Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 10:45 AM
Original message |
Resolved: no member of the executive, legislative or judicial branch |
|
of the government, or any civil servant, or any contractor, or any individual or corporation may subvert the statutory laws of the United States or its Constitution under the guise of "National Security".
If such illegal activity does occur, any and all parties who report such occurances to the media or a public servant who has oversight capacity, and the media and the public servant with oversight capabilites themselves shall be held harmless and not subject to any civil or criminal penalties for reporting the criminal use of "National Security".
How about something like that?
|
ayeshahaqqiqa
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 11:09 AM
Response to Original message |
|
Now if only we could get the idea out to people.
|
Inland
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 11:14 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Set up the Department of Redundancy Department to enforce it. |
|
All you are saying is, "all those laws we passed? We meant those. If we wanted a national security loophole, we would have written one, and when the day comes that we want the president to have any function beyond executing the laws passed by Congress, we'll rewrite the constitution."
|
Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. I disagree - there is a Catch-22 in place right this minute |
|
There appears to be a number of people who recognized the illegality of what was going on in the NSA, but they were effectively muzzled by the threat that they would be prosecuted for violating National Security if they talked.
"National Security" is the big rug the bad guys want to sweep all their disreputable dealings under and we have to find some kind of workable way to prevent this from happening.
|
TahitiNut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 11:16 AM
Response to Original message |
3. Moreover, all federal employees must be subject to the CFR. |
Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
TahitiNut
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 02:11 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Code of Federal Regulations |
bigtree
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 11:36 AM
Response to Original message |
4. I think that's the point of our protests now. Congress has only to act. |
|
Thomas Jefferson had no sympathy for a federal government which had violated its compact with the governed. He asserted that, "The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by compact, under the style and title of the Constitution of the United States, and of certain amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for general purposes, delegated to that government certain powers."
He wrote in opposition to the Alien and Sedition laws that, ". . . whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void and of no effect."
|
Phoebe Loosinhouse
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-01-06 03:52 PM
Response to Original message |
8. hey folks, we really do need a law that says "National Security" |
|
cannot be just a phrase that is slung around when the bad guys want to shield their activities. This should be part of the broader discussion.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:27 AM
Response to Original message |