- 3,733
- 175
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2008
FEMA sources confirm coming Martial Law
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by 5th platoon,
- Start date
- 1,557
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2003
Just Congress then? good, because I wasn't really buying into the idea that ALL of us were naive.
- 452
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2007
::Listens to "We As Americans" by Eminem
Jaymatik
Staff member
- 1,360
- 44
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2004
- 5,485
- 14
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2007
Martial Law isn't on the horizon but I don't think it's out of the question if the nation continues in the direction that it is heading. Not interms of its economic outlook but the corruption at the federal level and centralization of power in the Feds hands.
The Feds are preparing more for domestic upheaval than for a foreign threat to the US homeland when it comes to "Continuity of Government".
The Feds are preparing more for domestic upheaval than for a foreign threat to the US homeland when it comes to "Continuity of Government".
- 1,557
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2003
I'm being sarcastic.
I just find it funny that we say he gave himself these powers but thats not actually the case... Congress did.
(Disclaimer: I don't love or hate George Bush. Quite frankly, I believe he's as stupid as we think he is, but I cringe when people makeclaims without much, if any, evidence. I'm just dissecting the statement)
Continue.
And as was previously mentioned (PrurientSolesaid it), if there was social unrest anywhere they would implement Martial Law. It has nothing to do with Bush.
Jaymatik
Staff member
- 1,360
- 44
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2004
And who do you think put these people into office in the firsr place?
- 1,557
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2003
^^^ that was exactly my point. Read it again with a sarcastic undertone.
People to Congress to President.
You may not have given him that power directly, but the officials you elected did. He didn't just decide to give himself that executive power one day.
People to Congress to President.
You may not have given him that power directly, but the officials you elected did. He didn't just decide to give himself that executive power one day.
- 4,215
- 40
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2001
But what fact does that change? He should not have to audacity to ask for those powers he should know that he is infringing on the constitution.You can argue about who gave him what and whos fault it is all day and night but the fact is he has them.
- 3,024
- 12
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2006
- 1,557
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2003
The original argument was that he abused his position and awarded himself that power... that's not the case. Congress wasn't held at gunpoint... given the circumstances, they gave it to him. So what point are YOU trying to get at now? he shouldn't have asked? and?!?
- 4,215
- 40
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2001
Originally Posted by ArsnalJ23
The original argument was that he abused his position and awarded himself that power... that's not the case. Congress wasn't held at gun point... given the circumstances, they gave it to him. So what point are YOU trying to get at now? he shouldn't have asked? and?!?
The point is its wrong regardless of who gave it to him and now he can do stuff that he should not be allowed to do. But no one cares apparently
This is all particulars that arent important Bush and future presidents now can undermine the system that was put in place by the founding fathers. There issuppose to be a balance of power and that is slowly being erroded. But lets argue about nothing just for $#%*% and giggles
- 1,557
- 12
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2003
So all 535 members of Congress are in George Bush's pocket? you're giving him a lot more credit than you should, but we'll go alongwith it. Lets say the majority of Congress is Republican (and what you meant to say was that they were part of his party, not administration... in a realisticworld even when this is the case, you're still not guaranteed that all of them will support him, but anyway...), lets assume he scammed his way to thispower... what has he done with it? Excuse himself from War Crimes... what else? I asked this question before and that was the only thing anyone came up with."he can do stuff that he should not be allowed to do" Are you condemning him for what he can do or what he has done?!?Originally Posted by theone2401
Originally Posted by ArsnalJ23
The original argument was that he abused his position and awarded himself that power... that's not the case. Congress wasn't held at gun point... given the circumstances, they gave it to him. So what point are YOU trying to get at now? he shouldn't have asked? and?!?
The point is its wrong regardless of who gave it to him and now he can do stuff that he should not be allowed to do. But no one cares apparentlyLets not even get into the fact that maybe the people in congress who voted for this to pass were republicans who are part of his administration? Because congress and the president are completely seperate entities right?
This is all particulars that arent important Bush and future presidents now can undermine the system that was put in place by the founding fathers. There is suppose to be a balance of power and that is slowly being erroded. But lets argue about nothing just for $#%*% and giggles
If Congress deems it necessary to take that power back... you don't think they can at some point? It took a majority vote to give it to him (correct me ifI'm wrong, which I could be) so any person that comes into office might very well disagree with holding that kind of power and relinquish it. Again, ifI'm not mistaken, its a War time power anyway, it doesn't last forever.
Now if we want to take this back to the original topic like I did before, this still doesn't have anything to do with martial law. If the country goes intochaos, you put your trust in the government to take control and "protect you" because that's what you elected them to do, this is where martiallaw comes in.
- 1,231
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2003
You guys realize that the President still has the same power to declare martial law as he always had since 1802? In other words, not much. Bush loosened theterms of when he can impose martial law in 2006 but that was repealed this year.
EDIT: America lived through 1968. That was as bad as it can get in terms of riots and such.
EDIT: America lived through 1968. That was as bad as it can get in terms of riots and such.
- 1,641
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
who is meeting up at blackwater,raiding the AA-12's,12 guage rounds and armored vehicles and hightailing all the goonies from the zombie invasion???
Pm Me...
But seriously,I really wouldn't be surprised.
Pm Me...
But seriously,I really wouldn't be surprised.
- 121
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2002
So all 535 members of Congress are in George Bush's pocket?
Not this guy....
- 55
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
That's like saying The Great Depression was worse than what we're facing now, but as the days go by people are realizing that things aretrending to be far worse than The Great Depression. It's evident that things are getting worse and for people saying that it takes time for the bail outpackage to work are kidding themselves with false hope. I'm sure the masses would have never thought of the economic meltdown we're seeing today.
With that in mind. It's safe to assume that the worse is yet to come. Welcome to the New Era...