Martial law? It's not what you think.....

I have seen repeated threads on ATS about the coming martial law. Most reasons given for such an event involve serious injustice against the American people and the common man fighting back.

What if the martial law was to protect the people against the elite who have everything taken away from them? Wouldn't they and their private armies try to create as much disruption as possible, thus jeapordizing the actions taken against them.

I just read a story on another site which if true, would be a very plausible reason in declaring martial law. Basically it says that the US is ready to start issuing Treasury dollars backed by gold. They claim several sources at banks which confirm they are coming. They also claim that banks will be held to Basal III capital requirements, which means loans that can only be made with adequate underlying collateral and/or capital. Everything on the books and no more fractional reserve banking. They also claim that all federal based debt (credit cards, homeloans, etc) will be forgiven as we start this new system.

I doubt the accuracy of this report but it got me to thinking that such an change would most likely lead to scenarios that require martial law. The bankers and the big money would fight this very hard and attempt to make such a change fail in a dramatic and probbaly violent manner. In order to make it successful, it would be the bankers and the wall street thugs that would find themselves in the interment camps rather than the average patriotic american.

If this is the case I say bring on the martial law. Would you all be more wiling to accept it if this was indeed the case?

Banking Change

Well first of all, martial law throughout the entire US is virtually impossible with current logistic capability.

Second of all, if the power hungry psychopaths were the only ones in the camps, you would only need 1 camp.

And third of all, if true, this report sounds really good. Probably too good to be true.

However, going back to currency backed by metals would certainly help the situation we are seeing in the economy. As it would eliminate the majority of the "fake economy" which is causing all of the problems in the first place.

Great I'll never get a mortgage now! If that is the truth about the banking change then the only loans given will be to the elite who have the collaterall. It'd be the middle class and poor who'd be stuck with nowhere to go.

reply to post by sligtlyskeptical

it would be the bankers and the wall street thugs that would find themselves in the interment camps rather than the average patriotic american.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9b3a70fab854.jpeg[/atsimg]



In any case, in order to achieve a stable system they'd have to have a physical audit of Fort Knox.



[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/75c081cc621b.jpeg[/atsimg]



I'm not saying the rumor may not be true. But such a move would not constitute the inviting panacea it's being portrayed as.

Originally posted by ldyserenity
Great I'll never get a mortgage now!

If that is the truth about the banking change then the only loans given will be to the elite who have the collaterall. It'd be the middle class and poor who'd be stuck with nowhere to go.

Not true. When you get a mortgage the house you buy will be the collateral, although that is not what is meant by collateral. It means the banks much have a source of the funds they loan you rather than creating it out of thin air. The majority of all credit card debts and mortgages are illegal loans under the laws of the United States. You can't create money to loan it the law says, but yet that is how almost all loans are made.

I'm going to give you a S & F for this post. This is exactly what I think is occurring. Obama is a double-agent, if you will. He cannot come right out and say America is corrupted by corporate greed. What he seeks to do is put into place limits on what corporations may do. He is doing this through the vehicle known as socialism. However, this is why what he says and what appears to be done are two different things. The corporate entities are pissed because he is removing their power. When the changes are made government will firmly be in control.

Imagine you were really President and you knew that if you stepped out of line, or made bold statements against those really in power then you would be dealt with. But imagine you were truly for the people, and wanted to see a better world. Imagine that there are positions of power that may usurp the authority of the President and do anything they wished it if the President stood up to them. Imagine you don't know who these people are. How would you institute a just economy, or system of governing? You would have to remove the power from those areas under a guise of making it better for them.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
I'm going to give you a S & F for this post. This is exactly what I think is occurring. Obama is a double-agent, if you will. He cannot come right out and say America is corrupted by corporate greed. What he seeks to do is put into place limits on what corporations may do. He is doing this through the vehicle known as socialism. However, this is why what he says and what appears to be done are two different things. The corporate entities are pissed because he is removing their power. When the changes are made government will firmly be in control.

Imagine you were really President and you knew that if you stepped out of line, or made bold statements against those really in power then you would be dealt with. But imagine you were truly for the people, and wanted to see a better world. Imagine that there are positions of power that may usurp the authority of the President and do anything they wished it if the President stood up to them. Imagine you don't know who these people are. How would you institute a just economy, or system of governing? You would have to remove the power from those areas under a guise of making it better for them.

I don't think this will work...the elite will cry fowl and end up funding Obama's impeachment if this is really what he is trying to do. They aren't dumb, they didn't get where they are today by being dumb!

reply to post by ExPostFacto


The only just form of government, as I see it, is to not govern at all. Rather, to educate the people so they can govern themselves.

Way easier that way, and cheaper.

Originally posted by ExPostFacto
I'm going to give you a S & F for this post. This is exactly what I think is occurring. Obama is a double-agent, if you will. He cannot come right out and say America is corrupted by corporate greed. What he seeks to do is put into place limits on what corporations may do. He is doing this through the vehicle known as socialism. However, this is why what he says and what appears to be done are two different things. The corporate entities are pissed because he is removing their power. When the changes are made government will firmly be in control.

Imagine you were really President and you knew that if you stepped out of line, or made bold statements against those really in power then you would be dealt with. But imagine you were truly for the people, and wanted to see a better world. Imagine that there are positions of power that may usurp the authority of the President and do anything they wished it if the President stood up to them. Imagine you don't know who these people are. How would you institute a just economy, or system of governing? You would have to remove the power from those areas under a guise of making it better for them.

I hope to hell that is what is happening. There are multiple web sources that constantly do battle with each other that all claim certian elements of NESARA are occuring. Maybe they are just doing it to keep schmucks like myself visiting their websites?

After thinking about the issues for years, in my opinion the only good choice left is to do something like this. Otherwise we will be faced with widespread oppression or complete anarchy.

Of course there is always enough complete BS included in all these reports to make you doubt their credibility. For instance, why would a bank teller know anything about the coming new monetary change?

Big party at my house if they ever turn the tables on those who wish to oppress us.

Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by ExPostFacto

 

The only just form of government, as I see it, is to not govern at all. Rather, to educate the people so they can govern themselves.

Way easier that way, and cheaper.

You have to have some sort of authoritative body. How else would you decide on how to properly educate the people? Take a poll on ATS?(god forbid)

The goverment should be made up of the people, with all incentive to gain from serving removed from the equation. One term for one year and then back to private life.

reply to post by ExPostFacto



That is a little far fetched there

Remember, whatever we give to the government (powers, freedoms, etc) are not going to be given back willingly.

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical


You have to have some sort of authoritative body.

I disagree. First an example from history.

At the end of the American Civil War, when the slaves were freed. Where did they go? They went down the road a few miles, then realize holy crap, and then went back to their previous master, and asked for a job. Thus share-cropping became mainstream.

Now some philosophy.

What authority guides the leader? His own conscience? Exactly.

The leader is guided by his own internal conscience. So if Der Furor can guide himself so well, than why can't we peasants guide ourselves by simply using our own conscience?

And anyways, look at how poorly we have been led by these "leaders" in the first place.

I would rather screw up things on my own, and be able to blame myself, than letting someone else screw them up and forever be blaming them.

reply to post by ExPostFacto

This is exactly what I think is occurring. Obama is a double-agent, if you will. He cannot come right out and say America is corrupted by corporate greed. What he seeks to do is put into place limits on what corporations may do. He is doing this through the vehicle known as socialism.

JFK tried to stand up to them he had the treasury issue silver backed treasury bills by Executive Order. He was assassinated before all the money could be printed and it never was. It is amazing how many presidents and other political leaders end up dead, killed by “a lone gunman” after defying the banking powers, Ain't those numbered swiss bank accounts handy? Nine American Presidents have been the targets of assassination The latest was Ron Paul, just a few short weeks after he had assured his supporters he was in the Presidential race to the end, he abruptly quit a couple of days after the Bildeburgers met. An earlier report by Dan Estulin alleged the Bildeburgers were considering getting rid of Ron Paul.

I strongly suggest reading A Primer on Money: by the Congressional COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY. It is very well written and not dry. I got so angry reading it I read it all in one sitting just as the author hoped.


About the Federal Reserve

The fed caused the 1929 crash on purpose. Here is part of McFadden's speech

"Mr. Chairman, the United States is bankrupt: It has been bankrupted by the corrupt and dishonest Fed. It has repudiated its debts to its own citizens. Its chief foreign creditor is Great Britain, and a British bailiff has been at the White House and the British Agents are in the United States Treasury making inventory arranging terms of liquidations!..."Mr. Chairman, the Fed has offered to collect the British claims in full from the American public by trickery and corruption, if Great Britain will help to conceal its crimes. The British are shielding their agents, the Fed,... “The Fed Note is essentially unsound. It is the worst currency and the most dangerous that this Country has ever known... They should not have made the Government [liable on the private] debts of individuals and corporations, and, least of all, on the private debts of foreigners.”

"The Prime Minister of England came here for money! He came here to collect cash! "He came here with Fed Currency and other claims against the Fed which England had bought up in all parts of the world. And he has presented them for redemption in gold Source

.

McFadden brought charges against the fed and the Sec of the Treasury. He was killed on the third assassination attempt and the charges dropped

After World War I, Germany began to ]invest American banking loans in an economically wasteful fashion. Bankers lent to German states and municipalities, which used these funds for projects designed to bring about more social consumption, such as municipal beautification, parks, sports stadia, hotels, public bathhouses, and roads of little or no productive utility (Gee doesn't that sound familar)

So what happened? Within 34 hr of becoming President Roosevelt closed the doors on every bank –
And then Confiscated private citizens Gold to pay the debts of the Federal Reserve: first passing the Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933 on March 9, 1933

Sec. 3. Section 11 of the Federal Reserve Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: ''(n) Whenever in the judgment of the Secretary of the Treasury such action is necessary to protect the currency system of the United States, the Secretary of the Treasury, in his discretion, may require any or all individuals, partnerships, associations and corporations to pay and deliver to the Treasurer of the United States any or all gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates owned by such individuals, partnerships, associations and corporations....

Then Roosevelt confiscated the gold through an executive order on April 5th 1933
Executive Order 6102: 

"Section 2. All persons are hereby required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933, to a Federal Reserve Bank or a branch or agency thereof or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System all gold coin, gold bullion and gold certificates now owned by them or coming into their ownership on or before April 28, 1933"

Was McFadden right about the Fed? Milton Friedman, professor of economics at the University of Chicago and winner of a Nobel Prize in economics thinks so “The Federal Reserve definitely caused the Great Depression by contracting the amount of currency in circulation by one-third from 1929 to 1933”

reply to post by crimvelvet


You are right so how do you fight that? You fight it by acting like you are doing their biding, giving them something, and telling them it's to appease the people. While they run away laughing at the fraud they committed you are giving the appearance you work for them. You tell them "look I have to look like I'm being tough with you, here is a bunch of money." You pass laws for green energy, which opens funding for alternative energy but you state that it's for solar panels and windmills (very inefficient alternative energy collecting methods). Your goal though is to allow research in other methods of renewable energy funded by the banks you just took over.