Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Screw the 14th Amendment:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » National Security Donate to DU
 
renegade2011 Donating Member (49 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-11 07:44 PM
Original message
Screw the 14th Amendment:
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."

President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."

Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "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."

For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.

The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration."

http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911 /
--------------------------------------------------------
Now, let's all assume the worst, most tinfoil-hat-wearin' Conspiracy-buff mindset we can come up with, here. Let's assume that President Obama & pals really *aren't* in opposition to the Teabaggers, and this whole thing is nothing more than an exceedingly-complicated "False flag" thing designed to create a pretext for invoking these Bush-era "extraordinary powers".

So who ends up in the Halliburton camps?

Teabaggers? "Progrssives"?

Does anybody *really* think that the military would placidly fall in line behind something like this (especially when Right-wingers routinely portray Obama as some sort of "Kenyan Usurper" who isn't even legitimately eligible to be President anyway?)

Does anybody *really* think there haven't been innumerable (infinitely more plausible) situations where the above-mentioned JUNTA could have been more plausibly pulled off? (Katrina, the BP oil disaster, an Al-Quaida plot just "allowed" to slip through?) Assuming (as some here are obviously eager to do) that this whole scenario is part of some elaborate "Illuminati" or "New World Order" plot: WHY NOW, specifically?

Do any of you really think the (inevitable) chaos that would follow either a default OR the immediate forty percent reduction in government activity that would be required to avoid default without raising the Debt ceiling could REALLY be controlled?

BE HONEST
Refresh | +1 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Cool Logic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-27-11 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. You left out an important part...
Expansion of the President's power to declare martial law under revisions to the Insurrection Act, and take charge of United States National Guard troops without state governor authorization when public order has been lost and the state and its constituted authorities cannot enforce the law (repealed as of 2008 by H.R.4986 SEC.1068<1>)

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-4986
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 02nd 2014, 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » National Security Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC