Military Commissions Act/Keith Obermann report

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well Oldphart was only off by two whole days. As it turns out, I did not know that on October 17th, our fearless leader signed the John Warner "Public Law 109-364, or the “John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007” (H.R.5122)"

I was insinuating something such as this would occur, and today I find out, any future President may declare martial law without any input from a Governor of a State, or a Mayor in charge of an emergency.

Here we are at a war, and there is ZERO civil disobedience. FOR WHAT REASON IS THE DICTATOR-LIKE enabling legislation shown above being stuffed up our collective minds? http://www.correntewire.com/posse_comitatus_fuggedaboudit

How do you like this language, in conjunction with the statements I made about the President's letter alluding to "engaging in conspiracy theories", when you get to the last word in this description:

"...the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to 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 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.”

So what you have, is One Man or Woman, being the absolute Power, with NO check and balance at all, to order the military to do just about anything he wants. Aint this great.
 
Bush is a nazi

would you expect anything less,his grandpa got nazi money,hes a cfr member ie against sovereignty,signed the north american agreement,spent more money than all presidents combined,pushed a plan for total legalization of all illegal aliens,tripled the size of the BATF,pumped in more muslims than any other president,but Bush loves you and me so much.He is a traitor and should be charged and sentenced accordingly,do some research people wake up before its to late
 
Well, we are sure trying.

I don't know about all that other, but I do know this. The Military Commissions Act, and this new one, the John Warner Defense Act, completely scare the snot out of me.
 
This stuff scares me too, but unfortunately not many other people seem to care. Its like as long as they have plenty of cheap junk food and sports to watch, nothing else matters. "Bread and circuses", as the Roman emperors said, to keep the plebs happy while the republic goes by the wayside.

Honestly, it seems that some people you'd expect to be skeptical of big government with absolute power just hate the Democrat "liberals" so much, they are willing to throw away all their rights as American citizens just to avoid criticizing Republicans like Bush and his cronies.

All I can say is I'm glad I'm as old as I am, 'cause things aren't getting better.
 
Well I don't see how anyone, Republican of Democrat, or even Socialist, could defend this nonsense. It is simply trying to stamp Null and Void on the entire Constitution.
 
Baloney. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean its unconstitutional. Your logic and the logic of others who are complaining is flawed. You keep focusing on the potential for abuse and citing that as your reason for deeming it unconstitutional.

EVERY law has the potential for abuse. Does that mean that we should no longer pass laws? I don't think so. Whether a law is constitutional is determined by looking at it on its face, not coming up with the worst possible scenario or how it might be abused.

If you read this statute beyond its parameters then your doing the same thing as people who are trying to read the 2nd out of the constitution.
 
Gary, here's more info on Public Law 109-364. I wonder why this is coming out just a few days before an election? I would assume the current administration wants to retain the Congressional majority. Do they think the public is that dumb or do they know we can't do anything about it and want to throw it in our face? Things are getting worse every day.

Link:http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=631

badbob
 
Last edited:
And so, just as a side note, this law illustrates the absudity of the anti-gunners position that the "well-regulated militia being necessary..." part of the 2nd amendment, makes the 2A itself allegedly applicable only to members of states' National Guard units; and hence the RKBA is allegedly not an individual right, but a right only of Guardsmen & women.

But wait a sec.... if the Prez. can summon and use them to do his bidding *over the objection of* the governor of the state in question, and if the militia reference in the 2A specifically refers to a force which acts as a check or guard against the fedgov's standing army (the history plainly shows that this is the primary intent of the amendment), then how can a unit controlled by the fedgov act as a check against itself? It cannot, and the "militia" is everyone, the "people", as the amendment states, down to the last adult man and woman who is not an adjudicated felon.
 
Badbob, I think what they are doing is counting on folks with attitudes such as Stage 2, who won't think it is unconsitutitonal until there is a pounding on his door, and someone screaming RRRAAUUSSS!

"Vee Vill be takink all de vepons! Nobody vill be allowed to have firearms. Only de Poliz vill have vepons!"

Oh, wait, they already did that, just with a Cajun accent, instead of German.
 
Badbob, I think what they are doing is counting on folks with attitudes such as Stage 2, who won't think it is unconsitutitonal until there is a pounding on his door, and someone screaming RRRAAUUSSS!
Click to expand...

My point exactly. I believe in the process of our system. We don't invalidate laws based on the fears of people. We have a standard given by the constitution which as much as you would like it to, this law does not fall below. Whether or not someone will come to my door and take my guns is irrelevant. You keep focusing on the effects. The effects arent what is important. Anyone can pervert any law to any extent they like. Its what the law actually says which is important.

If you don't like it then vote in people to change it, but don't sit here and complain that some mythical standard has been violated when it clearly hasn't.
 
Gary Conner wrote:
Badbob, I think what they are doing is counting on folks with attitudes such as Stage 2, who won't think it is unconsitutitonal until there is a pounding on his door, and someone screaming RRRAAUUSSS!

"Vee Vill be takink all de vepons! Nobody vill be allowed to have firearms. Only de Poliz vill have vepons!"

Oh, wait, they already did that, just with a Cajun accent, instead of German.

-----------------------

Re this last, didn't the federal courts slap "them" down on that?. Of course, some might note, not incorrectly, that court action came after the fact, damage havng been already done, however in this country, PRIOR RESTRAINT is looked upon with some question.

Personally, I believe that re the "Cajun accented" version, that there should have been criminal prosecution brought against the "grabbers", but that's just my opinion. Nobody takes me seriously. Otherwise, I think that Bush has made a large mess out of a lot of things. Of course, he had considerable help from The Congress, the make-up of which might ultimately reflect poorly on The People who elected members of The House and Senate to office.
 
Don't like the Military Commissions Act of 2006 or the Defense Authorization Act of 2007? Why do we have these new laws? Could it possibly be because the blissninnies were screaming for precise legal definitions for the prisoners at Gitmo? Or maybe because the bleeding hearts were whining for the President to "do something" to make things right after Katrina? Well, by popular demand (at least as reported by the media), we now have two new and unneeded laws.

Don't like the new laws? Then make more racket than those who think that new laws are the solution for everything. As long as you don't shout them down, the new-law-idiots WILL be the voice of the American people.
 
Quote:
Badbob, I think what they are doing is counting on folks with attitudes such as Stage 2, who won't think it is unconsitutitonal until there is a pounding on his door, and someone screaming RRRAAUUSSS!

Stage 2 wrote:
My point exactly. I believe in the process of our system. We don't invalidate laws based on the fears of people.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Stage 2, You mean to imply that the Military Commissions Act, and the John Warner Defense Appropriations Bill, were not based on "fear"?

Wake up Stage 2. For God's sake man. These Acts, if used by a president in conjunction can allow for a person to be put to death for excercising their First Amendment rights

Isn't having your First Amendment superceded by theses acts, allowing in additon not only violations of your First Amendment rights, but the DEATH PENALTY applied if you excercise them, and a president decides you are being "disobediant" enough to concern you?
 
Stage 2, You mean to imply that the Military Commissions Act, and the John Warner Defense Appropriations Bill, were not based on "fear"?
Click to expand...

Yes Gary I do. For some reason, certian people thought that our SOP for the last 80 years was not a good idea and decided that those we captured on the battlefield were entitled to access to our courts. The MCA was written in response to this. I don't call that fear I call it restoring precedent.



Wake up Stage 2. For God's sake man. These Acts, if used by a president in conjunction can allow for a person to be put to death for excercising their First Amendment rights
Click to expand...

I can say the same thing about the 4th amendment. What is considered reasonable has changed with the times. If a tyrant is in office then what he deems reasonable is what rules the day. Same logic, yet no one here is clamoring for a revision of the 4th.

Isn't having your First Amendment superceded by theses acts, allowing in additon not only violations of your First Amendment rights, but the DEATH PENALTY applied if you excercise them, and a president decides you are being "disobediant" enough to concern you?
Click to expand...

No, because you and others who are just as "alarmed" have no understanding of statutory construction and thus no understanding of the application of this law. All of your fanciful situations cannot legally come to be under the MCA.

Bottome line, if an administration does what you and others fear, they will not have done so because of the law, but because of a predisposition towards tyranny. As a result, no law passed or repealed will stop them. On the contrary, if an administration does adhere to the rule of law, then they will not be able to use this act to engage in the activities that you fear.
 
This is obviously unconstitutional, as were both Patriot Acts, and Bush's signing statements while not necessarily unconstitutional go against the spirit of the document in terms of how Bush uses signing statements.

As for the real danger to American citizens, it is in the Democrats hands. If the Democrats do what most of their rank and file want and trash Patriot I&II and the Commissions Act, the Republic is restored, and we can look at the neo-cons much like we would some horrendous dream.

If they acquiese to the pull of further unfettered power, they will slam the doors on the future of our Republic. Hillary Clinton, regardless of her fellow Democrats desires will use this to attack her political enemies. I have no doubts about that. Barack Obama or Edwards, or Warner who knows?

The problem is that the Republicans will be in disarray for a decade or more while the traditional and libertarian elements vie for control and do away with the neo-con influence, in the meantime, the Dems can wreck alot of the country, and only worsen the things the Neo-Cons began now economically, socially, and militarily.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top