Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (119851)	6/13/2005 2:49:01 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793690

Now, wouldn't that qualify as 'losing the Constitution' for those affected? The President is authorized to do that under the Constitution, no? Which means the Constitution would be alive and well and functioning, even if temporarily in a somewhat altered state. Now, if the whole country were put under martial law and the SOBs in power got to liking it that way and opted not to restore normal operations once the emergency had passed, then one could say the Constitution was lost. But then it would have been the SOBs who did it, not the terrorists. Terrorism was only the trigger. You know, we don't have the experience with martial law to know how things play out, but I'd bet that the normal institutions would continue to function to the extent that anything functioned. Somehow I can't imagine the military taking over the running of family court. If the infrastructure were too badly damaged, survivors would just go elsewhere, where martial law was not in place.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (119851)	6/13/2005 7:03:18 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793690

Yes, Nadine...My thoughts were along those lines....And one can visualize what might happen from there as well. If communications lines are down throughout the country, and the military is scattered all over the world....or even perhaps many of the military and citizens dead from whatever type of nuke or bio attack....Well, then, who is in charge? These are serious issues, and thoughts. Many in America haven't considered them I don't think. Too many don't even think we are really in a 'war'... They have forgotten 9-11 and the words of the radical Islamists telling us what their intent is... In my mind, the radical Islamists aren't the only problem we are dealing with...we are dealing with the nations who could and do fund them. Iraq under Saddam was certainly one of them....large amount of funds, and access to planes, ships, etc that could potentially cause a good deal of damage to the US... But, it is much easier to put one's head in the sand and not even consider thoughts like that, isn't it? If we lose a city, the President will declare martial law and suspend habeas corpus. Not much choice about it; if the institutions of civil governance have been destroyed, you must go with the army. Now, wouldn't that qualify as 'losing the Constitution' for those affected?