What is Digg?211 Comments
- t3soro, on 10/12/2007, -18/+105arm yourselves, fellow citizens. the day is near that we will need to stand up for our rights.
- raisputin3, on 10/12/2007, -17/+82agreed 100%. The Bush REGIME (yes, REGIME) is out of control, and the majority of Americans are too asleep/scared of the "Islamofascists"/brainwashed to see what is going on in our own country, by our elected leaders. the time is ripe for the American people to say enough is enough, impeach Bush, Cheney, and take the country back as our own. Doing it peacefully would be my preferred method, but if it comes down to it, the 2nd ammendment was put there for a reason. Our government has been working to destroy this for a long time...
- dukeeeey, on 10/12/2007, -5/+65i think if you find out how many there are
you'll be more scared ..
to quote my favourite online encyclopedia ;p
Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was a plan by the United States federal government to test their ability to detain large numbers of American citizens in case of massive civil unrest or national emergency. Exercises similar to Rex 84 happen periodically.[1] Plans for roundups of persons in the United States in times of crisis are constructed during periods of increased political repression such as the Palmer Raids and the McCarthy Era. For example, from 1967 to 1971 the FBI kept a list of persons to be rounded up as subversive, dubbed the "ADEX" list.[2]
Get informed .. work out what your criminal government is doing. - dukeeeey, on 10/12/2007, -5/+61Marshall law means this
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=277826260716604258 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -11/+61Will you shush up already!? i'm trying to watch american idol!
- TheShadowKnows, on 10/12/2007, -9/+46"Everyone thinks bush is a dictator worse than hitler."
It's sad for America that this could even be an argument. - david76, on 10/12/2007, -6/+39The National Guard is used for domestic emergencies. There's no need to use the Armed Forces.
- royceguy, on 10/12/2007, -6/+38@theblooms
I live in CA, am a Democrat and have lots of guns. Nice ones with large capacity magazines and everything.
Belonging to the Democratic party doesn't mean you have to swear allegiance to one set of values to the extent that you must these days if you're a Republican (see the "RINO movement.") Most Americans fall squarely in the middle....just as most Democrats might be for making buying a gun harder than getting your driver's license doesn't mean they all (or even most) want to take them away. It's just not true.
Personally, I don't mind requiring John Smith to verify that he knows what end of the gun goes "bang-bang" and that you shouldn't leave it out for your six year old to play with before he can purchase one. (PS- In CA, the training class reqt is waived if you've been in the service.)
I used to be in the NRA (and a Republican, for that matter) but got tired of the rhetoric. Don't take anyones word for anything. (Including me.) Find out for yourself.
PS My governor can kick your governor's ass. /wink - 1jaxstate1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+34Guess I'll head to Walmart and grab me a shotgun and a ***** of shells.
- david76, on 10/31/2007, -4/+35From the Military Commissions Act of 2006:
S.3930 Section 2 Construction of Presidential Authority to Establish Military Commissions "The authority to establish military commissions under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as added by section 3(a), may not be construed to alter or limit the authority of the President under the Constitution of the United States and laws of the United States to establish military commissions for areas declared to be under martial law or in occupied territories should circumstances so require."
Once martial law is declared, the President can use military tribunals. - Insightful, on 10/12/2007, -9/+39"Paradoxically, preserving liberty may require the rule of a single leader--a dictator--willing to use those dreaded 'extraordinary measures,' which few know how, or are willing, to employ." -- Michael Ledeen
Michael Ledeen is also the same guy who broke the web exclusive: "Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, is dead."
http://pajamasmedia.com/xpress/michaelledeen/2007/01/04/breaking_news.php
Except there is a small problem: Khamenei's not dead. Reality, and apparently, death, both have a strong liberal bias.
He is also involved in the uranium yellowcake lie and Iran Contra scandal.
And yes, he is a highly influential source in the neocon circle. - t3soro, on 10/12/2007, -3/+32holy ***** dukeeeey, that is ***** scary.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+33What part of the so called PATRIOT ACT isn't scary.
It suspended the constitution, installed a secret government and gave the President the power to jail anyone
forever without due process or council.
It is illegal to for anyone that has knowledge of such persons to reveal to anyone who they are.
It gives them the power to round up citizens and place them in forced labor camps at the direction of the President.
Not to mention the fact they are recording all telcom and IP traffic as well.
It is our duty under the constitution to reject and defeat those involved in this blatant coup d'etat. - kabronkline, on 10/12/2007, -7/+33I'm fully prepared to arm myself and about 5 other individuals. Don't worry, if you don't have a gun, there is always at least one guy near that has a few extra. Martial law won't be happening anytime soon on a large scale in this nation... government won't have any citizens left to govern (or pay taxes).
Bring it. - drakethegreat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+27Would you rather willingly or unwillingly give up freedom? Thats all it comes down to.
- supermanred, on 10/12/2007, -2/+23I keep getting dugg down for comments like yours, but ***** it...here goes...
YEAH! Arm yourselves, but I always stress try to stop these IDIOTS now with non-violence. They are destroying your country!!!! - theblooms, on 10/12/2007, -5/+26@Exhaust
Do you not watch the news nor read the newspapers? Hello, Iraq? Not exactly state-of-the-art weaponry at play against us over there!
@royceguy
You must have bought all your normal capacity magazines before 1/1/2000, because the are illegal as hell now. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/pen/12020-12040.html is the state statute.
Also, try to buy a normal AR-15 in California. You know, the exact same accurate-as-hell rifle that is often used in varmint hunting and 3-gun competitions? The only ones you can get have the magazine well WELDED SHUT. In order to load the things, you have to break the gun down after every 10 rounds and load if from the top! Insanity.
Which county do you live in? In most counties, it is damn near impossible to obtain a Concealed Carry Permit. http://www.packing.org/state/california/ tells you how to apply for one. In 38 other states, you pay a nominal fee, and they send you your permit, without Big Brother's permission. It's called the Shall-Issue laws. Where the state Shall Issue all it's citizens Concealed Weapons Permits. CA is a LONG way from having anything like that.
And what if you already OWN many firearms that the state of CA think look evil? But you want to move to CA? Even if you have never been convicted of so much as a traffic ticket, if you cross the state line with an "ugly" gun, you become an instant felon. That's ***** up.
I know all about the gun laws in CA. And how ***** up they are compared to the majority of the rest of the country.
Oh, and the quip about the 6 year old with guns? My 7 year old owns his very own bolt-action single shot .22 rifle. It is his. And this fall, he will be using my .243, and with any luck, bagging his first buck.
One last thing, you said "just as most Democrats might be for making buying a gun harder than getting your driver's license". Last time I checked, there wasn't a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing the RIGHT to drive a car. But there is one guaranteeing the RIGHT to keeping and bearing arms. Now am I saying that Felons should be allowed guns? Of course not, that would be asinine. But felons already lost most of their rights when they decided to break the law. For all non-felons, there shouldn't be any impediment whatsoever to owning and carrying whatever firearm that one chooses. - ne0shell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20geez some people...
There's a huge difference between bringing in the National Guard, who are meant to be used for disasters but are off fighting in place of the regular military in Iraq and using the real military who are not trained to be rescue workers, they are trained to detain and kill people.
The founders of our country put that into law because they had seen the effects of allowing the military to operate as police. You guys who think nothing bad will happen to you because you watch Fox or whatever will be the first ones to cry like babies when your arrested just like everyone else. You'll also be the ones to run and "inform" on your neighbors in order to try to serve the system. You'll also be some of the first ones the rest of us take care of when the ***** hits the fan.
The written plans call for civil unrest and violence. After the police and domestic military are wiped out they'll send in foreign UN troops as a second wave. After that we'll be under global govt folks. Now before you break out the kook and moonbat insults keep in mind, this is from their written plans, not mine. - dukeeeey, on 10/12/2007, -8/+27inform your friends .. and family
- d00ley, on 10/12/2007, -9/+27Bamont and pabster, you are pathetic excuses for Americans.
- griz, on 10/12/2007, -6/+24Our military can't get Iraq under control. You think they are going to be able to control a country full of people who understand and have a desire for what it truly means to be free?
- artpop, on 10/12/2007, -11/+28With all those guns you have in the USA it would be very messy indeed.
- d00ley, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19Don't give too much credit to Bush, and don't underestimate the foresight and planning his neocon handlers put into this. Don't forget that the neocons planned and implemented the strategy that has gotten us to this point over 25 years ago. To assume that it is Bush that they intend to make a dictator is not necessarily a correct one. Unless ALL of these types of laws are repealed immediately, the ability to declare martial law and ascend to dictatorship will be available to our future Presidents. Bush is NOT necessarily the intended dictator. And the complete "discarding" of the constitution may not be planned for several years.
Also, do not forget who the Neocons are. They are not just "right-wingers". They also include global socialists. Don't forget that Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News, is one of the leading backers of Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign.
Don't get trapped by the right-left illusion. Don't get bamboozled. The intended dictator could be Hillary Clinton as easily as it could be George W. Bush. It could also be Jeb Bush who is now being prepped and maneuvered to become our next Vice President.
This group of people, often labeled as Neocons, play this game thinking many years ahead. Their endgame is not necessarily now. It is unquestionable that they are laying the groundwork and infrastructure for a hostile takeover of our democracy. Do not think for a second, though, that George W. Bush is the mastermind behind this. He is a tool. And don't think the would be dictator is going to come in a form that you'd expect. It could be somebody that's for easy to believe in or trust. - Detritus, on 10/12/2007, -10/+26Martian Law means this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmDopPmh494 - supermanred, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20Dont you all wish Al Gore had won now? Oh wait, Im pretty sure he did....what I meant was dont you all wish Bush had not been declared dictator in error?
- spyd3rweb, on 10/12/2007, -4/+20your tinfoil hat insults dont work anymore at making cold hard facts disappear.
- ArthurSucks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19We do?
- Exhaust, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15@elbxmatatan
Let's hope so. Unfortunately there will be the tweekster types that will welcome the new overlords and say anyone that stands for true freedom is a tinfoil hate wearing enemy lover. - pytis, on 10/12/2007, -10/+24What if were minors? what can we do? :(
Just stand and watch?
(I'm 15) - psylence, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19Bamont: cite sources for your claims...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free"
i should seriously be beaten for not knowing who to credit that too but really dude... think about that for just a minute...
we let them pass a law that will implant a homing beacon into our id's that we will have to carry under force of law. - chucksmooth, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15we also have a country full of people who don't expect 72 virgins to be waiting for them after a suicide bombing. most of us would fall right in line
- MatthJD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Funny - it's only the comments that against the article that have been dugg down negative.
- Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17@raisputin3
It isn't the BUSH REGIME. He's a puppet and when he's gone whoever is next in line will continue to eat away our freedoms, regardless of which party they belong to. Unfortunately, the only way to take back our country at this point is probably via civil war and a lot of bloodshed. - Rammsteined, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15Just because we've lived through Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and 5000 episodes of Neighbours, doesn't mean Bush can be excused.
- ponyfreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14In all fairness, anybody who voted for Bush should have to "volunteer" to be the bomber to get us out of this mess.
- PopcornDave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13@trendicide
You've hit the nail on the head there. Like or loathe Bush, there's another ***** just around the corner that's going to use every goddamn thing that the government has put in to place to *their* advantage when they come in to power.
For example, if Hillary is elected president, does anybody really expect her to disown the patriot act? McCain? Guilliani? Edwards?
I highly doubt it. Too useful of a tool to mess with your enemies - real or perceived.
And I would suspect that this same kind of thing was probably around during the Civil War, the Spanish American War, WWI, WWII , Korea, and probably Viet Nam to some degree. The government is *always* interested in keeping "order" ( in their eyes ) no matter who's in the White House. - Kahnza, on 10/12/2007, -9/+21Draft? lololololol We're more likely to see more and more recruiting efforts by all branches of the military first. To the point that they make telemarketing calls seem like happy happy fun time. Relentless calls asking you to join, more flyers in your mail. And increased commercials on TV. They want to guilt you into joining.
And all that money is lining the pockets of CEOs and people like Cheney. - seadeus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15@Exhaust
"My only concern is how could 'the people' stand up to the strongest military in the world?"
"The people" are also in the military. We have nothing to fear until the US military starts recruiting in foreign nations. ...wait, Bush started that too. - SpectralSounds, on 10/12/2007, -7/+19Blah blah blah.
Wont happen. If it does, bring on the revolution. - Rammsteined, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13Two wrongs don't make a right, so why should 25?
Guess what bluntsage -- the republicans and democrats only want one thing, more control. Once he's out, the next carries on these policies.
Turning a blind eye to those that lead you will get you nowhere. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I know we Americans look weak and hopeless right now, but I have faith if that day comes the American people will rise to the occasion and fight for the rights that made America great. They will have to jail us all!
- growlzor, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13***** Bush! God this guy seriously just sucks
- KamikazeeDriver, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13"You think they are going to be able to control a country full of people who understand and have a desire for what it truly means to be free?"
lets change it to "a country full of well armed people . . ." hahahah
I don't own a gun. You may not either, but I bet you know someone who has several of them, and would be willing to give you one should the need arose. - musicbaker, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Please note that Ron Paul was one of the few who voted against this bill.
- janne1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13I hope no one is under the illusion that the US has a two party government! Different leaders, same wars.
- nihilite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11@griz: Agreed - remember that when the Japanese discussed invading america during WWII, they noted that they would "face a rifleman behind every stone". Martial law would only be possible with the assent of a large portion of the population.
- Trendecide, on 10/12/2007, -4/+13Simply stated and very much the truth. I've begun my countdown until Bush has to leave office... it has been a very uncomfortable 8 years, but this most certainly hasn't been the first President like this (or "regime" as this article so aptly states). The US may be asleep, but my God have mercy on your soul when we decide to wake up. United we stand.
- Tweekster, on 10/12/2007, -8/+17you have no idea how taxes work do you.
Cheney gets paid for the halliburton work he already performed but it is a deffered payment over a number of years.
unless halliburton goes totally bankrupt, it makes no difference how well or poor the company does, they still have to pay up.
they could make 1 dollar of profit a year, it is irrelevant. he gets paid the same amount because it was a set amount for work performed
but dont let facts get in the way or anything - rnwen2750, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10We're warming up our fighting arms with the digg down button. Seriously, if this happens, it could be deep trouble for the US. Do you also wish to see your friends go to jail to see if they cave or fight the power? Hating on mankind is not attractive.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 204 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is