[jaim]

Yahoo! Answers - Why did George Bush move toward Marshall Law in the US?

Doing a quick search I can't find much on this. Scary **** though.

[jaim]

Finally found something. Check it out. You hard core conservatives should be quite pissed about this.

Bush Moves Toward Martial Law : SF Indymedia

[Hammer]

I bet your source is real reliable and trustworthy. Try better bait next time.

[BDA116]

Leahy voted for that bill. All hardcore libs should be pissed.
In fact, it passed the Senate unanimously. Including the KKK - klinton, kennedy and kerry.
Passed the House 396 to 31.
Funny how doing a search on the bill turns up none of the nonsense "reported" in that lib "article". Par for the course.

[jaim]

Originally Posted by Hammer

I bet your source is real reliable and trustworthy. Try better bait next time.

What are you talking about? The bill was signed. Bush can now declare Marshall law without much effort. A true conservative would be outraged.
I would have posted a less biased URL if I could have found one in my search. Since I didn't know what the bill was called I had a hard time finding information on it. Which in and of itself is disturbing considering the bills mentioned essentially put the presidency on the road to dictatorship.

And yes BDA liberals should be pisses as well.

And for those that don't think this is a big deal you really need to do some reading and research on how this country is supposed to work. And as John Kerry might say. "If you don't do your research you may just get stuck in Iraq. "

[BDA116]

No, kerry was saying that only kids that can't make it through college go into the military.
He was letting his disdain for the U.S. and our armed forces shine through again.
Have YOU actually read the bill? Apparently not, since you still believe that horseshit.
And if you actually cared, you'd know that technically the U.S. has been in a state of "martial law" (I don't know what the hell Marshall Law is, and it shows the intellect of that lib shitwrap) for decades.
How? Like I said, if you actually cared, you'd do the research yourself and see why.
But you don't, you're more concerned with mindlessly spreading mindless leftist bullshit. More propaganda spread by a jack-booted sheeple.
Your idiotic "article" specifically names Leahy as being upset about it.
Why then did he help pass it? Bush didn't just whip this out of his ass, it was drafted as a House Bill co-sponsored by a democrat and passed by a massive margin. Bush signed into law what Leahy voted for and helped make law.
Liberals.

[BDA116]

Specifically, your moronic leftist "article" states this:

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." 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."

Not only is that not completely factual, it is intentionally written to be extremely misleading - just like everything penned by a leftist extremist. Then again, you sheeple lap it all up.
Here is what the ACTUALLY law states:

SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.

• (a) Use of the Armed Forces Authorized-

• • (1) IN GENERAL- Section 333 of title 10, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`Sec. 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law

• `(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies- (1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to--

• • `(A) 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--

• • • `(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; and

• • • `(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or

• • `(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).

• `(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that--

• • `(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

• • `(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

• `(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

• `(b) Notice to Congress- The President shall notify Congress of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.'.

Very typical of new bills passed and signed, it cleans up text from existing United States law.
Here is the current way section 333 reads:

§ 333. Interference with State and Federal law
The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it—
(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.
In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

Not really doing much more than clearing up the language, as the Senate wanted. No NEW powers are granted. This power has existed all along, now it is being more carefully clarified.

The bill also clarifies a couple other sections of Title 10, and changes the heading of Chapter 15 of Title 10.
Just general cleaning up of language.
Nothing new, nothing exciting, nothing to get all worked up about.
Yet the mindless sheeple always will.

Here, read the whole damned thing for yourself:
Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)
And here is a link to current Code, specifically that chapter and sections:
US CODE: Title 10,333. Interference with State and Federal law
Why are you not worked up about the current Code?
Oh yeah, because it wasn't written by or signed into law by President Bush.

[sheepofblue]

[kawboy69]

[slanger]

Originally Posted by jaim

Finally found something. Check it out. You hard core conservatives should be quite pissed about this.

Bush Moves Toward Martial Law : SF Indymedia

wow.... ummmm who really cares... martial law is needed sometime, say maybe after katrina... gee bethca didnt think of that... i serve as an army reservist and am ready to be called into action at any time... send me to iraq or send me to california to deal with tree huggin hippies

[seamus]

I can't wait until LTL reads that and sees how militia was changed to read National Guard in Federal Service.

To respond to the original thread topic, Martial Law implies the military has been granted temporary rule of the civilian population. This law provides for military assistance in an emergency which the police cannot adequately control.

Having been a part of a military response to a national emergency, it is clearly dictated and monitored. Civilian authorities are clearly in control and the military responds and acts within set boundaries.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to search the LOC and look up US Codes.

[davef]

1.Owned (from the Urban Dictionary)
v owned, 0wned, pwned, 0wn3d, pwn3d, own3d.
v. tr.
To be made a fool of; To make a fool of; To confound or prove wrong; embarrasing someone: Being embarrased.
BDA owned you at Fireblades.org.

[leelover]

Originally Posted by davef

1.Owned (from the Urban Dictionary)
v owned, 0wned, pwned, 0wn3d, pwn3d, own3d.
v. tr.
To be made a fool of; To make a fool of; To confound or prove wrong; embarrasing someone: Being embarrased.
BDA owned you at Fireblades.org.