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.

 

Democrat Says All Military Veterans are Mentally Ill !

page: 2
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


One of these days, the war lovers in Washington will throw a war for everyone..and the war fighters who have to die for the glory of the politicians will fail to show up.

Wouldn't that be the definition of awkward moments... Mass insubordination would be a Sea Change moment in our nation, and perhaps a wake up call to those sorry excuses we have for citizens who would embrace freedoms they were born into, while degrading and crapping on those in our history that died to insure we have them. Of course.. even freedom is presented as entirely relative these days and something we ought to feel guilty for or bad about or just self conscious about anyway.

Veterans across the nation ought to take this woman at her word and *ALL* file mental disability claims at or around the same time. Watch the V.A. break like a sheet of glass on concrete and then ask Diane how her wonderful brainstorm played out?




posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Take the most disturbed vet and he's still got more common sense than the majority of the ass clowns in office, including Queen Ass Clown Feinstein.

She makes me sick.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


He will get it - they just make it hard. Tell him to keep appealing. Of course, if they take guns away from vets they are going to have to pay 100% disability to all of them. It won't happen for that reason alone but that's how dumb this woman is. How the h*#l does she keep her position?



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 12:40 PM
link   
In the YouTube clip Feinstein says that PTSD is a new phenomenon that had occurred since Iraq. The women is an incredible moron with little understanding of anything except what she wants from others.

I guess using her own words all vets from any era prior to Iraq are exempt from her gun grabs. I can't believe people even vote for that crone.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


I bet we won't see her cutting veterans checks for disability, though...



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 01:33 PM
link   


If you went to serve your country, end up killing, and than at some point you begin to see that what you thought you where doing, was not really a "service" to your country, but more of a pawn for companies that lobby war and push for it...
reply to post by benrl
 


Your thoughts on this are exactly how I feel. Our young men and women are constantly put into harms way for the sake of occupying a region, corporate or energy interests, or fighting overseas border battles that are not a direct threat to the United States. Presidents continue to side step congress to enter conflicts, and our representatives never protest the decisions unless public outrage gets their attention (Syria conflict).

Service to this country doesn't mean fighting in conflicts that are politically motivated or used to occupy regions that control the flow of oil. Patriotism and service to this country means protecting it's citizens, our homeland and the constitution of the United States. I view Snowden much more as a patriot for exposing NSA corruption and the trampling on our rights here at home, than I do with someone with a gun used as a pawn to kill people and destroy infrastructure just for foreign political agendas. Don't forget the battle to defend Kuwait. While our young men were doing the dirty work and fighting for their country, their young men were dancing in night clubs.

To blindly follow orders without any moral convictions, or not having a right to ask questions about a mission, is nothing more than brainwashing soldiers. They're used as pawns for the political elite to police the world. These same politicians are quick to send these young people into battle, but turn their backs on them when they come back home maimed or mentally ill. They than use these maimed soldiers as sympathy for their twisted cause and parade them in front of a camera during their political speeches.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   

WeRpeons



If you went to serve your country, end up killing, and than at some point you begin to see that what you thought you where doing, was not really a "service" to your country, but more of a pawn for companies that lobby war and push for it...
reply to post by benrl
 


Your thoughts on this are exactly how I feel. Our young men and women are constantly put into harms way for the sake of occupying a region, corporate or energy interests, or fighting overseas border battles that are not a direct threat to the United States. Presidents continue to side step congress to enter conflicts, and our representatives never protest the decisions unless public outrage gets their attention (Syria conflict).

Service to this country doesn't mean fighting in conflicts that are politically motivated or used to occupy regions that control the flow of oil. Patriotism and service to this country means protecting it's citizens, our homeland and the constitution of the United States. I view Snowden much more as a patriot for exposing NSA corruption and the trampling on our rights here at home, than I do with someone with a gun used as a pawn to kill people and destroy infrastructure just for foreign political agendas. Don't forget the battle to defend Kuwait. While our young men were doing the dirty work and fighting for their country, their young men were dancing in night clubs.

To blindly follow orders without any moral convictions, or not having a right to ask questions about a mission, is nothing more than brainwashing soldiers. They're used as pawns for the political elite to police the world. These same politicians are quick to send these young people into battle, but turn their backs on them when they come back home maimed or mentally ill. They than use these maimed soldiers as sympathy for their twisted cause and parade them in front of a camera during their political speeches.

Kudo's to you brother!



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 


Its even simpler than that, The honorable who honor their oaths, are being ordered to war by leaders who don't honor theirs.

Its not brainwashing to follow your oath, it is doing your duty you signed up for.

The failure is the PEOPLE, who continue to vote for politicians who are clearly bought and paid for.

Every representative that supported the Iraq war should of been out on their ass, and any that push for more of the same should be.

Yet every election we the people Vote them back in.

WE have failed our duty to our Soldiers.
edit on 22-2-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 

I agree with you %100 ....people do not research who they are voting ...I do..that's why this country is going down hill!



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


The people are placated, distracted, divided.

I know very smart people, who refuse to even consider candidates outside "their" party.

People need to see, that Just like an NFL team the players involved do not care about anything other than the checks.

Everything else is theater to keep the cash flowing from special interest into their pocket, and the end result is a Government for the Corporations and not the people.

Vote 3rd party, vote the Incumbents out, Defect? no budget passed? Clean house just once, Next term watch what happens.

ETA:

People like to use the tea party as an example of the chaos this would cause, Thats BS, that "Chaos" Is open debate, it was never meant to be My side Your Side.

It was supposed to be open discourse, Government works best when it is limited by the check and balance of real open discourse in places like the Senate and in the house.

It should never be black and white, Right/Left.

It should be Citizens representing the multitude of diversity we have in this country, I refuse to believe that that is trickled down and distilled in the two party system.

How many Unjust wars would we face if it wasn't simply two sides to every issue in government?
edit on 22-2-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


Even IF people got off their duffs and researched beyond party propaganda, at this point what good would it do?

The incumbents whom contaminate the halls of our Federal government are worse than cancer viruses attacking an immune system that is severely lacking!

The problem with voting period is that we only get to select those whom have already been vetted by an already cancerous political system!

Think of government as a deadly disease! Do you really think they would allow an antibiotic to be elected that could possibly cure the disease?



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


A big HERE ! HERE !! on all that.

When the first war in Iraq started I began to ask people ,"How do you change a 'hawk' into a 'dove'?"
The answer is "to shoot at them". I don't say shoot them. That is not the point.
There is very little which will get a person's attention as much as a gun fired in their direction. It will also change you thoughts of war, once you see it "up close and personel".



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by seeker1963
 



The problem with voting period is that we only get to select those whom have already been vetted by an already cancerous political system!


Absolutely, 100% and totally untrue. Although it is the generally accepted 'wisdom' and with very good reason. It's meant to be and very hard work is put into insuring it remains the commonly accepted logic by the majority of the public.

The fact of the matter is, candidates aren't selected in back rooms behind locked doors. That is the impression you are supposed to have and I had it too, right through most of my adult life. Then I ran into Ron Pauls campaign staff at an appearance he had here and attended their seminar on the US political system to specifically focus on the caucus and primary segments.

You want to know where every candidate you'll care to vote on is selected? That's it. Right there. 1 county at a time, to determine the direction of each state, which then determines the candidate ticket for the nation and general election. Those county meetings are not open to be friendly and welcoming....but THEY ARE PUBLIC and anyone CAN participate...though they'll leave you thinking that isn't the case.

There also are not MANY PEOPLE at those county ones, specifically because the public doesn't believe they are allowed to participate and so, never shows up anyway. Therefore, you have the DNC hacks and the RNC hacks sitting around a room in your county, picking who they'll be seeing elected, for lack of anyone else showing up to offer an opinion.

We have the system we deserve because a majority haven't even taken the time required to understand how it operates outside the most public and visibly corrupt portions of it. That's the sadness here. Apathy breeds Anarchy..and Anarchy within rule books they force us to follow is precisely what we've gotten.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Do you not think the two party system was devised to win even IF a third party candidate gets in the race?

How often do we hear in the US that if, "You vote for a party other than the Democrat or Republican Party, all you are doing is stealing votes from one party or the other?"?

I agree with you on local and state levels perhaps your statements are correct. However, entering the Federal Race is a whole other ball game.

It is a rigged game! The only winners are those whom RULE over us! What do we get out of it Wrabbit? The fact that we did our patriotic duty to further prop up what is already corrupt to the core?

Someone posted a link to a Youtube video, describing exactly what I am talking about as far as a third party running in a two party system. For the life of me, I cannot remember what it was called, but if anyone knows what I am referring too, I would appreciate if you could help me out with that one.
edit on 22-2-2014 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)


Freedom is nothing more than an extinct dinosaur as long as we have a corrupt system, with the power to remain in power.
edit on 22-2-2014 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)


EDIT: I found it! It is called "First Pass the Post" voting!

As you can see, they have this all planned out!


edit on 22-2-2014 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 06:26 PM
link   
I'm pretty certain that it doesn't matter, but not only is this news over a year old, Feinstein didn't say what is quoted.

March 7, 2013

U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee meeting

Feinstein:



The problem with expanding this is that, you know, with the advent of PTSD, which I think is a new phenomenon as a product of the Iraq War, it’s not clear how the seller or transferrer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member, or a veteran, and that there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this. So, you know, I would be happy to sit down with you again and see if we could work something out but I think we have to — if you’re going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally don’t have access to this kind of weapon.


Another rendition since the above quote is from Snopes and would probably be automatically suspect thereby:



the problem with expanding this is that you know with the advent of PTSD, uhh, which i think is a new phenomenon as a product of the iraq war, umm, it's not clear how the seller or transferer of a firearm covered by this bill would verify that an individual was a member, or a vetran, and um that there was no impairment of that individual with respect to having a weapon like this. so you know i would be happy to sit down with you again and see if we could work something out but um, i think we have to -- if you're going to do this, find a way that veterans who are incapacitated for one reason or another mentally, uh, dont have access to this kind of weapon.


The second quote is from the Georgia Outdoor News Forum - March 7, 2013. This is from my home state and I can tell you, none of these ol' boys support anything but gun rights.

This was picked up and reverberated through the right-wing echo chamber at the time (3/7/2013) and again recently (1/29/2014).

I mention "right-wing echo chamber" because of these search results: Google - Last 30 days - Faux Feinstein quote

Anyone interested in denying ignorance would find this level of misrepresentation and misquoting more than a bit disturbing I would think.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   

tothetenthpower
reply to post by benrl
 


It doesn't surprise me that many democrats would hold the notion that less guns would be good. I just don't think it' something they are actively trying to accomplish. I can't imagine that liberals are less partial to the constitution than conservatives are.

Everybody is American right? Mostly you all hold the same base ideals. It seems to be that ignorance regarding what are America's founding ideals is what causes the rift between people. By ignorance I mean just lack of knowledge. Whether it's willful or not is dependent on the person in question.


~Tenth


America is as diverse as any other nation, I would argue more so than any other, and opinions and ideals vary from person to person.

Oh there are people here who feel the same, that Guns are silly, that the Founding fathers got several things wrong and that we should change the constitution again for guns, just like their other errors.

But though it is winnowing, and less easy to say, we like to think we are a nation of laws. Not bound by popular opinion, though flawed the founders had the right idea. LESS government constrained by strict controls was the way to prevent encroachment on liberties.

So taking the Guns away or restricting them is not a matter of whim, there is a strict process to do so, the problem is it’s never tried because it would fail.

So we get all these attempts to further restrict, when if they were serious about it they would go for an amendment.

The other problem is that even when the constitution is changed its traditionally the expansion of rights not the removal, in fact Prohibition being a prime example of trying to take away rather than give, and was repealed and acknowledged to be a huge mistake.

Switzerland, Israel, have high rates of ownership as well, not just third world. There is a more systemic problem than guns that goes far further than anyone is willing to look. If it was as simple as a safety issue, Education and Mental health care would be first and foremost, as well as enforcement of existing laws not more.

Things like holding people criminally liable for what happens with their guns, We hold people accountable for what happens with their car if someone uses it. If they get the keys and the keys where negligently placed you can be responsible for what they do legally.

SO Im not even saying NO common sense reform, the problem is everyone get so black and white on this debate it goes nowhere. Almost as if the whole point was to inflame and distract rather than to get anything done.

edit on 22-2-2014 by benrl because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by nighthawk1954
 


But see what you said there. "Now the Democrats are coming up with ways to take away gun from our Veterans. This makes me sick!"

Um.. I hate to break this to you but that was just one democrat. Yes she said it and that statement makes me sick too. However, why not attack her....why level HER statement at all Democrats. For the record, not a democrat. Just sayin.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
WE ARE NOT INSANE. sometimes there's different factors other than just because I was in the military I've gone crazy. Did they ever think that maybe we all look crazy is because everyone see's and labels us as such. Oh and another thing I don't see a whole lot of difference between the democrats and liberals in America other than the fact they always say something that just sounds plain stupid.



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Gryphon66
 


How did she not say what was quoted? Perhaps not verbatim but certainly along the same lines. First - she thinks PTSD is a new disorder. Then she says they need to figure out which vets have this so they don't have access to weapons. Does she even know what PTSD is? At her age she should know good and well that we have seen PTSD in vets for a very long time. She should also learn to read statistics and do some research. It is not the vets who are killing people with guns - but criminals getting them anyway they can (non-militarized members of society).



posted on Feb, 22 2014 @ 09:17 PM
link   

blueyezblkdragon
WE ARE NOT INSANE. sometimes there's different factors other than just because I was in the military I've gone crazy. Did they ever think that maybe we all look crazy is because everyone see's and labels us as such. Oh and another thing I don't see a whole lot of difference between the democrats and liberals in America other than the fact they always say something that just sounds plain stupid.


The reason why some people think that vets are crazy is because more have committed suicide than have died in this war. Clearly something is wrong that needs to be addressed and find out why this is happening.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join