Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency

page: 10
102
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Sorry I didnt post on this sooner....This is absolute craziness....Who is to stop bush now from doing whatever he wants....All I have to say is that supporters of bush better not wine and say I didnt see this coming after this move....and I also bump that SeatleLaw be removed from this thread....waste of a post if you ask me




posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by NGC2736
But the fact was Mr. Osborne, that I was referring to something that was germane to the post itself, ie that lawyers 'built' the document in question. Therefore my aside to the worth of lawyers and their ilk, who twist the words of freedom, was aimed at no one present on this thread.

However, in the interest of fairness, I withdraw the remark. I will go that step towards peace, though it is beyond my power to apologize to such craven vermin.

And I speak specifically towards those lawyers who use their wiles to support the political process whereby oppression is moved forward on a daily basis in my nation. Their actions, from the doctrin of plausible deniability on down, amount to the outright rape of our Constitutional Liberties. And this document in question is the offspring, cloaking itself in the mantle of legality, and slithering it's way into the lives of free Americans.


NGC, you never learn. Your generalizations continue to betray your bigotry and biases.

It will be lawyers (if anyone) who will challenge this imperial decree's constitutionality and slap down this administration's imperial power grab.

But when the law (thanks to those lawyers dedicated to constitutional government) is effective and works for the people and democracy (see, e.g., Hamden v. Rumsfeld, S.Ct. 2007) you will be silent. Your festering boil of anger will continue to bubble.






posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 06:39 PM
link   
seattle, I have went as far as I will to keep this within the bounds of civility. You are bent on some agenda to re-write the history of your profession. Do it to your hearts content, it will make small difference in the eyes of the world.

You feel victimized because you are lumped into the group you so proudly identify with, and still see nothing wrong with verbally assaulting me. I have pointed out that while you may be a paragon of virtue, the same cannot be said for the majority of lawyers.

Do I stand alone in saying that the wiles of lawyers have been a yoke on the neck of freedom, and humanity in general? I think not. History is replete with many who would equate your profession with a tumor or the ass of all mankind. I have striven to make it plain that being a lawyer was a choice, much as associating with any criminal endeavor, and therefore crying foul is futile whining.

In your U2U you called me a bigot and a coward for refusing to debate you in public, so you could 'put me in my place', so to speak. You Sir, are so far beneath my contempt that it isn't even funny. I would sooner talk physics to a jackass than listen further to your pestilent so called reasoning.

I have apologized, publicly and privately, to the OP for allowing you to lead me into derailing this thread. But like most of your kind, you never drop anything, or show any civility towards the world. I have privately asked you for truce, but you insist on fighting. You are a poster child for bullies.

I have stated to you in a U2U that we are not able to resolve our respective positions, and that in the interest of peace, we need to let the matter stand as agreeing to disagree. You refuse.

In your very actions you portray the exact cartoon figure of the frothing lawyer so many see.

Get over yourself.



posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Uisge Baugh
This is absolute craziness....Who is to stop bush now from doing whatever he wants....All I have to say is that supporters of bush better not wine and say I didnt see this coming after this move.... WE SEE IT. Who could do anything if not the people of the United States?
This hasnt even been covered in any newscast.
Total denial. :shk;






and I also bump that SeatleLaw be removed from this thread....waste of a post if you ask me
Well, fortunatly, we all are allowed to express how we feel, and if there are those who do not see this coming, or refuse to, there is nothing we can do.
Respect at ATS is imperative.



posted on Jun, 9 2007 @ 02:48 AM
link   
i am not sue if jeffereson or frankiln wrote this "from time to lime the river of liberty needs to be refreshed by the blood of patriots and tyrants.
i do believe if he tried something hinky like this it would be idiotic the people would not stand for it . maybe thats why he wants all the illegal immigrants fight for bush get a green card.



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NGC2736
seattle, I have went as far as I will to keep this within the bounds of civility. You are bent on some agenda to re-write the history of your profession. Do it to your hearts content, it will make small difference in the eyes of the world.

You feel victimized because you are lumped into the group you so proudly identify with, and still see nothing wrong with verbally assaulting me. I have pointed out that while you may be a paragon of virtue, the same cannot be said for the majority of lawyers.

Do I stand alone in saying that the wiles of lawyers have been a yoke on the neck of freedom, and humanity in general? I think not. History is replete with many who would equate your profession with a tumor or the ass of all mankind. I have striven to make it plain that being a lawyer was a choice, much as associating with any criminal endeavor, and therefore crying foul is futile whining.

In your U2U you called me a bigot and a coward for refusing to debate you in public, so you could 'put me in my place', so to speak. You Sir, are so far beneath my contempt that it isn't even funny. I would sooner talk physics to a jackass than listen further to your pestilent so called reasoning.

I have apologized, publicly and privately, to the OP for allowing you to lead me into derailing this thread. But like most of your kind, you never drop anything, or show any civility towards the world. I have privately asked you for truce, but you insist on fighting. You are a poster child for bullies.

I have stated to you in a U2U that we are not able to resolve our respective positions, and that in the interest of peace, we need to let the matter stand as agreeing to disagree. You refuse.

In your very actions you portray the exact cartoon figure of the frothing lawyer so many see.

Get over yourself.


Sniff, sniff ...





posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by proteus33
i am not sue if jeffereson or frankiln wrote this "from time to lime the river of liberty needs to be refreshed by the blood of patriots and tyrants.
i do believe if he tried something hinky like this it would be idiotic the people would not stand for it . maybe thats why he wants all the illegal immigrants fight for bush get a green card.


That is from Jefferson.

Seattlelaw isn't there an ambulance that needs chasing or something?



posted on Jun, 11 2007 @ 11:10 PM
link   
Don't mean to bring up old topics, but HSPD 51(Homeland Security Presidential Directive 51) in conjunction with the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 sure do sound very much like what John Titor warned us about how this Iraq war would bring about laws that permitted the creation of the American Federal Empire. The framework has been put in place. About the only thing remaining to start to happen are the Elian Gonzalez/Waco like events to start popping up on the news. The media events are also a strong possibility at this point in time since the amnesty bill has been shot down. There is talk about passing laws empowering local police to act like immigration officials and begin deporting illegals they run into. There are 2 cases, one in Chicago and another American city I don't remember, where "un-documented" women are seeking refuge in churches, watch those media events closely. For those of you very much in favor of deportation, remember the warning. A divided America is what leads to an all out world wide nuclear exchange. Since the 2nd World War, an American world police force has in essence kept the world. I would hate to see Usama laughing in his cave as he continues to watch on CNN how our beloved country destroys itself partially by the laws he help forge. Wake up you civically un-ethical sheep!



posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by seattlelaw

NGC, you never learn. Your generalizations continue to betray your bigotry and biases.

It will be lawyers (if anyone) who will challenge this imperial decree's constitutionality and slap down this administration's imperial power grab.

But when the law (thanks to those lawyers dedicated to constitutional government) is effective and works for the people and democracy (see, e.g., Hamden v. Rumsfeld, S.Ct. 2007) you will be silent. Your festering boil of anger will continue to bubble.





I hate bringing things like this up after they seem to have died off. I've been trying to catch up on the topics of interest to me. Anyway, being a fellow Seattlite I feel a bit embarassed. Seattlelaw, you seem to be an intelligent person (that unfortunately belittle's other people in an obvious attempt to try and make yourself appear more intelligent). However, your vast amount of intelligence seems to be missing a very serious and valid point when it comes to this declaration by Bush. If and when this 'disaster' happens you guys in the 'law' department will be moot. There will be no need for laws. There will be only one law and one enforcer of the law. Bush. That is what this declaration means.

So, if this 'event' indeed comes to fruition and you find you and your 'constitutional law' friends out of work (or more likely in concentration camps) then maybe you will finally see what is being (and has been for some time now) spraypainted like nasty graphitti all over that beautiful document that used to be the U.S. Constitution.



posted on Jun, 15 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   
apparently the new translation for "president" is "dictator"



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by blowfishdl
apparently the new translation for "president" is "dictator"
Actually the two are not interchangeable and its either one or the other. Its like being a little pregnant. He is either a dictator like his dictator counterparts in this world, or he is a dignified president of the United States of America, where our forefathers set the ground rules to ensure us freedom and liberty.

All of you Bushies out there better hope this is just talk, and no action is taken. Dictators rule FOR LIFE or until they're put out of their misery.

Careful what you wish for and careful what you think a dictatorship will be like.
We;ll be wanting to go visit Kimmy Ill for our vacations.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 06:03 PM
link   
It might sound wierd, but s today's society playing out much like the new Star Wars trilogy? Just a thought...



posted on Jun, 18 2007 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by j84867
Don't mean to bring up old topics, but HSPD 51(Homeland Security Presidential Directive 51) in conjunction with the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 sure do sound very much like what John Titor warned us about how this Iraq war would bring about laws that permitted the creation of the American Federal Empire. The framework has been put in place. About the only thing remaining to start to happen are the Elian Gonzalez/Waco like events to start popping up on the news. The media events are also a strong possibility at this point in time since the amnesty bill has been shot down. There is talk about passing laws empowering local police to act like immigration officials and begin deporting illegals they run into. There are 2 cases, one in Chicago and another American city I don't remember, where "un-documented" women are seeking refuge in churches, watch those media events closely. For those of you very much in favor of deportation, remember the warning. A divided America is what leads to an all out world wide nuclear exchange. Since the 2nd World War, an American world police force has in essence kept the world. I would hate to see Usama laughing in his cave as he continues to watch on CNN how our beloved country destroys itself partially by the laws he help forge. Wake up you civically un-ethical sheep!


You bring up an interesting point that I'd like to elaborate on. One thing that has been making me scratch my head lately is the apparent "tilt" in the media away from the government toward alternative topics and/or government control. What if it's all a big charade just intended to desensitze us to what our futures will be like "under one (American) God"? I hate to put it that way, but it seems with issues like the one in the OP this is the way it's going.

I mean the media THRIVES on the negative anyways. Who wants to hear about Mrs. Farmer's crop having a bumper year? But have feds blow off her head after resisting arrest for growing marijuana and you have a story. Spin it towards her being a bad person outside of the issue at hand, and BAM! you have been desensitized a tad to these types of actions in the future. Just like saying "Mr. Jones was deported after being arrested for a number of parking violations" instead of saying "Mr. Jones was forcefully deported after no apparent resistance by men with machine guns".

Guess mom was right when she said that watching too much TV will make you go blind.



posted on Jun, 19 2007 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz

Originally posted by j84867
Don't mean to bring up old topics, but HSPD 51(Homeland Security Presidential Directive 51) in conjunction with the Military Commissions Act of 2006 and the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 sure do sound very much like what John Titor warned us about how this Iraq war would bring about laws that permitted the creation of the American Federal Empire. The framework has been put in place. About the only thing remaining to start to happen are the Elian Gonzalez/Waco like events to start popping up on the news. The media events are also a strong possibility at this point in time since the amnesty bill has been shot down. There is talk about passing laws empowering local police to act like immigration officials and begin deporting illegals they run into. There are 2 cases, one in Chicago and another American city I don't remember, where "un-documented" women are seeking refuge in churches, watch those media events closely. For those of you very much in favor of deportation, remember the warning. A divided America is what leads to an all out world wide nuclear exchange. Since the 2nd World War, an American world police force has in essence kept the world. I would hate to see Usama laughing in his cave as he continues to watch on CNN how our beloved country destroys itself partially by the laws he help forge. Wake up you civically un-ethical sheep!


You bring up an interesting point that I'd like to elaborate on. One thing that has been making me scratch my head lately is the apparent "tilt" in the media away from the government toward alternative topics and/or government control. What if it's all a big charade just intended to desensitze us to what our futures will be like "under one (American) God"? I hate to put it that way, but it seems with issues like the one in the OP this is the way it's going.

I mean the media THRIVES on the negative anyways. Who wants to hear about Mrs. Farmer's crop having a bumper year? But have feds blow off her head after resisting arrest for growing marijuana and you have a story. Spin it towards her being a bad person outside of the issue at hand, and BAM! you have been desensitized a tad to these types of actions in the future. Just like saying "Mr. Jones was deported after being arrested for a number of parking violations" instead of saying "Mr. Jones was forcefully deported after no apparent resistance by men with machine guns".

Guess mom was right when she said that watching too much TV will make you go blind.


Fiverz,
I don't call it a TV. I call it TS, "The Sphincter".
I love the power of the internet. Its the frontier where true freedom still reigns.



posted on Jun, 20 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   
Admittedly, I’m jumping in on this thread without reading the prior ten pages…so please excuse me if this has been covered. From the last few comments, I’m guessing that it hasn’t.

I guess I don’t understand the fear of a Bush dictatorship as a result of the great and horrible National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive.

I’m cutting a bit from an equally misguided thread that attempted to compare this act to the Reichstag Fire Decree…the decree that went a long way in establishing Hitler as a dictator.

The Reichstag Fire Decree shows us what it looks like to have a real deal written document establish a real deal dictator…


It is therefore permissible to restrict the rights of personal freedom [habeas corpus], freedom of opinion, including the freedom of the press, the freedom to organize and assemble, the privacy of postal, telegraphic and telephonic communications, and warrants for house searches, orders for confiscations as well as restrictions on property, are also permissible beyond the legal limits otherwise prescribed.


The Fire Decree literally removed FREEDOM OF OPINION from Germany. So to be an adequate comparison, the Presidential Directive would have to effectively restrict citizen rights while stripping power from the other two branches of our government.

Let's see...ladies and gentlemen (cue evil music)...the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive:


from Section 5a describing ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS of the act...

(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;



(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic...



And for those of you worried that the President would have sole authorship of a national continuity program:


(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.


And leave it to the government to be redundant...



(21) This directive:
(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law


Now I’m not saying that Bush wouldn’t like to be dictator.
But to say that lawyers have paved the way for this to happen is pretty inaccurate, I think.



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essedarius
And leave it to the government to be redundant...



(21) This directive:
(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law


Now I’m not saying that Bush wouldn’t like to be dictator.
But to say that lawyers have paved the way for this to happen is pretty inaccurate, I think.


That's all well and fine ... but who are the laws written by? Who approves them? Who enforces them? Answer those questions properly, and there's a bit more than meets the eye.

It seems like alot of people have a large problem reading between the lines. If someone tells you an object is round, they show you documents where it's written that it's round, and they have 10 other people tell you that it's round, are you going to just say it's round? Or are you going to look yourself to see if it's a cube or not? And btw, I did read the entire thread. Just felt like adding and aside there. If anything's redundant, it's my post here since similar sentiments have already been expressed earlier in the thread.



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fiverz
It seems like alot of people have a large problem reading between the lines. If someone tells you an object is round, they show you documents where it's written that it's round, and they have 10 other people tell you that it's round, are you going to just say it's round? Or are you going to look yourself to see if it's a cube or not?


I see what you're saying, but the core of this conversation is the Presidential Directive and whether or not it provides Bush with undue power in the event of a disaster.

So I'm not really relying on documents to define a situation...for the purposes of this conversation, the documents ARE the situation.

In my opinion, using that document as the sole piece of evidence, it is clear that Bush is not setting himself up with dictatorial powers.

But I'm willing to read between the lines and look at the broader picture...

Let's start by looking at the ways that a dictator comes to power. The way I see it, there are three basic ways:

  1. A law or directive provides the power. (Hitler, Mussolini)
  2. Political paranoia and oppression. (Stalin, Hussein)
  3. Military coup. (Castro, Khadafi)

I would have been more concerned about number one when Bush controlled the legislative branch of government. Right now, however, you have to admit that it would be highly unlikely that he would be able to muster support WITHIN HIS OWN PARTY, much less from the Dems, to pass a law providing him supreme power. (The Presidential Directive is probably as close as he could get and it is MILES away from anything that could be relied upon to destroy the legislative and judiciary branches of government, the constitution, and democracy all in one fell swoop.)

As for number two, I simply don't think that Bush has the popularity within political circles...and even less among citizens of the US...to lead successful campaign to eradicate Democrats.

Can you honestly say that you believe Bush could convince the country that Democrats are evil and should be imprisoned AND THEN convince the country that he is such a good president that term limits should be abolished? Personally, I don't see it.

And number three simply isn't an option for gaining control in the U.S.
Bottom line: American citizens are armed to the teeth.

Furthermore, if this were truly Bush's plan we would have seen a huge push for gun control following 9/11...that was his window of opportunity as his popularity was HIGH and his people were ready...and he didn't do anything that would constitute a push for supreme power. (Please don't wave the Patriot Act at me on this point...read the Reichstag Fire Decree...that's how REAL wannabe dictators use a staged event.)

I guess all I'm saying is this: Contrary to appearances at times...POWER is spread across many different entities in this country. For Bush to obtain dictatorial power in this country he would have to take power from all those people (who dislike him), sieze control of the media (who loves to mock him), placate economic leaders (who wouldn't trust him) and convince the citizens of his country (who HATE him) that this is a good idea.

Now people throw the word "impossible" around a lot these days but...

Impossible.



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essedarius
Admittedly, I’m jumping in on this thread without reading the prior ten pages…so please excuse me if this has been covered. From the last few comments, I’m guessing that it hasn’t.

I guess I don’t understand the fear of a Bush dictatorship as a result of the great and horrible National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive.

You need to read up on dictatorships, coups, and what someone elected can do, which is why we have THE US CONSTITUTION, so that, would not happen in this country. Papers, declarations, content, does not mean diddly. A Dictatorship is a Dictatorship, no matter how you color it or who is THE DICTATOR.



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
You need to read up on dictatorships, coups, and what someone elected can do, which is why we have THE US CONSTITUTION, so that, would not happen in this country.


I don't understand. (No sarcasm...I see you saying that I don't understand something, but I honestly am not sure what you mean.)


A Dictatorship is a Dictatorship, no matter how you color it or who is THE DICTATOR.


But dictators rise to power in very different ways and, in my opinion, Bush does not have the popularity or infrastructure to succeed at ANY of them.



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
EEEgads!!!!

Do you think Bush needs to be popular to win what, the DICTATORSHIP VOTE>????????

THERE IS NO VOTE. He needs no backing. All he has to do is implement himself after said "disaster" and that's that. Now the people may not like it, the government may not like it, he may have to hide, but he will be the dictator. A dictator is a person who IS NOT WANTED as a whole.

If i'm off here, please correct me. Name me happy people living under a dictatorship???


I swear, i just dont understand if i'm tapped or if i just see more than anyone else. HELP!!!





new topics
top topics
 
102
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join