14 replies to this topic

[MaryAM]

http://www.journalin...e6127406122.txt
Mary Anne

[zoropb]

http://www.journalin...e6127406122.txt
Mary Anne

Wow they must be expecting something real bad.
My 100 year signal would agree something bad is out there since it is in cash from May. We have had 2 world wars and Vietnam during last 3 signals last 13,13,and 17 years. Geez I hope we do not go 4 for 4. Thanks for that post Mary.

[OEXCHAOS]

Bear in mind that in the minds of certain officials and in writing, having a Ron Paul bumper sticker is enough to raise suspicion of domestic terrorism. This has not been signed into law as yet, however.

It's a fiasco.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!...erties/GLfhBn6D

[rkd80]

Think you guys might be slightly overreacting. As much as I despise the Patriot Act and everyone who supports it, it would appear that this particular vote is to reaffirm existing language and does not actually add anything new. So while the act itself represents a troubling trend in America, I do not view this vote as an indication of the situation worsening.

Here is Rubio's explanation - albeit biased since he voted for it.

http://government.br...al-defense.html

[gm_general]

http://www.journalin...e6127406122.txt
Mary Anne

Wow they must be expecting something real bad.
My 100 year signal would agree something bad is out there since it is in cash from May. We have had 2 world wars and Vietnam during last 3 signals last 13,13,and 17 years. Geez I hope we do not go 4 for 4. Thanks for that post Mary.

Again, this is the reason:

[dasein]

it would appear that this particular vote is to reaffirm existing language and does not actually add anything new.

from another site - it appears this just reiterates what Bush signed a few years ago-
repealed Habeus Corpus (right to confront accuser...).

"On Oct. 17, 2006, President Bush signed a law suspending the right of habeas corpus to persons "determined by the United States" to be an "enemy combatant" in the Global War on Terror. President Bush's action drew severe criticism, mainly for the law's failure to specifically designate who in the United Stateswill determine who is and who is not an "enemy combatant."
"What, really, a time of shame this is..."
To President Bush's support for the law -- the Military Commissions Act of 2006 -- and its suspension of writs of habeas corpus, Jonathan Turley, professor of constitutional law at George Washington University stated, "What, really, a time of shame this is for the American system. What the Congress did and what the president signed today essentially revokes over 200 years of American principles and values.""

Not to mention repealing Pax Icomitatus (making it now legal for the government to turn the military against it's own citizens...)

Posse Comitatus Finis
Posted on September 25, 2008 by willyloman
by Scott Creighton
According to the Army Times, on Oct. 1st the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team is coming home. Coming home to start a new dwell-time mission just like their last one in Iraq, here on U.S. soil, in full “battle rattle” gear. This is in direct conflict with the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 and the MSM is ignoring it completely.
“They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.” Army Times
They will be stationed in Fort Stewart, Ga. but under the control of Northern Command. Which is quite ironic considering that Posse Comitatus was first established as a deal struck between the North and South after the Civil War; where in the North promised not to garrison troops in the South and to allow them their own policing of civilian unrest. Now, here we are throwing out the valuable lessons taught by history by having U.S. Army troops, controled by the North, stationed in the South to help with “civil unrest”.
Many will claim that the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR) establishes sufficiant congressional Authorization for the President to use such force, however, they tend to forget that the wording of that act was repealed in 2008.
Following that repeal, the President issued his own “signing statement” that effectively said he would not abide by the laws of the land; once again.
President Bush Signs H.R. 4986, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 into Law
Today, I have signed into law H.R. 4986, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. The Act authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, for military construction, and for national security-related energy programs.
Provisions of the Act, including sections 841, 846, 1079, and 1222, purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the President’s ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as Commander in Chief. The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 28, 2008.

[gm_general]

Bear in mind that in the minds of certain officials and in writing, having a Ron Paul bumper sticker is enough to raise suspicion of domestic terrorism. This has not been signed into law as yet, however.

It's a fiasco.

https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions#!...erties/GLfhBn6D

This is likely why the vote is so low, I signed up and they sent me no email as as result. So I had to try a change password. So I did that successfully, and went to sign in at this link. What I got was:

404 Page Not Found
The page you're looking for is currently unavailable to view

Hmmm....

[pdx5]

Relax everybody, everything is running normally. I am still getting all my bills on time!

[Rogerdodger]

POLL: PEOPLE FEAR BIG GOV'T MORE THAN BIG BUSINESS OR LABOR...

Well at least we still have personal property rights...unless the government thinks it can make more tax money with a different owner.

Kelo v. City of New London
Supreme Court of the United States ruled that it was okie-dokie to take land by force from one private owner to give it to another.
The city took Susette Kelo's property and gave it to a redeveloper. The redeveloper was unable to obtain financing and abandoned the redevelopment project, leaving the land as an empty lot.

And we have protection against unreasonable search and seizure...never mind...
Three Grandmas Say They Were Strip-Searched at JFK
Michigan Police Can Download Your Personal Data Against Your Will
Court says police can use GPS to track anyone

Edited by Rogerdodger, 13 December 2011 - 01:05 AM.

[Rogerdodger]

Osama's greatest victory was not the attack on America but rather the consequent destruction of individual American's personal freedoms and liberty and Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Now everything from warrant-less phone taps to strip searches to fondling children's private parts to imprisonment without trial is now commonplace in this once great land of freedom.
Crisis and threats and emergencies have always given rulers the opportunity to crush freedoms without pushback from the masses.
"Never let a crisis go to waste" is the motto de jour.

COMING SOON: AMERICANS IN GITMO...

Bill allows indefinite detention without trial...

President 'demanded law apply to U.S. citizens'...

Even Al Jazeera asks: 'How did we get here?'

Edited by Rogerdodger, 15 December 2011 - 11:47 AM.