Discussions
Do You Think GWB will cancel the 2008 Election and declare Marshall Law?
Posted by momoftwingirls • 2 years ago • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS]
Topics: gwb declaring marshall law
Are you wondering the same thing as I do?
If not, why have you not thought about this yet? He has the ability to do so in order to stay in power.
mparent7777-2.blogspot.com/2007/07/will-bush-cancel-2008-election.html
www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/12/will_bush_declare_war_on_congr...
digg.com/politics/Bush_Moves_Toward_Martial_Law_2
Honestly, at this point, anything is possible and what a better way to stay in power. I am just wondering why Clinton did not declare war to stay in power? I guess it was just not his time.
User Comments
-
Going out on a limb here, but perhaps it was because he wasn't an insane megalomaniac more concerned with retaining power than with the good of the country? Just a guess. -
Well...thanks for starting this thread. Just the mere thought of that happening is gonna cause a sleepless night here.
-
I have long harbored the idea that this might happen but have mostly kept it to myself, not wanting to be branded a lunatic. fwiw-
Hehe, same here. -
I half expected it before the last election and even though that some of the groundwork was being laid, but it hadn't even entered my mind this time. I was a lot more interested in the outcome last time around.
-
Tiffany I did expect it in the last election and was not surprised that Ohio turned into another Florida instead. Who know which state will be the surprise place it all turns out to hinge on but in my observation of the current ruling regime, they seem very much dedicated to the "stick to what worked before" school or totalitarian government. I personally will be shocked if we do Not have another outcome that boils down to The Supremes singing their classic hit "The Republicans Really Won Again" to the tune "Here He Comes Again" in the key of Rove.
(and this is for my friends who've asked me why I haven't updated my politics blog lately. Will try to work this thread into a post, so please discuss more) -
likewise.
-
-
I love Bill Clinton! Faults and negativity intact! I wish he was my husband! LOL-
are you serious? -
lol. maybe when he was running for office.. he was a hotty lol
Imagine Bill back in the 70's with a El Camino and some Astro turf lining it and a joint. -
You know, I always found the little flaws in my President to be so endearing... -
Endearing? How about zero scruples and a man void of discernment? Although the media was ruthless, he flat out lied. Period. He disgraced his position and made a mockery of what it means to take an oath.
-
It dismays me that so many people remain so much more concerned with Bill Clinton's sex life (and the fact that he shared the same desire as every normal human being to keep it private) than the actual relevant Presidential actions of his successor. To me, it's far more "making a mockery of what it means to take an oath" to be willing to sacrifice the lives of thousands of Americans and foreign nationals for your own purposes than to try to cover up a sexual indiscretion.
As you all probably know by now, I'm a pretty hard-core Roman Catholic. I don't believe in sex outside of marriage ever, period. I don't believe in lying ever, period. But as a President, Bill Clinton wiped out hundreds of millions of dollars in debt that Bush has managed to reinstate at record speeds, and I don't recall him sacrificing any of my friends and neighbors to his personal goals...I'd happily put him back in office even if he had an intimate relationship with a rhinocerous. -
BRAVO! *claps furiously*
i was going to reply to this sub-thread in a similar manner, but our power went out and so did the router.
thanks, Madame X, for saying that far better than I would have. -
I agree, Madamex. My response was to the comment that scholarpreneur found Clinton's flaws "endearing". This is not an adjective I'd dare use.
Anyone's sex life is their business. The issue with Clinton is that he lied under oath, spending our tax dollars!
My political allegiance is not with either party (left or right). I loathe the fact that young soldiers have been killed, disfigured, and more with a war that began on a false premise. Yet, I do know from civilians in the ME, that there has been more freedom, specifically, religious freedom, in that region since the war started. In my book, this would be considered a benefit of going to war. Yet, the motives,lying and deception to go to war: repulsive. -
ender: I liked your other avatar
-
MadameX: While that is true, Bill Clinton rode into office promising to end discrimination against gays in the military, and actually codified it. He was also the original signer of the Defense Of Marriage Act, which many consider a plus, and I consider evil. -
Bill Clinton may have lied about his sex life which quite frankly I don't think should have even entered the public arena but Dubya lied about the weapon of mass destruction and started an outrageous war that's killing thousands of innocent people.
Bill Clinton's lie only hurt his wife and family
Dubya's lie hurt millions of people and family grieving for their loss of son, daughter, sister, brother, father, mother.. should I go on?
I think on the lying scale... Dubya's action of more reprehensible and evil than Bill Clinton's lie could ever be.
-
-
I'm not wondering, because I found my tin foil hat and can now protect myself from invasive alien paranoia rays.
-
lol, i found the one i made back when signs came out. -
Hey smart alec! I have never even heard of a president cancelling an election until last week! I thought it was interesting to talk about, but NO, YOU always have to call me crazy.
If I am so crazy, then prove to me how SANE you really are.
What, you think everything in life is hunky dory!!!
Yeah, it is time you take off those Rose Colored Glasses before you go blind. -
I don't recall ever having called you crazy, much less "always". Nor do I recall ever referring to myself as sane. I think the idea is highly paranoid. Like others in this thread, I think it's a possibility, but a very remote one.
If you want a less flippant answer, I'll be happy to provide one. I don't think the government NEEDS to cancel a general election. If they did, I think it's as likely as not this country would devolve into a state of civil unrest so great as to provoke an internal war. I don't think the powers that be want this, and since we've been moving toward martial law for quite some time, I doubt they'd make such a drastic move when they could just sit back and let us be led there gently, like lambs.
There's always something to worry about, and speculating about possible futures is a worthwhile option. Just because I've called the idea paranoid doesn't mean I'm right, nor does it prevent you from discussing it.
-
-
This isn't even a remotely realistic possibility, even on the most cynical outlook. You might think of Bush and Cheney as megalomaniacs, you probably wouldn't even be wrong. But whether Bush wants to do such a thing or not, even if he theoretically can do it, they will simply not allow him to do it. Just because he occupies what is ostensibly the most powerful position in the world doesn't mean he doesn't answer to anybody.
And don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about the rule of law, their breed obviously hasn't got any respect for that. I'm talking about the special interests who control Bush, the ones who put Cheney there to keep him in line in the first place, they are the ones who are really pulling the strings, albeit from a respectable distance.
These include the oil lobby, the archons of the military-industrial complex, the Saudi royal family, and people I don't even want to speculate on. And they would never EVER let Bush attempt something so prone to backfire in their faces.
This is not, I must emphasize, out of respect for the law, but because it would do them more harm than good to interrupt the status quo so drastically. And right now they are very happy with the status quo. They got exactly what they wanted out of a Bush presidency, a quagmire war that is like a license to print money. They can handle four years of a Democratic president, whom they will be able to manipulate almost as easily. And then in four years once we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan and maybe a few other wars too, they'll put up another one of their boys.
What they are really afraid of is Huckabee, because if he wins he fowls up the whole scheme.-
oh boy, there you go adding substantive analysis to the discussion
-
i know, you'd think these people would learn ... real discussion and thought. pfft
-
And seriously, who wants a fowl in the White House?
-
Wah wah waaaah.
-
-
double post
-
Huckabee scares the hell out of me.
I don't think Bush could or would - and I saw Mark Crispin Miller's NYC show before the 2004 election where he brought that up very idea - he doesn't have the support he'd need from any quarter anymore.
As far as the "I am just wondering why Clinton did not declare war to stay in power?" question... Ignoring Fox News and the Arkansas Project bullshit, Clinton was a 100 times the statesman that Bush is and Clinton believed in the US as a republic. Bush knows things would be easier if he was a dictator as he quipped on July 30, 2001.-
@ techfun, this must be an off the cuff opinion: 'Clinton was a 100 times the statesman that Bush is and Clinton believed in the US as a republic' because there's no one in my knowledge in the internal workings of the democratic party that would agree with you. certainly it exhibits a wellmeaning favor regarding clinton. but it misleads, and it is not truthful. It is well known that clinton favored / favors socialism, appreciated communism, was a good student of facscist propaganda methods, and America had more military actions under his presidency - a presidency of peace time - than any other president I believe. He had the highest taxes of any peace time president, and if you revisit old articles about the economy under clinton, you will learn that he basically left the technology sector alone because it was generating the economy, altho there are reports he wanted to. But everyone else got hit. Under his presidency the rich became richer but the pool got smaller. his presidency was a turning point for the democratic party, where it has become the party of the rich (note the democrates don't talk about the republicans being party of the rich much any longer ;.)
always better ti get your facts straight then write. you may end up being wrong in something but not everything :-)
-
-
If he did that, do you think there would be a armed rebellion?
I would join with my paintball gun. -
Huckabee and Obama. This outta be interesting.-
If Obama goes on to win again in New Hampshire next week I may well jump on his bandwagon. And personally, I'd love to see the R's nominate Huckabee since I'd peg his chances in the general at 0%. No way folks will go for Another Arkansas governor let alone a Baptist preacher.
-
LB: i agree... i think he'd be easy to shoot down, but a lot of people seem to be pretty enamored with him... which scares the bahjesus out of me too
-
If Huckabee makes it to the general he'll win. There's a huge moral shift taking place in the United States quickly moving to more family centered and traditional Christian values. How do I figure that? Watch the news, watch tv in general, listen to the radio. Lot of people talking about "spirituality" more accurately lot more people talking about God and sin and morals then there have been in 20 or 30 years. We'll have to wait and see, but that's my prediction based on how we as a nation seem to be moving.
-
-
Answer to header Q: It is possible, though highly improbable, in my humble opinion.
Yet, who can deny the "stealth maneuver" of GWB? To our chagrin, most of America is focused upon the insignificant news of the likes of Brittany, Paris, and Pitt, more than they are about the erosion of their civil liberties.
The sad and despicable act that transformed the US in 2001, was the perfect excuse for the Patriot Act and the signing of other laws intent upon fulfilling the vision of those behind the scenes.
My question, in light of martial law, is how do we prepare for such an event? What do we do when it happens? It is not about fear but about being prudent. To not ask these questions is the equivalent of putting our head in the sand.-
those of us who look to the BBC for our news are more focused on Kenya, but I'm afraid your right that way too many people are paying much more attention to Brittany, etc. than to what is going on in the world.
-
Yes, Yes and Yes.
How will we even know we are in a State of Marshall Law? I mean, the Patriot Act, probably created by our government leaders, well before 2001, was given to us, "Sheeple" as a little reminder of how our government is able to control us, at any level.
First, they take away our passenger rights, now, they make us out to be criminals and put us on a terrorist watch list.
Yup, with a government like this, we are good to go for the rest of our lives.
And like GlobalGirl, I am not about to put my head in the sand.
-
-
Did you actually read the Weekly Standard article or just the headline? It has nothing to do with your question.-
@tomhanna
You are correct. The Weekly Standard article may not have been directly related to Martial Law, however, it clearly reminds us that our President may justify any of his actions through an "Executive Order".
Do you see now see the implication here?
Regarding martial law links, here is the one for Digg above:
www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/
-
-
It has everything to do with the question. You aren't going to bury her counterpoint chalking it up to a Weekly Standard article. A lot of people simply aren't going to fly off the deep end and start insisting Bush is going to declare Marshal Law.
I don't mind differing opinions, but do not shut someone up simply because you do not agree with the statement.
Speaking of the Weekly Standard, must we really count off the number of liberally bent news outlets out there that feed liberals THEIR talking points? Pundits quote these services on a nightly basis.-
Wait. What? I think Tom was merely pointing out the article in question had nothing to do with marshal law OR a possible suspension of the election. It's about spending.
-
Huh? I'm not complaining that it's the Weekly Standard. The Weekly Standard is a fine publication. But the article she linked to had nothing whatsoever to do with suspending the 2008 election or any of these other loonytunes Bush-hater conspiracy theories. It wasn't even about something Bush has done or intends to do. It was an editorial encouraging Bush to use a perfectly legal method to help put an end to the runaway practice of pork barrel earmarks by Congress. It has "war" and "Congress" in the title and the original poster jumped to the conclusion it supported her case without even bothering to read it.
-
-
argh... and I've falling into bad spelling practices. I meant Martial Law, I'm sure
-
What is the problem in USA ?
-
Heh. Which one?
-
-
I think that he would really like to but...I am not sure that he knows how. -
I am Thrilled Barack Obama Won in Iowa last Night!! ;)) Good Riddance Bush!! Peace* -
I really doubt it because nothing says "oh God, please get me out of this job" like the look on that man's face whenever he's in front of a camera. He was in over his head from the get go, and now I really think he wants to just get gone. -
Disappearing posts?
The more I see of Obama, the more I like him -
I think the world will be in too much of a mess to even have an election
-
who the hell is marshall and why would we follow his law????
-
very funny
-
-
The possibility for a standing president & congress to suspend elections has always been a possibility.
However, American history has proven that the republic can have elections during crises, the Civil War being the greatest example and proof. 1863 presidential campaigning were not interrupted, and elections held. To Lincoln’s credit and integrity, it was said if he had to he’d collect votes on himself - on the battlefields, if I recall correctly.
What many Americans don’t realize is that the President has great executive powers, executive powers that have accreted to the presidential office over time.
The depths of these powers were first exhibited through Abraham Lincoln, where he suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus. The writ originated in England abridging the power of its kings to make people ‘disappear’ i.e., sent to prison without a hearing at court for cause.
With the beginning of the Civil War, Lincoln had summary arrests of people suspected of Southern sympathies that could undermine the ‘Union’s’ campaign to keep Southern states in the union.
Many people literally disappeared and sent to prisons without judicial hearing, under Lincoln’s presidency. This is one reason he was called a dictator. This executive action would be repeated during the Second World War, under Roosevelt.
So, there is ample precedent, and the Congress has agreed or acquiesced in these orders in the past. Should a standing president have cause to do so in this century, assuredly it will be done.
Regarding Martial Law: it has happened before. Given America’s Martial Law history, you never want to see it happen with its Summary Judgement, internment, execution, confiscation of property without due recourse. The history informs the future.
.
The tragedy of 9/11 has put into motion government departmental laws, executive orders and programs under the Congress and President not in keeping with the act. In other words, SEVERAL bad men have been the cause of the abridgement of individual rights of privacy and privileges – in deed affecting 300 million people. An interesting ratio. Privacy is eroding faster than Arctic Ice. Biometrics, Cell Phone, Bank Accounts – the list is growing, and the Federal Government’s detailed interest is explained as being for all citizens’ benefit. It should be noted that Hitler did the same – without technology.
These abridgements or potential abridgement of rights has distingished pedigree in the Congress. There was once a famous senator who liked Hitler’s requirement for travel papers between cities so much that he wanted it as law for American’s to have ‘papers’ (I guess like an internal passport) to travel within the US. The US is not there yet, but citizens will need passports to travel to Canada.-
I was wondering when you were going to pop into this thread. Glad you did. Good points and some I personally hesitated to mention. However, now that you did, some say history was a precursor, a beta test for what is to come. Read between the lines.
-
I meant to add, that current legislative acts and government programs effecting American liberties are curiously disproportionate to 9/11 and not in keeping with America's ability to protect itself internally and not treat its citizens as tho they are the enemy when the enemy is across the ocean and seas.
During the Second World War, excepting the unfortunate internment of American Japanese, Germans (and I believe Italians), Americans still retained their liberties. The FBI was able to round up nearly 200 German agents. It's an incredible story, and they did it without measures now installed - permanently - to protect America from terror threats. -
You have been an American expat for sometime. You have also run with those privy to information. As such, when you look upon your home country from afar and see what is happening, what are some of your concerns?
-
globalgirl, thank you. I see people voting for their rights to be diminished, I see Federal legislators with ideas that are not vigorously reviewed by citizens for their effectiveness and consequences, and I see legislators behave like Mom and Pops that know best what's good for their children.
I also see it this way, there are those in government I grew up with, people that were classmates, that no one thought was that 'great' or 'good', even people I wouldn't want for neighbors, suddenly my rulers.
People gradually give their liberties up under an implicit understanding that their government will provide them the comfort of security - make them feel good. These transactions have too rarely been honored by the governing in the long run. The governing eventually see themselves as smarter than their citizens. And the governed end up paying more than it was worth. America was founded on the opposite premise. -
Interesting. There has been a clear erosion and stripping of civil liberties clothed in the guise of Homeland Security. It amazes me how people have this false notion that the leaders of our country have our best interest in mind. Party lines are not so clear and their united mantra is to "stay on course".
Do you think martial law is inevitable?
-
-
George Bush isn't exactly popular with the regular military right now. A lot of the troops on the frontline don't like the Blackwater Contractors he has brought in. It is too early for there to be a praetorian style coup in America, it won't happen until there is a much larger contractor army in place beholden to a specific party. What is scary is that there is a litmus test for personal views to join the largest private contractor, Blackwater which has 25,000 troops in Iraq. A lot will depend on who gets elected. A lot of the Republicans want to cut back on the contractor thing. We need someone a lot more moderate than what we are being offered.-
Blackwater is very disturbing to me. How is it that we can allow for these private contractors to defend our nation, making hundreds of thousands more than our soldiers? For what purpose? We leave our soldiers unprotected and without adequate safeguards, while these private contractors are being trained and utilized like corporate elites.
-
GG, I don't know whether you've seen Mark's (Stoneman) post on the Blackwater issue. It's a couple of months old, but I think it suggests an interesting possible answer to your question: mrstoneman.blogspot.com/2007/10/outsourcing-military-tasks.html
-
Excellent post by Stoneman. Thanks.
-
-
Hmmm. In a word, Decadent. America is known in many ways but in most ways today insignificant compared to long before.
America was once known as a bastion of freedom and liberty, as a nation of moral and ethical preeminence, a country that measured care through acts of compassion on the world stage, and respected intelligence and education. It was looked the complete opposite of a police state. People yearned to see their countries like the US.
Now they see America as a stupid country with bad education and no respect for Intelligence. They see it get lost in arguments about stupid things with stupid people.
Now they only want to be like the US in wealth, nothing more. America is bankrupt morally, ethically, economically. There's no more reasons to admire America.
As for Blackwater. I acquired an excellent position in Iraq for a Croatian (he's as dear to me as if he were my brother) here with a security firm. He came back for one month leave and was so angry about Blackwater security personnel. I played devils advocate with him; mistake. He said thy're thugs, pathological, mean, nasty, without conscience. For days he told me what he saw, and even threatening with with automatic rifles loaded and ready to shoot him - measures of intimidation to get my friend to go through a high security check point. To do what he wanted would have lost him his job. He didn't yield. What happened in the days that followed never made the papers - but should have. And its probably a miracle he's still alive. The enemy was American security personnel not Sunni or Shia. In fact my friend said you can't believe how wonderful the people are there in Baghdad (but not among themselves).
My friend had nothing but praise for American military personnel, without exception. He said most exhibited good values and care for others. He has lived in the states and speaks A. English like a native. So his comments have great value for me.-
Alarming story about Blackwater. What is interesting is the double meaning of that word. From what I gather, the founder married and converted to Roman Catholicism and supports many Christian organizations. I don't know how an faith-based organization (or any NGO) can accept money from a company with very questionable practices. I find this troubling too.
-
-
I'm glad that I'm not the only one that mentions Hitler and The Bushs in the same post. Great points brought up and very valid.
When thousands of Americans die and the leader of the country refuses to go under oath, you know that our rights have been shredded.
Blackwater is not defending us, our soldiers are defending them while they defend the $ interest of those who started the invasion to begin with.-
Let me make a very important point, with full understanding of what I am doing and its implications - and possible repercussions for me.
Not long after 9/11 I was approached in Saudi Arabia for a private meeting with a gentleman well versed in West Asian 'activities'. He explained many dynamics, several that were highly revelatory and greatly explaining some things that were a 'mystery'.
What is germane here is one important upshot of this meeting: that alQaeda wanted America to reflexively enter into a war in Asia. One reason was that it would drain America's wealth and would not provide an opportunity to recover the expense. Simple as that.
Although alQaeda got some distastefully unanticipated results, it also got its wish. You all fund a war that may never recover its costs.
The kings of Europe thought through their martial ventures with more care.
You now sit on a bubble of debt. What will you be talking about should it burst instead of slowly deflating? I can live on a bowl of rice and small fish once a day, and sleep in a room under -4C. Can you?
What has happened to you America? -
Your story is fascinating.
I am not afraid of what may be. Having lived amongst the poor and gone without many creature comforts, I know what I can do without and how little I need to really live. However, most Americans can't comprehend a life that is any different than access to credit and abundance. Both are crumbling and many don't see.
-
-
Never thought of it, thanks for adding to my paranoia. I'm going down in my bunker now...
-
The debt is the wealth that is being shared amongst but a few.
You can't build bombs and not have somewhere to sell them, or have contracting companies that are in need of places to rebuild.
As far as living on rice and fish, well I was homeless for years and lived on a can of soup every couple of days, I lived in doorways and rooftops, I slept under over passes during hurricanes. I lived in central park and in the world trade center. So, I am not the one to ask about survival skills. I survived the worst my country has to offer. There are many like me here, but we only hear about the needs for others.
What has happened to America? One word, Corruption!-
and moral depravity
-
Rozie818, bravo! It appears America doesn't study history anymore, or its people would exercise more care - and compassion. There are corners everywhere on life's road, and the unexpected always happens - too people. peoples and nations.
While we are chatting there are some countries preparing for war. Not the possibility of war. They are preparing for a fight. And if you don't care about economics & finances you won't care about dangers over the horizon, either. Hardiness and comforts are polar; they never mix.
Be comfortable America. Sleep, sleep. There's a new world waiting for you when you wake.
-
-
80% of the reason I moved to Costa Rica is because I couldn't sit in the front row of a fool's circus anymore. And kerosene can't melt a skyscraper.
-
Wow. I read this post and thought it was one of the dumbest things I have ever read. Then I got to the post from Merlyn. Perhaps you should have done a little research before you moved to another country.
www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=1
Or, on a level much simpler for the average intellectual midget to understand, you could have just paid attention to news stories like this.
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL
Anyhow, back to the topic at hand, the short answer is No, I don't buy into nonsense and paranoia. Bush will be gone this time next year and we'll all have someone new to worry about.
But it's always at the very least entertaining to have some moonbats around, so thanks for the post anyway. -
What exactly is your point? That martial law will never be instituted? This conversation is not stupid, my friend, but relevant.
-
I never said that martial law would never be declared. That was not the premise of this post. The question was, Do you think Bush will do it to stay in power. The answer is, "No, I'm not a moron".
-
-
I will not get started on 911, but that was the flood gate to war.
Many of us know that a nut in a cave has no control over the FAA. Why fly from Boston unless you know you'll get there. They took one Newark wouldn't that one have more gas?
Without 911 we are not at war. No pipelines, no oil control no middle east profits.-
Excuse me for not giving you a direct reply to your comment; my current opinion is this, of all the government departments, the American military is the only one that has a sober view of the world today and where the dangers are. The intelligence agencies have fine people but have become lethally political. Sad.
-
Ummm... since when do airplanes use gas? And why would a plane from Newark have more "gas" than a plane in Boston?
-
-
In reference to comments about B Clinton, if any American had done what he did by providing Chinese with advanced technology for campaign money, he or she would be in prison.
If he makes you feel good, and he's likable, he can do anything he wants, right? :-)-
Amen - glad someone else knows about this! -
Thanks for appreciating it. I never realized how dangerous modern American news media is until they didn't report it. Actually, the Dems were happy there was a Monica problem bleaching TV screans because they were scarred stiff the real bad news would be learned. True. And swapping advanced technology to the Chinese (to abbreviate military R&D) for political campaign money wasn't the only thing that was done wrong.
-
-
Lol. I found this comment from mom of twins amusing.
"And like GlobalGirl, I am not about to put my head in the sand."
Why not? I'm sure the sand would smell better than your heads current surroundings.-
Simply stated, you don't sound very intelligent.
-
Of course I don't. But I could always buy into nonsense like this and become an overnight genius in your eyes. But let me address this in this manner instead.
How would one sound intelligent in text?
Please. I'm not worried about impressing someone who buys into notions like this with my intelligence. Much like someone who would post this isn't concerned with how stupid they will look in a year. -
I apologize profusely because my post was not complete - my electricity blew out before I was finished. Lots of lightening, thunder and rain here in Northern California.
Let me finish - I may have misinterpreted you. When you said "stupid thread", I thought you were saying her question about martial law was stupid. Therefore, my completed response was to be that you were seemingly not informed about the potential reality of such extreme measures being enacted/enforced.
I personally don't think Bush will use his executive power to stop the election. -
No need to apologize. My skin isn't that thin, and I enjoy a good debate.
-
Thanks for being forgiving. I like to play fair and when the electricity busted, I was concerned a backlash would result. Thankfully, you [and others] were gracious.
-
-
Put nothing past G.W.Bush, Dick Chenney,and the Bildeburg Group.-
u know about the Bilderburps?
-
-
If Marshall Law is declared I hope this Country and the White House burn to the ground. We need to rebuild a new Country....
Besides Bush would not be in control anyway, FEMA would. That same Agency that cared so dearly for the people affected by Hurricane Katrina. The Same Govt I live under refused aid to help my People , because it was offered from Cuba.... oh Yes Wave that FLAG now...
Do you believe they have camps ready for something like this? (Marshall LAW)
They do have Concentration Camps waiting for us here in America?
Rex 84 Program would allow military bases to be closed and turned into prisons.
Larger camp in Alaska....
Forget about talking about your constitutional rights and anything like this lol... yoiu have nada
" The first targets in any FEMA emergency would be Hispanics and Blacks, the FEMA orders call for them to be rounded up and detained. Tax protesters, demonstrators against government military intervention outside U.S. borders, and people who maintain weapons in their homes are also targets."
educate-yourself.org/cn/femaoverview06sep05.shtml
Really today all I can say is F America. Never understood why people are so proud to be American...Maybe because you never had to struggle for anything? Or you had it good for 500 or so years or more? well we will all be in masters field this time around....
That's the day I would kill trying to leave the USA-
Zawadi, maybe you should leave NOW since you dislike being here so much.
Although I disagree with some of our foreign policies and erosion of civil liberties to name a few, I am thankful to be here. No country is without problems. -
Now that's funny. Yes, every American has had it good for 500 years or more. And I remember 487 years ago when I was 18, somebody tried to tell me it would never last this long. What?
But let's get past that. I always get a kick out of people who say we have no Constitutional rights anymore. And they will be back tomorrow, saying the same thing, never realizing that they are the best proof to the ignorance of their own sayings.
Let me break that down a notch, because some won't get that. Zawadi, were your statement accurate and there were no more rights, than free speech would be gone. And the black helicopters would be circling your house right now to take you off to that camp in Alaska. -
Actually, trlr, your statement is wildly overly simplistic. I'm not taking a political position here, just stepping in as an attorney with an undergraduate degree in political science to explain the workings of the law, since there's a huge disconnect in what you've written here.
To use a very simple analogy, there is no Constitutionally protected right to cross in the middle of the street. In fact, in most places there is a state law or local ordinance that makes it illegal for pedestrians to cross the street except at designated crosswalks. Despite the fact that it is against the law to cross in the middle of the street in most cities, people routinely do so and are not arrested. No black helicopters monitor the streets identifying people who cross in the middle and sending them tickets...but existing law would allow them to do so.
The basic point is that the simple fact that people do something and get away with it does not mean that they have a legally protected right to do that thing, or even that it is legally permissible to do that thing. The assumptions you make are far off base and very dangerous from a strictly technical perspective, without any need to think about conspiracies or motivations or what you think of our administration or any such thing: the simple fact is that lack of enforcement does not equal lack of an enforceable law. -
Well, X. Nice try at a diversionary tactic. One problem with your logic though. We were not discussing breaking the law and getting away with it, hence there is no law. We were discussing following the law, and being imprisoned anyway. So am I really being "wildly overly simplistic"? Let me restate my case.
The claim was that a program allows military bases to be turned into prisons, followed by this statement. "Forget about talking about your constitutional rights and anything like this lol... yoiu have nada"
Wouldn't that be wildly over simplistic? Let's throw that into your scenario and do this the right way. Instead of breaking the law, lets look at someone following the law, as the premise actually suggested.
Assuming you cross at the cross walk when given the appropriate signal, does the fact that a cop has a ticket book in hand mean he was going to write you a ticket for doing so? No. And by the same token, the alleged fact that military bases can be turned into prisons does not mean they will be used for people who are practicing Constitutionally protected behavior.
So while I appreciate the input of an expert opinion from an attorney, I am not quite as easy to bamboozle as someone who was too stupid to get out of jury duty may be. -
I'm kind of torn as to how to respond to this, trlr. On the one hand, I want to clarify. On the other, your lack of comprehension seems to run so deep that I think I may be powerless. Either that or you're intentionally shifting the issue and hoping that no one will notice, but the reading comprehension level around here seems to be pretty high, so that isn't likely to happen.
You told Zawadi that if her belief that we no longer had Constitutional rights and that things like those camps were possible, then black helicopters would already be coming to take her away. Pure and simple--I have just re-read your initial post and that's crystal clear...you said that if she didn't have a Constitutional right to say what she'd said, they'd be coming for her right now. But, in fact, people do things they don't have Constitutional rights to do every minute of every day, and most of them are never arrested.
This piece of your most recent response is accurate: "Assuming you cross at the cross walk when given the appropriate signal, does the fact that a cop has a ticket book in hand mean he was going to write you a ticket for doing so? No. And by the same token, the alleged fact that military bases can be turned into prisons does not mean they will be used for people who are practicing Constitutionally protected behavior."
However, it has nothing whatsoever to do with your initial assertion that if a Constitutionally protected right didn't exist, Zawadi would be arrested. That was and remains a ridiculous statement. At least, I fervently hope it does, because I'm wearing a t-shirt with a cat on it right now, and I'm absolutely positive that I don't have a Constitutional right to do that, and I really don't want to get arrested tonight. -
Well, when diversion doesn't work, resort to lying? Here is your statement.
"You told Zawadi that if her belief that we no longer had Constitutional rights and that things like those camps were possible, then black helicopters would already be coming to take her away."
I never said that her belief that things like those camps were possible would have her taken away. I never even implied that. And what I did say was a follow up to a much broader statement. It follows.
"But let's get past that. I always get a kick out of people who say we have no Constitutional rights anymore. And they will be back tomorrow, saying the same thing, never realizing that they are the best proof to the ignorance of their own sayings."
See that? Now, did I make it so simple as to say that every individual who spoke out would be arrested? No. However, it would be likely that, since there are many people who say such things, that were there no more rights, we would see a few of these getting hauled away. I went on to point out that I was going to break that down for her and gave an example of what it would mean to her personally.
Then you return to your diversionary tactics here.
"However, it has nothing whatsoever to do with your initial assertion that if a Constitutionally protected right didn't exist, Zawadi would be arrested. That was and remains a ridiculous statement. At least, I fervently hope it does, because I'm wearing a t-shirt with a cat on it right now, and I'm absolutely positive that I don't have a Constitutional right to do that, and I really don't want to get arrested tonight."
As you stated, my claim was that if our rights that are protected by the constitution don't exist, she would be arrested for partaking in those activities. That speaks only to activities that are protected. Yet you go on to elaborate that my statement being true would have you arrested for partaking in an activity that, by your own admission, is not Constitutionally protected.
-
-
globalgirl, nice comment for someone who only read the bottom of my post.
Since my people didn't come here on their own, would you like to pay for the ticket?... and I have a huge family also. Paypal is fine-
Who exactly is "my people"?
It doesn't matter how we arrived here (I came from my Mom), we can still come and go from the US to almost anywhere in the world.
I know you are skeptical of the US, but I also see the great benefits and freedoms we have here, especially as a woman. Don't you agree?
-
-
global i couldnt care less how you label yourself, this is my life and i will slap whatever label on it that makes me feel like I belong to more than a history filled and paved with the blood of innocent people....
You got your name right? Well i don't , stop right where you are and allow me to discover who i am.... thanks-
I did not mean to offend you, Zawadi. I simply did not understand "my people". I still don't. Can you clarify?
-
Isn't it possible,Zawadi, that the way to feel like you belong to "more than a history filled and paved with blood" is to belong to a present and future in which you unite with the people you're sharing the world with today and affect positive change?
-
I could assist in that discovery if you would like. I have a pretty good idea already. Lol.
-
I don't want to jump to conclusions. We are ALL part of the human race. As Americans we have MANY freedoms that most of the world lacks. For this I understand why soldiers kiss the American soil. We are a blessed nation. Far from perfect - but I am still thankful to be here, especially having traveled to foreign lands (literally and through books!) and know the violations and oppression of others.
-
-
Wrong placement.
-
Well, since none of Our People were here to start with-it was a nice barren wasteland oh, 30 thousand years ago or so, how about we all pack up and head home? Then Bush can have the country and do what he likes with it.
The idea of an American President declaring himself King has always been big in Sci Fi, Robert A Heinlein, Margaret Atwood, and Octavia Butler wrote some great books about America without that whole rule of law nonsese getting in the way.
Is it possible for it to happen now? Who knows. Before 9/11 we would have said it was impossible for the US Government to just nab anyone they wanted and lock them away forever. It's a brave new world now.-
Dang. I do miss Octavia.
We interred people during WWII as well. Not that that makes the present situation more tolerable, just that I don't see it as a particularly new thing in this country. -
Wow. Have Alex Jones ratings gone up or is it the "Paulbots"?
-
a few hundred years ago there were people here who called it home. Descartes
-
Aldous Huxley. Yes, it is. BTW, my bags are packed and I'm leaving on a jet plane....
-
thanks gg. now I will be hearing PPM in my head all day
-
...leaving on a jet plane, don't know when I'll be back again..
Everybody JOIN IN, pack and go on the count of 3!
-
-
I do ands that's all that matters... how many people do u know with black skin who only spoke creole and never lived outside of the usa.. and never spoke a word of english? my people did....
When i say MY People I also mean people who need to know who they are and not feel the need to accept other peoples labels.... we are the only people on the planet where someone else named us, do u realize that?
This is not a post about seperating people.. but i have always seen myself as more than just an american... it's just another label, it's my nationality only.
Oh and my son is part Irish and German and British and he will say " i'm african american"
I am angry abuot how the USA uses it's own citizens like cattle and lab rats.. if you can't see through the smoke and mirrors i'm sorry.
You know the french part of me laughs because my ancestors name meant sheep in French lol, but i'm not lmao
I can't follow along blindly because it's confortable here... I never seen life this way.. just because it's ok here, it's not ok over there.. get it?
Do you really know what's going on out there? not just what happens in the cesored news.. but really?-
We're all gonna die soon enough, and life sucks. Thanks for the happy thoughts.
-
-
MadameX
Isn't it possible,Zawadi, that the way to feel like you belong to "more than a history filled and paved with blood" is to belong to a present and future in which you unite with the people you're sharing the world with today and affect positive change?
i want to believe that this world is going in a positive direction, but I see it happening in the USA, not in the places that matter to me.. i love African People and they are still slaves after 1000 yrs of Islam. this makes me sick.. and the reason i have such an ugly attitude on the board when it comes to topics like this.-
I understand that completely, Zawadi. I really do. But if there's one thing I've learned as I've gotten older it's that adding my anger to the situation doesn't do anyone any good, and adding my love and understanding often does. It's usually not the good I'd like to do--I want to feed the whole world and I can only drop off a couple of bags of groceries at the food pantry or save up for months to build one little house for one family in Jamaica. The world is full of things that are hard to look at that I can't fix. But if I'm angry and hostile I still can't fix them, and I've brought more anger and hostility into the world. If I take the time to smile and speak kindly to every person I encounter and to listen when people talk and to give whatever small thing I can, who knows what some of those things might grow to that I never get to see? And even if they don't ever grow beyond making a person who was having a bad day smile and feel welcome for a minute, hasn't that been more productive than venting my anger about something I can't reach? I'm definitely not saying these things should be ignored, but there's always a positive and a negative way to react, no matter how positive or negative the situation is.
-
-
Unfettered, I was shocked by Octavia's passing so suddenly, she was great writer.
-
Yes. Yes she was. Particularly within the Seattle SF community, she is greatly missed.
-
-
Descartes
We're all gonna die soon enough, and life sucks. Thanks for the happy thoughts.
hit the road jack.. -
trlrtrash13
Wow. Have Alex Jones ratings gone up or is it the "Paulbots"?
You know it's funny because allot of folks think jones is a nutcase but can't prove him wrong... it's like a challenge to him i guess and so far when it comes to the truth the man is on point... For the past 2 weeks I have been falling asleep listening to nothing but jones lol.... geez maybe I need one night of some goonies or poltergeist to put me sound asleep instead of the truth.-
I have proven Jones wrong many times. One example (a minor one at that) is here.
theaxisofstevil.com/2007/12/18/alex-jones-the-paranoia-reaches-insanity/
Another example was a couple years ago on the Coast to Coast Am radio show. He claimed that we had begun construction of a "NAFTA Super Highway". He called a new highway that runs from Mexico to Canada. The fact? The NAFTA Super Highway is a term that has been used since 1994 by NASCO for I35 which runs from the Mexican border to 200 miles shy of the Canadian border. He claimed it was some super secret deal, so I directed him to their website you can read here.
www.nascocorridor.com/
A simple look at his site shows how he manipulates people. Here are some examples.
1. Here is a headline that states "Man arrested, cuffed after using $2 bills. That is said to imply the arrest was for using $2 bills. For proof of that claim, read the url below. For a fact, the man was arrested because the ink on the bills was smeared and they were in sequence and hence, were suspected of being counterfeit. That info is way at the end of the story.
www.infowars.com/articles/ps/arrested_for_using_2_dollar_bills.htm
In another headline he says "Couple banned for life from shopping center and branded 'terrorists' for taking pictures of their grandchildren'. On his site he ends the story with the paragraph below the url.
www.infowars.com/articles/ps/terror_fear_couple_banned_from_shopping_center...
In the reply to the Sparshotts, Ms Gillard said: "By the sounds of it my officers/duty manager didn't explain the position very clearly and for that I apologise."
Below that there is a link to the full story. It continued to say this.
Speaking after the incident, she added: "Fareham Shopping Centre is private property and has a policy to support the security of the shops, where the taking of photographs needs prior permission.
"The Sparshotts are welcome back to the centre."
Ms Gillard refused to comment further on the centre's security policies, but added that the camera ban was not because of a terrorist threat.
So for a fact, the headline is a lie. The center is not branding them as terrorists, and they are not banned for life, and they were removed for taking pictures without pre-approval. It had nothing to do with whom they were photographing.
The fact is, Alex Jones site is full of bs and nonsense like that. He is a lying fear monger who exploits the emotions of those who feel displaced in society and latch on to his ignorance without investigating the facts.
Alex Jones says it's a shame we have to go to the alternative media to get the truth. The real shame is that he calls half stories and lies "truth".
-
-
Believer it or not, I have never listened to Alex Jones.
-
At first I looked at him like he had some majior issues lol ( like i don't)
I was curious and thought it was funny when he did a video of a hidden ritual at Bohemian Grove and after that i was a listener... I never knew how ignorant i was about how the governments, not just USA.. but everywhere.. how they use their own citizens and how my anger towards people in other countries is part of the tool they will use on us to make us or get us to hate each other.... that's what i learned so far.. it's all about money and power.. not race.. it's going to be a race in the end though. -
Although I have not listened to this guy, I have read a lot and am familiar with the Bohemian Grove (I live near there) and more related to this subject.
-
-
MadameX, i'm calming down and trying to work on my attitude when it comes to topics like this... I am not alone in doing it, i have someone allot older and wiser than I am that I speak to and she is like a mom to me away from home...
I mean I know I love humanity, I hate when people use others to gain something and not care about the lives they destroy.
Too many stories to write here and i'm sure you know this is woorldwide.
There are times when I really feel sick inside about it... but not as bad as the people who are going through the hard times and worse.
I said I would spend more time, bloging about what I think, and not do it here, but
I'm still at it lol
I don't remember where i heard this comment
"if you have lived your whole life and have never seen or felt a cause you would risk your life for, you haven't lived at all"
I have days like this. thank God for Prozac !!!! -
globalgirl, wow u live near there? get some pics lol lol postem here hahahha
-
trlrtrash13, I just got back and saw the responses you gave to what I said. I don't think I've ever seen anybody be so rude to someone on this network before. Are you an adult?
You do realize that insulting people's intellect just makes you look like you are overcompensating right? I ask because most adults have that one down already.
If on the off chance you actually are an adult, you proved every syllable of my view of the US degenerating into a circus of fools. There is no more civil discourse, hence nothing is accomplished. People on both ends call the other end stupid for what they believe and facts are always conveniently adjusted. Meanwhile the rest of the world just laughs at us.
Thank you for proving my point by responding like a baboon. Maybe Fox News will have an image of a banana for you on the screen tonight.-
Yes, Merlyn, I am an adult. This is too funny. I have to point this out.
Look at this quote from you.
"You do realize that insulting people's intellect just makes you look like you are overcompensating right? I ask because most adults have that one down already."
You state that insulting someones intellect makes one look like they are over-compensating. And follow that up with an insult on my intellect. But it gets better.
You said this...
"you proved every syllable of my view of the US degenerating into a circus of fools. "
Was my attack on the intellect of the 9/11 conspiracy people so much worse than calling them a "circus of fools"? Yet you state that that is the view you have of "the U.S.".
And to be sure, you weren't done insulting intellect yet.
"Thank you for proving my point by responding like a baboon."
So, for a fact, you have stated that I proved your point. Furthermore, you stated that your point was that the U.S. has degenerated into a circus of fools. So are you really taken back by my rudeness, or are you just an elitist who feels that only they have the right to partake in such behavior.
-
-
Hitler and Bush don't go together at all. It is a bad comparison. Pinochet and Bush go together, the neo-conservative style very much reminds me of the falange and South American style strongman tactics. This is not necessarily about race, but more about religion and ideology. Blackwater actively recruits and incorporates Chilean special forces into its troops. It is insidious. Most people in the United States don't understand or can't recognize the symbolism.
-
I guess we are in for a civil war then.. Things are crappy anyway, No one is happy and that will be the last straw.. I want him Out Out Out of that office -
use the impeach link below.. I just did it
-
I have been giving the thread a great deal of thought, and the small polarity of opinions which is normal.
If GWB or any other president would 'cancel' national elections, it would definitely be symbolic of fascism. In the sum of American History, in its greatest times of hardships and wars, this act has never been a subject of concern.
There's always an outside chance that one day it will occur. But how could it?
There's an interesting book I was asked to review, one I emphatically was not interested in doing, but warmed up to it as I read. I have a lot more to go, so I have searched on the Net for a review for this thread, and maybe for comment - if this fits.
Here are two good reviews that may give insights to the question 'how this could happen?'. Incidentally, I have my own views, at the moment, on this book.
Heil Woodrow
By DAVID OSHINSKY
Published: December 30, 2007
www.nytimes.com/2007/12/30/books/review/Oshinsky-t.html?ex=1356584400&en=c1...
America's 'Fascist Moment'
Books | Review of: Liberal Fascism: The Secret History of the American Left, from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning
www.nysun.com/article/68954-
Have you ever seen Freedom to Fascism? www.freedomtofascism.com/downloads/dvd.php
From site:
America: Freedom to Fascism is a compelling and troubling account of how the wealth of our nation was silently passed from its citizens to a handful of powerful bankers in 1913. That's the year the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment were introduced, giving a privately held corporation the means to control our finances while ensuring its interest payments through the strong arms of the newly-formed Internal Revenue Service. Ever since then, Russo suggests, Americans have been gradually conditioned to accept fewer freedoms and a lower standard of living... all the while considering debt and servitude as distinctly American values. -
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson
-
The issuance of money isn't in question. The increasing citizen debt (taxes) to the government is. Once a tax (by law) is established it is rarely rescinded. And its demand accompanies previous levies. If I'm not mistaken, the tax load grew under Clinton to the highest in peace time history, going from 6 months to 7 months wages to pay. It smacks of socialism. And there are some in government or who want to be in government who think it should be more.
-
Alias, I'm very unclear on what you might mean by "in question".
-
MadameX, meaning there's agreement with the TJ quote and balanced as a follow-on to GlobalGirl's comment.
The Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment particularly are a very unattractive feature of US federal political history. In the best argument for these is 'the general and common good' for the country as a federal responsibility, especially regarding the increased expenses for building and maintaining a navy at the time.
Some argue that it came in handy during the depression to keep the federal government running and growing. By the late sixties it served social issues, although with each new legislation it was promised that these programs would not require more money - the implication was taxes would not increase. Not only did they, but there was a blip with a surtax under Nixon.
Going beyond Constitutional definition, and amendment, Federal taxes didn't end with income; it began there, continually increasing with the shibboleth 'its for the good of the country'. My question as a member of 'its for the good of the country' has always been, 'is it?'
The political process has changed in the past hundred years, but not Federal levies - except for finding more to tax and the percentages. While it has turned confusing and budensome 'for the people', it has become an extremely mischievious Federal and Congressional game. Here's a case in point, where 'for the good of the people' is 'for the good of some':
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/01/04/eveningnews/main3676573.shtml
One Byrd Gets Lion's Share Of Earmarks
Why Are So Many Of Your Tax Dollars Going To Dedicate Buildings To W.Va. Sen. Robert Byrd?
WASHINGTON, Jan. 4, 2008
So many look at politics through very narrow interests and participate in it like a live audience on a TV game show. Its neither. -
I am disgusted with Sen. Robert Byrd, as well as the countless other ways our govt has irresponsibly allocated tax dollars to such purposes, while taking money from programs that desperately need it.
The documentary I quoted is riveting and enlightening. Everyone should watch it.
The bigger question for me [and others] is what does one do with such knowledge? -
@globalgirl, the answer is the same as it's always been in American history:
ACTION IN NUMBERS
In application, MADD did it with their cause.
The lessons learned from British history by the founders of the Republic was that there had to be a balance of power - I prefer to call it a balance of powers. This included 'the people', the citizens.
The paradigm has always been a guiding ideal, and in practice has sometimes resulted in social conflict to be exercised, but also largely exercised through the power of the polling booth, unions, associations, etc.
Voters have tended to be single-issue oriented, so the power of their votes collectively have little affect on overall govermental accountability. Unions have little affect with the deindustrialization of America and movement offshore. Associations have the biggest clout, but their interests are largely narrow. The Fourth Estate was once seen as the final gaurantor of governmemtal accountability but has now (comfortably) aligned itself - for a number of reasons - with the left of center political spectrum, and has lost its moral role as a democratic gaurdian.
So, with an association that is non-partisan, that has its wealth in numbers and petitioners, that monitors and lobbies and makes public legislators' and goverment officials' activities, their use of power, their constitutional infractions, etc. will go a long way in making changes, correcting abuses, and enforcing legislative discipline.
It can be done. Do the people have the will to do it? Are there those who can selflessly lead this?
Whatever anyone may think of him, Nader was the last to do this.
Remember this, all governments, even democratic governments, are afraid of citizens that speak with one voice. Otherwise they are only afraid of small number of citizens with a great deal of money deciding not to give or share it with them :-) -
Do you think a grassroots campaign can change this? In this documentary, it was made known that the Supreme Court has ruled we the people can't ask the govt where in the law it states taxes are mandatory. This is how they justify the term voluntary:
www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=106502,00.html -
The case I see GG is this:
Packard v. United States, 7 F. Supp. 2d 143, 145 (D. Conn. 1998) - The court dismissed Packard's refund suit for recovery of penalties for failure to pay income tax and failure to pay estimated taxes where the taxpayer contested the obligation to pay taxes on religious grounds, noting that "the ability of the Government to function could be impaired if persons could refuse to pay taxes because they disagreed with the Government's use of tax revenues."
The last cluase quote is about diagreeing with the government's use of the money. Attitudes similar to Packard's existed during the Viet Nam War, and didn't prevail then either.
The government has the power to confiscate any cash, assets and real estate to satisfy demand. It does and will continue to. There is one case I read about where a woman's home was seized for an amount owed at the tune of pocket money.
Televised hearings on the IRS some years ago dramatically demonstrated problems that exist within and because of the IRS. It showed that the IRS has police state powers.
So an associations's agendas should not advance non-compliance. Rather, it should agressively represent the wage earners and their interests (defined above), wherein the bicameral legislature and beauracracies have failed.
It's doable.
This is a serious matter and affects every other issue on the minds of Americans. For example, the upcoming primary candidates are currently debating issues like health care. There are a number of remedies, but only federalizing it seems the only one on the table for discussion. Tho the notion of health care for everyone has compassionate merit, it will not stop at basic coverage; it will be augmented as every other social welfare plan has sine the early 70s. If citizens are preapred for the cost though taxes, fine. It will be a cost overlaid on existing taxes. In the meantime the government has been robbing from Peter to pay Paul with the cost problems with Social Security.
Nothing is in balance. Nothing is remotely in balance. If the government were a business, it wuold be in Chapter 11 or maybe 13, or boarded up with a sign that reads, 'Out of Business'. :-) On the other hand Americans can continue to sell itself to foreign capital - in Europe some are calling it America's 'Fire Sale'. It looks like a 'Blue Light Special' to me :-)
Someone will have to pay for all this, now and over the time-horizon. It wont be politicos because the sum of their wages just isn't enough. It WILL BE the American citizens. :-)
ACTION, NUMBERS, PLAN, TARGET
demonstrated However, legisltures
-
-
HAHAHA He might be a crappy president but he isn't a Bond villian or Hitler. -
Wow, just found this thread. Some very interesting thoughts and opinions! I'd like to add the following link to the mix, as I believe it's related to the start of this thread...what do you think?
oneeyedview.com/spying-on-the-home-front-
There are two sentences that are interesting in that post.
'So many people in America think this does not affect them.' Citizens are very, very, mistaken. Everyone is affected. ALL communications are surveiled or filtered and flagged for content.
'President Bush described his anti-terrorist measures as narrow and targeted.'
By intent, this is true. By practice it is not. The anti-terror intiatives put all citizens under the eye of the government.
The federal government is rapidly developing profiles on citizens. Not only will the Feds know everything about your finances, but your biology and physical chactertistics, habits, etc.
This is to find terrorists in America? All Americans are suspects? -
Relevant post. The question is, so now what? The road has been paved. We must ask how to travel it.
-
If we must ask, we no longer have power protected by a constitution; we are no longer free.
-
My point exactly.
-
-
trlrtrash13, thanks for the links, I will take a look.
-
No problem.
-
no -
DO you know what GWB stands for? GAY WHITE BOY!! ROFL
-
What a jejune sense of humor. How old are you?
-
He's a decent human being. And politics is better battled through hot air than arms :-)
It might be impolite to mention, but NOTE had certain innumerable actions occurred in an earlier presidency, America would most likely not be in the position it is today.
Bush has had difficult geo-political decisions to make, in some ways on the order of the Cuban Missile Crisis President Kennedy faced. The possible outcomes of Kennedy not acting would have brought America to a position long ago far worse than today. On the other hand, had Russia decided to respond differently, Mr Kennedy would be called very bad names by survivors of the results.
Had Bushed not acted following the September's slaughter, the US would have been looked on as vulnerable and further terror acts would have been performed. My opinion is that the action in Afghanistan was necessary; it brought a war to those who started war. (I am not persuaded the Iraq War is necessary; but there were other reasons for it - not oil for the popular reason people echo each other).
-
-
Alias Inkhorn is correct about surveillance. We live in a society of accepted total surveillance. It is just the norm whether we like it or not. Any public space can automatically be surveilled. Your phone can be tapped from the outside of your house by tapping into the line leading to telephone pole. Any wireless message that leaves the space of your property is fair game. This is not paranoia. The basic software for total monitoring of every electronic communication is already in place, it is called "Dragonware Suite", it is the next generation after Carnivore. www.pier55.com/Technology/Carnivore.shtml . Essentially anything that passes through a server is fair game. Assume you have nothing to hide, because if you do and you have communicated it electronically, it already has been found. Don't assume that it is just the government that is gathering information. Corporations have access to and can buy the same software, and can use it to sell you things you don't need and market things you don't want. Sometimes this is more bothersome to me than the big brother aspect of government.
-
Thanks for the nod. Americans have yet to fully understand that Uncle Sam is now Big Bro. And it goes beyond what has been posted.
-
-
Why not? He is the only President in the history of the USA that was never elected. He also holds a few other firsts, like he has managed to reduce the US economy to 70% of where it was when he started, and US land ownership by foriegn land owners had grown more than 50 fold since he started. Americans now own less of the US than foriegners do.
I wouldn't be suprised at all at marshall law.
He went to war to boister his family business revenue, even partnering with the "terrorists" that he claims to be in pursuit of. These are all matters of public record.
Marshall law for George would be like ordering something different for lunch. Sadly, the USA doesn't have the money for it, so he will have to get a loan from China to pay for it.
Sorry George. You did it to yourself. Oh, and over 300,000,000 Americans.-
Although I don't like Bush you should really get your facts straight. The American citizens do not elect a president. The electoral college elects the president and George Bush just as Harry Truman was elected president of the United States.
George Bush also has very little to do with where our economy is at right now or foreign interests owning more land. These problems started decades ago while he was still doing coke and getting DUI's. Americans certainly do not own less land than foreigners but foreigner's do own the more profitable land. -
joepro, understand your feelings, but on the matter of the economy and foreigner money and ownerships, best look at the Fed, Congress, Wall Street, and others. Don't confuse a president's power to spend with absolute control of financial monetory policies. As long as people pin the tail on the president, others more responsible are not held accountable.
-
talen32, absolutely true about general elections. they are not direct elections for a president; in a sense each state population is voting for a state outcome to be represented by that state's electors to vote in the electoral college for a president.
This system has worked very, very well, altho there have been a couple of occasions where an elector voted opposite of his state's popular vote.
The reason for the Electoral College has some interesting history behind it. The upshot is that the founders of the American Republic were, in nearly every instance, highly informed students of history.. What happened to the fall of the roman Republic they were modeling the new American Republic after was never out of mine.
If anyone has not studied or read the history of the fall of the roman republic, do so; you'll very well see similarities to present day federal politics.
Admittedly, I do.
-
-
I certainly hope Commander guy does cancel the elections and declare Marshall Law. I wanted him to do this in 2004, but I guess he was just too popular to get away with it then. But now, it is the perfect time to get out the crown and have a good old fashioned coronation.
My fear is that the Dems will elect someone with integrity like Obama or Edwards, and that there will be a Warren Commission into the goings on of the Bush Administration, and that the Decider may face charges after he is out of office.
That would suck.-
On the other hand, the Congress is accountable, also. People have voted for congressional candidates based on narrow issues and interests. The people got just that. If the people broadened their field of view of Congressional behaviour, etc, present Congressional activities would be substantially moderated and I believe better governing result.
IN one way, people shifting nearly all their hopes on a president or presidential candidate has shifted attention and power away from the Congress. The original idea of the Constitution was that the people were represented through and by the Congress. Anyway, give it some thought.
-
-
...
Just scanning through this I wonder if maybe I'm the only one here who thinks that Mr. Bush is even a decent person. (And what's this about starting a war for personal gain? There are 4,000+ people *dead* because a bunch of homicidal maniacs from the Middle East decided to declare war on *us*. I'm really rather relieved that the Taliban was ousted and that Saddam Husein got cornered in a rat hole. Now if we could just locate Bin Laden...)
As for the question this thread is meant to answer... No. Not a chance. He didn't declare martial law on September 11, 2001, he's got no reason to declare it now.
So how about getting off your Bush-bashing soap boxes and focus on picking someone to vote for this year.-
faux pas - posted in the wrong place. should be here ..
He's a decent human being. And politics is better battled through hot air than the call to arms :-)
It might be impolite to mention, but NOTE had certain innumerable actions occurred in an earlier presidency, America would most likely not be in the position it is today.
Bush has had difficult geo-political decisions to make, in some ways on the order of the Cuban Missile Crisis President Kennedy faced. The possible outcomes of Kennedy not acting would have brought America to a position long ago far worse than today. On the other hand, had Russia decided to respond differently, Mr Kennedy would be called very bad names by survivors of the results.
Had Bushed not acted following the September's slaughter, the US would have been looked on as vulnerable and further terror acts would have been performed. My opinion is that the action in Afghanistan was necessary; it brought a war to those who started war. (I am not persuaded the Iraq War is necessary; but there were other reasons for it - not oil for the popular reason people echo each other). -
Glad someone agrees. (At least in part.) ^_^
Hot air is a much better way to settle things, especially when all parties are willing to talk. Other wise... I'd like to call Arnold Schwarzenegger and Silvester Stallone, please.
-
-
It all comes down to the $, nothing more, The C Group is drenched in $ because of 9-11.
In 1993, a moron in a cave took credit for the attack and was proud of it, it is the way of the terrorist, in 2001, no one took such credit.
Attacking yourself to get your country behind you is a war tactic as old as war itself.
The people being blind to it is just as old as well.
No, it's not only oil, it's every aspect that a country would need to live that is now being controlled.
Trading with the emery (Hitler, Nixon, Bin Ladins) are in their blood, and if people do not wake up and see what these people are doing to us, we're all F'd.
The buck stops here, that's right all the bucks.
They know that people out there believe they knew about 9-11, they don't care, just like the chads ( BTW only in his brothers hood), and the anthrax and the self serving appointments.
No one has the balls to confront them, and the people are too scare to know the truth.
Let them go in front of the public under a PSE and get questioned.
But that would never happen because my country has lost it's back bone.
Lets commute Henry Lee Lucas sentence to life, but fry the metal retarded.
Let's help build camps, and fund elections for the Nixons of the world.
And when were asked to be honest to the people F'em
I am tired of people smoke screening what is really happening.
We're looking for weapons of mass destruction with weapons of mass destruction. We're invading countries with cute little slogans like "Shock and Awe"
Private contracting companies couldn't bid on Iraq because of National Security, but you know who could, why do they have clearance.
BTW, where is the anthrax? as soon as it came to light that only dems were getting it, it stopped being sent? Smart powder or what.
It just goes on and on, lie after, lie, funding bill after funding bill, while our kids are other kids around the world are being killed.
New F'ing law, you have a beef with another country, take off your diapers and go man o man o. But they can't cause they are lying little a-wipes who make others do their work for them while they are building mansions in Paraguay.-
Conspiracies abound, but they are usually where you'd never guess, otherwise conspiracies would be of little interest :-) Was there a conspiracy in the death of 40 + friends of the Clinton's while Billy was in office? I don't know. Maybe it's was all a coincidence.
And while there has been Bush-bashing in threads, it should be noted he's in good company; Ol' Hickory was called a Jackass while running for president and as a president, similar to Bush, had his hands full, too. Impossible to keep everybody happy and do your job.
Will GWB declare martial law? I imagine that its possible due to some earth shaking event, and law and order are at risk because local agencies cannot cope.
So, martial law is usually declared for a locale, not an entire nation.
But while you are focused in conspiracies and other political fears, your wallet and bank account are dying for infusion because of TAXES in the meantime.
YOUR CONCERNS & FEARS SHOULD BE FOCUSED AT CONGRESS.
What happens in the next days will set your collective financial fate. It is time to stop questioning each other (sometimes rudely) and question Congress (rudely if necessary).
Here are excerpts of an article that ACTUALLY should be read in its entirety. PASS IT ALONG TO OTHERS YOU KNOW.
JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL
Hold the Pork
Congress allocates money for nearly 9,000 new earmarks. But no law says Bush has to spend it.
Monday, January 7, 2008 12:01 a.m. EST
opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110011090
What Mr. Bush knows, and Congress doesn't want the taxpayers to know, is that the vast majority of the offending earmarks--the ones that aren't part of the actual budget law and were instead "air-dropped" into the committee report--aren't legally binding. A Dec. 18 legal analysis by the Congressional Research Service found that most of the committee reports have not been formally passed by both houses and "presented" to the President for signing, and thus have not become law. "President Bush could ignore the 90% of earmarks that never make it to the floor of the House or Senate for a vote," says Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina, who has read the CRS report. "He doesn't need a line-item veto."
--
This possibility led Old Bull members of Congress to call the White House, complaining that such a move would threaten its relations with the legislative branch and threatening retribution. But none of those complaints or threats were made publicly. Members know how unpopular earmarking is with voters, and they also know that Mr. Bush could easily turn the tables on them if they actually engaged in petty revenge over the loss of their budgetary toys.
--
Earmarks have other damaging effects. Many members feel compelled to vote for bloated spending bills, fearing their local projects will be stripped out. They also have dramatically expanded lobbying. Lobbyists go client-hunting, telling municipal officials they can virtually guarantee an earmark. In 2006, more than 4,000 companies or local governments hired lobbyists to pursue earmarks, up from 1,865 in 2001. And as the cases of Jack Abramoff and Duke Cunningham demonstrated, earmarks by the thousands result in scandals by the dozens.
The White House is at a crossroads. "If Bush were to do the right thing on earmarks it would an attention-getting precedent that could make other budget reforms possible," says Alison Fraser, who heads up economic policy for the Heritage Foundation. "It's a legacy-building moment."
--
By taking similarly bold action now on earmarks, Mr. Bush would also be doing lawmakers a favor by forcing them to refocus their priorities. "When members of Congress invest their time in securing federal funds for sewer plants and bike paths in their districts, they are doing more than assuming a federal role for a local responsibility," says Sen. DeMint. "They are diverting our energy away it away from solving national problems and wasting it on the task of steering tax dollars back home. Earmarking results in a terrible waste of taxpayer money, but the greatest cost is the wasted opportunity to address serious national challenges."
________________________
Thomas Jefferson recognized the dangers of pork-barrel spending back in 1796, when he wrote James Madison that allowing Congress to spend federal money for local projects would set off "a scene of scramble among the members [for] who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get most who are meanest."
-
-
President Bush should not be of concern. There are others in government you should be. I have seen it. Tho the following is off topic, it's a wake up call, and an example, and answers the thread's question by redirecting focus or rousing concerned action.
For sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article3137695.ece-
I seem to recall something about this... and my Dad alternating between getting hot under the collar because our political leaders were selling us out, and getting hot under the collar because they were selling us out for little. (Part Scots, he hates a poor business deal.)
-
There's more than this, Brigid. It is interesting that there is a native from California now out of the country and supporter of alQaeda wanted for treason, then we have ... others who are not. :-)
-
Ah, that guy. I remember hearing about him. Nasty piece of goods. I fail to understand why anyone would do such terrible things.
-
brigid, me, too.. but there others who don't do the same things he does but just as evil for the country.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a comment.
