I WANT to be WRONG!!!!

[ksinger]

OK...background. I''m NOT a conspiracy theorist. My historian husband also sneers at all that - he thinks we don''t usually NEED a conspiracy to do really stupid stuff. And yet, yesterday I saw him as shaken as I''ve seen him in nearly 30 years. All the pieces are in place. A populace distracted by infotainment and by and large utterly ingnorant of history and easily manipulated by fear(of course the fear bit is hardly new), global economic meltdown, a Congress that has rolled over at every turn to give this president all the power he demanded - all in the name of "Homeland Security", a president and an administration who have spent the last 8 years thumbing their collective nose at Congress (signing statements galore that do end runs around Congress'' intent), the courts (ignoring subpoenas with complete impunity), and purging the military of many of those who ever disagreed openly with the course of the war, a lowering of the bar for entry INTO the military, resulting in the creation of soldiers with "questionable" smarts and ethics, federalization of the National Guards, and the growth of mercenary forces (Blackwater, et al) to "supplement" the regular military, and who are answerable to NO ONE.

And now this, all starting OCT 1, 2008, right before a pivotal presidential election:

Is Posse Comitatus Dead? US Troops on US Streets

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10341">http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10341>http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10341


Many will dismiss the conclusion I come to from this as unlikely, and I do too....I think....and yet. If you think it could never happen here, please remember that soldiers are not encouraged to NOT conform, but to take orders, and that laws were put in place BECAUSE the military has been abused before by power in our own history. I would also trot out this for your consideration.

Operation Northwoods

And on that cheerful note, I will leave you all with my happy-snappy quotes of the day:


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.

~ General Herman Goering, President of German Reichstag and Nazi Party, Commander of Luftwaffe during World War II, April 18, 1946. (This quote is said to have been made during the Nuremburg Trials, but in fact, while during the time of the trials, was made in private to an Allied intelligence officer, later published in the book, Nuremburg Diary.)

"I dread our own power and our own ambition; I dread our being too much dreaded....We may say that we shall not abuse this astonishing and hitherto unheard-of-power. But every other nation will think we shall abuse it. It is impossible but that, sooner or later, this state of things must produce a combination against us which may end in our ruin." -- Edmund Burke, describing his fears for the former British Empire

 

[LaraOnline]

I''m with you and your man. We don''t need a conspiracy to do stupid stuff.
And there''s probably no issue with history repeating itself, either, as people are equally stupid from generation to generation, no?
However, I *do* think that the politics of military intervention is a closely studied subject, both in the military academies, and in the halls of power. I mean, my husband loves to read war history... power, naked power, is interesting.
So undoubtedly, politicians are adept at manipulating electorates to accept a war, even a war of the politicians own making. I''ve got no problem with that.
Rather than conspiracy, let us point the finger primarily at the self-interest of prominent power-groups, and take the whole mess from there.

 

[starsapphire]

So, you are saying that now it is even easier for the govt to become even more heavy handed and that we could have Martial Law if something happens? You don''t even want to hear MY theories of what may/is going to happen.

 

[starsapphire]

Maybe you do.....I think that this Banking Collapse is going to cause the world to adopt the WORLD BANK. Then, all of the world will become under one ruler. And we will all have to have a chip in our forehead or our hand. And then........you don''t wanna know.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 10/8/2008 8:19:21 AM
Author: LaraOnline
I''m with you and your man. We don''t need a conspiracy to do stupid stuff.
And there''s probably no issue with history repeating itself, either, as people are equally stupid from generation to generation, no?
However, I *do* think that the politics of military intervention is a closely studied subject, both in the military academies, and in the halls of power. I mean, my husband loves to read war history... power, naked power, is interesting.
So undoubtedly, politicians are adept at manipulating electorates to accept a war, even a war of the politicians own making. I''ve got no problem with that.
Rather than conspiracy, let us point the finger primarily at the self-interest of prominent power-groups, and take the whole mess from there.

Well, obviously it won''t repeat exactly, but we do seem to have patterns...countries rise, fall, make war, etc. There are loose patterns that do seem to be followed over and over. A closed society here would probably not resemble others totally, but it would still be closed.

The point is, the laws have been severely broken here- again all in the name of "Homeland" security, (that phrasing just creeps me out)..much more "breaking" and we may wake up and the world has changed, severely.

We are able to have a great reverence for our military precisely because we''ve felt protected from use of that military against civilian populations, but with these new developments, well...that may be changing. People in this country forget that the military is not "the individual noble men and women" when the chips fall, but a coherent FORCE than can be directed. It is an extension of the one(s) directing it. If they decide to use it to quell internal conflict, we, the fat and dumb, will look dully and say, "well, at least we''re safe".

I''m depressed.

 

[ksinger]

Date: 10/8/2008 8:32:59 AM
Author: starsapphire
Maybe you do.....I think that this Banking Collapse is going to cause the world to adopt the WORLD BANK. Then, all of the world will become under one ruler. And we will all have to have a chip in our forehead or our hand. And then........you don''t wanna know.

Well, since people seem to feel "ownership" of their threads, I would ask in accordance with PS policy, that other than generalities, religion in it''s specific theological points, not be discussed here. I realize how hard it is to keep religion out of any of this, since it has been injected into the public square and into politics to a high degree. I''ve made it abundantly clear in other threads that I despise this turn of events. But my personal beliefs have not been trotted forth - (and I DO have some). I suggest we keep it that way.

This is a discussion of the possible misuse of the military against civilians. No injection of theology is necessary here.

 

[starsapphire]

I apologise, but, correct me if I am wrong, where did I say ANYTHING about religion. And where does it say anything about anyone owning a thread???? If that is true, then I am going to start charging on mine.

 

[starsapphire]

Evidentally you feel that people with different viewpoints can''t post on YOUR thread. I''m sorry but I am kinda ticked off at this.

 

[purrfectpear]

If there were more people with those views, I would feel compelled to invest in Alcoa stock.

Tin foil anyone?

 

[ksinger]

Date: 10/8/2008 8:52:44 AM
Author: starsapphire
I apologise, but, correct me if I am wrong, where did I say ANYTHING about religion. And where does it say anything about anyone owning a thread???? If that is true, then I am going to start charging on mine.

If you want to think everyone on here is a total idiot, go right ahead. It isn''t so, however. Methinks you doth protest too much. I know as much about specific eschatological beliefs as anyone raised where I live...in Oklahoma.

I don''t own this thread, but people around here seem to ask people to stay on topic alot, and so I will ask you to do the same. Please don''t get my thread pulled.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 10/8/2008 8:32:59 AM
Author: starsapphire
Maybe you do.....I think that this Banking Collapse is going to cause the world to adopt the WORLD BANK. Then, all of the world will become under one ruler. And we will all have to have a chip in our forehead or our hand. And then........you don''t wanna know.

/threadjack: I hope you''re wrong as well, but I think it''s plausible. Blegh.

/endthreadjack.

 

[starsapphire]

Date: 10/8/2008 9:00:07 AM
Author: ksinger

Date: 10/8/2008 8:52:44 AM
Author: starsapphire
I apologise, but, correct me if I am wrong, where did I say ANYTHING about religion. And where does it say anything about anyone owning a thread???? If that is true, then I am going to start charging on mine.

If you want to think everyone on here is a total idiot, go right ahead. It isn''t so, however. Methinks you doth protest too much. I know as much about specific eschatological beliefs as anyone raised where I live...in Oklahoma.

I don''t own this thread, but people around here seem to ask people to stay on topic alot, and so I will ask you to do the same. Please don''t get my thread pulled.

WOW.

I am really starting not to like this place.

 

[LaraOnline]

Oh Starsapphire,
please don't get upset. Obviously I'm missing the whole 'offensive' part of your post - probably because I'm not deeply religious, and haven't been studying up on my post-apocalyptic interpretations of the bible lately

- but at its most 'hardcore', I read your post as 'the end is nigh', and basically agreeing with ksinger that the heavens are falling.

I mean, let's face it, it would be most wierd for the US troops to turn upon civilians en masse within the country, surely that also is a crazy wierd idea - (can you guess I haven't read your attachments yet, ksinger?) - I am outside your cultural 'melting pot' of ideas, although I have a US news channel on at the moment, and I have to say, it's very energetic

)

At its most benign - which is where I actually placed the post, because let's face it, a chatroom is kinda like a coffee machine at a really boring workplace where you just want to hang out at the coffee machine all the time, so you look for a lively topic - I read Starsapphire's comment as just that - a funny comment. I thought it was quite fun! And on topic!

I hope I haven't upset anyone by saying that!

 

[strmrdr]

The supreme court just put a big road block up on it.
You can not enslave an armed society.

As far as this goes they are just formalizing something that had been happening all along in the last 30 years or so.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Date: 10/8/2008 8:32:59 AM
Author: starsapphire
Maybe you do.....I think that this Banking Collapse is going to cause the world to adopt the WORLD BANK. Then, all of the world will become under one ruler. And we will all have to have a chip in our forehead or our hand. And then........you don''t wanna know.

Agreed.

And Star, the best tactic is to just ignore KSinger and post whenever and wherever you''d like. It''s a public forum.

 

[LaraOnline]

Date: 10/8/2008 9:45:26 AM
Author: strmrdr
The supreme court just put a big road block up on it.

You can not enslave an armed society.


As far as this goes they are just formalizing something that had been happening all along in the last 30 years or so.

Is this why the US population seems to cling to its liberal gun laws? For fear the its own government will rise up against it?
Man... that''s intense.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:09:36 AM
Author: LaraOnline

Date: 10/8/2008 9:45:26 AM

Author: strmrdr

The supreme court just put a big road block up on it.


You can not enslave an armed society.



As far as this goes they are just formalizing something that had been happening all along in the last 30 years or so.

Is this why the US population seems to cling to its liberal gun laws? For fear the its own government will rise up against it?

Man... that's intense.

The founding fathers understood history that is why the 2nd amendment exists.

To quote Jefferson,
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.
The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is
wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts
they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,
it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not
warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of
resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as
to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost
in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from
time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
It is its natural manure."

 

[strmrdr]

Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples'' liberty''s teeth.
George Washington

 

[strmrdr]

Now for a history test:
Name one government that has never raised a hand against the people they governed.
Hint: there isn''t one.

 

[LaraOnline]

Dunno about that, strmrdr.
Democracy is basically designed to prevent citizens from murdering each other.
Civilians in other democracies rest easy in their beds each night, without a murder weapon in every house.
Every citizen having access to weapons is no real way to encourage us all to be ''the best we can be''... is it?
I''m sorry if I''m stirring up a hornets nest here, I know there is probably no real way I can understand.
I guess having already had a civil war has something to do with it... but honestly, we''ve discovered penicillin since then... the civil war was a really long time ago. Even psycho ignorant political stirrers in this day and age are unlikely to take up arms as a comprehensive rebel group... are they?

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:29:30 AM
Author: LaraOnline
Dunno about that, strmrdr.

Democracy is basically designed to prevent citizens from murdering each other.

Civilians in other democracies rest easy in their beds each night, without a murder weapon in every house.

Every citizen having access to weapons is no real way to encourage us all to be ''the best we can be''... is it?

I''m sorry if I''m stirring up a hornets nest here, I know there is probably no real way I can understand.

I guess having already had a civil war has something to do with it... but honestly, we''ve discovered penicillin since then... the civil war was a really long time ago. Even psycho ignorant political stirrers in this day and age are unlikely to take up arms as a comprehensive rebel group... are they?

Your right you wont understand.
As for the last sentence no but the people when pushed to far will.
That is how this country was founded, 30% said enough is enough.

 

[SarahLovesJS]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:29:30 AM
Author: LaraOnline
Dunno about that, strmrdr.

Democracy is basically designed to prevent citizens from murdering each other.

Civilians in other democracies rest easy in their beds each night, without a murder weapon in every house.

Every citizen having access to weapons is no real way to encourage us all to be ''the best we can be''... is it?

I''m sorry if I''m stirring up a hornets nest here, I know there is probably no real way I can understand.

I guess having already had a civil war has something to do with it... but honestly, we''ve discovered penicillin since then... the civil war was a really long time ago. Even psycho ignorant political stirrers in this day and age are unlikely to take up arms as a comprehensive rebel group... are they?

Lara this is off topic, but I just wanted to say I really appreciate you being around! It''s really interesting to see your view of things, if you don''t mind me saying so!

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:29:30 AM
Author: LaraOnline
Dunno about that, strmrdr.
Democracy is basically designed to prevent citizens from murdering each other.
Civilians in other democracies rest easy in their beds each night, without a murder weapon in every house.
Every citizen having access to weapons is no real way to encourage us all to be 'the best we can be'... is it?
I'm sorry if I'm stirring up a hornets nest here, I know there is probably no real way I can understand.
I guess having already had a civil war has something to do with it... but honestly, we've discovered penicillin since then... the civil war was a really long time ago. Even psycho ignorant political stirrers in this day and age are unlikely to take up arms as a comprehensive rebel group... are they?

Ah, but the U.S. is thankfully NOT a democracy, it is a republic.

The Bill of Rights was not put in place to protect us from each other, the Bill of Rights was created to protect us FROM our government because our founding fathers knew how destructive a people ruled by the gov't (and not vice versa) was.

Many of us still believe in those same ideals that this country was founded on. We may be shrinking, but our right to freedom still burns inside of us. I, for one, will always fight for my constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

 

[LaraOnline]

Aw thanks Sarah, it''s a real love-in for me tonight!! I appreciate your comments.

When strmrdr talks about 30% saying enough is enough, what is he talking about? The war over independence? I guess I should google, never studied US history.

I clicked on ksinger''s links, they were , well, from different sources.
Are you doing some assignment, ksinger?

here is an excerpt from one of the articles about a group of US military training in the US after coming back from Iraq.

Nothing here really freaks me out, or makes me think that the heads of state are going to bunker down underground and release the dogs of war on locals:

They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.

Training for homeland scenarios has already begun at Fort Stewart and includes specialty tasks such as knowing how to use the “jaws of life” to extract a person from a mangled vehicle; extra medical training for a CBRNE incident; and working with U.S. Forestry Service experts on how to go in with chainsaws and cut and clear trees to clear a road or area.

The 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them.

Am I out of touch??

 

[LaraOnline]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:50:33 AM
Author: NewEnglandLady

Ah, but the U.S. is thankfully NOT a democracy, it is a republic.

The Bill of Rights was not put in place to protect us from each other, the Bill of Rights was created to protect us FROM our government because our founding fathers knew how destructive a people ruled by the gov't (and not vice versa) was.

Many of us still believe in those same ideals that this country was founded on. We may be shrinking, but our right to freedom still burns inside of us. I, for one, will always fight for my constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Are you saying the US is not founded on democratic principles? It is a concept that the country makes great play on, in foreign diplomacy theatres all over the world?!
I can't understand how the right to vote also includes the right to bear arms.
It has me scratching my head. I don't link it to freedom.. what is the next step, that I should get a tank and park it in my yard?
I know this is a cultural thing, because it befuddles pretty much everyone outside the US, I'd guess...

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:53:10 AM
Author: LaraOnline
Aw thanks Sarah, it''s a real love-in for me tonight!! I appreciate your comments.


When strmrdr talks about 30% saying enough is enough, what is he talking about? The war over independence? I guess I should google, never studied US history.

At the start of the revolution it only had around 30% support.
Many more were mad but thought other means should be used.

 

[dragonfly411]

Lara - I think it has to do with the right to defend yourself, your rights, and your freedom as well as your life. If communist Hitler strolled into my town and said he was going to rule over me and my town, I''d want to be able to have a gun to defend my right to NOT live under that rule should I so choose. I think that is the point of it.

 

[Lauren8211]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:56:06 AM
Author: LaraOnline

Date: 10/8/2008 10:50:33 AM
Author: NewEnglandLady

Ah, but the U.S. is thankfully NOT a democracy, it is a republic.

The Bill of Rights was not put in place to protect us from each other, the Bill of Rights was created to protect us FROM our government because our founding fathers knew how destructive a people ruled by the gov''t (and not vice versa) was.

Many of us still believe in those same ideals that this country was founded on. We may be shrinking, but our right to freedom still burns inside of us. I, for one, will always fight for my constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Are you saying the US is not founded on democratic principles? It is a concept that the country makes great play on, in foreign diplomacy theatres all over the world?!
I can''t understand how the right to vote also includes the right to bear arms.
It has me scratching my head. I don''t link it to freedom.. what is the next step, that I should get a tank and park it in my yard?
I know this is a cultural thing, because it befuddles pretty much everyone outside the US, I''d guess...

Lara, I don''t link it to freedom, either. I find it more restrictive than anything. My political views tend to not fall in line with the general American public.

But then again, I don''t like apple pie, either.

 

[NewEnglandLady]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:56:06 AM
Author: LaraOnline

Date: 10/8/2008 10:50:33 AM
Author: NewEnglandLady

Ah, but the U.S. is thankfully NOT a democracy, it is a republic.

The Bill of Rights was not put in place to protect us from each other, the Bill of Rights was created to protect us FROM our government because our founding fathers knew how destructive a people ruled by the gov''t (and not vice versa) was.

Many of us still believe in those same ideals that this country was founded on. We may be shrinking, but our right to freedom still burns inside of us. I, for one, will always fight for my constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Are you saying the US is not founded on democratic principles? It is a concept that the country makes great play on, in foreign diplomacy theatres all over the world?!
I can''t understand how the right to vote also includes the right to bear arms.
It has me scratching my head. I don''t link it to freedom.. what is the next step, that I should get a tank and park it in my yard?
I know this is a cultural thing, because it befuddles pretty much everyone outside the US, I''d guess...

The right to vote does not appear in the constitution until the 15th, 19th, 24th and 26th amendments--it was never a "right" given to us in our original constitution. The right to bear arms was. So our right to vote really has nothing to do with our right to bear arms. I''m not sure what the link is?

The link to freedom is that we have the power over our OWN lives and property. The whole point of the first 10 amendments is the guarantee that our government can''t take away specific individual rights--those ARE our freedoms. Absolutely you should have the freedom to get a tank and park it in your own yard if you wish. The tank would be your property that sits on...your property. It''s no different than freedom of speech or freedom of religion or any of the other freedoms guaranteed in the same Bill of Rights.

 

[elle_chris]

Date: 10/8/2008 10:50:33 AM
Author: NewEnglandLady

Date: 10/8/2008 10:29:30 AM
Author: LaraOnline
Dunno about that, strmrdr.
Democracy is basically designed to prevent citizens from murdering each other.
Civilians in other democracies rest easy in their beds each night, without a murder weapon in every house.
Every citizen having access to weapons is no real way to encourage us all to be ''the best we can be''... is it?
I''m sorry if I''m stirring up a hornets nest here, I know there is probably no real way I can understand.
I guess having already had a civil war has something to do with it... but honestly, we''ve discovered penicillin since then... the civil war was a really long time ago. Even psycho ignorant political stirrers in this day and age are unlikely to take up arms as a comprehensive rebel group... are they?

Ah, but the U.S. is thankfully NOT a democracy, it is a republic.

The Bill of Rights was not put in place to protect us from each other, the Bill of Rights was created to protect us FROM our government because our founding fathers knew how destructive a people ruled by the gov''t (and not vice versa) was.

Many of us still believe in those same ideals that this country was founded on. We may be shrinking, but our right to freedom still burns inside of us. I, for one, will always fight for my constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Agreed.

LaraOnline- Officially we''re a republic, but we''re goverened by a "representitive democracy". We''re not the only ones, I believe the U.K. is as well.

I think one of the most important things that many americans forget is that our goverrment is- of the people, for the people, by the people. Not a goverment that gets protected from the people.

My husband came to the states from Europe when he was 22. He always says something that I think hits the nail on the head in regards to differences between us and many other nations.

"Everything in the United States is allowed unless it explicity states otherwise".
vs
"Nothing is allowed unless it explicity states otherwise".