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.

 

Revolution 2012 Get ready it's going to happen (arms treaty)

page: 10
60
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:02 AM
link   
People often think such revolutionary battles would take place in the middle of the street and that would be it, not so. At the beginning those caught off guard without training and pissed off that a regime is arriving to collect their guns would more than likely engage in long shootouts with the police and whatever other unconstitutional thugs a regime may use. But the smart ones knowing that this day will come will fall back into the wilderness to well stocked and well protected isolated areas only accessible by foot via trails that are well known to only the people who have traveled them all their life while hunting. I would imagine many militias in the U.S. have already stored, or will quickly begin to store vast amounts of ammunition and food deep in the wilderness far away from any major cities.

Such areas would force police/military onto equal ground, especially in mountainous areas where even the best armored personal carriers would get stuck. Then at the time of choosing patriots can mount guerrilla tactics against small to medium patrols of police/troops. The more successful the guerrilla ambushes, the more equipment is recovered for use by the patriots.




posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Jocko Flocko
 


Another tactic would be to attack corporate farms that back the regime. You don’t even have to kill, just sabotage or maybe a bullet through a tractors engine block. The people working the farms will get the message and leave as well.

Hungry people get angry when the Gov't cannot provide.

Any government that started a Revolution/Civil War wouldn't last one season.

I would like to think that our Gov't knows this, but they have been pulling some seriously doofus moves the past two decades haven't they?



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   
enough wahh wahh about government taking rights away from human beings in soceity.. if its their system or society, then just leave it and keep your free rights..a government entity does not make up on its own, it needs individual's energy to create and allow its existence, kind of like money...


Wikipedia definition 'constitution':

A constitution is a set of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is governed.[1] These rules together make up, i.e. constitute, what the entity is. When these principles are written down into a single collection or set of legal documents, those documents may be said to comprise a written constitution.

Dictionary.com 'human being':
human being 
noun
1.any individual of the genus Homo, especially a member of the species Homo sapiens.

2.a person, especially as distinguished from other animals or as representing the human species: living conditions not fit for human beings; a very generous human being.

--------------------
Dictionary.com 'deception':
de·cep·tion [dih-sep-shuhn]
noun
1.the act of deceiving; the state of being deceived.

2.something that deceives or is intended to deceive; fraud; artifice.
-------------------
Dictionary.com 'freedom':
free·dom [free-duhm]
noun
1.the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or under physical restraint: He won his freedom after a retrial.

2.exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.

3.the power to determine action without restraint.

4.political or national independence.

5.personal liberty, as opposed to bondage or slavery: a slave who bought his freedom.
____________________________________________________________________________

Well there you have it folks.. you can be apart of a decieving constitution and live under a false entity...

OR

You can be a natural entity of the universe and take back your freedom. Choice is yours


~ Love is an art



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by SWCCFAN
Very well said


The points you made exemplifies the statement that freedom is not free. I salute you and thank you for your service. Having work as a DOD contractor I understand the issues at hand. While the odds are against the few whom have the testicular fortitude to stand up, we are aware of the what the future holds for our children and grand children and what they will be living through if we do nothing.

If you are willing to trade liberty for security you only act to further enslave your decedents.



I am certainly not implicating that I will never fight the man I am just saying that at this point in the current situation even under an order to surrender our arms I won't be immediately taking to the hills to run my insurgency.

I like many others will have lost many of my firearms - I have many that are I have received as gifts from my grandfather who passed away some 10 years ago with no record of ever having purchased them so those are not on the records. I have also purchased most of my firearms from individuals which at the time required no records. I would be saddened to lose my band new SOCOM M1 but that is all new and purchased under with records. I have some secret war prizes as well as a drop gun I purchased in my first foray into the criminal underworld. I did it just to see how easy it could be done. In a back alley in Baltimore for 300.00 I walk away with a hotter than HADES Keltec 9m - not a great gun but not traceable to me either.

The government also thankfully as taught me how to be a really good liar thanks to my training in resistance to interrogation, SERE school and my use of HUMINT skills as an operator and interrogator. Although they will know this of course I can even beat a poly under the right circumstances with time to prepare.

Hopefully, they don't have the resources to round up people on all their lists as I am sure I have made quite a few - Veteran, SF training, liberty lover, etc...

As for fortitude trust me if they come here in a hostile manner to seize anything be it guns, livestock or otherwise they will be met in kind and trust me in a most effective way.

I have excellent kill zones prepared with great fields of fire. I can engage out to about 1300m from several points.

They will in the end win but I won't be alone in Valhalla I can tell you that. They had better bring a supply of body bags with them.

I am sure that I will have ample warning since before this were to happen here the local law enforcement is going to have to be replaced which is one of my indicators that thing should shift from passive to aggressive resistance.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jaguarsky
reply to post by LDragonFire
 


Yes, nothing more than more fear-mongering, sadly kept going by those too lazy to actually research the things they scream most fiercly about. This treaty is about international arms deals. It has NOTHING to do with regular folks in the US having, buying or selling guns.


In one breath all of the people claiming this is only about international arms deals are saying that we have no information about the wording of the treaty and then in another breath your stating that it's ONLY about international trading....

Make up your minds, either we don't know the wording yet or it's only about international arms deals, you can't have it both ways...

Besides which, the majority of arms for sale in America are not necessarily manufactured here, so international trade would affect the individuals rights to keep and bear arms.

It's also no secret that Obama and the others pushing for this treaty want to limit civilian ownership of firearms.

so calling it fear mongering is disingenuous at best.

I have a question for you....Do you believe that there should be limits on the types and number of firearms that the public has???

Jaden



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Sheesh it's a good thing all my guns were lost, stolen or I sold them. Too bad, huh? Can't remember the names or dates. unfortunate, ain't it?



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
This is just mind blowing!!! I think this should be the final nail in the U.N.'s coffin. The U.S. should remove itself from the pathetic United Nations as soon as possible and level the U.N. building to the ground with explosives.

Can the UN possibly sink any lower?


Iran was just appointed by the United Nations to sit on the UN's Arms Trade Treaty conference. Yes, the same Iran that was just found guilty in a UN report of rearming the Syrian regime in its war against its own people, is now one of 15 countries at the UN overseeing arms control. That's sort of like OJ saying he really wants to track down the real killers, isn't it?



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I'm gonna go out and buy a gun with my next paycheck.

absolutely



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gwampo
I'm gonna go out and buy a gun with my next paycheck.

absolutely


And then conveniently lose it.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Sad to say this great country has reached a destination resembling the roman empire just before it collapsed. personally i fell this country has been irreparably damaged and it is just going to be a collapse from here where the rich and the powerful will just move to the next booming economy, either China or South America.

Now with that being said, I will admit I have not started a family because of the fear of what is coming. i think a revolution is inevitable and it will be ugly. This will start after the USA invades Iran...

The really sad part is that most Americans are too busy hating each other over trivial issues like gay marriage and (de)regulation, welfare and obesity to realize that the single biggest expense in America is military spending on the hundreds of american military bases around the globe. And most of that money is now going to third party middle-men companies like haliburton!

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by MaleCABayArea
reply to post by seabag
 


Sad to say this great country has reached a destination resembling the roman empire just before it collapsed. personally i fell this country has been irreparably damaged and it is just going to be a collapse from here where the rich and the powerful will just move to the next booming economy, either China or South America.

Now with that being said, I will admit I have not started a family because of the fear of what is coming. i think a revolution is inevitable and it will be ugly. This will start after the USA invades Iran...

The really sad part is that most Americans are too busy hating each other over trivial issues like gay marriage and (de)regulation, welfare and obesity to realize that the single biggest expense in America is military spending on the hundreds of american military bases around the globe. And most of that money is now going to third party middle-men companies like haliburton!

WAKE UP AMERICA!!!


Haliburton? You're kidding, right? Try GE. The US isn't going to "invade" Iran, we're too busy invading the US.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I'm just wondering:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If your constitution states that you all have a right to bear arms, as part of a " well regulated militia" then couldn't the US government say that they have a right to take away those arms because you are all individual gun owners and are not actually part of a militia?

Also:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

So, couldn't the US government say that an armed revolution by the American people, is treason? They would consider you all as their enemies wouldn't they?

I suppose you could all form a well-regulated militia, so that you would have a definite right, as stated in the words of the Constitution, to bear arms - but then you really would be accused of Treason because:

"The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states"

I'm not speaking in defence of the govt - I've never trusted any present or former governments of the US or the UK - but I'm just wondering why you are all prepared to get together, rise up and use your weapons in the cause of personal gun ownership rights - but not against things like the truly sickening police brutality which, going by some of the videos posted on ATS, seems to happen every day in the US.

Owning a gun wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference to any of the people being beaten up in the police cells, or whilst they're already lying on the ground handcuffed.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by aBeneGesserit
 


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You see the commas they are independent clauses. The most important one is saved for last.

The people are the militia, separate from the National Guard, Reserve, and Land/Naval forces.

See The Militia act of 1903 for the current federal definitions.
edit on 10-7-2012 by SWCCFAN because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 04:26 PM
link   
The United Nations can get their wish and take people's guns and ammo, bullet first. I hope the patriots out there are ready to kick some ass the United Nations needs it, they are trying to steal everything away from individuals and force inter-dependency, their peace is at the end of a gun while they steal everybody's ability to defend themselves against their assault. Take em out, if this passes it should be clear that the gloves have been more than just dropped. Get your rope, an angry mob, and get rid of them, eviscerate their HQ in new york and once they are gone give them the legal straight jacket to prevent them from doing it again. It's either that, or you may as well submit and become servile to these bastards now.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by aBeneGesserit
I'm just wondering:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If your constitution states that you all have a right to bear arms, as part of a " well regulated militia" then couldn't the US government say that they have a right to take away those arms because you are all individual gun owners and are not actually part of a militia?

Also:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

So, couldn't the US government say that an armed revolution by the American people, is treason? They would consider you all as their enemies wouldn't they?

I suppose you could all form a well-regulated militia, so that you would have a definite right, as stated in the words of the Constitution, to bear arms - but then you really would be accused of Treason because:

"The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states"

I'm not speaking in defence of the govt - I've never trusted any present or former governments of the US or the UK - but I'm just wondering why you are all prepared to get together, rise up and use your weapons in the cause of personal gun ownership rights - but not against things like the truly sickening police brutality which, going by some of the videos posted on ATS, seems to happen every day in the US.

Owning a gun wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference to any of the people being beaten up in the police cells, or whilst they're already lying on the ground handcuffed.


If you bothered to read the history and understand the thinking of the men that drafted the Bill of Rights, you'd know that this amendment was added to empower the citizenry to protect itself from the government as well as foreign invaders.

"No freeman shall be debarred the use of arms (within his own lands or tenements)."
--Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution with (his note added), 1776. Papers, 1:353

The purpose of the 2d amendment isn't to arm an "army," that's taken care of elsewhere in the constitution. Ask yourself this: if the sole reason for the second amendment was the "militia" argument (which pacifists and liberals/communists just love) then why even place it in the Bill of Rights? It's already one of the eight enumerated powers.

No. It's provided so that it ensures ALL free men are guaranteed the right to arm themselves to defend their family and land against oppression. It takes about 3 minutes of cogent thought to figure it out. If you're a liberal it takes about 30 years to grasp it.

and as a parting thought, just so you know the mindset of one of the architects of the constitution:

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
--Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
edit on 10-7-2012 by tangonine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SWCCFAN
 




"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." You see the commas they are independent clauses. The most important one is saved for last.


You are joking aren't you?
Here's me thinking that commas were punctuation, when in actual fact they denote independent clauses? No way! A comma denotes a pause in a sentence equivalent to taking a breath. If they were independent clauses they wouldn't be in the same sentence and those commas would be full-stops. If you can all twist your own constitution to fit your own ideas of 'rights' then no wonder you've got a load of twisters running the country.

Apart from that, here's a note from the same page of your constitution:

"4. In the Congressional Statutes at Large, Vol. 1, Page 97, the first and third commas are omitted, so that it reads:

"A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

"The question remains open of where those additional, and grammatically spurious, commas came from, but they do not change the legal meaning of the provision, and it would not be erroneous to omit them."
www.constitution.org...

So basically, whoever wrote the original just liked using commas and it still means that you have to be part of a well regulated militia, to have the right to bear arms.

I clicked on your link to the Militia Act 1903 but it wasn't that clear about the people as a militia so I looked up 'militia' and got this from Wiki:

"The reserve militia[3] or unorganized militia, also created by the Militia Act of 1903 which presently consist of every able-bodied man of at least 17 and under 45 years of age who are not members of the National Guard or Naval Militia. (that is, anyone who would be eligible for a draft)"

I understand what you meant now about the people being the militia but you would still be:

"subject to inspection by Regular Army officers, and had to meet certain standards."

So, even if you are separate from the National Guard, Reserve, and Land/Naval forces, the President would still be your Commander, so you would definitely be considered as committing treason.

If you formed your own militia, it wouldn't be "regulated" therefore it wouldn't be recognised by the US govt. and you would probably be treated in the same way as rioters would be. Or even worse, you'd end up in Guantanamo Bay.

If you all started a revolution over this issue and lost - the end result would be no gun ownership.
Which is apparently what they want anyway.

If you started the revolution and won - you'd end up keeping your gun ownership rights.
You'd all be cheering at your victory but nothing else will have changed. You'd be in the same position as before. Losing jobs, losing homes, watching the fat-cat bankers and financial parasites getting richer and richer- but that's ok because you've still got your guns.

Revolution is supposed to be for change - not to keep things as they are.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Please explain to how (what experience you have and at what level of command) where you think your frame of reference would be so superior to mine to open with...


Originally posted by Masterjaden

I don't think that you understand what will happen...

Jaden


I think I made it pretty clear that I served 24 years in the Army. I was enlisted first holding the MOS's 11B, 97B, 18C in that order achieving the rank SFC. Then I got a commission and retired as a Major starting in the Military Intelligence branch and ending in Special Forces branch. I attended the SF Q course not once but twice, Ranger School, MFF, among other schools.

I have been on a General's Staff in Special Operations Command which is the winner hands down of any unit in the Army in receipt of orders from the Pentagon with morally or legally questionable objectives.

The government will not start out to disarm the public like someone else said they will at first make it voluntary, then penalize owners, then when and if small groups of what will be labeled as "domestic terrorist cells". The military is only going to be involved if an actual insurgency breaks out. If the military is required to intervene in what is clearly a law enforcement issue we are going to have to be in "a state of emergency" at least and likely under at least localized Martial Law. I believe we are already under a state of emergency regarding the war on terror at the national level.


Originally posted by Masterjaden

It isn't going to be individual soldiers who refuse orders...

As soon as the order comes down, there will be a mass revolt from high ranking officials down to lower ranks...


I think you have more confidence in these "high ranking officials" than I do having seen them in action. Being a Flag Grade Officer or even Field Grade for that matter in any service makes one by necessity a political animal. Leadership at those levels is an extension of politics - nothing more, nothing less.

Every order received is "questioned" at these levels out of nothing if not a sense of self preservation for the first one in the chain who does comply with an order that is illegal without so objecting will be the first one to suffer at the hands of the very men who issued it via court martial. The opposite is also true. The first to openly so state will be subject to the same penalties. Men and women at this level often have a lot to lose career and family wise.

Let me explain what I mean - the leaders at these levels are going to fight such an order, having been on a General's Staff before I can tell you there are no orders issued at that level that are not "questioned" at least in practical terms by those to whom they are given and often in legal terms as well. This happened almost every single time an order at the Group or Command level is received. Call it "Staff Work" or whatever other terms in use "The Military Decision Making Process" etc. make no mistake they are in effect very much "questioning" their orders. They are making sure that the orders are legal (Done through their lawyers; every Commander at a field grade level has one assigned to protect his butt.), practical, (done through their operations staff - meaning within their unit's scope of abilities).


Originally posted by Masterjaden

There isn't going to be one or two privates saying "no way"...In fact, most privates would cut off their own junk if told to by a superior officer...


The senior leaders are not going to revolt nor will they retire or resign in large numbers. Why? Because they are at the level in their careers to know that the Army will just find someone who will carry it out and they believe that by staying they can contain or limit the negative impact of these orders on the lives of their subordinates - they will stay and be quiet so they can stay in charge - egos are huge in these men and women. They think no one else will be able to achieve the balance between accomplishing their "illegal orders" and protecting their Soldiers. I doubt honestly the protection of civilians or even the Constitution will enter into their decision making processes.

If the leaders at the flag and field grades have let the hypothetical mission intent to disarm the American public come to the point where Soldiers are actually planning to or preparing to carry it out their options as either a Junior Officer or certainly as an NCO or Private are going to be very limited.

In closing I say you haven't a clue what motivates Soldiers in these ranks - they will not retire or resign to make a point. They will stay because they think they alone can find a way to execute the mission and maintain its legality.

There will be some who leave but certainly no mass revolt or resignations.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by aBeneGesserit
 



giant quote of shut the front door



Can't respond to my post right mister/miss I'm not American? The constitution gives congress the power to raise an army. That's not in the Bill of Rights, it's one of the enumerated powers. The Bill of Rights is EXCLUSIVELY reserved for INDIVIDUAL rights. See? That's why I said it takes a liberal 30 years to understand it and a free man 3 minutes. No sense arguing with stupid.

And nice job ducking my Jefferson quotes. I know they don't fit with your liberal meme, but where you fail is having an argument. You just "ignore" facts. You don't know how to respond because logic evades you. You should take a class. In logic. Oh and read a book or two on American history.

You're not even American? right? So What the funky?
edit on 10-7-2012 by tangonine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by tangonine
 


Those of us that are American, have served, have bled for you on every single inch of this planet (ok, minus Serbia... ya'll are on your own), I provide this, And it's not to offend, but to tell you that there is a group of men that will gladly come to you, if our political machinations let us, to save you. It's what we do.



edit on 10-7-2012 by tangonine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


How to respond... Even Crixus had a change of heart. We've been poisoned at the core.






top topics



 
60
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join