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.

 

Is the cat out of the bag?

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Liquesence
 


Well okay fine was this in South Amwerica that he did this?? But I was more hoping for a evening address where people who get off work can see it.




posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by American-philosopher
reply to post by Liquesence
 


Well okay fine was this in South Amwerica that he did this?? But I was more hoping for a evening address where people who get off work can see it.


The convenience of your evening, of just evening in general?


Well, i am not sure where he was when he gave the address. But i do not think that the supposed immediacy of some press conference or the immediacy of action of the events it addresses cannot be scheduled around when people in certain areas arrive home or are available to view it, especially when people have entirely different schedules depending on which jobs they work--and--in which part of the world (or country) they live (not to mention the fact that the different media it in different parts of the world airing it are independent of the actual speech/conference). Just sayin'.

I understand where you're coming from, though.

I just think saying he should wait until *you* are home in the evening is a very limited way of looking at it.

*shrug*

So you missed it, ok, no sweat, i was just pointing out the fact that he did give one.

That's all.

Peace


edit on 22-3-2011 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2011 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by American-philosopher



We the People" pose no threat whatsoever to out government and it will act in anyway necessary to ensure it's very survival. Whether we, or our "representatives" approve or not
reply to post by JakesterL
 


Is that the problem now? That we the people do not pose a threat to our current government and I am not meaning it in a violent way. I mean it ina way of mass people standing up for what they want the whole of the american people.

And are you saying that we are entering a DUNE scenario where it is just a battle for resources a battle for the spice. And the ends justify the means,anything to get the spice.


My previous post is of pure strategic consideration, which is why it will need to be done without the shackles of the morality of the people. I’m saying that some time soon, there will be no more need to pretend we are holding the strings.

The Iraq war for example, WMDs was the premise we invaded for. The intelligence provided has been proven to be false. Then the mission changed. Our guilt was quite predictable and who can say no to spreading our cherished democracy? Only one big problem with that, it wasn’t why we invaded. Once we neglected to admit fault, then it became a moral obligation to stay. Hey Halliburton isn’t complaining. In that case, the will of the people wasn’t denied, just hijacked. We were deceived and what of those who orchestrated it, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld? If there are no consequences, why wouldn’t they? Why won’t they now? Give me an example of how the government can’t do whatever it pleases, regardless if it’s against the will of the people.

What can you do in response, elect one of the two candidates already indoctrinated? The last independent president elected was George Washington. I think the two parties have the system pretty well figured out by now. Pick any extreme view right or left and neither even comes close to an accurate representation of the people. But come election time, that’s what will be offered. They already know, the more ridiculous agendas of either party have no real chance of success. So the status quo will be maintained, business as usual.

The objective of the government is to increase it’s own power, not to serve the people. To that end you will see both parties in total agreement. If a conflict arises between corporate sponsorship and public opinion, the public will lose each and every time. It doesn’t matter who is in office, republican/democrat the outcome will be the same. They have the same masters and it’s not “we the people”.

EDITED:
American-Philosopher do you think my scenario is really all that strange?

In this link the language seems pretty strong in objection towards our tactics and citing civilian deaths. China, Russia and even North Korea want to be champions of humanity as well: China and Russia call for an immediate cease fire in Libya I guess we will find out soon enough, but my money is on we don’t back down and in fact escalate our presence.
edit on 3/22/2011 by JakesterL because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 01:03 AM
link   
reply to post by JakesterL
 


No I don;t think your scenario is all that strange. I just detest it! Even though it might be the truth of the matter.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by American-philosopher
reply to post by JakesterL
 


No I don;t think your scenario is all that strange. I just detest it! Even though it might be the truth of the matter.


I can only hope by some miracle, more folks in our government share your moral conviction. Right now that seems to be the more impossible scenario, of all things surreal.



posted on Mar, 23 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   
I've think there is more to this deep rabbit hole. A lot of these US conglomerates and corporations have interests in these countries. They might be the ones pulling the strings not the President. They have a lot of money to make especially in the rebuilding of the country when it collapses. Remember when Russia wanted in on the rebuilding of infrastructure in Iraq and they wanted to sell all of their electrical and switchgear components?



new topics

top topics
 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join