Amerika, You've Been Hijacked

I thought this was a good analogy, the United States has been hijacked and the terrorists won't land the plane.

1. Aircraft hijacking is the unlawful seizure of an aircraft by an individual or a group.

Most Presidents Ignore the Constitution

Trashing the Constitution: More "Change" From DC

NSA Spying and the Shredding of the Constitution

Violating the Constitution With an Illegal War

2. In most cases, the pilot is forced to fly according to the orders of the hijackers.

President Asks for Expanded Patriot Act: Authority to Fight Terror

FBI Conducted Spying on tens of thousands

Federal Reserve system NOT in the Constitution

3. Occasionally, however, the hijackers have flown the aircraft themselves.

President Signs the Homeland Security Act

New Bill Gives Obama Internet 'Kill Switch'

House Approves Iraq War Resolution

4. Most aircraft hijackers intend to use the passengers as hostages, either for monetary ransom or for some political or administrative concession by authorities.

Government splits on Iraq war - Oil link

In Afghan war, drugs are winning

Afghanistan's Multi-Billion dollar Heroin trade

US troops surge in Afghanistan to begin

5. Hijackers also have used aircraft as a weapon to target particular locations.

Military involvements since 1950: Korea, Lebanon, Dominican Republic, Vietnam, covert operations in Iran, Grenada, Beirut, Panama, Gulf War (Iraq/Kuwait), Somalia, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan & Iraq.

*Not included: Countless covert operations conducted by the Cocaine Importing Agency.




The terrorists are in Washington.
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/f196c2135e6f.png[/atsimg]

Remember, YOU are flying the plane.

[edit on 20/6/2010 by serbsta]

Finally!
I feel the same way, live here, and noone seems to see it.

Almost makes This sound possible, right?

ummmm
Stewardess !!!!

Does this flight have parachutes on board??
If so can you bring me one ???

reply to post by serbsta


Let's see, your analogy is flawed, but just slightly.

1: America is not an aircraft. It is a Republic, a Representative Democracy. The people that are directly answerable to you are your Representatives and Senators in Washington, this is why you directly elect them.

2: The President has not at any time been under direct control of the people. As citizens of the United States, you have at no point in history ever voted directly for the POTUS, you vote for electors, who pledge to vote for the POTUS. This is the pilot of your aircraft analogy. Congress are your flight staff, and the SCOTUS is the Air Traffic Controllers. You the citizen, are the FAA. The "Hijackers" in your scenario? Those would be Special interest groups and lobbyists.

3: The Iraq War is in fact a legal war, the resolution authorizing the use of our troops was passed by Congress.

4: The Afghanistan War is in fact a legal war, the resolution authorizing the use of our troops was passed by Congress.

If you don't like how this government works, work to change it. YOU DO HAVE THE POWER. Write, or call your representatives, if they do not listen to you, vote them out, replace them with someone who will. If you don't believe ANYONE will listen to you, run yourself.

Oh, btw, those of you that want to bail out? Canada is North, Mexico is South. Take your pick. America, love it, leave it, or change it.


[edit on 6/21/2010 by whatukno]

reply to post by whatukno

Originally posted by whatukno

1: America is not an aircraft. It is a Republic, a Representative Democracy. The people that are directly answerable to you are your Representatives and Senators in Washington, this is why you directly elect them.

Yes because I literally called America an aircraft...

Passing something through Congress makes it legal? The decision to invade another country, occupy its lands, kill its people, can never be legally decided within the confines of the offending nation. The only reason the U.S. was able to justify the war through the UN Security Council was because they used a blatant lie, the 'weapons of mass destruction' myth in order to justify it. Technically, the war is currently viewed as legal only by the institutions which authorized it, but when you see to what extent the U.S. went in order to achieve this, how on earth can you call it 'legal'?

Don't even start with Afghanistan.

Geneva Convention: Article 48 = "In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives."

Geneva Convention: Article 52/Protocol I = "In so far as objects are concerned, military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage"

Both laws have been broken countless times (we don't need to go into examples), among many others. The invasion of Afghanistan is unjustified and illegal.

The "Hijackers" in your scenario? Those would be Special interest groups and lobbyists.

You don't think special interest groups require some kind of cooperation from the inside? We don't even need to go back far to see just how big business can infiltrate (good word) government, Dick Cheney.

Thanks for posting.

[edit on 21/6/2010 by serbsta]

reply to post by serbsta


Yes in fact it is legal for Congress to start a war. Both wars were resolutions passed before congress authorizing them.

Are they JUST and HONORABLE wars? Well, that is a different story isn't it?

But they are indeed legal wars.

Were supposed to have 3 branches of government for checks and balances, separation of powers etc.

If we had a justice department, or a supreme court, we wouldn't be in this mess.

There are historic signs of fascism that all despot govts deploy at some point, through teamwork the GOP & DNC have many, if not all, in place.

If you want detailed historic examples of how history is repeating, check out "The end of America".. stalin used to claim dangerous "sleeper cells" were lurking around waiting to unleash terrorist mayhem, and it was goebbels who pioneered embedding journalists with German troops in Poland.

Homeland = Fatherland
hitler wanted a Neue Ordnung / meaning "New order"
Shock and awe = Luftwaffe’s “Schrecklichkeit”
Burning dixi chick cds / goebbels organized spontaneous book burnings
Pinochet used fake "Plan Z" documents to hype a threat / bushs Yellow cake
PATRIOT ACT = Ermächtigungsgesetz aka Enabling Act of 1933

Secret prisons that torture and strip prisoners of due process subjecting them to military tribunals / kangaroo courts.. hitler set up "Peoples court", mussolini had his "confino di polizia".. the US has GITMO plus others

bushs staged "Mission accomplished" act looks very much like a scene from "Triumph of the will", an infamous nazi party propaganda flick where the fuhrer descends from a military plane, looking macho & confident, to greet his giddy uniformed troops saying he needs their support in accomplishing the mission.

Maybe one big reason there were no in depth public 9/11 trials, criminal or civil, where govt evidence is aggressively challenged?.. ONE suspect charged with hitlers false flag Reichstag Fire was convicted, the rest acquitted.. lesson learned.

Just like 1930s Germany, people easily duped are still loyal to the party regardless of damage / epic failures / millions killed based on lies .. and the partys ridiculously phony dear leaders... we just happen to have a front row seat to watch history repeat.

www.endofamericamovie.com...
...and some here: www.youtube.com...

it's not the leaders it's them that hand out bribes and loans that need to be dealt with if we are ever going to get a peacefull world.

Any major changes should be put before the people and the people must have the power to hold it's own investigations into the conduct of those in power but we are moving further away from that each passing day.

No one asked me if i wanted all my emails to be spyed upon and CCTV's every 1/2 mile on the motorway.

Have we reached a stage where we dare not ask questions like why did golden sacks sell a 44% stake in Bp just before it blew up or why were the twin towers double insured a few months before they fell down.

Google 'Holly Greig' to see how bad things have got here in the UK and then think where we are heading if we don't do something about it.

reply to post by zzombie


First, love the avatar.

Second, I agree. The executive has pretty much harnessed sole authority, clearly it isn't working, for the rest of us that is.

reply to post by whatukno


I would beg to disagree here.

Here is the wording:

ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8

The Congress shall have Power:

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;


The problem is that the US did not declare War on Iraq or Afghanistan. Like Vietnam, it is a police action and there are those of us that consider Police Actions to be unconstitutional. ONLY Congress has the right to declare War. I'd even go so far, though the constitutionality has never been tested, that the Afghan and Iraq wars violate the War Powers Act.

From Ron Paul, who I agree with on this issue:

It’s astonishing that the authorization passed by the committee mentions the United Nations 25 times, yet does not mention the Constitution once. Congress has allowed itself to be bypassed completely, even though much is made of the President’s willingness to consult some legislative leaders about the war. The real negotiations took place between the Bush administration and the UN, replacing debate in the people’s house. By transferring its authority to declare war to the President and ultimately the UN, Congress not only violates the Constitution, but also disenfranchises the American people. Already the administration has sought to gain favor with the UN by pledging hundreds of millions of tax dollars to UNESCO. UNESCO is the anti-American "educational" arm of the UN, an organization from which President Reagan heroically removed us in 1984. Now we find ourselves rejoining the agency to soften UN resistance to our plans in Iraq. I don’t believe in resolutions that cite the UN as authority for our military actions. America has a sovereign right to defend itself, and we don’t need UN permission or approval to act in the interests of American national security. The decision to go to war should be made by the U.S. Congress alone. If Congress believes war is justified, it should give the President full warmaking authority, rather than binding him with resolutions designed to please our UN detractors. Sadly, the leadership of both parties on the International Relations committee fails to understand the Constitution. One Republican member stated that the constitutional requirement that Congress declare war is an anachronism and should no longer be followed, while a Democratic member said that a declaration of war would be "frivolous." I don’t think most Americans believe our Constitution is outdated or frivolous, and they expect Congress to follow it. When Congress issued clear declarations of war against Japan and Germany during World War II, the nation was committed and victory was achieved. When Congress shirks its duty and avoids declaring war, as with Korea, and Vietnam, the nation is less committed and victory is elusive. No lives should be lost in Iraq unless Congress expresses the clear will of the American people and votes yes or no on a declaration of war.