|
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 08:17 PM by lightseeker
|
Originally posted by Stress
,,,let's look at facts to see where we are and how much substantial evidence there is to support this thread:
2000 Election
9-11 and the Homeland Security Joke
2004 Election
Invadin Iraq
Catchin Sadaam but not the supposed 9-11 mastermind Osama
Goin against the U.N., Congress, the American people,,,etc
Thanks for your post, Stress; I will try to touch on these subjects in my next podcast which should be up by Thursday. I would like to echo Justin's
request that more of you folks start your own podcasts and/or blogs and start making some noise.
The software necessary to record, edit and upload your podcast are all available for free on the net and tutorials are available, as well. I
personally use Audacity but there are others as well. If you need links or other info feel free to send me a U2U.
If we don't do more than just bemoan the current state of affairs and make our voices heard they win and we lose.
|
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 08:50 PM by DominionOfGozer
|
i dont understand how that would be possible, the limit is two terms. i could be wrong but i think there is a constitutional law that says only in the
middle of extreme circumstances could additional time be gained. that could be a false statement.
but like of all those other people running for president i dont know what is wrong with them, i'm confident hillary would win. although the dude from
hunt for red october is cool, the rest of them i dont know that much about. but i figure if bill is the first lady. then maybe it wouldn't be such a
bad idea.
i know i will never get involved in politics or any form of government ever again.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 09:03 PM by mhuss
|
If that # happens I think thats when we need to step up and get active against this Tyranny. AKA start a civil war before we are all enslaved, by the
federal selfish bankers. ;-p
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 09:36 PM by Justin Oldham
|
Originally posted by DominionOfGozer
i dont understand how that would be possible, the limit is two terms. i could be wrong but i think there is a constitutional law that says only in the
middle of extreme circumstances could additional time be gained. that could be a false statement.
Try this for some light reading on the subject. Thre is one specific scenario that
I could see Mr. Bush following through with.
Imagine...in the wake of the November elections, the Republicans lose soooo badly that there are very few who are still in office. Mr. Bush might
declare that something was rotten, and demand an investigation. Naturally, the results would be questioned. If he could prove some degree of
tampering, he might be in a position to 'insist' that he stayed on the job until it got worked out.
Unlikely? Yes. Why? The Democrat majority would move to destroy what was left of the GOP and...it wouldn't be hard to do.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 09:38 PM by awdsmirk
|
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator.
-- GW Bush 12/18/2000
Source: transcripts.cnn.com...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 09:45 PM by lightseeker
|
Originally posted by DominionOfGozer
i dont understand how that would be possible, the limit is two terms. i could be wrong but i think there is a constitutional law that says only in the
middle of extreme circumstances could additional time be gained. that could be a false statement.
Listen to my podcast here:
The Lightcast
Or Justin Oldham's p'cast, here:
Introducing Justin Oldham (reply 5)
Either one or both will give you the lowdown on how Bush might just dance around that Constitutional amendment. Be informed and know what's going on,
then get involved in fighting for and preserving our rights.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-7-2007 @ 09:51 PM by Intheshadwos
|
The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive (National Security Presidential Directive NSPD-51/Homeland Security Presidential
Directive HSPD-20), signed by United States President George W. Bush on May 4, 2007, is a Presidential Directive which specifies the procedures for
continuity of the federal government in the event of a "catastrophic emergency."
Such an emergency is construed as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or
disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."
The unclassified portion of the directive was posted on the White House website on May 9, 2007.
The directive further stipulates that, in the case of such an emergency, the new position of "National Continuity Coordinator" would be filled by
the assistant to the president for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (this position is currently held by Frances Townsend).
en.wikipedia.org...
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-7-2007 @ 02:25 AM by Justin Oldham
|
I started a discussion thread on that specific Presidential Order that might take
this discussion a bit further, if you want to have a reason to sleep with the lights on.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 17-8-2007 @ 09:20 PM by clay2 baraka
|
Originally posted by SkipShipman
I once heard a talk on the mashed potato circuit from a former DIRNSA that our country has "nuclear missiles pointed almost everywhere in the
world," and by the way "with care not to harm our own forces."
Canadians beware, they are pointed at you too. (scary thought, and likely true). Sorry, just a tangent.
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 17-8-2007 @ 09:40 PM by jerico65
|
Regardless if there is an attack or not, I think he'll step down when his time is up.
The only glich I can think of is what happens if his successor and VP are killed? Who takes over then? The present Speaker of the House?
Pelosi president? God help us all!!!
|
copyright & usage
|
|
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
|
reply posted on 24-8-2007 @ 12:35 PM by morbidtracie
|
Originally posted by lightseeker
Has anyone pondered this question, lately?:
What if, when the time comes for Bush to leave office and turn over the keys to the Oval Office to his successor, he decides that he is not ready to
go? Suppose, just for the sake of arguments sake, that some new "terrorist" attack or "National Emergency" should occur in the weeks either
directly before or directly after a new president is elected and he decides to pen another Executive Order, claiming that the need of the country and
his oath of office supercede the Constitutional mandate that he leave office after his second term. Now add in to the mix the variable that as
Comander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, he directs the Joint Chiefs to use all available force to enforce his order and suppress any civil unrest.
Pretty crazy stuff, right? But is it so far out of left field that you can not for a minute imagine it happening?
That is the subject of my latest Lightcast and you can hear it here:
Lightcast Episode 2
Tune in and then post your thoughts and opinions in my comments page;
I promise I won't be surprised or upset if you want to call me crazy or paranoid but I suspect that I am not the only person on this site who has had
the same thought, though they were probably smart enough not to mention it to anyone. 
Thanks for listening.
You know, I had the same thought.
Sometimes I think my own thoughts are crazy, so don't feel bad.
I planned on doing a podcast on that very subject in the next few weeks.
I listened to yours and I like it!
Vitchilo, you nailed it.
[edit on 24-8-2007 by morbidtracie]
|
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 10:24 PM by Anonymous ATS
|
|
copyright & usage
|
|
