See other National News Articles
Title: Bush’s Martial Law Act of 2007
Source:
http://kurtnimmo.com
URL Source: http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=631
Published: Oct 28, 2006
Author: Nimmo
Post Date: 2006-11-01 06:04:18 by Kamala
Keywords: None
Views: 432
Comments: 28
Bush’s Martial Law Act of 2007 Saturday October 28th 2006, 9:44 am On October 17, with little fanfare, the unitary decider signed H.R.5122, or the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007. “The act provides $462.8 billion in budget authority for the department. Senate and House conferees added the $70 billion defense supplemental budget request to the act, so overall, the act authorizes $532.8 billion for fiscal 2007,” explains Jim Garamone of the American Forces Press Service. According to a press release from the office of Senator Patrick Leahy, however, the bill takes a “sizable step toward weakening states’ authority over their [National] Guard units, according to the congressional leaders who are leading the fight for Guard empowerment.” Leahey and senator Kit Bond, a Montana Republican, “said the conference agreement is expected to include a provision making it easier for the President to declare martial law, stripping state governors of part of their authority over state National Guard units in domestic emergencies. The provision is opposed by the National Governors Association and by key leaders in both the House and Senate.” Frank Morales, an Episcopal priest and activist in New York City, writes that the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007 actually encourages the establishment of martial law “by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President’s ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions.” In the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Bush demanded Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco yield to him the command over any National Guard troops sent to the area. “Bush wanted to invoke the Insurrection Act, which would have allowed him to take control over all armed forces deployed, including Louisiana’s National Guard troops. But under the terms of the act, he had to get the assent of the legislature or the governor of the state. The legislature was not in session and Blanco refused,” writes Deirdre Griswold. As of September 11, 2005, Griswold notes, citing the Los Angeles Times, “Bush has not yet invoked the Insurrection Act, but his administration is still discussing how to make it easier for the federal government to override local authorities in the future.” Leaning on Blanco was considered politically sensitive. “Can you imagine how it would have been perceived if a president of the United States of one party had pre-emptively taken from the female governor of another party the command and control of her forces, unless the security situation made it completely clear that she was unable to effectively execute her command authority and that lawlessness was the inevitable result?” an anonymous senior administration official told the New York Times on September 8, 2005. Blanco “rejected a more modest proposal for a hybrid command structure in which both the Guard and active-duty troops would be under the command of an active-duty, three-star general—but only after he had been sworn into the Louisiana National Guard,” the New York Times adds. Bush’s Martial Law Act of 2007 modifies the Insurrection Act and deals yet another blow to the Posse Comitatus Act. “Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, ‘Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies,’” explains Morales. “Section 333, ‘Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law’ states that ‘the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of (’refuse’ or ‘fail’ in) maintaining public order, ‘in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.’” For the current President, “enforcement of the laws to restore public order” means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against “disorderly” citizenry—protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event. The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called “illegal aliens,” “potential terrorists” and other “undesirables” for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That’s right. Under the cover of a trumped-up “immigration emergency” and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration. Back in January, the Army Corps of Engineers awarded Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root a $385 million contract to construct detention centers at undisclosed locations in the United States. As usual, the New York Times either missed over glossed over the significance of this development, characterizing it instead as a waste of taxpayer money. Peter Dale Scott, however, hit the nail right on the head. “For those who follow covert government operations abroad and at home, the contract evoked ominous memories of Oliver North’s controversial Rex-84 ‘readiness exercise’ in 1984. This called for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to round up and detain 400,000 imaginary ‘refugees,’ in the context of ‘uncontrolled population movements’ over the Mexican border into the United States. North’s activities raised civil liberties concerns in both Congress and the Justice Department. The concerns persist.” As Scott notes, plans for detention camps are nothing new, and indeed “have a long history, going back to fears in the 1970s of a national uprising by black militants. As Alonzo Chardy reported in the Miami Herald on July 5, 1987, an executive order for continuity of government (COG) had been drafted in 1982 by FEMA head Louis Giuffrida. The order called for ’suspension of the Constitution’ and ‘declaration of martial law.’ The martial law portions of the plan were outlined in a memo by Giuffrida’s deputy, John Brinkerhoff.” Brinkerhoff told PBS: “The United States itself is now for the first time since the War of 1812 a theater of war. That means that we should apply, in my view, the same kind of command structure in the United States that we apply in other theaters of war.” Giuffrida was the Reagan administration’s first director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from 1981 to 1985 and was the head of then-Governor Reagan’s California Specialized Training Institute, a National Guard school. In “1970 he had written a paper for the Army War College in which he called for martial law in case of a national uprising by black militants. Among his ideas were ‘assembly centers or relocation camps’ for at least 21 million ‘American Negroes,’” writes Sam Smith. “During 1968 and 1972, Reagan ran a series of war games in California called Cable Splicer, which involved the Guard, state and local police, and the US Sixth Army. Details of this operation were reported in 1975 in a story by Ron Ridenour of the New Times, an Arizona alternative paper, and later exhumed by Dave Lindorff in the Village Voice…. Cable Splicer, it turned out, was a training exercise for martial law. The man in charge was none other than Edwin Meese, then Reagan’s executive secretary. At one point, Meese told the Cable Splicer combatants: This is an operation, this is an exercise, this is an objective which is going forward because in the long run … it is the only way that will be able to prevail [against anti-war protests.]” In response to Richard Nixon’s October 30, 1969, issuance of Executive Order 11490, “Assigning Emergency Preparedness Functions to Federal Departments and Agencies,” which consolidated some 21 operative Executive Orders and two Defense Mobilization Orders issued between 1951 and 1966 on a variety of emergency preparedness matters, Howard J. Ruff noted: “The only thing standing between us and a dictatorship is the good character of the President and the lack of a crisis severe enough that the public would stand still for it” (see Diana Reynolds, Civil Security Planning). Not only is Bush’s lack of “good character” obvious, he also considers himself our unitary decider with the power to ignore over 750 laws. “Among the laws Bush said he can ignore are military rules and regulations, affirmative-action provisions, requirements that Congress be told about immigration services problems, ‘whistle-blower’ protections for nuclear regulatory officials, and safeguards against political interference in federally funded research,” the Boston Globe reported in April. “From the inception of the Republic until 2000, Presidents produced signing statements containing fewer than 600 challenges to the bills they signed. According to the most recent update, in his one-and-a-half terms so far, President George W. Bush (Bush II) has produced more than 800,” explains the American Bar Association Task Force on Presidential Signing Statements and the Separation of Powers Doctrine. “It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the president’s polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq, and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections, the Bush administration is on the ropes,” concludes Morales. “And so it is particularly worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect, declare himself dictator
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Kamala (#0)
Bush may over-estimate his influence with both the military and Police Departments throughout the nation. Nothing could make my red, white and blue ass happier than to see that little punk tried and hung publicly beside his daddy and the other toadies that have been implementing his paranoia !
"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." Samuel Adams
Can you imagine how the freeptards and lepers would react to American troops stormtrooping into their towns and cities under martial law? They'd be lined up on the sides of the roads with American flags. The men would offer their mothers, wives and children for the soldiers sexual entertainment, and if a soldier or two swing the other way, they'd happily offer themselves as well. After all, it's for the troops, and above all else, they support the troops and would be more than willing "to please." If their mothers, wives, or children complained and/or refused to be used as sperm depositories, the freeptard's and Leper's would hold them down, call them traitors and high five the soldiers as they finished with them. All the while singing God Bless America.
How many observe Christ's birthday! How few, his precepts! O! 'tis easier to keep Holidays than Commandments. Benjamin Franklin
Too true. But first, they would eagerly finger you, me and that olive-skinned stranger down the street as "domestic terrorists" and cheer as the Stormtroopers hauled us off to the nearest Gitmo-like camp...
Check out my blog, America, the Bushieful.
funny!
Have the American people forgotten that there are three EQUAL branches of this government? Bush or any other madman running around the Whitehouse CAN still be restrained and or removed from power, instead we have over 500 congressmen that seem to be part and parcel of this ongoing madness. Are the Congress people active participants, dupes or totally clueless. Rubberstamping by Congress leaves something unknown.
When it happens, it will probably be foreign UN troops, and nobody will have to volunteer their women. The troops will take them by force and shoot the men. Believe it's coming and sooner rather than later thanks to the Klinton/Bush crime family...along with the Talmud worshippers. Notice how most of our troops, which are responsible for defending the USA from foreign attack, are conveniently tied up in various countries overseas? I believe their is a reason for that.
It's a gentlemen's club and they're all in on it, i.e. active participants IMO, as is the judiciary. Nobody gets to ANY branch of government without "help" IMO. It's no accident this is happening with no resistance.
The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called “illegal aliens,” “potential terrorists” and other “undesirables” for detention in facilities already contracted for and under i can't believe that bush has the support of the entire government behind him for this--including all the state's governor's and all other state leadership. what in the hell is going on here ?????
Agreed, nearly all. The soothing elixir for the masses has always been that, "if we just put the OTHER party in power they will straighten things out"... There is only one party, the ruling elite government party. As long as Americans are willing to keep their heads in the sand, nothing will change.
It's the freeptards and lepers who enable this govt. Should that takeover occur, remember it is they who are the domestic enemy within we've been warned about. As you suggest, they'll be easy to spot.
Bush or any other madman running around the Whitehouse CAN still be restrained and or removed from power, instead we have over 500 congressmen that seem to be part and parcel of this ongoing madness. Are the Congress people active participants, dupes or totally clueless. Rubberstamping by Congress leaves something unknown. cyni! i know! i can't believe what i'm seeing here !!
You understand what is going on as well as the rest of us. There is "NO" loyal opposition, and there has been none since FDR. Recall..Most of us felt that heads would roll when Bush took over from the Clinton mess, what happened, not a thing. Bush even kept on some of Clintons people. The next HINT, Pelosi has stated openly, that if dems take over, there will be no impeachment if she is Speaker. What does that tell you??????
exactly
That regardless of how the poorly worded and misleading poll was spun, the Dems know only a small percentage want Bush impeached.
What you are seeing is the final culmination of all the plans that people like Stadtmiller and Chuck Harder and William Cooper and the JBS warned us about on shortwave radio for the past 15 years or more. It's all happened. And nobody protested or fought back. This is our last chance before the window of opportunity closes forever.
Firstly, Pelosi is guarteeing no impeachment without having access to any inside information, this is a positive indication of a one party system. Example...If Pelosi were to broadcast that if she becomes Speaker, she would do everything in her power to assure that Bush was impeached. Pelosi would not become Speaker.
This is turning the President's claimed foreign policy dictatorship into a domestic one. Shit. We could all be arrested by federal troops just for what we've posted here! Ain't advocating voting for the president's opposition and calling him an idiot "conspiring" to "insurrection"?
the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.
Yes.
the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.
Some of us did, IndieTX but the problem was/is that people get up to speed at different moments in time. I remember cheering for the Buchanan fence and working for Ross Perot against NAFTA in the mid 90s. I was then posting on an obscure forum called Prodigy. Not only was I posting, but I also did my best to organize people on a congressional district level. Then, briefly, in '94 I thought we finally had a handle on this mess with the R-sweep. By early '96 I knew I was wrong. From there I traveled onto the FR in hopes that the 'net might be the vehicle for organization. In '00 RimJob proved me wrong once again. So, here we sit as you say, watching the finalization of the scheme to join North America before placing it neatly into their NWO.
so tell us how you feel about bush's Martial Law Act.
What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if he people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. And their sense of identification with Hitler, their trust in him, made it easier to widen this gap and reassured those who would otherwise have worried about it. "This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter. "You will understand me when I say that my Middle High German was my life. It was all I cared about. I was a scholar, a specialist. Then, suddenly, I was plunged into all the new activity, as the universe was drawn into the new situation; meetings, conferences, interviews, ceremonies, and, above all, papers to be filled out, reports, bibliographies, lists, questionnaires. And on top of that were the demands in the community, the things in which one had to, was "expected to" participate that had not been there or had not been important before. It was all rigmarole, of course, but it consumed all one's energies, coming on top of the work one really wanted to do. You can see how easy it was, then, not to think about fundamental things. One had no time." "Those," I said, "are the words of my friend the baker. "One had no time to think. There was so much going on." "Your friend the baker was right," said my colleague. "The dictatorship, and the whole process of its coming into being, was above all diverting. It provided an excuse not to think for people who did not want to think anyway. I do not speak of your "little men", your baker and so on; I speak of my colleagues and myself, learned men, mind you. Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about - we were decent people - and kept us so busy with continuous changes and "crises" and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the "national enemies", without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us. Unconsciously, I suppose, we were grateful. Who wants to think? "To live in this process is absolutely not to be able to notice it - please try to believe me - unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us had ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, "regretted," that, unless one were detached from the whole process from the beginning, unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these "little measures" that no "patriotic German" could resent must some day lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing. One day it is over his head. "How is this to be avoided, among ordinary men, even highly educated ordinary men? Frankly, I do not know. I do not see, even now. Many, many times since it all happened I have pondered that pair of great maxims, Principiis obsta and Finem respice - "Resist the beginnings" and "consider the end." But one must foresee the end in order to resist, or even see, the beginnings. One must foresee the end clearly and certainly and how is this to be done, by ordinary men or even by extraordinary men? Things might have changed here before they went as far as they did; they didn't, but they might have. And everyone counts on that might. "Your "little men," your Nazi friends, were not against National Socialism in principle. Men like me, who were, are the greater offenders, not because we knew better (that would be too much to say) but because we sensed better. Pastor Niemoller spoke for the thousands and thousands of men like me when he spoke (too modestly of himself) and said that, when the Nazis attacked the Communists, he was a little uneasy, but, after all, he was not a Communist, and so he did nothing: and then they attacked the Socialists, and he was a little uneasier, but, still, he was not a Socialist, and he did nothing; and then the schools, the press, the Jews, and so on, and he was always uneasier, but still he did nothing. And then they attacked the Church, and he was a Churchman, and he did something - but then it was too late." "Yes," I said. "You see," my colleague went on, "one doesn't see exactly where or how to move. Believe me, this is true. Each act, each occasion, is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for the one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join with you in resisting somehow. You don't want to act, or even to talk, alone; you don't want to "go out of your way to make trouble." Why not? - Well, you are not in the habit of doing it. And it is not just fear, fear of standing alone, that restrains you; it is also genuine uncertainty. "Uncertainty is a very important factor, and, instead of decreasing as time goes on, it grows. Outside, in the streets, in the general community, "everyone is happy. One hears no protest, and certainly sees none. You know, in France or Italy there will be slogans against the government painted on walls and fences; in Germany, outside the great cities, perhaps, there is not even this. In the university community, in your own community, you speak privately to you colleagues, some of whom certainly feel as you do; but what do they say? They say, "It's not so bad" or "You're seeing things" or "You're an alarmist." "And you are an alarmist. You are saying that this must lead to this, and you can't prove it. These are the beginnings, yes; but how do you know for sure when you don't know the end, and how do you know, or even surmise, the end? On the one hand, your enemies, the law, the regime, the Party, intimidate you. On the other, your colleagues pooh-pooh you as pessimistic or even neurotic. You are left with your close friends, who are, naturally, people who have always thought as you have. "But your friends are fewer now. Some have drifted off somewhere or submerged themselves in their work. You no longer see as many as you did at meetings or gatherings. Informal groups become smaller; attendance drops off in little organizations, and the organizations themselves wither. Now, in small gatherings of your oldest friends, you feel that you are talking to yourselves, that you are isolated from the reality of things. This weakens your confidence still further and serves as a further deterrent to – to what? It is clearer all the time that, if you are going to do anything, you must make an occasion to do it, and then you are obviously a troublemaker. So you wait, and you wait. "But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and the smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked – if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in "43" had come immediately after the "German Firm" stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in "33". But of course this isn't the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D. the law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal bread.
about the same as I do any other set of tentative plans for an attack/defense/whatever senario or anything else ....... Bush will soon be gone and another human will be in there and either the same groups or other groups will be attacking him/her for legitimate and silly reasons too ...... just as everyone holding office in the past ........ Henny Penny is not a new thing ............. there is always room for criticism on any plan, but some takes are so outlandish only a small fraction adhere to them ....... we all know which areas these are ...... was reading the other day that when Kennedy was running in '60, one goofy knock was he was a Catholic and if he won there would be troops in the streets enforcing Catholic beliefs and the Pope's picture would be on all postage stamps so we could lick his ass .........
In 1935, the nine old men capitulated to FDR, to save their own jobs. Thereafter the Supreme Court dissolved into meaninglessness. Run of the mill business was loitering, littering laws etc. They became the "toothless" old men, of no value to this country. Justice Roberts, a pub, even groveled to do a thirty day "investigation" into the Pearl Harbor fiasco that cleared FDR of all wrongdoing. Roberts then resigned and happened to be "offered" job as head of U of Penn.
Read that before. It is a great essay.
That will probably be when they'll bring those Halliburton concentration camps on line.
"I woke up in the CRAZY HOUSE."
This will work - as most refuse to learn what's in the Constitution. International treaties such as the Geneva Conventions and U.N. Charter are - by definition of the Constitution - extensions of the Constitution. Nobody wants to go there. I don't get it. The Afghan & Iraq wars are War Crimes and violations of the U.S. Constitution - but no one goes to the Constitution, versus arguing 'ordinary' matters of morality. Most of Bush's attacks on America are apathetic self-inflicted wounds of 'denial,' and ignorance.
i get it. it's globalism so there is no one, nationally or internationally, for us little peons to go to for remedy.
lol!
#2. To: Kamala (#0)
#3. To: Fibr Dog (#2)
(Edited)
Can you imagine how the freeptards and lepers would react to American troops stormtrooping into their towns and cities under martial law? They'd be lined up on the sides of the roads with American flags. The men would offer their mothers, wives and children for the soldiers sexual entertainment, and if a soldier or two swing the other way, they'd happily offer themselves as well. After all, it's for the troops, and above all else, they support the troops and would be more than willing "to please." If their mothers, wives, or children complained and/or refused to be used as sperm depositories, the freeptard's and Leper's would hold them down, call them traitors and high five the soldiers as they finished with them. All the while singing God Bless America.
#4. To: Fibr Dog (#2)
#5. To: Kamala (#0)
“It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration;
#6. To: Fibr Dog, innieway, honway (#2)
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#7. To: Cynicom (#5)
instead we have over 500 congressmen that seem to be part and parcel of this ongoing madness.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#8. To: Kamala (#0)
For the current President, “enforcement of the laws to restore public order” means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against “disorderly” citizenry—protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.
#9. To: IndieTX (#7)
It's a gentlemen's club and they're all in on it
#10. To: Fibr Dog, all (#2)
#11. To: Cynicom (#5)
Have the American people forgotten that there are three EQUAL branches of this government?
#12. To: christine (#8)
what in the hell is going on here ?????
#13. To: Jethro Tull, Fibr Dog (#10)
remember it is they who are the domestic enemy
#14. To: Cynicom (#12)
What does that tell you??????
#15. To: christine (#11)
i know! i can't believe what i'm seeing here !!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#16. To: It Is A Republic (#14)
the Dems know only a small percentage want Bush impeached.
#17. To: Kamala (#0)
... the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of (’refuse’ or ‘fail’ in) maintaining public order, ‘in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.’”
#18. To: Cynicom (#5)
Have the American people forgotten that there are three EQUAL branches of this government?
#19. To: IndieTX (#15)
And nobody protested or fought back.
#20. To: It Is A Republic (#14)
That regardless of how the poorly worded and misleading poll was spun, the Dems know only a small percentage want Bush impeached.
#21. To: Kamala (#0)
"What no one seemed to notice," said a colleague of mine, a philologist, "was the ever widening gap, after1933,between the government and the people. Just think how very wide this gap was to begin with, here in Germany...
#22. To: christine (#20)
#23. To: bluedogtxn (#18)
Yes.
#24. To: bluedogtxn (#21)
But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That's the difficulty
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#25. To: Kamala (#0)
#26. To: Kamala, Christine, Aristeides, Honway, Diana, Robin, All (#0)
#27. To: SKYDRIFTER (#26)
International treaties such as the Geneva Conventions and U.N. Charter are - by definition of the Constitution - extensions of the Constitution. Nobody wants to go there. I don't get it.
#28. To: Fibr Dog (#2)
After all, it's for the troops
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest