Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bush Signs Bill Enabling Martial Law

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the maybe-sweden dept.

1594

An anonymous reader writes to point us to an article on the meaning of a new law that President Bush signed on Oct. 17. It seems to allow the President to impose martial law on any state or territory, using federal troops and/or the state's own, or other states', National Guard troops. From the article: "In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law. It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions." Here is a link to the bill in question. The relevant part is Sec. 1076 about 3/4 of the way down the page.

cancel ×

1594 comments

frist psot (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624738)

!!1 frist psot!!!!!

Oh My. (5, Insightful)

Meagermanx (768421) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624744)

My initial reaction to this is "Oh My."
Sometimes, people in power should have checks and balances to their ability to oppress their own people. After all, a little revolution now and again is a good thing.

Re:Oh My. (5, Funny)

Rachel Lucid (964267) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624774)

Yes, I'm pretty sure when the elections get 'cancelled indefinitely' we'll be all primed for revolution. Provided we're not all distracted by the new consoles first.

Re:Oh My. (5, Insightful)

HotBlackDessiato (842220) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624910)

Yes, I'm pretty sure when the elections get 'cancelled indefinitely' we'll be all primed for revolution. Provided we're not all distracted by the new consoles first.
No need to "cancel" elections, just make them so they're pretend elections.

Mod parent up! (5, Insightful)

khasim (1285) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624948)

Even Saddam had elections.

It isn't whether you have elections, it's who counts the votes.

Re:Mod parent up! (4, Insightful)

Alpha Prime (25709) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624992)

And with Diebold counting the vote, we're screwed!

Re:Oh My. (5, Insightful)

Broken scope (973885) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625032)

Suddenly the 1 reason for the 2nd amendment becomes crystal clear.

Re:Oh My. (2, Insightful)

daeg (828071) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624860)

We have the checks and balances, he just seems to be ignoring them. The Executive Branch is designed to enforce laws and represent the government as a whole. Bush, through a frightening number of executive orders, is ignoring the legislative process where laws are debated, written, and rewritten in the Legislative Branch. What I don't understand is why Congress, even under Republican control, isn't reprimanding the President for this behavior--afterall, he is effectively taking away their need to legislate things of national importance.

The GOP should be outraged as well. The focus is entirely on the President, who will become largely irrelevant in two years. They should be allowing the Legislature to work at full capacity and bring forth some new stars for the party. Having no attention on potential candidates will make public exposure of new candidates more difficult.

Re:Oh My. (5, Insightful)

bgfay (5362) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624962)

The biggest concern I have as an American is that the checks and balances simply are not working and the administration just keeps demanding that we trust them. We won't torture--wink, wink. We won't tap your phone-line--nod, nod. And so on.

My brother and I were just talking about how for the first time in a long time the midterm elections are of paramount importance. With three branches of government sufficiently controlled by the administration's party, we are going down the drain. If we take the House and maybe (oh please, oh please) the Senate, we have the chance to do something that matters: nothing.

That sounds odd I know. But the real goal of putting the Congress in Democratic hands is to keep the administration from doing more of the same. Nothing would be preferable to the damage being done at the moment.

Re:Oh My. (1)

DiamondGeezer (872237) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625000)

It's what happens when you have a one-party state, or as the Republicans called it a "clean sweep".

Re:Oh My. (1)

BorgCopyeditor (590345) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625036)

Bush, through a frightening number of executive orders, is ignoring the legislative process where laws are debated, written, and rewritten in the Legislative Branch

Not to mention asserting that the judicial branch, too, is irrelevant, especially through the claims made in signing statements about military tribunals and about the president's presumed authority to declare anyone an "enemy combatant" without any judicial review of this declaration.

But I'm told that thinking there's something wrong with these things proves that I "want the terrorists to win," so I guess I'd better just shut up now.

Re:Oh My. (3, Funny)

TerranFury (726743) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625040)

Well, there's always Jeb.

*shudder*

Re:Oh My. (1)

Instine (963303) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624902)

And you thought us limeies were bad. Just wait... You'll be begging to pay us our tea taxes, just to help get rid of "GWB the Opressive".

; }

Re:Oh My. (1, Insightful)

Bloater (12932) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624972)

We got the equivalent law some months ago here in the UK. The government no longer needs parliament to pass acts (the primary purpose of parliament). The Prime Minister now has full autocratic power over every person in the UK including the Queen - should he, or his successors whoever they may be, choose to use it. That includes the right to personally ban elections if he wanted to (not to suggest that he wants to, of course, just to indicate the lack of foresight that parliament had in allowing this poorly worded law to pass).

So what else is new? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624748)

n/t

"Posse Comitatus" and "Insurrection" (3, Funny)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624752)

I'm quite certain that Bush thinks those are some conditions to be fixed with 5iaGRa.

In a stelthier move... (3, Funny)

LordEd (840443) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624758)

... the white house quickly slashdots the article alerting people to the bill.

Re:In a stelthier move... (1)

HoosierPeschke (887362) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624772)

...but was unable to completely wipe out the information for those geeks with the Slashdotter Extension [efinke.com] .

Coral Cache, Google Cache, and Mirrordot all remain stable in the face of the slashdotting...

Hurricane and winter storms (4, Insightful)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624770)

This probably has more to do with the hurricanes and winter storms. During Katrina, the Feds were criticised for *not* bringing in the defence force to render aid.

Re:Hurricane and winter storms (3, Insightful)

majutsu (1018766) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624806)

Or that is one way to justify it.

Re:Hurricane and winter storms (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624876)

Yes, thats why it says "in case of insurrection, break constitution".

Re:Hurricane and winter storms (4, Insightful)

Xeth (614132) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624970)

I'm sure that's a reasonable justification. But the granted powers are considerably beyond the scope of rendering aid in an emergency. Why would you grant government powers so incredibly far-reaching when the solution requires something much narrower?

Re:Hurricane and winter storms (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625042)

Yes, because you need to fight a war with your own citizens in order to get food and water to them within a week.

Voluntary or involuntary (2, Insightful)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625060)

States and localities could request military assistance already. Governor Bianco invoked the Stafford Act on August 27, and Mayor Nagin less formally said "We need troops, man!".

The Insurrection Act is about using Federal troops to coerce a local government. For example, President Eisenhower used it on Little Rock when they violated a court order to desegregate.

Godwin's law (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624782)

This all seem awfully familiar.

Obligatory.... (5, Insightful)

LordPhantom (763327) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624790)

"People should not be afraid of their government - Governments should be afraid of their people"

Remember remember the 5th of november... (5, Funny)

arcite (661011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624922)

Oh #hit! It's almost here and I haven't gotten my Fedex with my mask and cape yet!

Did anyone get a delivery for a g. fox by accident? Anyone?

Re:Remember remember the 5th of november... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625066)

you can say 'shit' on slashdot.

Re:Obligatory.... (1)

Robber Baron (112304) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625026)

"People should not be afraid of their government - Governments should be afraid of their people"


Actually no. If the frigging government is doing its job correctly, there would be no need for it to be afraid of its people! That dubya needs to be sequestered behind armour ought to tell you something.

They're just being good boy scouts. (1)

Tibor the Hun (143056) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624792)

They're just prepairing for the next presidential election when Cheney miraculously pulls another victory for them. So, just in case people get up in arms over it, they'll have the law on their side. (Though I doubt that they'd need it, Cheney is a crack shot himself, I hear.)

Re:They're just being good boy scouts. (1)

Trikenstein (571493) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624926)

(Though I doubt that they'd need it, Cheney is a crack shot himself, I hear.)

Say goodbye to your face

What Happened to News For Nerds??!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624798)

Slashdot, political drivel for leftists, news that matters only to liberals.

Or do the editors just feel frisky because Election day is coming up? The agenda of this site is a little too obvious.

Re:What Happened to News For Nerds??!! (1)

CosmeticLobotamy (155360) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624870)

In five years, when a Democrat is in charge (yeah, right), it'll be fun to hear about how obvious our Republican bias is with our constant criticizing and conspiracy-theorizing.

Re:What Happened to News For Nerds??!! (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624936)

Well instead of bitching why don't you post some constructive examples of what you believe in.

It's my firm personal opinion that the American political system is out of tune. Hell, Bush may be the best thing to happen. I think that his policies and actions have weakened America. Thus providing a stimulus to vote his ass out and fix shit. In terms of promoting terror the current administration has real terrorists outflanked. Constant fear mongering emanates from the White House instilling in average Americans the opinion that something must be done now. It's sick when you have a reactionary administration that seems to care more about polls and spin instead of providing the vision to lead their country.
So all-in-all let Bush do what he wants, I think history will judge him harshly.

Re:What Happened to News For Nerds??!! (1)

TerranFury (726743) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624974)

Political thought should have more to it than rooting for the local sportsteam. This isn't about cheering on a party or hoping the Democrats go to the World Series.

just impeach the bastard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624802)


for NOT defending the constitution

martial law oh noes! (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624804)

Canada has always had the ability to declare martial law. (It's called "The Riot Act".) It was enacted once in the 70s for a short time. And that's about it. It's not really a big deal, IMO, given the fact that such powers will probably never be used.

Re:martial law oh noes! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624880)

Hey, we'll have none of that reasoned discourse 'round these parts! If Clinton had enacted this, then it would not be a big deal ... but this is Bush so the sky is falling. Mind you, many /.ers have accused Bush of ignoring and wantonly violating the constitution, but for some reason Bush now feels the need to push through this law "in the stealth of night" when he only has 2 years left in office. Apparently, logic and rational thought processes are nowwhere to be found on /. Sad.

You're obviously not a Canadian (1)

arcite (661011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624956)

It was and is a big deal to us. It was a pivitol moment in our collective history and hopefully it will never happen again!

Re:You're obviously not a Canadian (1)

wes33 (698200) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625058)

plus it's called the "emergencies act" (replacing the old and misused - by Trudeau - "war measures act" in 1988)

Re:martial law oh noes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625052)

It's actually called the "war measures act". It was invoked during WWI, WWII, and the FLQ terrorist crisis in the 1970s. And in each case, invoking it has been a VERY big deal.

I'm sure it was Bush... (0, Flamebait)

daninaustin (985354) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624810)

Last time I looked it took a majority of both the House and Senate to pass a law... People complain that about the lack of federal action during Katrina, but when laws are passed to allow the federal govt. to actually do more all the conspiracy theorists start crawling out from their bunkers. If congress passed something before they had read it then shame on them, You Bush haters really need to get a life.

Re:I'm sure it was Bush... (0, Troll)

WilliamSChips (793741) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624906)

Bush and the United States military were the last ones there when Katrina hit. Fucking Fidel Castro did more than Bush. Bush has shown that his interests are clearly not in helping the American people. The conspiracy theorists are more levelheaded than Bush supporters.

Re:I'm sure it was Bush... (0, Troll)

udderly (890305) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624958)

Hells Bells, you know that the guy can't win with this crowd. Interestingly enough, GWB is simultaneously the stupidest president ever and is engineering a most Machiavellian evil plan to take over the world.

I will admit that he certainly seems to have been fairly ineffective--but I wonder how history will judge him. I personally just think that he's ineffectual because he speaks *as if* he's an idiot, which keeps him from being able to clearly communicate what he's trying to do. I wouldn't be surprised if he just had some sort of undiagnosed dyslexia or reading disorder.

Either way, I will probably be relieved when Hillary's president--heaven knows that the Clinton cabal has never tried anything shifty.

Mod Parent Up (1)

toddhisattva (127032) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625022)

The parent blows up Leaky Leahy's conspiracy theory.

Martial Law would have been a step up from anything New Orleans has had for a couple of centuries.

Oh Jesus.. (4, Interesting)

yamamushi (903955) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624812)

How much more are people going to take before they realize what is going on here? Seriously, we're only a step away from open revolution.. Will it actually take having troops parade around your hometown enforcing martial law before people stand up for their rights?? (which we don't have many anymore). I'm not saying there should be a call-to-arms, but I AM saying that people need to wake up and see what's going on before it's too late! First Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, Military Commissions Act, and now THIS?! All in the name of "terrorism". We're just letting the government trample all over our constitution, because people don't understand why it was written in the first place, TO LIMIT GOVERNMENT! When will people realize that FREEDOM is NOT letting your government take away all your rights...

Re:Oh Jesus.. (2, Insightful)

dkmeans (883158) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624884)

Get a clue -- the American public is very heavily armed last time I checked...the government doesn't like us owning 200 million plus firearms...be glad for the 2nd amendment...that's what it's ther for. We can, and will shoot back. One day you might actually be glad there's the NRA protecting your rights to not be opressed at teh end of a rifle from your government....

Re:Oh Jesus.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625034)

Do you really, honestly think 200 million rifles and handguns frightens the government and prevents opression? Please. If you honestly believe that this is a deterrent when they have things like tanks and cruise missiles, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'll give you a sweetheart deal on.

At least if you're unarmed, they'll just use the soma to calm you down.

Re:Oh Jesus.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625076)

Yeah, it's not like the government has anything that can withstand rifle blasts. Like an updated version of the medieval armoured horse. Except that it's mechanized. And it can fire things back while the "rider" is stationed safely inside it. I should stop before I give the government ideas on how to overcome its own "heavily armed" populace.

Open revolution?? (5, Insightful)

daninaustin (985354) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624900)

Come on now. Most of the people who oppose Bush are also the same ones for gun control. What are you going to revolt with, rocks and sticks? Remember rule #1... You need a gun for a gunfight.

Re:Open revolution?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624960)

That's okay. For every 20 gun control moms in minivans, there's a crazy anarchist hippie with an arsenal ready to be passed around for the sake of freedom. Or maybe that's just here in California?

Re:Open revolution?? (1)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625004)

Since California has The Ahnold, we're just separate from the Union and form the Republic of California!

what, are you an idiot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624968)

That's perhaps the most paranoid crap I've read on Slashdot in a while, and that's saying something. Go back down in your bunker, and wait for the tanks. The rest of us have our lives to lead.

Lemme guess... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624976)

you're a big supporter of gun ownership rights? Oh, I see you put a little disclaimer in there about your rant not being a "call-to-arms".

Could you list actual and specific cases where the Patriot Act, Patriot Act II, or Military Commissions Act have resulted in an American being unduly persecuted or oppressed? Any?

Re:Oh Jesus.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624988)

We're just letting the government trample all over our constitution, because people don't understand why it was written in the first place, TO LIMIT GOVERNMENT!

What do they teach in history class these days? Did you not learn about the Articles of Confederation? [wikipedia.org]

As a matter of simple fact, the Constitution was written in order to strengthen the federal government, albeit in a limited way. That's way the Constitution was so controversial when it was being ratified. If you look at the preamble of the Constitution, it is actually a justification for the strengthening of the US government, compared to what had existed before.

Re:Oh Jesus.. (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625028)

Its funny how those in power, arent interested in limiting themselves... even though that is the job we trust them with doing.

For example.. give me the power to make my own movie... huge budgets, endless cash... i'll do as i want, as i please because its what i want and what i see fit.... But whos fault is it? I was given power to make a movie... I did it my way... you dont like it? Tough. I can bullshit the guy that gave me the power to make a movie, and win him over onto my side by telling him how nice is family is, and how adorable his new baby is. I can win him over by playing around of golf with him and say i'm just like him... and yap endlessly about how i love golf, when really i only play it to make buisness deals and could careless...

Thats our government.

Text mirror (1)

mgkimsal2 (200677) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624816)

FWIW (1)

mgkimsal2 (200677) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624868)

I didn't mirror all the javascript, png files and such - just the basic HTML.

Gzipped version (3, Informative)

mgkimsal2 (200677) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624894)

I'm already getting hammered here - not sure how many people are using gzip in the browser to pull from my web server, but http://fosterburgess.com/kimsal/martiallaw.html.gz [fosterburgess.com] would definitely give you a gzipped version, lightening the load on my bandwidth a bit :)

Signs adding up? (1)

EGSonikku (519478) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624818)

http://news.pacificnews.org/news/view_article.html [pacificnews.org] ?article_id=eed74d9d44c30493706fe03f4c9b3a77

Coincidence ? I'm not normally part of the tinfoil brigade but now I calls it like I see's it.

If you didn't vote Libertarian, you ASKED FOR THIS (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624820)

Anyone who voted Republicrat or Democan, shut up and go sit on the sidelines.

You've already demonstrated that you want an intrusive, activist government.
You have no room to complain now.
You ASKED FOR THIS!!!

______________________________________
A vote against a Libertarian candidate is
a vote to abolish the Constitution itself

Re:If you didn't vote Libertarian, you ASKED FOR T (2, Insightful)

Xeth (614132) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624878)

Um, alternatively, a vote against a Libertarian candidate is a show of disbelief about the benefits of a largely unregulated economy. Yes, the Libertarians have a few right ideas. But I think that the mercantile right is, in fact, one of the less-important rights, and sometimes it must be lessened to ensure that other rights are safeguarded and society is bettered.

-1, US-centric (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624824)

politics.slashdot.org more like usa.slashdot.org, go to hell kdawson

Calling Godwin (4, Insightful)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624832)

Re:Calling Godwin (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624998)

For people who don't understand this reference fully, the wikipedia article about the Reichstag Fire and it's background could be helpful:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire#Backgr ound [wikipedia.org]

Law (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624834)

How could this be a "stealth" move?

This is a LAW people. Congress had to pass it. Where was the yelling and screaming about this before the bill was passed?

Why didn't anyone bring this up, if it is indeed what they say it is?

You mean to tell me that NO Democrat and NO Republican read the bill, and after the bill was passed they found out what they voted for?

You know why?

Because it DOES NOTHING OF THE KIND.

Please! If this were indeed the case, you would have seen articles in the Washington Post, NY Times, LA Times, and every single news channel talking about this for weeks.

People that actually believe this are just promoting their own paranoid fantasies, prompted by the people they want to put into power.

I've seen people act like sheep before, but this is ridiculous.

Re:Law (1)

Xeth (614132) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624904)

So, did you read the bill? Start to finish? It's absolutely huge. And it's certainly not the only bill before Congress this year or month or week. It's stealthy in the sense that a poison needle in a haystack sitting in the public square is stealthy.

Re:Law (5, Insightful)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624932)

You mean to tell me that NO Democrat and NO Republican read the bill, and after the bill was passed they found out what they voted for?

A lot of these bills are not properly vetted and stuff get put in them all the time. Don't forget that this is the same Congress that approved a "Highway to Nowhere" in Alaska and practically done nothing that the people wanted but chased after stuff that only the Beltway talking heads were talking about. I'm looking forward to this election shaking up the entire political establishment.

OWN3D by the dimwit (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624842)

LMAO yanks have fun being incarcerated in the land of the "FREE"?

Oh Canada!!!! my home .....

Well, it USED to be about freedom (5, Interesting)

slidersv (972720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624844)

I feel like I'm bent over, my pants are down, and the illiterate president is hard at work behind me.
Considering the statement "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it" and the quality of education in US public schools, I get the feeling of inevitability.
Peak of cold war jumps to mind, except now instead of communism, it's called terrorism.

Are we doomed? Is slavery at hand?
Unless people would stop choosing their leaders based on their tie quality, we will all suffer.

Re:Well, it USED to be about freedom (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624996)

Slavery is nigh, actually. It's just of a different form. These days, it's economic slavery. People being seduced into buying all sorts of crap they don't need and putting it on credit. People seduced into buying cars on extended credit. People suckered into drawing down the equity in their houses the moment they actually start to see daylight. The goal is to keep you all perpetually shackled to debt, and keep sucking on the cigarette of consumerism. Keep buying; keep digging yourselves deeper into debt; never stop. Keeping everyone up to their eyeballs in debt is the only way to achieve wealth for all. Yeah, right.

Re:Well, it USED to be about freedom (1)

Cstryon (793006) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625050)

We can't blame Bush alone. Yes he is the President, but he is not in complete power. He leads the executive. The Legislative, and Judicial still have to approve of this "Martial Law" thing before it passes.

Re:Well, it USED to be about freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625072)

When the president signs a law, it means congress already passed it. The president has the right to veto a law that congress passes or sign it, but only after it's been voted on.

Stealth? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624848)

Why not do it publicly? Something to hide? Is this a law the public wants/needs?

It's coming... (1, Insightful)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624854)

Removal of due process under the law, martial law at whim, and it won't be long before the Constitution is gutted out to removed the two-term limit and replace the presidency with a monarchy. I'm surprised this didn't happened under Ronald Reagan since today's players worked for him. Maybe they needed someone more guillable than an ex-actor?

November elections (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624862)

Remember this come November. Don't be surprised if dubya imposes martial law in every state that sends a Dem to Washington. One small leap for dubya, one giant leap for totalitarian fascism. Welcome to the new US, where freedom runs you.

Re:November elections (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16625030)

+1 Insightful!?! Puh-leez!

Re:November elections (0, Flamebait)

creimer (824291) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625070)

The conspiracy is now clearer. Get the bulk of our military forces stuck in far off countries to prevent any general from rallying the troops behind the Constitution and offer safe passage back to the U.S. for any military personnel overseas who pledge their loyalty to the new marital law government. This is all beginning to make sense.

Text of the section (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624866)

Rather than having everyone load a huge bill... here is the text of the section:
The formatting sucks, but hey, it's congress.

=========

SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMER-
                        GENCIES.
        (a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES AUTHORIZED.--
                  (1) IN GENERAL.--Section 333 of title 10, United States
        Code, is amended to read as follows:
" 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 insurrec-
          tion, 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.".
                      (2) PROCLAMATION TO DISPERSE.--Section 334 of such title
          is amended by inserting "or those obstructing the enforcement
          of the laws" after "insurgents".
                      (3) HEADING AMENDMENT.--The heading of chapter 15 of
          such title is amended to read as follows:
              "CHAPTER 15--ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS TO
                                RESTORE PUBLIC ORDER".
                    (4) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.--(A) The tables of chapters
            at the beginning of subtitle A of title 10, United States Code,
            and at the beginning of part I of such subtitle, are each
            amended by striking the item relating to chapter 15 and
            inserting the following new item:
"15 Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order ... 331".
                      (B) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 15
            of such title is amended by striking the item relating to sections
            333 and inserting the following new item:
"333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law.".
            (b) PROVISION OF SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND EQUIPMENT.--
                      (1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 152 of such title is amended
            by adding at the end the following new section:
" 2567. Supplies, services, and equipment: provision in major
                                public emergencies
          "(a) PROVISION AUTHORIZED.--In any situation in which the
President determines to exercise the authority in section
333(a)(1)(A) of this title, the President may direct the Secretary
of Defense to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons
affected by the situation.
          "(b) COVERED SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND EQUIPMENT.--The sup-
plies, services, and equipment provided under this section may
include food, water, utilities, bedding, transportation, tentage,
search and rescue, medical care, minor repairs, the removal of
debris, and other assistance necessary for the immediate preserva-
tion of life and property.
          "(c) LIMITATIONS.--(1) Supplies, services, and equipment may
be provided under this section--
                      "(A) only to the extent that the constituted authorities
          of the State or possession concerned are unable to provide
          such supplies, services, and equipment, as the case may be;
          and "(B) only until such authorities, or other departments or
          agencies of the United States charged with the provision of
          such supplies, services, and equipment, are able to provide
          such supplies, services, and equipment.
        "(2) The Secretary may provide supplies, services, and equip-
ment under this section only to the extent that the Secretary
determines that doing so will not interfere with military prepared-
ness or ongoing military operations or functions.
        "(d) INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN AUTHORITIES.--The provision
of supplies, services, or equipment under this section shall not
be subject to the provisions of section 403(c) of the Robert T.
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
5170b(c)).".
                    (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.--The table of sections at the
        beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end
        the following new item:
"2567. Supplies, services, and equipment: provision in major public emergencies".
          (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--Section 12304(c)(1) of such title
is amended by striking "No unit" and all that follows through
"subsection (b)," and inserting "Except to perform any of the func-
tions authorized by chapter 15 or section 12406 of this title or
by subsection (b), no unit or member of a reserve component may
be ordered to active duty under this section".

Re:Text of the section (2, Insightful)

Lawrence_Bird (67278) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625078)

Oh so shocking that the Senator from VT would cry about the bill after it is passed. Where were the Dems when it was voted on? Where was the fillibuster? And all you Katrina 'why didn't the feds do more' whiners are now getting exactly what you deserve.

great (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624874)

sammo is here to kick some ass!

Re:great (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625046)

If i could only mod you +5 Funny :) I'm not sure how many got that ;)

Sammo Hung rules!

OCTOBER SURPRISE!!!! (4, Insightful)

arcite (661011) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624890)

SURPRISE!

I for one welcome our new illustrious and infallible world leader for life.

I humbly volunteer to be a mole for the new empire Pax america.

Perhaps I could spit polish Karl Rove's shoes? Your sires? :::cowers away:::

Bush bashing begins? (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624912)

Is Bush "seeking" these new powers, or are they pushed onto the Executive branch because people in the CIA want to use other provisions of them (no habeus corpus, etc) ? Is he really twirling his moustache over this, or is he the patsy?

Either way it sucks, but don't give him more credit than he deserves. He's no Sith Lord.

Re:Bush bashing begins? (1)

spinfire (148920) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625038)

The CIA is part of the Executive Branch and thus operates under the authority of the President. If the President is "bitch" to the CIA, he isn't doing his job because he is supposed to oversee them and holds ultimate responsibility for their actions.

I can't believe you People (1, Insightful)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624916)

First, you lambast the president for acting like a king, for deciding which of the laws he should follow, and which he should not.

And now, you lambast the congress for authorizing such arbitrariness. I mean, did you ever really think that the Republican Congress would not pass acts enabling wiretapping and dismantling oversight, enabling torture and disabling oversight, enabling arbitrary arrests, and disabling oversight.

Face it, the Republican Congress won't save you from the excesses of a dictator, because they like what he dictates.

Well, that's one way... (5, Funny)

jafo (11982) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624928)

That's one way to get around those pesky two term limits.

Sean

Axis of EVIL (0, Troll)

slidersv (972720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624934)

I thought military states (e.g. North Korea) are all axis of evil, and is not a way to go

I guess I was wrong...

It's such a beautiful day (0, Offtopic)

ishmalius (153450) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624942)

Why spoil such a wonderful weekend? Can't we please have a one-day moratorium, a brief respite without the word "Bush" being so obsessive-compulsively uttered?

Re:It's such a beautiful day (1)

BorgCopyeditor (590345) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625068)

He's the one who signed the bill, so perhaps you should direct your complaints to him and his enablers. For my part, I'll admit that I have a little OCD thing about freedom. There are worse obsessions, I think.

Why all the political stories? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624950)

And especially about 10 days until the election, and most of them being anti-GOP.

Of course, /. editors would NEVER try to influence the election. Never.

Heh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624952)

So, now the Insurrection Act has a martial flaw?

Legal inconsistencies? (2, Funny)

BeeBeard (999187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624954)

I will only agree to this if it doesn't interfere with my right to be beaten, tortured, and detained against my will. Otherwise, the President can just count me out of this. No thank you, sir!

Tying the knot?! (1)

BeeBeard (999187) | more than 7 years ago | (#16624980)

I'm reading these Slashdot comments, and I don't understand why all these people are so against getting married. Marriage is a fine institution and...oh no, I think I've misread something.

Well it's finaly time.... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16624984)

...to buy a few guns and a lot of ammo, just in case.

Sunlight Rule would help put an end to this (1)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 7 years ago | (#16625080)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...