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.
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
The right wing comes with nationalism though. And the corporative state sounds like ideas taken out of context probably on purpose. The book was published and copyrighted in 2000 by the University of Nebraska Press.
"In view of the fact that private organisation of production is a function of national concern, the organiser of the enterprise is responsible to the State for the direction given to production."
"State intervention in economic production arises only when private initiative is lacking or insufficient, or when the political interests of the State are involved. This intervention may take the form of control, assistance or direct management."
Benito Mussolini, 1935, Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions, Rome: 'Ardita' Publishers.
We all know how conservative and militant most nebraskans are so no suprise there. What suprises me though is that you fell for the bait and swallowed all the lies. I thought liberals were a bit smarter than conservatives, apparently not.
Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
hey...here's an outlandish, crazy idea....get off your ass, and help make government work for all of us. and if you need to know the secret on how to do that, read an elementary school history book.
Originally posted by otheym
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
I am a vet also, brother. USAF 1960-1964. I am just as frustrated as anyone else but I am realistic. The corrupt system we live under is collapsing, it cannot be fixed. All I am going to do is try to stay out of the way of collateral damage and rebuild from the ground up. Actually, that is happening already. I bought some property in the country and we plan to be as self sufficient as possible to ride out the collapse of the US empire.
Originally posted by janus89
Long time lurker but threads like this are starting to annoy me. How come no one in America looks at how corporations are the ones running things with politicians in cohoots. Everyone thinks they become a martyr patriot the second they blame the government for EVERYTHING. Corporations on the other hand are some sacred symbols of good ol' American free market so no one wants to hold them accountable. If you want to prosecute someone for treason then do so with the top management of MNCs that pollute the Earth, strip her of resources, buy politicians and judges , organize slave labor , ship jobs overseas among other horrible acts.
Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
Geez...where to start? Lots of BS here in my opinion...mixed with Rant.
Can you at least provide a link to this??
5. Eric Holder specifically told Congress during a hearing that he and President Obama do not answer to Congress, they answer to the UN. After multiple times asking Mr. Holder if he would like to change his answer and many many times, Holder said NO... the subject is changed. Holder is backed by Obama.
Originally posted by Blaze1129
Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
How long are YOU going to wait?
Once that time comes... What will you do?
I can only speak for my self and a hand full of friends. The Goverment will bring the fight to the people and I do suspect that we are being under estimated. They may have the stick, but they are severly out numbered. We have the home advantage and we're pretty good at the things we can do against our enemies whether they are foreign or domestic. Most of us are ready to "Lock and Load" when the time comes.
Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
Geez...where to start? Lots of BS here in my opinion...mixed with Rant.
Can you at least provide a link to this??
5. Eric Holder specifically told Congress during a hearing that he and President Obama do not answer to Congress, they answer to the UN. After multiple times asking Mr. Holder if he would like to change his answer and many many times, Holder said NO... the subject is changed. Holder is backed by Obama.
No bullsh*t here my friend.
it wasn't holder that told that to congress it was secretary of defense leon pannetta who told that to a senate committee regarding our attacks in libya....
the president used his powers that he can use force for no longer than 60 days withoutneeding the approval from congress. anyway...
PANNETTA
Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
1. Attorney General Eric Holder (personally appointed by Barry) and Fast & Furious. Here's the deal.... they have emails blatantly saying they were pushing this agenda to make 2nd Amendment changes regarding your rights to bear arms.
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
Geez...where to start? Lots of BS here in my opinion...mixed with Rant.
Can you at least provide a link to this??
5. Eric Holder specifically told Congress during a hearing that he and President Obama do not answer to Congress, they answer to the UN. After multiple times asking Mr. Holder if he would like to change his answer and many many times, Holder said NO... the subject is changed. Holder is backed by Obama.
No bullsh*t here my friend.
it wasn't holder that told that to congress it was secretary of defense leon pannetta who told that to a senate committee regarding our attacks in libya....
the president used his powers that he can use force for no longer than 60 days withoutneeding the approval from congress. anyway...
PANNETTA
No BS? BUT..it wasn't the Attorney General? It was the Secretary of Defense? And it was regarding our participation in Libya?
Absent troops on the ground, the President is authorized to take action in a support capacity to the United Nations efforts and can do so for up to 60 days without seeking approval from Congress. this has been that way for a very long time, you can disagree with it, but it is not "TREASON"...
GOD Help me...that hacked together youtube is about Rep. Sessions running his mouth and putting words in the mouth of Panetta...Panetta said "of course we would LIKE to have a legal basis"...and he is speaking of an action already authorized under US Law and given the go ahead by the POTUS...when he says "we would like" to have a legal basis in international law.
NO WHERE...besides the partisan ramblings of Rep. Sessions does Panetta cede legal authority to take action to NATO or anyone other than the USA.
He had that authorization under US Law and the approcal of the President of the United States.
What utter BS...and that is after suffering through that video of Sessions rambling and listening carefully
Read your claim again...NOTHING about it is true.edit on 14-6-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Indigo5
Originally posted by mrgregbusybee
Originally posted by Indigo5
reply to post by mrgregbusybee
Geez...where to start? Lots of BS here in my opinion...mixed with Rant.
Can you at least provide a link to this??
5. Eric Holder specifically told Congress during a hearing that he and President Obama do not answer to Congress, they answer to the UN. After multiple times asking Mr. Holder if he would like to change his answer and many many times, Holder said NO... the subject is changed. Holder is backed by Obama.
No bullsh*t here my friend.
it wasn't holder that told that to congress it was secretary of defense leon pannetta who told that to a senate committee regarding our attacks in libya....
the president used his powers that he can use force for no longer than 60 days withoutneeding the approval from congress. anyway...
PANNETTA
No BS? BUT..it wasn't the Attorney General? It was the Secretary of Defense? And it was regarding our participation in Libya?
Absent troops on the ground, the President is authorized to take action in a support capacity to the United Nations efforts and can do so for up to 60 days without seeking approval from Congress. this has been that way for a very long time, you can disagree with it, but it is not "TREASON"...
GOD Help me...that hacked together youtube is about Rep. Sessions running his mouth and putting words in the mouth of Panetta...Panetta said "of course we would LIKE to have a legal basis"...and he is speaking of an action already authorized under US Law and given the go ahead by the POTUS...when he says "we would like" to have a legal basis in international law.
NO WHERE...besides the partisan ramblings of Rep. Sessions does Panetta cede legal authority to take action to NATO or anyone other than the USA.
He had that authorization under US Law and the approcal of the President of the United States.
What utter BS...and that is after suffering through that video of Sessions rambling and listening carefully
Read your claim again...NOTHING about it is true.edit on 14-6-2012 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)