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.

 

US Marines headed to WALLSTREET to protect protesters! THIS IS IT

page: 21
325
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clark Savage Jr.

Originally posted by aivlas
Can I see the source for this 99% figure as well? or is that a made up tagline?


Clearly, on a medium very sympathetic to fringe movements and even on HERE it is no where near 99 percent in favor of this. It's a tagline by a vocal group to try to have more widespread appeal is my opinion.

This is war between two small factions: the elites and the would-be elites. I firmly and absolutely believe we should all read the last page of Orwell's Animal Farm about now.

The new will be the same as the old when the dust settles, and the vast majority will be just under a different heel--unable to tell the difference between the old elite and the new.


The "99%" isn't the people who agree with them. They are referring to the people who are not in the top 1% of the wealthy. So anybody making less than $380,354 is in the 99%.




posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Honor93
 



Dress Blues The most distinctive uniform in the military Every detail of the dress blues uniform reflects the proud legacy of Marines who have served for more than two centuries: The buttons featuring the eagle and anchor have been on the uniform since 1804, making them the oldest military insignia in continued use. The "blood stripe" runs down each trouser leg of the dress blues worn by noncommissioned officers, staff noncommissioned officers and officers. The solid red stripe became part of the uniform in 1849. Today, it serves to honor the memory of fallen comrades. The collar of today’s dress blues reflects the original Marine uniform of the American Revolution, which had a high leather neck to help protect Marines from sword blows. Because it embodies Marine Corps history, rigorous standards apply to wearing this uniform and every Marine upholds those standards with pride.


Oh really?

Completely agree that this thread is garbage though. Hardly a single on topic post in the entire thing. Also, incredibly misleading title, other bad or just wrong facts and where are these marines fighting to protect the people?

Link - USMC

edit on 1-10-2011 by Domo1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
wow, 20 pages of comments (admittedly, i didn't read all of 'em) and it seems no one caught either of these from the original post: Army / Marines don't wear "dress blues" and Congress is on vacation/recess.

to me, it just goes to show most of these participants have no clue as to what or why they are there and are far too easily misled.
congressional schedule
it would seem the propaganda machine is in full swing ...


not only that, but do most people here even realize most cops have served in the military prior to becoming cops?



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:12 PM
link   
I swear some people on ATS are dumb as stumps...
Here more facts that may explode your lame libertarian ideals.



Moody’s Investors Service and Standard & Poor’s adjusted the way they graded securities after Goldman Sachs Group Inc., UBS AG and at least six more banks pressured them, according to a U.S. Senate report.

The world’s two largest bond-ranking companies, both based in New York, made exceptions to rules when bankers asked for better safety ratings on complex mortgage-backed securities, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said yesterday. When Mooy’s and S&P changed their assessments of hundreds of those bonds in July 2007, it helped trigger the financial crisis, the panel said.

“The ratings agencies weakened their standards as each competed to provide the most favorable rating to win business and greater market share,” according to the report. “The result was a race to the bottom.”



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Clark Savage Jr.
 


Not surprising really, why does everything related to anon seem to be mainly led by propaganda.

reply to post by Cuervo
 


Got to love people imposing what they think is right on other people, have they asked the 99% of people they are supposed to be standing up for if they actually want a change?
edit on 1-10-2011 by aivlas because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


The strategy is to get more and more and more and more people dependent on the State till the State just runs everything. Communism is State ownership of all the means of production. This is where the OBama admin is leading us. I don't deny there are other forces at work. There are plenty of other forces at work.
This adbusters group is environmentally minded, and I have no doubt that they would take us back to primitive mode. These young college kids may take it for a while, but they do not believe their camping out in some private park depending on handouts is forever. I'm convinced that the adbusters is a loose coalition for the UN Agenda which is depopulation and resource rationing, because they believe that there are limited reources. The tip off to me was the word "sustainability" in that page....its in all the UN Agenda 21 literature. NGO's are a big part of the setup because it APPEARS to be grassroots but in reality is spurred by the UN. I bet they get funding from the UN, courtesy of YOUR paycheck.

Here is another page for them, calling themself an NGO, and also they expose that they are associated with Friends Of The Earth, another UN NGO affiliation dedicated to radical environmentalism and resource rationing.

blog.world-citizenship.org...
edit on 1-10-2011 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I am watching the live feed at 12:15am but it cuts out. I have asked the question if the marines have shown up, but they have about 8000 people asking questions atm. I am trying guys.

~Morpheus



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Originally posted by neo96


simple fact rich peopel are rich because they are better with their own money and secondly they are doing the things that too many people arent you work for your money but you dont put that money back to work.



Absolute bollocks. Most of the elite are BORN into very rich families, as someone just mentioned this is NOT about a clever businessman coming up with a groovy business venture and netting a nice million, this is about the very top of the crust - the super-rich families which operate outside, nay determine such systems.



Just wanted to say that you are ABSOLUTELY on the money here Mr lizard. These people are born into this generational wealth, it is rigged from the start. Neo has claimed in another thread of mine to be a billionaire himself so who knows, I dont know how you could become a billionaire with such poor spelling.....oh thats right, the uber rich are born into it and don't need to work for anything, good grammar included



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 

yeah ok touche ... i am more familiar with the army but still ... Congress is at recess and from last reports there are NO soldiers of any kind on the premises.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I'm convinced that the adbusters is a loose coalition for the UN Agenda which is depopulation and resource rationing, because they believe that there are limited reources. The tip off to me was the word "sustainability" in that page....its in all the UN Agenda 21 literature.


Many non-profits and socially-minded businesses think about "sustainability". It is not about population control. It is not from fear of limited resources. It is the drive to make sure your efforts are able to continue indefinitely without outside help. In that sense, the American government is not sustainable. We cannot continue to allow the money we wrongly printed to be sat on by the top hoarders.

People who work for a living (I assume most of us here) buy things. We buy houses, cars, food, and blow money on entertainment. For every dollar we spend in this way, we raise the US GDP by three dollars. Even poor people who get assistance from the government do more for our economy than the ultra rich. The ultra wealthy on the other hand simply sit on that money and let it grow. This does nothing but hurt our economy. That money vanishes from the system and we have to print more, leading to inflation. This is what people mean by "sustainability" or lack thereof.

Hell, even I use that term when I'm trying to grow food on my property and build solar panels.

I'm not sure what sites you visit but turning "sustainability" into a bad word is hegemony, pure and simple.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Given that mods should be aware of the hottest threads...

Why hasn't this been labeled as a hoax yet? Crying wolf like this is irresponsible.

All I can guess is that it is because it is the weekend.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 

that PC crap won't fly here.
the system of robbing Peter to pay Paul has been "unsustainable" for more than 40yrs, publicly, politically and generationally ... this is not news.

the word game has been long over-played and most aren't that gullible anymore. heck, the country has been aware of our unsustainable condition since the days of FDR.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Cuervo
 

that PC crap won't fly here.
the system of robbing Peter to pay Paul has been "unsustainable" for more than 40yrs, publicly, politically and generationally ... this is not news.

the word game has been long over-played and most aren't that gullible anymore. heck, the country has been aware of our unsustainable condition since the days of FDR.



So the dictionary is full of "pc crap" now? As I explained earlier, the subsidized industries are your "peter and paul" analogies on steroids yet you and other will gladly overlook these bloated fat cats in order to sneer at the single mother using food stamps.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by bluestar.ranch
 


The protest shouldn't be on Wall Street, it should be in front of the Capital. Our leaders in D.C. made those banks give out bad loans and then loaned them money to keep the heads of those banks from talking, IMO.

Progressive ideas got us here and progressives will escalate it! Anyone down there is just trying to stir sh#^ up!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by bluestar.ranch
 


They could protest the Federal Reserve for devaluing our money. I'm all for breaking the straggle hold banks have on our society but it should start with the 800lb gorilla, the Fed!



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I'm convinced that the adbusters is a loose coalition for the UN Agenda which is depopulation and resource rationing, because they believe that there are limited reources. The tip off to me was the word "sustainability" in that page....its in all the UN Agenda 21 literature.


Many non-profits and socially-minded businesses think about "sustainability". It is not about population control. It is not from fear of limited resources. It is the drive to make sure your efforts are able to continue indefinitely without outside help. In that sense, the American government is not sustainable. We cannot continue to allow the money we wrongly printed to be sat on by the top hoarders.

People who work for a living (I assume most of us here) buy things. We buy houses, cars, food, and blow money on entertainment. For every dollar we spend in this way, we raise the US GDP by three dollars. Even poor people who get assistance from the government do more for our economy than the ultra rich. The ultra wealthy on the other hand simply sit on that money and let it grow. This does nothing but hurt our economy. That money vanishes from the system and we have to print more, leading to inflation. This is what people mean by "sustainability" or lack thereof.

Hell, even I use that term when I'm trying to grow food on my property and build solar panels.

I'm not sure what sites you visit but turning "sustainability" into a bad word is hegemony, pure and simple.


I got it from the UNs own darn literature. Have you read any of Maurice Strong's statements about population control? I have read a lot of stuff on UN Agenda 21, and the fact is that you just do not know what is going on with it. You do not know the strategy they are employing.

Here, I'll help you


1. The United Nations bans opposition to its Global Tax Design. "When United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced his plan 'to fundamentally transform the global economy — based on low-carbon, clean energy resources,' few realized he was calling for a new global tax to be designed without public scrutiny.... The UN's one nation, one vote system has been used since its founding to render the U.S. impotent, regardless of the fact that we are its major financial donor. ....Banning the press and global tax opponents from its July 13-14 tax design meeting in Tokyo, Japan, for example, is anathema to a democratic process, but the UN is not a democracy. Rather, its unelected bureaucrats use a 'collaborative decision-making process' to reach 'consensus' with no debate or expressed opposition.....


"The purpose of the Fund is to enable the UN to implement its global blueprint for sustainable development called Agenda 21. This green agenda is the new Marxism that requires government ensured economic equity.... In the U.S., federal and state legislatures were bypassed when then-President Clinton signed an executive order to create the President's Council on Sustainable Development to implement Agenda 21. Federal grants continue to flow to local governments to carry out the UN's green agenda across America.


[11-6-09]: "In the bill, the Affordable Health Choices Act, community transformation plans would be carried out using federal money and be overseen by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC would distribute the money as well as coordinate the various state, local, and 'community' entities responsible for carrying out the plans.
"...both state and local governments are eligible for the grants, as are 'national networks of community-based organizations'.... The transformation plans must include 'activities' for all ages, beginning in public schools, which focus on eating healthy food, adequate amounts of physical activity....'Every time our friends on the other side start talking about community organizations, we usually think ACORN..."


I just love this one from Maurice Strong

"...current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class - involving high meat intake use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work-place air-conditioning, and suburban housing - are not sustainable. A shift is necessary. which will require a vast strengthening of the multilateral system, including the United Nations..." [1] Maurice Strong , opening speech at the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development


www.crossroad.to...

Im running out of characters



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by sasquatch5100
reply to post by bluestar.ranch
 


They could protest the Federal Reserve for devaluing our money. I'm all for breaking the straggle hold banks have on our society but it should start with the 800lb gorilla, the Fed!


Who are owned by Wall Street who is regulated by the Fed who are owned by Wall Street who is regulated by the Fed who are owned by Wall Street who is regulated by the Fed who are owned by Wall Street who is regulated by the Fed who are owned by Wall Street who is regulated by the Fed who are owned by Wall Street who is regulated by the Fed... see why they are starting with Wall Street?



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
So far our members have flagged this thread 207 times. 207 flags for a thread that has a misleading title and the
OP offers one stinking line of his own text ?

Well at least I knew ATS, when most of the members cared about the quality, of the threads that were posted..
The OP offers nothing as far as any insights or ideas about the topic he has posted. Just a line and some cut and paste and wham.

Crap, absolutely and positively.



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


Here's what you need to know about the organizational structure of the UN Agenda 21 and its subsidiary NGOs


Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 specifically calls for each community to formulate its own Local Agenda 21:
"Each local authority should enter into a dialogue with its citizens, local organizations, and private enterprises and adopt 'a local Agenda 21.' Through consultation and consensus-building, local authorities would learn from citizens and from local, civic, community, business and industrial organizations and acquire the information needed for formulating the best strategies." (Agenda 21, Chapter 28, sec 1,3.)
This tactic may sound reasonable until you realize that the dedicated "Stakeholder Group' that organizes and oversees local transformation is not elected by the public. And the people selected to represent the 'citizens' in your community will not present your interests. The chosen 'partners', professional staff, and working groups are implementing a new system of governance without asking your opinion.




The same steps and strategies are detailed in The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide: An introduction to Sustainable Development. This "planning framework for sustainable development at the local level" was prepared by The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) in partnership with the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) and the International Development Research Centre of Canada. Remember, UNEP also prepared the GBA which supposedly proves the environmental "crisis." Could there be a conflict of interest here?

The ICLEI Planning Guide suggests that Stakeholders select two kinds of people to serve their agenda: (1

A. Community Residents: women, youth, indigenous people, community leaders, teachers
B. Community-Based Organizations: churches, formal women's groups, traditional social groups, special interest groups

C. Independent Sector: Non-governmental organizations (NGO). academia, media

D. Private/Entrepreneurial Sector: environmental service agencies, small business/cooperatives, banks

E. Local Government and Associations: elected officials, management staff, regional associations

F. National/Regional Government: planning commission, utilities, service agencies, financial agencies.7

Sustainable development is a process of bringing these three development processes into balance with each other," states ICLEID's Agenda 21 Planning Guide on page 21. "The implementation of a sustainable development strategy therefore involves negotiation among the primary interest groups (stakeholders) involved in these development processes. Once an Action Plan for balancing these development processes is established, these stakeholders must each take responsibility and leadership to implement the plan."


www.crossroad.to...
So there you go. Did you notice Canada in that text?



posted on Oct, 1 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by 11andrew34
 


I suggest anyone who agrees hits the ALERT button on the OP. This thread is embarrassing. The title is very misleading and there is no proof.



new topics

top topics



 
325
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join