Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act » Post A Reply

Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon: Icon 1     Icon 2     Icon 3     Icon 4     Icon 5     Icon 6     Icon 7    
Icon 8     Icon 9     Icon 10     Icon 11     Icon 12     Icon 13     Icon 14    
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

 

Instant Graemlins Instant UBB Code™
Smile   Frown   Embarrassed   Big Grin   Wink   Razz  
Cool   Roll Eyes   Mad   Eek!   Confused   BadOne  
Good Luck   More Crap   Wall Bang   Were Up   Were Down    
Insert URL Hyperlink - UBB Code™   Insert Email Address - UBB Code™
Bold - UBB Code™   Italics - UBB Code™
Quote - UBB Code™   Code Tag - UBB Code™
List Start - UBB Code™   List Item - UBB Code™
List End - UBB Code™   Image - UBB Code™

What is UBB Code™?
Options


Disable Graemlins in this post.


 


T O P I C     R E V I E W
bdgee  - posted
I have received an email with the following.

I have sent an email to the moderators of the debates.

"What would you do if you learned that President Bush was preparing - in violation of federal law - to use the U.S. military to maintain order within our borders? I hope you would at least take one minute to help us raise awareness about the situation.

For more than 200 years, federal laws have protected the American people against the use of military forces on our own soil. Strengthened in 1878 by the , these laws have guaranteed that the federal government could not use the military for domestic law enforcement purposes.*

Without such protection, the federal government could use the might of our army to violate state and individual rights. Moreover, minor incursions by the military into domestic law enforcement activity could lay the foundation for the imposition of martial law at a moment's notice. This is one slippery slope we don't want to start sliding down.

That is why we should all be deeply disturbed by the news that President Bush has assigned the 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team to be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army component of Northern Command (NorthCom). According to an article in Army Times, the soldiers could be called upon for a variety of tasks, including quelling "civil unrest." They are apparently engaged in training with shields and batons, beanbag bullets, and Tasers.

We need to raise awareness about this threat to our liberty immediately. The American Freedom Campaign believes the best method available at the moment is to send an email to the moderators of the next two presidential debates, urging them to ask the candidates whether they would fully enforce the Posse Comitatus Act.

Please join us in the effort by clicking on the following link:

http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/2165/t/1027/campaign.jsp?campaign_KEY=26045

In just one minute, you can share your feelings with both Tom Brokaw at NBC and Bob Schieffer at CBS. After you do so, please spread the word by forwarding this alert widely to friends and family or by using the Tell-A-Friend option that will appear on our site after you send your email.

Thanks so much for taking action on this important campaign.

Best,
Steve

Steve Fox
Campaign Director
American Freedom Campaign Action Fund"

 
Propertymanager  - posted
Civil unrest? That could be the understatement of the year! When the economy finally collapses, those that have been getting all the free handouts are going to be mighty upset when it becomes apparent that the free ride is over.
 
glassman  - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Propertymanager:
Civil unrest? That could be the understatement of the year! When the economy finally collapses, those that have been getting all the free handouts are going to be mighty upset when it becomes apparent that the free ride is over.

they aren't the ones to be afraid of PM [Wink] they're lazy
 
Relentless.  - posted
Yeah I'd be a bit more concerned about the hard working folk.
 
Propertymanager  - posted
quote:
they aren't the ones to be afraid of PM they're lazy
They will no longer have the luxury of being lazy after their benefits are stopped.
 
glassman  - posted
if we don't have jobs? we won't be too busy working to get excited now will we?
 
glassman  - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Propertymanager:
quote:
they aren't the ones to be afraid of PM they're lazy
They will no longer have the luxury of being lazy after their benefits are stopped.
LOL... you must know more lazy people than anyone i've ever met...
 
NaturalResources  - posted
...Didn't Bill Clinton violate this law as well durring WACO?...

Oh yeah, it wasn't a violation because the ATF only RENTED the tank from the military. [Roll Eyes]
 
glassman  - posted
quote:
Originally posted by NaturalResources:
...Didn't Bill Clinton violate this law as well durring WACO?...

Oh yeah, it wasn't a violation because the ATF only RENTED the tank from the military. [Roll Eyes]

under Clinton a lot of US Navy Seals were being required to acknowledge that they would be willing to ignore the posse comitatus in order to re-enlist...

many refused,

BUT,

the law was never designed to keep the Navy (or the Coast Guard) from being used this way..

many Navy resources have been used in the war on drugs...
 
glassman  - posted
HR5122 also known as the John Warner Defense Authorization Act was signed by the president on Oct 17, 2006 John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Section 1076 Text of Hr5122 is titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies". Removing the legalese from the text, and combining multiple sentences, it provides that: The President may employ the armed forces to restore public order in any State of the United States the President determines hinders the execution of laws or deprives people of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. The actual text is on page 322-323 of the legislation. As of 2008, these changes were repealed, changing the text of the law back to the original 1878 wording, under Public Law 110-181 (H.R. 4986, Section 1068,) however in signing H.R. 4986 into law President Bush attached a signing statement which indicated that the Executive Branch did not feel bound by the changes enacted by the repeal.

President Bush Signs H.R. 4986, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 into Law

Today, I have signed into law H.R. 4986, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. The Act authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, for military construction, and for national security-related energy programs.

Provisions of the Act, including sections 841, 846, 1079, and 1222, purport to impose requirements that could inhibit the President's ability to carry out his constitutional obligations to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, to protect national security, to supervise the executive branch, and to execute his authority as Commander in Chief. The executive branch shall construe such provisions in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

January 28, 2008.

 
bdgee  - posted
PM,

You are a jerk, first class, with a gold bar and silver ribbon.

Then too, you are almost always ill-informed. Is that by choice?
 
Propertymanager  - posted
quote:
You are a jerk, first class, with a gold bar and silver ribbon.

Then too, you are almost always ill-informed. Is that by choice?

More 3rd grade insults from Professor Gibberish!
 
NaturalResources  - posted
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
quote:
Originally posted by NaturalResources:
...Didn't Bill Clinton violate this law as well durring WACO?...

Oh yeah, it wasn't a violation because the ATF only RENTED the tank from the military. [Roll Eyes]

under Clinton a lot of US Navy Seals were being required to acknowledge that they would be willing to ignore the posse comitatus in order to re-enlist...

many refused,

BUT,

the law was never designed to keep the Navy (or the Coast Guard) from being used this way..

many Navy resources have been used in the war on drugs...

It's ok to use military weaponry on US citizens if they are in violation of drug laws? It's ok to use military weaponry on US citizens if they are considered members of a cult? Where do you draw the line?

The only point I was trying to make is that we have been on this "slippery slope" for much longer than Bush has been president...

And, if you ask me? It won't matter who is president when the government finally finds an excuse to declare martial law and brings in the military. It is GOING to happen, sooner or later IMO.
 
bdgee  - posted
quote:
Originally posted by Propertymanager:
quote:
You are a jerk, first class, with a gold bar and silver ribbon.

Then too, you are almost always ill-informed. Is that by choice?

More 3rd grade insults from Professor Gibberish!
So much is beyond you ability to fathom.
 
CashCowMoo  - posted
you two argue like gay lovers
 
bdgee  - posted
Oh?

I thought you were his toy boy. You sure do love his b.s. and harmonizing to his name calling.
 



Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share