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.

 

Secret Group? Not so Secret,(I call it Illuminati)

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 08:30 PM
link   
It kind of amused me when I saw the headline of this article, secret group? I call them the Illuminati, the people of TPTBor the "shadow government" by want of any other name. But the title caught my attention, I don't know about how much power any President could amass aside from a little help from "friends" in high places. I would like your opinion on this article. But there are definate nefarious goings on in this country then by whom is the question? What do you think? The following laws we know have been inacted Here's the article:



KrisAnne Hall



On March 2, 2012 I gave a legal analysis of HR347/S1794 (which included some links to frightening government abuses) and how it unquestionably violates the First Amendment. Upon hearing numerous reports the following week, I realized that the people are not getting the whole truth.



One vote is no big deal right? Maybe, but some votes are not inconsequential when they destroy the very safeguards of Liberty. But it is not one vote; there is a pattern forming here.



On March 2, 2012 I gave a legal analysis of HR347/S1794 (which included some links to frightening government abuses) and how it unquestionably violates the First Amendment. Upon hearing numerous reports the following week, I realized that the people are not getting the whole truth. Look at the roll call for HR 1540, The National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. This is the bill that authorizes indefinite detention of US Citizens and repealed the law against bestiality in the military. Do not believe the lies from Congress, this bill does authorize indefinite detention and if you still don’t understand it, watch this legal analysis video, it will help you. It is a direct assault on our rights protected in the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments.












edit on 16-4-2012 by 1loserel2 because: make corrections

edit on 16-4-2012 by 1loserel2 because: add thought

edit on 16-4-2012 by 1loserel2 because: add portion




posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
I read the reasons for your edits....


Originally posted by 1loserel2


edit on 16-4-2012 by 1loserel2 because: make corrections

edit on 16-4-2012 by 1loserel2 because: add thought

edit on 16-4-2012 by 1loserel2 because: add portion



Then I looked back over at new topics and saw fifty minutes have passed... so I wondered if I do not say anything, will you add thought and make corrections to add portion . To your broken link.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 07:44 AM
link   
this looks odd from the quotes you posted in the OP ...


...and repealed the law against bestiality in the military. ...


WTF. IS that an OK thing for a soldier???

WHO get that added to the bill??

Or is that one of many stupid things people put in there to see if anyone in power reads the bills they vote on?



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
From what I can glean HR374 was signed into law in March and provides penalties for protest which:

“impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions.”

This has nothing to do with the First Amendment (or the "illuminati").




Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


"peaceably assemble" is the key phrase here. Disrupting the operations of government is a broad definition, and I am a staunch libertarian, but that has nothing to do with speech.

Secondly the National Defense Authorization Bill, final version, signed into law says this:




Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.





(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.





The law relating to US citizens HAS NOT CHANGED and it's irresponsible for people to keep spreading this lie.

I don't agree with the bill, again as a libertarian, but the above bills are within constitutional authority.




top topics
 
1

log in

join