We're Taking Back Our Government, and This Is What We Have To Say

Did I miss something?
Don't some of us live in the United States?
What is wrong with supporting this?
I would sign that.
Hell, I will sign that write now.

reply to post by NuroSlam

Why does the government have to acknowledge it? They acknowledge none of the individuals natural rights that were expressed in the declaration of independence. So who really cares if they do or don't. If the "mob" accepts it is really all that matters in a "revolution". Which, is a bad idea as it leaves a vacuum for the next oligarchy to take control. Next next step really is HOW.

They'd have to acknowledge it by stepping down from power and not using the military to totally crush any attempts at revolution that arises.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the sentiment of your letter.

My point is... you don't have the HOW figured out, therefore your letter unfortunately amounts to idle complaining. (No different than a street protest that ends up with everyone patting each other on the back and going home.)

When you figure out how to get 300 million people to revolt... or even 30 million... or even 3 million... then your letter will be impressive.

Human nature dictates that the intelligent, greedy few will control the stupid majority.
Until we evolve out of this as a species, nothing will ever change.

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by ForeverDusk
We who are fed up, of course. Eventually that will be most Americans.

So "we" only refers to the angry minority that you hope will grow.
See, I hope things will get better and people will get happier but to each his own I suppose.
Well your title says "proof" and "we" and yet here you are declaring that "we" does not mean both you and me, it just means you and some other people. Well, that is not "we" taking back our country. That is a few spoiled angry little people demanding the rest of us go along with what they want. I believe there are other countries where things are supposed to go that way. This is America. You want a civil war then just say it.

So when our founding fathers wrote the Deceleration of Independence and put WE THE PEOPLE at the very beginning do you honestly think that they were talking about each and every person? No, I didn't think so. You are taking things out of context like most trolls do. "WE" represent those Americans who are fed up with the unethical, and irrational decisions that are being made. That doesn't make us spoiled little brats. It just means we do not like where this is headed and demand a change. Unlike some who assume if we leave it be then it will fix itself. A common statement by local and federal government, big business and is exactly what the secret societies and PTB want.

If you do not want to be a part of the "WE" then continue to keep your head in the sand and wait to be sheered...

reply to post by Kitilani

There goes that nuance noticing. Damn. I am not sure where you see such black and white lines but can you quote me once ever saying that "the "tack back our government" crowd is Christian extremist, tea bagger republicans" or can you actually read what I did write?

Let me know how it works out before you go painting me into a corner just because you imagined you painted the rest of the room already. You might have a valid argument if you use the terms I actually used because this twists what I wrote completely.

Excuse me but was this your statement or not???

This is about the last thing I need. A bunch of angry Christian extremists who are more worried about gay marriage than taking care of poor and sick children are not going to take back my America for me...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Do I normally see things in black and white???

Of course not. However we are witnessing the death of this country and its complete dismantling by the Corporate/Banker cartel. Power is being moved from the control of the American people to the control of the Cartels where only they have a say in what happens.

Now it is happening openly. The FDA even stated on their web site in 2008 that they now take direction from the WTO not the American people. They called it “Harmonization” of laws.

At this point it is time to get of the fence. There are no longer multiple sides. There is the bought and paid for major parties – Rebooblican and DemiRat and the ONLY other player on the field the Tea Party. If you do not like it then form a party called the Tea Cakes for all I care. But I strongly suggest you hammer out your differences with the Tea Party no matter what. Fight the war against our common enemy, the Corporate Cartel and save the infighting for later. If the Liberals keep on with their whining because they can not have everything THEIR way, I suggest they get out of the way.

We are now at the point of LEAD, FOLLOW or get the freck out of the way.

I am an agnostic, the thought of religious fanatics makes me cringe. But at this point I consider the enemy of my enemy my friend and we can worry about tempering the fanaticism later.

BACKGROUND

In Sept. 14, 1994 David Rockefeller, speaking at the UN Business Council,. Allegedly said:
"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."

Sounds like conspiracy crap.

Unfortunately in his Autobiography “Memoirs” on page 405," Mr. Rockefeller writes: “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents... to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world ... If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Is there any data to back up the alleged “Right Major Crisis”

In1995 we have WTO ratified a move that spells the death knell for American onshore corporations. The USA starts exporting Jobs and importing cheap Chinese junk racking up a large trade deficit. We have a bunch of laws passed that remove the restraints put on banks after the depression, a law passed allowing the AIG to “gamble” with CDCs that are used by banks to cover the risky mortgages “Equal Housing” mandated. Five banking laws designed to cause the housing mortgage collapse but allow the big banks to emerge unscathed with the tax payer footing the bill.

To top it off we have the Fed double the US money supply ticking off China who is not as dumb as rank and file Americans.

...up until 1957 we had never gone more than 17 years without paying down some of the debt.

In the 1970’s, the national debt more than doubled, from $366 billion to $829 billion.
In the 1980’s, the national debt more than tripled, from $829 billion to $2.9 trillion.
In the 1990’s, the national debt almost doubled again, from $2.9 trillion to $5.6 trillion.
In the 2000’s, the national debt is projected to more than double again, from $5.6 trillion to $12.9 trillion (projected national debt at the end of fiscal year 2009).
... if you look at the national debt as a percentage of our nation’s GDP (gross domestic product), the debt is increasing at a staggering rate.  In 1969, the national debt was just 38% of GDP, but it was over 90% of GDP by the end of 2009, and is projected to grow to over 100% of GDP by 2011....

History of the National Debt

So yes it is pretty obvious a crisis was planned and very neatly executed by the Cartels.

Now Obama has put GE Chairman and CEO Jeff Immelt, an admitted globalist, in as the Chair of the President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.
I dug up the dirt on him HERE JP Morgan is GE's advisor and both are involved in the MSM.

Originally posted by SpringHeeledJack
reply to post by spav5

 

Like I said, this is about restoring the Constitution. Naturally, this would involve Democratic elections. Not career politicians and bureaucrats that were bred for the role.

Personally, I'd like to see scientists, humanists, great thinkers, an array of religious leaders, veterans, veterans, veterans, the bold, the brave, those of great integrity, those that favor moderation and a hands-off approach to a free people.

I second this...

Most of our so-called leaders, AKA puppets, have been bred and fed by the Skull and Bones, Builderburg Group, Trilateral Commission, or Council of Foreign Relations... just to name a few. It is time we had someone speak for the middle class Americans that make up majority of people and can make decisions that are better suited for the majority of the people and not just the wealthy leeches that pay for representation.

No, "WE" can not speak for EVERYONE, but no one person of word can. There will always be people who do not agree with every dot of the i and cross of the t. It's unrealistic to think otherwise and a useless argument.

reply to post by NuroSlam

I get it. Capitalism is evil and the root of all of mans horror. So where was capitalism in Egypt, where was capitalism in Germany. Really, the problem is a governing body not the means of economic success.

That is so correct and that is why the Constitution put strict fetters on the Federal government. They wanted the absolute minimum of government. Only that which was necessary to keep other nations from moving in and taking over. The minimum necessary to deal with other nations and to keep the states from fighting among each other.

The actual running of the day to day government was to be at the state and local level where it could be under the close eye of the people.

By the way most people have absolutely no idea of what a "Free Market" is. They equate it with the abominations foisted on us by the Federal Government under the same name.

Also young liberals are completely ignorant of the fact that property right laws are perfectly adequate to protect the environment. It was only the fact that large corporations leaned on judges and the Federal Government went along with the "Price of Progress" B.S. that the problem became large.

Interesting that the same families yelling "Price of Progress" at the beginning of the last century were the same ones screaming about "protecting the environment" a few decades later. The same thread runs through out -POWER, not concern for humans or the environment but they certainly have pulled the wool over a lot of peoples eyes.

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by ForeverDusk

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by ForeverDusk
That would be decided at a new Congress. This is about restoring the Constitution.

edit on 8/4/2011 by ForeverDusk because: (no reason given)

What new congress? The one the teabaggers install? The one the Democrats put in place? Why on Earth would I want to abdicate my roll in electing officials to some "new congress?" You are suggesting we overthrow the government and install a new congress

That's not at all what I'm suggesting. The "new Congress" is the same body that's been in place since the founding of this country, just with new people. You know, NOT career politicians.

That is exactly what I said.

Those "new people" would be put in place by whom?
The people already in place would be removed how?
Why would I let them decide who gets to be president instead of voting myself?

edit on 4-8-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)

This has been answered so many times it's giving me a headache...

As I read it the ONLY thing that will change is the people in office and the current ones will be LAID OFF. Let them see what it feels like. Nobody said anything about changing how the people get there besides not being groomed for the position by the ones who pull their strings... they will still need to run for office, just things may or may not be handled a different way.

But it seems like you have all the answers, so can you tell me how YOU would rebuild our government since you obviously do not like the opinions of others on here. Now keep in mind you have to represent "WE" and not just YOU.

I doubt you can, but you seem to think everyone knows how to build a government from the ground up around ATS because you keep asking how and who...

reply to post by SmArTbEaTz

This has been answered so many times it's giving me a headache...

As I read it the ONLY thing that will change is the people in office and the current ones will be LAID OFF....

I am afraid there are those who think the present system and people running it are just fine and dandy and have only the best interests of the people and environment in mind.

The complete brainwashing of the general populous by government schools and the MSM propaganda machine is mind boggling! I would expect anyone coming to ATS to have an inkling of what is going on behind the curtain.

Unfortunately we are coming up on the next Presidential Election cycle. Therefore we at ATS will get run over by hordes of mind-dead corporate puppets who do not even realize who their REAL masters are; the foundations paying the grants for their Professors salaries.

They can not even follow a simple money trail!

reply to post by crimvelvet


It really is sad to think about too...

They would rather wait in line to be sheered because as long as it does not affect them in the "here and now" then they are oblivious to the silent weapon that was laid out so long ago...

Originally posted by NuroSlam
]I get it. Capitalism is evil and the root of all of mans horror.

Did I say that?

I find it interesting that you slipped in the word capitalism, when I have been referring to corporatism this entire thread.

Adam Smith was smart enough to understand that the success and health of capitalism depends on ethics and morality. But you seem to be unwilling to examine that a mindless entity does not have ethics or morality, such a collective is devoid of the singular ability to detect its extremities and impact.(just like government)
Combine that with dictatorial contractual leverage, government and pro corporate politicians (who think they are promoting capitalism) and you get corporatism.

Just wondering,

Can you please list several things you think are detrimental about corporations?

Are you able to do so?

Originally posted by crimvelvet
reply to post by SmArTbEaTz

 

This has been answered so many times it's giving me a headache...

As I read it the ONLY thing that will change is the people in office and the current ones will be LAID OFF....

I am afraid there are those who think the present system and people running it are just fine and dandy and have only the best interests of the people and environment in mind.

The complete brainwashing of the general populous by government schools and the MSM propaganda machine is mind boggling! I would expect anyone coming to ATS to have an inkling of what is going on behind the curtain.

Unfortunately we are coming up on the next Presidential Election cycle. Therefore we at ATS will get run over by hordes of mind-dead corporate puppets who do not even realize who their REAL masters are; the foundations paying the grants for their Professors salaries.

They can not even follow a simple money trail!

And the Rick Perry will become POTUS

and life will be good

Why do you people want to ``take back`` the government anyway?

What good has it ever done?

This is the problem I have with the small govt revolutionary statist types: You guys have no idea what ``small govt`` is or what kind of govt should be established to ensure that it does not grow ``too big``.

Most of you believe govt without consent of the governed [slavery] is fine, most of you think taking money from people without consent [stealing] is fine too. Once you have it in your head that theft and slavery are acceptable, it's pretty much a downward spiral from there.

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
Why do you people want to ``take back`` the government anyway?

What good has it ever done?

This is the problem I have with the small govt revolutionary statist types: You guys have no idea what ``small govt`` is or what kind of govt should be established to ensure that it does not grow ``too big``.

Most of you believe govt without consent of the governed [slavery] is fine, most of you think taking money from people without consent [stealing] is fine too. Once you have it in your head that theft and slavery are acceptable, it's pretty much a downward spiral from there.

But theft via contract and a system made by and for the thieves is too much to examine...

reply to post by SmArTbEaTz

It really is sad to think about too...

They would rather wait in line to be sheered because as long as it does not affect them in the "here and now" then they are oblivious to the silent weapon that was laid out so long ago...

SIGHHHhhh...

I have a feeling it is now too little too late.

China blasts US, urges new global reserve currency

..."China, the largest creditor of the world's sole superpower, has every right now to demand the United States address its structural debt problems and ensure the safety of China's dollar assets," China's official news agency said in a commentary.

"International supervision over the issue of US dollars should be introduced and a new, stable and secured global reserve currency may also be an option to avert a catastrophe caused by any single country," it said.....

And so "Global Governance" will now enter stage left as the USA gives up another chunk of its sovereignty right on schedule.

A year ago in The Global Journal this article appeared Of What Use is Global Governance? written by Pascal Lamy, Director, World Trade Organization (WTO) He speaks of the European Union as sort of an intermediate stage.

...the very incarnation of an international organization of integration in which Member States have agreed to relinquish sovereignty in order to strengthen the coherence and effectiveness of their actions.

...If there is one place on earth where new forms of global governance have been tested since the Second World War, it is in Europe. European integration is the most ambitious supranational governance experience ever undertaken. It is the story of interdependence desired, defined, and organized by the Member States. In no respect is the work complete—neither geographically nor in terms of depth (i.e., the powers conferred by the Member States to the E.U.), nor, obviously, in terms of identity....

Our challenge today is to establish a system of global governance that provides a better balance between leadership, effectiveness, and legitimacy on the one hand, and coherence on the other...

More recently:
"Global Governance 2025" by US & EU Intelligence Agencies courtesy of Freedom of Information Act, at cia.gov.


The Atlantic Council has a summary HERE

This report analyzes the gap between current international governance institutions, organizations and norms and the demands for global governance likely to be posed by long-term strategic challenges over the next 15 years. The report is the product of research and analysis by the NIC and EUISS following a series of international dialogues co-organized by the Atlantic Council, TPN, and other partner organizations in Beijing, Tokyo, Dubai, New Delhi, Pretoria, Sao Paulo & Brasilia, Moscow, and Paris. ....

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
Why do you people want to ``take back`` the government anyway?

What good has it ever done?

This is the problem I have with the small govt revolutionary statist types: You guys have no idea what ``small govt`` is or what kind of govt should be established to ensure that it does not grow ``too big``.

Most of you believe govt without consent of the governed [slavery] is fine, most of you think taking money from people without consent [stealing] is fine too. Once you have it in your head that theft and slavery are acceptable, it's pretty much a downward spiral from there.

But theft via contract and a system made by and for the thieves is too much to examine...

Who are the thieves?

What contract?

What system are you talking about here btw?

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint

Originally posted by Janky Red

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
Why do you people want to ``take back`` the government anyway?

What good has it ever done?

This is the problem I have with the small govt revolutionary statist types: You guys have no idea what ``small govt`` is or what kind of govt should be established to ensure that it does not grow ``too big``.

Most of you believe govt without consent of the governed [slavery] is fine, most of you think taking money from people without consent [stealing] is fine too. Once you have it in your head that theft and slavery are acceptable, it's pretty much a downward spiral from there.

But theft via contract and a system made by and for the thieves is too much to examine...

Who are the thieves?

What contract?

What system are you talking about here btw?

edit on 6-8-2011 by Rockdisjoint because: (no reason given)

I have never met the thieves personally

The world of one sided, pro corporate contracts that are new occurrence in the history of man.

Corporatism

reply to post by Janky Red

Are you saying that anarchism would lead to corporatism or some other type of totalitarian rule?

Originally posted by Rockdisjoint
reply to post by Janky Red

 

Are you saying that anarchism would lead to corporatism or some other type of totalitarian rule?

First off, corporatism already exists,

Collective factions (hierarchical like corporations or government) exist in Somalia; engage and business, private law, governance and totalitarian rule free of any centralized law or enforcement


Monarchy was proceeded by anarchy, tribes (collectives) engaged in conflict in war until one group won and established singular rule over the rest. Care to guess how many dictators were installed following anarchy?

Originally posted by DeReK DaRkLy
They'd have to acknowledge it by stepping down from power and not using the military to totally crush any attempts at revolution that arises.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the sentiment of your letter.

My point is... you don't have the HOW figured out, therefore your letter unfortunately amounts to idle complaining. (No different than a street protest that ends up with everyone patting each other on the back and going home.)

Umm, I think you have me confused with the OP, not my letter, wouldn't sign it as I will not support replacing one tyrant with another

reply to post by Janky Red

First off, corporatism already exists,

This is true.

Collective factions (hierarchical like corporations or government) exist in Somalia; engage and business, private law, governance and totalitarian rule free of any centralized law or enforcement

Somalia, isn't that great of a case for Anarchy, since it has only been around for a short while.

Monarchy was proceeded by anarchy, tribes (collectives) engaged in conflict in war until one group won and established singular rule over the rest. Care to guess how many dictators were installed following anarchy?

Many dictators have been installed after so called periods of anarchy, but you have to be more specific here. What type of anarchism are you attempting to refute? Not all stateless theories, legal order, ect are the same.