|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Many aren't going to like this answer [esp NAVFAC] but it's because the illegals are part of the plan - the balkanization of the US.
It won't be long and the sh*t is going to hit the fan. And when the excuse comes for the big crackdown - ie martial law Bush & Company has everything set.
What Bush just did is over ride the individual States right to utilize their own state militias - the National Guards - in the manner the States see fit.
Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122)
http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/
The state militias are what are refered to in the second amendent to the US Constitution - aka the Bill of Rights.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
The purpose of the second amendment is to allow the individual states to keep an armed militia for the express purpose of fighting the Federal government in times when the Federal government is usuping the powers reserved for the States exclusively ie. "the security of a free state."
That time has come.
And Bush is going to take control of the very means by which the States will have to fight off the Federal Government - the armed State militias.
And Bush is going to fill the streets of America with the US military.
"In the United States, a Federal statute known as the Posse Comitatus Act forbids the use of the military of the United States as a posse comitatus or for law enforcement purposes."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_comitatus_(common_law)
Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is an ominous assault on American democratic tradition and jurisprudence. The 1878 Act, which reads,
"Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both,"
is the only U.S. criminal statute that outlaws military operations directed against the American people under the cover of 'law enforcement.' As such, it has been the best protection we've had against the power-hungry intentions of an unscrupulous and reckless executive, an executive intent on using force to enforce its will. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hollywoodaction
Joined: 02 Jul 2004
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NAVFC wrote: |
| Meegook wrote: |
The start of conditioning the sheeple to accept large operations such as this.
Start with those who will garner little sympathy from the rest of the population, abuse them a little, violate their rights, etc and study the reaction of the rest of the sheeple.
Already we can see what the reaction is of some:
Arrest them all and throw away the key!
This was a practice run to see how to run a large scale arrest round-up. There will be many more in the near future. |
..Meegook, go commit yourself. EVerytime the government does something your here screaming conspiracy. Go get a life and some therapy. As much as you might hate to believe it, the nation does have criminals in it, and it IS law enforcement's job to find and arrest them.
There is nothing wrong with that. It is not a violation of civil rights to arrest someone suspected of a crime. |
I don't think it's necessarily a conspiracy, but it certainly sets a precedent of scale (well, if you don't take into consideration how the Japanese-Americans were treated during WW2). See it as you wish, but I bet the department of homeland security is paying close attention to the operation, as they should. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
The streets of America:
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Doesn't this kind of stigmitization prevent them from leading a normal life, should they wish to do so? |
This stigmatization (and what gung-ho neighbors might do with this information) does bother me. If an ex-felon wants to actually rehabilitate him or herself, he or she faces an uphill battle that probably cannot be won. This is esp. problematic with nonsex-offense-related ex-felons. Think of the ex-felon African-American cook who tried so hard to straighten his life out in the film Heat but so many external factors conspired against him and forced him back into crime, literally against his will.
Carter once proposed that legislatures wipe these people's slate entirely clean and enable them to start new. I thought it was a bold proposal, and was all for it, at least on a case-by-case basis. The far right, of course, attacked him and, if I recall, they likened him to Dukakis and inevitably brought Willie Horton into it...
Also, ambiguous "sex offenders" like Mary Kay Letourneau are probably forced to comply with the Adam Walsh Act as well. And, personally, I do not believe that she and a very few exceptions like her were truly sex offenders in the first place -- that is, I do not believe there is a continuing threat in these cases, and too many gung-ho parents, like you seem to anticipate, would destroy any life they tried to build.
On the other hand, this is a serious issue. Recidivism is extremely high with respect to sex offenders, particularly where children are involved. And every time there are large-scale ops like this, the most unsuspected, "trustworthy" people show up as sex offenders (bus drivers, nurses, police officers, teachers, the list goes on...and let's not forget about religious authorities). Perhaps it is best to err on the side of caution.
Yes, then, I share your reservations. But there are children involved as victims here. So I think if a convicted sex offender moves into a residential neighborhood, people should be warned. Perhaps they should also be counseled.
What else would you propose? |
I would say don't let their status as previously convicted sex offenders be made available to the public. The State keeps their file. And no, they shouldn't have to register with the State wherever they go. Not as if that information would be hard to find anyway.
Re: Carter's Proposal. Sounds better than not letting ex-felons vote. I think a case-by-case basis is less important than wiping the records for only certain abuses. If somebody is caught dealing marijuana, his/her record should be wiped clean; if somebody abducted a minor and raped her, his/her record stays. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| I would say don't let their status as previously convicted sex offenders be made available to the public. The State keeps their file. And no, they shouldn't have to register with the State wherever they go. Not as if that information would be hard to find anyway. |
Agreed. Register with the local authorities but that's it. Give them a chance to live their lifes or just lock them back up and throw away the key.
They either paid the price for their crime or they didn't. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Meegook: are those pics from Seattle PD's response to the anarchists and their insanely destructive, anti-globalization rioting in Nov. 1999?
If so, do you not feel any pangs of conscience for taking those pics out of context and presenting them here as if they accurately depicted everyday life on "the streets of America?"
Setting aside that it was the far left and their mindless attempt to destroy so much in Seattle for a moment, and before W. Bush was even elected in the first place, let alone reelected and began tightening up national security measures, was this not clearly a unique incident and not representative of general conditions in the United States?
And, in any case, you failed to articulate the relationship between Seattle PD's response to these riots and the operation we are discussing here. Can you explain this, please?
Last edited by Gopher on Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Did you read any of the my earlier posts? About the Posse Comitatus Act being overridden and the National Guard being taken over by the President?
The images I posted are what I think we will soon see in many American cities as the Police State begins to tighen it's grip on dissenters, such as those in Seattle.
Look ahead at where the US is headed. The Police are looking more like the Military every day, and acting like it too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
This is way too cynical, Ya-ta.
What makes you so sure these kinds of task force actions are designed as purely "media events?" And how did you conclude that this particular op was a staged event?
(a) Authorities collaborate on a multi-state action that nets massive arrests;
(b) the Attorney-General steps up and ensures that the Administration claims credit for it, as any self-respecting politician of any partisan slant would do from the White House.
But what makes you so sure that "b" necessarily undermines "a," indeed supplants "a" as the main event?
|
Not at all cynical. If you prefer the term 'pre-election day grandstanding' to 'media event', I won't quibble. While I'm disgusted with the timing, that is not my focus. My focus is elsewhere: on protecting the innocent and the concept of mass arrests.
If you think the law enforcement authorities woke up on a Tuesday morning and found an e-mail listing the addresses of 11,000 criminals in their in-box, then you are being too gullible for words. As I said in my post, the authorities should be arresting perpetrators as the evidence becomes available, especially for sex offenders.
How many innocent kids suffered or at least were at risk during the weeks and months these guys were at liberty while the authorities compiled their list of more than a thousand, waiting for the big sweep?
As for mass arrests, it's reasonable to make a sweep of a mafia gang or a drug ring, but those involve a few dozen people at most. However, there is something sinister in arresting thousands at one time. There is simply no good reason for it if criminals are arrested as the evidence warrants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| If you think the law enforcement authorities woke up on a Tuesday morning and found an e-mail listing the addresses of 11,000 criminals in their in-box, then you are being too gullible for words. |
This overly simplifies what I think happened.
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| ...there is something sinister in arresting thousands at one time. There is simply no good reason for it if criminals are arrested as the evidence warrants. |
I do not know what you know about federal task forces, multi-juristictional sting and other ops, and related phenomena, or their workings. But, in any case, I do not think this is so sinister a thing.
I think these kinds of task forces and ops are a good idea, esp. concerning their usual targets: child pornography and sex offenders.
There is also a national registry for people who run out on child support and, I believe, federally-coordinated "Brady" background checks on potential gun buyers (if still in effect). I see nothing sinister in these things, either.
Moreover, local and state police sometimes coordinate on drunk driving checkpoint ops. I agree that police ought to be vigilant and go after each and every drunk driver that is out there. But sometimes, a broad, sweeping, multi-juristictional op is the best, most effective way to go about it...
And Meegook's calling such developments "a police state" (and I do not know whether you agree with him, Ya-ta) is truly laughable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| However, there is something sinister in arresting thousands at one time. |
There most certainly is - conditioning of the masses.
| Quote: |
And Meegook's calling such developments "a police state" is truly laughable. |
What's laugable is that you don't see the obvious.
Writ of habeas corpus - in effect since 812 AD - out the door.
Mass arrests coordinated by the Federal government.
A new law giving the President control over the State's National Guard.
New law allowing the US military to be used in law enforcement with the US overthrowing the Posse Comitatus Act of almost 150 years ago.
Nope, no indication of a Police State in the United States.
None at all.
LMHO
Last edited by Meegook on Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:51 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Meegook wrote: |
| ...conditioning of the masses. |
Circumstantial speculation. Easily understood by your cliche antiAmericanism, antiEstablishmentism, and just plain hysteria anytime any beat cop blows his nose...
If not, cite the direct evidence that has led to you conclude that the U.S. govt is moving to condition the masses in order to establish a police state. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Typical. I'm no more anti-American for pointing out the lies and abuses of the Bush Admin than I would be anti-mother if I opposed her smoking.
In fact, I'm one of the few here advocating supporting the US Constitution - can't get any more pro-American than that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Meegook wrote: |
| ...the lies and abuses... |
I said this to Ya-ta Boy on another thread. But it also applies to you. So here it is again:
...if you and the others truly feel that things are so low and so dictatorial in the United States, if the govt is so irredeemably gone, then you really ought to follow through with your convictions:
(a) Go somewhere else that meets your standards; or
(b) Move to overthrow the govt.
Anything else is just useless and petty complaining...
In the case of "b," by the way, we would find ourselves opposed in a civil war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Meegook

Joined: 12 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| If not, cite the direct evidence that has led to you conclude that the U.S. govt is moving to condition the masses in order to establish a police state. |
MEDIA ADVISORY:
Pentagon Propaganda Plan Is Undemocratic, Possibly Illegal
February 19, 2002
The New York Times reported today that the Pentagon�s Office of Strategic Influence is �developing plans to provide news items, possibly even false ones, to foreign media organizations� in an effort �to influence public sentiment and policy makers in both friendly and unfriendly countries.�
http://www.fair.org/activism/osi-propaganda.html
| Quote: |
| and just plain hysteria anytime any beat cop blows his nose... |
Straw man argument. And down right silly.
| Quote: |
then you really ought to follow through with your convictions:
(a) Go somewhere else that meets your standards; or
(b) Move to overthrow the govt. |
I've done the first but not becuz it meets my 'standards,' and am advocating a civil disobedience revolution for the second.
Any more suggestions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher

Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
(a) Go somewhere else that meets your standards; or
(b) Move to overthrow the govt. |
| Meegook wrote: |
I've done the first but not becuz it meets my 'standards,' and am advocating a civil disobedience revolution for the second.
Any more suggestions? |
I think we should not romanticize or politicize your decision to leave the U.S. and live in South Korea, since you have brought it up...(that's all I will say on the matter, as I still and most sincerely think it unfair to insult you personally regards your family life as you yourself have presented it here; people's lives are complex and complicated). That is, suffice it so say, I think you left America for other than romantic or political reasons.
And "civil disobedience" does not cut it. If you think the U.S. govt is rotten to the core, a police state that suppresses the people and orchestrates 9/11-style conspiracies via the Pentagon et al., and will hold no more free and fair elections, then you really need to take steps to overthrow the govt -- that is, if you are the Constitutional patriot you claim to be and if you are sure that your "analysis" is truly correct (and I find if hoplessly flawed, by the way).
If you do not indeed do this while, at the same time, continue to complain about the govt and make such allegations as you make on this board, then you are simply failing, out of cowardice or some other reason, to put your money where your mouth is, so to speak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|