|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Apr 2, 2014 11:13:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Apr 10, 2014 15:00:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Apr 15, 2014 10:46:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Apr 23, 2014 11:04:19 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on Apr 30, 2014 11:54:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on May 9, 2014 11:17:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on May 29, 2014 11:11:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by homerj on May 29, 2014 18:58:24 GMT
Wow... Holy Sh**T indeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on May 30, 2014 2:26:23 GMT
Did a bit of Googling, found this: "The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the ability of the President of the United States to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. The laws are chiefly contained in 10 U.S.C. § 331 - 10 U.S.C. § 335. The general aim is to limit Presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection. Coupled with the Posse Comitatus Act, Presidential powers for law enforcement are limited and delayed." I believe this law is the current one in effect, although it appears there were attempts to broaden the President's abilities under the GW Bush administration in 2006/7. Those amendments were repealed, and the 1807 Act as orignally worded is still the law of the land. I don't see how this directive changes anything from the status quo, but I certainly could be missing something. The last time the law was invoked was during the LA Riots of 1992, at least according to my brief googling. Gotta ask, is this yet another thing (see Obamaphone) that actually started under another administration but that our current President is getting blamed for? Also, is a better alternative to let a bunch of rioters burn a city to the ground while the 1st Marine Division sits on their collective asses an hour away and twiddles their thumbs? |
|
|
|
Post by NamelessStain on May 30, 2014 14:36:47 GMT
DM, The phones started under Reagan, was modified under Clinton, and finally modified under W. www.fcc.gov/lifelineThe problem is people are getting more than 1 phone. There have been videos where people admit they have 3. Abuse of the system. Now the new DoD stuff was drawn up in 2010. Can't blame that one prior presidents: www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/302518p.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on May 30, 2014 15:29:15 GMT
DM, The phones started under Reagan, was modified under Clinton, and finally modified under W. www.fcc.gov/lifelineThe problem is people are getting more than 1 phone. There have been videos where people admit they have 3. Abuse of the system. Now the new DoD stuff was drawn up in 2010. Can't blame that one prior presidents: www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/302518p.pdfAbuse of the system seems to be par for the course for most of our entitlement programs, that's for sure. Doesn't seem to be endemic to any one President, the current one or previous ones. Again, though, does the new DOD directive radically change the existing policy? I only did a cursory read. It seems like the 1807 language pretty much says the same thing as our current language does. Is the new directive a clarification, a broadening of policy, a required periodic update or revisit...? |
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on May 30, 2014 19:21:25 GMT
The problem isn't really the wasteful spending of this administration, it's the creeping tendency of the government to try to increase it's power over the American citizen. The Neo-Cons aren't much better than the Progressives in these areas, just the other side of the same coin. They're seriously almost as bad (as many of the Neo-Cons aren't true conservatives...they're just Rino's with red ties). In my opinion the problem with this administration is across a broad front though. It's the willingness of this administration to violate the Constitution and to target those that they don't agree with politically. President Obama's Top 10 Constitutional Violations Of 2013It's also spelled out in plain English what their vision is if some American people disagree with them. From the obsessive Progressive need to try to ban/outlaw firearms and then confiscate them, to asking US Military personnel if they'd fire on American citizens as a litmus test, the purging of US Military officers if they're politically ' unreliable', the rumors of the possibility of an economic collapse, this administration targeting conservatives by using the IRS, labeling conservative citizens as ' Domestic Terrorists', training sessions for the US Military where the premise is to regain control of State government buildings after Tea Partiers seize control and so on. FM 3-39.40 INTERNMENT AND RESETTLEMENT OPERATIONS
Actual PDF of FM 3-39.40 - Internment And Resettlement OperationsMilitary 'purge' meant to weed out officers who won't fire on AmericansPurging America's Military'Purge Surge ' : Obama fires another commanderThe Civil War of 2016 U.S. Military Officers Are Told to Plan To Fight AmericansFull Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the FutureDHS Domestic Terror WarningMichelle Malkin - Confirmed: The Obama DHS hit job on conservatives is realPDF - 'Rightwing Extremism ReportSome try to discount these tendencies as ' conspiracy theories' and you're unlikely to find these actions and reports being discussed on MSNBC, but one can't exactly discount it altogether as they're in black-and-white US Military manuals, actual training sessions, officers are actually being forced out of the Military or given substandard ratings to sideline them and there's been some talk in the US House of Representatives and Senate of trying to impeach Obama for his violations of the US Constitution. So it's not like this stuff is all some bullshit conspiracy theory. I'm not interested in receiving a daily dose of fear by guys like Alex Jones and I do my best to investigate claims made by people like him, but I do want to know the truth one way or the other. The mainstream/corporate media certainly isn't going to report on it, but then again some sites and net-based media tend to exaggerate one way or the other (as if the truth isn't bad enough). So an individual looking for actual facts has to read some of this stuff from a cynical point of view, research the claims from actual government reports and go from there. The truth is that in the past couple years there have been some disturbing trends. I get what you're saying though and for part of it I agree, I don't think that the Democratic party should be blamed for issues which are bi-partisan. Elitist actions are elitist actions. I'm hoping that this trend reverses itself, but it's still a trend. Some of it is some pretty scary shit. I wouldn't want the Marines or the 82nd Airborne to just sit there jerking off as American cities burn, but I'm not real comfortable with political parties being targeted for political reasons, firearms in common usage being banned out of the Progressive's fear of weapons or too much freedom or with the demonization of actual Conservatives in LEO and Military exercises and reports. |
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on May 30, 2014 20:46:12 GMT
Browning, you speak much truth. There is a hint of OBS (Obama Derangement Syndrome) in much news, just like there was a hint of BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) in much of the 'news' from 2000 to 2008. On the good side, if you don't like the current boss then in 2 years we're rid of him.
I found this sentence in your post interesting:
..."the demonization of actual Conservatives in LEO and Military exercises and reports."
Because I see MUCH demonization of LEOs and military personnel in 'conservative news' - - like the assumption that these noble Americans will somehow gleefully goose-step to whatever tune the Commander-in-Chief whistles. The idiots who grabbed their muskets for the corporate welfare deadbeat rancher recently were absolutely foaming at the mouth to kill some local cop or federal officer because they represented THE MAN. Pathetic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Browning35 on May 31, 2014 15:44:46 GMT
If anything I see more support for the troops and law enforcement from Conservatives. What support they receive generally comes from us. The exception to that rule is when there's a violation of the Constitution and is on a case-by-case basis. For local and State LE there's quite a bit of support and I've never heard a single Conservative say anything bad at all about Military personnel. We might not necessarily agree when they get sent off to some 3rd world shithole that doesn't have anything to do with the US's security, but for the individual troops there's alot of respect.
Down here when Chris Kyle died Conservatives were lining the road ways for his funeral procession. Not too many Progressives/Liberals are going to be doing that. For most of them they believe the Military to be mindless butchers. The police they generally view as fascist bullies.
There are some extremists on the right who have a problem with all authority, but those cases are fairly rare.
|
|
|
|
Post by dannusmaximus on Jun 1, 2014 3:15:51 GMT
I think many liberal / progressives are frankly scared of people who are or were in the military, because they have no understanding of that culture. They WANT to respect them, but it's kind of like the respect you have for a lion. You respect it because you are kind of scared of it and aren't quite sure what it might do. My lib friends are not anti military, per se, but they have no history of service in their family or peer group. It's hard to fully support something you have no concept about. This doesn't make them awful people, just products of their environment. Going into the military is still largely a blue-collar career choice, and most of my lib/proggie friends come from an upper class professional parenting background. They don't know a single person (other than me) who was actually in the military. A blue-collar person probably knows several, and probably has relatives that served as well.
I still think the coservative view that cops and soldiers are a potential tool of The Man is far more common then you believe, even though it is absolutely true that most people waving their tiny flags at parades or listening to ass-kickin' pro 'murican country songs probably trend conservative.
On a slightly different bent, it's almost exclusively conservative politicians who are trying like hell (and in many states succeeding) to get rid of police and firefighter pensions, presumptive medical care, and other compensatory benefits traditionally given to public safety personnel. Whic is a damn funny way of showing support, when you think about it...
|
|
