More Scary than Hillary!

T

TFinalshot

Guest
If there's any truth to any of this, it should raise some serious questions about what our government is up too. Dont kill the messenger just seek the truth. . .


Rule by Fear or Rule by Law?
By Lewis Seiler and Dan Hamburg
The San Francisco Chronicle
Monday 04 February 2008

"The power of the Executive to cast a man into prison without formulating any charge known to the law, and particularly to deny him the judgment of his peers, is in the highest degree odious and is the foundation of all totalitarian government whether Nazi or Communist." - Winston Churchill, Nov. 21, 1943

Since 9/11, and seemingly without the notice of most Americans, the federal government has assumed the authority to institute martial law, arrest a wide swath of dissidents (citizen and noncitizen alike), and detain people without legal or constitutional recourse in the event of "an emergency influx of immigrants in the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs."

Beginning in 1999, the government has entered into a series of single-bid contracts with Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR) to build detention camps at undisclosed locations within the United States. The government has also contracted with several companies to build thousands of railcars, some reportedly equipped with shackles, ostensibly to transport detainees.

According to diplomat and author Peter Dale Scott, the KBR contract is part of a Homeland Security plan titled ENDGAME, which sets as its goal the removal of "all removable aliens" and "potential terrorists."

Fraud-busters such as Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles, have complained about these contracts, saying that more taxpayer dollars should not go to taxpayer-gouging Halliburton. But the real question is: What kind of "new programs" require the construction and refurbishment of detention facilities in nearly every state of the union with the capacity to house perhaps millions of people?

Sect. 1042 of the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies," gives the executive the power to invoke martial law. For the first time in more than a century, the president is now authorized to use the military in response to "a natural disaster, a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or any other condition in which the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to the extent that state officials cannot maintain public order."

The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations, or who speaks out against the government's policies. The law calls for secret trials for citizens and noncitizens alike.

Also in 2007, the White House quietly issued National Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD-51), to ensure "continuity of government" in the event of what the document vaguely calls a "catastrophic emergency." Should the president determine that such an emergency has occurred, he and he alone is empowered to do whatever he deems necessary to ensure "continuity of government." This could include everything from canceling elections to suspending the Constitution to launching a nuclear attack. Congress has yet to hold a single hearing on NSPD-51.

U.S. Rep. Jane Harman, D-Venice (Los Angeles County) has come up with a new way to expand the domestic "war on terror." Her Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (HR1955), which passed the House by the lopsided vote of 404-6, would set up a commission to "examine and report upon the facts and causes" of so-called violent radicalism and extremist ideology, then make legislative recommendations on combatting it.

According to commentary in the Baltimore Sun, Rep. Harman and her colleagues from both sides of the aisle believe the country faces a native brand of terrorism, and needs a commission with sweeping investigative power to combat it.

A clue as to where Harman's commission might be aiming is the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, a law that labels those who "engage in sit-ins, civil disobedience, trespass, or any other crime in the name of animal rights" as terrorists. Other groups in the crosshairs could be anti-abortion protesters, anti-tax agitators, immigration activists, environmentalists, peace demonstrators, Second Amendment rights supporters ... the list goes on and on. According to author Naomi Wolf, the National Counterterrorism Center holds the names of roughly 775,000 "terror suspects" with the number increasing by 20,000 per month.

What could the government be contemplating that leads it to make contingency plans to detain without recourse millions of its own citizens?

The Constitution does not allow the executive to have unchecked power under any circumstances. The people must not allow the president to use the war on terrorism to rule by fear instead of by law.

----------
Lewis Seiler is the president of Voice of the Environment, Inc. Dan Hamburg, a former congressman, is executive director.
 
Those dang black helicopters, I knew they were up to no good. On the bright side maybe only liberal terrorists are being put into these camps. Who knows?


Ransom
 
This kind of news, if true, should cause people to take notice. Dont let yourself be lulled into thinking that GB has your back!

I cant imagine any patriot of this nation accepting or even allowing more government intrusion into the privacy of the innocent American citizens. . . this applys to everyone not just those who we think should be targeted. Heck, it mentions people rallying gun control could be cited under these polices. If you though GB pushed his power around, wait till Hillary gets hold of this. . .
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-15-08 AT 11:30AM (MST)[p]T,

I don't like executive orders and things like ENDGAME. I don't like anything that brings more government intrusion into our lives period.

The problem is that the American people have tolerated this for so long that we don't even know we are givng up our rights. Look at what happened in past Administrations.

Clinton's EO 12919 said almost the same thing. It was frightening then and is frightening now. Any power taken by a President will be assumed by his successors. That has been historical.

Kind of scary.

Nemont
 
Nemont, I agree with you, but why are so many people just doing exactly what the previous other posts have done on this thread? If youre an American you should care about this stuff, right, no matter what party is behind it. I think it stinks, and it makes me wonder about the integrity of a man who likes to claim allegiance to the morally superior Republican Party but then wants to ignore the issues or worse, shut down the discussion. Our media if completely failing us by not reporting more on issues this important. . .
 
Tfinal;

Before you lay this at GB's foot, you should re-read your own first post. It seems that a lot of Democrats were involved in this. Items that passed voting in congress, A democrat member of the house, from Venice, CA. pushing her agenda though with the aid of her fellow democrats.
You have one thing right, I would be more scared of this under the rule of Hillary Clinton then I would with Bush.
With all the unrest in France and other parts of Europe caused by Moslem immigration to those countries, and the rioting going on, I can see where this came about in the event it happens here. If used right, it can bring peace to a country in turmoil from certain groups, if used wrong, it can bring about a dictatorship and bring our freedom down.
You need to get out of that snowbound cabin, before GB sends his black helicopters after you. He told me that he is getting pissed at you for blaming every wrong on him and he is going to unlease Cheney to take care of the problem.

RELH
 
I dont really blame so much GB, he's NOT really smart enough to engineer this stuff nor even figure this all out, it's the neocons and the rest of the psycos in the administration that scare me, Bush is, if you have not figured it out yet, just a puppet. . .
 
RELH that was funny.

" The Military Commissions Act of 2006, rammed through Congress just before the 2006 midterm elections, allows for the indefinite imprisonment of anyone who donates money to a charity that turns up on a list of "terrorist" organizations"

This part is OK by me.

Notice every act he cites her was "ramed through" no bias or ax to grind there...........any who. In every act you can find sinarios for dictatorship. These sinarios are a lot like conspiracy theories . Therories is where these remain. Have some faith in our American system T. You know as well as I do T, that if a dictatorship ever occured it would be quelled right in its tracks. For a multitude of reason I will refrain from listing.

Now you can call me Policy Phd 202 :)



"Thanks climate PhD 202" - TFinalshot Feb-05-08, 02:16 PM (MST)
 
" I dont really blame so much GB, he's NOT really smart enough to engineer this stuff nor even figure this all out, it's the neocons and the rest of the psycos in the administration that scare me, Bush is, if you have not figured it out yet, just a puppet. . ."

ROFLMMFAO
Now come on T....................LMAO.......I gotta ask though.....
..........LMAO......so who is the pupet master............LMAO



"Thanks climate PhD 202" - TFinalshot Feb-05-08, 02:16 PM (MST)
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-15-08 AT 03:57PM (MST)[p]I definately agree on the puppet master T. I think there is some truth to this in many ways.

Not directed at anyone just my viewpoint: When you have a liberal press telling the enemy just how it is that we got them you're only adding to the problem. Technology can't keep up the pace when advantages in our technologies are exposed on a daily basis.

The other thing is we're not dealing with an enemy here bound by the geneva convention by any stretch. When you're strapping bombs to kids and sending them into market places just to inflict terror you can't always sit them down and just ask them a question and think they'll respond. When they're loping off heads on the internet to prove how ruthless they are they aren't going to tell you politely! We're fighting an unconventional war with our enemy hiding amongst the people. Some unconventional techniques have most likely saved hundreds of lives but the press always fails to point that out. I AGREE there needs to be limitations but in every war there is collateral damage and unconventional techniques involved on all sides. If you think that some of this hasn't stopped more incidents from happening on U.S. terra firma you need to wake up. They are not basing their attacks against the military around the world they're hitting unprotected civilians.

The fact there has been so few civilian casualties inflicted by our methods demonstrates we're trying to handle it a decent manner. War is not humane and it never will be but the press always tries to sensationalize it. Think not, where was the story on the front page about those American GI's that lost their lives fighting these tyrant's when the waterboarding story broke? Why it was buried in the content of those same papers that are openly promoting how inhumane we are on the front page? The irony lies in the fact all those they waterboarded are still alive but those GI's aren't! War is messy business at best and how easily we forget 9/11. If you think Osama will stop the fight the minute we pull out you had better think again. This enemy won't stop until you and your children are either dead or converted to his beliefs and nothing short of his death will deter his resolve!
 
Tfinal;

I may have to agree with you on Cheney, he scares me as much as does Hillary if given too much power. Now you know why I stated GB may unlease Cheney on you.

RELH
 
It's kind of funny that anyone in the military that is involved with flight operations, pilots and crew members, and Spec Ops has to go through a POW training course. Guess what? They get water boarded. That's part of the training. Our fine liberal friends are bitching about us torturing Muslim terrorists, when America's finest are going through the same thing. If we have to torture a thousand extremists to save one American life, it is worth it. There is a place for those people and it is called HELL.
 
Buglinbull2;

Does it jerk your chain also about the waterboarding. Where was the liberal democrats, that are yelling about waterboarding terrorists, when thousands of our service men went though water boarding as part of their E&E, Escape & Evasion training. this has been part of the course for about 20 years.
Just another smoke screen to ping the present Admin, but it was ok that we used it on our servicemen for the past 20 years. Nothing but a bunch of two face hypocrites at their best to BS the american public.
I bet when this started in congress, there was a bunch of SEALS, Special Forces types that laughted their heads off and wonder where was that darn liberal democrat congressman when they were doing it to me!

RELH
 
As I recall, the likely nominee for the republican party is 100% against the use of torture - this includes waterboarding. Who would know better than Mcain about torture?

Lest hear the spin now boyzzzzzzzzz . . . Your man, your party, and he's against you. . . hum, maybe youre not republicans after all maybe your Neocons?
 
Tfinal;

McCain is against any form of torture for the simple reason what he saw and had done to him while he was in Hanol Hilton. The torture used there was far more severe then any water boarding.
This whole issue has been blown way out of proportion by members of congress trying to find a way to disgrace the GOP leadership over the treatment of terrorists. I also do not think that terrorists do not meet the criterial of a POW.
I am 100% for water boarding to gain information when those same terrorists are beheading their captives and blowing up innocent civilians including children. Where do you stand on this.

RELH
 
As far as the terrorist are concerned they are at war, do they check a box on their arrest form to denote POW or Suspect? who gets to decide who's a terrorist, who's a POW and who's a suspect held for questioning? with your theory lets torture them all and find out.

If they torture a real terrorist to death I'm fine with that, but how do you decide who is and who isn't ? MANY innocent people have been detained and to torture them at will is not what this country is about. besides it's well known that torture doesn't produce reliable information, anyone willing to strap on a bomb and blow themselves up is willing to tell a fib wouldn't you say? or are they too good for that?
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-16-08 AT 01:48PM (MST)[p]I think i'll go with Mcain on this one. . .

H-dude is right. And Mcain is against torture because he knows that the results usually are less than desirable and almost alway misleading, particularly when used on people that would rather die than live. Those guys would love nothing more that to throw you off course and watch as we hunt down the wrong suspects meanwhile the real plot goes on. . .

Is there any merit to the fact that the USA put on trial people who used water boarding against the USA? THIS great country of ours made it illegal, is there any use in considering that one small little fact?
 
I see that both of you avoided the fact it has been used for years with our servicemen to train them on what to expect when captured by the enemy. Never heard any objection from you TF when it was applied to our servicemen, I guess they do not count as your terrorists does with you.
Tfinal, your expertise statement in metholds of interegations also shows your lack of knowledge on the valued use of waterboarding to gain the truth. Any good operative will have "control questions" that he already knows the answer too in order to determine if his subject is telling the truth or trying to mislead them. So find another area to attack, your statement that it "is always misleading" is misleading in itself.
As for the person who is not afraid of dying due to his zealot religious beliefs, as you are indicating some Muslims are, is not ironclad either in gaining information from them. There are metholds to convince them that they are NOT going to "Allah" when they die. Black Jack Pershing proved that years ago. If everyone thought as you do, we will never win the war against terrorists. As for that trial, that was pushed by liberals like you who had a political agenda to bring forth. I have serious doubts that they were sincere about it being a crime to waterboard terrorists. They were looking forward to embarassing the GOP Admin. in order for political gain.

RELH
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-16-08 AT 03:31PM (MST)[p]
I think I'll go with Mcain on this one. . .

I also dont have to stick my head up a bulls ass to see if the t-bone is any good, I can take the butchers word for it. . .

As for water boarding out own guys, last I checked this was an all volunteer army. . .
 
LAST EDITED ON Feb-16-08 AT 04:29PM (MST)[p]How do you tell the difference? Well when you have a guy shooting at our troops and/or has been identified as a leader of a terrorist group I think that would be rather easy. Those boys that wound up in Guantanamo weren't out there selling girl scout cookies! Most were caught redhanded bearing arms against our troops and the civilized world. When you have surveillence videos of them killing and attacking people and catch them in the act of leaving that may be an indicator that your suspect may be a terrorist. When you catch them moving small arms weapons, RPG's & C4 under cover of darkness to militant sites they aren't getting ready to pray for your salvation.

The problem here is that they're not standing in our front yard getting ready to kill our family. Some how I think that would make all the difference in the world to you no matter what you say here because then it will be you and yours paying the ultimate price not just some kid down the road you never knew. I'm for limiting what they do, but I know they're saving lives doing some of it and if that will put an end to this that's fine by me. If you had a chance to save your kid by waterboarding somebody to save his life (especially when you know you won't kill the guy) Tfinal you'd be holding the hose!
 
"I can take the butchers word for it" only problem Tfinal that butcher was only hired yesterday and has as much expertise as the local village idiot. But that is ok, you have the right to take his word for it. P.T. Barnum said it best, and I need not say more.
"As for water boarding our own guys, last I checked this was an all volunteer army". Thank you Tfinal for finally coming out of the closet. In that one sentence you have defined your true feelings about our servicemen along with your liberal politicians in Washington. Protecting a terorist is more important then the lives or treatment of our servicemen.
In that one statement it is very self evident that you do not give a rat's butt about our troops or you would never have made that statement. Now at last we know where you stand. I see no difference with you and your kind that was prevalent during Viet Nam and was waiting in line to spit on our troops as they came home.

RELH
 
Do you think our servicemen expect to be killed while practicing waterboarding? they shoot at each other during training also but are they using live ammo? this argument is as dumb as it gets.

If we torture then we can expect EVERYONE to do the same to our troops, not just ragheads but EVERYONE. we are supposed to be the ones on the high ground here, there's no proof torture does any good anyway and just who gets it and who decides when it's enough. this is a slippery slope and should be left up to guys like McCain and Powell who know what they're talking about, not people who are affraid of everything or guys like Bush who know as much about military service as Captian Crunch.
 
If you think for one moment any good field commander wouldn't put pressure on an enemy to save his men you are sadly mistaken. If it would disclose the location of the enemy he is about to face and allow capture without a fight. Capturing the enemy will save lives on both sides. Sorry dude but we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. Sacrificing men is always the one thing any commander will try to avoid since he's entrusted with protecting them. It most certainly isn't you or I that are writing their parents and as far as I'm concerned, 1 more letter is too many. Like I said I'm not for pulling the stops out on this stuff there should be LIMITS. But intelligence wins wars especially in this theatre of operation. How many more thousands of lives is it worth to sacrifice Dude when this technique doesn't result in anybodies death or any type of disability? How many more body bags do we fill? How many grieving parents will lose their sons? How many innocent victims could we save? Is it worth another 9/11 in this country?
It's a crappy hand that we've been dealt but the only way to win this one is to take the other guy out of the game.
 
Hey RELH,

Not a lot of people know about Black Jack Pershing, please elaborate on his methods of working with muslims. I think we need more creative military minds in the theater today like Black Jack.

The original Turduckhen:)

T, ever since Eisenhower we have had Emergency Government Contingency Plans as a part of the cold war. I'm not quite sure how any comparisons can be made with Directive 51 versus anyprevious presidential executive order, directive, or circular. Our congressional representatives have repeatedly been denied access to Directive 51 in it's entirety.

If you want to be outraged, form a political movement and go protest. Of course, keep in mind, you will be arrested and held without due process legally. Homeland Security and Directive 51 have some odd historical parallels worthy of being noted.

Cheney the power behind the throne....now where I have heard that assertion before? ;)

McCain and Clinton voted for MAC 2006
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom