Rule by fear or rule by law?

[hobo]eclipse · Feb 24, 2008, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by San Francisco Chronicle

"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."

San Francisco Chronicle - Rule by fear or rule by law?

WOW! just WOW! mainsteam news reporting the US is building camps to hold people who are not interested in "the rapid development of new programs." This is the direction America is heading, but does this sound like freedom?

Maddogg6 · Feb 24, 2008, 12:28 PM

Quote:

This is the direction America is heading, but does this sound like freedom?

Only to neocons... it certainly is not the path the founding fathers wanted - they tried to warn us of these situations (enemy within scenario). And slowly but certainly, laws and 'executive' orders have dwindled our freedoms in response to fear-mongered victims demands.

I laugh at how people demand to be protected - and they actually think looking at your laptop and up your ass in an airport is actually gonna make some difference... the old saying - 'if theres a will, there is a way' - but it doesnt seem to stop the neocons from saying/thinking 'sure I will live with less freedom if it makes me *feel* safer'... pfff.

Stop pissing off the worlds nuts and feel safer that way. US foreign policy pretty much ensures the worlds nut cases will have the USA in its sites for years to come.

We are told our military is spreading democracy, but its not just taxes that is taken in payment - its that countries resources that US corps control.... look at copper in Chille, then look at oil in Iraq.... nahhh - that couldn't possibly be the reason extremists want to kill us - why? for protecting 'US interests' ?- they actually mean, 'hording resources that US corps make $Billions$ on' So, as long as few benefit economically - its ok that we all loose freedoms over it - I guess.

[hobo]eclipse · Feb 26, 2008, 04:31 AM

U.S. Northern Command, Canada Command establish new bilateral Civil Assistance Plan

Quote:

“Unity of effort during bilateral support for civil support operations such as floods, forest fires, hurricanes, earthquakes and effects of a terrorist attack"

the thing about this reasoning, all except one of these are definates. we all know what earthquakes, floods, forest fires and hurricanes are, but what defines a "terrorist attack".

dubya laid it out for us very nicely in the patriot act, just who they define as domestic terrorist and what can be done. and now our neighbors military can patrol our soil?

Maddogg6 · Feb 26, 2008, 07:58 PM

Quote:

but what defines a "terrorist attack".

Theoretically, any one doing something criminal .... only, now you have feds and potentially foreign military to deal with instead of local law enforcement.