President Bush Signs Un-American Military Commissions Act

[Fonceai]

@Mia

But you make excuses for his behaviors that were already found to be problematic.

He lied to Federal Authorities.

That's it.

You say he was taking money home, but that's not the lie he told.

He's not an American citizen, he acts suspiciously, he can get the futch out.

[jose]

YouTube - Jack Cafferty on the Politics of Fear
sorry wrong thread

[Mia]

Um, he has been an American citizen for overe 20 years. And since the Federal Authorities are lying, I don't know that he lied to them.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: xyzer What absolute nonsense..based on illogical emotionalism rather than fact! Quote by: PatrickHenry Can any deny that the US is an oligarchy at the present moment? That it siezes other nations militarily and holds them captive through various means, financial, political and military? That it engages in propaganda ops against its own citizens? Yes, I can and do deny it Patrick! The USA governmental structure has not changed a bit except in the minds of those afflicted with political paranoia! We have a Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary, just as we have always had. Plus a 'Rule of Law'. Any Act passed by the Legislature and approved by the President is subject to interpretation in the courts as it always has been? To suggest that somehow a small group is running our government is a bit over the top IMNSHO! To suggest some dark, ominous conspiracy to deprive us of rights, is afoot is balderdash and nonsense! Don't worry about it Patrick, we have the same system we have always had with the same checks and balances we have always had! The Constitution is still in place. You can sleep at night!

You are mistaken.
The Constitution has been superseded: The nation is now governed under a Declared State of Emergency: Notice: Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Persons Who Commit, Threaten to Commit, or Support Terrorism

Do you understand a DSoE? Your confidence in government is misplaced. It is not the same one you served in the military. In a DSoE, the president alone is in charge. All the rest is a smokescreen, but this DSoE has now continued for FIVE FULL YEARS!

The Republic has been replaced with Empire and the president is the emperor. Now, you may contend that presidents are elected, but the elections are managed by the oligarchy, the candidates prescreened.

DSoEs in America have led to the overweening power of the State and the reduction of the individual to serfdom.

In 1933, Congressman Beck, speaking from the Congressional
Record, states:

"I think of all the damnable heresies that have ever been suggested in connection with the Constitution, the doctrine of emergency is the worst. it means that when Congress declares an emergency, there is no Constitution. This means its death. It is the very doctrine that the German chancellor is invoking today in the dying hours of the parliamentary body of the German republic, namely, that because of an emergency, it should grant to the German chancellor absolute power to pass any law, even though the law contradicts the Constitution of the German republic. Chancellor Hitler is at least frank about it. We pay the Constitution lipservice, but the result is the same."

:(

[Fonceai]

@Patrick

I forgot about the DSoE.

I know we've legally been at war since the Gulf War started.

That really tends to fucth with gov't process.

[lsbskins1]

Everyday, I am forced to admit that there is a significant percentage of Americans who have not the least clue what the Constitution is about. It makes me so sad.

[Fonceai]

What should make you sadder is the number of naturalized citizens who know more about it than citizens by birth.

Then again, I think you shouldn't be a citizen unless you can pass the written test... the same one as the immigrants have to take.

[GHook93]

Quote by: Zeebadee You're assuming that there will be elections in 2008.

Its a pretty safe assumption!

[GHook93]

Quote by: RickSp Temporarily? Sure. And who is an enemy combatant? Anyone the government says is an enemy combatant. So you are arguing that murders and rapists still have rights but everyone else doesn't. Oh good. This is Bush's America? " Mr Bush, your words are lies that imperil us all ~ Sadly, of course , the distance of history will recognize that the threat this generation of Americans needed to take seriously was you:" Keith Olbermann

You asked me to differentiate between abolishe and suspend.

[RickSp]

Quote by: GHook93 You asked me to differentiate between abolishe and suspend.

"Suspend" has a specific time or event horizon. There is no such provision in the current statute. Habeas corpus is such a fundamental right that no abolition should be possible yet that is exactly what this odious law does.

I have been confusing you and Fonceai. My apologies. I am sure at least one of you should feel insulted.

[RickSp]

Quote by: lsbskins1 Everyday, I am forced to admit that there is a significant percentage of Americans who have not the least clue what the Constitution is about. It makes me so sad.

Apparently many in the Congress relect that constituency.

[GHook93]

Quote by: RickSp And you are studying law? Sad. No law takes precedence over the Constitution. The Constitution may be interpretted by the Judiciary. It may be amended. The Bush administration and the current Congress simply ignore it. Both should be booted out, if Bush doesn't arrange a coup first.

I didn't make argument Rick,

The constitution reigns supreme over all laws of the land via the supremacy clause. Every Federal law reigns supreme over state laws via the supremacy clause, granted the law is not declared unconstitutional.

The courts job is to determine if the law is unconstitutional. All unconstitutional laws are null and void.

[GHook93]

Quote by: jose yes they are covered, that's why they are reported and investigated and as you can see in the link you provided, when appropriate punishment follows. but there again my comment, ¨please list some of the freedoms that you believe you have, that i don´t¨was directed to GHook, to list some of the freedoms that he believes he has in USA that I don't have here and i´m looking forward to HIS reply Quote by: GHook93 We still have more freedoms that basically any other country in the world. Spain The government generally respected the human rights of its citizens; although there were a few problems in some areas, the law and judiciary provide effective means of addressing individual instances of abuse.

Give me time I will reply, but I have to do alittle work in the office today.

(You're not going to call me a wimp again when I do)

[Zeebadee]

Quote by: RickSp Keith Olbermann refers to the Military Commissions Act as the 'Beginning of the end of America'. I don't think that he is wrong.

I think he's being overly optimistic. bush has already stated that, "If you're not with us, you're against us". Every politician, judge, and writer, among others, must now be wondering exactly how far they can go in opposing anything bush wants to do. If you're not in agreement with bush, you must be supporting the enemy.

It nows falls to SCOTUS to determine the constitutionality of this act. I think that it's pretty good odds that literally, the future of this Republic is now in the hands of one justice, Anthony Kennedy.

[jose]

Quote by: GHook93 Give me time I will reply, but I have to do alittle work in the office today. (You're not going to call me a wimp again when I do)

no of course not... unless if you wimp out

[lsbskins1]

Let me try it this way...

I am elected President. I believe that anyone who advocated the Iraq war was enabling the terrorists by creating a situation that bred terrorism. I order all of you guys who supported the war arrested under the provisions of this law. I am the Commander in Chief. I have the power. I can make YOU sit in a jail cell until terrorism is no longer a threat to US citizens. Now you are in jail as a terrorist threat and have no way to make me bring you before a judge and make the case that you are, in fact, a threat. How do you feel about it now?

[GHook93]

Quote by: lsbskins1 Let me try it this way... I am elected President. I believe that anyone who advocated the Iraq war was enabling the terrorists by creating a situation that bred terrorism. I order all of you guys who supported the war arrested under the provisions of this law. I am the Commander in Chief. I have the power. I can make YOU sit in a jail cell until terrorism is no longer a threat to US citizens. Now you are in jail as a terrorist threat and have no way to make me bring you before a judge and make the case that you are, in fact, a threat. How do you feel about it now?

Not apples to apples. So its moot.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: GHook93 Not apples to apples. So its moot.

Why not? The power is the power. I get to have the final say, as CIC. What is different?

[GHook93]

Quote by: lsbskins1 Why not? The power is the power. I get to have the final say, as CIC. What is different?

You can twist the law any way you wish, but its aimed at foreign nationals that are Islamic terrorist.

You can twist a straw man into making an illogical hypothetical, hence it is not apples to appkes.

Your new law, as you call it, would still have to pass through congress and then the courts would have to deem it constitutional. Which would surely be shot down by both.

[lsbskins1]

Quote by: GHook93 You can twist the law any way you wish, but its aimed at foreign nationals that are Islamic terrorist. You can twist a straw man into making an illogical hypothetical, hence it is not apples to appkes. Your new law, as you call it, would still have to pass through congress and then the courts would have to deem it constitutional. Which would surely be shot down by both.

It is the law you are defending, not a new one. Find me where in the text of that law it says you have to be a "foreign national" to be subject to it's provisions. Maybe you should actually know what you are defending before you defend it.

We can only hope the courts have the balls to strike this down.