Can only end in VIOLENT Revolution, regardless you being goody two shoe

The last few posts illustrate exactly why there will be no revolution, only a civil war.

Lashing out at each other is so much more gratifying ~ and POSSIBLE than trying to upset the fruit basket of those who work day and night to divide us into nattering little factions.

Originally posted by frazzle
The last few posts illustrate exactly why there will be no revolution, only a civil war.
Lashing out at each other is so much more gratifying ~ and POSSIBLE than trying to upset the fruit basket of those who work day and night to divide us into nattering little factions.

for crying out loud, we a have a 48 story building having explosion PUFFS on the video and then imploding

if that is not enough evidence to cause REVOLUTION

look, I've been dealing with issue of 9/11 inside job for a long time

PEOPLE DO NOT CARE ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE DYING

I know it sounds like it can't be
but people overall really ARE that stupid and ARE that evil

just look at my threads on ATS, half the s# heads are to #ing scared to even post online anymore

In a way.........I am glad many will die in the future, I am talking millions

maybe the average F#er deserves to break a leg

maybe dying, is what will be needed, for living

reply to post by JilianK


Atrocities have been committed in many countries. America is not unique in this regard. The only thing that is unique though is that 3000 people died for monetary reasons rather than pure hate. I consider that more evil than the typical genocide.

Originally posted by Auricom
reply to post by JilianK

 

I believe in live and let live. And yes, there is a narrow line between the two. When something steps over that line and prevents me from living in peace, it's time to do something. And in my opinion, that line for many of us has been stepped over a very long time ago.

It's not a question regarding our desire to remain a "goody two shoe", it's a matter of "who's first" and "will we follow"? No one wants to be a martyr, not anyone with half a wit at least.

The very large part, if not all, of any damage our constitution has suffered has not been accomplished through force of arms but through legislation. That is were the war is friends.

Originally posted by JilianK

Originally posted by frazzle
The last few posts illustrate exactly why there will be no revolution, only a civil war.
Lashing out at each other is so much more gratifying ~ and POSSIBLE than trying to upset the fruit basket of those who work day and night to divide us into nattering little factions.

for crying out loud, we a have a 48 story building having explosion PUFFS on the video and then imploding

if that is not enough evidence to cause REVOLUTION

look, I've been dealing with issue of 9/11 inside job for a long time

PEOPLE DO NOT CARE ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE DYING

I know it sounds like it can't be
but people overall really ARE that stupid and ARE that evil

just look at my threads on ATS, half the s# heads are to #ing scared to even post online anymore

In a way.........I am glad many will die in the future, I am talking millions

maybe the average F#er deserves to break a leg

maybe dying, is what will be needed, for living

You'll get no argument out of me that the events of that day should have been more than enough to cause one hell of a revolution. But it didn't. People aren't even smart enough to figure out who did 9/11 even though the planners put their evil intentions in writing for everyone to see. Its downright embarrassing!

So although I can't say I'm very glad about millions MORE people suffering and dying than already have, there's nothing I can do to stop it from happening because, as you say, no one cares until its their own frigging hide. So we will get what we've dealt to others and its what we've got coming.

Far as I'm concerned we're a few centuries too late for a good old fashioned revolt against the machine, anyway. But I believe it will end in civil war because we aren't smart enough to figure out how to get to the planners, so we'll take it out on each other. And we may succeed in taking a lot of stupid out of the gene pool, but evil will survive, it always does. That's why they call it hell on earth.

reply to post by frazzle


People can show their disapproval of bipartisanship, which has gotten us into this mess in the first place, by voting for a different party. Why don't the smaller parties go knocking on some doors to get enough signatures to be included in all or at least more state ballots?

Whats wrong with voting green, libertarian, constitution, justice, socialist, communist, etc? Do people fear change or are they too lazy to do their own research before voting? Why do so many people relly on msm to help them with all the issues? And why don't third parties make a ruckus about lack of media coverage? Why don't some rich people help third parties like the koch brothers help the libertarians?

We still CAN VOTE whatever we want, and I don't think there is widespread vote fraud.

The Federal Election Commission has released its “2008 presidential popular vote summary for all candidates listed on at least one state ballot.” The results:

•Barack Obama (Democrat) 69,498,516 [52.93%]
•John McCain (Republican) 59,948,323 [45.65%]
•Ralph Nader (Independent, Peace and Freedom) 739,034 [0.56%]
•Bob Barr (Libertarian) 523,715 [0.40%]
•Chuck Baldwin (Constitution/Reform/U.S. Taxpayers) 199,750 [0.15%]
•Cynthia McKinney (Green, Independent, Mountain) 161,797 [0.12%]
•Write-In (Miscellaneous) 112,597 [0.09%]
•Alan Keyes (America’s Independent) 47,746 [0.04%]
•Ron Paul (Constitution, Louisiana Taxpayers) 42,426 [0.03%]
•Gloria La Riva (Socialism and Liberation) 6,818 [0.01%]
•Brian Moore (Liberty Union, Socialist) 6,538
•None of These Candidates [Nevada only] 6,267
•Róger Calero (Socialist Workers) 5,151
•Richard Duncan (Independent) 3,905
•James Harris (Socialist Workers) 2,424
•Charles Jay (Boston Tea Party/Independent) 2,422
•John Joseph Polachek (New) 1,149
•Frank Edward McEnulty (Unaffiliated) 829
•Jeffrey J. Wamboldt (Independent) 764
•Thomas Robert Stevens (Objectivist) 755
•Gene C. Amondson (Prohibition) 653
•Jeffrey “Jeff” Boss (Vote Here) 639
•George Phillies (Libertarian) 531
•Ted Weill (Reform) 481
•Jonathan E. Allen (Heartquake ’08) 480
•Bradford Lyttle (U.S. Pacifist) 110The Hill reports on its website that among the “tens of thousands of votes cast for write-in candidates, ultra-fringe parties, and fictitious (or erroneous) contenders” were 43 write-in votes for Vermin Supreme, 19 for Bill Clinton, 11 for Mickey Mouse, nine for Santa Claus, seven for Donald Duck, and five each for “Jesus” and “Joe Plumber”.
Candidates receiving exactly one tallied write-in vote for president were Jose M. Aparicio, Theodis (Ted) Brown Sr., James R. Germalic, Ronald G. Hobbs, Charles Jay, Keith Russell Judd, Lou Kujawski, Curtis Montgomery, Reverend Mere Peace-MsMere, John Leroy Plemons, Michael Skok, David Jon Sponheim, and Shelley Renée Upchurch.

www.independentpoliticalreport.com...

CAN PEOPLE SEE WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS DAMM PICTURE?!

once they end the brain frequency intrusions, stop the subliminal subconcious whisperings, and tear down the nazified system of control and observation, then the earth will have true freedom to fight a fair war. Until then, rethink how you think. Dont give in to physical violence, but cast everything into the monkey wrench belch quench system of lies and torture.

Got to have 15% of the popular vote count in the major sampling polls that, get this and laugh or cry, only 1500 callers are asked with only D and R listed by their names..........and an other section! So in other words the polls are prone to error and sublminally they intentionally ignore the other parties.

But the smaller parties have not done the ground work to include themselves in the ballots anyway, with the noticeable exception of libertarians.

Is it popular to be libertarian lately? I see mainstream republicans saying "i am libertarian lite" or "constitutional conservative". Did you know there is a constitution party as well....

Nobody mentions it so i figure I give them some free exposure. You know like candy samples!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Sorry kiddo, what got us into this mess was the original intent of the invaders of this great land to destroy the people who were already here. Were those people given an opportunity to vote against their destruction? Not likely.

And voting won't prevent our destruction, either, because the kind of people who were so determined to kill off the natives to get their land are mirror images of the ones who count your vote. That's the fraud and it should be clear by now that treaty breakers don't die when they're caught cheating, they just go to work for the corporations they promised to regulate to get your vote.

They have nothing but contempt for people who buy into their scam.

Originally posted by JilianK

PEOPLE DO NOT CARE ABOUT OTHER PEOPLE DYING

I know it sounds like it can't be
but people overall really ARE that stupid and ARE that evil

just look at my threads on ATS, half the s# heads are to #ing scared to even post online anymore

Too many people got bannd because they could not take the constant abuse from the trolls....i imagine they are PAID to post #, because how can you justify someone being THAT BORED to sit on this site 24/7 and argue nonsense

If I didn't care about anything then I would not be here. I actually got U2Us from a few people who told me to say this and say that, I guess they didn't have the nerve to say it themselves. I mean they looked legitimate posters with good intentions. 300 million americans all too ignorant, too scared, too overworked or too something. it boggles the mind!

What do people do with themselves all #ing day?? I mean we have tons of visitors and no members

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Sorry kiddo, what got us into this mess was the original intent of the invaders of this great land to destroy the people who were already here. Were those people given an opportunity to vote against their destruction? Not likely.

And voting won't prevent our destruction, either, because the kind of people who were so determined to kill off the natives to get their land are mirror images of the ones who count your vote. That's the fraud and it should be clear by now that treaty breakers don't die when they're caught cheating, they just go to work for the corporations they promised to regulate to get your vote.

They have nothing but contempt for people who buy into their scam.

I can tell you the biggest fault of this system........drum roll..........misinterpretated first amendment that allows unlimited campaign contributions to any party. Do away with unlimited campaign contributions and replace it with a vote tax.

Then what I mentioned earlier and what is included in the video as well. There are solutons but we need to unravel the gordion knot first by determing what is wrong with the system.

In many countries small parties can get up to 40% of the total vote combined, compared to america where at best 2%...BIG PROBLEM

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

I can tell you the biggest fault of this system........drum roll..........misinterpretated first amendment that allows unlimited campaign contributions to any party. Do away with unlimited campaign contributions and replace it with a vote tax.

Then what I mentioned earlier and what is included in the video as well. There are solutons but we need to unravel the gordion knot first by determing what is wrong with the system.

In many countries small parties can get up to 40% of the total vote combined, compared to america where at best 2%...BIG PROBLEM

Interpretation period. And all the potential for misinterpretation was written right into the Constitution. Who defines General Welfare, or the Commerce Clause, or the Supremacy Clause or many other phrases that literally BEG for misinterpretation and abuse. Those clauses are there for no other purpose than to give authority to government to undermine the Bill of Rights and/or civil rights and/or natural rights which is now almost complete. That is what's at fault.

The rules were written by that era's 1% and they made it a republic because that gives ultimate power to the few at the top, as opposed to democracy which gives power to the people. This was not an accident or oversight, they realized that democracy had to be defamed and disclaimed to keep it that way.

reply to post by frazzle

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.

Honestly I have no idea how that can be purposefully mispresented to include financial contributions.

Money does not equate to speech in the literal sense. Speech means opening ones mouth to utter words OR typing words on a computer. Dropping a ballot is also free speech because you write or mark something. Money is considered bribery in my book.

I am not familiar with anything other than the bill of rights so I cannot debate you on equal ground.

The right wingers praise "a republic" and left wingers want "a democracy". I can see a case for a healthy republic in that an ignorant or hateful majority do not oppress a minority, but by the same token the 1% can take advantage in unforseen ways.

Either way the super rich always win. I am talking billionares and trillionares here!

The few who understand the system, will either be so interested in
its profits, or so dependent on its favours that there will be no
opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body
of the people mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous
advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens
without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system
is inimical to their interests."

John Sherman

We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it.
The only question is whether World Government will be achieved
by conquest or consent.

James Paul Warburg

I care not what puppet is placed on
the throne of England to rule the Empire, ...
The man that controls Britain's money
supply controls the British Empire.
And I control the money supply.

Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild

Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits.

Sir Josiah Stamp

The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world.

Carroll Quigley

In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. ... This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard.

Alan Greenspan

quotes.liberty-tree.ca...

Basically evil people ADMITTING how EVIL they are. Too bad everyone is clueless!

This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.

David Rockefeller

We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time
Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended
our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost
forty years."

It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world
if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a
world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite
and world bankers is surely preferable to the national
auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

David Rockefeller

quotes.liberty-tree.ca...

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by frazzle

 

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.

Honestly I have no idea how that can be purposefully mispresented to include financial contributions.

Money does not equate to speech in the literal sense. Speech means opening ones mouth to utter words OR typing words on a computer. Dropping a ballot is also free speech because you write or mark something. Money is considered bribery in my book.

I am not familiar with anything other than the bill of rights so I cannot debate you on equal ground.

The right wingers praise "a republic" and left wingers want "a democracy". I can see a case for a healthy republic in that an ignorant or hateful majority do not oppress a minority, but by the same token the 1% can take advantage in unforseen ways.

Either way the super rich always win. I am talking billionares and trillionares here!

Financial contributions ~ actually ANY financial transaction falls under the Commerce Clause, which includes damn near everything, from the time you're born until you die. Well okay, from before you're born (prenatal care financial transactions) until after you're dead (burial expenses and probate etc.)

I also think about a hateful or ignorant majority, which a republic doesn't forestall in any way, just look at us. Hateful and ignorant should be our middle name. But don't you think the majority would vote to eliminate, say the Patriot Act or any of the other increasingly intrusive and abusive laws on the books today if they lived in a democracy? Our reps don't agree, though, and their word is law.

During the Constitutional Convention, George Clinton, Governor of New York, was an adversary of the Constitution. He said:

"The extent of many of the states of the Union, is at this time almost too great for the superintendence of a republican form of government, and must one day or other revolve into more vigorous ones, or by separation be reduced into smaller and more useful, as well as moderate ones."

www.rightsofthepeople.com...

He wasn't wrong, but election laws of "our republic' prevent people from voting to separate as they could if it was a democracy.

ETA: Separation is the only way we could forestall the revolution the OP is predicting. Unfortunately we couldn't do that without a counter attack because they mean to keep us under their thumbs.

Originally posted by frazzle

I also think about a hateful or ignorant majority, which a republic doesn't forestall in any way, just look at us. Hateful and ignorant should be our middle name. But don't you think the majority would vote to eliminate, say the Patriot Act or any of the other increasingly intrusive and abusive laws on the books today if they lived in a democracy? Our reps don't agree, though, and their word is law.

Yeah we certainly have an ignorant and hateful majority, because of the media that spouts disinfo 24/7, well with a few necessary exceptions. Media is becoming a little more honest lately, but not that much.

I get tired of many right wingers calling obama a socialist. Socialism implies nationalisation of industry, the people owning the means of production and the government acting as proxy for the people whom theoretically are shareholders of the enterprise. I keep explaining this to everyone but some just cant comprehend it, I guess thanks to the mcarthy era and the cold war.

Capitalism always develops a rich class, and when we add masonry to the mix it simply gets worse. Rich people buy bonds and want the welfare nanny state. Liberalism does not equate to socialism. Besides the few socialist parties get a laughable vote count. Liberals and conservatives are both capitalist orientated. One wants pure capitalism with charities picking up the tab and the other wants nanny state.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Exactly, that's why we'll end up with a civil war and not a revolution. We are prevented from going our separate ways peacefully.

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Exactly, that's why we'll end up with a civil war and not a revolution. We are prevented from going our separate ways peacefully.

Respectfully I disagree. I think it is too early to know what will happen. Some people are waking up, and I see more conservatives becoming tea party than liberals becoming occupy.

I have no idea what happened but it seems occupy has faded into obscurity. They either gave up or many jumped on the obozo bandwagon of false hope and change.

I am an occupy supporter by the way. Center-Left on the political scale.

Glad I moved to greece many years ago, but greece has problems of its own. Trying to start a hotel business just before the recession hit five years ago more or less has made me insolvent. I keep trying though a little here and a little there.