It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Biggest Coup D'état In Human History?

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:22 PM

Originally posted by pjl_u2
Masons are zionist british agents

And this dreck is why I avoided this site for a LONG time.


For my next post, I'm off to put some words on the wall and throw darts at them. I gotta keep up.

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:36 PM

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
BTW, ask JFK what happens when you try to print "UNITED STATES NOTES."

Here's a United States note from 1966: So how did LBJ escape unscathed?

And I'm pretty sure Eisenhower survived his presidency, even though they were printed in 1953.

United States Notes were the first permanent kind of federal paper money, the original "greenbacks." Previously, what the Treasury had issued in wartime were bonds and interest bearing notes. These were also issued during the Civil War, but then the innovation was introduced of Legal Tender Notes that paid no interest but were intended for "all debts public and private, except duties on imports and interest on the public debt" -- the purest kind of fiat paper money.


Over time, United States Notes became an increasingly minor part of United States 1910, U.S. Notes only accounted for a tenth of all currency, and by 1960 for only a hundreth. Thus, this form of currency came to be considered a nuisance. In 1966 it was decided to discontinue current issues ($2 in 1966 and $5 in 1968) and to simply concentrate on satisfying the law of 1878 with a new $100 note issue. Few of these, however, made their way to the public. The Treasury adopted the practice of moving notes into a certain room where they were regarded de jure as being in circulation. By the 1990's, when U.S. Notes would count for less than a thousandth of U.S. currency, it was considered about time to end this farcical, dishonest procedure, and Congress finally eliminated the statutory requirement that the Treasury issue them.

I learn a new half-baked "theory" every day here on ATS. Never heard this one before, yet it only took me a few minutes to debunk it.

Keep 'em coming.

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:20 PM
The hidden hands, (6 families) have set things up so that they have complete control over everything. There is nothing that they cannot touch. The money trail (after investigation) leads from every social organization to almost any type of organized religion that exists. The roots of these hidden hands are from those who have been in control of society’s moneys since before the 2 world wars.

In fact money, bankers, and royalty usually all go hand in hand. The most brutal part of this is when you think about the Federal Reserve Bank created in 1913. The bill was pushed, during an economic downturn, to create this organization that does not need to answer to the government and creates money out of thin air. And even worse it lends it at a 6% interest rate that cannot be repaid.

In fact you create money that you give out to a country and then, that country must repay the money that has been created with the same currency but with interest. So basically you always owe more money that exists. You are always in a position of debt. And most of you understand that debt is a very wrong thing.

I found an interesting webpage that explains a lot of things, with a lot of images. I could not confirm that everything they mention is 100% accurate. But still interesting to see how this probably works.

The Rockefellers and the Rothschild’s are two family names that have been around for a little while. I’m sure that both of those families are even richer than most of the top 100 richest people in the official list. They tend to invest their money into similar products that are not fully public. Some people think that they have a tendency of control markets.

Interesting is the fact that the FED had no immediate control over society’s free market, until 9/11 and the patriot act. After that, because of the economic downturn (that happened because of a housing bubble that was caused by the rich trying to get richer) bailouts to banks ( that actually created the FED, started getting help so that they could face the downturn. Rich and fabulous is what that is…. JPmorgan, and others are a part of those that instigated these procedures. Why would they want to devalue their own market value?

No! I think that something is happening right now, that is causing some of these groups to loose their power. And since the same 6 famillies are at war for total power, I am guessing that they are fighting each other, through economics, wars, and such. And I would not even be surprised if there is an opposition to the Rockefellers.

Please keep in mind that secret societies like the skull and bones, and the illuminati, exist. They are but extensions of these groups. Probably these secret societies are a way of recruiting into the families those with the most influence and with the best promise. I am guessing that the Bilderberg and the Trilateral commission, who both exist as well, probably a result of the recruitment.

Those that succeed go on to the bilderberg and such, as a way of continuing what has been ongoing for a while. And from what I hear the meetings in the past two years have not been going great. Something about the objective of killing thousands of innocent people, does not fly hard with some of the members. There was even rumor of discordance between the members. So it would be only logical to assume that the people attending these meetings do not have their hearts completely invested into the ideals of the group.

And god bless those people that still fight from the underground and resist, because you can clearly see that giving too much power to some is really a bad idea. And the future of mankind cannot be decided by a few “supposed” elites that clearly have nothing more then us on the answers of the question to life and existence and the universe.

And no the answer to universe and everything is not 46!

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:48 PM
reply to post by mothershipzeta

if "dreck" suddenly means in decadent english -"one who reads between the lines of history and sees from above" you may be onto something... and as for LBJ surviving?

hehe .... ""In part, Johnson was influenced in his attitude towards the Jews by the religious beliefs that his family, especially his grandfather (Samuel Ealy Johnson, Sr.), who was a member of the Christadelphian church, shared with him.[2][3] Christadelphians believe that the Jews are God's chosen people,[4] and LBJ's grandfather once said to him '"Take care of the Jews, God’s chosen people. Consider them your friends and help them any way you can."'[2] In reference to Operation Texas, Texas historian James M. Smallwood commented that LBJ 'apparently took seriously his grandfather's charge'.[2]"- Lyndon Johnson the guy after the Catholic Kennedy in office
LBJ of Huguenot stock (french traitors to faith and country)

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:55 PM

Judge Andrew Napolitano addresses issues with the Patriot Act. The Judges web page:

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:35 PM

Originally posted by KpxMarMoTT
You quickly understand that everything was planned out. That; some government officials were aware of everything. Some intelligence agencies as well, and most importantly, they aided the attack itself since they had prior knowledge and did nothing to stop it or avert it. Now you tell me you still live in a democracy.

Well but we never lived in a democracy. We live in a republic... a distinction that is becoming increasingly important to understand.

Nice post!

[edit on 4-8-2010 by spectre76]

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:03 PM
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

As crooked as the bank may be, it still doesn't make it privately held. The question here, is whether it's private or public, not whether they abuse their powers or how they do it.

Well sure, that's how the Federal Reserve explains it, but we'll get back to this...

Well actually, it's how the law describes it and the issue of whether it is adhered to, is not one of whether it is private or public.

No. Congress didn't create anything. They merely underhandedly passed the Federal Reserve Act, clearing the way for the banksters to set up their premeditated scheme.

I have no doubts that it was a premeditated plan to enslave our population in a wage system. In fact, the bankers had been trying to slap a central banking system with a debt based currency on the US for quite some time, with both successes and failures under their belt. In fact, it was like a see-saw. The bankers would corrupt the government enough to install a central banking system and then liberty would ultimately prevail with the new government in place, throwing the bankers back a step. I actually consider those attempts to be probes, each time teaching the bankers pretty valuable lessons about what to do the next time to make it more... permanent. Low and behold, the bankers were ultimately successful in 1913, permanently.

With that being said, it was still "created" by Congress, because they are the ones who had to pass the bill, which they did, irregardless of what pretences their actions were under. Did they actually write the bill? I doubt it, but without Congress passing it and the President signing it, it wouldn't exist (until another Congress passed it, at least). All in all, I guess "create" was not the best word to use, rather "pass" would have been more accurate but that's only semantics. It still doesn't change the fact that without a willing Congress, it wouldn't exist.

Hardly a degree. The one thing they can do, is change the Act, or abolish it altogether, but instead, after the Fed caused the economic meltdown, and told the Congress they won't tell them where the money all went, Congress shot down Ron Paul's F.R. Transparency Act, and then gave the Fed more power.

Not only can they repeal or change the Act, but Congress (and the President) is also the deciding factor in the appointment of its Board of Governors. According to law, the people should have quasi-control over the bank, through Congressional approval of the President's appointments. Now, whether the law is abided by or not or whether it is effective or not, doesn't play into whether it is privately held or publicly held.

I wasn't trying to suggest that the system isn't corrupt or that it isn't filled with cronies, only that it is neither publicly held or privately held. Don't get me wrong, I want the bank to fold just as much as the next liberty loving American but that has no effect on it's legal standing and still doesn't make it privately held. Many people are under the false belief that the bank was legally intended to be a normal, private for-profit bank and that just isn't true. It's these kinds of rumors that make the whole "End the Fed" movement look silly. the way I look at it, we don't really need to make the bank look worse than it already is. The truth is bad enough. Also, when educating the public, all it takes is for that person to actually do his own research to that this is wrong, thereby calling into question the rest of our argument.

Just because the bankers behind the FED RES profit from the central bank and just because Congress fails to hold them accountable, does not make them a privately held, for-profit bank, though it appears to be the case when transparency is non-existent.

Take for instance an everyday normal corporation. Just because the members of the board of this corporation do not listen to the share holders, does not mean that the shareholders don't own part of the corporation.

We could also use an automobile for instance. If the bank owns your automobile and someone steals it, it doesn't mean that the bank no longer owns the automobile.

This kind of corruption is not indicative of the Federal Reserve only. In fact, the same suspected tactics for profit that are used with the bankers, are also used by charities the world over. The scheme goes as follows:

You open a "non-profit" organization and receive all of the tax-breaks and incentives, then you open a support company (or multiple) to support this non-profit, only the support company is for profit. This allows you to reap all of the awards of a non-profit, while still profiting through the teeth. Almost all "charities" run this kind of scheme and I suspect that the scheme with the Federal Reserve is similar.

While the Federal Reserve isn't a for profit, as it gives all of the profits over to the Treasury after expenses, it is the expenses that is the key word here. This is aside from bank favoritism.

So, no matter how the chips lay, the Federal Reserve was not meant to be a privately held and/or for-profit bank, contrary to popular belief. Many people falsely believe it to operate just like a normal for-profit bank, but that just isn't true.


posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:29 PM

Originally posted by mothershipzeta
Here's a United States note from 1966: So how did LBJ escape unscathed?

I learn a new half-baked "theory" every day here on ATS. Never heard this one before, yet it only took me a few minutes to debunk it.

Not so fast. Jim Marrs, G. Edward Griffin and many others have written extensively about presidents who were opposed to private central banks before they were assassinated:

The Real Motive to Assassinate JFK ... Executive Order 11110

...A number of "Kennedy bills" were indeed issued, but were quickly withdrawn after Kennedy's death. According to information from the Library of the Comptroller of the Currency, Executive Order 11110 remains in effect today, although successive administrations beginning with that of President Lyndon Johnson apparently have simply ignored it and instead returned to the practice of paying interest on Federal Reserve notes. Today we continue to use Federal Reserve Notes, and the deficit is at an all-time high.

In 1828, Andrew Jackson said in a speech addressing the central bankers:

“You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out … if people only understood the rank injustice of the money and banking system, there would be a revolution by morning.”

Over the next 8 years Jackson worked to abolish the federal charter of the Second Bank of the U.S. In 1835 an attempt was made on his life. The would be assassin, Richard Lawrence, pointed two pistols at Jackson, pulled the triggers, and miraculously both misfired. Jackson told his vice president, Martin Van Buren, "The bank, Mr. Van Buren, is trying to kill me...."

In 1836 Jackson succeeded in abolishing the second national bank, stating,

“The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it.”

On Andrew Jackson's tombstone he had engraved, "I Killed The Bank."

In 1863, Abraham Lincoln warned the American people:

"The money power preys upon the nation in time of peace and conspires against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me, and causes me to tremble for the safety of our country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the republic is destroyed. "

Lincoln was shot and killed a year and a half later in April, 1865.

In 1881 President Garfield was assassinated less than four months after taking office. He was another anti-banking establishment President, who took action and spoke out against them. He was “coincidentally” shot and killed shortly after declaring:

“Whosoever controls the volume of money in any country is absolute master of all industry and commerce … And when you realize that the entire system is very easily controlled, one way or another, by a few powerful men at the top, you will not have to be told how periods of inflation and depression originate.”

"I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies … If the American people ever allow the private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.” -Thomas Jefferson

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 06:50 PM

Originally posted by airspoon
I wasn't trying to suggest that the system isn't corrupt or that it isn't filled with cronies, only that it is neither publicly held or privately held. Don't get me wrong, I want the bank to fold just as much as the next liberty loving American but that has no effect on it's legal standing and still doesn't make it privately held.

Airspoon, I hate to keep disagreeing with you after your outstanding 9/11 thread, but the fact is that the Fed IS privately held. By that I mean that nearly all of it's stock is owned by something like eight international banks, which the Fed won't even identify. There is absolutely no congressional oversight or accountability and just because the president appoints it's chairman (basically, whomever the Fed wants) in no way makes it a public institution. And just because it's limited to a 6% profit (tax-free) for it's inflation/recession printing press cycles doesn't make it public either.

The only thing "public" about the Fed is when it demands hundreds of billions of dollars in public taxpayer money (under threat of martial law) that goes straight to the very banks that own it or when a former Fed chairman like Geithner or Greenspan is appointed Treasury Secretary, which is more oligarchy than "public."

If there was anything "public" about the Fed, we wouldn't be paying interest on our own money and the Fed's books could be audited. The rest is just smoke and mirrors.

BTW, I highly recommend G. Edward Griffin's The Creature From Jekyll Island -- A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. Written in 1988, Chapter 2 is titled, "The Name of the Game is Bailouts."

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 07:57 PM
reply to post by airspoon

de facto: in fact
1. Actual: de facto segregation.
2. Exercising power or serving a function without being legally or officially established: a de facto government; a de facto nuclear storage facility.

Ok, so it should be clarified when spoken that it is a de facto private institution.

Much like it is the de facto supreme office of government. If it controls the economy that is supreme in of itself, and then you throw in it being above the 3 branches, what is there to discuss? In practice that's the way the game is played.

We can all argue over how it is written, but that doesn't change the reality. Much like it's written that this is supposed to be a republic, under a strict definition, yet in reality, by de facto the system is instead a democracy, one in which the mobs don't even rule, instead the group with the majority of the horded and plundered resources does.

Just because they say they're this or that, means little. Those would be claims, not backed up by proof that I have seen. So when they say they hand over their profits to the treasury I want to see proof. The only proof I've ever seen is the proof that it's the other way around, when they shimmy trillions of dollars to the privately owned banks that own them but don't own them at the same time. Obama handed out about 1 trillion (at least initially) for "stimulus". The Fed handed out something on the order of 24 trillion (and that figure is something like a year old) to private banks. Oh, sure, a few Congress Critters hooted and howled about it, but it didn't change a damn thing. It took an SEC investigation, that fined Goldman Sachs $.5 billion, just to find out where they put their portion of the ahndouts.

In my last post I tried providing some examples of how it is 'private' by de facto. I'm hoping you'll respond to those points in that context so we can gain more clarification. Another critical issue is how can the government owe money (with interest) to itself?

And just because Congress enacted the creation of others isn't how I'd define them as being creators. If I invent something , and then Sony mass-produces it, it doesn't make them the creators, only the producers. Semantics.

The Fed was designed by the private bankers as the ultimate vehicle for their control. Part of the design is it not being subject to true oversight or auditing. The weaknesses of corporations and the ability to be investigated was carefully loop-holed out, in its design. They did that for a reason, but is that reason the one we'd find on their website?

[edit on 4-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 11:20 PM
The Patriot act is the same as the Gestapo act in Germany, also formed after a false flag event (The burning on the Reichstag) that was contrived by the German government and blamed on Jewish Communists. What followed was the largest curtailing of freedoms in German history.

The Patriot Act followed what MANY believe to be a false flag event (9/11) blamed on the "bad guy of the day", Islamic Terrorism, and highly likely to have been contrived (at least in part) by the US government.

What will follow (and has already begun) will be the largest curtailing of freedoms in United States history.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 01:38 AM
reply to post by GoldenFleece

This link details the FED and helps explain it.
Federal Reserve Explained

In short, if you were given a homework assignment to come up with the most profitable, risk-free business in the world, it would be the FED. When they (our government) injects billions of dollars into the economy via a "stimulus" package, they are in fact borrowing it from the FED. It literally cost the FED less than a few dollars to "create" that money. They then collect enormous amounts of interest on that money. They have quite literally pulled that money out of their @ss. It is not tied to an asset.

It is the exact same strategy the credit card companies use; keep people in debt so they will never pay it off. There is a video called Maxed Out that is worth watching. It details how the CC companies thrive on people being over extended because their profits come purely from interest, penalties and fees. It is not by accident that you can't improve your credit by paying your balance every month. You actually improve your credit score by maintaining a balance and making regular payments. The credit scoring system is designed to make other people money, NOT to help you manage your credit score.

The FED is nothing but a CC company on mega-steroids. To the powerful, greedy people in the world, the FED is the ultimate money-making and money-controlling scheme. They lend money at no cost to themselves and make obscene profits in interest. That's what makes them tick. It's the ultimate aphrodisiac for the powerful and greedy.

As far as 9/11 goes, the sooner we can get past partisan politics the better. Anybody who thinks this whole trend started with Bush is naive. If 9/11 was in fact a conspiracy, it was in the works for years. The NWO and OWG has been in the planning stages for decades. Did Bush suck? Yes! So does Obama, so did Clinton and on it goes. The institution of the POTUS is nothing but a facade. Our presidents are puppets. In the big picture, the wealthy and powerful couldn't give a crap less about things like healthcare, gay marriage or pork barrel spending. To them, those things are insignificant and unimportant. Much like if I won the lotto tomorrow, say $150 mil. Power Ball. Do you think I would care about the cost of health insurance? Or property tax? Now imagine how little those things matter to multi-billionaires.

The ultimate goal of the FED or more accurately, it's 300+ stock holders, is to keep America in debt. How do we do that? By borrowing more and more money. "America" is the FEDs biggest and best customer. Not the people, mind you, but the government. It's the biggest pyramid scheme of all time. And most Americans have no clue to what degree the system is rigged.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 04:21 AM
You know what I never understood. These people who spend millions of their own dollars to take a 150K a year job. Why would anyone do that unless its a thirst for power? Those are the ones in congress I simply don't trust.

Who spends that kind of money to cast one vote? One vote in 100.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 07:39 AM
The Patriot Act was put into place immediately after 9/11 so that the folks at the top of the executive branch (Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz, and a few others - as well as their Pentagon brass co-conspirators) could use the NSA to keep track of investigative journalists who might ignore the Anthrax warning and dig into the 9/11 Attacks anyway.

Of course, it took the press 5 years to finally realize they were being watched...

All those civil liberty restrictions - if viewed as systemic moves to shut down potential 9/11 investigations - become less ideological and much more pragmatic in nature. After all, the Bush/Cheney crowd proved to be a much more cold-blooded, non-idealistic bunch. More into the trillions of dollars for the corporate bosses.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:04 AM
Tell me something :

Why do you think the 9/11 Investigation never really happened? Why do you think the media never bulged in any direction or asked any questions? Simple really they needed the whole affair to be shut down, and never spoken about again! The president never got impeached ? Why? Ohhh Why? The victims themselves had family, and just try and ask what was their experience on the 9/11 commission. Even the official story makes no sense. The only reasonable answer I can give you is that politicians of the bush administration were aware. They knew something was about to happen. And most importantly they are probably those who instigated such events. When everything that has been investigated seems to be untrue, and the only plausible answer that remains, even if doubtful, well; must be true. And this would explain why no investigation ever got anywhere. Why no one was held responsible in office. Why explanations fall short. It’s the only reason why they never talk about it.

Then a few days after 9/11 they give more power to the FED and commence a major intelligence operation that could in fact mean they could spy on each and every single American and Canadian citizen. What I find even more curious is the FEMA camps, the endless wars on “terrorism” that we go out to “fight”. We are more about the occupation then we are about a force that is defending it’s own territory.

If we investigate what is happening In south Africa, in Europe, in Russia, you will see that there are many different reasons to question what the military and the government are doing. CIA undercover operations to play with the balance of power in the regions etc etc. Seems more like Germany in WW2 trying to annex other countries then a show of force to fight off the “terrorists”. And even further important, it is no longer needed to CONQUER a country, as long as they need to buy or back the currency of worthless paper the FED throws their way. (the only reason the American dollar was so strong is because everybody uses it as a reserve, so yes it is still of value for the moment)

…..I have to say this out loud, because I know that some of you think about it, but do not want to say it out loud.

I would not be surprised if the next world war is started by the U.S.

Everything is in place for another hot head to take the office and declare himself chancellor. Only then would all of those FEMA camps be useful. And more important, the military would be strategically placed for an offensive in any country and the laws would permit it to happen in a heartbeat. But you go ahead and say I’m a crackpot! But wait and see… the next coming Big Event , will be a war that the United States will start.

And of course it is not going to be visible , they control the media. So you will hear things like right now, saying that you are defending your nation, you have nothing to fear, you are safe and they want to ensure security. That’s most likely how it’s going to happen.

And most importantly, the American people are fast asleep and are not looking into this as much as they ought too. Just like Rome all over again, being distracted by fun and games, they no longer care what happens in the political arena. And this is exactly what most in power want. They want all of us distracted by something else, so that no one interferes, and that they do not need to fight a mob of people.

And if you want something interesting to read up on, read on the Rothschild’s and their influence on ww2. You will quickly find that the financial market was one of the causes for why the “FURRER” took power. Because he gave the economy back to the people. He even took barter instead of the FIAT currency of the bankers. He took the economy away from the bankers. He fought the bankers. If I remember correctly there was something about the Jewish people owning too much of the worlds moneys. One of the reason they started the biggest massacres of all times. (And no I do not approve the killing of any human being no matter what nationality or rationality that could be applied)

This is why you can no longer look at the world, and look at politicians, as those who change things. It never starts at the political level, it always starts with those holding the money in their hands. And the same 6 families have the money and power, and are placing their chess pieces right now.

Mark my words, another world war is very close of happening. What you will do about it? will you change our history as you know it to be.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:12 AM
When I went through the thread, I made some very-very interesting observations. First, "The Patriot Act" is a set of national security practices, which my government has been doing since World War II. All they were trying to do is make everything more legal and flexible.

Second, who opened this thread? Someone who lives in Quebec. While he is speaking smack about the US, he is hiding his own country's failures. Seriously, he comes from a portion of his country, which tried to separate itself from the rest of Canada. Why? Because the other half speaks English.

What gives him the right to tell you what is wrong with your country when his country has issues as well.

[edit on 5-8-2010 by Section31]

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:20 AM
Well yes I come from Quebec , And yes my country has short commings, and yes my country follows the U.S in all things.

But the Group Ramstein has a song that explains this even better :
We all live in America!

So much as my credibility goes, I am not bashing americans, I am simply pointing out what is happening and what I see. No one here would be interested in Quebec City affairs, as it is not something that has far reaching consequences in the world we live in.

But consider what is happening with one of the worlds most important financial capitals, I say that is more about the subject at hand. But thanks for pointing out were I come from!

[edit on 5-8-2010 by KpxMarMoTT]

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:23 AM
reply to post by KpxMarMoTT

We may all live in America, but I live in the United States. It is a separate country. Get use to it.

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:25 AM
Section 31 , I am glad you are so proud of being an american. I can not be happier for you! And even if you are proud of living in another country then mine, I fail to see how that pertains to anything I have said?

Please explain:

posted on Aug, 5 2010 @ 10:55 AM
reply to post by KpxMarMoTT

Your thread was a clear attempt at using my country's policies, so you can create a false environment of fear.

Even though you live 'in the country above us', my fellow U.S. citizens should not have to stand by while you are trying to spread false fear.

No, there was no Coup D'etat attempt to take over the US. Our issues are from other foreign entities trying to break our citizen's moral, and they are doing it by dropping false flags all over the place. Instead of US citizens standing up for their country, they are buying into these fake conspiracies planted by another country's citizen. Why? Because other countries are fearful over what those laws might mean for them.

Before you come in here and drop false flags, do some research on the history of my country's national security. You will find out that many of our current laws are based upon older versions, which limits the government from carrying out certain successful security practices.

Sure, people don't like the idea that their phone or internet can be tapped, but our government has been doing it for over 50 years. It is nothing new. "Patriot Act" was just a means to create a more flexible system, so that we are able to obtain information about attacks quickly. It was not our government's attempt to take over the entire system.

Please, stop with this hyper paranoia. It is not doing yourself or others any justice. People are turning the "Patriot Act" into something more deviant than what it actually is, for there is a great sense of fear caused by unknown elements.


[edit on 5-8-2010 by Section31]

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in