http://buffalobeast.com/108/the_madness_of_king_us.htm

Snippet:

Get it straight: the Military Commissions Act of 2006 means the president can arrest you, torture you (come on, let’s be honest), and keep you in prison for the rest of your life without charge, representation or trial. No evidence needs to be produced, even of probable cause. But there’s a pedo in congress and some nut just shot a bunch of Amish girls, so hardly anyone even noticed.

Of course, the congressmen who voted for this fascist disaster, especially Democrat traitors like Buffalo’s own representative Brian Higgins, should be dragged through the streets by their constituents. But they won’t be, and the blame ultimately rests with the constituents themselves, whose woeful ignorance about the basic principles of free society can’t be overstated. It’s got to be one of the top rules in the “how not to become a slave to your government” handbook—don’t ever give your government the right to throw you in jail for nothing. Governments are never capable of handling this kind of power responsibly, and ours has already proven no different.

Of course, this is just another insane, stumbling step towards our seemingly inevitable future authoritarian police state. Otherwise normal, sane people seem hell-bent on enabling corporate oligarchs to take away every basic protection their ancestors fought for, all in the fear of a terrorist bogeyman which has been so sensationalized in the media that it’s almost hilarious.

Yea .. It's ****ing horrible. I'm Canadian but we are so tied into the USA that it ultimately affects us too, especialy because of the plan to pretty much eliminate the borders with the SPP and coming American Union.

Yea .. It's ****ing horrible. I'm Canadian but we are so tied into the USA that it ultimately affects us too, especialy because of the plan to pretty much eliminate the borders with the SPP and coming American Union.

It might be time to rethink that then. I know if any political party in the Netherlands would propose severing political ties with the USA over this I would consider voting for them (except that if it happens it is going to be by a party so left wing to make radical maoists seem conservative by comparison).


Eri

The only thing I can say is he won't be in office forever, and hopefully Americans will stop the madness in the next election - unless it's rigged and a lot of dead people vote Republican again - seems they have a large bloc of dead people they cater to (not to be confused with AARP).

I could have sworn we were discussing this in another thread... (http://eq.forums.thedruidsgrove.org/showthread.php?t=14498&page=5)

It might be time to rethink that then. I know if any political party in the Netherlands would propose severing political ties with the USA over this I would consider voting for them (except that if it happens it is going to be by a party so left wing to make radical maoists seem conservative by comparison).


Eri

First, that would never happen, mainly because of the sheer idiocy of the idea.

The US and the Netherlands do quite alot of trading between the nations...but the US is better able to absorb the loss of trade which would come with it.

But, regardless of that.

**** you, Eri.

I could have sworn we were discussing this in another thread... (http://eq.forums.thedruidsgrove.org/showthread.php?t=14498&page=5)

Yeah, you doofuses hijacked my thread about the page scandal. You'd think the moderators would fix that. Oh wait...

Not sure this is the right thread for this but:

Bush's Immigration Message Undermines His Message on Terrorism (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17557)

Truly, the White House should not be surprised when polls reflect that this time the message has not taken hold. Why? In this past spring and summer, the U.S. public has become amply aware that Bush has no serious intent of securing our borders. Instead, the building evidence, including that derived from FOIA requests by this author and by Judicial Watch, is that Bush agreed to erase our borders at the trilateral U.S.-Mexico-Canada summit meeting in Waco, Tex., on March 23. Here the three leaders issued what amounts to a press release declaring that now we are in the “Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) of North America

We have incontrovertible proof that terrorists have crossed our border with Mexico. On March 1, 2005, Mahmoud Youssef Kourani pleaded guilty to federal charges of using meetings at his home in Dearborn, Michigan, to raise money for Hezbollah’s terrorist activities in Lebanon. Kourani was an illegal alien who had been smuggled across our border with Mexico after the bribed a Mexican consular official in Beirut to get him a visa to travel to Mexico. Kourani and a Middle East traveling partner then paid smugglers in Mexico to get them into the United States. He established residence among the Lebanese expatriate community in Dearborn, Michigan, and began soliciting funds for Hezbollah terrorists back home. Kourani was sentenced to 54 months in federal prison.


Freedom killing, constitution shredding, lying bastards... IMPEACH BUSH!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igycXBseoAg&eurl=

The Presidents job is to defend the constitution. It was part of his swearing in cerimony.

Very interesting legal counterpoint:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWNlMjg3YWRlNmNjMTk0NDc1NzE0ZWI2YzBlOGRlNzU=

Could someone clear it up to me if this applies to anyone on US soil (if the government/Pres deems nessacary, or only to non citizens, if the gov deems nessacary.

I've heard both.

Thanks!

Could someone clear it up to me if this applies to anyone on US soil (if the government/Pres deems nessacary, or only to non citizens, if the gov deems nessacary.

I've heard both.

Thanks!

Ultimately it does not really matter as the US citizen <i>could</i> be charged with terrorism charges, be locked up somewhere outside of the USA without legal representation for however long as the prosecutors see fit to keep him or her in that legal hole. And they can apply unspecified force (must not call it torture) to force the prisoner to confess. Then they can present a guilty verdict based on indisclosed evidence and toss away the key.

Not saying it happens, or even that it ever will happen, but theoretically the new 'laws' give the power to do just that.


Eri

It used to be innocent until proven guilty.


Under Bush it's guilty until confirmed guilty.

Ultimately it does not really matter as the US citizen <i>could</i> be charged with terrorism charges, be locked up somewhere outside of the USA without legal representation for however long as the prosecutors see fit to keep him or her in that legal hole. And they can apply unspecified force (must not call it torture) to force the prisoner to confess. Then they can present a guilty verdict based on indisclosed evidence and toss away the key.

Not saying it happens, or even that it ever will happen, but theoretically the new 'laws' give the power to do just that.


Eri

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c109:4:./temp/~c109zkZN4L::

The Military Commisions act of 2006 does not grant that power. It only applies to non-citizens.

SEC. 7. HABEAS CORPUS MATTERS.

(a) In General- Section 2241 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking both the subsection (e) added by section 1005(e)(1) of Public Law 109-148 (119 Stat. 2742) and the subsection (e) added by added by section 1405(e)(1) of Public Law 109-163 (119 Stat. 3477) and inserting the following new subsection (e):

`(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.

`(2) Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 1005(e) of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 (10 U.S.C. 801 note), no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider any other action against the United States or its agents relating to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of confinement of an alien who is or was detained by the United States and has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.'.

(b) Effective Date- The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply to all cases, without exception, pending on or after the date of the enactment of this Act which relate to any aspect of the detention, transfer, treatment, trial, or conditions of detention of an alien detained by the United States since September 11, 2001.

Very interesting legal counterpoint:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWNlMjg3YWRlNmNjMTk0NDc1NzE0ZWI2YzBlOGRlNzU=

If you read the postings in the other thread, you will see that the government has already expanded the definition of alien combatant to encompass US citizens under certain circumstances, the easy extrapolation which can be made from that legal decision to encompass citizens in an "illegal group", and the fact that the President already, once, arbitrarily designated a US citizen captured on US soil as an alien combatant in order to circumvent his own executive order which specifically was limited to alien combatants (the order which spawned this act).

Yep. No one is safe, citizen or not.

Holy, as if it wasn't enough already.


In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.

source (http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/martial_law_bush_moves_toward_martial_law.htm)

Vote people. Next Tuesday. For the love of everything America holds dear, vote. And if Diebold wins them the election anyways...clean your guns.

Holy, as if it wasn't enough already.




source (http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/martial_law_bush_moves_toward_martial_law.htm)

Now it's time to actually go read the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR05122:@@@D&summ2=m&) and not blindly believe Mr Jones.

For example, Your article states:

Title XIV of the new law, entitled, "Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions, authorizes "the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders."

In fact, Section XIV says nothing of the sort. it actually says:

Title XIV: Authorization for Increased Costs Due to Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom - (Sec. 1401) Authorizes emergency supplemental appropriations to DOD for FY2007, for additional costs due to Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom, for: (1) procurement; (2) O&M; (3) the Defense Health Program; (4) military personnel; (5) the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Fund; (6) classified programs; and (7) the Iraq Freedom Fund.


Btw Swift, how do you like Judy Wood's latest theory about 9/11? She's one of the so called scholars for 9/11 you love quoting so much.

According to Wood, the government used a "Starwars particle beam weapon (http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html)" to take down the towers.

Well, the law does officially end our two-war force strength doctrine, just plain stupid.

Oh...and Title X, subtitle E (Sec. 1042) Revises federal provisions allowing the President to utilize the Armed Forces in connection with interference with federal and state law to allow the President to employ the Armed Forces and National Guard in federal service to restore public order in cases of natural disaster, epidemic or other public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or domestic violence. Requires the President to notify Congress within 14 days of the exercise of such authority. Authorizes the President, when exercising such authority, to direct the Secretary to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons affected by the situation.

Read more, Teaenae. They don't just slap that stuff on the first page.

The question, though, remains the constitutionality of such a law.

I read that part too. Of course, we could do a scan of katrina in these boards and see how many people bashed bush for not sending in the army or taking control of the national guard sooner and ignored the fact that he wasn't legally able to.

Scan all you want, you won't find what you're looking for. :p Things get deleted out of here really quickly.

Scan all you want, you won't find what you're looking for. :p Things get deleted out of here really quickly.

Pfft! censorship!!!!

I read that part too. Of course, we could do a scan of katrina in these boards and see how many people bashed bush for not sending in the army or taking control of the national guard sooner and ignored the fact that he wasn't legally able to.

If you read that part too, then why did you claim it didn't exist?

I just read my post again. I can't seem to find where I said it doesn't exist. I said that one of the problems with the article is that it completely misquotes sections like Title XIV. Heck, the subject line of Title XIV isn't even the same.

And most certainly the vast majority of Bush haters on this board were highly critical of the president for not sending in the National Guard sooner even though the governor did not request the help yet.

Scan all you want, you won't find what you're looking for. :p Things get deleted out of here really quickly.

Panamah is kidding of course.

We don't delete anything here.

Well scammer spam, we do.

You may need to check the box for how far back you want to go on the boards, everything from its inception should be available to you.

I just read my post again. I can't seem to find where I said it doesn't exist. I said that one of the problems with the article is that it completely misquotes sections like Title XIV. Heck, the subject line of Title XIV isn't even the same.

And most certainly the vast majority of Bush haters on this board were highly critical of the president for not sending in the National Guard sooner even though the governor did not request the help yet.

The National Guards are not federal troops, they are state troops and President Bush can call up Guard units for duty...but until now, not within the US. It was the States who were activating their troops and then sending them to NO. Now, the National Guard has pretty much just been made part of the Federal forces subject to arbitrary use by the President. I don't know what the **** is wrong with the people who passed this bill. They've just completely ignored their state sovereignty

First, that would never happen, mainly because of the sheer idiocy of the idea.

The US and the Netherlands do quite alot of trading between the nations...but the US is better able to absorb the loss of trade which would come with it.

But, regardless of that.

**** you, Eri.

You and Eri seem to actually AGREE on the issue here, so it begs the question: What do you feel would be an appropriate, democratic way for Eri to state her opinion on the matter as well as signal her thoughts on the matter to her country's government?