Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Bush Moves Toward Martial Law
towardfreedom.com — In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy, will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law. The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables".
Aidenag- 1340 diggs
- digg it
- JenadaeX, on 10/12/2007, -31/+109why/how is this man still alive? where have all of Americas murderers gone :(
- t3hCyborg, on 10/12/2007, -7/+34http://duggmirror.com/politics/Bush_Moves_Toward_Martial_Law_2/
Piggyback! - SqueakyWheel, on 10/12/2007, -10/+59Wow Bush is going to become a dictator and start randomly taking away our families and killing them.
- M4tt3r, on 10/12/2007, -6/+33Source:
(1) http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/091906a.html and http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/092906b.html See also, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, "The Use of Federal Troops for Disaster Assistance: Legal Issues," by Jennifer K. Elsea, Legislative Attorney, August 14, 2006
(2) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill+h109-5122
(3) Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International, "Recent Contract Awards", Summer 2006, Vol.12, No.2, pg.8; See also, Peter Dale Scott, "Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps," New American Media, January 31, 2006.
(4) "Technology Transfer from defense: Concealed Weapons Detection", National Institute of Justice Journal, No 229, August, 1995, pp.42-43. - deesine, on 10/12/2007, -122/+12Aren't the Dems constantly accusing Bush&Co of scare mongering?
I guess they'll use the tactic too if they see a chance. - praisethelard, on 06/06/2008, -15/+67It's time to put the 2nd Amendment to good use.
- Philodox, on 10/12/2007, -10/+68@Deesine
The difference is that Bush uses scare mongering to take away the freedoms of U.S. citizens. - SillyDigger, on 10/12/2007, -8/+71@deesine
Its not a scare tactic, its not fear mongering and its not a conspiracy theory, its reality.
Read H.R. 5122 for yourself - NoSuchAgency, on 10/12/2007, -3/+52You can't even get within a mile of Bush wearing a dissenting t-shirt, let alone with a rifle.
- ascharf85, on 10/12/2007, -44/+17Dang Bush is powerful.
He signed in a law all by himself. I'd say we just go ahead and abolish the senate, cause seriously we all know that Bush can sign any law he wants that gets to his desk. Does anybody really believe that the House and Senate vote on these matters?
;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)
(The joy of sarcasm.)
Uh...oh...I....am....getting...modded....down.....by....idiots........ughhh......... - cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -22/+7Are you implying that you wish to do something about him being alive? Smart.
- gb506, on 10/12/2007, -45/+7Good grief, the paranoid moonbattery on parade here is laughable.
- r2d7, on 10/12/2007, -5/+43Do you guys still hold elections if you're under martial law or does he stay in charge indefinitely?
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4Dude Thomas Jefferson died a long time ago.
- Jawood, on 10/12/2007, -4/+42@ascharf85
"He signed in a law all by himself. I'd say we just go ahead and abolish the senate, cause seriously we all know that Bush can sign any law he wants that gets to his desk. Does anybody really believe that the House and Senate vote on these matters?"
Yes, normally that's how our Government works.
The trouble, sir, is that Congress has been going along with the Bush Administration without questioning anything he proposes and vice versa. The Republicans have broken our Republic.
I'm really trying to keep an open mind but the Republican party is really pushing my libertarian buttons here! - deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+33Welcome to the new Fascist America!
All hail George W. Bush our new dictator.
Who would have thought? We gave Iraq democracy and we took democracy away in America.
The 12 Signs of Fascism ...
http://www.democratgiftshop.com/cgi-bin/store/store.cgi/571511948/angryintheusa/381479 - MusicalGenius, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12My whole self yearns for one thing... I just hope that we have hope with the next election. It's almost all I want at this point.
- anonym41414, on 10/12/2007, -17/+4"Read H.R. 5122 for yourself"
It's a freakin' appropriations bill. It's 439 pages long. If YOU'VE read it, I'll eat my hat.
Care to point to some specific provisions of this legislation that support your nutball black-helicopter, new-world-order conspiracy theories? - anonym41414, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9"You can't even get within a mile of Bush wearing a dissenting t-shirt, let alone with a rifle."
My commute to work takes me right past the White House every morning, and I regularly see people dissenting their little butts off right outside the man's bedroom window. - SillyDigger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23@anonym41414
Re: It's a freakin' appropriations bill.
and?
Re: It's 439 pages long.
If you're too lazy to read this stuff like our politicians I feel sorry for the future of this country and just so you know yes I'm reading it.
Re: If YOU'VE read it, I'll eat my hat.
Please upload the video on youtube.
Re: Care to point to some specific provisions of this legislation that support your nutball black-helicopter, new-world-order conspiracy theories?
Sure, try SEC. 1076 and just for the record obviously no one (except you) is talking about black helicopters or the "new world order" the discussion is about our law makers giving the President unnecessary leeway to declare Marshal Law. - scottelloco, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1@JenadaeX
They've gone into politics. - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18I don't think any sane person advocates doing any kind of physical harm to Bush. Anyone talking like that here should just stop. I think it's illegal to even say anything like that.
Let's all just calm down and let the law do it's job. A great many US citizens are now aware that the last two Presidential elections were stolen in Florida and Ohio. Everyone is watching for it this time very closely. There's going to be a lot of exit polling going on.
We The People won't stand for it a third time. We all know that the NeoCons are going to lose control of both houses. Critical Mass has been reached. One too many lies have been told.
Once progressives have subpoena power in both houses, the truth will begin to come out. Be patient.
If they somehow steal another election, We The People will not stand for any Martial Law. Neither will the rest of the world. - littlebylittle, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14And when I say "If they somehow steal another election, We The People will not stand for any Martial Law," I do not mean that I advocate any violence. No violence will be necessary. Just let them start gunning down non-violent American Citizen protesters. See what happens.
- davidlow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15@squeakywheel,
"Wow Bush is going to become a dictator and start randomly taking away our families and killing them."
The point is not that Bush will actually do those things, but that from now on it will actually be legal for any president to do them. Because of this, it becomes critically important that future presidents are competent and benevolent leaders. Until now, even presidents who turned out to be incompetent were not able to claim dictatorial powers and harm his people directly.
If you think Bush is trustworthy in this regard, you may argue the point with anyone you wish. Speaking for myself, I don't like the idea of handing over the keys to my freedom to any single individual. - conna, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7if bush is snuffed out that will leave Dick in charge. Not the best solution.
- jackkerouac, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Once progressives have subpoena power in both houses, the truth will begin to come out. Be patient."
First we're gonna take back Ohio, then Michigan, then we're going right on up to the Whtie House!!! YEEEEAAAARRRGGGGGHHH!!!!!!!!!! - sputza, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@jarland,
Did you read anything you moron? Read the article and then the bill... its not just martial law. - 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@davidflow -> The point is not that Bush will actually do those things, but that from now on it will actually be legal for any president to do them. Because of this, it becomes critically important that future presidents are competent and benevolent leaders.
No free society should have to worry about the "benevolence" of the person that leads only one of three branches of our government. What becomes critically important is that government is NEVER allowed to acquire this kind of power in the first place. What we need are elected representatives that aren't spineless drones, and more importantly, value patriotism over nationalism (I personally don't think many of them know the difference). Once the November elections leave a lot of Republicans looking for work, the first item on the agenda should be to UNDO this mess, not allow it to continue in any way, shape or form.
- t3hCyborg, on 10/12/2007, -7/+34http://duggmirror.com/politics/Bush_Moves_Toward_Martial_Law_2/
- jblossom, on 10/12/2007, -19/+145This is a truly evil event.
We had a coup d'etat in 2000, and the insurrection at the ballot box was squelched in Ohio in 2004. Now this government intends to do away forever with the thin veil of democracy behind which it has stood.
It may be too late. Even if Democrats win they've established precedence in the Bilbray vs. Busby special election to ignore the vote altogether. Brian Bilbray was sworn in as Duke Cunningham's replacement in Congress by Dennis Hastert BEFORE HIS ELECTION RESULTS WERE CERTIFIED - to avoid issues regarding the potential manipulation of electronic voting machines. The excuse used for this was a very questionable interpretation of the U.S. Constitution which claimed that only Congress could determine the credentials of a representative. In other words, as long as the Fascist elements remain in power they will be able to declare any election at the Congressional level null and void.
The American people have no one to blame for this but themselves. Hitler did not rise to power by crushing the German people: he duped them to the point that they welcomed him with open arms.
As I've mentioned before, ours is a democracy born from bloodshed and ideas. The government is challenging us to think that their willingness to allow Americans to risk their blood will be stronger than the idea of democracy. We have proven that wrong time and again in this country, from the War of Independence to the battles for civil rights and beyond. Let's pray that it doesn't come to that - and let's pray even harder that this cowardly piece of legislation slipped into a bill that yet again has escaped the notice of the public does not go unnoticed.
Act up - spread the word - this issue is EXTREMELY important to the future of our nation.
DIGG THIS STORY TO THE MAX - GET OTHERS TO DO SO ASAP.- Demagogue, on 10/12/2007, -110/+14you didnt just compare bush to hitler did you.
your a fool - archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -15/+80And yet the Bush administration is using the same tricks the Nazis did before WWII...make the people fearful, and they'll give you absolute power.
- deesine, on 10/12/2007, -66/+7Scare monger much?
Go take your meds. - Demagogue, on 10/12/2007, -40/+8dugg down by the dems and bush haters... Our President definetely has been one of the worse ones in america's history, but you CANNOT compare him to hitler. We have elections, he'll be out of office next term. Just face it that over half of america wanted him in office. It wasnt some crazy conspiracy theory. Comparing hitler to bush is WAY off.
- 7952, on 10/12/2007, -31/+3I think you are right to highlight the threat posed by laws like this. However, the threat is not Bush. He has acted in exactly the way that any politician would in his position. And if you wanted to turn America into a fascist state, Bush is not the man to do it. No external threat will ever reforge an entire countries political consciousness. Only grave internal crisis could do this. Such an event could be a catastrophic break down in the trust of the president, forcing a strong man who would defeat the incumbent and use the new powers that had been acquired (by Bush) to restore order. If the 9/11 conspiracy stories were true (which they are not) the real threat comes after the public realize, not before. Creating a dictatorship in reaction to the conspiracy.
- JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+38@archiesteel
"Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. ...Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
- - Hermann Goering, the guy who set fire to Hitler's parliment building for Hitler so Hitler could declare martial law and pass laws similar to our "patriot" act. - Jammer, on 10/12/2007, -29/+2Idiot. I hereby invoke Godwin's Law, which states once Hitler or the term Nazi is used in a post, the thread is therefore terminated.
- kaemaril, on 10/12/2007, -1/+25"Idiot. I hereby invoke Godwin's Law, which states once Hitler or the term Nazi is used in a post, the thread is therefore terminated."
Godwin's "Law" says no such thing, buddy.
Here you go :
"As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."
Note also that no mention is made of whether or not the comparison is appropriate. - webcrumb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14Consider yourselves lucky. The US has the largest latent militia in the world; these laws already exist in the UK and we have neither a written constitution or amendments to protect us, simply legislation that is easy to change with the stupidly large majority that exists in the House of Commons.
It's already possible under law for the police to detain anyone gathering at a meeting, whether in a public or private place, for no reason more than they don't like it. A meeting is two or more people in one place at one time.
The erosion of personal rights has not only just begun, and it is nowhere near finished. - vixiecron, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2"DIGG THIS STORY TO THE MAX - GET OTHERS TO DO SO ASAP."
And apparently check your brain and ability to read at the door.
As I read these comments, this comes to mind -- how unbelievably bad is our educational system today that there are so many people in the United States spewing such ridiculously-absurd nonsense? Is there some set of core assumptions that you refuse to relinquish which tilt your world view towards the idiotic? What are they? Don't read? Never question? Forget context? Never believe a republican about anything? How can you read the same history, the same constitution, the same daily news, the same US code, the same house and senate resolutions, etc. and still reach conclusions about these things and various current events related to them that are so far removed from reality as to be rather bizarre? I'm completely astounded! It is as if a very significant portion of the population of this country (and perhaps the planet Earth) has just about all of the perception and analytic capability of a frightened heard of buffalo.
I'm not a right-wing nut. I'm not a religious conservative. I'm not a "neo-con", whatever the hell that's supposed to be. Do not call me any of these things. If you want to call me something, you could call me a slightly-conservative libertarian. You could also probably call me a loud-mouthed jerk, after this comment. You can definitely call me disgusted.
- Demagogue, on 10/12/2007, -110/+14you didnt just compare bush to hitler did you.
- anareric, on 10/12/2007, -13/+119I fear what GWB's third term is going to be like.
- jamessavik, on 10/12/2007, -11/+19Won't happen. Bush wants to retire and play golf- and not go hunting with Cheney.
I suspect that this is more about shoring up some of the problem areas that became apparent on 9/11. - anareric, on 10/12/2007, -3/+22Why would anyone in their right mind actually want to go hunting with Dick?
- rhettnyedotorg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11hah you say that like you actually believe it. he's not going anywhere and you should be ashamed of yourself if you still believe there is a democracy.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8No, Bush will be out in 2 years. His own party is pretty fed up with him, and even the retired military generals are saying this administration ***** up Iraq, which makes me think the active generals probably have a pretty dim view of the administration, too.
He has very little support. He can sign all the bills he wants, but he can't personally enforce them. - JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25No they'll just put in another puppet.
- CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -13/+4So when there are elections in two years and Bush isn't a dictator, you're going to apologize, right? No? You're just going to come up with something else? Yeah, that's what I thought.
- jamessavik, on 10/12/2007, -11/+19Won't happen. Bush wants to retire and play golf- and not go hunting with Cheney.
- jaycliche, on 10/12/2007, -22/+6Wan't all that in the original patriot act?
- dancpsu, on 10/12/2007, -81/+14This is exactly the reason why democrats don't get elected.
Instead of putting forth reasonable policy discussions, you put out conspiracy theories that the majority of the public laughs at.
Some people here sound like they need a regular dosage of anti-psychotics.- minorthreat, on 10/12/2007, -9/+60no, we point out all the laws and amendments Bush changes/breaks, that takes away our civil liberties on which the country was founded on.. all in the name of fighting this so-called war on terror.
- Azur2, on 10/12/2007, -38/+8I'm with dancpsu on this. I'm very strongly against Bush, against neocons, and against the infringements of rights, but this reads like really paranoid communist propaganda.
- minorthreat, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24When was the last time someone posted something that GWB and Congress have done that is positive? hmm.. We aren't biased and we could care less about bashing your favorite political party, we are just pointing out the obvious.
- ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11I smoke a regular does of anti-psychotics. And I still hate Bush. Maybe you should too.
Minorthreat: When's that last time we could? Maybe that's what you were saying. - peritonlogon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8The reason why Democrats don't get elected is because they're not an opposition party, they're Republicans who are reasonable-esque. What have the Democrats proposed to reign in the absurd conservative nanny state policies or to get us out of an extremely unpopular war? Nothing. Not a single thing. Why? Because they're the same people paid for with the same dollars as Republicans. They're not as corrupt, that's about all you can say for them. They will never win an election on their own merits because they have no merits.
- tehJR, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-Qv9zSe0eg
- UGM2099, on 10/12/2007, -7/+40Protests are a guarantee if another election is stolen.
- eggo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15You would think that the first one would have been enough...
- t3hCyborg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+56I'm not trying to defend GWB here, but let's all keep in mind that Bush can not make a law on his own, the HoR and Senate also have voted for this law. Don't think about just getting Bush out of office, think of getting all the supporters of these clear breaches to out freedom out of office.
- SillyDigger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+45173 democrats voted for this and sadly none have admitted that they have made a mistake, face it our goverment has been hijacked by people on both sides who have no interest in this country.
- rippyd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Well, that's generally true. But the president is allowed to issue "signing statements" when signing legislation that allow him to interpret the law relative to his opinion of the constitution. Congress can not challenge his signing statements, so in effect Bush is allowed to modify this legislation he signs into law to fit his view and agenda. Many think that Bush has abused his power with signing statements, taking them far beyond the scope of their original intent. Arlen Specter (R-PA) for example, has expressed this view.
When Bush signed the renewal of the Patriot Act in March, he issued a signing statement that in effect did away with a provision in the bill requiring congressional oversight. Congress wanted the ability to keep tabs on how the adminstration was managing the Patriot Act. While bill was signed, Bush granted himself the ability simply ingore that portion of the law that gives congress oversight privilages.
Bush has used signing statements to grant himself the right to ignore military regulations, affirmative action laws, requirements to inform congress, and safeguards against political inferference in research funded by to govt.
Bush has issued over 750 signing statements in 6 years. Clinton in his 8 years as president issued 140. G.H.W. Bush in 4 years issued 232. And it's not just the number. - megaloid, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16"...face it our government has been hijacked by people on both sides who have no interest in this country."
Oh, I think they're VERY interested in our country, very interested in turning it into a nice, manageable feudal society with a large network of gulags for those who resist. This is what they're hellbent on doing. Whether they ultimately succeed at it is another matter. Even now, I am inclined to believe that the American people will respond in surprising ways once we wake up.
- spartan018, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10*plays the "Martial Law" theme from the BSG Season 2 soundtrack*
- anonym41414, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Yours was the only comment in this damn thread actually worth reading.
Gosh, that's a great soundtrack.
*fires up itunes*
- anonym41414, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Yours was the only comment in this damn thread actually worth reading.
- Kickstart70, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5What's the name of this law so hat I can research further? The link is dead.
- toppgun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7H.R. 5122
- haastyle, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5someone mirror it?
- JonasBriden, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12http://duggmirror.com/politics/Bush_Moves_Toward_Martial_Law_2/
- rhmmj, on 10/12/2007, -11/+5@JenadaeX (top most comment)
What the hell kind of a comment is that? Definitely not a smart one for you or for the site. Forgive me for not replying to the actual comment, I really don't want to be associated with it. - electronicmaji, on 10/12/2007, -14/+8WOOT awesome MARTIAL LAW I love that wrestler!
- TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -30/+11I love the rampant conspiracy theories and crazy discussions on Digg now.
Honestly, people need to get a grip and actually understand how the government works. Just because the president proposes something doesn't mean its going to pass, its called checks and balanced, and this alarmist liberal/conservative/moderate/right wing/left wing/crazy people ***** needs to stop.
I'm going to be dugg down, but the crazy ***** needs to stop, and I'm just happy that the majority of the diggers here can't vote because they obviously lack a real informed opinion.- Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21You're right! We need to understand how the system works.
We shouldn't EVER question anything the President proposes because talking about how
crazy, scary or F'ing stupid his proposals are is clearly "alarmist".
Please remove your head from your ass and consider, just for a moment, that this man
ISN'T out for the good of "the people" but only for he and his associates goals.
And if you hadn't noticed the "checks and balanced" (your words, I think you meant "balances") system is being manipulated by a few powerful individuals using fear mongering
tactics. - beesucker, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15Bringing attention to a law, proposed or enacted, that gives the federal government military control over the populace seems like something that most Americans would find distasteful. I mean, our country was kind of founded out of the wish to have some individual sovereignty, to limit the scope of centralized government. It is scary to me now that any sort of criticism of our government is dismissed as conspiratorial. So why does this '*****' need to stop? What are you afraid will happen if people question these things? What about this article is conspiratorial? I guess that saying that Bush has officially become dictator is a bit conspiratorial, but what about the issue of the law itself? What do you think? Should the federal government have more control over your life or less? If less, then this law seems to be a problem. If, however, you want them to have more control, then be happy, you got what you want - don't worry about Digg.
- TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3All I'm trying to say is that the constant alarmist fear mongering is getting old. We get it, bush bashing is popular, and i'm not a huge fan of him or his administration, but that doesn't mean I think its all some conspiracy against America, we've had bad presidents before, it doesn't mean its a conspiracy.
- Cronus6, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21You're right! We need to understand how the system works.
- SillyDigger, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6USA! USA! *durrrr* *drool* I hate libbyruls *durrr* *duhhhh*
- shanal, on 10/12/2007, -15/+7WE NEED JACK BAUER
- flag8, on 10/12/2007, -8/+32This is starting to sound like the Nazi's 'Final Solution'
- gkoberger, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12I think people need to make up their mind.. is he "stealthy" or just an idiot? He's cleverly hookwinking america or just a complete idiot, depending on what people need him to be..
- archiesteel, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16He's not an idiot. He pretends to be, so that people underestimate him. But he's not a genius either. He is very ambitious, and very ambitious people tend to be cunning, if amoral.
- TheG2, on 10/12/2007, -11/+9@gkoberger
I agree.
Apparently, histories dumbest president was able to cover up the biggest conspiracy ever, and able to manipulate the entire american people.
No one can make up their mind, he's either a complete idiot, or the smartest most devilish president ever. Pick one. - Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8It worked for Reagan, so they tried it again. I expect they'll have a hunchback deaf-mute dwarf for their next candidate.
- Cl1mh4224rd, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5"He's not an idiot. He pretends to be, so that people underestimate him. But he's not a genius either. He is very ambitious, and very ambitious people tend to be cunning, if amoral."
He's an ambitious idiot with his own ideas about how things are supposed to work.
I'm not suggesting some large-scale dark government here, but way too many people here on Digg seem to believe every little detail of everything Bush does... came from Bush's brain.
Bush consults others (which isn't sinister). You can tell by comparing his TV interviews and speeches with the bills he signs. On TV he's a bumbling idiot, but people interpret the things he signs as an indication of calculated stealth *on his part*.
BS. He's an idiot. He just doesn't get to ask, "what's the best way of doing this," when in front of the camera. - egrumling, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4No, Bush is a figurehead, put out there mostly because Chaney doesn't have the health to campaign, and isn't "electable," at least not for President.
Read _Worse_Than_Watergate_ to find out how the administration works. Chaney is considered to be one of the strongest VPs ever. Bush is there to win elections and make us all feel good about having a redneck president (well hot damn, he cuts up brush on the weekends, just like me!). The biggest problem with this administration seems to be that they learned from the mistakes of the Regan and Nixon administrations: Namely, keep your damn mouth shut, and ride the knife edge of legality, sticking to the letter of the law instead of the spirit.
I really hope that the dems win back the house, if only to slow down the government to a pace it can handle. Passing laws without debate in the middle of the night shows a contempt for constitution, and the Republicans should be held accountable for it. Hopefully we'll see a Veto or two, but the best solution would be gridlock and budget shutdowns. Another good read is _the_Clock_of_the_Long_Now_ by Stewart Band (http://www.amazon.com/Clock-Long-Now-Stewart-Brand/dp/046504512X). It does a good job at explaining reliative/human perception of time, and what can happen when one institution attempts to move faster than it should.
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -5/+36Conspiracy huh? Well, here's an excerpt:
_____________________________________________________________
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.
Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."
______________________________________________________________________
So the law is real, it was passed a week ago, and here it is. Explain.- zorpscorp, on 10/12/2007, -3/+29Martial Law's nothing new, but this new bill makes it a LOT more powerful when used.
- Urusai, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27Remember, 50% of the citizens are complete dumbasses. The rest of us better beef up our gun collection.
- revisrev, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5yea, but these citizens are people that follow orders even when they don't want to.
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h109-5122
Everything you need to know about the enacted law (including the four other names it has gone by, such as the "Heroes at Home Act of 2006"...I wonder if I could legislate a new Ferrari for myself if I called it the "Everlasting Liberty and Truth Act of 2007"...).
http://www.govtrack.us/data/us/bills.text/109/h/h5122.pdf
The law itself. All 439 pages.
It's interesting to note that someone slipped this in along with revisions to the reporting of rape in military schools, requests for soldiers to participate in sports before completing their service, and the halting of killing deers by helicopter on Santa Rosa.
Here's the section you should focus on:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMER-
GENCIES.
(a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES AUTHORIZED.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Section 333 of title 10, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
`` 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and
Federal law
``(a) USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.--
(1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the
National Guard in Federal service, to--
``(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United
States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or
other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or
incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the
United States, the President determines that--
``(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent
that the constituted authorities of the State or possession
are incapable of maintaining public order; and
``(ii) such violence results in a condition described in
paragraph (2); or
``(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic
violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrec-
tion, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition
described in paragraph (2).
``(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition
that-- ``(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or
possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that
State or possession, that any part or class of its people is
deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named
in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted
authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse
to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that
protection; or
H. R. 5122--323
``(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the
United States or impedes the course of justice under those
laws.
``(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State
shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the
laws secured by the Constitution.
``(b) NOTICE TO CONGRESS.--The President shall notify Congress
of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A)
as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days
thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.''.
(2) PROCLAMATION TO DISPERSE.--Section 334 of such title
is amended by inserting ``or those obstructing the enforcement
of the laws'' after ``insurgents''.
(3) HEADING AMENDMENT.--The heading of chapter 15 of
such title is amended to read as follows:
``CHAPTER 15--ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS TO
RESTORE PUBLIC ORDER''.
---------------------------------------------------
Namely 1076(1)(2)(B)...
"restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or >>>incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that -- opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. - imjustabill, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@Urusai. The problem is the 50% that are the dumbasses are the ones who already have the beefy gun collections.
The worst part is that things like this get put into giant bills (just the table of contents for the HR 5122 is over 20 pages long), and congresspeople are too busy taking special interest money to read the whole thing. - ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Ran out of room. Anyway, you see where this is going.
- orp2000, on 10/12/2007, -2/+24You are an idiot. I wish you couldn't vote...because you obviously can't read. This is not something he is "proposing." The very first line of the summary reads "...has signed into law." What part of that is confusing to you?
- Koosebane, on 10/12/2007, -20/+4NO.
The sky is NOT falling. - dattaway, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19With the proliferation of small, cheap camcorders and video hosting sites, we are ripe to provide the world with lots of action packed entertainment.
- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -8/+8With the proliferation of small arms, and cheap ammunition, we are ripe to deter any thought of this type of hostility.
- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -29/+16What a bunch of *****, and people are falling for it! You can't buy this type of humor...
First he is a drooling idiot, now he is working behind the scenes to declare martial law if he wishes...
*****. You can't have it both ways!
Did any of you jackasses figure in that the cops and the Army are us, friends, neighbors, relatives? Do you honestly believe that the powers in play here would actually come and shoot you if you are violating curfew? Please. The cops around here have children that go to the school where my kids go... The people that live around here are armed to the teeth, especially now during the start of bear season and with deer season right around the corner!
Let me give you fear mongering asswipes something to consider... The 2nd Ammendment was created just for this reason! No person in their right mind will invade their own land with troops, when the people they are fighting are their sons, brothers, sisters, fathers, etc., especially if they know that their are many among us (including myself) are armed skilled and ready for it. But it will not happen! The only way it could is if they take away our 2nd Amendment rights!
Do you honestly think that the US Army is going to come to your neighborhood and start leveling the place because the people there are protesting? What a pile of *****!
Dugg down.- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6No kidding... I remember before New Years 2000, and all the nutbags were running amok, declaring that Clinton was going to call Martial Law to sweep up the guns or whatever nonsense... Then he was going to do it before the election....
- jblossom, on 10/12/2007, -4/+25May 4, 1970. Kent State University, Ohio. 4 Dead.
July 14, 1874. 30 striking workers killed by Federal troops, Chicago, IL
April 20, 1914. 5 men, 2 women, 12 children killed by state militia in Ludlow, CO
1894 - Federal troops killed 34 attempting to break a strike
I am sure that Jewish Germans could not have imagined that Nazis would have come into their neighborhoods to destroy their lives and then later cart them off to the ovens. And not that many Germans would have believed it, either.
We can ignore dangers like this from which our laws have protected us. Or we can face them and the hard truths of power gone awry. The choice is ours. - cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -16/+2@jblossom
Roswell, New Mexico 1947. Aliens crash land
Come on jblossom, can you seriously take figures that are clearly low (however some of those events were bad) and use them to convince us that they are coming for us? Give me a break, that is utter ***** and now you are grasping for reasons why we should believe that we are going to become target practice... - SuckItUp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16@jblossom
You forgot about Waco, Randy Weaver, etc. Or do they not count since that was under good king Clinton? - chicagobiker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17"Did any of you jackasses figure in that the cops and the Army are us, friends, neighbors, relatives? Do you honestly believe that the powers in play here would actually come and shoot you if you are violating curfew? "
By the time you find out you're wrong it'll be to late. This will be just about the time your policeman neighbor you've had over for dinner for years is busting you in the face with the butt of his rifle. He'll be damned if his family will starve with the loss of his job over yours.
Cops and soldiers who disobey their superiors are the FIRST to be put in the new jails. The ones that are left who comply, jail the citizens. - jblossom, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12RE cpuenvy and Wavey comments the suspension of writ of Habeus Corpus is certainly also very important, but I think that you're trying to gloss over in a big way is this further extension of Federal power to overstep the rights of the States and the people. Wavey points out that the Insurrection Act only allows for the Federal government to bypass state authority when Federal laws are being violated or when the states are depriving citizens of their Constitutional rights. These capabilities allowed enforcements of civil rights laws in the 1960s - a good use of Federal force to uphold the law. But look at the wording:
...the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."
1) President alone determines.
2) Domestic violence has occurred - could be practically anything - maybe someone trampled a lawn, say
3) President alone judges that states are incapable or refusing
4) Note addition of "conspiracy" - could be anything that the President is afraid of
This is WAY, WAY beyond law enforcement. This is a fishing expedition that flies in the face of democracy. It allows an autocrat such as Bush - already inclined to "signing statements" and others acts of ignoring the rule of law - to declare when he doesn't feel comfortable with what citizens are doing.
RE cpuenvy's comments on "gee, not enough people have died," my examples are in response to your statement:
"Do you honestly think that the US Army is going to come to your neighborhood and start leveling the place because the people there are protesting? What a pile of *****!"
Well, it's not BS, people have been killed just for protesting. I gave only a handful of examples from our history. And that's the point. If you wait until some real ugly number comes up before you start worrying about your freedoms - then it's too late. That's what happened in Germany. People pooh-poohed things, thinking that it was something that wouldn't affect them personally, just a few rabble-rousers, "them." And then they came for the pooh-poohers.
RE the Second Amendment, there may come a time when guns make a difference in fighting oppression in this country, but if we get to that point before thinking that we cold use them to defend our liberties then we would have most likely lost the ability to use them effectively anyway. While I support the 2nd Amendment (though also noting its intent to be used for a well-regulated militia) I think that there are a lot of folks who hide behind it thinking that they are safe from government tyranny because they have a gun. If you have to use a gun then the power of democracy has failed. The most powerful weapon we have are the laws and the Constitution that protect us from having to get to that point with our government. Enough of drugstore cowboys who would rather boy it up down at the bar and talk tough about using a gun against the government than do something real. Get some REAL courage - and fight for freedom NOW - without a gun. Or cuss words. - nextedge, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8The suspension of habius corpus effectively negates the second amendment.
The civil war had brothers fighting against brothers
Many experiments have shown that people can and will do horrendous things because an authority figure told them to.
You assume bush is by himself an idiot or genius, it doesn't matter, he has a machine behind him. (for example his father was director of the CIA)
You assume that it's all going to happen in a big explosion, and we will all jump up and protest. It wont, it will happen slowly, so slowly that by the time you want to stop it, it will be too late. Do you think that the other countries that have atrocities decided they wanted the?.. and, the military in other countries that does those atrocities? who are they? aren't they the sons of the very people they are oppressing? - hosiah, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11"Do you honestly think that the US Army is going to come to your neighborhood and start leveling the place because the people there are protesting? What a pile of *****!"
Happens every day. Hey, put up a website about how to hack boarding passes. Support gays getting married. Profess belief in evolution. Stand in front of a casino and teach people about probability mathematics. *****, half my neighbors would burn me at a stake if they knew I run Linux.
I don't feel like dumping my whole personal life in here, but I individually have been the victim of four instances of police brutality (my worst convicted offense is a speeding ticket) and my family together has had much worse happen at the hands of the law. I mean "my kids still have nightmares about it" worse. - egrumling, on 10/12/2007, -7/+0Branch Davidians*. Ruby Ridge. Elian Gonzolas Oh, but that was under Democrats' rule. The gun totin' lobby doesn't seem to have a problem with the current crew. Maybe the Democrats should get a few country music singers and NASCAR drivers to endorse them, instead of Doc Hollywood. :)
*just because the crazy right wingers (including Rush Limbaugh and some prominent members of the NRA), thought that Janet Reno was out of control at the time. History showed that David Koresh set the fires. - jackkerouac, on 10/12/2007, -10/+2"Happens every day. Hey, put up a website about how to hack boarding passes. Support gays getting married. Profess belief in evolution. Stand in front of a casino and teach people about probability mathematics. *****, half my neighbors would burn me at a stake if they knew I run Linux."
Wow, you really are a ***** idiot.
Your neighbors would "burn you at the stake" if they knew you run Linux? Where do you live, the Microsoft campus?
I profess a belief in evolution and so far, amazingly enough, the black helicopters haven't touched down in my front lawn.
And if you 'stand in front of a casino and teach people about probability mathematics,' those people comping for you aren't the Army, they're the guys from the local nut house.
Christ, people like you give all lefties a really, really bad name. - hosiah, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1@jackkerouac
"Christ, people like you give all lefties a really, really bad name."
I'm not a ***** leftie, you maggot. And ***** your whole bloodline for defiling the name of Jack Kerouac for your screen name.
- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -17/+6No kidding... I remember before New Years 2000, and all the nutbags were running amok, declaring that Clinton was going to call Martial Law to sweep up the guns or whatever nonsense... Then he was going to do it before the election....
- jamessavik, on 10/12/2007, -14/+6I wish people would make up their mind. Bush can't be a drooling idiot AND an maniacal evil genius overlord at the same time.
IMHO he is merely mediocre with tendencies to lapse into sub-par. - huxrules, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15Ok kids-
This is what the 2nd Amendment is for. Please buy Ak-47's and AR-15's. If you don't want to purchase a gun then please buy ammo. 5.56mm rounds and 7.62mm rounds.
Thx- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7And if you buy ammo, leave your address. Then, I will know where to stop when I need to reload.... I require lots of bandoleers of .223 and 7.62x39.
LMAO! - rhettnyedotorg, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Come up to Canada but don't bring your guns.
- fyngyrz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Seriously -- if America falls away from its republic, how long do you think it will take the ruling junta to turn its eyes to the "northern resource area"? Particularly since there is little military or militia to be concerned with?
Historically speaking, Canada has been safe *because* of the USA's republic and civic commitment to liberty in general. Without that, you're just a lot of land with a lot of oil. Kind of like Iraq. Except you have more resources America could use than the Iraqis do... - positron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3A temporary refuge in Canada, should the going get rough, sounds nice. The again, how smart is it moving to a country in which the citizenry have little if any right to truely arm themselves against the inevitable tyranny of government?
- cpuenvy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7And if you buy ammo, leave your address. Then, I will know where to stop when I need to reload.... I require lots of bandoleers of .223 and 7.62x39.
- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -18/+7Not suprising. Sounds like something I can see them using in case a nuke goes off in one of our cities.
I am still waiting for the Digg headline "Bush kills puppies and kittens with bare hands". or just replace Bush with Conservatives or Republicans. At the rate digg is going these days we will see it in time.- rhettnyedotorg, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5yeah like say, perhaps like if a nuke were to accidentally go off in like a place similar to mississippi or somewhere else full of the people that bush hates, or like san-fran or something. OOPS! nuke went off. sorry, hippies. also, while we're at it lets declare martial law everywhere else in the country. there's a conspiracy theory for you.
- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5My point was if terrorists attack us on our soil or an Avian flu outbreak, martial law maybe needed in such cases. So not a "consipiracy theory" a fact of life we may have to deal with.
- fredkreuger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1lol, avian flu
- yoekpaf, on 10/12/2007, -8/+6look at the site it came from. It is meant to be at least a little fear-mongering. Don't take the story as absolute. He may have signed it, but all the implications in the story do not necessarily follow.
- cramtod, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18I would not compare to Bush to Hitler, however the tactics between the two regimes is quite similar. I guess this would mean Karl Rove = Joseph Goebbels.
"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."
-- Joseph Goebbels, German Minister of Propaganda, 1933-1945
" ... voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
-- Hermann Goering, Hitler’s Reich Marshall, at the Nuremberg Trials- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6Liberalism is more close to Socialism and the Nazi style regime (less the autrocities) than true Conservatism which is for less government influence in our lives. Your post is just another one of those things liberals do in reversing the roles and exactly following the policy of Joseph Goebbels.
Joseph Goebbels would be proud of you. - egrumling, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@SwordofKahless
You are confusing two different things. People tend to think left/right and authoritarian/anarchism. Unfortunately, both parties in the US tend to be authoritarian in nature.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2
Take the test to see where you fit on the chart. It didn't really surprise me when I saw where I land, but interesting anyway. - SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2That was fun I came out a little off the bulls eye to the Libertarian left. LOL. That can't be, the sky is falling.
- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -15/+6Liberalism is more close to Socialism and the Nazi style regime (less the autrocities) than true Conservatism which is for less government influence in our lives. Your post is just another one of those things liberals do in reversing the roles and exactly following the policy of Joseph Goebbels.
- milomilomilo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Stop with the " You cant have it both ways" *****.
That is just muddying the waters.
Not many people say he is plain dumb, They claim he is incompetent.
That he is unable to perform his duties to the American people correctly, that doesn't negate the fact that the Bush Administration has disregarded the will of the American people dozens of times, and attacked the freedoms that this country is based upon.
But I guess playing ostrich works for you. - jav1231, on 10/12/2007, -10/+5jblossom,
hehehehe....hahahaha...oh stop...***** so much comedy. Tell me you're not serious cuz I DON'T want to lose the joke....hehehehehhehe *****.......
"coup d'etat in 2000" niiiiiicccceeeeeeee
Dude! You're good! - aragami, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9*checks url* yep this is definatly digg, its going the way of shoutwire with this conspiracy/antibush ***** though, you dont like the president?
go do something about it.. sitting in your room whining about him to other people online is NOT going to provoke a regime change- Continuum, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@jarland
When you said that martial law is nothing the first time I dugg you up. then the second time i thought "meh, hes just restating it in case someone missed it" but man, after two times of saying the same thing.... STOP. we get it.
- Continuum, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@jarland
- minox, on 10/12/2007, -14/+6Wow, more reasons why digg should be bought out. Someone needs to filter this utter ***** from making the front page.
- rlbigfish, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11Yea, Heaven forbid people have alternative thoughts.
- minox, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3If alternative thoughts are of this caliber, please confine them to mini political buttons on your duct tape backpack.
- adolfojp, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Wasn't this the plot of the new Star Wars Trilogy?
- actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestapo#History
- rlbigfish, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20Bush is an idiot, or a puppet, if you will. The PNAC (Project for a New American Century) boys needed an idiot to do their dirty work so that it all looks like he is bumbling around and mistakenly ***** up the Constitution.
This would explain why most of PNAC's doctrine became the Bush doctrine, and why a large percentage of Bush's administration is made up of PNAC members. - Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Posse Comitatus already does not apply in cases where the Insurrection Act is invoked. This is an existing limit on posse comitatus. Posse comitatus also does not apply to anything under the Military Purpose Doctrine. These are actions that further a military or foreign affairs purpose.
Also, the Insurrection Act already gives the President broad powers of authority The insurrection statutes permit the President to use the armed forces in the
following circumstances:
1. An insurrection within a State. The legislature or governor must request
assistance from the President.
2. A rebellion making it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United
States (i.e., federal law) by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings..
3. Any insurrection or domestic violence which:
a. opposes or obstructs federal law; or
b. hinders the execution of State law so that the people are deprived of their Constitutional rights, and the State is unable or unwilling
to protect those rights.
For # 3, the President already has authority to act without the express permission of a state governor.
The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2007 is intended to expedite the deployment of National Guard troops in the event of a major attack or emergency on national soil. Leahy's alarmist tone that this will give the President authority to declare martial law on a whim is, well, alarmist and largely inaccurate, pursuant to the authority that the Insurrection Act had already granted.- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Wrong. Scroll up and you'll see where I point out what was amended.
In short, the President no longer needs an emergency or insurrection to deploy troops. All he needs is a threat to any federal law by any person, the rest is at his discretion. - Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I understand what you posted. What you are no understanding is the information pursuant to the Insurrection Act to which I referred. In other words, the Insurrection Act is not being overridden, as this article would have you believe. The President is still bound to the tenets of the Insurrection Act and of Posse Comitatus insofar as it pertains to the boundaries under which it can be evoked. Even with these new rules, the President cannot simply do this on a whim -- despite what Leahy may have you believe.
- Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Sorry, typo: "no" = "not"
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Wrong. Scroll up and you'll see where I point out what was amended.
- Justint, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4I am blown away by these comments as a whole, wow I am shocked. We need not be afraid of GWB, Rather the radical Islam, who if we are not vigilant will be blowing up their children (suicide bombers) in our Malls and Restaurants, blowing up a dirty bombs in our cities, than all of a sudden you will wish someone like GWB was president again.
- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4I agree with you but are not blown away by the comments here since Digg is overwhelming liberal and hard left socialist. Since early development of the Nazi movement in Germany parallels liberalism and DNC party politics and propaganda. I am not saying Republicans are exempt since there are many liberal moderates in the Republican party and others that have adopted liberal polices for the purpose of appealing to a PAC, like NOW.
Bush has his problems however he and true conservatives are the least of our problems. - actorboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Are we only allowed to fear one group or person at a time?
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15"Since early development of the Nazi movement in Germany parallels liberalism and DNC party politics and propaganda."
Such as?
Hitler ran on a policy of strong nationalism, religious rectitude, and white racial pride. So...you came to the conclusion that the Democrats are the closest to the Nazis? - SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8@actorboy
"Are we only allowed to fear one group or person at a time?"
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself."
--Franklin D. Roosevelt - ardenr, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Look Mr. Timberlake, if we weren't blowing up Their children, they wouldn't be coming after ours. And they will. If I was Iraqi, I'd sure be think about it when my parents get shot for being in thwe wrong place, and my kids are rolled over by a tank
- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3The examples you stated are of niether party however the left will use those examples to assail the right. The parallels in the methods of propaganda are similiar and usage of Joseph Goebells tactics as stated earlier in this thread.
For Nazi's it was superiority of an Aryan master race where as liberalism is superiority of secular beliefs and intolerance of religious beliefs. Although the "right" is considered to be racist by the left when all actuality it is the left that pursues racists policies and uses race as a means to assail. - SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -6/+4editing time ran out, but to add.
@ZenMojo
I can take up half of Digg writing about liberal policies that have passed in the last 15 years particularly the Welfare Reform Act that effects every single Americans rights and has little to do with welfare. - SuckItUp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@SwordofKahless
Comparing the Democrats to Nazis is just plain wrong. A much better comparison would be to the idiots like Neville Chamberlain who didn't understand that the world can be an evil place and you must constantly fight against that evil or be consumed by it. - SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3@SuckItUp
I would say you provide an accurate comparison of liberlism and foreign policy. However what I was speaking of was in terms of how the liberals play party politics, their belief system and how it effects every day Americans in domestic policy.
Probably not the best term to use here since people think of Nazism and tend to generalize and not look at the full depth of the historical movement. Remove the term Nazism from the statement and make comparisons based on exact historical events of the movement problably would have made more sense but is more comment work. - JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Hey this isn't about left or right. The left and the right are the hands of the same beast. Both attack the nation's foundation The Constitution and The Bill of Rights, both are a threat, both should be feared.
- SwordofKahless, on 10/12/2007, -15/+4I agree with you but are not blown away by the comments here since Digg is overwhelming liberal and hard left socialist. Since early development of the Nazi movement in Germany parallels liberalism and DNC party politics and propaganda. I am not saying Republicans are exempt since there are many liberal moderates in the Republican party and others that have adopted liberal polices for the purpose of appealing to a PAC, like NOW.
- zephc, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7I can't stand Bush, but I can't see where in this bill there is anything other than a bunch of appropriations for military spending. It *is* a huge bill, but I'm not finding what they are talking about with the strings in quotes, nor around the section they mention. This *is* 5122 version 2, right? I looked and there is no section 1076, though there are amendments to Section 1076 to title 10, United States Code, but they seem to deal with medical provisions
What am I missing?
http://www.house.gov/hasc/HR5122(v2).pdf- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10If you scroll up, I found the section for you and copied and pasted it. Check under "ZenMojo" or just ctrl+f for 1076.
- asimo8, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Think about it. If the president were assassinated, things would get worse very quickly.
If you think G.W. Bush was bad, imagine if we had someone with the same goals who was actually smart. - secretivecoward, on 10/12/2007, -14/+4Believe it or not, this is good news.
This gives the President the power to clear up any issues in a State where the Governor is stupid, like say Louisiana. - MadN, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Good thing we joined the NRA.
But, wait...
Actually kinda funny, the paranoid NRA has helped elect the number one threat to private firearm ownership.
/Vote Democrat cross the slate.
//Pray the votes are counted this year.
///Pick up my guitar and play.......- SillyDigger, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Since 173 democrats voted for it shows that even if you voted democrat this will continue, like I said earlier our nation has been hijacked by people who are not interested in the good of this county.
- Noxieas, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Its not very hard to compare Bush to Hitler; "Often times a reference to Hitler is *not* used to describe government sanctioned genocide, but rather the stifling of individual freedoms, imperialistic foreign policy or the misuse of government programs." Gee sounds like it hit us right on the money.
Hitler's 14 points of Fascism, Compared to Bush's current policy.
http://oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
http://www.furnitureforthepeople.com/actpat.htm
http://www.history.ucsb.edu/faculty/marcuse/classes/33d/projects/media/*****.htm
Take your pick you conservative sheep, the sooner you wake up and get a clue the better; Our nation is on a land slide heading towards a cliff.- ChuyMatt, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4I don't know. Pants are rather evil. Kilts are better.
OK, seriously, I work with 2 holocaust survivors who are very politically active (another couldn't give a crap) and they are both frightened, as they are remembering things from their childhood that feel similar. So, no, thinking that there is a state sponsored manipulation going on here is not disrespecting my guys. It is actually honoring them by not wanting such things to EVER happen again.
- ChuyMatt, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4I don't know. Pants are rather evil. Kilts are better.
- kokojie, on 10/12/2007, -13/+5Guess what, martial law was legal long before Bush took office and WTF is wrong with rounding up "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables". If the American people do not want these people to be here, then they should not be here. If I was clearly told by the American government that I was not welcomed in America, I would pick up my stuff and leave! If these people broke the law to stay in America, then the law should be enforced to the fullest extent. This is a country of law, not a country of illegals. If illegal activities are not punished, then why should others obey the law?
- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10...and what if these people ARE the American people? What if it's you? Someday, when you finally feel they've gone too far, you won't have any say about it.
- thewatchman, on 10/12/2007, -11/+3I agree, martial law not imposed to oppress us but to help protect us. Police and soldiers are my friends and neighbors, and I'm not a criminal so I don't fear them. When crap happens here like the ongoing "youth" problems in France, you'll be glad martial law was an option.
- bluejet, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13@kokojie
Tell that to the patriotic, law-abiding Japanese U.S. citizens - aka "undesirables", aka "potential terrorists" - who were put in camps during WWII. - chicagobiker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11When specific definitions of "potential terrorist" and "undesirables" are defined then I won't worry.
But until then either of those terms can apply to just about anyone or anything. - JonForTheWin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Tell that to the true conservatives, The Constitutionalists, when the next government-sponsored terrorist attack takes place.
- SillyDigger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1The fact its not about immigration, they want to exploit poor mexicans who are looking for a better way of life and as for terrorists if they wanted to catch them they can just like the previous admin caught the Unibomber, the WTC bomber, the CIA shooter and the Oklahoma Bomber and they did it all while utlizing existing laws.
Don't get my wrong I'm not a Cliton fan by the least bit I'm just pointing out the obvious - fredkreuger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4"If I was clearly told by the American government that I was not welcomed in America, I would pick up my stuff and leave!"
Technically, I work for the American govt. Where do you want your mail forwarded to?
- postal21, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13wait, the bill says we are making camps in america to put people? wtf is that?
- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Well, any thoughts of becoming an expatriate are now getting solidified. This isn't America anymore.
- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@jarland
Ok, what a relief! It's good to know that, even if we lose all our rights, as long as we have poptarts and Walmart, everything's just dandy!
- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@jarland
- WackyT, on 10/12/2007, -11/+4Hmmm. Who's fear mongering? Looks like the Social Paranoids and Liber-idiots, doesn't it?
- rowanjl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I'd be worried even if there was a "left wing" party in power. You guys however, turn a blind eye to wrongs committed by your party...
- LudwigW, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11When JFK was assassinated the whole world stopped. The military, including all of US troops in Europe--where I was at the time--went on a war footing.
There are many ways in which the 'government' could suspend your basic civil rights. Most likely it would begin with a small, but important event. The event would be viewed as a challenge to authority. The response would be to have US Troops, probably starting with National Guard (at points, the NG made up 40% of the troops deployed in Iraq) because the local people would feel less threatened by local troops.
The presence of troops would escalate to where a nation emergency was declared. The emergency would restrict travel and require more instances of proof of identity. Special identification or decals or plates would be issued under the pretext of 'essential personnel'.
It's a lot simpler than most of us would suspect, and only obvious after the fact. - rareblue, on 10/12/2007, -5/+14People blindly follow dictators. Hitler, Stalin, add dictators name Here _____. People allow themselves to live in dictatorships, because they get fat (obesity), Dumb (schools aren't they in great shape) and Lazy (who's going to win at football on Sunday). You tell a cop to follow a law and he will blindly follow (watch cops). You tell the military to do something with threat of Court Marshall, they will obey. All dictators use the people that will blindly follow. People once thought Hitler was a great guy. Wake the ***** up people, we have the greatest communication tool on earth, use it.
ANYONE WHO WILL GIVE UP LIBERTY FOR SECURITY DESERVES NIETHER- ramaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
"ANYONE WHO WILL GIVE UP LIBERTY FOR SECURITY DESERVES NEITHER"
I believe that's a quote from Benjamin Franklin, isn't it? And a good one.
- ramaz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
- clearzen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11I still have my guns. The government will have to kill me to take my freedom
- nextedge, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7They have already taken it
- stmiller, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2What freedom?
- MUTTZ, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1We will all pry it from your cold-dead-fingers>Clearzen The line forms to the rear.
-
Show 51 - 76 of 76 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by