Thread: Martial Law is Treason. Question Rep. Brad Sherman

Yes, that is a U.S. congressman, and yes, he is referring to treason, which is what martial law is in the United States. In this Youtube video. We don't do martial law. The Constitution provides only for the suspension of habeas corpus, by a vote in the legislature, and nothing else. Posse Comitatus from just after the Civil War bars the use of regular military, as opposed to national guard, to quell civil disturbance. This is precisely why the Founders didn't want "standing armies." They knew that the first thing on the minds of tyrants is to turn them against their own people.

That congressman, Brad Sherman is saying [b]a few members were even told that there would be Martial Law in America if we voted “Noâ€

I thought martial law was of the last resort, not a manipulative tactic to use against people. Maybe I'm stupid, but I thought martial law was declared by the president......not congress to bully a vote.

A large portion of those so-called "innocent" prisoners were later captured again or killed on the battlefield. The people screaming about waterboarding could care less about the prisoners. It's just another piece of political warfare and political correctness. Once you seen a video of a beheading, it's difficult to have sympathy for someone being waterboarded, which is purely mental and your head remains intact.

If this country gets blown to smithareens, it will be because of political correctness and political partisanship.

We've already went through this "mistreatment" in 2004, when all those soldiers were brought up on charges. As far as impeaching Bush, it's a dead-end, the Iraq war was illegal whether people like it or not. Everybody from the Clintons to the Kennedys concurred that Sadaam had WMDs. Sadaam violated the "cease fire" of the first war as well as 17-18 UN resolutions. This war is a continuation of the first war. Threatening to indict Bush is nothing but political pandering.

It is clear that Speaker Pelosi is not qualified to preside over this unfolding rebirth of the republic. Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. And impeach Nancy Pelosi.

It is too late to impeach anyone, but I think a treason trial or two is in order.

These guys in our Congress and Executive Branch are no better than the MS13 gang members. They are all corrupt, self serving, deceiptful and dedicated to the destruction of the United States of America... and folks... we elected them !!!

And now the very military we pay for in our payroll taxes each month has been dispatched to the US to shut out mouths, and drive us into prisons if we object to anything King George and Queen Pelosi instruct us to do.

Originally Posted by vortex

It is clear that Speaker Pelosi is not qualified to preside over this unfolding rebirth of the republic. Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. And impeach Nancy Pelosi.

It is too late to impeach anyone, but I think a treason trial or two is in order.

If we can't even get an impeachment hearing how are we going to get a treason trial? Without an impeachment Bush can pardon himself pre-emptively, and everyone in his administration, for any charges that MIGHT come up. But pardons aren't allowed, legally, if an impeachment hearing has been declared. That's one of the strongest arguments for it, whether it comes to a senate trial or not. As far as it being too late, Clinton was impeached on December 16th and his senate trial was Jan. 8th. There is plenty of time to give the administration a swift kick in the rear before it departs.

A large portion of those so-called "innocent" prisoners were later captured again or killed on the battlefield.

Well no wonder. If you torture someone who is innocent you can't be surprised if they now turn out to hate you even if they didn't before. That's just human nature. Anyway I'm not worried about guilty prisoners, but the ones who are scooped up by the warlords for the bounty. This is from an article in the Washington Monthly

The basic message from these four pieces is that the evidence against an awful lot of the Guantanamo prisoners isn't just weak, it's known to be flatly false. For example, here's an account of Mohammed al-Tumani, a prisoner who was lucky enough to be assigned a "personal representative" who discovered that his primary accuser was a busy man indeed:

Tumani's enterprising representative looked at the classified evidence against the Syrian youth and found that just one man — the aforementioned accuser — had placed Tumani at the terrorist training camp. And he had placed Tumani there three months before the teenager had even entered Afghanistan. The curious U.S. officer pulled the classified file of the accuser, saw that he had accused 60 men, and, suddenly skeptical, pulled the files of every detainee the accuser had placed at the one training camp. None of the men had been in Afghanistan at the time the accuser said he saw them at the camp.

The tribunal declared Tumani an enemy combatant anyway.

The problem is too many people think the reality is the show "24", which is well-made and keeps people thinking that torture is keeping us one step ahead of a terrorist attack. That's not what is happening. It's more like the Keystone Cops, and we're going to pay for the hatred it generates.

I'm against torturing a room full of people on the off-chance somebody knows something. It's just not American. And once it starts they start blabbering crazy, wild things just to tell you what you want to hear.