HR 6166, by the numbers

This was posted on another board. BTW, conspiracy researcher Alan Watt had exactly the same opinion about the meaning of the numbers, "SIX TO THE ONE, then you have 666."

666=the red number number of the man beast,slave to the system of man, to rely on man rather then God to survive, ect

1= in numbers I think this means you,singularity, holiness within your heart holy spirit.

6>I theorize this means " the 6 is aimed towards one "1" to destroy the holy spirit within, to destroy the persona and make one slave, to make one nothing but a number,the mark of man targeting the "1" with the agenda of man, when David numbered the people God was angry with him,

6166

66 i ASSUME THIS means as time goes on the 1 will be destroyed and 66 replaces 1 this is mark of beast, it could also mean the other 66 with one in middle represents a trap of "1" so "1" can not escape there for snared into the beast wicked web of dead, there for killing "1" either spiritually or physically. I'm not sure



-----------------> time progressing forward.
6 1 6 6
^them ^you traped ^them ^reinforced trapping

-----------------> time progressing forward.
what is left of you after being trapped and if you take thier planned mark no more "1"
666

Another interpretation:

Under HR 6166, to be a lawful enemy (and thus have any rights at all) you must wear a MILITARY MARK... This has to have major occultic significance. They don't want a free soul out there. Militaries are the epitome of group think, thought control, and the hive mind in action. Not to mention the fact that they exist to kill and destroy, which is exactly what lucifer wants.

What are military people commonly referred to as? Dogs of war (beasts), you must wear the mark of a military to be exempt from this law =

YOU MUST WEAR A MARK OF THE BEAST TO BE EXEMPT FROM HR 6166 and thus have any rights at all!

What do you think about the name of the bill, "HR 6166"? A lot of people feel that the true mark of the beast number should be 616, most believe it should be 666, but this law has both! It's not a coincidence. It's either part of their game or it's a sign of the true satanic nature of this law. I believe the latter, this thing came from the pit of hell! It could even represent the fact that HR 6166 = implementation of The Mark of the Beast!

There will be national identity cards for every US citizen in 2008. That may be when HR 6166 becomes the "mark of the beast."

interestig perspective but...
i am truly lost as to what exactly this has to do with the "war on terror".
where is the link to what hr 6166 says? i could google it, then i'd probably end up with a million and one sources. where's teh one to support what you're saying?
you give a small blurb of a mention to another board, but then you have no links, no sources, nothing to back up your claims. just your own thoughts, which makes this conjecture. if anything it almost looks like a prophecy sorta thing to me...but that's just me...

Here's a link to HR 6166:

Military Commissions Act of 2006

Note that there are two versions of the bill.

Originally posted by conspiraciesabound
Under HR 6166, to be a lawful enemy (and thus have any rights at all) you must wear a MILITARY MARK....

The requirement that lawful combatants must wear identifying marks dates at least as far back as the Geneva Conventions, which were last agreed to in 1949, with some later added protocols.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions:

(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;

(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;

(c) That of carrying arms openly;

(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.

usmilitary.about.com...

ahh. thanks much for that.
it's very much appreciated!
//reads

Are we saying that there is some sort of conspiracy in the numbering? The bills are numbered sequentailly ... so that would be the 6,166th bill introduced to the 109th Congress. If there were to be some sort of conspiracy in order for the bill to get this particular numbering system they would have had to had the text prepared in advance and waited for this number to become available.

Maybe I'm confused ... are you saying this is a conspiracy or just some sort of numerology coinicidence?

Originally posted by SmallMindsBigIdeas
Are we saying that there is some sort of conspiracy in the numbering? The bills are numbered sequentailly ... so that would be the 6,166th bill introduced to the 109th Congress. If there were to be some sort of conspiracy in order for the bill to get this particular numbering system they would have had to had the text prepared in advance and waited for this number to become available.

Maybe I'm confused ... are you saying this is a conspiracy or just some sort of numerology coinicidence?

It's there for you to see. The beast system is being put in place. Think with your heart, not your head.

[edit on 7-10-2006 by conspiraciesabound]

This is an interesting sentiment. The MCA is the most aggressively heinous attack on the supposed morals and ideals contained within American borders that I have had the misfortune of being alive for. It is basically a legal tender for tanks in the streets and unmarked helicopters hovering.

On aside, I feel one must get beyond the idea that hive mind is inherently negative. The universe is of transcendental structure, and to best realize this is through careful organization with the laws of the structure itself. To fight the negative, amoral hive mind, it is best to create a positive, moral hive mind.

Individuality is essential to the positive hive mind. We are truly liberated when we are all living in accord to the will of the source of life, while still remaining individual and autonomous.

One thing I remember from my rebellious teenage years is that peaceful protesting of an issue gets zero results for the protestor. Only bold or violent protests recieve the results they ideally wanted in setting up their protest, and this is on a global level, of course there are exceptions, but few. I am not advocating violent protesting or any violent acts; I am simply stating an observation-turned-opinion on the nature of protest.

To protest is to wish to stop something. You can protest in a subtle way while still doing the act that you do not wish to be doing that you are 'protesting' in that subtle way, but it does not yield results. On a larger level, peaceful protests of government events and buildings and meetings achieve nothing substantial. They have to get a permit in advance, and if its a high-profile meeting, they are placed in a neat little zone far enough away from the meeting to be out of sight to the people meeting and completely controllable if they became unruly. Violent protesting gets bad media coverage; peaceful protesting gets NO media coverage. Or just enough to keep you at bay.

According to our constitution, if a majority of the American population decided that our system of governing and the members of the governing system were not performing properly and were oppressing the people, they could theoreticly 'violently protest' and remove said government from the offices by force of arms. The right to bear arms, this is the political reason for it, and the other reasons are self defense and hunting and things of that nature. They try to change it to make it only for things of that nature by making automatic weaponry illegal, and making heavier weaponry illegal to obtain or extremely difficult to. They effectively remove the political reason for the right to bear arms, which was the most important reason it was made.

Now we are effectively stuck with our current system of governing and our current 2 big political parties for ETERNITY, or until our nation ceases to be, breaks down into another depression, whatever. I don't know about you, but seeing how well these small countries perform with leftward leaning parliament governments with prime ministers and such over the years has made me see it as a better system than our Republic system of democracy. I'd prefer a Parliament to a Congress, and I'd prefer a prime minister who's power but more importantly ego has been forced into size than a ballsy presidential seat with its glamor and uber-powers.

I hear alot of crap about some sort of legislature that allows foreign troops under a UN or Nato mandate to patrol American streets with the permission of the government and enforce things like martial law, should they be imposed on us? Is this speculation on future legislature that im referring to here, is it failed legislature, or god forbid is it passed legislature?


[edit on 10/10/2006 by runetang]