<A federal energy policy: can it happen here? The Oil Drum Updated World Oil Forecasts, including Saudi Arabia>
<DrumBeat: August 4, 2007 DrumBeat DrumBeat: August 7, 2007>

146 comments on DrumBeat: August 5, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version

Gilgamesh on August 5, 2007 - 12:12pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

so now dissent about 2 countries is effectivley stopped

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dragonfly41 on August 5, 2007 - 8:33pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Why doesn't Bush just pass an Executive Order that says "Anyone that does not think what I think, is going to be hunted down and jailed/tortured"? It would save him time instead of passing all these "little" Executive Orders.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Dryki on August 6, 2007 - 11:18am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I like the way it also covers spouses and dependent children. Nice touch - leave no bit of the Constitution behind. [I don't recall this in previous Edict - was it there?]

The United States Constitution, Article I, section IX, 3, provides that no bill of attainder or ex post facto law shall be passed; bills of attainder were abolished in the United Kingdom in 1870.

cfm in Gray, ME

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TrueKaiser on August 5, 2007 - 3:06pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

you would think that wouldn't you? but no thats not what they will use it for. Crushing all dissent by using this would be too obvious of a power grab and would be extremely counter-productive. The military industrial complex as well as the current handlers of bush learned this lesson during Vietnam. No what they are doing is slightly more complex but very simple to understand. they will let small scale dissent flourish under their watchful eye of course. though when a group of these dissenters start to make traction thats when they act, with this order and the one about iraq they can effectively shut these operations down. When doing so they will of course not state the real reason, they will say they were terrorist or some such thing but the effect is the same.

They don't even have to hide this any further then a simple lie as to the reason of any of the required raids. Anyone else in the dissenting crowd would be even further marginalized by both factions in their own group and the public at large if they tried to tell the truth. Mainly because it is hard to believe a so called free and democratic country could practice tactics, the same kind of tactics used by nations many of us were taught as we grew up were evil. Remember only small lies need protection, the big ones protect themselves.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Gilgamesh on August 5, 2007 - 6:02pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

so breed dissent with the system but prevent the people from expressing it to their elected officials!

hooray fascism.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Noizette on August 6, 2007 - 10:00am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Dissent has to find a legitimate support, has to have some validation in the media, otherwise ppl might riot.

If mild dissenters or questioners or grumps are ‘represented’ by the Dems, by some TV shows, commentators, pundits, they can nod and say, right on, and feel they are still part of the total fabric of the US, their pov is out there in the public space, legitimate. This defangs them completely and keeps them quiet, buying charcoal for the BBQ, debating about supporting Hillary C or Obama - a *lot* to discuss over the beers and steaks.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
auntiegrav on August 6, 2007 - 8:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Not to mention that any active dissenters are easily tagged if they join groups, so that disinformation campaigns and false-flag infiltrators can get them into trouble and separated from the larger group quite quickly. If someone starts a "Democrats for Death" group, then an undercover agent will join and offer the tools to get them into 'proper' trouble, when otherwise, they might have slowly educated people to stand up for themselves.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
GLT149 on August 5, 2007 - 6:16pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Speculation Alert: The Republicans are sure to lose the White House in 2008, unless they employ extraordinary means to win the election. One of those tactics may be the use of this EO, in combinations with others, to pick off one or more of the prominent democratic grassroots organizations such as moveon.org or kos. Their assets would be taken or frozen and the MSM would brand them supporters of terrorism. By branding them terrorist supporters, any presidential candidate would also be tainted and excoriated by most of the MSM as well. Such a tactic could have the effect of swaying some independent voters to the Republicans who would otherwise have voted Democratic.

This seems more logical to me than the theory that a catastrophe will be engineered to justify imposition of martial law under these EOs. Martial law would be too disruptive to business interests. They've got enough on their hands with the credit and mortgage debacle.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Greg Hunter on August 5, 2007 - 7:25pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I agree with the slow erosion as I suspect The Patriot Act powers will be used to track down criminals that the public will not care that their rights were violated. I am wondering if the original Pedophile and high level drug prosecutions will be used to get law enforcement and the public to accept this type of invasion of privacy.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

146 comments on DrumBeat: August 5, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Show without comments | PDF version