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 Soldiers WILL NOT Be Used to DETAIN Innocent Civilians

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 02:52 AM
link   
It is time to end the madness folks. Most US Soldiers would never turn their backs on American Citizens, they have sworn to uphold the constitution.

If anything, there are a select few in the military with nefarious intent, take the Ft. Hood shooter for instance.

Second, I don't deny that their are camps in the United States.. I also don't deny that there are branches with military power that serve a different purpose.

The US Soldiers turning their backs on US Citizens was a myth perpetuated by those who wish to transform this country to radical ends, in order to create division.

Now that said, currently there is the middle east on fire and people asking for democracy across the globe. Let me make this clear as day for those who will undoubtedly fail to understand the difference, the United States is a Federal Constitutional Republic.

en.wikipedia.org...

A constitutional republic is a state in which the head of state and other officials are representatives of the people and must govern according to existing constitutional law that limits the government's power over all of its citizens. Because the head of the state is elected, it is a republic and not a monarchy.
In a constitutional republic, executive, legislative, and judicial powers are separated into distinct branches.[1]


Hence, it is supposed to keep the government small and limit it's power.

A democracy is different. It is a recipe for disaster.
en.wikipedia.org...

Democracy is generally defined as a form of government in which all adult citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives.[1] Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law.[1] It can also encompass social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.[citation needed]


So who perpetuated this myth?
Can you say United Nations? They believe they have International Law, which by definition would be a One World Government, only one problem. The United States.

So what is the UN?
en.wikipedia.org...

What is FEMA?
en.wikipedia.org...

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is an agency of the United States Department of Homeland Security, initially created by Presidential Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1978 and implemented by two Executive Orders. On 1 April 1979.[1][4] The primary purpose of FEMA is to coordinate the response to a disaster that has occurred in the United States and that overwhelms the resources of local and state authorities.


An agency of US Dept. of Homeland Security, whats that?

en.wikipedia.org...

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a cabinet department of the United States federal government, created in response to the September 11 attacks, and with the primary responsibilities of protecting the territory of the United States and protectorates from and responding to terrorist attacks, man-made accidents, and natural disasters. In fiscal year 2011 it was allocated a budget of $98.8 billion and spent, net, $66.4 billion.


Yes the terrorists delivered a nearly fatal blow on 9/11 which resulted in an unconstitutional police force known as Homeland Security.

www.larouchepub.com...

`Homeland Security'
Threatens Constitution

by Michele Steinberg

American experts on matters of national security, and guarding U.S. critical infrastructure, warned, that the rush for Congress to ram through a Department of Homeland Defense is a threat to the Constitution, as well as a flight-forward reaction. The seminar, convened on July 10 by the Coalition on Defending American Constitutional Rights and Liberties and the Founders' Views of Mankind, came not a moment too soon. According to news from the U.S. Senate on July 24, the Senate plans to complete the mark-up and passage of the Soviet-style Homeland Security bill introduced by Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.) by Aug. 2. This Senate version would then be "worked out" in conference committee with the version that will have been rammed through the House of Representatives before the Summer recess, so that the bill could be signed and passed into law by Sept. 11, or, if not then, at least before the November elections.

Along with the creation of the U.S. Northern Command, a military command for the United States, Canada and Mexico, which threatens to abolish the Founding Fathers' posse comitatus prohibition against using the military against the domestic population on U.S. soil, and in tandem with initiatives that do not require Congressional review, such as the Attorney General's decisions to rewrite "guidelines" to allow Soviet-style domestic spying, and Executive Orders for secret evidence and military incarceration, the bill moves toward enacting police-state measures—without contributing at all to stopping terrorism.


So in conclusion US Soldiers will not be rounding up US Citizens unless they are deemed an enemy to the US Constitutional Republic. It will be the unconstitutional organization of DHS alongside the United Nations and any other Enemies of the United States, which by the way we have alot.

The only way to defend the US is to form a well regulated Constitutional Militia. As those fighting abroad will not be able to protect us.

I hope I finely killed the idea that US Soldiers would be detaining and firing on it's own citizens once and for all on ATS. It was a myth, designed to mislead Americans to create division amongst its citizens.

edit on 7-12-2011 by thehoneycomb because: Title




posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


Lol, this is what the german SS said about thier German brothers.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


Well, seeing is how you seem to like wikipedia, like it some more.
I have only one word to reply for your big post.
Sure!!



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:07 AM
link   
if "they" can get the military to goto war over whatever reasons
to kill people . they can certainly get the same people to "restrain" its own countrymen.

it would haveto be the worst possible mistake to think someone wont do something because you wouldnt
do it. i wouldnt even call that logic.

deny the ignoramuses!!!



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:08 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMindWar
 


There are some good people in DHS but don't get me wrong it's unconstitutional and they are not held to the same standards as the US military.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:08 AM
link   
you do not need to worry about the US troops rounding up and detaining US citizens, they will have the US version of the Gestapo doing that, put a uniform on a person and make them feel somewhat superior and they will do what it takes.

edit on 7-12-2011 by munkey66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


Like I said, I do not deny that the internment camps exist.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


Well, thats easy, just tell these US soldiers that "these civilians" are far from innocent. They are the home bred terrorists, or members of sleeper cells or whatever you chose.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   
reply to post by stopmakingsense
 


The military will no doubt be in conflict over such a scenario, but look above about the division created by US Northern Command.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Pokoia
 


Sure, but that doesn't make it true.

What is true is that the above is where the battle lines are being drawn.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
There I fixed the title, I was struggling with that one.

The US military will not be used to detain innocent civilians, because they will not be needed to.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


I don't care if SOME soldiers won't shoot.

I don't trust any of them and I don't trust people with guns that claim they'll protect others.

In a true SHTF situation, most people would look out for themselves and shoot everyone else.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by The Sword
 





The only way to defend the US is to form a well regulated Constitutional Militia. As those fighting abroad will not be able to protect us.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


I have read on this one before, average guy who just gets power.
Who would never got into that field if there were true standards.
TSA,DHS anyone??
But not military.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:30 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


So, if you know that it has happened before in this very country, was this post a troll?
The thread title was, "US Soldiers WILL NOT Be Used to DETAIN Innocent Civilians", was it not?
People are capable of amazingly terrible things if allowed to, therefore we should never forget the mistakes of the past.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


I'm with you, and tried to say the same thing awhile ago....the military defends the constitution, they follow orders, but only lawful orders....From high to low, all ranks are trained to evaluate the orders given them...And if there is an ethical/moral possibility to that order, question it. After Vietnam, the majority of our troops have a solid sense of ethics. Granted there are exceptions to all rules, and units that are devoted to the mission, however, most believe that they are supposed to DEFEND US citizens, not attack them. This is not an untrained military, most of the soldiers now are combat vets....these are not a bunch of green soldiers that have never experienced stressful situations. I could understand an untried unit blindly following orders when confronted by an unruly mob....However, these guys and gals have seen it, and are capable of keeping a cool head.

I would put my money on a soldier upholding the constitution over an order any day....I might be naive but I can live with that until proven otherwise.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by g146541
 


I do agree that there are some in the military who would, but there are many who wouldn't also. But I don't think it will be as much of an issue as some people think because there will be other players.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:32 AM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 


The bad thing is that there will always be a small percentage of military that WILL follow orders to attack/detain Americans.

Lets estimate 20 out of 100 say they will follow any order. Those that say they will are taken aside and trained to be an army against the US. Combine that with foreign forces (such as UN officers for instance) and you've got a nasty little group that are in it for themselves. That small portion that answered yes are probably just ignorant and "zey vill follow ze orderz comrade."

Well, ignorant or just wanting a check. Essentially people with Wall Street mentality who will sell out the human race for a bonus check.

Sure, people don't believe things like this will happen. I'm also sure most Americans never thought a law could be put forth that destroys The Bill of Rights and was approved by over 90 members who are supposed to be there to *protect* those rights.

And if it doesn't get vetoed there will still be many, many sheeple (such as the ones who support the TSA as well as warrantless searches of your car during checkpoint stops) who will keep their brain turned off and thank their slave masters for "keeping them safe by taking away our rights and turning American citizens into the enemy.



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Cataka
 


I agree that the military will be in conflict with this one and thus compromised, but as stated previously The only way to defend the US is to form a well regulated Constitutional Militia.

Also TSA is part of the Homeland Security structure now and not the military, on the contrary I think they are more likely one giant Union now.
edit on 7-12-2011 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2011 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by g146541
reply to post by munkey66
 


I have read on this one before, average guy who just gets power.
Who would never got into that field if there were true standards.
TSA,DHS anyone??
But not military.


I can tell you haven't sworn the oath....lumping TSA and the Army together is like a vet lumping the Army with the Navy....Those of us that have been there, know that each organization has a different personality....I can't speak for the Navy or Air Force (but I can assume), the average Army Officer, NCO, and Enlisted man will uphold the constitution, question any unethical order, and be DAMN Sure before firing on US citizens.....and those citizens WILL pose an immediate threat to them, they will not fire just because they are told, nor will they just violate their rights because someone said.......Yes they have been sent overseas and followed orders, but they understand the difference.

edit-And I know my peers, not a one would follow an order that would violate a US civilian's rights, again, unless they were an immediate threat to the unit.....and my peers are at LTC/Major lvl, so that means those orders wouldn't go any farther down the chain.
edit on 7-12-2011 by pointr97 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join