hell haven't had it in the last 60 years. Big government and corporations = STATE CORPORATISM! This is the whole problem in our country. You damn right government is to blame. They are in bed with corporations, wall street, the banks etc. Why? Look at Obama's cabinet and the current administration............they are all Wall Street and corporate financial throw backs. Most of our government is made up of ex corporate businessmen. It's been like this forever. NOTHING WILL EVERY CHANGE unless we get rid of our debt based Federal Reserve monetary system. This private banking cartel is their source of power. They can do whatever the hell they want because of it. You can elect anyone you want to Congress, the Senate, the Presidency and it won't matter one iota. Ron Paul could be elected President and even he would not matter. Americans can blindly argue about health care, cap and trade, whatever political hot button of the month is. IT WON'T MATTER! We have to completely radicalize and and revolutionize how we create our money in this country. Why do you think it's such an entrenched system? Because it is THE source of power for our government and in turn these big corporations.

So you bet I lay the blame SOLEY on government. They are supposed to represent the PEOPLE! The BOTTOMLINE is America needs LESS government not more. We need less corporate control and less corporate power in this country. So in my eyes LIBERALS and CONSERVATIVES, DEMS AND REPUBS have failed the American people and failed them miserably. They are two sides of the same coin. We need three, four, five, TEN different parties representing the American people. Not just two. Liberals and conservatives are ruining this country. Anyone that toes any political line and is not a free thinking, objective person is ruining this country. 200 years ago Americans for the most part agreed that less government is good. Americans don't even know what it means to be American anymore. There are lots of smart Americans that love big government. So if there is a civil war it's not going to have anything to do with black or white, up down, or left right. It's going to be fought between those that love big government and those that love personal liberty. Everyone else will get caught up in the divisive rhetoric and end up being part of the problem not the solution.

You can ask the most die hard liberal or conservative about politics..but ask them how money is created in this country and they'll probably stare blankly into your eyes. Change our money system and you'll change our politics.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ADVISOR
 


Representative democracy is a form of government founded on the principle of elected individuals representing the people, as opposed to either autocracy or direct democracy.
The term republic may have many different meanings. Today, it often simply means a state with an elected or otherwise non-monarchical head of state, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran or Republic of Korea. It may also have a meaning similar to liberal democracy. For example, "the United States relies on representative democracy, but its system of government is much more complex than that. It is not a simple representative democracy, but a constitutional republic in which majority rule is tempered by minority rights protected by law"



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 



LAST SENTENCE = EXACTLY!


Many people fail to realize this. And someone needs to tell our Politicians this as well! We need to bring Constitutional Republicanism to Iraq NOT DEMOCRACY! LOL.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ADVISOR
No that is the problem, people keep thinking the USA is a democracy, it is not. SHOW ME where it says democracy, because I have read nothing in the Constitution that says democratic any f'n thing.

It says Republic, and multiple times.

People are doing it again, get out from under the blankets man.


Autowrench:
As a student of the Constitution, I say this is so. America was never a democracy, only in a false style environment of government. Some quotes from Ben Franklin will go good here....

We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.
At the signing of the Declaration of Independence

Church and State
The church, the state, and the poor, are 3 daughters which we should maintain, but not portion off.

"You have a Republic, If you can keep it."

America is a Constitutional Republic . . . NOT a Democracy
By Daneen G. Peterson, Ph.D.
Speech Given September 9, 2006 in Salt Lake City, Utah
www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com...

How often have you heard people refer to America as a Democracy? When was the last time that you heard America referred to as a Republic? There is a very good reason that our Pledge of Allegiance refers to our country as a Republic and there is a very good reason that our Declaration of Independence and our constitution do not even mentioned the word "democracy".

Many people are under the false impression our form of government is a democracy, or representative democracy. This is of course completely untrue. The Founders were extremely knowledgeable about the issue of democracy and feared a democracy as much as a monarchy. They understood that the only entity that can take away the people's freedom is their own government, either by being too weak to protect them from external threats or by becoming too powerful and taking over every aspect of life.

In a Republic, the sovereignty resides with the people themselves. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives when he chooses to solve a problem. The people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government is a servant of the people, and obliged to its owner, We the People. Many politicians have lost sight of that fact.

A Constitutional Republic has some similarities to democracy in that it uses democratic processes to elect representatives and pass new laws, etc. The critical difference lies in the fact that a Constitutional Republic has a Constitution that limits the powers of the government. It also spells out how the government is structured, creating checks on its power and balancing power between the different branches.

The goal of a Constitutional Republic was to avoid the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobocracy but what exists in America today is a far cry from the Constitutional Republic our forefathers brought forth.

Today we have DO have a mobocracy occurring in our streets all across America. Sadly, such mobocracy or 'mob rule' was endorsed and encouraged by Sen. John McCain who praised the recent wave of pro-illegal immigration demonstrations by saying . . . "if the protesters hang tough they will succeed in forcing Congress to liberalize immigration laws. If such demonstrations continue, I think we will have a bill for the President to sign soon . . . The more debate, the more demonstrations, the more likely we will prevail.' He was of course referring to the Senate's massive illegal-alien amnesty bill S. 2611 which did in fact, pass. Was S. 2611 passed to appease the mob? If so, it is a perfect example of rule by mobocracy!

Article IV Section 4 of the Constitution states: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion . . .

Not only is our Constitution being ignored, the exact OPPOSITE is being encourage by John McCain and seconded by ALL those who voted for S. 2611 in the Senate. If you want to preserve the Constitutional Republic you should vote out of office . . . every single senator that voted for S. 2611.



posted on Aug, 14 2009 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Zosynspiracy
 


You're right. They are the same and I failed to fully realize that. They are either:

A. Ex-CEO"s
B. Ex-Board members
C. Ex-wall street bankers
D. Career politicians who have lots of friends in one or more (most likely the latter) of the areas above who only got to where they are because of very large campaign contributions by the above.

Damn...we're screwed...





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join