PDA

View Full Version : Bush May Institute Martial Law & Declare Himself President For Life



Prakosh
10-21-2006, 08:17 AM
The loss of Habeus Corpus together with Bush's continued insistence that he can sign a bill while maintinaing that parts of the very law he is signing will not apply to him makes him the most dangerous and deceitful president in the history of this once great nation. He will go down in history as the closest thing to a dictator we have had. Unless of course he decides to declare himself President for Life in which case he will then have become the first actual dictator in American history. As Mick Jagger said, "It's just a shout away."

From Olbermann's Latest Commentary:

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has said it is unacceptable to compare anything this country has ever done to anything the terrorists have ever done.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who has insisted again that "the United States does not torture. It’s against our laws and it’s against our values" and who has said it with a straight face while the pictures from Abu Ghraib Prison and the stories of Waterboarding figuratively fade in and out, around him.

We have handed a blank check drawn against our freedom to a man who may now, if he so decides, declare not merely any non-American citizens "unlawful enemy combatants" and ship them somewhere—anywhere -- but may now, if he so decides, declare you an "unlawful enemy combatant" and ship you somewhere - anywhere.

And if you think this hyperbole or hysteria, ask the newspaper editors when John Adams was president or the pacifists when Woodrow Wilson was president or the Japanese at Manzanar when Franklin Roosevelt was president.

And if you somehow think habeas corpus has not been suspended for American citizens but only for everybody else, ask yourself this: If you are pulled off the street tomorrow, and they call you an alien or an undocumented immigrant or an "unlawful enemy combatant"—exactly how are you going to convince them to give you a court hearing to prove you are not? Do you think this attorney general is going to help you?

This President now has his blank check.

He lied to get it.

He lied as he received it.

Is there any reason to even hope he has not lied about how he intends to use it nor who he intends to use it against?

"These military commissions will provide a fair trial," you told us yesterday, Mr. Bush, "in which the accused are presumed innocent, have access to an attorney and can hear all the evidence against them."

"Presumed innocent," Mr. Bush?

The very piece of paper you signed as you said that, allows for the detainees to be abused up to the point just before they sustain "serious mental and physical trauma" in the hope of getting them to incriminate themselves, and may no longer even invoke The Geneva Conventions in their own defense.

"Access to an attorney," Mr. Bush?

Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift said on this program, Sir, and to the Supreme Court, that he was only granted access to his detainee defendant on the promise that the detainee would plead guilty.

"Hearing all the evidence," Mr. Bush?

The Military Commissions Act specifically permits the introduction of classified evidence not made available to the defense.

Your words are lies, Sir.

They are lies that imperil us all.

"One of the terrorists believed to have planned the 9/11 attacks," you told us yesterday, "said he hoped the attacks would be the beginning of the end of America."

That terrorist, sir, could only hope.

Not his actions, nor the actions of a ceaseless line of terrorists (real or imagined), could measure up to what you have wrought.

Habeas corpus? Gone.

The Geneva Conventions? Optional.

The moral force we shined outwards to the world as an eternal beacon, and inwards at ourselves as an eternal protection? Snuffed out.

These things you have done, Mr. Bush, they would be "the beginning of the end of America."

And did it even occur to you once, sir — somewhere in amidst those eight separate, gruesome, intentional, terroristic invocations of the horrors of 9/11 -- that with only a little further shift in this world we now know—just a touch more repudiation of all of that for which our patriots died --- did it ever occur to you once that in just 27 months and two days from now when you leave office, some irresponsible future president and a "competent tribunal" of lackeys would be entitled, by the actions of your own hand, to declare the status of "unlawful enemy combatant" for -- and convene a Military Commission to try -- not John Walker Lindh, but George Walker Bush?

Full Delighful Disquisition (msnbc.msn.com/id/15321167/)

toby
10-21-2006, 09:34 AM
What a huge pile of steaming crap. Oberman needs to be labeled FOR ENTERTAINMENT PURPOSES ONLY, NO FACTUAL INFORMATION INCLUDED!
His news is more fake than the fake news Daily Show!

habeas corpus has never been aplied to enemy combantants, so it can't be taken away from them.

Damocles
10-21-2006, 11:59 AM
If any President did this they would have the true enmity of many with weapons... This is ridiculous speculation.

maineman
10-21-2006, 12:11 PM
the fact is, the law he signed gives him that power.

it may very well be unwise for him to use it in that way, but he now has it.

He could easily whisk any of us away in the dead of night and claim all sorts of classified evidence existed that made us an enemy combatant...and our family's would have no recourse, nor would we.

Cancel7
10-21-2006, 12:45 PM
If any President did this they would have the true enmity of many with weapons... This is ridiculous speculation.

Really. Like who? You damo? Maybe Dixie is going to take up arms to remove him from office?

What could, and may well happen under this adminstration in the event of a large-scale attack, one that is even more destructive than 9/11, is an open question. I hope not to find out, but I place no trust in "oh that can't happen here" simply because so much previously thought impossible here has occured. With nary a word of dissent from so much of this country.

It could not happen without the backing of the military.

And when if does happen, it will be with their backing.
And when it only begins, and the dissenters are marched off to the detention camps THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED, there will be many posting right here, and certainly all over the internet, making posts saying why it's necessary. Why they're only traitors anyway.

And they will, to a man, claim they are Patriots. Ignorant of the fact that the Founding Fathers, who never spoke with one voice after the revolution, would rise up if they could, and TO A MAN, point at them and call them traitor.

We are a very short hop away from the need to burn down the barn and start all over.

But it won't be you who leads, and I have no confidence nor trust in your gun. I don't think they'll ever be used to protect me, or my rights.

Cancel7
10-21-2006, 12:47 PM
the fact is, the law he signed gives him that power.

it may very well be unwise for him to use it in that way, but he now has it.

He could easily whisk any of us away in the dead of night and claim all sorts of classified evidence existed that made us an enemy combatant...and our family's would have no recourse, nor would we.

And we've seen all the outraged posts made by Damo and other righties on here, about this FACT.

Cypress
10-21-2006, 12:59 PM
the fact is, the law he signed gives him that power.

it may very well be unwise for him to use it in that way, but he now has it.

He could easily whisk any of us away in the dead of night and claim all sorts of classified evidence existed that made us an enemy combatant...and our family's would have no recourse, nor would we.

and even if we assume Bush is ethical enough not to do it, what's to prevent a future president from abusing this power? What red-blooded american can really support giving the government this type of power?

maineman
10-21-2006, 01:14 PM
In answer to your question: Dixie can...but then, we all know his blood is yellow!

uscitizen
10-21-2006, 03:06 PM
In answer to your question: Dixie can...but then, we all know his blood is yellow!
cause it has all turned to corrupted puss.

OrnotBitwise
10-21-2006, 06:58 PM
If any President did this they would have the true enmity of many with weapons... This is ridiculous speculation.No, it's not. It is necessary speculation. To fail to speculate along these lines is to allow freedom to slip away, bit by bit.

The only real treason is to say "it can't happen here."

Prakosh
10-21-2006, 07:42 PM
Given all that Bush has already done that many believed could not happen here, I would say that at this point believing it can't happen here is foolhardy at best, and downright delusional at worst. He took away habeus corpus without so much as a whimper from anyone. So what are you going to do if he does all this for your own protection--the same thing you already did--nothing.

uscitizen
10-21-2006, 07:44 PM
Many pieces needed for a police state have been made since the republicans regained power.

Damocles
10-22-2006, 10:03 AM
Really. Like who? You damo? Maybe Dixie is going to take up arms to remove him from office?

What could, and may well happen under this adminstration in the event of a large-scale attack, one that is even more destructive than 9/11, is an open question. I hope not to find out, but I place no trust in "oh that can't happen here" simply because so much previously thought impossible here has occured. With nary a word of dissent from so much of this country.

It could not happen without the backing of the military.

And when if does happen, it will be with their backing.
And when it only begins, and the dissenters are marched off to the detention camps THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN CONSTRUCTED, there will be many posting right here, and certainly all over the internet, making posts saying why it's necessary. Why they're only traitors anyway.

And they will, to a man, claim they are Patriots. Ignorant of the fact that the Founding Fathers, who never spoke with one voice after the revolution, would rise up if they could, and TO A MAN, point at them and call them traitor.

We are a very short hop away from the need to burn down the barn and start all over.

But it won't be you who leads, and I have no confidence nor trust in your gun. I don't think they'll ever be used to protect me, or my rights.
The people in the military are not going to stand for permanence in that way. They too are americans. The reality is, nobody would support a President who tried this. This is inane repetitive simpleton attacks made on every President during a second term. I'm sure they argued the same thing when Roosevelt was ending his fourth....

Bush will in no way have enough support to be successful at such a coup.

Damocles
10-22-2006, 10:04 AM
No, it's not. It is necessary speculation. To fail to speculate along these lines is to allow freedom to slip away, bit by bit.

The only real treason is to say "it can't happen here."
As I stated before, this is the same speculation heard about nearly every President in a second term who ever uses the military for anything at all...

It is simply baseless speculation with "sky-is-falling" fearmongering built right in.

There is no way he has enough popular support to be able to pull that off.

Jarod
10-22-2006, 10:18 AM
As I stated before, this is the same speculation heard about nearly every President in a second term who ever uses the military for anything at all...

It is simply baseless speculation with "sky-is-falling" fearmongering built right in.

There is no way he has enough popular support to be able to pull that off.



Agreed, but those who do support him currently would continue to support him if he did try to run a coup!

Damocles
10-22-2006, 10:21 AM
Agreed, but those who do support him currently would continue to support him if he did try to run a coup!
I would doubt that. Only a few of those who support him now would if he simply declared himself permanent President...

Jarod
10-22-2006, 10:25 AM
It is scary when 30 some-odd percent of Americans support someone like Bush no matter what he does!

OrnotBitwise
10-22-2006, 10:51 AM
I would doubt that. Only a few of those who support him now would if he simply declared himself permanent President...It's impossible to know without performing the experiment. I think I'm content in my ignorance, in this case. :)

For the record, I expect you're right: only a fraction of his current base would continue to support him after such a drastic action. Certainly not a majority of the Republican party, nor a majority of "social conservatives," whoever they are.

Fifteen, maybe twenty percent of the country? No more than that, I'd wager. That's still a frighteningly large number of people though.

Prakosh
10-22-2006, 11:52 AM
There is one clear distinction though between continuing to support him and actively doing something about the power he has accrued to himself. So far the American people haven't done anything that I can see about what he has done so far. And I wouldn't be surprised if this same level of head-in-sandedness didn't continue no matter what this buffoon did. Having 15 to 20 percent support is one thing, but I would still say all bets are off if another terrorist attack occur and it is serious enough to cause some kind of mass panic. I think the population is willing to do almost anything so long as Daddy saves them.

Cancel7
10-22-2006, 12:16 PM
There is one clear distinction though between continuing to support him and actively doing something about the power he has accrued to himself. So far the American people haven't done anything that I can see about what he has done so far. And I wouldn't be surprised if this same level of head-in-sandedness didn't continue no matter what this buffoon did. Having 15 to 20 percent support is one thing, but I would still say all bets are off if another terrorist attack occur and it is serious enough to cause some kind of mass panic. I think the population is willing to do almost anything so long as Daddy saves them.

That is the missing, and key element.

Another terrorist attack, big enough to cause mass panic.

OrnotBitwise
10-22-2006, 12:22 PM
That is the missing, and key element.

Another terrorist attack, big enough to cause mass panic.A distinct possiblity. I think they may wait until 2008 for that, however.

AnyOldIron
10-23-2006, 02:50 AM
As Orwell taught us, the way to get people to actively support tyranny is to give them a threat, a common enemy...

Worked for Castro...

uscitizen
10-23-2006, 06:00 AM
Hitler had a common enemy of Jews, Bush has a common enemy of Islamofascists.......Whom have lost rights under our "for all" government.
No bush is not like Hitler, well Yet anyway ....

Prakosh
10-23-2006, 12:25 PM
Before he was dumped from Air America for general upheaval and non-stop Bush and Scott "the Duck" McClellan bashing, Mike Malloy read a 10-12 minute segment from "1984" on his radio program. It was the greatest thing ever for talk radio. I used to actually stay up to listen and read along. I sure miss Malloy.