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.

 

If the first shots of the second American Revolution are fired, who are valid targets?

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Let me preface this by saying that I am not advocating violent actions against or insurrection. Additionally, I'm not sure if this is the best forum for the discussion, so please move if needed. I had plenty of reservations about this post, but I have yet to see a topic or subject that cannot be discussed philosophically.

that being said...

For a long time there has been discussion and rumors of Americans being fed up and on the verge of revolution. I've I have even seen some say they are just waiting for someone to make the first move.

Through one viewpoint, that day came today when Joe Stack the frustrated software engineer flew a small plane into an Austin TX IRS office. He left behind a manifesto explaining his feelings of disillusionment and having no way to get out of or fix a broken system.

In some discussion in another thread, there was some argument that the IRS office were innocent people, and the individual IRS agents are just doing their job; that if any great wrong exists, it was from the top levels. Others said, that like the Nazi SS, simply doing a job doesn't fly as an excuse.

Flashback 230 years, the opposition was clear: British military, Royal Governors, and the Tax Collectors. They were not US.

Back to today, we are all Americans; the Corporate lobbiest, the wheezily politicians, and the lowly IRS clerk.

Could this fact be the only thing really holding back a violent revolution??

There are some, who cannot fathom that any violent action could or should ever be used in the US; that the system is setup to always allow for peaceful reform through the people. If the system doesn't change, its because the people want it that way.

This group often believes that if the government is storming a house, jailing an individual, listening to a phone call, checking out the nude body scans of 10 year olds, sending hundreds of billions to corporate entities, devaluing the currency, or increasing the national debt then it must have a good reason, or at best or just a little miffed at the situation.

There are others, who have or believe it possible, for the system to become so corrupt that it can only ensure suppression and oppression, and the people are manipulated to keep it that way. That through lies, un-education, distortion, double speak and polarization, the people will not care, accept or be unable to correct the system.

So if you are on of the people who cannot ever see a situation for violence, the following is not directed towards you. For the rest, who think that the government keeps pushing and taxing and taking from the people, and it is or could require violence as the only remaining course of action, I ask:

What or who would constitute a valid target? Is it those who set the policy, regulation and budgets? Is it those who enforce those policies, regulations and budgets?

I'm not looking for individual names, but positions or groups, and justification behind these choices.

Additionally, if interested, what about justification of methods of engagement?

This is not intended to be a hit list or any kind.

I've been curious after reading the other threads, what makes one person deem one individual or group guilty/valid while another person sees that group as innocent/off-limits.

Regarding the Joe Stack incident: If this was his attack on the government, I don't think it was a valid target, and his method of attack was also poor. I don't feel that the local IRS agents are guilty parties for their enforcement of IRS code. I don't consider mass attacks on low level individuals justifiable.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
Notice: This post does not imply validation of acts of violence and/or murder of any kind nor does it advocate the overthrow of the US Government.

Speaking hypothetically, anyone in a position to create or enforce law or is an armed extension of the government.

This includes, but is not limited to:

- Any holder of Federal or State office.
- Police on any level
- Any member of Federal or State departments
- Any military member
- Any member of any company supplying the above.

That's the short list.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


Interesting.

So anytime you would hear a story about a cop,or an assembly worker at Smith & Wesson, or National Park Ranger getting killed by a person fed up with the government taxes/wire taps etc, you would think they had it coming?



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
i personally believe the people at the top aka congress and so on. i believe a police officer or military officer should only be a target if they knowingly do something wrong. not just for the sake of being one.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
any one directly involved in turning the u.s. into a fascist regime. most politicians, most police... sadly many in the armed forces as well... any one willing to shoot at an american for not handing over there guns should have a target tattooed on there face. anyone willing to take away our freedom so they receive there pay check or further there elitist goals deserves something as well in my opinion, npt death in all cases... but for sure there job... to be honest, my feelings are a bit stronger then I'm letting on, not to say i hope to see a violent resolution, because i dont want that... but i dont see many other options. our country is in a scary place, we have sat back to long, i feel were at a give up or fight back point...

[edit on 18-2-2010 by srslyguyz]



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:41 PM
link   
En-masse,
Media should be the first to hear, then report.
Remember Paul Revere? He cruised around town on his horse telling the people to be aware of what's to come, and to prepare for it.

My history is rusty, I know. That's kinda what went down in simplest form though, no?

I think media outlets should be stormed, picketed for not reporting said storms. I don't know. Who's got my back to look after my family once I get straight-jacketed out of there?

The "Today" show lets people hold signs like where they're from and stuff. Since I'm on the wrong coast to do that, maybe someone else can have a sign saying something obviously true, yet mildly controversial...

I got it! "Visit Abovetopsecret.com"

Yeah, invite the agents of dis-info, I know. It's worth it to awaken the masses though isn't it? They (agents) can be weeded out as the days progress, as the eyes become open.

Good thread OP!



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   
If it was me. Which it isn't because I'm not in the US.

But if it was me, I'd be going for the government think tanks and working groups first. And Wall Street.

You're already got a target list and a half there. Just take the names off the minutes for Bilderberger, Trilateral, CFR, The committee of 300 and the Club of Rome and PNAC.

Then you can move on to places like the entire executive staff of Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 09:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Wolf321
 


I have thought about this subject for many a long, sleepless night. Considering I am one of the more open advocates about violent revolution on here, it is only fitting that I provide my ideology of "the enemy".

Truth be told, the corruption doesn't only rest on a national level, but on a global level as well. Which is why I begin with the list that follows:

2009 Bilderberg Attendees

There are obviously people on that national level that are a major part of the corruption but aren't involved with the Bilderbergs. This list made last year painted a fair picture of a couple of those people:

2009 Most Corrupt List

There are those that are so obviously corrupt that they are seen as the leaders amongst them. It would be ideal that after the major corrupter were "ousted from power" the others would follow for their own fear and safety. After all, they have never really shown much backbone in the past.

Of course, the chain of authority flows like a waterfall. There will be those who choose to defend the corrupted with their lives, perhaps due to their blind loyalty, or perhaps because they have stake in the corruptors. Those people too would sadly becomes enemies of the Republic.

As much as I advocate violent revolution, do not confuse that with senseless violence. I believe everybody should be given a chance to "walk away" first and foremost, and never look back. Sadly, most people will not take that route, especially at the beginning of such movements.



However, I have also thought of another course of action that targets a different "enemy". For those who saw the movie or read the novel "V for Vendetta", V garnished the will of the people by gaining control of the mass media. After that, the people worked on their own. All that was needed was for the message to be painted across in detail and in a way they could all understand. Accomplish that and there will be no need for further revolution, for the corroptors will have no choice but to step down against the outnumbering masses.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by belial259
Bilderberger, Trilateral, CFR, The committee of 300 and the Club of Rome and PNAC.


I second this completely. Elite groups who try to covertly control and circumvent sovereignty is high on the list.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by gwydionblack
 

Those links were great. I like how judicial watch broke down the corruption. Take note, that was only the 10 most. It could easily have listed 99% of elected and appointed federal officials.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:18 PM
link   
What both alarms me and at the exact same time saddens me is how these threads sound so much like the radical Islamic fascist talking points.

Calling for the violent overthrow and destruction of the government because of a belief in a specific dogma.

Picking out specific targets for terrorist/revolutionary action. I.E. Murder and Destruction.

Don't fool yourselves. You are advocating violent insurrection, and advocating the destruction of the government in order to install your own version of what you think that government should stand for.

Revolution/Jihad pretty much the same exact thing. Even calling an obviously disgruntled person a martyr for the cause.

I am sure if you talked with a radical Islamic extremist, they would call themselves patriots and freedom fighters too.

So instead of going out like me and collecting signatures to be on this Novembers ballot, trying to do the right thing and changing this government through the non violent and constitutional means that we have at our disposal, you would rather throw it away in a bloodbath and install your own version of what you think the government should be. And to hell with anyone else who thinks different than you.

Not advocating violence my ass! When your thread is tittled "Who are valid targets?" that's a direct threat, and call for a violent overthrow/jihad of the government.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
If you look at US history, the typical first targets-victims of any rebellion( there are many in our history) are the foot soldiers/law enforcement officers/ field agents that have to enforce a law or policy or investigate an incident...then it only grows bigger.

In the days prior to the Civil War, the secession had just began, and two Union soldiers spot a Confederate Flag( the First Flag-Stars and Bars) fying over a hotel/boarding house. They promptly stroll over to take it down. The owner confronts them, an argument ensues about rights, the owner pulls our his shotgun...the soldiers pull up their rifles with bayonets...and BAM. A soldier and a private citizen lay dead.

Or The Boston Massacre...about 10-dozen British Soldiers patrol the streets of Boston. An angry crowd confonts them as agents of the Crown. Verbal insults fly, the crowd grows more defiant, the soldiers start to feel out of control and threatened by the growing mob. Someone throws an object, the crowd gets too close, an inexperienced soldier fires or misfires his weapon, was it their's or ours? More shots ring out...screams, powder smoke fogs the air... the crowd runs in horror.

These are the most likely sorts of scenarios we may see. Imagine, FDA agents seizing livestock because they are not tagged or licensed... aka Amish Farm with milkcows from todays headlines. Or IRS agents and Fed Marshalls coming to make an arrest because a rural family has refused insurance under the new Health Care Laws. Or how about an angry crowd in front of a Federal Office or a Congressman's office after the US Govt takes your IRAs and 401Ks and converts them to useless T-Bills... I'd be pissed too. Maybe a rural or even suburban homeschool family is confronted by a Fed Agent and Social Services...questioning and threatening taking the children because the lessons include Judeo-Christian studies.

How about this? A small rural community...a neighbor calls and says that Fed Agents and the Sheriff just confiscated her son's guns... because a right-winger tax nut just flew his plane into an IRS office. The Administration feels a threat from rightwing Constitutionalists and declares the incident a harbinger of domestic violence and declares martial law, suspends the impending elections until order can be restored, and is rounding up all firearms and banning open assemblies by suspension of the US Constitution.
The people in the community have decided to meet at the country store on the corner...armed, and confront the Fed agents and county sheriff.

Given the anger and frutration of most of the people I know and deal with... and we fit all of the above situations.... it wouldn't take much to start the snowball rolling.

God Save America



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
What both alarms me and at the exact same time saddens me is how these threads sound so much like the radical Islamic fascist talking points.


Are you trying to imply an Australian atheist and Aboriginal has an Islamic Fascist mindset?


Calling for the violent overthrow and destruction of the government because of a belief in a specific dogma.

Picking out specific targets for terrorist/revolutionary action. I.E. Murder and Destruction.

Don't fool yourselves. You are advocating violent insurrection, and advocating the destruction of the government in order to install your own version of what you think that government should stand for.

Revolution/Jihad pretty much the same exact thing. Even calling an obviously disgruntled person a martyr for the cause.


I really doubt that. Besides in my case it's a foreign government so you can hardly accuse me of being seditious.

I think you're really reaching quite a bit. You're comparing the American and French revolution and things like the Eureka stockade to Muslim Secular beliefs and religious dogma.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 


I simply disagree with your interpretation. I said this thread is about understanding why one person would perceive one person or group as a legitimate target over another, not whether violence as a means of government change is valid.

I could just have easily made a thread over what would constitute a valid jihadist target if you were a radical muslim. I would be willing to bet there are jihadist who don't agree with using women and children as human shields, while others are content to bomb a school yard.

The discussion is on point-of-view justification for the targets, not the war.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wolf321
reply to post by whatukno
 


The discussion is on point-of-view justification for the targets, not the war.


Well as George W Bush said more than a few times. Cut the head off the snake and the body dies.

You do have to admit following his advice would be rather ironic, all things considered.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by belial259
 


I am not talking about the revolutionary war that started this country. I am talking specifically about these kinds of threads that basically beg for people to go out murdering people for the specific purpose of starting a civil war and overthrowing the government of the United States so that they can install a regime of their own.

Picking targets, calling people martyrs, planning and plotting the violent overthrow of the government. Sounds just like the people that we are at war with in the middle east.

Just change the Koran with the Constitution and the Federalist Papers and you have the same exact thing.

Just because the terminology is different, doesn't mean the goals aren't the same.

Fundamentalist dogma, is fundamentalist dogma, doesn't matter if it's political or religious.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:39 PM
link   
I really have one question for those that are espousing so much of this revolutionary rhetoric on this board: what will become of the people who have completely different political opinions and beliefs than you in the post-revolutionary world? Will they be allowed to continue life normally? Allowed to partake in politics and decision making?



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by belial259
 


I am not talking about the revolutionary war that started this country. I am talking specifically about these kinds of threads that basically beg for people to go out murdering people for the specific purpose of starting a civil war and overthrowing the government of the United States so that they can install a regime of their own.

Picking targets, calling people martyrs, planning and plotting the violent overthrow of the government. Sounds just like the people that we are at war with in the middle east.


And I bet you'd advocate dealing with us dangerous ideological extremists in a similar manner right? Which is quite legally justifiable.

That's your sign right there, that this discussion and others like it are long overdue.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Having fun with this thread , and because 1/2 the board is about the
plane crash .

I'll go with the MSM.

If they did their jobs, and reported the NEWS.

We wouldn't be in this situation.



posted on Feb, 18 2010 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Someone336
 


As far as I'm concerned you can... you can believe anything you want, say what you want, pursue anything you want...

So long as it abides with the US Constitution. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Christian, Muslim, Jew, Gay, Straight, meateater, vegen,...I don't care. Just don't overTAX me, don't infringe on my rights or beliefs, don't put boundries on my family or me, and don't give away the country's sovereignty.




top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join