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.

 

Disinfo Alert - China puts Lien on US Treasury

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   
www.dailypaul.com...

nov. 13th suddlebutt that did not get resolved as true or false.
several known to be disinfo sites did report it as factual but no
confirmation or evidence to prove. China maybe filing for
imminent domain rights over USA.




posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 09:59 PM
link   
Well if we borrowed it at 45,then shouldn't we have to pay it back at 45+interest? If that is the cas then we should have made a profit!

-E-

[edit on 8-12-2009 by MysterE]



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
That would probably be the worst idea ever, as it would certainly lead to war if the Chinese started seizing US property.

Even if war didn't start, there would most likely be an embargo, either government enforced or citizen mandated (which can't be counted out -- have you seen all of those CitGo ads talking about them being local business?), which would decimate the Chinese economy moreso than the US. For the US, it would involve higher prices on many luxury items while production is shifted from China to other nations, but for the Chinese it would involve massive job loss, which could possibly lead to the government's collapse as we saw in the USSR (it could be a strong contributing factor, anyway, that I'm sure we would nudge along).

The only possible way this could go down that I see would be if China succeeded in getting a lien against the US and then used that as diplomatic leverage. It would sour relations even further, but in the short term they might get some consolations.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
It will be interesting to see if this turns out to be a disinformation piece, or simply, the truth.

I am leaning towards the former, but nothing the financial cartel does surprises me anymore.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
From article:

"(2): We understand that a total of 163 prominent individuals, many from Congress, plus George Bush 41, William Clinton 42 and George Bush 43, plus THREE current and former US Supreme Court Justices, will be arrested on the basis of arrest warrants in the light of the continued sabotage and the deadline for the Chinese to implement their LIEN on the US Treasury."

I pretty much stopped right there.
That won't happen. There will be war far before that ever happens. If any of those three men were ever to be taken in, it wouldn't be by a foreign country, it would be under the authority of the current administration here in the US... and we know that ain't gonna' happen either.

In short, there is no way that the US would allow a President, or a Senator for that matter, to be arrested at the behest of a competing Global Power. No way in hell.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by JayinAR

In short, there is no way that the US would allow a President, or a Senator for that matter, to be arrested at the behest of a competing Global Power. No way in hell.


The article is speaking of former presidents.
There's always the World Court at the Hague.



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


In the late 1830s, Andrew Jackson, then president of the United States, was moving the Cherokee Indians our of Georgia in a forceful manner. Instead of taking up arms, the Cherokee went to court and won in the Supreme Court -- they could keep their land, according to the Court. Andrew Jackson's response was, "they made the ruling, let them enforce it". In 1839 Georgia had moved the Cherokee off their land.

Let's say, in 2010, the World Court decides to arrest several former US presidents and senators, sending them into Chinese custody. The US says, "Not gonna happen." Does the World Court then send U.N. troops to overpower the American military and take them by force? The US provides most of the U.N.'s military strength. Not gonna happen!



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


Well sure it was speaking of former Presidents. Afterall, we don't have three current Presidents, do we?



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by junglejake
 


I see it more as a corporate takeover, if it should happen.
Doesn't China hold a lot of the mortgage foreclosures?
How many of our roads have been leased to them?



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Alethea
 


Roads being leased to them?
I'm assuming you are speaking of toll-roads, right?
Otherwise, it reminds me of a Kids In the Hall skit where a man goes to a laundrymat and tries to lease underwear from people... But the kicker was that he was only leasing rights to the roads, not physical ownership. Meaning, he was purchasing them in naming rights only. The man got to keep and wear his underwear while the leasee paid him to do so.

Edit to remove "faith" in place of "naming rights"

[edit on 8-12-2009 by JayinAR]



posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alethea
I see it more as a corporate takeover, if it should happen.
Doesn't China hold a lot of the mortgage foreclosures?
How many of our roads have been leased to them?

Leases can be canceled; We the People didn't agree to those leases or the mortgage sales, so only the government itself is legally responsible. Those mortgage foreclosures were originally bought from American corporations, not purchased from the government (not by the will of the People, because there was an overwhelming public mandate against the Bailout Bill) or the People; The government is operating illegally because one of the terms in the Constitution (See Article 4, Section 4) is that they must guarantee a Republican (representative) form of government & they violated it. Those "representatives" who voted in favor of the Bailout Bill have revoked any Powers that We the People have invested in their Offices & are impostors.

At its worst, the government itself operates as a corporation instead of a government, so China could foreclose on that...And maybe even those Wall Street corporations that loaned those bad loans.

Overall, we'd be better off re-forming a new government around the same principles that the current "government" violates, even though sworn into Office to live up to those principles. In short, the government is an impostor criminal corporation pretending to be a government & we should allow China to foreclose on it.


[edit on 8-12-2009 by MidnightDStroyer]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join