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.

 

I am a terrorist,and you may be too.

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   
I am a member of the NRA (National Rifle Association). I am also an Oath Keeper. I hold a press credential for journalism, photography, and videography. I am a veteran. I own a number of guns including an assault rifle. I own a kevlar vest. I have rations stored in case of an emergency. I support Ron Paul.

Among other things, these facts alone could deem me a terrorist, depending on who is doing the interpreting. You could be deemed a terrorist as easily, and you could be detained under the new National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) until the government deems you safe, which could take a long time.

Where are we going? Are we all going to sit by and do nothing while the priciples of our constitution, the very principles which make our nation possible, get eroded away by those who are supposed to protect it. Without the constitution, the United States is doomed. We can suffer a collapse of our dollar, or even a terrible natural disaster, but without our constitution the very foundation of American society turns to sand, and leaves us with no foundation to build upon.

The United States has not been attacked since 9/11. Sure, there have been a few "foiled" plots, where the FBI was directly connected to and monitoring the would be "terrorist". Why have we not heard anything else in the news about where these individuals are and what has happened to them? Have we seen a trial? I feel that these are false flags designed to justify the current NDAA. I would bet some of you feel the same way.

Where is the outrage? Is this how Americans really lose their basic, constitutionally based civil liberties? The legislation has been passed and was sent to the president on Dec. 21. President Obama has now withdrawn his veto threat. — Mark Gouras, Kent

First we allow the TSA to grope our grandmothers and our children, now they are setting up checkpoints on the roads. We are rapidly becoming a nation where you must "show me your papers". For those of you who have never seen "1984", I would recommend watching it. It is a bit boring through some of it, but the message is clear.

How do we stop this? Do we let this continue until the next election? Will there even be another election, or will "they" create a "crisis" in which an election would have to be "delayed" for a time until that "crisis" is over?
At this point, nothing would surprise me.

Obama stood in front of the original documents of the constitution and layed out his plans, allowing people to be arrested and held by the U.S. military without a lawyer, without a trial and without the right to come before a judge under a writ of habeas corpus. [“Senate passes defense bill despite Obama’s veto threat,” News, Dec. 2.]
In America? I find this disturbing. If someone were to tell me in 1980 that this would be happening here in 2011 I would have laughed in their face. I just ask myself, "What is next, what will we allow them to do next"?

And the big question is this; "What can we do to stop it"?




posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
The real question is how big is DHS and at which event will they expand their powers to not only policing citizens, (unconstitutionally I might add) into military powers?

I have heard about a deployment of our military in the coming year, could this be the time that DHS expands it's unconstitutional authority?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by govspy911
 


Under the new paradigm Even Captain Kirk would be hauled off as a domestic terrorist for championing The Constitution:

Wanted: Captain Kirk, For Domestic Terrorism And Sedition
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Star and flag.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by govspy911

And the big question is this; "What can we do to stop it"?


Not a damn thing.....

You see while it would be nice to be able to stop it we as a society no longer can. It is a Hydra of a problem. No matter how many heads you chop off they will simply re-grow.

Our nice polite, politically correct, Prozac infused society has lost it's will to fight. For all intent and purposes those that are not chemically, corporately or electronically (mass media) lobotomized are simply to small in numbers to be anything but socially minimized.

In simpler words; The fight has left the theater..........



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Whats hilarious is everyone's a terrorist including the clowns that wrote it

Once they open that door there's no way to close it and everyone's susceptible including the military itself, if anyone opposes them, Creedy will black bag them


I say we the people black bag them before they get the door open



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by sweetnlow
 


So basically we all live in a lawless society is what you are saying and since they declared the whole world a battleground means we are at war, so laws don't apply?

Or there are so many laws that contradict each other and basically anybody and everybody is a terrorist.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 

YES, this is why they hired private contractors, to ensure it works, just like Hitlers SS



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:27 PM
link   
One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by sweetnlow
 


Ok so back to my original question. Does anybody have any idea how big this faction has grown?

How many people are willing to carry out their orders?

Can we get a realistic number?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   
I have noticed a change in the way we train or military. The Marines are still training for a wartime theatre, but the Army seems to be training more for police action than combat. I was watching a comparison and saw where the Army is training a lot like police officers. I will link a video at the bottom.

Hopefully, with many of our troops coming home, we will have some Oath Keepers who will defend the constitution against a domestic enemy. When asked, most soldiers stated that they would not fire upon or attempt to disarm American citizens. I hope that this is the case. At least then we would have some who are trained and would be willing to stand against an Orwellian tyranny.

I cannot accept that we can do nothing. We would surely have to dig deep and find the bravery and sacrifice that our forefathers exhibited when founding this nation. They would be rolling in their graves at what is happening here now. I swore an oath to support and defend the constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Any person or entity that attempts to destroy the principles of the constitution is an enemy at the gate, only they are well within the gates now. That oath does not expire when we ETS (end time in service) or retire. That oath remains intact as long as we are able bodied.

www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by thehoneycomb
 

Freedom fighters or SS? The SS will absolutely carry out their orders because they are being paid handsomely by the FED
The military after clearing their ranks of Heros, will carry out their orders, because they wont want a goodole black bagging the SS will give them

Law enforcement is high priority on the black bag list along with the rest of us



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
The 2012 NDAA doesn't change anything regarding detention/due process:



16 SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED
17 FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN
18 COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AU-
19 THORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
20 (a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the author-
21 ity of the President to use all necessary and appropriate
22 force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military
23 Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the
24 Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered per-
1 sons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition
2 under the law of war.
3 (b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under
4 this section is any person as follows:
5 (1) A person who planned, authorized, com-
6 mitted, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred
7 on September 11, 2001, or harbored those respon-
8 sible for those attacks.
9 (2) A person who was a part of or substantially
10 supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces
11 that are engaged in hostilities against the United
12 States or its coalition partners, including any person
13 who has committed a belligerent act or has directly
14 supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
15 forces.
16 (c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The dis-
17 position of a person under the law of war as described
18 in subsection (a) may include the following:
19 (1) Detention under the law of war without
20 trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the
21 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
22 (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United
23 States Code (as amended by the Military Commis-
24 sions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–
25 84)).
1 (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or
2 competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
3 (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the
4 person’s country of origin, any other foreign coun-
5 try, or any other foreign entity.
6 (d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is in-
7 tended to limit or expand the authority of the President
8 or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military
9 Force.
10 (e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be
11 construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
12 the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
13 aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
14 captured or arrested in the United States.

15 (f) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—
16 The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress
17 regarding the application of the authority described in this
18 section, including the organizations, entities, and individ-
19 uals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of
20 subsection (b)(2).


The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) was passed a week after 9/11 and granted the government the authority that concerns you. They've had it ever since, and the 2012 NDAA doesn't expand that authority. The fuss over this part of this bill is something of a case of slamming the barn door after the horse has run out.

The entire 2012 NDAA as a pdf: www.gpo.gov...
The parts about this issue begin on page 426.

The wikipedia page for The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists: en.wikipedia.org...

The AUMF as a pdf: www.gpo.gov...



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by govspy911
 


I don't think the majority of Army would carry out orders that go against the constitution, that said DHS imo is unconstitutional but their powers, just like the SS were originally only police powers, not military, so problem with DHS is that they may lack the training or firepower. There are parts of the military that may not be loyal to constitutional values like NATO or NORTHCOMM for instance.

Now I'm just going to throw this out there, in the constitution it states enemies both foreign and domestic. I think that OWS was orchestrated by the radical left and in the coming year, Obama may give them praise and even let them have a role in government, possibly even train some of them in combat and teach them that capitalists and right winged conservatives are terrorists or enemies of freedom and militarize them. It could totally happen.

Not to talk down on OWS, but as many are calling for the end of capitalism and are holding up signs supporting socialism and communism as well as people like Che. I think it's safe to say that these folks could be seen by some as enemies of the constitution. Which of course would result in civil war, the left versus right.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by govspy911
 


Also added some may be coming home, but I am personally aware of another deployment in the coming year. Not sure how many though.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by sweetnlow
 


Ok so back to my original question. Does anybody have any idea how big this faction has grown?

How many people are willing to carry out their orders?

Can we get a realistic number?

I don't think there is a real number to be found yet. What we can do is point out about when things will really get rolling. It will probably start with a collapse of the economic system, when we can no longer print any more money which will cause the government to have to shut down. I don't think they will go down easy. They will continue to raise the debt until there is no hope at all for recovery. When the dollar is gone and the people get hungry, and they will rebel, then we will probably see martial law begin to unfold.

During a shutdown, not even the military will be paid. If they cannot take care of their famlies because of the decisions of their leaders, they will likely revolt against them, that could be our "ace in the hole". Martial law would be used to squell an uprising of the people, but they will find that many, or most, of our soldiers will stand with the people as we have seen during the Occupy Movement. We must be cautious of any other nations that may take advantage of such a disruption of our society, as well as those here at home.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by govspy911
 


We can start with DHS, I am having trouble grasping just how big they have become. I don't think they are large enough to carry out such an operation just yet. But with troops abroad, they may be able to carry it out on a small scale, with a little help from other parties it could be full scale so question is who's the other party?



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by OnceReturned
The 2012 NDAA doesn't change anything regarding detention/due process:



16 SEC. 1031. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED
17 FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN
18 COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AU-
19 THORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE.
20 (a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the author-
21 ity of the President to use all necessary and appropriate
22 force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military
23 Force (Public Law 107–40) includes the authority for the
24 Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered per-
1 sons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition
2 under the law of war.
3 (b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under
4 this section is any person as follows:
5 (1) A person who planned, authorized, com-
6 mitted, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred
7 on September 11, 2001, or harbored those respon-
8 sible for those attacks.
9 (2) A person who was a part of or substantially
10 supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces
11 that are engaged in hostilities against the United
12 States or its coalition partners, including any person
13 who has committed a belligerent act or has directly
14 supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
15 forces.
16 (c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The dis-
17 position of a person under the law of war as described
18 in subsection (a) may include the following:
19 (1) Detention under the law of war without
20 trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the
21 Authorization for Use of Military Force.
22 (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United
23 States Code (as amended by the Military Commis-
24 sions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111–
25 84)).
1 (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or
2 competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.
3 (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the
4 person’s country of origin, any other foreign coun-
5 try, or any other foreign entity.
6 (d) CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section is in-
7 tended to limit or expand the authority of the President
8 or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military
9 Force.
10 (e) AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be
11 construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
12 the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
13 aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
14 captured or arrested in the United States.

15 (f) REQUIREMENT FOR BRIEFINGS OF CONGRESS.—
16 The Secretary of Defense shall regularly brief Congress
17 regarding the application of the authority described in this
18 section, including the organizations, entities, and individ-
19 uals considered to be ‘‘covered persons’’ for purposes of
20 subsection (b)(2).


The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) was passed a week after 9/11 and granted the government the authority that concerns you. They've had it ever since, and the 2012 NDAA doesn't expand that authority. The fuss over this part of this bill is something of a case of slamming the barn door after the horse has run out.

The entire 2012 NDAA as a pdf: www.gpo.gov...
The parts about this issue begin on page 426.

The wikipedia page for The Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists: en.wikipedia.org...

The AUMF as a pdf: www.gpo.gov...

It states that the requirement to detain does not extend to citizens, but that does not forbid it, it just means that they do not HAVE to detain citizens, but they can if they want to.
14 (2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The require15
ment to detain a person in military custody under
16 this section does not extend to a lawful resident
17 alien of the United States on the basis of conduct
18 taking place within the United States, except to the
19 extent permitted by the Constitution of the United
20 States.
If you are declared an enemy combatant, regardless of your citizenship, you may fall under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). Once declared an enemy combatant, all the gloves come off.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by govspy911
 


We can start with DHS, I am having trouble grasping just how big they have become. I don't think they are large enough to carry out such an operation just yet. But with troops abroad, they may be able to carry it out on a small scale, with a little help from other parties it could be full scale so question is who's the other party?


They are likely much bigger than we can imagine. With modern technology and weapons you and I do not have, and cannot get, a few can control many. They are already using predator drones to surveil American citizens, and these drones are operated by the military which makes their use unconstitutional. Help with martial law may come from a foreign body such as the UN.



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by govspy911
 


That is where I think most of the help would come from. There is also NORTHCOM which was also created in 2002 alongside Homeland Security, they will provide digital surveillance and logistics, I guess I just answered my own question.
en.wikipedia.org...

So how many US troops would fall under the orders of Northcom?


Task forces
USNORTHCOM is composed of several standing Joint Task Forces (JTFs) previously assigned to United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM): Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region, Joint Task Force-Civil Support, Joint Task Force Alaska, and Joint Task Force North. USNORTHCOM service components include U.S. Fifth Army/ARNORTH, First Air Force/AFNORTH, and United States Fleet Forces Command.

edit on 29-12-2011 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by govspy911
 


That is where I think most of the help would come from. There is also NORTHCOM which was also created in 2002 alongside Homeland Security, they will provide digital surveillance and logistics, I guess I just answered my own question.
en.wikipedia.org...

So how many US troops would fall under the orders of Northcom?


Task forces
USNORTHCOM is composed of several standing Joint Task Forces (JTFs) previously assigned to United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM): Joint Force Headquarters National Capital Region, Joint Task Force-Civil Support, Joint Task Force Alaska, and Joint Task Force North. USNORTHCOM service components include U.S. Fifth Army/ARNORTH, First Air Force/AFNORTH, and United States Fleet Forces Command.

edit on 29-12-2011 by thehoneycomb because: (no reason given)


Fortunately, most of those are American troops. As a veteran, I can tell you that most troops take their oath to the constitution very seriously. It is the police forces that I would be more concerned about. Local police answer to the mayor, and city laws and such. The sheriff on the other hand, he answers to the constitution. The sheriff has the authority to arrest the mayor, and his police. WIth what I have seen with the current police violence, just Youtube it and you will find a lot, I can see where there is a Nazi Gestapo mentality toward citizens. Not all cops are like this, I'm sure, but there is a lot of them. I would be looking hard at law enforcement members to uphold martial law, even against our troops.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join