It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

I beg of you read this. Stop the drama...

page: 14
58
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by elevatedone
*** ATTENTION ***

Back on topic please, we're not discussing each other, banned members or spell checkers.

Thank You.


I agree I agree. If you read this whole thread the facts speak out still. The OP was sidetracked by something and it lead this thread into chaos. There is no reason to stop the real discussion however. Re-read the ops first post.

The message had nothing to do with banned member or spell checkers, but as for discussing others....well. Don't we have to discuss others to understand one another?

This is a thread to talk to one another about one another. It does not have to be negative or abusive. Nothing we do has to be. Don't let it become that way...


[edit on 10-11-2009 by Sevard]




posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Draves
 




I now know why I don't fit in and what is wrong with the world. Simply put it is drama. We are obsessed with it. We cannot live a happy life without something to gossip about.


Gossip, Drama, and Social humiliation can actually serve some rather useful functions in society though. For one, it acts as a form of social punishment and deterrent against socially unacceptable actions. From the old ladies at the small-town church, to Washington sex scandals - it works on all levels. This doesn't mean that it's right to be so judgemental, or that ostricisation isn't a horrible thing you can do to your fellow human beings. Nor is it always used in the promotion of what's what's just and right in humans. That's not what this particular social tools are about. Have ever been about.

Sure, it doesn't even come close to being a form of serious deterrent or preventative mechanism. Some celebrities even go out of their way to stir up controversy for publicity. Still It does help to curb those behaviors, or drive out the offending parties to societies outskirts. For example, Nick Nolte and Paul "Pee-Wee Herman" Reubens's careers have both suffered greatly for their behaviors. As has Brittney Spears's career. Madonna, however, boosted her career with controversy - but in doing so, also raised concerns among many parents who would then take the matter up with their children.




Secondly, it can serve as a great outlet for schadenfreude - the delight in the misfortune of others. Because we choose these people (by media attention in Hollywood, or by votes in Government) to lead us... to be our icons... they necessarily stand apart and above us as leaders. Gossip and Drama, especially when followed by a blow to their career, serves to reaffirm within ourselves that - while they may be above us in society, it is ultimately WE who hold the power over their fame and position. We propped them up, and we delight in knowing we can knock them right back down if they step out of line.

[edit on 10-11-2009 by Lasheic]



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by MajorDisaster
Alas, I tried my absolute best to steer Peter and Tink down the right path, and I'm sure lots of others did too - but it was just not meant to be. Back to never-never-land for them!


Great thread though!

Back on topic - how do you fight (or passively resist) an enemy that has far superior technology and that's fully prepared to wipe out 90% of humanity? With ninjas? Or Hemp? Or both.......?


Aye. He sure did make a mess eh? this thread is loaded with land mines


May tink and peter find happiness in never never land.

Topic~
how do you fight the enemy? Our own citizens will be the ones using that technology on ourselves in the end wont it? We need to convince them not to do it. There would be no fight then. It doesn't matter that some poeple have power now. The mass public is what gives them that power and we work for them. We can stop. We could. I think we may just be able to one day....



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by rjmelter
reply to post by Draves 2.0
 


so basically this is what has happened. Draves has gotten to the "step carefully topic"; many people either disagree fully, neutral, agree partially, or agree fully. Some dont understand the points. As far as how I see it Draves, is that you have made many good points and many of the people that would disagree with you (had you gone and did a verbal communication on this) have "attacked you". Yet they have not... I see that you are getting worked up over what you see as attacks... But it was expected was it not? The topic on hand leans more toward a spiritual awareness, and spiritual needs vs those of physical needs -Thoughts!- and wants.

Regardless of what anyone says there are a few things I know

We do have within ourselves a deeper being, eiter it is energy/spirit or just deeper awareness deeply rooted into our biological structure due to the key elements of creation Carbon, Hydrogen, Nitrogen... then - electrons, protons, neurons- and the smaller things that scientists are only now discovering.

What we do with this being is up to all of us.

We come from different lives, we live for different reasons... to make a difference, or just to live a simple life.

YOU feel you have been created to make change, you see suffering and you wish to end it, thus you are a protector... of sorts. BUT simple WANTING to stop something does not authoritate the power to do so. You have to discipline yourself, you have to become more than you are ( a complex human form that can be taken advantage of, a form that is flawed by conception and creation, yet these flaws make us strong and you have to figure yours out and master them).

I agree Drama does need stopping, but the topic of this thread is so entirely complex that you should possibly rethink how you approach generalizing vague ideas, go deeper... Look for the roots, seperate the roots, analyze the roots, but most important understand them.

This is a very good post, dont go awol because your emotional about the subject. I for one agree with many of your points, but I see that your letting feedback get to you. Don't. Take it in, understand their perspective... They will be right in some aspects just as you are on some.

but i seriously would hate to see a good thread go away because of intolerance of other peoples perspectives. WE are like magnets. We go thru life picking up tidbits of everything, sometimes things we dont want to pickup and if we were to compare what we collect... The material is similar yet none is the same, none is composed of the same... It all dependes on where each magnet came from. Thank Goodness We arent just magnets tho, we can reject what we want to



Aye. The OP has made a very touchy subject and it shows. It is touchy only because it is not talked about. We are uncomfortable with it. I do think it is worth truly talking about.

I am sure the OP expected something like this. I also bet he tried to defend his position.

He did make some good points, but really no one single person will ever have all the answers. We all have a small piece of it. It is our burden to put a very confusing puzzle together together.

We have to change things. Not me or you or him or her or them. We need to together.

Ah spiritual awareness...i would love this topic to shift that way. There is so much out there. There is so much to learn. Why can't we just try to see it?

I feel the OP had a good reason to start this and also had his own reasons to become emotional. That does not mean there isn't a little truth in everything we say and do. It comes down to why. Why are things this way? Why did these things happen? Why did he have a large response? What is wrong in this world and what do we need to do as a people to fix it?

[edit on 10-11-2009 by Sevard]



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   
words are just words... until someone takes an action against you or punishes you.

what does everything think? where should we go from here? we are doing what we can on our own, which is at the very least something... but not enough. I don't think it is wrong to wish to be a part of something bigger, the move the change along. and some of you say talk is cheap, well... yours is too. at least ours are positive and are hopefully making people think! We understand that this site isn't the only place that we need to talk to people about what is going on, but it is nice to have a thread a person can sit down and read after talking with them.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by rjmelter

Just so yo know... The founders of the Constitution, and the Declaration of Independence were breaking the law. The Monetary System isnt owned by the Government.

One very interesting fact that we learned in our Criminal Justice class...

well two now that i think of it.

History is written by the winners...

And The Criminal Justice system in place is in place to protect the powerful that established it, not protect the justice that is supposed to be ensured.

Rising to the occasional truth means doing what you know is right vs what is told to you is right. Discerning truth is not an easy task, and it is not meant for the weak minded.


"Criminal Justice" is an oxymoron, I laugh every time someone says that.


Criminals do not deserve justice, the victims deserve justice, how is it then "Criminal Justice"? Sadly people who go to "law school" these days are part of the problem not part of the solution. I went to law school for 2 years, I quit when I found out what the BAR stands for, British Accredited Registry,The term “BAR” is an acronym for British Accredited Registry, these snakes are in fact working for the Crown of England.

www.healthfreedom.info...



Anyone with a BAR card is a federal criminal, who might that be? Most politicians and ALL lawyers and attorneys, they are traitors.

We have been under british rule since the mid 1800's. Andrew Jackson kicked the Rothschilds and the central bank the hell out of this country and for good reason, other than they were manipulating government then, they also killed his parents.

Anyway, the OP is just asking for us to come together, not go along to get along, he wants to see a solution. I have put forth the ONLY LEGAL ONE so far that I have seen. It is how we were enslaved to begin with and it is the only way we will get out of the enslavement.

Somewhere on ATS here a guy posted how to talk in court, he was right, you are a beneficiary of the TRUST, you demand the Judge be your trustee and do your bidding, you tell HIM he must discharge the matter, erase the record and compensate you from the trust fund.

That is another solution.

rjmelter, I wish you would read American Jurisprudence, there are other law books as well, criminal justice schools are teaching would-be cops how to enforce corporate code on sovereign Citizens, that is the problem. It's unlawful and unconstitutional.

Sheriff Richard Mack is another one to watch on youtube and read his books, he is making a difference, small so far but a difference. I try to educate as many officers as I can, they are no longer peace officers but corporate security guards. Sad but true.

If they do not file their "Oath of Office" in 15 days after taking the position, they are commiting a federal crime, impersonating an officer. I could go on and on with the legal stuff. But..................

We should read all the posts here before we state a response, I have tried to read as many as I can before I get aggravated at the ignorance. If we all just took the time to learn the actual Law and who and what is behind the downfall of this country, we would all be farther ahead. I know I was once ignorant and then I started to investigate and learn what the real truth is. Again i could go on and on with the legal stuff, federal statutes and all. THINK FOR YOURSELF, turn the damn TV OFF!!!



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
I did not read through this entire thread though I have something to add.

This world (as I am aware) consists of several main components:

NOTE: I am leaving out spiritual and or religious connotations for good reason. This is mainly about the physical more limiting side of things.

ONE

We (Humans) consist of physical bodies and tend to migrate towards control and domination. We do so because we (perceive) we are limited, weak and alone in the Universe.

TWO

In the "game" of dominance we become attracted and distracted through the illusion of material objects which have been given "value" by humanity. This "value" is precisely and only what we GIVE it.

IE: We are more focused on clothes than bodies. We are more focused on transportation vehicles than the road/path traveled. We are more focused on money than peace and balance.

THREE

We find (perceive) it easier to follow pattern (or leader) and live via repetition rather than accept change and learn from it. This enables the dog-chasing-its-tail-effect.

IE: Politicians, presidential leaders, UN, countries and states and providences, work, school, church, etc.

FOUR

We have emotions which can be very effective and powerful abilities and or advantages. Most do not understand such “things” and in doing so allow emotions to control and dominate the host instead of existing in balance.

IE: Greed, fear, jealousy, anger, etc.

FIVE

Because of our physical brains we exist in duality (or a world of duality) and this causes more confusion, limitation and control. We get caught up in controlling arguments of which team, side or object is “better” over the other when reality IS balance.

IE: Politicians vs. republicans, good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, tall vs. short, life vs. death, etc.

CONCLUSION

We (Humans) live in a wonderful and limiting reality. There is nothing “wrong” or “bad” with any of these concepts, they simply are. When we (Humanity) are ready to move into a more expansive understanding (awareness) then it will be so.

And so I will leave you with this quote.

“We all have our cocoons, Ryan. It's the struggle to free ourselves that makes us who we truly are.” –Ming from Warriors of Virtue (1997)



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by lagenese
 




We need to change our ways, in an individual way. Any change begins with the self.


Problem being, we don't really have any sort of clear understanding of human behavior. Partly because of just how complex our brains our, and how complex the social and environmental world we build and inhabit. There's some good starts, but the entire subject is touchy as hell and prone to irrational bickering, hatred, and even violence. To change our ways, you're talking about changing some very fundamental threads of the human psyche (whether woven by culture or evolution) which weave into a tapestry of hot button subjects as diverse and debated as religion, politics, equality, morality, ethics, philosophy, child rearing, even art.

And in the end, I find it very likely that nothing will ultimately change. I feel there is good enough evidence to strongly suggest some human universals to our mental arena. Ones we're all born with, evolved with, and which serve such a diverse array of purposes - that changing them is impossible without first defining them, and then with a permenant conscious effort work to mitigate them or manipulate them into less obstructive forces in society.

It's amazing... how so much of our culture and thinking is based around extremely old information and philosophies that even most people who've been shaped by them are completely unaware of their names, history, or doctrines. We are all endowed with an innate psychology aptitude which allows us to model other people's minds and behaviors - so as to better suit our social interactions and convey ideas beyond mere literal interpretations of language. Many people never really stop to think they possess such intuitive/innate psychology, even though they use it constantly, let alone have much of a concept of psychology as we've come to understand it. Perhaps some vague mish-mashes of Freud's dream/symbolism analysis, Pavlov's conditioning, and a pharmaceutical rainbow of chemicals over-prescribed and under-functional. These three themes I notice quite a lot here on ATS... and all three of them are horridly wrong or criminally incomplete in light of years of research and debate they came before.

So how do we, as individuals - and as a society, as a culture, move from such poor public concepts to something more meaningful... and will people feel comfortable scrapping their old doctrines of the mind that have become so ingrained into their thinking? Will they want to acknowledge that genetics plays a role in personality and potential, or that we as parents might actually have very little influence on our children's overall development? Can people accept that we may well not all born equal in terms of potential, and still understand that we all still equal in terms of human rights? How far can it go? Will the population at large be able to scrap the scraped tablet, dispel the noble savage? What would it be like if the people knew the full extent to which our understanding has shown that, there is most likely no trace of a ghost in the machine? That if, somehow, there is a soul - it has nothing to do with YOU as a person which is determined by your brain?

If it were shown to be true, would the public at large really give up their comfortable delusions of a "soul", to embrace the truth? What if it also meant giving up the certainty of free will? Will people be able to reconcile the fact that, it doesn't really matter - because unlike the phantasmal visages of the inferred soul - the illusion of free will is one we cannot apparently step out of?

Would the masses even bother listening to the debates, reading the research, and informing their opinion... or are such questions and re-considerations simply too taboo to risk engaging with? Is it disinterest, or a desire for self-affirmation that drives people to their church pews, their self-help gurus, their ideological prophets - rather than to their libraries and to the works of those who are at the forefronts of the research and debate? Why do so many choose to listen to the Pope, instead of Pinker? Their spiritualists, rather than Skinner? Their Chakras, rather than Chomsky?

If we ever hope to truly understand ourselves, I have little doubt that first we will have to face the mirror and take a long hard look at ourselves and who we truly are. We may not like what we see staring back at us when we replace romanticism with realism. But we don't have to like it, nor just accept it fatalistically. It's simply no use blaming the mirror, if your face is askew. We just have to make an honest effort to really know ourselves first. Otherwise, any changes we wish to promote or try to enact in our behaviors will be implemented blindly. Like a house built on an unstable foundation, the walls will soon crack, and those who slip through those cracks will become the martyrs of the new call to change human behavior with the next blindly applied convention. Rinse. Repeat.

There's still a lot left unanswered, unexplored, and unknown. Perhaps we will some day, if we choose to work to acknowledge and effectively mitigate ugly truths if we find them - rather than covering over and ignoring them with comfortable delusions of who we want to be, rather than who we are.

"Man will only become better when you show him what he is like." ~ Anton Chekhov



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sevard

I am sure the OP expected something like this. I also bet he tried to defend his position.

...

I feel the OP had a good reason to start this and also had his own reasons to become emotional.


and it would seem they have returned but once again to further bolster their position, as well as the reasons behind and for such emotional outbursts and whatnot.

sevard == draves



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
who cares who is who? we all just want out voices heard.

how do we get more people aware that this is not what our founding fathers had in mind? it's hard to even keep people in this forum on topic. no wonder its so frickin difficult to get the general population to listen. stop thinking of your own opinion and agenda. what can we do to help our country, our communities?



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sevard
how do you fight the enemy? Our own citizens will be the ones using that technology on ourselves in the end wont it? We need to convince them not to do it. There would be no fight then. It doesn't matter that some poeple have power now. The mass public is what gives them that power and we work for them. We can stop. We could. I think we may just be able to one day....


Well first of all, since this is your first day and all, welcome to ATS! my Backwards brother in arms!


I think you are still being a bit naive, my friend. As I keep trying to tell you, the PTB at the very top "turned to the Dark Side" and sold their souls to Satan, or someone or someTHING else, long ago. They are sorcerors who practise Black Magick. There IS NO reasoning or convincing with such people; they are for all intents and purposes, demons.

How do you reason with a demon as it's busy dropping an atomic bomb or unleashing a Plague on you? You don't!!!

Therein lies the real crux of the problem, and that is why ALL of our efforts so far have been in vain.

Understand now?



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by tinker_j
who cares who is who? we all just want out voices heard.

how do we get more people aware that this is not what our founding fathers had in mind? it's hard to even keep people in this forum on topic. no wonder its so frickin difficult to get the general population to listen. stop thinking of your own opinion and agenda. what can we do to help our country, our communities?


Please be specific, some of us have explained exactly what is wrong and a remedy. It is very simple and basic, we all must TAKE BACK OUR SOVEREIGNTY. That is what this country was founded by, SOVEREIGN PEOPLE.

I stated what YOU can DO, if you research it you will see what taking back your "strawman" will do for YOU and the country. If everyone understood it and did it, the Elite would have no more POWER,.......................... KNOWLEDGE IS POWER, and we must take back our power. It basically comes down to identity theft by the government through the "birth certificate" which has been discussed before, maybe not in enough detail.

Stop the identity theft and you stop THEM. How simple is that?

What do you NOT understand people?



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by tinker_j
 




how do we get more people aware that this is not what our founding fathers had in mind?


Who are you to speak for the founding fathers? Who are you to say that the founding fathers all shared the same common vision, rather than agreeing upon an amalgamation of concessions between multiple different visions of America? People talk about the founding fathers as if they were one person with one voice and one vision. Sometimes I wonder if the founding fathers that people claim to speak for have more in common with figures such as Heracles and Jesus Christ - rather than of the actual men who drafted, heatedly debated, and eventually ratified it.

While there were sentiments and warnings against spurious and frequent changes to the Constitution - the Constitution was given a clear avenue for it's change. I see the Constitution as a Living Document which must represent living people - not representing the government of a world 200 years dead and gone. There is a balance struck between change, and establishment by the obtuse and extremely harsh requirements of the amendment process meant to weed out those weak and spurious changes that would only weaken the credibility of the social contract - while yet allowing necessary and strongly desired changes to occur - so as to adapt to the changes of the culture, the times, and the world.

The founding fathers were not soothsayers. They were not oracles. They were not astrologers reading the future from the positions of the stars. They had no idea what sort of a world their descendants would be living in. How could they possibly draft a document or forge a government capable of meeting the demands of all it's people for all of time? Such a feat is reserved to gods, and even then shows it's limitations. The nation was founded of the people, by the people, and for the people. The people who live now are whom the Constitution is there to govern and protect do not live in the same world their anscetors did, and I have severe reservations regarding the suggestion that the founding fathers would have so blindly shackled the future nation to a government built for the world of of 1778 for perpetuity.

To quote Jefferson:



"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."


I may not agree with all of the laws and regulations under which I am governed... but I consider it to be the height of foolishness to suggest that the hands of time can be turned back on government and world politics. That we can, in any way, scrap the whole system and go back to square one. Like it or not, the world is moving forward, and America must have a government which can keep pace. Elsewise, we'll be left behind and marginalized - stagnating while simply be waiting for some other Matthew Perry from some other nation to blow open our harbors and force us to rejoin the world.

Would the founding fathers approve? It's hard to say on an individual basis, and impossible to suggest what a group consensus may be. Depending on whether or not you consider Thomas Paine a founding father (generally, he's only considered one until the usefulness of his patriotic amero-fellatio cherry picked statements become less an asset and more a burden in light of his actual views and proposals) - I know he would not approve of the American government today. But, then again, he wasn't entirely happy with the way the US Constitution turned out and went on to advocate and inspire social revolutions in England and France. His works Rights of Man and Agrarian Justice are at rather striking odds with most people's view as the intention of the founders.


Certainly, however, no founding father who advocated rebellion against tyranny taking root in America had a great love for the Constitution. At least, before it was ratified. Clearly the suggestion that the citizens have a right to revolt against the government, and even attempts at protections of that right in the Constitution itself, imply that the Constitution is worthless when it no longer represents the people to such a point that they decide to rebel against the Government.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by tinker_j
 




how do we get more people aware that this is not what our founding fathers had in mind?


Who are you to speak for the founding fathers? Who are you to say that the founding fathers all shared the same common vision, rather than agreeing upon an amalgamation of concessions between multiple different visions of America? People talk about the founding fathers as if they were one person with one voice and one vision. Sometimes I wonder if the founding fathers that people claim to speak for have more in common with figures such as Heracles and Jesus Christ - rather than of the actual men who drafted, heatedly debated, and eventually ratified it.

While there were sentiments and warnings against spurious and frequent changes to the Constitution - the Constitution was given a clear avenue for it's change. I see the Constitution as a Living Document which must represent living people - not representing the government of a world 200 years dead and gone. There is a balance struck between change, and establishment by the obtuse and extremely harsh requirements of the amendment process meant to weed out those weak and spurious changes that would only weaken the credibility of the social contract - while yet allowing necessary and strongly desired changes to occur - so as to adapt to the changes of the culture, the times, and the world.

The founding fathers were not soothsayers. They were not oracles. They were not astrologers reading the future from the positions of the stars. They had no idea what sort of a world their descendants would be living in. How could they possibly draft a document or forge a government capable of meeting the demands of all it's people for all of time? Such a feat is reserved to gods, and even then shows it's limitations. The nation was founded of the people, by the people, and for the people. The people who live now are whom the Constitution is there to govern and protect do not live in the same world their anscetors did, and I have severe reservations regarding the suggestion that the founding fathers would have so blindly shackled the future nation to a government built for the world of of 1778 for perpetuity.

To quote Jefferson:



"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."


I may not agree with all of the laws and regulations under which I am governed... but I consider it to be the height of foolishness to suggest that the hands of time can be turned back on government and world politics. That we can, in any way, scrap the whole system and go back to square one. Like it or not, the world is moving forward, and America must have a government which can keep pace. Elsewise, we'll be left behind and marginalized - stagnating while simply be waiting for some other Matthew Perry from some other nation to blow open our harbors and force us to rejoin the world.

Would the founding fathers approve? It's hard to say on an individual basis, and impossible to suggest what a group consensus may be. Depending on whether or not you consider Thomas Paine a founding father (generally, he's only considered one until the usefulness of his patriotic amero-fellatio cherry picked statements become less an asset and more a burden in light of his actual views and proposals) - I know he would not approve of the American government today. But, then again, he wasn't entirely happy with the way the US Constitution turned out and went on to advocate and inspire social revolutions in England and France. His works Rights of Man and Agrarian Justice are at rather striking odds with most people's view as the intention of the founders.


Certainly, however, no founding father who advocated rebellion against tyranny taking root in America had a great love for the Constitution. At least, before it was ratified. Clearly the suggestion that the citizens have a right to revolt against the government, and even attempts at protections of that right in the Constitution itself, imply that the Constitution is worthless when it no longer represents the people to such a point that they decide to rebel against the Government.


you don't need to be rude. I am allowed to have my own opinion. I may not have typed a book like you did, but I also had about two minutes to write before I had somewhere to be. lay off dude.

I am well aware that our founding fathers couldn't have possibly fathomed what life would be like today. However, they wanted to create a form of government that was for the people and ours is not anymore. It's overran by a bunch of elitists that never end up doing what they "promise" or propose they are going to. As we've all said, talk is cheap and the politicians of today all talk a good talk, but when it comes down to it, we are stuck in the same rut we have been for years, only digging the hole deeper. So WE, the people must fight back. Laws are in place typically for a good reason, but why do they apply to us, the common people, and not the elite? I want to see or at the very least help life be better for the common person. There are many ways I could do this, but I CHOOSE this fight. I will try to spread awareness of what our government has so diligently tried to hide. I'm not asking you to agree, but respect my fight. You can do things your way and I will do things mine... we will each have followers and maybe someday, we will meet somewhere in the middle.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 04:06 PM
link   
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."-Thomas Jefferson

I also find it hilarious that you posted the quote I had as my signature earlier.
our government is not progressing with the general population. it is going the way one particular group wants it to. I'm pretty sure that goes directly against this quote as well.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Draves
 


To OP Draves,

I have to say that even though I'm typically a negative person (some are, some aren't, needed for balance, eh?) ... I have to applaud your post. It was very clear, very direct, very honest, and quite assertive while being compassionate at the same time.

If only we had world mediators like yourself, we'd be in a better place.

Yes there is some idealism to what you said, but I think it was tempered with realism as well, because you're right. We have all become a bunch of children and our culture is seriously lacking in the fortitude of our truly adult ancestors.

I'm not sure what I can do to act on what you said, and I think many of us will always choose the easier way which ends up being the harder way in the long run, but I feel that your intention is good and important and really worth pondering for everyone here.

Kudos to you, and to your honesty!



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by formernewager
reply to post by Draves
 


To OP Draves,

I have to say that even though I'm typically a negative person (some are, some aren't, needed for balance, eh?) ... I have to applaud your post. It was very clear, very direct, very honest, and quite assertive while being compassionate at the same time.

If only we had world mediators like yourself, we'd be in a better place.

Yes there is some idealism to what you said, but I think it was tempered with realism as well, because you're right. We have all become a bunch of children and our culture is seriously lacking in the fortitude of our truly adult ancestors.

I'm not sure what I can do to act on what you said, and I think many of us will always choose the easier way which ends up being the harder way in the long run, but I feel that your intention is good and important and really worth pondering for everyone here.

Kudos to you, and to your honesty!


just wanted to say thanks for the support from all of us who would like see some kind of peaceful resolution to our current dilemma. The more people even start to think that there is a peaceful way to make ourselves heard, the more likely it is to happen eventually.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
Thanks for the post OP.

Here we have a guy spilling his heart out and wanting something good for the world. And some of you shoot him down with no alternative solutions, acting as if you know everything and a peaceful resolution would not work (like you or myself would know?) , or you are arguing over some spelling mistakes.

YES. Something needs to be done. No one should starve on this planet. No one should be homeless. We need to stop spending money on better ways to kill each other and spend it on something productive.

Now, the first step is we need to agree that there needs to be a change for the better for humans as a whole. Just focus on the big picture. Some positive change needs to happen. If we can't agree on that, well then, I could probably come up with a lot of names to call you and say you need to go visit a third world country or something, but I won't. ( or did I?)

[edit on 10-11-2009 by doped00]



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by tinker_j
 




you don't need to be rude.


You're right. You became a target of a building frustration, a trigger to a rant which has been building with the repeated evocation of the name and supposed intents of the "Founding Fathers", by nearly everybody and their brother-in-law as a support for their own particular causes. Most often, it seems, as little more than appeals from an almost religiously admired authority. An easy way to promote or dismiss political movements out of hand, without reconciling or dealing with the actual issues.

The founding fathers were a remarkable collection of minds who deserve to be revered and honored (in most cases) for their contributions to history. However, ironically their actual deeds, personalities, opinions, and ideologies are forgotten in favor of a unrealistically homogeneous and near religiously sacred hodge-podge of idealized characteristics. Bob Basso's bastardization of Thomas Paine being a prime example.

I apologize for any undue rudeness on my part.



I am allowed to have my own opinion.


Indeed you are, and I wouldn't deny you your opinion. That does not necessarily imply that I am required to respect that opinion.



However, they wanted to create a form of government that was for the people and ours is not anymore.


Are our governors and statesmen not citizens? Of the people, by the people... and that is something we shouldn't forget, even if livid over their mismanagement and promotion of self-interest.



It's overran by a bunch of elitists


Elitists are on every level of society though, from politics to sports to World of Warcraft. We'll never be rid of them, especially in an economy that promotes the disparaging division between the haves and have-nots. The struggle between the commoners, the bourgeouis, and the aristocrats. That is a discussion for another thread, though.

What is of relevance, however, is that elitism has been alive and well in America since the very founding of the nation. The debate and color spectrum of positions America's founders had in struggling with elitism vs. agrarianism most famously portrayed by the contention between Jefferson's and Hamilton's visions of America, and their impact on it's development. Yet, Jefferson himself was himself an elite of society.



that never end up doing what they "promise" or propose they are going to.


Leaving the substantial influence of lobbyists aside for the moment, it is unrealistic to expect them to make good on all of their campaign promises. The policies your representative was elected by promoting may be irreconcilable to the policies which elected the representatives of your neighboring state. The house and senate are crucibles of compromise and contention, and your representatives voice not only doesn't have to represent your position - but is competing with hundreds of other representatives. There is no white knight who can charge into D.C. to clean up Washington by keeping their promises and sticking to their guns. Despite the reverence for Ron Paul on ATS, how much influence does he truly have in shaping the legislature?

And even beyond that, if we choose to demonize them as corrupt tyrants - this is still in line with issues the Founders dealt with. It's why Paine referred government as evil, but a necessary one. Or more accurately summed up by British humorist Alan Coren... “Democracy consists of choosing your dictators after they've told you what you think it is you want to hear”.

Elected representatives only represent your voice to the extent you're paying attention to their voting record, and how desperate they are for votes. Otherwise, they are not intended to necessarily represent YOU... but rather we choose them to make decisions of their own which are most likely to align with our interests. They cannot truly represent the will of the people, because there is no collective will in a free and liberated society where everyone can have their own opinions... and it necessarily depends upon the education of the represented. Alexander Hamilton argued that the uneducated common man has no place in politics. In a way, Jefferson agreed with him, and espoused the virtues of a well educated public as a means to ensure liberty. John F. Kennedy would later encapsulate both views in his '63 speech at Vanderbilt University when he echoed Jefferson's position that; "only an educated and informed people will be a free people; that the ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all"



politicians of today all talk a good talk, but when it comes down to it, we are stuck in the same rut we have been for years, only digging the hole deeper.


It's always been that way though. Most Americans know well the phrase "The more things change, the more they stay the same." Or as The Who put it; "Meet the New Boss, Same as the Old Boss."



Laws are in place typically for a good reason


Heh, I wouldn't necessarily agree with this. A good many of them (especially on the state and county level) are forgotten placeholders, legislative spam, and otherwise outdated and often unenforced junk. In my state, it is illegal to buy carry-out liquor on Sunday, but perfectly acceptable to have as many drinks as you want at a restaurant. According to several "Strange Laws" websites, in North Dakota it is still perfectly legal to shoot Native Americans - provided they're on horseback and you're in a covered wagon at the time. However, I can't verify that claim since none of them bothered to provide the location of the law.



but why do they apply to us, the common people, and not the elite?


The law applies to both commoner, middle class, and elite equally. What is not equal, are the resources, affluence, and connections to contend, skirt, or duck through loopholes necessary to weasel out of the consequences.



I'm not asking you to agree, but respect my fight.


I am obligated to neither agree with or respect your chosen battles. Nor are you obligated to agree with me or respect my chosen battles.



we will each have followers


No offense, but the language used seems a bit lacking in hubris. What would I want with followers? Even so, I would rather be surrounded by colleagues who can think for themselves and will challenge my opinions. If you do not challenge your own opinions by sheltering them from criticism among yes-men or by censoring the opposition - then you prevent yourself from being able to change them. You become a slave to your own beliefs and convictions.



our government is not progressing with the general population.


On the contrary, I think it's the general population that isn't keeping up with the world, and the government by extension. How often have you noticed the general public engaging topics such as the implications of Genetic Patenting? The government has already been dealing with Gene Patenting laws for the better part of the last decade, and they can have direct repercussions on your civil rights. Check out the case of Moore vs. Regents of the University of California. Yet the general population still has trouble deciding whether or not Intelligent Design (Creationism) should be taught in science class along with evolution. That's not very encouraging IMO.



it is going the way one particular group wants it to.


I assume you're referring to the NWO, so correct me on that if I'm mistaken. For now, all I'll say is that I think the NWO is not controlled by anyone. Rather, it's an emergent trend that is propelled from the innumerable interactions from the bottom up - rather than from the top down. If such is the case, I think it's going to happen whether anybody wants it to or not, and there's not a damned thing anyone can do about it. The only way to stop it, would be to enact the very measures so many people fear it represents.



posted on Nov, 10 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Lasheic
 


Do you enjoy picking apart people's posts? I don't need a play by play of what you think of what I write. I appreciate objective criticism, but doing it isn't really furthering what this discussion was intended for.

What can WE do?



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join