Losing our freedom

[Rainsford]

Here's a hint. Just because the police haven't come to haul you away for nothing doesn't mean you don't have fewer freedoms.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: nutxo


For some reason I keep thinking that amended means that something already existed. Which would make your statement just as incorrect as you say mine is.

You didn't say "amended," you said "pulled together." The laws listed above were significantly changed, and not just in ways relating to commerce. Again, maybe you should stick to whatever is your area of expertise if you're going to make blanket statements like that.

 

[0marTheZealot]

The Patriot Act is a warmup compared to what can happen in an economic crisis. The following executive orders can be invoked during an economic crisis :


?10995: Right to seize all communications media in the United States.


?10997: Right to seize all electric power, fuels and minerals, both public and private.


?10999: Right to seize all means of transportation, including personal vehicles of any kind and total control of highways, seaports and waterways.


?11000: Right to seize any and all American people and divide up families in order to create work forces to be transferred to any place the government. sees fit.


?11001: Right to seize all health, education and welfare facilities, both public and private.


?11002: Right to force registration of all men, women and children in the United States.


?11003: Right to seize all air space, airports and aircraft.


?11004: Right to seize all housing and finance authorities in order to establish ?Relocation Designated Areas? and to force abandonment of areas classified as ?unsafe.?


?11005: Right to seize all railroads, inland waterways, and storage facilities, both public and private.


?11921: Authorizes plans to establish government control of wages and salaries, credit and the flow of money in US financial institutions

Sources : http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/jfkeo/exonum.htm
http://www.disastercenter.com/laworder/11051.htm

We aren't that far from an economic crisis. A simple thing like Iran cutting it's oil exports in half would push oil prices above $100, which would be devasting to the world economy, not just the US economy. A terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia that damages a port or a well could easily do that as well. Hell, an attack on a refinary that utterly cripples that refinary would kill us economically. We live in perilous times. If you think the Patriot Act was bad, this is worse. Executive Orders can not be disobeyed as they carry the full weight of being a law, no oversight from Congress or the Supreme Court. Welcome to Nazi America ca. 2005.

Executive Order - A rule or order having the force of law, issued by the President. --> definition of an Executive Order
http://clinton2.nara.gov/OMB/inforeg/glossary.html

 

[RabidMongoose]

We aren't that far from an economic crisis.

I disagree. I don't think that we're anywhere near an economic crisis that would initiate the use of any of those executive orders.

 

[0marTheZealot]

Then you don't know how indebted we are to oil. A $10 spike is what is largely responsible for our current economic situation.

 

[RabidMongoose]

I think you're overexaggerating the use of these executive orders. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think you're saying that they will be used far too easily.

You're saying that one attack against a refinery will cause all of these executive orders to be passed. I'm doubting that as well as other cases where you seem to portray martial law like activity happening very easily.

 

[0marTheZealot]

Well the option is on the table. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they were invoked before the election to "delay" it if there was, god forbid, a terrorist attack. However, I am merely pointing out the fact that we are standing on a razor's edge, and there is so much power behind the scenes that major things like the Patriot Act will look like rules made up in a playground compared to what can actually happen.

I have no doubt in my mind that we will see those Executive Orders invoked in my lifetime. I pray it won't be in the near future.

 

[1EZduzit]

Once upon a time:


I clocked you doing 68 in a 65mph zone. May I see your driver license, registration, and insurance card please?

Certainly, Officer.

I see you don?t have your seat belt on. Do you know how dangerous that is? I will have to site you for that. You also appeared to have been weaving a little?

I was trying to get the radio station in a little better.

Well, I going to have to have you blow in this?I see you have been drinking?

Yes, I had a glass of wine at supper.

Well, that?s what you say. We?ll have to take you down and have a blood test.

What about my car?

We have to tow it away to have the drug dogs check it out for contraband anyway, so you don?t have to worry about it.

Jesus Christ!! I have 3 hours to drive before I get home and I have to be at work at 6:00 A.M. tomorrow!!

Well, you should have thought about that before you broke the law now shouldn?t of you. I?m just doing my job, you know.

==========================


I?m over exaggerating here also, but I?d bet it or something very similar to it has happened and more then once. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
Well the option is on the table. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they were invoked before the election to "delay" it if there was, god forbid, a terrorist attack. However, I am merely pointing out the fact that we are standing on a razor's edge, and there is so much power behind the scenes that major things like the Patriot Act will look like rules made up in a playground compared to what can actually happen.

I have no doubt in my mind that we will see those Executive Orders invoked in my lifetime. I pray it won't be in the near future.

The options have always been on the table. You seem to be acting as if these are brand new exectuive orders. I don't believe that they are. And that doesn't mean that any hiccup in the economy is going to warrant the use of them.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Riprorin
You don't understand the concept of a private company, do you?

More like private a$$holes, they can't go belly up fast enough as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Riprorin
You don't understand the concept of a private company, do you?

More like private a$$holes, they can't go belly up fast enough as far as I'm concerned.

You do realize that the private sector employ many people in this country, don't you?

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
So we have another person who thinks corporations have more rights then individuals. Just because you don't mind being "owned" don't try and justify that this man was fired for having an opinion and trying to voice it. This man's rights are every bit as important to the integrity of the Bill of Rights as the company's rights.

I think if you check history you will find that when people are denied the right to dissent that it never leads to anything good, only bad. Absoulte power corrupts absoultely.

in the corporate environment then yes I do think in instances such as this the companies do have more rights than their employees....they hired him therefore they can decide when and why they want to fire him.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Riprorin
This guy was free to say what he wanted and the private company he worked for was free to fire him.

I disagree. He should have the right to ask questions and dissent without being fired. Talk about your "thought police". Just a good reason not to work for anybody with Republican persuasions. They don't want to employ you, they want to own you.

Companies are in business to make money. Piss off an important client and you run the risk of getting fired. That's the way free enterprise works.

Yea sure, under your Country the only way to express freedom of speech is with a bag over your head.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Riprorin
This guy was free to say what he wanted and the private company he worked for was free to fire him.

I disagree. He should have the right to ask questions and dissent without being fired. Talk about your "thought police". Just a good reason not to work for anybody with Republican persuasions. They don't want to employ you, they want to own you.

Companies are in business to make money. Piss off an important client and you run the risk of getting fired. That's the way free enterprise works.

Yea sure, under your Country the only way to express freedom of speech is with a bag over your head.

You want a world where there's no consequences for your actions. Unfortunately, such a world doesn't exist. Like I said, he can continue to express himself, he just needs to find another employer. However, he shpuld be forewarned that employers who don't care if their employees drive off clients don't tend to stay in business very long.