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.

 

Hatred for a "left wing Congress" ends in shootout in Oakland (UPDATE)

page: 5
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 10:42 AM
link   

As everyone is an individual with individual needs and goals there can be no functional equality of outcome no matter what the mechanism of trying to make equality in all things possible.
Equality to all regardless of age and inclination? Not possible.
Ever.
What some desire, others have no need for, and some even hate. so how do you reconsile that? You cant. The only basic equality any govt can maintain is to leave all alone to their own productive lifestyles the best they can and create an equal evironment for that to be worked toward.


This. Said in a much shorter and easier on the eyes post. I cannot understand why the Government ended up being the benifacter of people.




posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Y2KJMan

Why on earth do suburban schools in the US have upwards of three music teachers, while an urban school a few miles away of comparable size doesn't even have a music program? That is not equality, that's punishing people for not being able to afford to live in suburbs.

I have one answer for this:
There is no enumerated constitutional right to an education. Therefore the federal government has no business in our education system at all, calling for them to run it is not the answer.

OMG, there are alot of US that believe that the Theory of Evolution is not the correct answer for the origins of life. Oh NOES!!!! There are those of us that believe that God, a creator, or some other entity created life as we know it on Earth. Silence us please! We are no goodniks only here to shovel these falsehoods on all of humanity!

Spare me the speach, we have a freedom to believe what we believe for whatever reasons we so choose. My children (3 of them so far) will most likely be homeschooled from day one. I do not want them taught that there is no god, and that capitalism is evil with no redeeming qualities. I do not want them taught that human beings are not special, we are just the next step in the evolutionary chain. I dont care if you dont agree, it is my right to raise my children as I see fit.


Once you have educational and income equality between all of the races and both sexes, then you will have made the biggest step towards egalitarianism. People will finally be judged by the content of their character and their real value to society. Until then, these are all at best stopgap measures and pissing into the wind.


There is no way you can fight human nature on this, there will never be a time where all races, creeds, genders etc get equal pay. There exists a situation where no matter what, those that are not like you get treated a different way. This has been shown throughout history and will be throughout the future. So in effect doing anything is pissing into the wind, so why have Aff Action at all?


You're right it is not an enumerated constitutional right in the United States, but I believe it should be, and that is what the amendment process is for. I think education should be a right everywhere not just you country of course too.

However, I support your right to home-school your children, just as I support the right of parents to put their children in private schools as well. That is your freedom, but I also do not think you should be specially catered to. Your children should be held to the same standards of knowledge and education that others should when tested and applying for college.

I will in fact spare you my speech on Creationism, but I'm sure you've heard it all before anyways.

As for your last paragraph, wow, I really hope you don't teach your children that kind of jaded hatred too! So you really don't think humanity will ever be able to get past racism? I am terribly sorry to hear that, but I do believe that you will be wrong in this someday.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


Again with the equality lie?
If people want to oganize their schools with emphasis on academics or atheletics is their business cause they do it with their money.
The equality concept is unmasked theft where the entertainment-oriented ignorant and lazy want parity with the informed that invest their time and money where their kids are involved. Where I live, there seems to be no outcry that the jewish students dont predominantly go into pro ball. I guess medical and law school is enough.
How does 1% of the population end up being known for running everything while 15% excells primarily by chasing a ball owned by the 1%?
More money is spent proportionally on inner city 'disadvantaged"
systems and no positive results are forthcoming. Do you think this is any accident when this is a 100% correlation everywhere?
Education is based on home experiences and culture, not some NEA functionary dreaming of a comfortable retirement. In the end, people teach themselves if they want to.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Y2KJMan
 


A few replies to your longer and incredibly uninformed post:

First, if you believe in the rule of the constitution, then you should support the income tax system, as it is the 16th Amendment.

Second, the Birther argument has been proven false, the presidential czars are not an invention of President Obama, but are a common-name for task-oriented presidential employees and even some congress-approved positions. Before the early 1900s, these positions were simply known as presidential advisers, department directors or just employees and go back all the way to the beginning of your nation. Although it would have been really funny to hear Lewis & Clark referred to as the Exploration Czars haha!

As for "Obamacare" it is covered under the interstate commerce clause, so again, constitutional. Please try again, you have failed to state anything President Obama has done that is in breach of the US Constitution or an impeachable offense.

Third, It's not my problem that you didn't go to college and I did, but your bitterness does explain a lot about your views.

Fourth, the Common Man in the United States might not care about the rest of the world, but the rest of the world has to care about America. We are interconnected, you might not realize this but we do. You can be willfully ignorant, you can embrace the idiocy and isolation that you bring upon yourself, but we do not. I am not trying to influence your nation, I am just giving my opinion upon it.

Fifth, We can stop buying your debt, in fact the rest of the world can, but then your nation would collapse.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


If you knew anything about the 13 and 16th amendments and the history and the specifics of the statutes and how and when they were voted in you'd have to retract you post.
THe whole issue is that these were frauds and the lack of documentation and voting and record keeping irregularites
regarding the procedure is quite exceptional. If you read te IRS statute, you'd realize its only taxes corporate profit. That's all. IRS regs are a pure fabrication not based on the statutes at all and never required ratification or oversight.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Hudson
 


I specifically said "I believe" for a reason. It is based on what I have seen with my own two eyes. I did not state it as a fact.

You might as well ask me why I believe chocolate is much better than vanilla.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by nunya13
 


Wanna know why I didnt say 'I believe' anywhere in my reply? Because I researched it all and "I KNOW", which in my opinion trumps "i believe". Try it sometime
Please. prove me wrong with all of the facts.
Learn when (time and day) the 13th amendment was voted on and under what circumstances and who was there and why. Learn that many of the vote results are missing or never recorded. Learn that proper procedure was not followed, and in fact were bypassed.
Read the statutes, the few, clear fairly obvious pages and consider how anyone could generate 100k pages of unassociated nonsense out of it. Learn that regulations not based on statue they address are baseless legally unless you simply accept the authority of an unelected functionaries unvetted opinion.
There much to do besides generate personal opinions



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by mordant1
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


If you knew anything about the 13 and 16th amendments and the history and the specifics of the statutes and how and when they were voted in you'd have to retract you post.
THe whole issue is that these were frauds and the lack of documentation and voting and record keeping irregularites
regarding the procedure is quite exceptional. If you read te IRS statute, you'd realize its only taxes corporate profit. That's all. IRS regs are a pure fabrication not based on the statutes at all and never required ratification or oversight.


You are working off of a Redemption Movement argument that actually originated out of the Posse Comintatus organization and is currently used mainly by the Sovereign Citizens as a method of committing tax fraud.

The argument you have stated has been deemed completely frivolous and without merit by both the IRS and the United States Court system. If you make this argument in a court of law, you will be fined for even saying it that is how debunked this is.

So yes, I do know quite a bit about these amendments and their legal standings.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


As long as you hold the defendant preeminent you are correct. Only if.
Kinda like accepting OJ saying he didnt do it. Not much of a trial of evidence if you take the accused words as gospel no, is it?
Whatever gets you through the night, man. Some of us dont just side with the biggest meanest dog in the room. Some of us want proof and verification that our obligations were generated honestly.
I for one am still waiting



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:02 PM
link   

You're right it is not an enumerated constitutional right in the United States, but I believe it should be, and that is what the amendment process is for.

Oooh... that is true, believing that the right should exist does not compensate for the fact that it does not. Until the right exists I am correct. You cannot argue a point from a vantage that is incorrect and be correct in the end.


I will in fact spare you my speech on Creationism, but I'm sure you've heard it all before anyways.

You too have a speech on creationism? So that puts you in what, the majority of the population? Ever heard that sometimes what is commonly believed is not necessarily true or give it a more solid foundation? Just because it is your belief does not mean that it is the better of the options to be taught.


As for your last paragraph, wow, I really hope you don't teach your children that kind of jaded hatred too! So you really don't think humanity will ever be able to get past racism? I am terribly sorry to hear that, but I do believe that you will be wrong in this someday.

So somehow now I am racist? At least that is what you implied... being in the military and having been in for almost a decade; I have been working with, been friends with and known many more blacks, asians, pacific islanders, eastern europeans, and countless other minorities. It is likely I have done so, in higher numbers than you. So spare me the insinuation that I am racist. I also put my life on the line to protect the rights I so cherish, have you?


A few replies to your longer and incredibly uninformed post:

So now you call me ignorant also, again personal attacks I have not asked for. I will not retaliate either, while you call me ignorant I will turn the other cheek. Why is it though, that those that believe in American superiority of ideas (founding fathers, etc) are ignorant? Wasnt it us that bailed europe out? Or is that my imagination...?


First, if you believe in the rule of the constitution, then you should support the income tax system, as it is the 16th Amendment.

I do support taxes, though I believe income tax is the wrong kind needed to sustain and improve our situation. Flat tax makes so much more sense.


Second, the Birther argument has been proven false, the presidential czars are not an invention of President Obama, but are a common-name for task-oriented presidential employees and even some congress-approved positions. Before the early 1900s, these positions were simply known as presidential advisers, department directors or just employees and go back all the way to the beginning of your nation. Although it would have been really funny to hear Lewis & Clark referred to as the Exploration Czars haha!

You are so witty, Exploration Czars hahahaha..... actually your humor is lost on my ignorance.

Ever heard of the saying that two wrongs dont make a right? How about this one, just because he does it doesnt make it right. I dont care who has done it in the past, I want them gone, eliminated, the positions need to disappear. Dont even try to say I wanted people assassinated either, I could see that happening though.

Interstate commerce clause? Really? Kind of funny that the Obama administration now has to say that it is a tax for the Courts to not block the legislation... I dont see how they can tell me what I have to buy or have either. Next thing you know, if we dont wear Obama brand jeans... we will be fined. Its ok though, the Interstate Commerce Clause covers it. Loosely anyways, just like it does the Obamacare. Thats one hell of a rabbit hole to go down.


Third, It's not my problem that you didn't go to college and I did, but your bitterness does explain a lot about your views.

So just because I wasnt educated by liberal professors, I am bitter? On the contrary I believe that my military experience, training, and experience of other nations has given me an appreciation that you lack. Not your fault though, I cant blame you... you WENT to college.


I am just giving my opinion upon it.

Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they all stink.


Fifth, We can stop buying your debt, in fact the rest of the world can, but then your nation would collapse.

As would yours and EVERY SINGLE OTHER NATION ON THE PLANET. That is not necessarily a bad thing. A reset every so often is a good thing. Painful, but good.

[edit on 30-7-2010 by Y2KJMan]



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 


Maybe I missed it because the ABC link isn't working. When exactly did the guy point the finger at Beck? Did he ever actually say "I did it because Glenn Beck said. . ."?

People need to remember beck himself said in Forbes Magazine that he doesn't care about politics or the political process. He said he is just an entertainer. (April 26 2010)

If the left stopped going so rabid over the guy he would lose a lot of credibility. If the left wanted to realy discredit the guy they would just take his own quote off of page 58 in above mentioned Forbes magazine. They keep looking at the wrong words. Beck isn't afraid to speak out in Forbes because he knows that isn't his demographic. They aren't the ones watching the show.

This is more emotional pandering, just from a different side. It is more divide and conquer.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


I believe it was an extropolation of the man claiming to have become incensed about learning about the Tides Foundation's connections to Dear Leader and all his interesting pals. Beck is the only person that has even mentioned this in any investigative manner, otherwise if mentioned at all most just gush about its wonderfulness and unimpeachability.
Funny how one allegedly conservative guy can impeach the authority of millions that dont know or act like him, yet millions are not accountable for their professed lifestyles and philosphies which are overtly destructive.
Gotta love the equality of responsiblity displayed.



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mordant1
reply to post by ProjectJimmy
 


As long as you hold the defendant preeminent you are correct. Only if.
Kinda like accepting OJ saying he didnt do it. Not much of a trial of evidence if you take the accused words as gospel no, is it?
Whatever gets you through the night, man. Some of us dont just side with the biggest meanest dog in the room. Some of us want proof and verification that our obligations were generated honestly.
I for one am still waiting


In the United State the defendant is preeminent; innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof in any criminal trial rests upon the prosecution. Also how did this become a case of criminal trial?

Alright, this is going to be my last post on this because we have gotten horribly off-topic here, so I'll just lay it out:

16th Amendment Arguments against the Income Tax and why they are wrong:

Argument: Ohio was not a state until 1953.

Why it's wrong: Ohio became a state in 1803, however the current process by which a state was admitted to the union did not begin until 1812. This was reaffirmed by act of congress in 1953, and signed by President Eisenhower.

Argument: Since the 16th Amendment does not modify or repeal an existing part of the Constitution is is void.

Why it's wrong: The majority of amendments do not specifically repeal or modify the existing constitution, and there is no standing constitutional law that states that an amendment must directly cite the modified section of the original constitution. This creates a reality whereby legally any change to the constitution is seen as having supremacy over earlier incarnation when there is a conflict.

Argument: The 16th Amendment creates indentured servitude which brings it into conflict with the 13th Amendment.

Why it's wrong: This argument was found to be without merit by two court decisions that found that a payment of tax based upon income does not constitute slavery. Currently if this argument is voiced in a tax case, a fine of $5,000 is made against the person arguing for it as per IRC Section 6702 for making a claim without legal grounds.

Argument: The 16th Amendment is void because Americans are citizens of their respective state within a union.

Why it's wrong: The 14th Amendment.

Now back to the discussion at hand...



posted on Jul, 30 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   
That sir, was probably the best argument against that whole "you dont have to pay your taxes because they are illegal" arguement.

Kudos, mind if I plagiarize it for later use?



posted on Jul, 31 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Y2KJMan
That sir, was probably the best argument against that whole "you dont have to pay your taxes because they are illegal" arguement.

Kudos, mind if I plagiarize it for later use?


Oh sure thing mate, it's all just facts based on looking at case histories and interviewing to people like legal historians and the tax lawyers, it's all good to use. There are other arguments too that tax protesters use too, these are just ones that deal with the 16th Amendment. People are always coming up with new ideas why they shouldn't have to pay their taxes which is one of the many reasons the United States Tax Code is so very complicated, some good some bad in my opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join