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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (336525)	5/6/2007 12:49:21 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573197

"As for permission to declare marital law for any reason whatsoever, that's at best a major exaggeration." No it isn't. He essentially can use the military for any reason whatsoever. "Allowing greater military participation in law enforcement and disaster relief isn't declaring martial law. " Semantics. When you use military as a domestic police force is the heart of martial law. Given that he has also has been given the power to over-ride local, state and national laws for any reason, then it is mere semantic quibbling to say he can't declare martial law for any reason. Its rather telling that you have to argue this point with Tim. Is there an organization of brownshirts in this country about which we don't know anything?

To: combjelly who wrote (336525)	5/26/2007 5:20:29 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573197

When you use military as a domestic police force is the heart of martial law. If you define having the military assist the police, but with no curfew, not "shoot on sight" policies, no general imposition of military control or reduction of freedom, as "martial law", then your using the term in a different way then most people would use it, and using it to describe something much less horrible, then what most people think of when they hear the term martial law.