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.

 

Congress Will Vote To Declare World War 3

page: 4
94
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2011 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by awareness10
 





edit on 15-5-2011 by alexhiggins732 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 15 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by alexhiggins732
 



This kicks! thx.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   
Maybe they should construct a massive cage the size of Rhode Island, then, all members of every congress, group, whatever, can all enter it and fight to the death that way no other innocent people ever have to die as they sit in their palace's fat.

I would support that type of world war, let the ones creating the wars fight it out and leave the common folk of the world the hell alone. Just my humble opinion.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 11:40 PM
link   
So it this for real war or a digital war?

I thought the Us was broke no coins just paper.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsettica
So it this for real war or a digital war?

I thought the Us was broke no coins just paper.


The digital war/cyber war/censorship war is an entirely different aspect but undoubtedly will be used in conjunction with this war.



posted on May, 15 2011 @ 11:58 PM
link   
This thread is important, but the OP should use a better source, like the ACLU site's article.

That would help make the first few replies relevant to the article. Most of the first replies are wasted on wondering whether this is legit or not.

I would suggest mods delete this and have someone else repost it, OP or whoever.

It is important.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by daynight42
This thread is important, but the OP should use a better source, like the ACLU site's article.

That would help make the first few replies relevant to the article. Most of the first replies are wasted on wondering whether this is legit or not.

I would suggest mods delete this and have someone else repost it, OP or whoever.

It is important.


Deleting would would remove everyone's quotes and the links to the various pieces of legislation and articles that everyone dug up.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by nolabel
 


Other source but may be the same guy



A few top congressional insiders are aiming to sneak new worldwide war authority in to a "must pass" piece of legislation: the Defense Authorization bill.

This new war authority would give the president — any president — the power to unilaterally take our country to war wherever, whenever and however he or she sees fit. It would essentially declare a worldwide war without end.

It is shocking that Congress is entertaining such legislation at a time when many are looking to see an end to escalating conflict and abuses of power in the name of fighting terrorism.

Take action! Tell your representative to oppose new worldwide war authority.


secure.aclu.org...


From Daily Paul blog: dailypaul.com...

Also at Salon: www.salon.com...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by JAGx1981
Maybe they should construct a massive cage the size of Rhode Island, then, all members of every congress, group, whatever, can all enter it and fight to the death that way no other innocent people ever have to die as they sit in their palace's fat.

I would support that type of world war, let the ones creating the wars fight it out and leave the common folk of the world the hell alone. Just my humble opinion.


Yeah!! Not only would that make for the ULTIMATE CRAP REALITY SHOW, People would actually take back their
Guardianship right of Rule. If people really thought about it, the People Employ the Gov't not the other way around, therefore the People are THE BOSS and should be making the final decisions not these egomaniacs running everything.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:15 AM
link   
Looks like the MSM is picking up on this...



GOP seeks to redefine war on terror



A little over a week after the United States finally succeeded in its long-sought goal of killing Osama bin Laden, Congress is set to engage in a debate over whether to extend the war on terror indefinitely or leave in place legislation that could eventually wind it down.

Enacted over a lone dissenting vote just three days after the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, the “Authorization for the Use of Military Force,” or AUMF, authorized President George W. Bush to use “all necessary and appropriate force” against those involved in the 9/11 attacks as well as anyone who harbored the perpetrators.


...


The new language drops any reference to 9/11 and “affirms” a state of “armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban and associated forces.” The measure also explicitly gives the president the right to take prisoners “until the termination of hostilities” – something the courts have found to be implicit in the current version of the AUMF, though the new proposal could be seen to extend that power.


...

But critics say the Republican-sponsored measure amounts to the first full-scale declaration of war by the U.S. since World War II – at a moment when counter-terrorism efforts are succeeding, the U.S. is withdrawing from Iraq, and about to begin a withdrawal from Afghanistan. And, they say, it gives Obama and any successor carte blanche to attack any individual or any nation without further approval from Congress.



www.politico.com...




edit on 16-5-2011 by alexhiggins732 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   
Here's the watered down version in the Wall Street Journal


Defense Bill Would ‘Affirm’ War With al Qaeda


Even though Osama bin Laden is dead, Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon (R., Calif.) wants to remind Washington: The war on terror ain’t over.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Howard McKeon (R., Calif.) (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

And with that in mind, Rep. McKeon, who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, is pushing for Congress to renew the 2001 authorization to use military force against terrorists.

The chairman on Monday revealed his version of the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal 2012, and his mark of the bill includes a provision that “would affirm that the United States is engaged in an armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces.”

Critics say provisions in the bill are tantamount to a congressional declaration of war that could give the president broad new powers over private business and government spending.

One provision seeks to bolster the Authorization for Military Force, passed by Congress in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, which the Bush and Obama administration have used as legal authority to conduct military and intelligence operations in Afghanistan and other countries where al Qaeda affiliates have sprung up.

The American Civil Liberties Union and more than a dozen mostly left leaning groups wrote a letter to members of the House Armed Services Committee to oppose the “reaffirmation” saying that it essentially declares war and gives broad powers to the president that normally belong to Congress.


blogs.wsj.com...



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Learn to swim?




posted on May, 16 2011 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Because there just isn't enough war in the world.

We need more.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 03:33 AM
link   
ATS should ban you. No ifs, no buts. Advertising your blog is unconscionable conduct and you should suffer consequences.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
just to be clear, those countries that they have listed as "able to be invaded"

are the very countries, with 1 or 2 exceptions that do not yet have a rothschild run central bank.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Just so everyone knows, The US congress has NOT made a formal declaration of "war" since World War II. That declaration was against Romania on June 5, 1942. They have, however; made declarations of "Military engagements" against several countries, including Vietnam, which also was never a real war.

So this bill does nothing that hasn't already been done. They don't need congress to declare anything. That has been proven with Egypt but more specifically Libya. All they need is a few countries in the UN to say sure why not and the guns start firing. Not to mention, even if congress doesn't approve a "war" or "military engagement", they will and have funded such incursions before UN mandates or the likes (such as some knd of congressional declaration). The second Iraq invasion went underway even before congress approved any funding for it. Same thing with Afghanistan.
edit on 16-5-2011 by DragonFire1024 because: date

edit on 16-5-2011 by DragonFire1024 because: clarify

edit on 16-5-2011 by DragonFire1024 because: clarify once more



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by alexhiggins732
 


Can't believe people doubt you on this one. Read your blog for some time now and you're always ahead of the curve and right on target. It's funny that you're only validated after the MSM catches up, especially when few even trust the MSM in the first place.

This is a critical new step in the development of the "Police State", not just a rehash of the Patriot Act. People complain about the TSA treating them like terrorists now in their use of unconstitutional methods while borders remain wide open. Well, just wait till they pass this baby. This is WW3 being declared on US citizens on all fronts - totally bypasses the Constitution and Bill of Rights on all levels, the irony being that it's our own government vs US citizens. It's just a caveat that it also includes language about other countries and excuses that can be used against them.

Your title is dead-on - this is WW3. Thanks.....I think.



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damian-007
ATS should ban you. No ifs, no buts. Advertising your blog is unconscionable conduct and you should suffer consequences.


Yes. That is an excellent idea, making war with our allies is the best way to ensure the victory of our enemies.

BTW, When I was new here I was told by the mods it is OK to start a thread linking to my own blog as long as it is posted in any forum beside the Alternative Breaking News and such posts were not excessive as to be considered spam. I have followed those guidelines and only have only posted a very few, very important stories.
edit on 16-5-2011 by alexhiggins732 because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-5-2011 by alexhiggins732 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:27 AM
link   
This article, in its original form, is now up on info wars/prison planet

www.prisonplanet.com...
edit on 16-5-2011 by alexhiggins732 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by alexhiggins732

Originally posted by Damian-007
ATS should ban you. No ifs, no buts. Advertising your blog is unconscionable conduct and you should suffer consequences.


Yes. That is an excellent idea, making war with our allies is the best way to ensure the victory of our enemies.

BTW, When I was new here I was told by the mods it is OK to start a thread linking to my own blog as it was posted in any forum beside the Alternative Breaking News and such posts were not excessive as to be considered spam. I have followed those guidelines and only have only posted a very few, very important stories.
Don't mind all the morons here, they all follow each other like sheep, one person throws a tantrum about the source and it starts a chain reaction. Such people are already writing an insulting reply to your thread before they've even read the blog or the information provided. It's as if you can't possibly be the first person to write an article about some stupid bill, we need "mainstream" confirmation first.







 
94
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join