Bush, Emergency Power, and YOU!

[Hoblit]

This subject has come up a couple of times in the recent weeks and I thought hey, why don't we discuss this out loud.

The idea that the President will call some emergency power into play at the end of his term in order to continue the current administration.

This is easily laughed off as some tin foil hat conspiracy theory and gets labeled 'can't ever happen, no way'. YET, even mainstream 'regular people' mention their suspicions or at the very least show some concern.

So, lets discuss it? Why not?

Lets start with a couple of articles released last year on something that Bush signed relatively quietly. (I chose two articles to show that this is a real document and that you can look it up yourself if you have any question on bias from the two domains that report on this.)

http://www.npr.org/blogs/news/2007/06/h ... ive_h.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=55825

[Hoblit]

Why I think it's a possibility:

What would you do if he did? Who would do what? I'm pretty confident that MOST of America would be outraged! But would would they DO? They'd shake their fist at the TV in between American Idol and some reality TV show. We would still have to go to work, we would still have to live our daily lives because...well no matter what happens we are slaves to our own well being.

Sure, there would be folks protesting. Obviously...but within the confounds of the local police and they'd have to above all else, keep the order. Thats what they do right? Depending on how passionate the protesters are, there may be quite a bit of violence but it probably won't have any effect on whatever the outcome is to be.

Would somebody (Congress?) order the military to arrest him? I somehow believe at the very least there would be a consultation phase in which Congress or SCOTUS would have to discuss the legalities before ANYTHING could really be done. How long would that take? What would they ultimately decide? A legal document is as good as its language and its signed.

I personally thought that this scenario was far more possible when his approval ratings were higher back when this country was divided by a hard blue and red line. Back when the rhetoric of 'if you're not with us then you must be against us' mentality was becoming more accepted. Back when 'if you're not hiding something then you should have no problems with the patriot act' and other similar intrusive / warrentless information gathering. I'm not out of the woods yet, but it 'seems' that it wouldn't go over as well without all of the totally pro-bush'ers backing... they would have been the ones re-enforcing the fear mongering stating that we somehow need the current administration to handle whatever emergency had been called.

[erik]

So, lets discuss it? Why not?

"Catastrophic emergency" is loosely defined as "any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions."

What exactly would be the catastrophic emergency, as defined above?

[Hoblit]

No clue. Furthermore one would hope we'd never have to determine that. But that is a start because I have a feeling that would be one of the legalities that would have to be discussed if this power was ever invoked.

My understanding (from reading articles about that over a year ago) was that document was designed to circumvent time consuming bureaucracy so the president would have the power to engage disasters such as Katrina without hassle. (Although one would argue that it wouldn't have mattered as Washington ((arguably)) did not react very fast to Katrina anyways.)

[Me$$iah]

damn... another thread Im best off avoiding...

Whats going on around here today

[erik]

No clue.

In that case, I think that Bush will probably not get to use this as a way to stay in office.

[Hoblit]

No clue.

In that case, I think that Bush will probably not get to use this as a way to stay in office.

I'm supposed to guess exactly what the disaster would be in order to continue with a 'what if' scenario?

OK... LETS SAY the Golden Gate Bridge, The Statue of Liberty, & The Brooklyn Bridge were all blown up on the same day Bank of America was hacked and millions of accounts were suspended from use. <font size="1"><i> AS ANYTHING THAT WOULD QUALIFY AS A DISASTER TO OUR INFRASTRUCTURE.</i></font>

President pulls the order.

Can we proceed now?

[Spud]

You can't debunk a theory on the grounds that hoblit is clueless. I mean, we would have to start questioning a lot of things if that were the case...

[fluffy]

Republicans were making the same claims that Clinton would be doing this at the end of his second term, too.

[Caravan Ray]

damn... another thread Im best off avoiding...

No, not at all! - I think your input would be very valuable here Messiah.

(light blue touch paper.....stand well back )

[Me$$iah]

You really think so?

Well ok then, if ya want

I dont think Bush will use said powers. I know Im like really anti everything, and you cant believe Im saying this, but its true. I feel no threat of Bush decalring Marshal Law in the states. That is unless there is another 'terrorist' attack.

What does scare me tho, is the language used in the drafting of this thing. I mean theoretically the President could declare anything as emergency enough to warrant the use of such executive power. This may not be a problem during the end of this administration, may not even be a issue for the next. However, theres allways the next guy to be thinking of, even if this was designed benignly, then theres no way to guarantee the next guy in the chair wont be even more evil than the last.

I mean there is currently a state of emergency in operation in the US right now (does this warrant Marshal Law), and has been since 1947, the government have never said what this emergancy is, mind, but there it is.

Also combined with the patriot act and the new SR 1959 and HR 1955 bills (thought crime, loss of free speech etc.), then America is becoming a very scary place.
The constitution was written so that such power colud never be held by the government, nowadays, however such checks and balances are being neglected. Ans as always it aint necisarily the guy who puts these laws in place, it is as always, how the next guy in charge uses them

Roll on the police state, thats the general route things are taking, NAFTA next, then a nice harmonious trade deal with the EU and on and on and on and on (like strangers walking up and down the boulevard)


There..... I feel better now, was that good for you Ray

[Paco Del Stinko]

I have the feeling that Bush and Co. will just slither out the door and remain smug knowing that they got away with many gigantic crimes, both here and abroad, free from prosecution. Although Cheney has been rather quiet lately, and is probably in his bunker plotting how we can march into Iran as conquering heroes. (hey, they have oil there, too) Still, you can't rule anything out with these slimes and a late summer state of emergency wouldn't be shocking. Whatever benefits the corporations best.

[Me$$iah]

now that is true...... never let the corperations down

[Hoblit]

now that is true...... never let the corperations down

And in a very very sad way... we really need our corporations for the stability of the economy. I'm NOT advocating this, I'm simply observing.

Also, thanks Me$$iah...I'm glad you did chime in.

[mico saudad]

Mechanically there's absolutely no way that this could happen and be sustained in any way. Remember how Bush brutally mauled McCain to win the nomination then McCain sucked up and played the loyal dog even though you know he was seething. Those things are not forgotten. McCain would be absolutely livid and Republicans who've seen the incompetence but been loyal would form up and not let that play out.

No one would stand for it. Not the Democrats, not the Republicans, not the Supreme court (I'm betting they wish they could take back their decision now), and certainly by far not the American people, and yes not the corporations either. With all of those united it would be an impossible road to hoe.

I think one more major outrage would take us from the semi-unified "let's change our politics, reassess our priorities, restore our economy and our reputation around the world" to something a bit more uncontrollably mob-like.

[Paco Del Stinko]

I think one more major outrage would take us from the semi-unified "let's change our politics, reassess our priorities, restore our economy and our reputation around the world" to something a bit more uncontrollably mob-like.

I hate to say that I would hope so, but I hope so.

[Hoblit]

I think one more major outrage would take us from the semi-unified "let's change our politics, reassess our priorities, restore our economy and our reputation around the world" to something a bit more uncontrollably mob-like.

I hate to say that I would hope so, but I hope so.

I would like to hope so ...maybe even think so.

However:

I have no faith in the corporations. A lot of them are loyal to this particular administration for many reasons. Why upset a good thing? The rest of the corporations won't want to upset any stability by interfering. And what if they are offered greasing on top of that?

I have no faith in any of ya'll. What are ya'll gonna do? (I'm speaking of the public, not just songfight) Lets say America IS outraged, what are they going to do? We have to keep working in order to pay our rent...so those of who aren't too lazy to protest will have to do so when its convenient. And only to shake our tiny impotent fists into fire hoses. (You can't possibly think the current state of our Police would be PART of the revolt right?) Obviously this is past the point of writing our congressman. We'd really just be in a state of hope that congress would do SOMETHING. Anything. But its not like they haven't rolled over before in the last 8 years.

I think it could come down to the Supreme Court...

I sincerely HOPE I'm completely wrong and I do recognize that this is all HIGHLY SPECULATIVE. ALSO, I might reiterate that I thought this was much more likely when Bush had better approval numbers.

[Paco Del Stinko]

Yeah, I'd rather not see mobs in the streets and burning buildings and all, but I'd hate to see people sheep-out and sit drooling while the Brown Shirts goose-step down the streets. Let's hope that it remains as good fodder for a terrifying graphic novel. Terror as entertainment - yay!

[Caravan Ray]

I have no faith in the corporations. A lot of them are loyal to this particular administration for many reasons. Why upset a good thing? The rest of the corporations won't want to upset any stability by interfering. And what if they are offered greasing on top of that?

Don't be too afraid of "the corporations".

For 11 years, Rupert Murdoch's press in Australia was the Howard government's biggest cheerleader. The Australian, The Courier Mail and other Murdoch rags spewed out editorial after editorial about how invading Iraq is good, how global warming is a myth, about how David Hicks is a dangerous terrorist and especially, about how a Labor Government would drive us all to the poor house, turn us all homosexual and have a terrorist and/or illegal immigrant under every bed by tea-time.

Then - as the polls for Howard got worse and worse - a few weeks out of our last election, Big Rupert himself was photographed shaking hands with the then Leader of the Opposition, Kevin Rudd, saying things along the lines of - ..."yeah...this kid is OK!"

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/mur ... 52165.html

Murdoch and his ilk are pragmatists at heart. If I can compare them to rats (a not-at-all invalid comparison I believe) - they will jump a sinking ship without a look back when the time is right.

[Hoblit]

Reichstag Fire Decree (you can compare some points of this with the document that is the topic of this thread)

http://www.southalabama.edu/history/fac ... ecree.html

It was basically the emergency powers Hitler got pushed through directly after an emergency.
(You might WIKI it to put it into its actual context)

The reason I dug up this topic in the first place was because of this:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/ ... ss_sur.php

Apparently there was some legal determination that made military acts on U.S. soil untethered to the Constitution. But don't worry folks, they later changed their minds and the administration doesn't believe that anymore. (How reassuring)

[Paco Del Stinko]

Here ya go, Hobs. Maybe not martial law, but maybe a cousin, or something.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/a ... d_090708w/

[Me$$iah]

Oh tits!!!!


It appears that Martial Law has been declared.
This is a one minute speech and contains the deadly phrase
Quote :"Mr Speaker, I understand that we are under Martial Law, as declared by the speaker last night...."

Oh tits


Martial Law, how cleverly they manipulate the financial world to forward the agenda.

I understand that the evil that runs this show want only one thing, and that obviously, is everything. The financial crash that is happening all around is great for these people cos it means they get to exchange ficticious money, that has never existed, for real hard assets. Y'know peoples homes and property. This is evil. The 'Money Men' have done this before, and now we see it happening again.
What is called for ..... more International regulation..... hmmmm maybe like a world central bank.*

Problem-Reaction-Solution

Same old bait and switch as before.

And the tiptoe to a Fascist Orwellian world continues.

Damn them all




* A world bank would be so much easier to run if there was only one currency, one with no physical cash, but only numbers on a screen. Much as we have today, but without any actual cash. And how much easier would it be to regulate if eveybody was microchipped, and their finacial dealings were done exclusively through this system.