[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

The Pacific Plate Is CRACKING: A Massive Geological Disaster Is Unfolding! Waste Of The Day: Veterans' Hospital Equipment Is Missing The Earth Has Been Shaken By 466,742 Earthquakes So Far In 2025 LadyX Half of the US secret service and every gov't three letter agency wants Trump dead. Tomorrow should be a good show 1963 Chrysler Turbine 3I/ATLAS is Beginning to Reveal What it Truly Is Deep Intel on the Damning New F-35 Report CONFIRMED “A 757 did NOT hit the Pentagon on 9/11” says Military witnesses on the scene NEW: Armed man detained at site of Kirk memorial: Report $200 Silver Is "VERY ATTAINABLE In Coming Rush" Here's Why - Mike Maloney Trump’s Project 2025 and Big Tech could put 30% of jobs at risk by 2030 Brigitte Macron is going all the way to a U.S. court to prove she’s actually a woman China's 'Rocket Artillery 360 Mile Range 990 Pound Warhead FED's $3.5 Billion Gold Margin Call France Riots: Battle On Streets Of Paris Intensifies After Macron’s New Move Sparks Renewed Violence Saudi Arabia Pakistan Defence pact agreement explained | Geopolitical Analysis Fooling Us Badly With Psyops The Nobel Prize That Proved Einstein Wrong Put Castor Oil Here Before Bed – The Results After 7 Days Are Shocking Sounds Like They're Trying to Get Ghislaine Maxwell out of Prison Mississippi declared a public health emergency over its infant mortality rate (guess why) Andy Ngo: ANTIFA is a terrorist organization & Trump will need a lot of help to stop them America Is Reaching A Boiling Point The Pandemic Of Fake Psychiatric Diagnoses This Is How People Actually Use ChatGPT, According To New Research Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani Man puts down ABC's The View on air Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But..

War, War, War
See other War, War, War Articles

Title: Gates Plans Military State For Obama
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.realjewnews.com/?p=332
Published: Nov 29, 2008
Author: Brother Nathanael Kapner
Post Date: 2008-11-29 20:10:28 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 104
Comments: 2

US DEFENSE SECRETARY ROBERT GATES will “stay as Pentagon Chief,” reported BBC news on November 25 2008. Only two days before the announcement, Gates met with his co-militarist, Canada’s Defense Minister, Peter MacKay, to discuss plans for an Afghan “surge.”

“Violence is up in Afghanistan,” Gates told Canadian reporters. “It’s clear there’s a need for more troops to try to deal with this increased security problem,” Gates remarked

--snip-

A MILITARY STATE COMING TO AMERICA

THE DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2007 is about to be put into practice by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. The ACT usurps individual US States’ rights in managing National Guard deployments during emergencies. This is a direct violation of Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution, which limits the federalization of citizen-soldiers. On November 25 2008, Gates ordered Pentagon officials to “conduct a broad review to determine if the National Guard and Reserve can adequately deal with domestic emergencies.” Gates gave his department heads 25 days to submit their recommendations, along with budget forecasts, and 29 recommendations of his own to be added when the review is finished

--snip-

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

#1. To: christine (#0)

This $hit is just beyond pathetic.

Most here know all the reasons why.

Iran Truth Now!

Lod  posted on  2008-11-29   20:31:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

angrybear.blogspot.com/20...w-declared-for-other.html

Martial law declared for... 'other condition'

This editorial reminds us of the great increase in federal power regarding coercive force (also aid with guns).

Section 1076 of the Defense Authorization Act of 2006 changed the name of the key provision in the statute book from “Insurrection Act” to “Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order Act.” The Insurrection Act of 1807 stated that the president could deploy troops within the United States only “to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.” The new law expands the list of pretexts to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition” – and such a “condition” is not defined or limited.

One might think that given the experience with the USA PATRIOT Act and many other abuses of power, Congress would be leery about giving this president his biggest blank check yet to suspend the Constitution. But that would be naïve.

The new law was put in place in response to the debacle of the federal response to Hurricane Katrina. There was no evidence that permitting a president far more power would avoid future debacles, but such a law provides a comfort blanket to politicians. The risk of tyranny is irrelevant compared with the reduction of risk of embarrassment to politicians. According to Washington, the correct response to Katrina is not to recognize the failure of relying on federal agencies a thousand miles away but rather to vastly increase the power of the president to dictate a solution, regardless of whether he knows what he is doing and regardless of whether local and state rights are trampled.

The new law also empowers the president to commandeer the National Guard of one state to send to another state for as many as 365 days. Bush could send the South Carolina National Guard to suppress anti-war protests in New Haven. Or the next president could send the Massachusetts National Guard to disarm the residents of Wyoming, if they resisted a federal law that prohibited private ownership of semi-automatic weapons. Governors’ control of the National Guard can be trumped with a simple presidential declaration.

Section 1076 had bipartisan support on Capitol Hill, including support from Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Sen. John Warner (R-Va.), Sen. Ted Kennedy (D- Mass.), and Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Since the law would give the feds more power, it was very popular inside the Beltway.

On the other hand, every governor in the country opposed the changes. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, warned on September 19, 2006, that “we certainly do not need to make it easier for presidents to declare martial law.” Leahy’s alarm got no response. Ten days later, he commented in the Congressional Record, “Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy.” (Italics mine)

A lot of people are very selective about what they see as government coercion and as justifiable intervention, whether it be taxes, policing, spying, financial regulations, school. In any economic or government model and/or policy, the questions need answering that eventually affect our personal lives. Many form their arguments around a 'big or small' hypotheses, but also there appears a lot of variablity about what areas are subject to the notion of 'big or small', or 'centralized or diversified'.

In our discussions we tend to fragment these arguments as if they are not connected to each other. I fail to see how a liberal like me and a National Rifle member could disagree that this form of possible coercion is wrong. So why are we quiet? End

Posted by rdan at 11:22 AM

Mark

If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower

Kamala  posted on  2008-12-03   6:45:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]