Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

A letter to friends in America.

page: 2
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


If you notice in my first post. All of this propaganda around civil war revolution an dooms day marketing all will lead to self destruct as family member breaks or friend breaks and you have another mass shooting. Americans are to distanced from even there own neighbors anymore to create a army for civil war or revolution. They would shoot each other before they could decide who would be in charge.
Crazy but true. No body can agree on anything any more. And all the fear mongering is leading to violent outcomes by individuals and not groups. Just as they turned off the color code from DHS and it's fear mongering of every holiday of "hide the terrorist will get you" they turned to doomsday, civil war, zombies and so on.

What ever happened to the good old days when we did not have fear mongering marketed every where?




posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by randomname
 


HELLO ATS!!!!!!!

SEEKER IS MAKING HIS FIRST PREDICTION!!!!

If the US government turns it's forces on it's own people, I can GUARANTEE, that China AND Russia, will be dropping weapons and supplies to those of us who stand up!!!

Kinda like our government is now doing to help the so called terrorists that they are using to take away our current rights and freedoms!!!!



I believe that prediction would be 100% correct, if it went down like this. But now its time for CAPTAINTYINKNOTS to make his first ever prediction:

If the internal issues get to that point in america, it will not be US troops that we will be fighting with. It will be UN sent forces, at the request of a US president.

The US gov't knows that there will be many who would defect from the armed services in such a conflict and fight for the constitution. They know many others will refuse to fire on US civilians. But an international force? Possibly private firms? They will not have the same sentimental attachment.

'Course, I still think total financial collapse is more likely than another civil war, so I dont necessarily think it will get to the point where my prediction is relevant.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:35 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 



If you notice in my first post. All of this propaganda around civil war revolution an dooms day marketing all will lead to self destruct as family member breaks or friend breaks and you have another mass shooting. Americans are to distanced from even there own neighbors anymore to create a army for civil war or revolution. They would shoot each other before they could decide who would be in charge. Crazy but true. No body can agree on anything any more. And all the fear mongering is leading to violent outcomes by individuals and not groups. Just as they turned off the color code from DHS and it's fear mongering of every holiday of "hide the terrorist will get you" they turned to doomsday, civil war, zombies and so on.

What ever happened to the good old days when we did not have fear mongering marketed every where?


Seems to me like you are the one farting rainbows and unicorns! Have you been keeping an eye on the dollar and the economy of the US dollar????

Hell, if you think a bunch of gun nuts are a threat to America and it's safety, you ain't seen nothing!

Imagine if the states quit sending out welfare checks!

Imagine if the Feds stop sending out Social Security Payments!

Imagine what would happen when you go to your bank to get your worthless federal reserve fiat currency only to discover it and all of the other banks are closed!

Don't think it could happen?

Take a look at Greece! You know, the country that has already been taken over by the corrupt bankers and the MSM of the US ain't sayin squat about it???????????

Oh yea, guns are bad!


Wait till people are starving!



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


What was that generals name? General Hombre who had to tell the US Troops but your weapons away your in America not a war zone. Don't think they will not shot. Just look at Katrina with the cops shooting everybody. America is not as friendly to each other as you think.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


I agree Captain! Either of the two scenarios are definately possible!



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


Oh trust me I know it, there are plenty who would have no problem, or would blindly follow orders. But I think you are kidding yourself if you dont think there is a substantial amount that would refuse those orders. Many soldiers have families. You think some wouldnt desert in a time of all out war in america? You think there arent soldiers out there who disagree with where this country is headed? I have personally spoken to more than one that have told me, hypothecally, that they would never fire on a US citizen.

Theyd still have a force, but it would become part of a UN force trying to "peacekeep".

again, thats IF anything like this really happens. Which i have a hard time swallowing.
edit on 21-1-2013 by captaintyinknots because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


And I never said guns are bad. Take a look at what I said. I never even said the games are bad. But the marketing is bad. And marketing is not like it used to be. You don't just drive by and see a billboard and that is your marketing for the day. Marketing is every where and the way they do it is what is wrong. Market a ar15 assault rifle. Just don't do it with a advertisement saying get your man card. Don't sell it on video games for kids. Which EA Games was doing linking thee manufactures website to the gun in games. Quit with marketing through dooms day crap.

Maybe if the marketing is fixed the crazies will quit being programmed. I say the marketing is what is bad. Brandon Raub is a perfect example.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And notice what the judge sad when he released him.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And the judge even made a comment before letting him go about Agist and delusional. Agist is feeding cattle,horses or sheep for pay. link

Propaganda marketing! It even got Brandon Raub put in a mental hospital. But the judge said he was just marketing a product and not crazy.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by captaintyinknots
 


What was that generals name? General Hombre who had to tell the US Troops but your weapons away your in America not a war zone. Don't think they will not shot. Just look at Katrina with the cops shooting everybody. America is not as friendly to each other as you think.

Huh? During Katrina, there was 1 incident like that and the cops were answering a call about shootings from the bridge. By no means justified their actions which resulted in killing some and seriously wounding others. There was another incident when a cop shot a man he thought was aiming a weapon at him. The body was burned and there was a cover up.

There was absolutely no policy of attacking Americans during Katrina. None. The myths of "disarming citizens" are based on a limited incident. There were citizen militias protecting their neighborhoods - very armed- that the National Guard and cops left alone.

No idea who General Hombre is but if you are referring to General Honore, there was never a possibility of his regular Army troops firing on citizens because by law, they were not allowed to use their weapons. Katrina was before the de facto nullification of the POsse Comitatus Act by George W Bush (and continued by Obama).

As the legacy organization of the state citizen militias, the National Guard can fire on citizens under extreme circumstances but in most cases, they would be firing on their friends and family since the Guard is community based.
Simply put, they wouldn't. Not in any "civil war" type scenario anyway. As far as regular army now? Not sure but I'm willing to bet a lot of NCOs and enlisted would not comply.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 


Star on your last post! I have been saying all along with these senseless murders that the one thing the government is "PURPOSELY" overlooking is the effect of the poison drugs that Big Pharm is handing out, (with the help of dumb psychiatrists) and that it is one of the most common links of most of these shootings....

I was a victim of being fed these toxic poison for the past five years. I quit taking them about 8 months ago. Other than my anger coming back, I feel 100% better!

If I would write a book about the thoughts I had and my struggles fighting my evil impulses during my years of being a victim of Big Pharm, I would be a very wealthy man!

Clive Barkers early works wouldn't hold a candle to the evil thoughts I had coursing thru my mind. I just thank my creator that I had the strength and morals to prevent myself from doing what the drugs were telling me to do....

We are on the same page I think, and I apoligize if I misunderstood your previous post....


edit on 21-1-2013 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-1-2013 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
 


And the national guard are never used in their own area where they live anymore. There is a reason they send them ever where but home. Hell even the Roman Empire knew that trick. And there was a lot that happened with the cops during Katrina. The cops were even out robbing and looting. Every thing broke down. And the shooting at the bridge was over not wanting people to come into there town. And it happened on many different bridges not just one.
edit on 21-1-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   
What makes you think he would actually push that far?
The afore mentioned "gun control measures" are about to die a miserable death in legistlation.
We are gearing up to fight China,won't that be fun? Of course they won't ask me or you...unless you are eligible for a draft.
Then "policing the world" would be a very participatory event 18 - 35yrs of age.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 



What makes you think he would actually push that far?
The afore mentioned "gun control measures" are about to die a miserable death in legistlation.
We are gearing up to fight China,won't that be fun? Of course they won't ask me or you...unless you are eligible for a draft.
Then "policing the world" would be a very participatory event 18 - 35yrs of age.


China has already proven they are a hell of a lot smarter than the corrupt government of the US. Do you really think they would attack????

Take a look at the natural resources that China has been buying up. Yes! Even in the US. Do some research on mining companies in the United States and you will be shocked at how many of them are owned by China!

Remember this commercial???



Lets face it! Our government are criminals and cowards.

China is going to sit back while we kill each other and wait. Just as any other smart country would do....



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 


No.no.no.I didn't say they would hit us.We will hit them.We are going to protect the pacific from the communist scourge or what ever excuse they use.
China's leadership wants to expand into many territorial waters,you see they don't think we'll do anything as they encroach on Japan,Vietnam or the Phillipines.
America is pivoting to the Pacific.
And if they actually do EVER shoot at any of the above noted places and we freeze or confiscate assets then guess what,a lone is an asset aka we owe them NOTHING.
At least according to the given rules of our nation state.
Jerks aren't they?
edit on 21-1-2013 by cavtrooper7 because: finished my point



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 


Oh I agree with you on that my friend! Our current government has pretty much projected to the rest of the world their intent to focus on the Pacific.........

Big freakin mistake and nothing more than a monetary burden on the backs of tax paying citizens of the US though if you ask me.......

I mean WTF? We are in all of these non constitutional pseudo wars over terrorism, drugs, etc etc. and now our brilliant elected officials want to be the world police in the Pacific?????

Screw these warmongers! It isn't about protecting America, it is about spending another trillion dollars a year (on the tax payers back) to support the defense contracters who suck the blood right out of the American tax payers bodies........

Not mad at ya bro, I am definately one your brothers in arms, but this crap is getting ridiculous.....



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 08:38 PM
link   
No problem,I didn't see you as doing so.
It does certainly fit the MO though.
Economic problems,they are an easy target to blame,yet another way to off more "useless eaters"
On the plus side if we do have a civil war most of this ignorant crap would be cut way back.....if the right side won.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:16 PM
link   
I'm glad you posted this, I too think caution and reason and taking a very deep breath remembering those in front of you are part of your family (doesn't matter what they look like), is a very good first thought.

I get the distinct impression the governement AND it's people are being worked on, and I consider all friends.

Every different society has it's own fears it must combat also, they are the same yet different, be compassionate in consideration of them also.
Even though the people and the governement have done some stuff which isn't great, that is not for me to judge. Collectively they have built something very diverse and dynamic together, even though there are aspects we don't like about it, this includes those other countries you mention too.
They must work together. We must work together, and this is the only way I know to let you guys know that (personally at least), I only hope for the best for you.

Please be calm first and take care of each other.



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
 


And the national guard are never used in their own area where they live anymore. There is a reason they send them ever where but home. Hell even the Roman Empire knew that trick. And there was a lot that happened with the cops during Katrina. The cops were even out robbing and looting. Every thing broke down. And the shooting at the bridge was over not wanting people to come into there town. And it happened on many different bridges not just one.
edit on 21-1-2013 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)


No offense but every single sentence in this post is factually false(not sure about the Roman one). The Nat'l Guard has not been federalized in a Title 10 status on American soil since JFK was President. The only exception to that were units stationed at Camp Shelby during Katrina who were federalized for overseas duty and were about to leave from there. They were effectively just a part of Honore's regular army troops and, as such, were not allowed to fire upon citizens.

The National Guard is activated and commanded by the state governor, even under title 32 status in which they get paid by the feds but are still 100% under civilian state control (This is what happens for any federally declared emergency). When other state units arrive in say, New Jersey for Hurricane Sandy, it is only because they were invited by the officials of that state under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact. Your supposition that guard troops can be used in other parts of the country unless assistance is specifically asked for by another state is dead, flat wrong.

Yes, SOME cops were looting and acting the fool during Katrina. That is not what you stated. You stated they "were shooting everyone". A Gretna sheriff (suburb of N.O.) stopped people from entering his municipality. He did not shoot anyone. That was the Crescent City Connection Bridge. The Danziger bridge is the ONLY bridge on which people were shot by cops, all of whom were convicted and are now in jail.

ETA: When I refer to Title 10 on American soil, I obviously am not including units like the above which are simply training for overseas duty. I am referring to operations on US soil.
edit on 21-1-2013 by pierregustavetoutant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
 



The National Guard is activated and commanded by the state governor, even under title 32 status in which they get paid by the feds but are still 100% under civilian state control (This is what happens for any federally declared emergency). When other state units arrive in say, New Jersey for Hurricane Sandy, it is only because they were invited by the officials of that state under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact. Your supposition that guard troops can be used in other parts of the country unless assistance is specifically asked for by another state is dead, flat wrong.


In theory and how it SHOULD be, I agree with you. However, how do we explain those in the National Guard whom have been called upon to serve in the Middle East?

It seems like we have a disconnect between the rights of the states and the Feds demanding service from said states........

Is it because of corrupt state Governors who hold their hands out to the Feds, thus selling their state out?????

I am not trying to be a wise ass on this, but how can the National Guard be reserved as a protector of a state, when said state allows them to be used as a federal troop?



posted on Jan, 21 2013 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by pierregustavetoutant
 



The National Guard is activated and commanded by the state governor, even under title 32 status in which they get paid by the feds but are still 100% under civilian state control (This is what happens for any federally declared emergency). When other state units arrive in say, New Jersey for Hurricane Sandy, it is only because they were invited by the officials of that state under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact. Your supposition that guard troops can be used in other parts of the country unless assistance is specifically asked for by another state is dead, flat wrong.


In theory and how it SHOULD be, I agree with you. However, how do we explain those in the National Guard whom have been called upon to serve in the Middle East?

It seems like we have a disconnect between the rights of the states and the Feds demanding service from said states........

Is it because of corrupt state Governors who hold their hands out to the Feds, thus selling their state out?????

I am not trying to be a wise ass on this, but how can the National Guard be reserved as a protector of a state, when said state allows them to be used as a federal troop?


I kind of agree with you about the federalization of the Guard being a bit questionable but to answer your question about NG troops serving in the Middle East:

After the Civil War, Northern politicians and federal officials didnt really want the state militias to be too independent. Also, in the Spanish American War, there were complaints from regular army officers that volunteer troops from the state militias were not well trained.
In 1903, Congress passed the Militia Act which gave federal funding to state miltias and full tilt Army level training and equipment in return for service as a reserve component of the regular US armed forces. Basically it created the modern National Guard system and tied the state militias tightly to the federal government and regular US Army
So, the guard can be activated in 3 different ways:
1) State Active Duty - purely state controlled, no fed involvement or funding
2) Title 32 activation - state controlled, but with federal funding
3) Title 10 activation - total federal control - with few exceptions this is reserved for overseas duty such as to Iraq and Afghanistan.

ETA: This does not say that there is no possibility of a President using Guard against citizenry under Title 10, but this has yet to happen (and certainly did not during Katrina).

I'd have to check, but the NG troops on the Mexican border might be Title 10. But again, this would be in the name of border control dealing with a foreign nation, not US citizens.
edit on 21-1-2013 by pierregustavetoutant because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2013 @ 07:50 AM
link   
reply to post by mugger
 





Why is it the United States problem to defend all of these countries? If our government comes for our guns, there will be no U.S. to defend anyone else anyway.


Ask your political leaders that, as they are the ones that put that responsibility on themselves. World Police much?

And for the record, if the government was coming for "your guns" well, you are a civilian, so, yeah, you aren't the one defending anyone but your own self and your loved ones. the military, you know, the guys actually out there taking bullets to protect you, they will still have their guns.

Which brings us to the obvious. Even if the entire military command was onboard with some tyrannical coup, the actual people required to do this for the most part wouldn't be. don't you see, when you say the government is coming to take your guns, you really mean the military, because that's an operation that takes a hell of a lot of boots on the ground.

So, the next time you sit here and say the government is coming for your guns, remember that you are essentially saying that those troops, you know, the ones you probably have a bumber sticker saying you support, are mindless drones that will come kill you if they are told to do so.

Anyways. The US isn't some isolated fortress. Like it or not, it's part of the international community. As such, it has responsibilities and obligations. And be realistic, when we're talking about defending, we're talking about defending the US INTERESTS in the region, not the people. It's in the best interest of the United states that countries who are friendly to the US remain so, for trade and economic reasons as well as military.

Take WW2 for example, the US loves to shove it in the worlds face that "they won the war" when, in reality, the US, Britain, Canada,and Russia won the war. But the part left out is, the US refused to enter the war, or do much of anything, because they felt they had no vested interest in the region when Hitler decided to start invading everyone he could throw a tank at. Even when friendly neutral countries were brutally invaded, the best the US offered was a deal on some ships for the brits and canadians, in exchange for military bases.

not until Japan bombed the crap out of Pearl Harbor, showing their willingness and ability to strike at the mainland US, did they join in the war.

That lesson was learned hard. If the Us administration had the foresight to see the interests they SHOULD have in Europe, they would have made every effort to stop the German expansion before it became an all out world war.

Hence, the world police. The US is arguably at the top. When it comes to force, yes, no question, when it comes to economy and other factors, well, it's slipping. The best interest of the united states is to keep the status quo, and through applied pressure from various angles, seek the create an even larger gap in the balance of power.

This is why you see the US willing to wage war on places in the middle east to "free the people" while ignoring similar if not worst human rights abuses in other, less interesting, areas.

It hasn't been about defending people, ever, not to those in command at least, the ones moving the chess pieces. The boots on the ground, however, I'm sure would say they are defending your rights, and the right to life of anyone whom they are sent into battle for.






top topics



 
12
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join