Skip to comments.
Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack
News Max.Com ^
| 11-21-03
Posted on 11/20/2003 5:14:53 PM PST by hope
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 401-415 next last
To: hope
What is so sad about this is that it will take something like this to get serious about home security. Why won't they close the borders? Why are they waiting? Something like Franks is talking about can be avoided if they will just act!
To: Eastbound
The fact that the islamo-terrorists are now even killing Muslims should be proof enough. Muslims are badly in need of a wake-up call. Islamo-crazies are not their friend, nor are they of Islam.
To: hope; Travis McGee; archy
To: NittanyLion
I watched some constitutional scholars give testimony to a Congressional committee a few weeks ago about what the constitution says about the line of succession. They basically all said that this is a constitutional disaster waiting to happen. It has been addressed then changed a lot of times. But there's a lot of ambiguity there now. There could easily be a scramble for the presidency. Very frightening stuff.
344
posted on
11/21/2003 12:19:46 PM PST
by
twigs
To: Cvengr
Please see Post #299.
Regards,
Calamari
To: Prodigal Son
Who's the other one (besides Dean)?
Well, I am thinking of Clark as a viable candidate. I am probably wrong.
346
posted on
11/21/2003 12:40:11 PM PST
by
bluejay
To: visualops
Which 2 candidates have said they would suspend the Constitution [under certain circumstances]? Franks is speculating on a given scenario, not on what his personal actions would be, and he's not running for President. I don't know his party affiliation but I doubt he's a Dem.
Sorry, my mistake - I must be watching too much primary coverage. I thought the column referred to Clark.
347
posted on
11/21/2003 12:49:13 PM PST
by
bluejay
To: Happy2BMe
348
posted on
11/21/2003 12:54:24 PM PST
by
MeekOneGOP
(http://richard.meek.home.comcast.net/SorosClintoon.JPG)
To: Normal4me
I read this as to mean the citizens would bare arms to protect our country.I don't know how tank-tops will help. ;-)
Seriously, there will be a substantial number who will bear arms to defend the Constitution, while another faction(the larger one) will be wailing for protection at all costs, freedom be damned. The hopeful part of that scenerio will be that the faction who want freedom, will be the better armed one, and will get it's way.
349
posted on
11/21/2003 1:16:34 PM PST
by
StriperSniper
(The "mainstream" media is a left bank oxbow lake.)
To: StriperSniper
Heh...happy hour typo. :-)
To: Normal4me
Heh...happy hour typo. :-)Have one for me! ;-)
351
posted on
11/21/2003 1:44:19 PM PST
by
StriperSniper
(The "mainstream" media is a left bank oxbow lake.)
bump for further discussion
352
posted on
11/21/2003 3:31:32 PM PST
by
Prodigal Son
("Fundamentalist Left". It's a great meme. Spread it.)
To: B4Ranch
My kids aren't over 45.
353
posted on
11/21/2003 3:53:13 PM PST
by
visualops
(Nothing is fool-proof to a talented fool.)
To: bluejay
Still, have any of the Dem candidates said they would do any such thing? I would think that would be the last thing they would say, given how much they like calling Bush and the Republicans the militaristic war-mongering fascists who are going to declare martial law and take away all your rights.
354
posted on
11/21/2003 3:57:05 PM PST
by
visualops
(Nothing is fool-proof to a talented fool.)
To: visualops
Still, have any of the Dem candidates said they would do any such thing? I would think that would be the last thing they would say, given how much they like calling Bush and the Republicans the militaristic war-mongering fascists who are going to declare martial law and take away all your rights.
I can well believe that a Democrat could do some thing like this. Take a look at today's Opinion Journal. They have an excerpt from a column published in Hawaii's Star Bulletin. The column ends with a statement that certain things should not be decided by a democratic vote but by a judicial fiat. You are probably right - a Democrat would not suspend the Constitution in order to install a military government. A modern Democrat could, however, suspend (or at least bypass) the Constitution in order to install a government by well-informed and well-meaning intellectuals.
355
posted on
11/21/2003 4:19:29 PM PST
by
bluejay
To: visualops
#326
356
posted on
11/21/2003 4:24:22 PM PST
by
B4Ranch
(Wave your flag, dont waive your rights!)
Comment #357 Removed by Moderator
Comment #358 Removed by Moderator
To: Myrddin
All soldiers vow to defend the constitution.
To: txflake
"Military men don't typically publicly entertain such thoughts unless they're quite sure it's possible or probable.
I think he's trying to warn us, and this scares me."
good point. I just want to get through 2003. I think that'll be a sign that the enemy is reeling. they want to hit us this year. that asshole in Gaza has been predicting it; a lot of plugged in enemy types have been jawing about popping us hard this year.
Musharref started conditioning his people to the notion that part of their country could be looking at some serious bombing from the combined armed forces of the USA today. Something's been up for a while. We get about .02% of what is really happening.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 401-415 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson