The (p)Resident *has* declared a "National Emergency"

Many on DU have said that all bush needs to do is declare a national emergency in order to implement martial law, cancel elections, declare himself (p)Resident for life, round up "dissenters" and/or any number of fascist acts.

Well, he declared a national emergency on May 22, 2003. Yes, it's true, many presidents have done this in the past. They did not have the "Patriot Act" to aid them in expanding their Executive Powers. Nor did they have this particular SCOTUS to rule their actions Constitutional.

I asked yesterday, for someone to please, tell me I'm wrong. No one has, yet. So, I ask again today. Please, tell me that the "Patriot Act" combined with:


EO 13303 which declares a national emergency -and-

EO 13315 which expands the scope of the national emergency -and-

EO 13290 which takes additional steps with regard EO 13303 (expanded by EO 13315) -and-

All of which are then "modified" by EO 13364 to allow the U.S. to pillage Iraqi natural resources, i.e., oil


combined DO NOT, in fact, create the situation which many here believe will lead to a "kinder, gentler" fascism.

Certainly including under Clinton. And I was not a fan of it then, either. I think definitely back to under Reagan even. Maybe not all the same ones of course.

I also noted some differences during this regime's occupation of the White House which I think puts a different complexion on the issue.

Does it have the potential for abuse? Sure. But I have seen nothing to suggest that even Bush would go so far as to start rounding up dissenters, setting up camps, and that kind of thing. But again, I'm not of the paranoid sort. I see him as being a total and utter doofus who has no clue what he's doing. I don't see him as the guy who's going to declare martial law. Sorry, I just don't. And if he was going to do it, I think he would have done it in the past, not with 18 months to go before he can go back to Texas to ride the range like the true cowboy he is.

But it never hurts to be aware and try to anticipate encroachment of our rights. Only in vigilance can we prevent further erosion.

Though some here might call some of my posts paranoid, others might note that I have some background in opposition research and experience in fighting the once ridiculed "vast right-wing conspiracy." So, I'm not sure you can call me paranoid or just vigilant. Not that you did either.

The fact that there is even potential for abuse by this current (mis)administration is enough to set off my alarm bells. Whether shrub is a bumbling idiot or a useful idiot or the sly fox passing as one of the sheep is moot if you consider the people surrounding him. Are they his handlers or his minions? I don't know. I don't know if it even matters. The outcome can be the same.

I'd like for us to keep an eye on this. As you noted, "Only in vigilance can we prevent further erosion."

I didn't mean to suggest you were paranoid. If that came across, my bad. As I said, the potential for government abuse is always clear and present danger, as a certain writer once said. And I love the fact that we have the ACLU to highlight these abuses. Personally I wish they'd focus less on removing a little cross from some state seal and spend more time on those less high-profile cases of regular civilians being ordered to stop protesting, or remove a banner, and that kind of thing. It is the stamping out of dissent that is the biggest danger we face.

With the Internet today, it would be massively hard for any admin to start rounding up people, suspend elections, etc. But I appreciate having someone like you on the watch! Thanks.

I started to then I decided I was just being paranoid! :rofl: I crack myself up sometimes. :evilgrin:

Seriously, I just want us all to be aware of what's happening behind the scenes.

Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq



White House News


Message to the Congress of the United States Regarding International Emergency Economic Powers Act


By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)(NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that, due to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by acts of violence threatening the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people, it is in the interests of the United States to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, and expanded in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004. I hereby order:

Section 1. (a) Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported,


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html


:scared:

to start reading the other EOs which were mentioned in that EO.

Pretty scary and possibly broad reaching stuff is going on and We, the People don't seem to be aware of it. I'm trying to "connect the dots" to see if a picture emerges. So far, the picture is ugly.

I hope I'm wrong.

not by coincidence imo, just before the midterm election. Plus all the other totalitarian enabling junk that has been noted.

The procedures and powers delegated to the president during national emergencies are disconcerting enough during "calmer" times; during this (mis)administration with this SCOTUS and with the "Unitary Executive" crap percolating through our Executive Branch these days; they're downright horrifying.

Not that I have confidence this congress would try, but it is possible?

I understand EOs to be primarily for presidential use to set policy rather than law. That's a rather slim distinction, I think.

Perhaps a more knowledgeable person will chime in. You ask a good question.

... of the financial markets. People don't put their money into places where they sense instability. I think you'd see massive capital flight if Bush attempted something like that. And then there'd really be unrest.

As it is, it looks as though all the pieces are in place for a "fascist takeover".

What do you think would happen, if it only happened in bits and pieces rather than all at once. For example, just a few people here and there having their assets seized? Or arresting and/or harassing the occasional protester here and there? Or labeling someone who questions the results of a presidential election as guilty of sedition?

Would financial markets react to the gradual erosion of civil rights?

... if it did happen, it would certainly have to be gradual.

You've made a valid point. I'd like to see what others think happens were something like this to gradually come about.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be a popular topic today. *sigh*

Or I'm wearing my thread-killer under-roos and killing my own thread! LOL

edit: grammar

A facist takeover in America is highly unlikely right now because the people in power do not have the support of the people and barely have the support of the military.

Without the willing support of the German nation, Adolf Hitler could not have accomplished even a fraction of what he set out to do. Unfortunately, he had the support of Germans... and in large measure.

As bad as things are right now, George W. Bush and his administration do not have the support of the American people and therefore lack the manpower to carry out what you are suggesting they are planning for us.

And then the support of the masses will be there to intall the New World Order

their eyes to the fact that while we were fighting them over "there" they came for us over here?

Wouldn't there be a few more people to question how much safer this (mis)administration has "made" us if something like that happens on their watch?

I know I seem to be all over on this issue. I'm trying to separate out the scenarios which might be likely from the ones which are too unreal even for my tinfoil hat. T'ain't workin' so far.

Though, having said that, I truly don't believe another "9/11" is necessary to get us to cooperate in our own oppression/suppression.

the corporations have control of them - and the corporations have control of the people, via credit ratings, jobs, wages, access to health insurance, mortgages, investments, etc.

I believe Hitler, too, had some measure of support from the industrialists during a time when there was no global market. Did that contribute in any way? How might the global market and trans-national corporate power effect an attempted takeover today?

Do they need the consent of the people if they have the power of the corporations?

don't or can't set the stage. The point is that it's pointless if they do or don't.

Given the existing EOs, another EO is needed to make them do what you fear they'll do; simply put, the authority and steps authorized aren't the ones that leave you in terror. So you need another EO.

The problem is, even without the current EOs/declaration of emergency you'd simply need one EO that would try to institute all the objects of your fear.

Now, since the current situation with your cited EOs is completely equivalent to a situation in which there were no such EOs, I think the obvious step is for somebody to prove how a lack of EOs would ineluctably lead to a 'kinder, gentler fascism'.

How is another EO needed to make the current EOs cited (and the one I forgot) "make them do" what I read they're already doing?

I'll grant you that one EO could make all the fascist-like events happen at once, but wouldn't that be too obvious, even for this (mis)administration?

I'm not sure at all what this statement means: "I think the obvious step is for somebody to prove how a lack of EOs would ineluctably lead to a 'kinder, gentler fascism'." Why do that when there are EOs pointing the way?

As you can see, your post was confusing to me. Maybe I've not yet had enough caffeine or I'm not reading your post correctly. Could you take a minute and type it s.l.o.w.l.y. to me, please? :D

Thanks. :hi:

:kick:

The massive outflow of capital can be seen in many areas: global corporatism, private equity funds, hedge funds, vultures, and the increased "privatization" of government departments and functions (including military and intelligence community)

Michael Ledeen had a book published in 1972 that was based on his thesis, the title is "Universal Fascism" and many of the themes in it have actually happened-of course via deception and lies, a characteristic of this administration and it's loyal core which has been working along those lines for decades.

Leo Strauss's radical philosophy is one of the core influences of this criminal administration's "policies"
"Straussism: The Neocon Philosophy Directing The Age Of Tyranny" January 2007 Dissident
http://dissidentnews.wordpress.com/2007/01/27/straussism-the-neocon-philosophy-directing-the-age-of-tyranny-looking-glass-news/

Then there are the pragmatic political alliances and criminal tactics of Karl Rove et. al.-starkly documented by James Moore and Wayne Slater in "The Architect: Karl Rove and The Master Plan For Absolute Power" (2006 Crown Publishers).

The Model States Emergency Health Powers Act/MEPHA and other junk stemming from the PATRIOT ACT and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security combined with the EO's etc. are already in place.

The characteristics of fascism were here years ago, they have been consolidated by this installed criminal administration, and it isn't tinfoil to state that the Decider is very close to implementing totalitarian rule.

To me and a number of others here a valuable historic model to use for understanding this criminal administration is that of the Weimar Republic (an epoch which profoundly shaped Leo Strauss's ideology).

The Weimar Republic and the Third Reich
http://dmorgan.web.wesleyan.edu/materials/weimar.htm

The only rallying point is our Constitution and our Bill of Rights which have been papered over by this criminal administration poised for a distinct possibility of totalitarianism.

"It Can't Happen Here" by Sinclair Lewis was published in 1936-most of what he wrote about then has indeed happened more and more openly since the installation of this criminal administration.

You've detailed exactly what I was trying to say; mine was clumsy, yours was elegant.

Thank you!

:*

:hi:

The information you've added contributes so much to a general understanding of the issues to hand.

One thing to declare it another for the states to agree with it

allows it; the feds go in and start busting people.

Do we have state's rights anymore?

I hope you're right.