DOMESTIC MILITARY INTERVENTION? WTF?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 1:37 AM GMT
    http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/09/full_text_of_newsmax_column_suggesting_military_co.php

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 4:17 AM GMT
    This is WTF !!!! The christian right republicans play to win no matter what the method, how hypocritical, or what group they have to use to do it. They will continue toward the goal of winning regardless. Retoric that could cause someones death such as president Obama's is not a problem to them because Obama is not on Gods side, Watch and see how many top republicans downplay the possibilities of consequences of such talk as if it is of no importance, they'll say, ah the far left did the same to Bush. They'll ride the tide of any benefit they can get out of this for all its worth while counting their blessings that they didn't have to say it, but thankful for what it can do for them. They are out for one thing, bring this president down, make him fail then we'll be back in power. That's WTF !!!!!
  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Oct 01, 2009 5:36 AM GMT
    If I had a dollar for every loon I've seen on the Internet, I would be a relatively wealthy man.

    Some idiot (my patience is limited by the extent of a person's lunacy) ranting about the need he sees for a military coup in the US isn't going to ruin my day or cause me to lose sleep. A military coup is neither likely (who with actual command in the US Armed Forces supports or would support such a thing?) nor warranted.

    He can, as many of us had to under President W. Bush, wait until the next election and vote for his preferred candidates for Congress and the White House. In the meantime, he could substantiate his criticisms of how the Obama administration is engaged in unconstitutional activity warranting an overthrow of our elected government (or just continue with his rantastic foolishness).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 7:53 AM GMT
    Too bad this never happened when Bush was president. Obama's kinda lama at being a president so far, but he's not terrible. Fuckin white racists.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 8:42 AM GMT
    JakeBenson saidToo bad this never happened when Bush was president. Obama's kinda lama at being a president so far, but he's not terrible. Fuckin white racists.


    What I dont get is that people were arrested during the Bush era for wearing Anti-Bush t-shirts to a town hall meeting....and in the Obama era suddenly its a right to carry an assault rifle to a presidential rally. I really hope the Secret Service knows what they're doing. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8279777.stm
  • NickoftheNort...

    Posts: 1416

    Oct 01, 2009 12:27 PM GMT
    While we're on the subject, here's a blog entry by Rick Moran, a self-identified conservative, on the hyperbolic attacks on the current administration and why there's a need on the part of self-identified conservatives to criticize and rebuke the attacks:

    'Silence equals assent:’ Why pointing out conservative lunacy must be done
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Oct 01, 2009 12:39 PM GMT
    Tempting anarachy...this is sedition.



    This is the book that Orwell forgot to write.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 1:05 PM GMT
    Obama is proving a MAJOR disappointment!
    I'm not saying the article is entirely untrue, but I do have one question...
    SOURCES???????????

    Real Journalism is DEAD!

    The lack of TRUE journalists is how we ended up electing this rockstar President with no experience and no ability aside from campaigning.

    I'm seeing LOTS of "changes", but it is increasingly clear that NOTHING has "CHANGED".

    Yet another self-serving politician, grabbing for power at every opportunity, manufacturing crisis after crisis to ram sweeping legislative changes down our throats.

    Even worse, is Congress is complicit, SUSPENDING THEIR OWN RULES, in order to ram thousands of pages of UNREAD legislation INTO LAW! When they were called on this, they hired a SPEED-READER... (LITERALLY) to read one bill to them! Even HE couldn't finish, so they ended up skipping parts and didn't finish in the end. As he "read" to them, I watched as OUR OWN CONGRESSMEN, LAUGHED ON CAMERA (CSPAN) at the ludicrous scene THEY had created! It was RIDICULOUS!

    Where were the real journalists?

    Obama promised during his campaign, to post the full text of ALL bills on the internet DAYS before being voted on. THIS HAS NOT HAPPENED. When questioned on it, the only responders are claiming, "the public would never be able to understand it." What? You just called EVERY ONE of your constituents IGNORANT! Did we somehow manage to elect the "washed few", "the ILLUMINATI", "the INTELLIGENCIA", who are the ONLY people capable of understanding legislation?

    If this were the case, they would still allow THEMSELVES time to read legislation! But, they do not. They receive legislation in the middle of the night, and rush (also in the middle of the night), to pass legislation before anyone knows about it. Thousands of pages which they, themselves, received only a few hours before. Magical reading abilities? Or, more of the same politics?

    NONE of this is in the mainstream media. You have to go out and find it.

    The New York Times just admitted it had "MISSED THE STORY" on ACORN.

    Where were the journalists?

    Journalism is dead. R.I.P.

    Don't take my word for anything. Go out and do your own research!

    We got lazy, and allowed pop-culture journalism to feed us everything we used to elect President Obama. Sure, it's not fun to spend hours upon hours researching candidates before an election. But, it is our RESPONSIBILITY, as free men with the POWER to VOTE! Failure to do so allows the media to tell us who to elect. When the media fails, as I say it has... well, you already see the result.

    Shame on us for allowing this to happen! ESPECIALLY in an era where we have the INTERNET! The greatest tool for the research and dissemination of news in the history of mankind!
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Oct 01, 2009 1:21 PM GMT
    psferrari saidI'm not saying the article is entirely untrue, but I do have one question...SOURCES???????????

    Real Journalism is DEAD!


    Where were the real journalists?


    Journalism is dead. R.I.P.



    All this rhetoric coming from a faceless profile. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 1:21 PM GMT
    jprichva saidWriting in all caps somehow makes what you have to say EVEN MORE TRUE!


    No, but it does add emphasis...

    THIS IS ALL CAPS.

    THIS, is not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 3:55 PM GMT
    NickoftheNorth saidWhile we're on the subject, here's a blog entry by Rick Moran, a self-identified conservative, on the hyperbolic attacks on the current administration and why there's a need on the part of self-identified conservatives to criticize and rebuke the attacks:

    'Silence equals assent:’ Why pointing out conservative lunacy must be done
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>This guy should have more influence on the RNC, but they won't listen cause they are benefiting too much from the negativity. There are plenty of nuts out there that are taking this silence as consent and would do some terrible things if the opportunity knocks. Sources from the Secret Service are saying that the threats have increased about 400% against Obama over the occurances against Bush. Top republicans silence is partly to blame.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 3:59 PM GMT
    coolarmydude said
    psferrari saidI'm not saying the article is entirely untrue, but I do have one question...SOURCES???????????

    Real Journalism is DEAD!


    Where were the real journalists?


    Journalism is dead. R.I.P.



    All this rhetoric coming from a faceless profile. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Hey psferrari (pussy-icon-face) take your phony tea party to the trailer park. People on here actually think.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 4:43 PM GMT
    While corporate consolidation has certainly limited access to real journalism, there are some places you can go, particularly online to find out what's really going on.

    The Nation

    Democracy Now

    Alternet

    These all lean left, but they haven't held any punches where Obama is concerned.
  • bottomline

    Posts: 331

    Oct 01, 2009 5:45 PM GMT
    Well first off this article is not even professionally written. Anybody can write anything and post it on the internet. And a military coup is not possible in every country. A certain government structure is required to pull a military coup off. Musharaf came to power through a military coup because Pakistan government at the time was vulnerable to a coup, but the government he set up right after was not.

    The United States Constitution names the President of the United States the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. armed forces.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 7:13 PM GMT
    I think psferrai and Southbeach are one of the same persons. They seem to be both ill informed and making no attempt to get informed
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 7:15 PM GMT
    The OP link makes a big issue about the US military officer's oath not containing the phrase, contained in the enlisted oath, to obey the orders of the President of the United States. But neither does an officer swear to obey the orders of those appointed over him or her, as do the enlisted ranks. Therefore, does an officer have to obey ANYONE? Here's the actual US officer's oath:

    "I, _____ , having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

    What the link omits is that all US Federal officers receive their commission from the President, who can withdraw it at any time. Enlisted military do not receive a commission from the President, and so their oath is different. Here is what a US officer's commission reads, with my underlining emphasis:

    The President of the United States of America

    To all who shall see these presents, greeting:

    Know Ye, that reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities of .................., I do appoint ["him" or "her"] a ["Second Lieutenant" or "Ensign'] in the [name of service] to rank as such from the .... day of ........ ...... This Officer will therefore carefully and diligently discharge the duties of the office to which appointed by doing and performing all manner of things thereunto belonging.

    And I do strictly charge and require those Officers and other personnel of lesser rank to render such obedience as is due an officer of this grade and position. And this Officer is to observe and follow such orders and directives, from time to time, as may be given by me, or the future President of the United States of America, or other Superior Officers acting in accordance with the laws of the United States of America.

    This commission is to continue in force during the pleasure of the President of the United States of America for the time being, under the provisions of those Public Laws relating to Officers of the Armed Forces of the United States of America and the component thereof in which this appointment is made.

    Done at the City of Washington, this .... day of ........ in the year of our Lord ................ and of the Independence of the United States of America the ..........
    By the President: [signature]


    [The commission is signed by the secretary of the relevant military department (or of Homeland Security for the Coast Guard) and attested by the officer in charge of personnel of the service concerned (e.g., Adjutant General of the Army, Chief of Naval Personnel, etc.)]

    Officers in the state National Guards receive a similar commission from their respective Governors. By virtue of Federal Recognition, they receive a second commission as US Federal Reserve Officers from the President, as above.

    The author in the OP link is either incredibly ignorant, or else being deliberately deceptive. And clearly trying to foment rebellion and disloyalty among the Officer Corps of the United States, in outright violation of their Officer's Commissions. This is the textbook definition of Treason.

    I am not spinning tales here or offering opinions, gentlemen; I know my profession. If someone is counseling US officers to rise up against their Commander in Chief, or even to disobey him, that is Treason, and subornation of mutiny. Plain & simple.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 7:38 PM GMT
    JakeBenson saidToo bad this never happened when Bush was president. Obama's kinda lama at being a president so far, but he's not terrible. Fuckin white racists.


    southbeach1500 said
    MadeNUSA saidI think psferrai and Southbeach are one of the same persons. They seem to be both ill informed and making no attempt to get informed


    Interestingly, I always thought you and jprichva might be the same person as well.


    And JakeBenson seems to think that Obama and the Dalai Lama are the same person.

    Personally, I think Madonna and Hans Werner Henze are the same person. You never see them together, do you?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 7:48 PM GMT
    While that piece is certainly interesting and in theory some of those points might have a modicum of merit, a military coup is, in my opinion, extremely unlikely. We have an impeachment process and the ability to take a few other steps before it ever came to a military coup. When I read op pieces like that it only reminds me that there are some very narrow-minded individuals in the world, and the internet has unfortunately given them the ability to share their ideas with a mass audience.

    I do not think very many members of the military would take part in such an event anyway, even if it were possible. Members of the military would certainly raise an eyebrow at the suggestion they're going to overthrow the President, their Commander in Chief.
  • bottomline

    Posts: 331

    Oct 01, 2009 8:18 PM GMT
    Red_Vespa saidThe OP link makes a big issue about the US military officer's oath not containing the phrase, contained in the enlisted oath, to obey the orders of the President of the United States. But neither does an officer swear to obey the orders of those appointed over him or her, as do the enlisted ranks. Therefore, does an officer have to obey ANYONE? Here's the actual US officer's oath:

    "I, _____ , having been appointed an officer in the Army of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

    What the link omits is that all US Federal officers receive their commission from the President, who can withdraw it at any time. Enlisted military do not receive a commission from the President, and so their oath is different. Here is what a US officer's commission reads, with my underlining emphasis:

    The President of the United States of America

    To all who shall see these presents, greeting:

    Know Ye, that reposing special trust and confidence in the patriotism, valor, fidelity and abilities of .................., I do appoint ["him" or "her"] a ["Second Lieutenant" or "Ensign'] in the [name of service] to rank as such from the .... day of ........ ...... This Officer will therefore carefully and diligently discharge the duties of the office to which appointed by doing and performing all manner of things thereunto belonging.

    And I do strictly charge and require those Officers and other personnel of lesser rank to render such obedience as is due an officer of this grade and position. And this Officer is to observe and follow such orders and directives, from time to time, as may be given by me, or the future President of the United States of America, or other Superior Officers acting in accordance with the laws of the United States of America.

    This commission is to continue in force during the pleasure of the President of the United States of America for the time being, under the provisions of those Public Laws relating to Officers of the Armed Forces of the United States of America and the component thereof in which this appointment is made.

    Done at the City of Washington, this .... day of ........ in the year of our Lord ................ and of the Independence of the United States of America the ..........
    By the President: [signature]


    [The commission is signed by the secretary of the relevant military department (or of Homeland Security for the Coast Guard) and attested by the officer in charge of personnel of the service concerned (e.g., Adjutant General of the Army, Chief of Naval Personnel, etc.)]

    Officers in the state National Guards receive a similar commission from their respective Governors. By virtue of Federal Recognition, they receive a second commission as US Federal Reserve Officers from the President, as above.

    The author in the OP link is either incredibly ignorant, or else being deliberately deceptive. And clearly trying to foment rebellion and disloyalty among the Officer Corps of the United States, in outright violation of their Officer's Commissions. This is the textbook definition of Treason.

    I am not spinning tales here or offering opinions, gentlemen; I know my profession. If someone is counseling US officers to rise up against their Commander in Chief, or even to disobey him, that is Treason, and subornation of mutiny. Plain & simple.



    I dint see how there is anything else to be said after this post. Thanks to Red_Vespa for posting it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 9:02 PM GMT
    jprichva said
    theatrengym said
    Personally, I think Madonna and Hans Werner Henze are the same person. You never see them together, do you?

    Isn't Henze pushing up daisies these days?


    I don't think so. I double checked before I posted and I found nothing to suggest that he's died. For example, a date of birth on the wikipedia page about him but no date of death.

    As far as I know, the composer of Rachel, la Cubana is not yet decomposing.

    icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 01, 2009 9:19 PM GMT
    jprichva said
    theatrengym said
    As far as I know, the composer of Rachel, la Cubana is not yet decomposing.

    icon_rolleyes.gif

    Don't make me repeat the old Beethoven joke. Just don't.


    I first heard it about Bach. Papa Johann, that is.