That would be Ridiculous if they pass some damn socialist shit like that but then again .... the citizens have lost control of this country and until they take it back need to deal with whats happening
This is not socialist it's Fascist ...
Quote:
[T]he original 1878 Posse Comitatus Act was indeed passed with the intent of removing the Army from domestic law enforcement. Posse comitatus means ?the power of the county,? reflecting the inherent power of the old West county sheriff to call upon a posse of able-bodied men to supplement law enforcement assets and thereby maintain the peace. ...
Expect court challenges arguing the new law's conflicts with the precedents of the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act.
tony286
11-25-2011 09:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by theking
(Post 18585468)
More bills are proposed than get passed. Even if the bill passed the President can veto it. Even if the President didn't veto it...it would be challenged in Federal Court and ultimately it would be the Supreme Court that decides what parts...if any...are constitutional...just as they did with the Patriot Act...parts of which were found to be unconstitutional.
Well said, bills come and go more than we can count. It would never get thru congress.
porno jew
11-25-2011 09:43 AM
anti-communist paranoid and kook. :2 cents:
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehateporn
(Post 18585638)
Here's Norman Dodd (RIP), chief investigator of the Reece Committee on Tax Exempt Foundations
Here's an extract of what he says in the interview
"We're back in nineteen hundred and eight, and the trustees meet, and they raise this question among themselves: Namely, is there any means besides war, known to man, more capable, assuming you wish to alter the life of entire people."
Question: Now these are the trustees of the Carnegie Foundation?
"Mr. Dodd: "That's right, and they discuss this question in a very learned fashion for approximately a year, and come up with a conclusion that: War is the most effective means known to man assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people.
"So then they bring up a second question namely: How do we involve the United States in a war? And I doubt in nineteen hundred and nine there was any subject more removed from the minds of us as a people, than our involvement in a war. There were shows going on in the Balkans and most of the people of this country hardly knew the Balkans were. And they conclude that: They must control the diplomatic machinery of the United States.
"And that raises question number 3, namely how do we secure that control? and the answer comes out we must control the State Department. And, from that time on, their activities were centered on: securring control of the State Department. Now as a means to that end, the Endowment founded and instrumentality called the Council for Learned Society. And that Council was assigned the task of passing on every high official appointment of the State Department before the appointment was confirmed. At that point this finding linked up with what we had already suspected. But nevertheless here was confirmation of it.
"Well this happened, and, pretty soon the country was in a war which became to be known, of course, as World War I. And this group of trustees at one point congratulated themselves on the wisdom of the original decision. Because, as they put it, war has demonstrated a power to alter the life of the people of this country already.
"And then their interest went on seeing to it we as a people did not revert to our customs and our practices which prevailed prior to the outbreak of World War I. And they decided after the war was over that that meant we had to control education of the United States.
"And so they realized this was a very prodigious task. So they approached the Rockefeller Foundation and made the suggestion that the Rockefeller Foundation take on half the problem, and they retained the other half. They divided it between those subjects which were domestic in their significance and those which were international.
"And they, together, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Carnegie Endowment, decided that the crux of the matter lay in their ability to alter the teaching of American History in this country. So they approached the then three of the most prominent historians, with that suggestion and they were turned down flat. So then they decided they would have to build their own stable of historians. And so they then approached the Guggenheim Foundation which specialized in awarding fellowships, and said figuratively, 'When we find a likely young man who's headed to become a teacher of American history, and will you grant him on our say so a fellowship?' And the answer was, yes we will. So they gradually assembled twenty. And they took these twenty to England, London. And there they briefed them to what was expected of them. And that became the nucleus of the American Historical Association. To which ultimately the Endowment made a grant of four hundred thousand dollars for a study to be made, which would conclude what the future of this country was to be.
wehateporn
11-25-2011 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by porno jew
(Post 18585669)
anti-communist paranoid and kook. :2 cents:
You've been provided with the information, as have others reading the thread, so that's my job done :)
It's up to you how you choose to interpret it and if you would prefer to disregard Norman's lifetime research :2 cents:
oscer
11-25-2011 09:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam
(Post 18585661)
This is not socialist it's Fascist ...
Fair enough !
porno jew
11-25-2011 09:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehateporn
(Post 18585683)
You've been provided with the information, as have others reading the thread, so that's my job done :)
It's up to you how you choose to interpret it and if you would prefer to disregard Norman's lifetime research :2 cents:
actually i watched it again and got the subliminal message in it. he is really trying to say that tax exempt foundations are actually working to create conditions of maximum freedom and liberation. watch the video again. :2 cents:
_Richard_
11-25-2011 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wehateporn
(Post 18585426)
The major Tax Exempt Foundations, who are known to be behind the wars that involve the US, have been showing our teens these adverts. Teaching them to comply when the time comes
I'm talking about this senate bill. McCain is the most hawkish politician on capitol hill, if you don't think he would've taken the same exact steps in fighting the war on terror that Obama has, and then some...well, then I got a bridge I could sell you.
There was a reason obama got elected... CHANGE!
Not exactly working out like the people that elected him thought it would.
crockett
11-25-2011 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotsie
(Post 18585524)
I'm talking about this senate bill. McCain is the most hawkish politician on capitol hill, if you don't think he would've taken the same exact steps in fighting the war on terror that Obama has, and then some...well, then I got a bridge I could sell you.
You have to be kidding. Obama's stance was to finish up Iraq as fast as possible and get us out and redirect focus on Afghan and other hot spots like Pakistan boarders.
McCain was all for dragging out Iraq and keeping Afghan as the forgotten war. The reason being Iraq war was much more profitable for US business interest. The reality was it was US contractors milking the tax payers dry vs real economic growth from re-developing the country of Iraq.
Remember Bush claiming the rebuilding of Iraq would come from their oil sales? Umm yeah .. opps sorry guys, guess he got that one wrong, It's you the tax payers whom are flipping the bill.
The two couldn't have been completely further apart on their views of the so called war on terror. McCain would have continued a losing Bush strategy that would have probably bankrupted this country.
vsex
11-25-2011 10:35 AM
top o' the second page! :thumbsup
DWB
11-25-2011 10:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by glamourmodels
(Post 18585210)
I guess you cant read very well DWB, they can come anywhere in the world to get you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pornguy
(Post 18585383)
thing is DWB,. with something like that it does not matter where you are. they will come and get you.
Sure, they will get you if you are a "terrorist." That happens already. But they are not going to run down Joe Blow American citizen for no reason at all while he lives abroad. If you don't give them a reason, you won't have any problems. If you give them a reason, they will own your ass, and can do so now. The FBI has offices all around the world and will run you down if they get the call. You would have to really screw up to have the military run you down in a foreign country, when the FBI can do the same job with less man power and fewer resources.
My comment about leave while you can, means leave while you are still permitted to leave. If you think it's bad now, give it 10 more years. You'll all wish you had left and set up a life elsewhere. And if you have the means, get working on a 2nd citizenship.
Nikki_Licks
11-25-2011 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by oscer
(Post 18585040)
That would be Ridiculous if they pass some damn socialist shit like that but then again .... the citizens have lost control of this country and until they take it back need to deal with whats happening
Hopefully the people of this country will wake the fuck up. The only way to take this country back is force.....these corrupt politicians, government....etc, would rather see us dead before they give up their wealth and control :2 cents:
epitome
11-25-2011 11:00 AM
Drafted in secret by McCain.
To think that man was almost our President is scary.
I will have to remember that the people who voted for McCain are likely the same people against OWS and defending police actions. I can't help but to feel like I am on the correct side of the argument.
_Richard_
11-25-2011 11:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585841)
Sure, they will get you if you are a "terrorist." That happens already. But they are not going to run down Joe Blow American citizen for no reason at all while he lives abroad. If you don't give them a reason, you won't have any problems. If you give them a reason, they will own your ass, and can do so now. The FBI has offices all around the world and will run you down if they get the call. You would have to really screw up to have the military run you down in a foreign country, when the FBI can do the same job with less man power and fewer resources.
My comment about leave while you can, means leave while you are still permitted to leave. If you think it's bad now, give it 10 more years. You'll all wish you had left and set up a life elsewhere. And if you have the means, get working on a 2nd citizenship.
tell that to the 16 year old american who happened to be out for a car ride with his father, mr. number 2 of al qaeda?
lifes a bitch, then the government shoots you with a million dollar rocket
DWB
11-25-2011 11:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_
(Post 18585866)
tell that to the 16 year old american who happened to be out for a car ride with his father, mr. number 2 of al qaeda?
lifes a bitch, then the government shoots you with a million dollar rocket
Honestly, who is going to ride around with someone from Al Qaeda, their father or otherwise, and think nothing bad will happen to them?
Easy rules to follow:
- Don't be a terrorist.
- Don't do anything to make them think you are a terrorist, including discussing terror plots or surfing Muslim extremist websites.
- Don't fund or do business with terrorists.
- Don't look like a terrorist or change your name to Muhammad.
- Don't hang out with terrorists.
_Richard_
11-25-2011 11:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585897)
Honestly, who is going to ride around with someone from Al Qaeda, their father or otherwise, and think nothing bad will happen to them?
Easy rules to follow:
- Don't be a terrorist.
- Don't do anything to make them think you are a terrorist, including discussing terror plots or surfing Muslim extremist websites.
- Don't fund or do business with terrorists.
- Don't look like a terrorist or change your name to Muhammad.
- Don't hang out with terrorists.
what 16 year old thinks something bad is going to happen to them?
and that's a cool list. i like it
why are al qaeda flags flying over courthouses in benghazi? are we 'doing business' with the very people we have been at war with for 10+ years.. again doing business.. ..doing business with, again.. you know what i mean
PornoMonster
11-25-2011 11:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett
(Post 18585776)
You have to be kidding. Obama's stance was to finish up Iraq as fast as possible and get us out and redirect focus on Afghan and other hot spots like Pakistan boarders.
McCain was all for dragging out Iraq and keeping Afghan as the forgotten war. The reason being Iraq war was much more profitable for US business interest. The reality was it was US contractors milking the tax payers dry vs real economic growth from re-developing the country of Iraq.
Remember Bush claiming the rebuilding of Iraq would come from their oil sales? Umm yeah .. opps sorry guys, guess he got that one wrong, It's you the tax payers whom are flipping the bill.
The two couldn't have been completely further apart on their views of the so called war on terror. McCain would have continued a losing Bush strategy that would have probably bankrupted this country.
Whatever the "reasons" it is Still War on Terror, and costing billions ontop of billions.
Most people in my red state that voted for Obama, was riding on his claim we are spending to much money on the Wars..... Sure what he might of said in the run around political voice, and what was coming across to the people, are two different things.. Called good politics.
I do not need I am wrong or right, I am making a statement based on what other told me they were voting for....
Rochard
11-25-2011 11:59 AM
Hasn't the US Military always had this ability? NCIS, CID, etc? These are law enforcement agencies of the various military branches, staffed by civilians, but under orders of the military. They can arrest civilians.
I think the general public would be stunned if they knew what powers the President of the US has. The president has what's called "Executive Orders" that pretty much gives him unlimited power. If you have any doubt about this, check out Executive Order 9066. Some of the Executive Orders are really out there, such as taking over all transportation in the US and all communication.
DWB
11-25-2011 12:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_
(Post 18585909)
what 16 year old thinks something bad is going to happen to them?
and that's a cool list. i like it
why are al qaeda flags flying over courthouses in benghazi? are we 'doing business' with the very people we have been at war with for 10+ years.. again doing business.. ..doing business with, again.. you know what i mean
The war is/was bogus. There is no war on terror and no one is fighting for our freedom. No one hates us for our freedom, and it's not better to fight them over there so we don't fight them here. All nonsense. Like every other war, it's about Empire and resources. Period.
That said, I'm still not going to roll with anyone from Al Qaeda.
DWB
11-25-2011 12:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
(Post 18585936)
Hasn't the US Military always had this ability? NCIS, CID, etc? These are law enforcement agencies of the various military branches, staffed by civilians, but under orders of the military. They can arrest civilians.
I think the general public would be stunned if they knew what powers the President of the US has. The president has what's called "Executive Orders" that pretty much gives him unlimited power. If you have any doubt about this, check out Executive Order 9066. Some of the Executive Orders are really out there, such as taking over all transportation in the US and all communication.
I was under the same impression. They have always just taken people they want. Not sure if it was legal, but it's been done for a while. And there is no telling what goes on that the public never knows about.
crockett
11-25-2011 12:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PornoMonster
(Post 18585911)
Whatever the "reasons" it is Still War on Terror, and costing billions ontop of billions.
Most people in my red state that voted for Obama, was riding on his claim we are spending to much money on the Wars..... Sure what he might of said in the run around political voice, and what was coming across to the people, are two different things.. Called good politics.
I do not need I am wrong or right, I am making a statement based on what other told me they were voting for....
Obama was very clear in the fact he intended to pull us out of Iraq but to further pursue the war in Afghan and in other places the tangos were hiding (ie Pakistan)
Anyone whom thought he was going to end both wars, clearly didn't listen to what he was saying and heard what they wanted to hear. He said it many times that he intended to refocus on the war in Afghan something that has already paid it's dividends with the death of bin Laden as well as several other high ranking al qaeda members.
Nikki_Licks
11-25-2011 12:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585947)
The war is/was bogus. There is no war on terror and no one is fighting for our freedom. No one hates us for our freedom, and it's not better to fight them over there so we don't fight them here. All nonsense. Like every other war, it's about Empire and resources. Period.
So TRUE!!
_Richard_
11-25-2011 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585947)
The war is/was bogus. There is no war on terror and no one is fighting for our freedom. No one hates us for our freedom, and it's not better to fight them over there so we don't fight them here. All nonsense. Like every other war, it's about Empire and resources. Period.
That said, I'm still not going to roll with anyone from Al Qaeda.
empire and resources? lots of fallen empires, yet seems to be pretty static players in regards to resources etc
theking
11-25-2011 01:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett
(Post 18585963)
Obama was very clear in the fact he intended to pull us out of Iraq but to further pursue the war in Afghan and in other places the tangos were hiding (ie Pakistan)
Anyone whom thought he was going to end both wars, clearly didn't listen to what he was saying and heard what they wanted to hear. He said it many times that he intended to refocus on the war in Afghan something that has already paid it's dividends with the death of bin Laden as well as several other high ranking al qaeda members.
You are correct.
Rochard
11-25-2011 03:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585952)
I was under the same impression. They have always just taken people they want. Not sure if it was legal, but it's been done for a while. And there is no telling what goes on that the public never knows about.
I've watched NCIS work before. For the most part they are no different than your local police detectives. I find it hard to believe that anyone at that level would make people "disappear". If the government wanted to do that, I'm sure they could do it. At the same time, I don't believe that kind of crap goes on - if so, there would be a lot more people missing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585947)
The war is/was bogus. There is no war on terror and no one is fighting for our freedom. No one hates us for our freedom, and it's not better to fight them over there so we don't fight them here. All nonsense. Like every other war, it's about Empire and resources. Period.
That said, I'm still not going to roll with anyone from Al Qaeda.
What empire building? We are pulling out of Iraq, and Afghanistan holds no interest to anyone. I think the concept of "empire building" went out with WWII.
wehateporn
11-25-2011 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyClips
(Post 18586349)
What empire building?! lol the USA has bases in like 150 different counties and are picking off country by country that doesn't have a Rothschild operated central banking system
theking
11-25-2011 05:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyClips
(Post 18586349)
What empire building?! lol the USA has bases in like 150 different counties and are picking off country by country that doesn't have a Rothschild operated central banking system
No...we do not have bases in "like 150 different country's". Every country that we have an Embassy we have military personnel to protect the Embassy. What country's are we picking off one by one?
JFK
11-25-2011 06:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minte
(Post 18585749)
There was a reason obama got elected... CHANGE!
Not exactly working out like the people that elected him thought it would.
I want my 50 cents back ..................:2 cents:
PornoMonster
11-25-2011 07:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett
(Post 18585963)
Obama was very clear in the fact he intended to pull us out of Iraq but to further pursue the war in Afghan and in other places the tangos were hiding (ie Pakistan)
Anyone whom thought he was going to end both wars, clearly didn't listen to what he was saying and heard what they wanted to hear. He said it many times that he intended to refocus on the war in Afghan something that has already paid it's dividends with the death of bin Laden as well as several other high ranking al qaeda members.
Ask a HUGE % that voted for him what they thought Obama was going to do!
PornoMonster
11-25-2011 07:13 PM
Not to mention Him and the Left going on and on and on about
War Criminal
Unfunded War
Wars costing way to Much
Yes, I believe once people heard this, they didn't hear him say .... not so many words
I am going to do the same just in Different places.
PornoMonster
11-25-2011 07:17 PM
I, Yes can go back and look at what was said.
I did not Vote for him, my guy didn't even make it to the race.
I just feel Very Strongly about how this affected many Americans, most will not admit they were politicaly misled. Just to you know I am against ALL Political people doing this exact same thing with ANY matter.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.
Quote:
(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY.?The Secretary of Defense may, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Director of National In
telligence, waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the Secretary submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.
Reading, it's too much effort.
munki
11-26-2011 04:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWB
(Post 18585096)
Not sure how many more signs you need. Get out while you still can.
Life is pretty damn good abroad.
Have you renounced citizenship?
u-Bob
11-26-2011 06:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
(Post 18585936)
I think the general public would be stunned if they knew what powers the President of the US has. The president has what's called "Executive Orders" that pretty much gives him unlimited power.
There's no doubt that they have the ability to do a lot of 'unimaginable things', but the real question is "do they have the right to do so?". Might does not make right. Those executive orders were originally intended as a means to clarify existing laws or direct agencies/departments to implement existing laws.
Fletch XXX
11-26-2011 06:33 AM
Quote:
The Senate is going to vote on whether Congress will give this president—and every future president — the power to order the military to pick up and imprison without charge or trial civilians anywhere in the world.
i am armed and will shoot anyone who come to my house with a gun pointed at me.
this is america.
locked and loaded.
Shotsie
11-26-2011 07:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by crockett
(Post 18585776)
You have to be kidding. Obama's stance was to finish up Iraq as fast as possible and get us out and redirect focus on Afghan and other hot spots like Pakistan boarders.
McCain was all for dragging out Iraq and keeping Afghan as the forgotten war. The reason being Iraq war was much more profitable for US business interest. The reality was it was US contractors milking the tax payers dry vs real economic growth from re-developing the country of Iraq.
Remember Bush claiming the rebuilding of Iraq would come from their oil sales? Umm yeah .. opps sorry guys, guess he got that one wrong, It's you the tax payers whom are flipping the bill.
The two couldn't have been completely further apart on their views of the so called war on terror. McCain would have continued a losing Bush strategy that would have probably bankrupted this country.
I agree, that's where the and then some part comes in. Although, from listening to Obama's campaign rhetoric I was under the impression that he would be taking a more isolationist stance on the middle east, and that the majority of ground troops would be out of there by now. He promised a 16 month exit, it's been around 30 months now.
cykoe6
11-26-2011 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutt
(Post 18585047)
if they can re-write the bill so it defines exactly who can be detained indefinitely it would help - if they restrict it to dirty hippy commies and muslims i think it's a bill the majority will support.
Yea........ that is true....... obviously we can all agree that filthy hippies and rabid jihadists have it coming........ but unfortunately the government passes these laws in the interest of national security and then uses them for domestic police enforcement in the "drug war" like they did with roving wiretaps. The government cannot be trusted to limit itself to actual national security threats.
theking
11-26-2011 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shotsie
(Post 18587236)
I agree, that's where the and then some part comes in. Although, from listening to Obama's campaign rhetoric I was under the impression that he would be taking a more isolationist stance on the middle east, and that the majority of ground troops would be out of there by now. He promised a 16 month exit, it's been around 30 months now.
The 16 month exit was for combat units in Iraq and they have been removed.
