>----- Original Message -----
>From: "mike larkin" <mike_larkin2001 at yahoo.com>
> > http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0348/mondo6.php
>
>
>==========================
>
>Hahahahahahahaha.
>
>Tiny groups of citizens non-conspiratorially questioned the Constitution
>after the A-bomb proved to be a success and 'we've' been militarizing ever
>since in order repeat mass casualty events--in other countries--all of
>which have been unraveling the so called 'fabric of our Constitution' for
>decades.
>
>They read Paul Samuelson at West Point too..........
>
>Ian
:) here's the original article:
For what it's worth - Lloyd
-------
Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack Friday, Nov. 21, 2003 Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.
Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the men¹s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado.
In the magazine¹s December edition, the former commander of the military¹s Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government.
Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11, Franks said that ³the worst thing that could happen² is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties.
If that happens, Franks said, ³... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we¹ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.²
Franks then offered ³in a practical sense² what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack.
³It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world it may be in the United States of America that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.²
Franks didn¹t speculate about how soon such an event might take place.
Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent.
But Franks¹ scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.
The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades in the Army.
Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for valor. Known as a ³soldier¹s general,² Franks made his mark as a top commander during the U.S.¹s successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in 1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Laden¹s al-Qaeda attacked the United States on Sept. 11.
Franks said that within hours of the attacks, he was given orders to prepare to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden.
Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including:
President Bush: ³As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having been appraised properly by those who would say he¹s not very smart. I find the contrary. I think he¹s very, very bright. And I suspect that he¹ll be judged as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively. Probably we¹ll think of him in years to come as an American hero.²
On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the president¹s decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein.
³I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent.
³If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country, and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our actions and orders as leaders in this country?²
The Pentagon¹s deck of cards: Asked how the Pentagon decided to put its most-wanted Iraqis on a set of playing cards, Franks explained its genesis. He recalled that when his staff identified the most notorious Iraqis the U.S. wanted to capture, ³it just turned out that the number happened to be about the same as a deck of cards. And so somebody said, ŒAha, this will be the ace of spades.¹²
Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner than Osama bin laden.
³The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I won¹t say that¹ll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable.²
Franks ended his interview with a less-than-optimistic note. ³It¹s not in the history of civilization for peace ever to reign. Never has in the history of man. ... I doubt that we¹ll ever have a time when the world will actually be at peace.²
* NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 <U.S.C.> Section 107, this material * is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a * prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and * educational purposes only. Provided by G2-Forward.