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: 24
325
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by Honor93

no socialist society has granted Earth the respect it deserves. no socialist society has preserved Earths' resources. no socialist society has ever generated the proclaimed "utopia" as is supposedly claimed. so, why support a socialist structure?


There are quite a few socialist structures that work quite well. Just look at any of the Scandinavian nations. I think you've mistaken me though. On a federal level, I'm a wild west cowboy of capitalism. It's on a local, state level that I'm a commie bastard. I'm one of those socialists that are for states rights. To each his own as long as we all recognize the common enemies.

ok i concede, not many have successfully confused or confounded me but with this statement, you certainly have succeeded ...

On a federal level, I'm a wild west cowboy of capitalism. It's on a local, state level that I'm a commie bastard.
... how can you possibly achieve both?


I am saying the feds should have zero oversight on any matters that could be handled by the state (as per our constitution). For my state, I'm a socialist. Not your state, just mine.


Originally posted by Honor93
if you are saying a free market system must be capitalistic, we still disagree.
if you are saying federal oversight is necessary, why bother with states' rights?
if states' right are superior (agreed), why support the Fed as it stands today?
If we agree the FED Reserve is the crux of the problem, how does Wall St effect change there ?
**** they will simply turn on the printing press
Since Wall St is just a pawn, why shouldn't the FED sacrifice it for the "greater good" ?
IF this is all part of the plan to instill Martial Law, why feed the beast?


I'm not saying the Fed isn't an issue. But these guys are fighting a different issue. You can't deny that Wall Street is an issue. We both disagree on the oak and acorn philosophy of it all and believe that one came before the other but they are both corrupt. If they were protesting DC, I'd be just as excited. Almost.




posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:21 AM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 

agreed and quite true ... i come from the days of corporate 'raiders' ... before corps became "people".
you want some real dirt on how the process developed, search Lee Iacocca (and his buddies) ... one could call it a 'petri dish' of sorts for the excessive raping we've endured since. here's a link to get you started: Iacocca news many of his acts then set the stage for atrocities we see and dismiss today ... it's all part of the conditioning process.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by whywhynot
 


The regulations regarding the wearing of military uniforms applies to active duty and reserve personnel, not veterans.

As a veteran of our armed forces, I can wear my uniform at any time and for any purpose I choose.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by AgentC

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by jacobe001
 


thats funny parasites is a most approriate term for those protesters.

better rethink that we have already gotten a taste when they go offshore

50 million on welfare another 25 million unemployed

yes yes lets run off wall street that will fix everthing

not!



Pardon me, but Wall Street and the Banks ARE NOT the creator of YOUR wealth. Wall Street and the Banks ARE NOT the means by which you worked your butt off to own a home and your property.

I don't agree with most of these protestors ideology either ... but I need to ask, where in the hell is the Tea Party? That's right, they are all at home on their fat lazy butts, sucking up suds, watching Hannity or some other moron telling them how to thunketh and gyrating their loins for the day they can vote either Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, Newt Gingrich, Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Rick Santorum, and... uh ... er... that crazy dude we can't mention. After they vote, they'll go back to sitting on their fat lazy butts and think, "There, the repukocrats are back in power. All is well and safe again." Just like they did with Bush. And NOTHING will change.

I know a business man who took his own money and tried to galvanize every Tea Party and Patriot Org. in the U.S. to March on D.C. Planned it all months in advance ... 3 people showed up.

Like I said, I don't agree with most of those peoples politics. But ... I DO credit them for having more BALLS than the do nothing Tea Party and so called Patriot movements.



this is the "left's tea party" isn't it?

let them have their fun!



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
I have read their declaration and can agree with about 20 of their points. I definitely support them in who they have chosen to protest against. I wish I was even 500 miles closer, I would go. Any protests closer to Florida?


Go here to find out.
It lists all the protests at present by state and internationally.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by bluestar.ranch
 

I have been saying for years the THE MEN AND WOMEN OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES
should come home AND PROTECT US!!!! they must realize that in the end the the people they help in foreign
countries go back to the way they lived when we leave.they must also realize they have been USED ABUSED
BRAINWASHED AND POISONED!!!!!and for what to be dishonorably discharged?left to fend for themselves?
stripped of their pensions and retirements????I HOPE THEY GIVE THOSE BANKERS HELLLLLLL!!!!!!!
GOD BLESS AMERICANS i can't really say much about a-mer-i-ca because it hasn't felt like home for a while now.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by 1nOne
I really admire your idealism but you are not living in the real world.
These Marines will not 'save" or "protect" the protesters.
They will be arrested along with the others.
The Marines are not your saviours. The US Military would as freely turn against its own citizens just as it has warred against those of other countries.


Have you served? Did you swear to protect the Constitution of the United States of America? Do you know what honor is?

Do you have any idea what you are talking about???

The greater part of the United States Military, especially the U.S. Marines, would turn their arms on themselves before they would turn them on peaceful protesters.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by theviruskennewick
 


If that website just posted is real, I'm not sure we need much protecting. Looks like Uncle Sam better wake the # up or he's gonna have problems.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by gamesmaster63
 


I'll vouch for that. Most of the military people I've met are really good people.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I am saying the feds should have zero oversight on any matters that could be handled by the state (as per our constitution). For my state, I'm a socialist. Not your state, just mine.

ok, this makes a bit more sense but i'm still confused and here's why ...
the civil war was fought over similar states' rights. do we really want to return to such a divided union?
wouldn't what you suggest naturally lead to secession at some point?
what happens when ppl travel to and from opposing state economic structures?

don't get me wrong, in our current system this wouldn't work, i see that ... it's the alternate program i'm having difficulty seeing clearly. This would be akin to married gay couples being arrested 2 counties over while dining out and being "ignorant" to the rules of the state they are visiting.
or maybe a couple of high school kids decide to spend summer there but since they are not contributing members of the society (residents elsewhere), how are their basic needs met?

and, on the other side of the coin, what if ? ... a person or group from a neighboring state decides to temporarily relocate and take advantage of what isn't available in their home state? how is this fair to their host state or its contributors ?
or ... is the concept more simple than that ?? if so, please explain.

edit: the word Revolution in case you think i'm confused about which war was for what


edit on 2-10-2011 by Honor93 because: for clarification



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I am saying the feds should have zero oversight on any matters that could be handled by the state (as per our constitution). For my state, I'm a socialist. Not your state, just mine.

ok, this makes a bit more sense but i'm still confused and here's why ...
the Revolution was fought over similar states' rights. do we really want to return to such a divided union?
wouldn't what you suggest naturally lead to secession at some point?
what happens when ppl travel to and from opposing state economic structures?


The revolution was fought for independence. Our nation was much smaller then. I think secession would be even more likely under the current structure. People are stifled. Look at Texas, they keep talking about it. If each state were sovereign, no one would need to secede as we would all have a healthy amount of autonomy. Traveling from state to state wouldn't be any different than travelling between EU nations; they don't need a special passport and they all use the same currency.


Originally posted by Honor93
don't get me wrong, in our current system this wouldn't work, i see that ... it's the alternate program i'm having difficulty seeing clearly. This would be akin to married gay couples being arrested 2 counties over while dining out and being "ignorant" to the rules of the state they are visiting.
or maybe a couple of high school kids decide to spend summer there but since they are not contributing members of the society (residents elsewhere), how are their basic needs met?


Again, look at the EU (before they tried to become the US). The scenarios you mention could happen but think about how money talks. Do you think that a state with draconian anti-gay laws would be able to trade viably with many other states? The EU operates very much like our forefathers envisioned the US. Ironically (and sadly), the EU continued in our footsteps and are now feeling the sting of centralized capitalism.


Originally posted by Honor93
and, on the other side of the coin, what if ? ... a person or group from a neighboring state decides to temporarily relocate and take advantage of what isn't available in their home state? how is this fair to their host state or its contributors ?
or ... is the concept more simple than that ?? if so, please explain.


It wouldn't be that much different than temporarily relocating to a neighboring nation. If it's temporary, you would most likely still be covered by your home state. If not, then you should probably become a citizen. There would most likely be provisions for these scenarios.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Cuervo
 

these folks are protesting all kinds of things, all at once.
that's where i have a problem with the whole gathering.
curious question -- since i am not familiar with NY, are these Wall St protests addressing or encompassing the FR branch there simultaneously and i'm just unaware or what, exactly?

i'm all for disabling the FR, in every aspect it ever existed.
everything stemming from it is fraudulent in one form or another, including Wall St

i still cannot stand up for an unknown ... til that changes, i'll keep educating with the tools i was given at birth. (and what technology can add) never said i couldn't learn something new but from what i see so far, this is too poorly organized to have any real impact.

I noticed the FL gathering is scheduled for November ... i'm now wondering why no solidarity in the extended movement as well? do they need the travel time to move the agitators about?



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:52 AM
link   
Good morning and greetings from Greece!!!
I wish this movement all the best! And I really wish we from ATS could organize a global protest some day. This would send an even bigger message...
Anyways. I would like to share my opinion on the police. I don't know how the police are behaving, but I heard something about 400 arrests. In Greece they are very violent, spraying tear gases and asfyxiating gases constantly. They also use flash & sound grenades. They have water canons and globs. And trust me, they are not using them wisely or appropriately. Here are some videos for anyone who would like to see:
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

So, here's my question: Is THIS really their job..? And let's suppose that these are their orders. When they are ordered to act like this, do they forget they are also humans? And that their job is to protect people and not corrupted governments? I see that this will happen to the US as well, or sth like this anyway, so I 'like to hear your thoughts.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Imogene72
 


I had the privileged to speak to a retired NYPD officer not long ago. His feelings about what his job was? To drop them with one bullet, dead.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by gamesmaster63
reply to post by whywhynot
 


The regulations regarding the wearing of military uniforms applies to active duty and reserve personnel, not veterans.

As a veteran of our armed forces, I can wear my uniform at any time and for any purpose I choose.

I'm honored to meet a Medal of Honor recipient, the only class of veteran authorized to wear the uniform at their pleasure. If you are not a Medal of Honor recipient, you are still bound by 10 USC 771. This law forbids wear of the uniform by civilians, except as otherwise provided by law. And that law, implemented by Executive Order 10554 and delegated to the Secretary of Defense, brings us right back to the military regulations ... which say former members of the Armed Forces cannot wear the uniform for any purpose of their choosing, and they especially cannot wear uniforms to demonstrations--even if they are MoH recipients.

So no, you cannot wear the uniform at any time and for any purpose you choose, not legally. Maybe no one will hassle you, but if you strut around town in your uniform for no valid military or patriotic purpose, you will be breaking federal law, and you will look like a tool.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Cuervo
 

curious question -- since i am not familiar with NY, are these Wall St protests addressing or encompassing the FR branch there simultaneously and i'm just unaware or what, exactly?

i'm all for disabling the FR, in every aspect it ever existed.
everything stemming from it is fraudulent in one form or another, including Wall St


I'm not familiar with NY either but they are wanting to put the federal reserve back in to the hands of congress. If you want to abolish the federal reserve through congress, they need to possess it first. So, whether or not they want to destroy it, they are certainly setting up the pathway for it to be dismantled. Cart before the horse and all that jazz.

ps edit - As far as the FL delay, it's up to them locally. My area's not doing it for another five days. Not sure what the hold up is other than ensuring it will start with a bang and not a trickle. Your guess is as good as mine.
edit on 2-10-2011 by Cuervo because:
edit on 2-10-2011 by Cuervo because: FL response




posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Clisen33
 


You don't need to do anything to be arrested.

Nice to see the people the state usually employs against protesters making a stand. But as for not fighting or voting for Wall Street - yes you did. You vote for the whole show to continue. If you'd voted for a party that wanted to dismantle capitalism, whisper it - socialists - you might have a point. But socialism is the work of the Devil, isn't it?



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   
I'm disturbed by the questions brought forth about involvement of the Oathkeepers.

This is a very narrow partisan fight. It is a falsely created protest that is poorly misdirected. I still feel that it is White House directed, to mislead the public as to the real people at fault.

The politicians.



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


I keep saying Wall Street is not the real enemy.....



posted on Oct, 2 2011 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cuervo

Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Cuervo
 


I am saying the feds should have zero oversight on any matters that could be handled by the state (as per our constitution). For my state, I'm a socialist. Not your state, just mine.

ok, this makes a bit more sense but i'm still confused and here's why ...
the Revolution was fought over similar states' rights. do we really want to return to such a divided union?
wouldn't what you suggest naturally lead to secession at some point?
what happens when ppl travel to and from opposing state economic structures?


The revolution was fought for independence. Our nation was much smaller then. I think secession would be even more likely under the current structure. People are stifled. Look at Texas, they keep talking about it. If each state were sovereign, no one would need to secede as we would all have a healthy amount of autonomy. Traveling from state to state wouldn't be any different than travelling between EU nations; they don't need a special passport and they all use the same currency.


Originally posted by Honor93
don't get me wrong, in our current system this wouldn't work, i see that ... it's the alternate program i'm having difficulty seeing clearly. This would be akin to married gay couples being arrested 2 counties over while dining out and being "ignorant" to the rules of the state they are visiting.
or maybe a couple of high school kids decide to spend summer there but since they are not contributing members of the society (residents elsewhere), how are their basic needs met?


Again, look at the EU (before they tried to become the US). The scenarios you mention could happen but think about how money talks. Do you think that a state with draconian anti-gay laws would be able to trade viably with many other states? The EU operates very much like our forefathers envisioned the US. Ironically (and sadly), the EU continued in our footsteps and are now feeling the sting of centralized capitalism.


Originally posted by Honor93
and, on the other side of the coin, what if ? ... a person or group from a neighboring state decides to temporarily relocate and take advantage of what isn't available in their home state? how is this fair to their host state or its contributors ?
or ... is the concept more simple than that ?? if so, please explain.


It wouldn't be that much different than temporarily relocating to a neighboring nation. If it's temporary, you would most likely still be covered by your home state. If not, then you should probably become a citizen. There would most likely be provisions for these scenarios.


first, somehow i knew you wouldn't see past the word "Revolution", even though the ONLY internal revolution this country has ever endured was that of the civil war ... forget the fact that's what's being called for now ... i changed the word just in case and you jumped on it anyway. wow


i cannot subscribe to the globalist nonsense.
i understand what you are saying but i do not agree and see it much differently.
If the EU was doing so well, why did the fore-fathers seek to escape persecution?

Most ppl anticipated the Euro would tank, long before it was authorized.
what is so good about that system?
they borrow from the same Fed, they pay the same bills with the same limited resources, how is this better?

i can't say i've traveled europe and seen 1st hand but i've read plenty, conversed with many residents of many nations, lived through the birth and death of several socialist structures and a few countries for that matter ... point is, they systematically fail.

i do not desire another failed experiment as a solution.

Tx ?? geez, they and Montana use the word secede frequently ... no need to have any real issue, however, talking about it and acting on it are two entirely separate and different things.


There would most likely be provisions for these scenarios.

but see, that's my point ... "there would probably be" ... just isn't good enough.
ppl cross borders for medical treatments all the time, sometimes legally sometimes not.
ppl cross borders to evade prosecution, daily.
ppl cross borders for a variety of nefarious reasons and this plan does nothing to alleviate the 'problems'.

even destroying the FR without a plan of recovery is just plain silly.



new topics

top topics



 
325
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join