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.
""Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
The intensification of armaments, the increase of police forces - are all essential for the completion of the aforementioned plans. What we have to get at is that there should be in all the States of the world, besides ourselves, only the masses of the proletariat, a few millionaires devoted to our interests, police and soldiers.
• we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future; • we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values; • we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; • we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like A NEW PEARL HARBOR.
Originally posted by tpg65
In the 10 years since 9/11 , how many people have been brought to trial for the acts of terrorism ?
Zero ?
Don't you find that a little strange, people ?edit on 29/05/2011 by tpg65 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by tpg65
reply to post by hooper
Nah , not buying it . All that shows is a link to endless PDF's .
It doesn't even say what the charges were
Zacarias Moussaoui has often been referred to as "the 20th hijacker" but at the time of the 11 September 2001 attacks he had already been arrested in the US.
16. From in or about 1989 until the date of the filing of this Indictment, in the Eastern District of Virginia, the Southern District of New York, and elsewhere, the defendant, ZACARIAS MOUSSAOUI, a/k/a "Shaqil," a/k/a "Abu Khalid al Sahrawi," with other members and associates of al Qaeda and others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, unlawfully, wilfully and knowingly combined, conspired, confederated and agreed to kill and maim persons within the United States, and to create a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to other persons by destroying and damaging structures, conveyances, and other real and personal property within the United States, in violation of the laws of States and the United States, in circumstances involving conduct transcending national boundaries, and in which facilities of interstate and foreign commerce were used in furtherance of the offense, the offense obstructed, delayed, and affected interstate and foreign commerce, the victim was the United States Government, members of the uniformed services, and officials, officers, employees, and agents of the governmental branches, departments, and agencies of the United States, and the structures, conveyances, and other real and personal property were, in whole or in part, owned, possessed, and leased to the United States and its departments and agencies, resulting in the deaths of thousands of persons on September 11, 2001
Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by DragonriderGal
And that is why our constitution gives us the right to have an armed revolution if we think our government has been comprised.
I am a firm believer that this revolution will need to be non violent to succeed.
Originally posted by tpg65
reply to post by DragonriderGal
Please please keep to the ethos of the OP . I understand your opinion ,but this thread is going to remain impartial and objective.
Originally posted by vipertech0596
reply to post by patternfinder
Apple plus orange does not equal banana despite your stringing those statements together. Not to mention, you use Goering's statement and PNAC's document, not quite comprehending that they contradict each other in many respects.
Originally posted by tpg65
reply to post by DragonriderGal
Wow , thank you . That is amazing and well worth discussing .
Can any of it be proven/disproven ?
Regards.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by DragonriderGal
Well, part of why building 7 had to be taken down by them was that the records for just how much gold and who's gold it was, was stored there.
So you got a building full of records you don't want anyone to see, what sounds like a better option - let it burn to a crisp or make it collapse, put out the fires and let thousands of strangers grope around in the remains for weeks? I would let it burn to a crisp.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by Yankee451
The evidence I've seen, as shown in other posts, has led me to believe the media was and are an integral part in the 911 operation.
And you couldn't resist the continued spamming of the tv fakery/cgi hoax, hmm? There is no evidence. If there were, we all would be supporting it in some way or another. The tv fakery/cgi garbage is a proven HOAX. That's why those threads are in the HOAX bin. Get it?
Now, for the love of Jesus Christ, stop spamming a known and proven HOAX. Move on and do something constructive with yourself. Everybody knows it's a HOAX and nobody is falling for it.
Well, that would be swell.. but the founding fathers obviously felt that maybe a bit more would be needed.
And isn't it just a wee bit suspicious how they keep trying to get us to give up our guns??
You mean like this "fact": Fred F. Fielding worked for John Dean as White House counsel to Nixon -- "Deep Throat" of Watergate fame, avoided prison time. Better check on that one.
Fielding served as Associate Counsel for President Richard Nixon from 1970 to 1972, where he was the deputy to John Dean during the Watergate scandal
In April 2003, a team of journalism students taught by William Gaines conducted a detailed review of source materials, leading them to conclude that Fielding was Deep Throat, the unnamed source for articles written by Washington Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein.[11] Many years previously, former White House Chief of Staff for Richard Nixon, H. R. Haldeman, also concluded that Fielding was Deep Throat.[citation needed]
That speculation ended after former top Federal Bureau of Investigation official W. Mark Felt announced in May 2005 that he was the mysterious Watergate informant, as later confirmed by Woodward, Bernstein and Executive Editor Ben Bradlee in a statement released through The Washington Post.[citation needed]
Originally posted by Yankee451
reply to post by DragonriderGal
Well, that would be swell.. but the founding fathers obviously felt that maybe a bit more would be needed.
And isn't it just a wee bit suspicious how they keep trying to get us to give up our guns??
No one's coming after your guns.
Your guns won't do much against an Apache anyway.
Provocateurs instigate violence so the government will be able to crack down on it.
A violent revolution will only ensure the most violent person will win.
Time for a new paradigm.
Originally posted by Yankee451
So OP, how's it going so far...can you give an update?