BOHICA! Weiner's Bill to Restrict GA

When you enlist in the US Armed Forces you swear to defend the Constitution
against all enemies foreign and domestic. Though it can surely be debateable
about all activity on foreign soil, I do agree with here at home. And here
at home is where that sacred document is constantly trampled on by leftist
and an out of control judicial system. But don't think I am just picking on
Democrats, because I for one feel the Patriot Act is the most Unpatriotic
Act I have ever heard of.
In Afghanistan our troops are protecting the Constitution because the
idiots that attacked us are imbedded there. Iraq is a toss up! HA Though we
were actually only in an official cease fire from the first Gulf War , and
Iraq did not want to follow their own agreements so we attacked them again.
However the First Gulf War was NOT RIGHT. First Kuwait is a kingdom , so we
can not use the defending democracy thing, and since we had no protectional
treaty with that kingdom it really was none of our biz! Alot of modern
Presidents have that problem of sending our troops were they should not be,
Republicans and Democrats. Myself I do not feel we should send US troops
anywhere that a formal Declaration Of War by Congress as established in the
Constitution has been passed.
The terrorists are definitely a threat to the US and our
Constitution..but the biggest enemies are the politicians that scare people
into thinking they have to take our freedoms to be safe from terrorists or
even crooks on our streets. just think we have a political party that
screams First Amendment rights whenever their side has anything to say ,
even when it is just a blatent lie. But they do not feel vets who speak out
against their side should have those same rights. This same bunch feels it
is necessary to ban weapons against the very fabric and heart of the Second
Amendment. I fear the leftist more than a rag headed suicide bomber!
And let us not forget The Constitution was not written in peacetime. Nor
should we forget that Abraham Lincoln was the first President to throw it
aside and declare "the first Presidential Powers Act". He had anyone against
the Union ( Abe's side of it) put in federal Prison with no charges being
filed and held indefinitely....he even had the entire MAryland legislature
put in prison because he was afraid they would vote to secede! I don't think
any President since FDR has actually asked for war the" Constitutional way".
So even in times of conflict our Constitution can be in danger from within
as well as a enemy on the outside.
Just things to ponder!
"Graham Shevlin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 18:10:36 -0400, "W P Dixon"
wrote:

Well Pete I have defended the Constitution have you? VET USMC
fighting in the armed forces does not necessarily equate to defending
the Constitution. The contents of the Constitution are not affected by
Americans fighting overseas. What ultimately impacts the Constitution
is what happens in peacetime here in the continental USA.

However the First Gulf War was NOT RIGHT. First Kuwait is a kingdom , so
we
can not use the defending democracy thing, and since we had no
protectional
treaty with that kingdom it really was none of our biz!
??????????????????????????????

wow! What a spin.

We went to free "Kuwait", because the legal rulers asked the U.N. to do so.
It was a U.N. action.

Or do you not agree with our participation in the U.N.?
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.762 / Virus Database: 510 - Release Date: 9/13/2004

Matter of fact I do not , this mess about the UN screwing us every chance
they get in Iraq is examples why. Oil for Food, Brie For Food,etc etc etc
"Morgans" wrote in message
...

However the First Gulf War was NOT RIGHT. First Kuwait is a kingdom , so
we
can not use the defending democracy thing, and since we had no
protectional
treaty with that kingdom it really was none of our biz!
??????????????????????????????

wow! What a spin.

We went to free "Kuwait", because the legal rulers asked the U.N. to do
so.
It was a U.N. action.

Or do you not agree with our participation in the U.N.?
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.762 / Virus Database: 510 - Release Date: 9/13/2004

And let us not forget The Constitution was not written in peacetime.

Actually it was. The US was not at war with anyone in 1788-9.

Actually it was drawn up in 1787, ratified in 1788. I should have phrased my
statement more correctly though. The meaning being that the Constitution was
conceieved by other documents such as The Articles Of Confederation, etc.
which was written in 1778 and lastly ratified by Maryland in 1781 if I
remember correctly. The Articles was like the Daddy of the Constitution
which the nation needed because the Articles did not give any purpose to a
Federal Government to defend the new States..not to mention it did not
include a President or a Court which The Constitution put in place. It sure
would have been a hard row to hoe if every state had to act in it's own
defense in time of invasion.
But yes you are in fact correct about "The Constitution" being a
peacetime document because The American Revolution had ended in 1783. I
should have cleared up my thinking of The Articles better , my apologies.
But I am sure we can all agree if there had not been a war to insure it that
the Constitution would not exist....not that one anyway, maybe years later
we would have gotten freedom from England without a fight?


"G EddieA95" wrote in message
...
And let us not forget The Constitution was not written in peacetime.

Actually it was. The US was not at war with anyone in 1788-9.

Date: 9/17/2004 6:07 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


However the First Gulf War was NOT RIGHT. First Kuwait is a kingdom , so
we
can not use the defending democracy thing, and since we had no
protectional
treaty with that kingdom it really was none of our biz!
??????????????????????????????

wow! What a spin.

We went to free "Kuwait", because the legal rulers asked the U.N. to do so.
It was a U.N. action.

Or do you not agree with our participation in the U.N.?
--
Jim in NC

To put things in perspective the UN has authorized war exactly twice: Korea and
Kuwait and neiter was resolved satisfactorily. As a matter of fact a technical
state of war exists to this day in Korea.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired