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.

 

Ultra-Farce Whistleblowers Law Set To Pass Criminal Congress

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
SF Gate reports:


President Barack Obama is expected to sign the bill, which supporters say will discourage leaks of classified information. The legislation would allow intelligence agency whistle-blowers to raise concerns within their agencies instead of giving classified materials to WikiLeaks or other outlets, which is illegal.


LOL

Because the Watergate tapes would have been released by government immediately.

Because the Gulf of Tonkin report by the NSA would have been declassified by government immediately.

Our glorious leaders demand we trust them to release secret whistleblowers documents rather than the free press.

Stalin would be proud.

Of course, the government is not interested in protecting the people, they are interested in protecting themselves. The government is a criminal organization of looting theives that act in the interest of international banks and special interest groups.

The criminal government seeks to stifle free speech at every opportunity and criminalize the release of obviously news worthy material in total disregard for the first amendment of the US Constitution.

It is laughable that the criminal government actually thinks it can solve the wiki leaks problem by creating its own CIA run propaganda outlet. It shows how disconnected from reality our criminal government is and to what ridiculous lengths they will go in order to keep people from hearing the truth.



edit on 6-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Well...just one more thing making the government more secretive and powerful.

I mean, its not like they are hiding anything important right?

.....right?



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
I had so much hope when Obama became president. Now, not so much. He's just another one of "them". If he signs this bill, that will be the final straw as far as I'm concerned.

I said, "But, he studied Constitutional Law at freaking Harvard for cryin' out loud! The man wants to restore the constitution after the boondoggle that was the Bush years."

I WAS WRONG.

If you tell my wife that I admitted to being wrong, I'll kill you.

edit on 6-12-2010 by DragonTattooz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DragonTattooz
I had so much hope when Obama became president. Now, not so much. He's just another one of "them". If he signs this bill, that will be the final straw as far as I'm concerned.

I said, "But, he studied Constitutional Law at freaking Harvard for cryin' out loud! The man wants to restore the constitution after the boondoggle that was the Bush years."

I WAS WRONG.

If you tell my wife that I admitted to being wrong, I'll kill you.

edit on 6-12-2010 by DragonTattooz because: (no reason given)


There is only one way to tell if a politician is telling the truth.

If what he advocates weakens the power of the State, you can assume he's speaking the truth.

Anything else is bound to be a lie.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
It comes to know surprise that Obama would try to deem these types of actions " illegal ", but whats funny, is that we as the US do not have free reign over all. What many continue to fail to understand, is that WL release of classified information was done in another country. So these alleged statements that documents were stolen, whether true or not, must be PROVEN. Regardless of what the libs want to pass in congress, just because " they " say documents are stolen doesn't mean its so. There must be an arrest to have an official conviction.
And to take it one step further, if WL was able to obtain any information from a foreign country, they are not bound by our laws. Just because someone divulges information to the WL people, doesn't mean that they are responsible for that information, nor should they be held to laws that don't pertain to them.
Germany's president doesnt tell US citizens what to do, or vice versa.
Truth came out, and now the Libs in office are trying to save face~

PATHETIC!



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


The criminal US government does not care about the law.

The US Constitution is the law.

In the US Constitution, it explicitly says nothing but gold or silver may be legal tender.

In the US Constitution, it explicitly says the Army must be disbanded after 2 years if we are not engaged in a war.

In the US Constitution, it explicitly says ONLY THE CONGRESS may write law.

And on and on and so forth.

The criminal US government is operating as an illegal institution of looting thieves.

The criminal US government considers itself above the law.


edit on 6-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:35 PM
link   
If this gets through, it's all over. That'll mark the true descent of our democratic society.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Solasis
 


Our decent into a criminal's utopia occurred when we created the Fed in 1913.

I would even go farther and say our decent into tyranny occurred the day the states signed over their power to a criminal federal government.

We would all be a thousand times better off today had the states remained independent.

No civil war.

No WWI

No WWII

No Vietnam War

No Iraq War

No Federal Reserve fake fiat fraudulent money.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


The criminal US government does not care about the law.

The US Constitution is the law.


Normally I am right there with you Mnemeth, but some are partially correct in my mind, just not presented clearly.


n the US Constitution, it explicitly says nothing but gold or silver may be legal tender.


Article I, Section 10 states the following:

No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts...


It is here in which I assume you are referencing to. This is the only place in which the Constitution gives direct authority of Congress over the States. Here it declares that a State cannot make its own legal tender and could only accept Gold or Silver for its debts. I believe this was directed at State business, otherwise it would have explicitly placed "No State nor Person shall".

This is also where the 10th Amendment comes into play. As there is no place within the Constitution that enumerates the powers of what is a legal tender to the Federal Government. Only the power to 'coin Money' and establish its value is given (Article I, Section 8).

I believe this was done so to ensure maximum liberty to the People in terms of how they engage in private contract. The Government cannot dictate how we exchange goods or what we use for legal tender.

This is were your original argument rings true. It is here where the Government has overstepped and placed themselves in the criminal category.


In the US Constitution, it explicitly says the Army must be disbanded after 2 years if we are not engaged in a war.


Again in Article I, Section 8 we see the following:

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

To provide and maintain a Navy;


The power enumerated here is that Congress can only appropriate the money for a maximum of two years. Once that money comes up, they must re-appropriate. I believe they do this yearly now in the Defense Authorization Bill. Still, your point rings true because they are perpetually maintaining a standing army rather than having the States take that burden and mobilize in a time of National Defense to create a National Army.

Good points though. The Imperial National Government is criminal and it knows it. It knows that it has circumvented the Constitution right in front of everyone without even a whimper from the People nor the States.

As for this law. It will do nothing. It is more lip service and the People just eat it up. They soak it in and move onto Monday Night Football or Dancing with the Stars. Ignorance is Truly Bliss for most people.
edit on 6-12-2010 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



Our glorious leaders demand we trust them to release secret whistleblowers documents rather than the free press.


Probably the only topic you'll create that I'll ever agree with.





posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 


The US Government is a banana republic.

It is an institution of criminals dictating the law to a population of law abiders.

We have criminals writing law, we have criminals printing money, we have criminals judging the law.




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:18 PM
link   

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.


LOL



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


That is a big LOL. They fail at that duty daily and the People again, just let it go....sad really.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


That is a big LOL. They fail at that duty daily and the People again, just let it go....sad really.


The government is a lawless institution.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


Though I agree with you, allow me to take it a step further and make one minor correction, Article 1 Section 8, states and I quote: under Powers Of Congress

"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;"

source:www.usconstitution.net...

Though you were partially right, I would have to contend that this above standard supersedes all other standards. Keeping in mind Article 1 section 10 simply identifies what is PROHIBITED by THE STATES. Both you and the other user of this Article didn't fully understand that Article 1 Section 10 clearly states what a specific STATE may not do. One of which is, " No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."

source: www.usconstitution.net...

This says nothing about using other types of means as currency. It addresses, and prohibits the use of gold and silver, because these items hold a higher marketable value, also known as tangible asset. They identify this within this Article because they hoped to limit any debt undervalued, and paid with a higher valued asset.



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Whereweheaded
 


The word Coin was used, not print.

The word "Coin" was used because the only legal tender allowed in the Constitution is gold or silver.

Paper was used to represent "specie" - which means coins.

Hence, your argument fails.

Further, the reason why only gold and silver was allowed to be tender is because the Continental Dollar imploded from hyper-inflation. The founders knew all to well the dangers of fiat money.

Further fail.


edit on 6-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



um..you stand incorrect, There was a shortage of coins because people had started hoarding them; the uncertainty caused by the war had made the value of items fluctuate drastically. Because coins were made of gold and silver their value didn't change much, so people wanted to hang onto them rather than buy items that might lose their value. Which further suggests my above comment in regards to " tangible asset".

The first paper notes were printed in denominations of 1 cent, 5 cents, 25 cents, and 50 cents. The U.S. Department of the Treasury first issued paper U.S. currency in 1862.

source:www.factmonster.com...

I strongly recommend you get your facts straight. But regardless, This country is governed by nothing but thieves, liars, and crooks, that I think we can agree upon?



edit on 6-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by mnemeth1
 



um..you stand incorrect, There was a shortage of coins because people had started hoarding them; the uncertainty caused by the war had made the value of items fluctuate drastically. Because coins were made of gold and silver their value didn't change much, so people wanted to hang onto them rather than buy items that might lose their value. Which further suggests my above comment in regards to " tangible asset".

The first paper notes were printed in denominations of 1 cent, 5 cents, 25 cents, and 50 cents. The U.S. Department of the Treasury first issued paper U.S. currency in 1862.

I strongly recommend you get your facts straight. But regardless, This country is governed by nothing but thieves, liars, and crooks, that I think we can agree upon?




I strongly recommend you get your facts straight before coming in here and telling statist lies.

en.wikipedia.org...


By the end of 1778, Continentals retained from 1/5 to 1/7 of their face value. By 1780, the bills were worth 1/40th of face value. Congress attempted to reform the currency by removing the old bills from circulation and issuing new ones, without success. By May 1781, Continentals had become so worthless that they ceased to circulate as money. Franklin noted that the depreciation of the currency had, in effect, acted as a tax to pay for the war.[16] In the 1790s, after the ratification of the United States Constitution, Continentals could be exchanged for treasury bonds at 1% of face value.[17] Continental bills are now very rare, and are sought after by collectors.

After the collapse of Continental currency, Congress appointed Robert Morris to be Superintendent of Finance of the United States. Morris advocated the creation of the first financial institution chartered by the United States, the Bank of North America, in 1782. The bank was funded in part by specie loaned to the United States by France. Morris helped finance the final stages of the war by issuing notes in his name, backed by his own money. The Bank of North America also issued notes convertible into specie.[18]

The painful experience of the runaway inflation and collapse of the Continental dollar prompted the delegates to the Constitutional Convention to include the gold and silver clause into the United States Constitution so that the individual states could not issue bills of credit.


edit on 6-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


No lies here, facts that obviously you are unable to comprehend. Therefore I won't waste my time with someone whom can't seem to grasp historical fact.

Btw, using nothing but wikipedia as your sole basis of reference, only further suggests your inability to properly research.
edit on 6-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)


( side note ) for you to assume that I'm a statist, further proves that you have no comprehension of my views or beliefs, but nice try troll!
edit on 6-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


No lies here, facts that obviously you are unable to comprehend. Therefore I won't waste my time with someone whom can't seem to grasp historical fact.

Btw, using nothing but wikipedia as your sole basis of reference, only further suggests your inability to properly research.
edit on 6-12-2010 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)


Good, because I don't want to waste my time explaining the difference between a gold coin and worthless paper.

(side note) Anyone who defends in anyway a paper currency is necessarily a statist, because free markets do not use worthless paper as a currency. A paper currency necessarily requires a state and will necessarily expand state power when in the hands of said state.

Free markets use commodities as money, not paper.



edit on 6-12-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join