Will George Orwell's 1984 Become A Reality In 2004?

Chuck Baldwin Ministries ^ | 12-30-03 | Baldwin, Chuck

[cynicom]

I do not like Franks. However, I suspect he is speaking of what the Pentagon has in contingency plans. There are many such plans that we would not like.

[Jackson Brown]

This is just plain NUTS. He takes Tommy Franks statement about an attack by WMDs, which could be extreme enough to warrant martial law, and THEN goes directly to the conclusion that the next terrorist attack means the end of the republic with NO qualifiers whatsoever.

He also MIS-uses the Benjamin Franklin just like 99% of all others who bring it up when it does NOT apply and is not what Franklin meant.

When your talking about a condition so grave that Martial law would be necessary, it would be more about the temporary inconveniencing of liberties for (hopefully) permanent survival.

Franklin's entire adult life was spent writing laws to enhance security, at the expense of liberty...thus the "rule of law" instead of anarchy".

Also, I am very sure that a hit equal to 9/11 would not bring martial law. An undetermined attack by WMDs can be a completely different thing.

Now who can REALLY answer how bad an attack it would take?

Not this dweeb.

[prairiebreeze]

Chuck Baldwin needs to take a chill pill. Or a thorazine suppository.

Prairie

[sergeantdave]

Go buy some private property that's been stolen by the federal government through the Endangered Species Act and designated a de-facto government nature preserve by blood and soil cult worshippers who infiltrated federal natural resource agencies. Owners of these fascist land parcels are under severe development restrictions and must beg government bureaucrats for permission to use their land.

Now go cut down trees, dig up the land and fill the swamps.

Then come back and tell us what constitutional rights protected you from getting arrested, harrassed, fined, property seized and maybe thrown in prison.

We are about 2 inches from seeing the entire constitution thrown in the garbage can. A suspension of the constitution is not only a possibility, it's an ongoing process, bit by bit, piece by piece.

[Miss Marple]

The Endangered Species and Wetlands Acts are travesties, which should be reveresed.

However, many Americans are now aware of the problems with these laws and are working to have them changed.

Those acts are not done in the name of fighting terorism. They were passed to save the environment, and well-meaning people didn't realize how they would be abused. It is up to us to get them changed.

[Ramius]

Rightly put.

A significant WMD attack, say... a nuclear detonation on a ship in a major port city, that results in millions of casualties, AND then results in the temporary imposition of martial law in the region so that there might be SOME semblance of order... this is a far cry from the death of the constitution. Far from it. It is entirely within the constitutional powers of the President.

That's a long way from some bogey-man fear of a "military" government "taking over" the U.S.

[sergeantdave]

Agreed.

The point of the story is that the government has already installed a quasi-military force to carry out compliance with unconstitutional dictates.

A man not far from me spent decades and hundreds of thousands of dollars creating a nature preserve on his property. Because he didn't comply with some asinine bureaucratic demand, he was driven off his land at the point of a government gun. His land was seized by the corrupt fascist court and now he's a fugitive living in another state.

For him the constitution was suspended and the orders were carried out by the goosesteppers in the quasi-military.

[ladyinred]

Who is this guy that you post his bashing of the President so often? I have never heard of him before, and not sure I wish to!

[SkyRat]

You haven't seen half of it.

Check out the DARPA site and browse through their project files. Terminator is old compared to the stuff they dream up.

[ladyinred]

I have not noticed living in this so called Police State I keep reading about all of the time around here! Either I am a law abiding citizen, or I am not worth the police or government dealing with one or the other!

[tbpiper]

Yes.

No.

[dr_who_2]

Next year? No. Twenty years from now? Depends on 2004.

[Dog Anchor]

"President G.W. Bush, Attorney General John Ashcroft, and Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge, in concert with a Republican majority in Congress, have put in place a massive police state apparatus capable of enforcing martial law in a moment's notice. Furthermore, it appears that these leaders are more than willing to actually enact such a move."

---

Sound familiar folks?

[SkyRat]

Speaking of Big Brother....

Look what I found

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1048468/posts

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Actually, I was being sarcastic, poking fun at Dane.

I've read this elsewhere with better suporting information.

We're only a major crisis away from tyrrany, but we've been that way for a decade.

[mtbopfuyn]

One word - hogwash.

[SLB]

However, many Americans are now aware of the problems with these laws and are working to have them changed.

I certainly hope you are not holding your breath on this. Would hate to see you turn purple. The so called conservatives in congress are NOT going to turn these laws around.

Chuck Baldwin might be on the fringe to your line of thought, but is it not better to be safe than sorry? I would much rather have a little breathing room from less governemnt now, than have to suffer through the repealing of these laws/regulations.

[Miss Marple]

"....Better to be safe than sorry?"

Ah, but what are we to be safe FROM? I am often told that I am sacrificing freedom for security. You just demonstrated that you prefer safety as well.

You fear a massive government. Right now, I fear terrorists and anarchists more.

I don't lose sleep over this issue. Others do.

Write your congressman and express your concern.

[John O]

I actually don't think it's so nutty. If the US got hit with a couple more serious attacks, I think people would scramble for security.

I strongly disagree. The American people will be scrambling for revenge.

Moslems in this country will be exterminated without thought. Mosques and islamic buildings firebombed and survivors destroyed as they try to exit.

The call will arise from millions of American voices to destroy mecca, medina, and all the arab capitals and major cities.

The word "moslem" will be met with more hatred and derision than the words nip and kraut ever did during WWII.

We are a peaceful and peace loving people but if someone messes with us they will die. The American people had no problem with nuking two japanese cities. We would have done more if needed. We'll be all too eager to nuke the moslem menace out of existence.