It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What about the Constitution....

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 06:10 AM
If all goes as planned, then on Nov., just a little more than 6 months from now, Americans will salute it's new president. A Vice President, State elections in 35 states. House of Representatives in all states plus Gubernatorial elections in 11 states, as well as various state referendums and local elections, will also be chosen that day.

I've been wondering what would happen, if something major were to happen before then. I think it's safe to assume, that most ATS members have some serious doubts, regarding 9-11. We know it wasn't done by "outsiders" with boxcutters or Al Qaeda. How deep were the involvement of D. Rumsfeld, D. Cheney, C. Rice, C. Powell.? Only one could rubberstamp the deal.... President G. Bush Jr. Those were the key players, along with the top brass of the necessary branches, needed to pull this off. The rest were on a need to know only. Not that these folks couldn't add 2 plus 2 during and after 9-11.

Now there's been stories and rumors, regarding missing weapons grade plutonium and or depleted uranium, gone missing from U.S soil. If it's true or not, it's really not something we can do anything about at this stage.

Going back to the collaps of Russia, lots of the same materials went missing over there. The lack of security along with corruption, made it easy to get away with. Heck, some of these boys in charge of protecting this materiel, hadn't been payed by their socalled goverment in 6-8 months. Even United States started buying as much of the stuff they could lay their hands on. Only to make sure it didn't end up in the wrong places, with some bad people, with crazy agendas. $25.000 was a fortune in russian currency back then, and still is. The thing to keep in mind would be, who would buy such material and who would be willing to use it.? Seems kinda ironic at this point in time dosen't it.

9-11 was an excuse, for U.S.A to get a strong foothold in the middleeast. They knew going into Iraq, that Saddam had nothing invested in the 9-11 attack. They also knew there were no WMD or Al Qaeda training facilities. I've often wondered why C. Powell backed away from the scene. Was it more than he could stomack, did his conscience get the better of him.?

Could or rather would these same sick unscrupulous people have the nerve to discharge a "dirty bomb", in a major city suitable for such a evil purpose. It would certainly be a lot easier, than setting up the attack on the WTC. Of course making sure, that there are some sort of undisputable paper or moneytrail as a link. The link would obviously be pointing towards a fictive collaboration between Iran and Syria.

If this scenario were to happen, would President Bush be within his legal rights, to call for nationwide martial law, and in doing so, putting a temporary "freeze" on the upcomming elections. In other words, meaning Bush basically could stay in office, until things "settle down". The point being, that the United States at that point, would now be at war with Afghanistan-Iraq-Iran and Syria. God only knows if NATO will take the bait, and join forces in a war, where nuclear options are likely to play a part. I seriously doubt NATO will accept that. A conventional war maybe, but no nukes.

America is running low on funds, and they need this war very badly to stay in the game. However for things to fall into place, this will have to happen soon.. at least 2 to 3 months before electionday.

Since I'm not american, I'm therefore not familiar with the laws, should this thought experiment become a reality.

I'm looking forward to reading your thoughts. Am I a total spacekadet, or could it happen.?
I sincerely hope not...

posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 10:43 AM
In the United States we have a system of "checks and balances", meaning that the different branches of government "check"- or serve as a restraint for - each other's power. Sometimes this is referred to as the "Separations of Powers", meaning not one branch has any more power than the other.

There are three branches of Government:

The Executive Branch - The President and his Cabinet
The Legislative branch - The Senate and House of Representatives
The Judicial Branch - The Federal Court System and the Supreme Court

The power of each of these branches of government is "checked by" another branch...The president can't pass a law on his own; the Legislature (congress) must approve it. The Legislature can't pass a law on their own; the President can "Veto", or nullify, it. Even after the President vetos a potential new law passed by a simple mojority of the Legislature, the Legislature can still pass it again with a 2/3 majority vote.

Even if the law passes, the Judiciary Branch (the Supreme Court) can step in and declare it unconstitutional, thus nullifying the law. The Judiciary Branch's power is "checked" by the President who nominates the judges; and by the Legistative branch, who votes to accept or reject the President's nominee. answer your specific question:
I think the president can't declare Martial law and cancel the elections on his own...that idea would need to be voted on by the Legislature to allow it to happen...and even if the President and the Legistature agree to pass Martial law, the Judicial Branch (Supreme Court) of the U.S. governement could vote that cencelling the Elections is unconstitutional.

In the present political environment that exists in the U.S., I can NOT see congress and the Supreme Court going along with cancelling the election.

[edit on 4/27/2008 by Soylent Green Is People]

posted on Apr, 27 2008 @ 09:41 PM
Thank you Soylent Green Is People. I get the picture regarding "checks and balances" and the three executive branches. All acting as failsafes, in case one of these branches should brake down.

I'm certain it brings some comfort to people across the globe, who've lost faith in the american goverment. The total disregard of the Geneva Convention, and use of torture on enemy captives.

One could argue that the Supreme Court judges, have been handpicked over eight years of republican rule. In other words, some may feel they owe their job to this administration. Just a guess, but who really knows these days.

In respect to calling for a nationwide martial law. Knowing "red tape" and the time it takes to bring a lawsuit infront of a judge. One can only hope, that a desperate goverment can't prolong a Supreme Court decision. While working in the shadows, to get done what needs doing.

Again my friend, thank you for clearing up my questions.


log in