Everybody's talking about Martial Law.

[coloradodem2005]

Could these people legally do that just before an election? Especially if no major disaster like 9/11 or worse happens just before the elections?

Conspiracy theories abound here now. THis and Diebold. Diebold is truly a serious threat though.

What do you think the people would do if there was this kind of subversion?

[JailBush]

1. Legality doesn't mean a thing. How many laws have they broke already?

Any obvious subversion of the election process would obviously precipitate an enormous outpouring of outrage - probably a lot more than in 2000. But I think Republicans would just shrug it off. After all, who would expect U.S. citizens to mount a credible resistance?

[Vladhere]

27. the ravings of paranoids

who the hecks talking about marshall law? this "everyone" bs sounds like the delusion paranoid raving a psychotic.

[corporatewhore]

2. I went to miami where they

used 8.5 mill for the ftaa protests of the 87 bill to use against terrorists guess thats makes us what.Shit id believe it now people who were just walkin around were arrested. A 71 year old union retiree was arrested at gun point at the protests

[PissedOffPollyana]

20. Well, Florida is under martial law already.

J.E.B. signed an executive order on Sept. 7, 2001, declaring a state of emergency which has quietly been retained ever since. Guess that's how millions of dollars (8.5 aprox. I've read) from the 87B love-gift to Bush by the supine legislature were spent to treat dissenters like "combatants". Friends who were able to make it down there that Thursday told me it was terrifying and rather like a war zone, helicopters buzzing overhead, tanks and water cannons with police spraying chemical weaponry and rubber bullets on the crowd indiscriminantly.

That's a show I hope doesn't make it to anybody else's town!

[camero]

31. Yep, we are

!@#$%&* Jeb.

[tlcandie]

3. IMO this regime is here for the long haul ....

Especially after reading Greg Palast's most recent article about Baker taking care of finances for Iraq. They are becoming more bold and blatant about their lies, etc.

That tells me they don't care. If that is so, how can that be? To me that only means one thing...they are not even considering that they will leave office.

All they are doing is coming up with possible scenarios ahead of time and pushing through their laws to get things into place so that if/when these scenarios happen then they can do whatever is necessary to accomplish their goals.

Took them how many years to get here? They've arrived and they are making so much $$$ I can't keep up along with all their cronies why would they leave?

Once the $$$ starts dewindling, not sure that it will, then there's the power thing that they absolutely get off on, so I'm sorry to say I don't see them leaving via an election.

Martial law? I'm not sure what they have planned, but from what I've been reading one scenario is that it comes about due to a department of health regulation from something like what we are seeing now with this flu scare.

Next flu season could start in October.. and include SARS or something we've no clue what they have concoted...

EDIT for typos...

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

5. I have noticed that too. The lies are getting bolder and are

not even mentioned by anyone in power.
Very Soviet.

[PissedOffPollyana]

37. Well, the Reagan plan I read about...

... from what I recall (I think called Garden Party or something insidiously chipper like that) was planned to be enacted, if needed, through H&HS (with assistance from CDC) but more likely through FEMA. It is truly horrifying how much absolute control they could have in an instant, at the command of a handful of people and their say-so.

The plan even laid out color codes for detainees (who would preferably be taken at night, when they would be caught more off-guard and less likely to cause a scene for the neighbors). I forget now which was which, but one involved being sent to "camps" until they could decide what to do with them, most likely indefinite detention (for their own good and our safety, of course). The other involved brief detention if necessary, but leaned more toward a more permanent solution if you know what I mean.

The scary part is that with the performance of the media over the last few years particularly, the coverage would be all happy, warm, fuzzy and the wag would probably be that we are much better off and should feel lucky that we have a government that cares so much about our safety and well-being.
**wreeetch**

Oh, by the way, heard on the news the other day that flu is now a PANDEMIC... be afraid, be very afraid...

[Silverhair]

4. Only the "Chicken Littles" are in a flap over martial law.

Most of the martial law posters don't even know what they are talking about. They have some sort of image of the whole country in a lockdown with tanks and troops on every corner. None of those "Chicken Littles" understand how the military works, and why they don't have to worry about martial law. It just won't happen.
They aren't robots.

Bush can't just get out of bed one day and decide that DU is a pain in his rear so he's going to declare marial law and shut it down. Even if he did try to declare martial law, the order would not be carried out.

Are you aware of what the only thing, that for the life of our country, that has stopped the military from taking over? It is this: The military doesn't want to.

Nor would martial law mean a lockdown and soldiers everywhere. We don't have that many troops, and the gov't needs people to get to work. The economy can't be stopped without killing the country, so even under martial law - it would keep going. People would still go to work.

In fact, the average person would not be able to tell the difference. The ones called on to enforce marial law would be the same one called on to enforce current law - the civilian cops. The change would happen in the court system. If you ran afoul of the cops under martial law - you would have a very different court system than what you now enjoy. Punishments would change too.

And surveillence of the citizen would become really pervasive. Everybody would be expected to do their duty and tell the police of anything unusual or suspicious.

That would require at least the passive support of the population. They won't get it.

UNLESS - Something radically shocks the country. Not just another terrorist attack - but something big with fatalities in six figures.
In that case, the people will demand that something be done. And calling a conference at the UN to condemn the terrorists won't be what the public would have in mind.

[tlcandie]

7. LoL Silver ... You absolutely make me chuckle!!

Have a great night :D Chicken little here needs the covers over her head cuz she's very tired! :hi:

By all means don't check into Miami and all that went on there! :think:

Lockdown for this regime would be at the hands of Dyncorp, local polic or whoever THIS REGIME determines will be heading out into the streets to protect FREEDOM (them) against anarchist (us).

Research it yourself is the best way instead of listening to all of us!

[Silverhair]

8. Huge difference in the ability to apply overwhelming police

presence in a small area, (A few blocks of Miami, vs the entire nation.) Think logically, not emotionally. The country has weathered the type of problems of Miami before. Chicago of 68, Miami of 72, numberous race riots, Watts of 68?, etc etc. The country is still here and martial law didn't happen. The sky didn't fall.

I stand by what I said. The typical martial law poster has no idea what ACTUAL martial law really means.

I have seen all of this type stuff before - in the late 60's and early 70's. I heard all this martial law talk by people who had no idea what they were talking about then too.

I do know what I am talking about. Miami, at most, was a police riot. It wasn't martial law.

[corporatewhore]

15. It wasnt just at the protests but a long campaign

weeks before protests police were bullying local shop owners and residents about helping us and lending us space. They even bullied a church who was going to hold a workshop on freetrade and lodge some protestors.Alot of us who got there early woked with the local residents in talking about the disinformation the police had given them. People were picked off the streets days before protests and even after at a vigil for the prisoners

[Silverhair]

16. You are ignoring the difference in scale. It is fairly easy to

do that in one fairly small area. The entire country is a different matter. And dispite your hyperbole, none of you had to deal with a GENUINE martial law court system. You simply did not face GENUINE martial law.

The difference between what you faced and GENUINE martial law is like the difference between 3.2 beer and moonshine.

[rman]

17. "the military doesn't wan't to"

You'r probably correct.
Bush* doesn't yet have sufficient control over all those institutions he needs control over in order to establish tyranny. Control of the justice system is not compleet, the military is devided, as are the CIA and FBI. But then again, many important people in the military who were critical of Bush, have since been replaced. Intelligence officers critical of Bush get their cover blown or they get suicided.
I mean, he certainly is working on it.

And then there's the phenomena of 'civilian guard'; a fascist state needs a lot of police to keep things under control, yet a 'normal' state just doesn't have that many police (cause it isn't needed).
So the thing to do is to recruit civilians sympathetic to the tyrant, give them some training and guns and have m patrol the neighbourhood. Aka "brownshirts". For all i know preparations for this have started some time back. This would provide "the ability to apply overwhelming police" pretty much all over the nation.

[Silverhair]

23. it takes more than replacing some top officers and beauracrats...

to have that kind of control. Besides that, martial law is really about changes in the courts and legal system, but nobody here seems to understand that. Other posters are hung up on the idea that it means soldiers on the street corners.

[rman]

26. i don't think it matters much what people are hung up on,

People don't like the idea of Martial law regardless of what form exactly it takes. People don't believe it's for the better. Certainly not if it's because of some illegal war.
It doesn't matter much whether it's soldiers, police or brownshirts on the street corners.
Changes in the courts and legal system you say? Like the Patriot Act, and no more 4th amendment?
Bush is half-way there already.

[Silverhair]

33. Not even close. I have seen GENUINE martial law. n/t

[PissedOffPollyana]

24. I am well aware of what martial law is...

... and that it is indeed possible. Granted, it is not THAT imminent, but should not be ruled out as an option.

Let's think about how many people are just itching for an excuse. How many people floated death threats to M. Newdow, simply for wishing to return the Pledge to its original, inclusive state (without the god bit inserted in the 50s). We are a violent and irrational people, with a history of police brutality against groups of people that are seen as "undesirables". Dissenters have been painted as traitors and worse; I don't think it such a stretch to think that this could lead to large & symbolic actions that serve as an example to everyone else. They wouldn't need to bring their act to every town, just infer that they could. We are conditioned to accept fear by government decree; why would this be so different?

I had the "pleasure" of overhearing a group of police/security officers talking candidly about Miami FTAA protests while taking a smoke break outside during that time at a nearby shopping center. They were more than happy to crack skulls and were practically glowing over the whole thing. Anyone who thinks that nobody in military or law enforcement will lift a hand against other Americans is idealistic at best, in denial at worst.

I'm not putting up the sandbags or anything, but I'm not ruling it out either. I don't put anything past these bastards or those who serve their agenda.

[Silverhair]

25. Police tend strongly to be politically conservative, (Law & Order)

and protesters tend to be radical left and often unrulely. So, Yes, they would have been happy to get rough with a bunch of lefties. But that isn't martial law.

As I stated in another post. It is like comparing 3.2 beer with moonshine, and you had the 3.2 beer. GENUINE martial law is the moonshine.

[PissedOffPollyana]

34. Okay, true to that... but...

There are implications to the overwhelming focus on judiciary in this administration. I don't know that martial law, in the strictest sense of the word, would be possible with such expedience but does it really matter under what sort of judiciary (military or otherwise) they weave their magic? There is more than one way to oppress and these guys have the most in-depth playbook I've ever seen. They have perfected tactics all over the developing world through proxies and I think would have little hesitation toward at least something that looks a whole lot like martial law.

After a lot of reading of international documents and UN transcripts, I realized just how easily we've been able to keep the process at bay and do as they wished with virtually no impediments. I specialized, at that time, in Human Rights and had a very rude awakening about the mindset of America toward the sanctity of life and freedom. They simply work around the system by calling it something else, making a shift in the procedure that keeps it semantically off definition. "Enemy combatant" anyone?

Let's face it, these guys are all about doing one thing and spinning it another and the bulk of the populace is all about just blindly accepting. They have already 'disappeared' people and will use a martial court to try them (tribunal.. same diff.) away from public scrutiny. Part of that mechanism is already in place and whirring away. If PATRIOT II is any indication, they are nowhere near the ultimate destination. Hell, PATRIOT was all ready to go, right in time to capitalize on WTC. Can we be so cavalier to think that there are no other cards (or executive orders) up their collective sleeves? Where there is a will... there will be the 'true believers' to make it happen. If they want martial law, they shall have it; it's just up for argument how they would implement and what they would call it. I have no doubt the plans already exist and the excuse is merely a formality they need to creep it in, piece by piece to make us all feel like we are safer instead of locked down.

A rose by any other name would smell just as violently oppressive.

[camero]

9. He's right about all but one

Passive acceptance of the population. You can't say it'll never happen here. Because it can. With so many American just wanting to sit at home and wave flags and watch TV, they would easily be duped into Martial Law.

I remember when Baltimore first had the highest murder rates in the country when Schmoke was Mayor and people were crying out for the National Guard to patrol the streets.

And they said things like the Patriot Act could never happen here. Or Military tribunals. It happened.

It can happen here.

[Silverhair]

10. Those were in response to a shock.

I did leave open the possibility of martial law in response to a huge shock. 9-11 also produced a shock in the population, but not big enough for martial law, but big enough for the (Un)Patriot Act, and for the other things that happened. Just like Pearl Harbor produced the shock that made Americans inter Americans.

[camero]

11. It doesn't take as big a shock as you think

Never say never. We should at least be vigilant about that. I think one more attack with figures of 1000+ would make it happen because we are not used to that many deaths at one time on our soil. And the WWII generation is dieing off.

Or a public place where casualties are in the hundreds. 9/11 was more about symbols than casualties. It was part of the game plan but they more or less wanted to drop the veil of geographical invincibility.

[Silverhair]

13. You may be right. We agree in principle. I hope we never

find out, but somehow I think that eventually we will find out. Sooner or later a terrorist group is going to start thinking militarily instead of theatrically, and then we will be in real trouble. By theatrical thinking I mean that terrorists always hit targets for their symbolic value, instead of for the actual damage they could cause to the country.

[camero]

29. Me, niether

Maybe this is why Bush is not funding the Homeland Security Dept. like it should be. And our ports are way open to this.

[camero]

12. That was also just about street crime

What are people going to do when a Mall gets hit?

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

14. Forget a mall, how about a major sports event.

[camero]

28. Or that, yeah

That would definitely bring it about.

[Selwynn]

32. The military often carries out illegal orders without question.

"Bush can't just get out of bed one day and decide that DU is a pain in his rear so he's going to declare marial law and shut it down. Even if he did try to declare martial law, the order would not be carried out."

Says you. And that statement flies in the face of years of instances where the military has carried out the presidents orders no matter how heinous. By the way, before you get to comfortable in blowing thins like this off, I should remind you that COINTELPRO was a real thing - read up on it.

[rucky]

6. Bush isn't really sweatin' it, is he

n/t

[Lars39]

18. Jeb declared martial law in FL just days before 9-11,

and I don't believe it has been lifted. Gives a different oulook on the Miami demonstrations. :scared:

[Beaker]

21. not exactly.

martial law wasn't declared, or you would have noticed...the foundation was layed, but it never came to pass...and even if it had, it wouldn't be in effect now:

http://sun6.dms.state.fl.us/eog_new/eog/orders/2001/september/eo2001-261-09-07-01.html

...This Executive Order shall remain in full force and effect until the earlier of its revocation or June 30, 2003.

[Lars39]

22. I thought he had also signed a continuation.

It's been a while, but there was somebody here that stated Jeb had signed a continuation of the Executive Order so that it didn't sunset June 30. :shrug:
Thanks for finding that; what a foundation!

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. Everybody isn't talking about martial law

Only the hard core conspiracy theorists are.

[Iverson]

30. Too few are talking about marital law.

I never thought that I'd have to know much about the Posse Comitatus Act, but life doesn't always go as planned. My small understanding is that it has been weakened to the point of near-meaninglessness.

Also, there's some kind of military command post in Colorado that is a significant departure from anything we've done before. Gotta brush up on that.

We have indefinite detention without probable cause. Isn't that enough?

The shell of democracy remains intact so that those who see only the surface won't object.

[thisday]

35. i agree with iverson

declaring martial law would not be outside the realm of possi-
bility at all.

my union rep.(ILWU) was in florida for the F.T.A.A.and he
screened some photos he took.

the hundreds of military looking nat. guardsman or cops or
whatever they were had the whole vicinity and access to it
under absolute control.there were ranks of troops lining
the street as they approached the event,some had tanks of
pepper spray strapped to their back that could deliver a
powerful,constant flow of spray from a distance.

when the "fun" started, these troops acted like they had been
ordered to carry out their mission with extreme predjudice,
gassing,clubbing, spraying.

next step, machine guns.

[PissedOffPollyana]

39. Once again, right on Iverson!

I am nowhere near donning a tinfoil chappeau, but I read a damn lot and what I see makes me need to read even more just to get a grasp on what is going on beneath the veneer of the surface. We are dealing with some very insidious and power-mad people who have had decades to perfect their craft before bringing it stateside. If we are not as informed as we can be on what they are doing in our names and with our resources, we are not paying close enough attention.

Our government has at least one concentration camp, as well as people being held incommunicado for long stretches without a whiff of rights. They have made the assertion that they can, on the sayso of one person and a 2 page memo (with no evidence or anything that could be construed as factual) from some guy named Mobbs (apropos, no?), hold an American citizen without trial, without representation and without notification to family, etc. They have proposed that it might be nice if they could revoke citizenship upon the same whim, in an obvious effort to make it harder to justify legal recourse. Tell me, other than semantics, how does this differ from being "disappeared"? Answer; it doesn't. Who taught the death squads and the rest of the criminals who have utilized such tactics over the past few decades? Oh yeah, we did.

I know that most of us, including myself, would like to think that this sort of thing simply could not happen here. But then I think of the Haitians, Germans, Iranians, Iraqis, Argentinians, Chileans, Cambodians, Czechs, Laotians, etc. ... they also held that point of view at one point or another... then they learned a lesson in "never" they will _never_ forget.

As it is, we had a coup d'etat in 2000 and, as a country, we didn't seem to care. It was all about just getting the whole thing done with so we didn't have to pay attention anymore and could get back to TV and shopping. I have no doubt that they wil put a happy face on the thing and less doubt that most of the populace will just smile and go along. There is plenty of evidence to suggest that.

Oh, the Colorado thing, which they insist does not violate PC (nothing seems to anymore), is supposed to be a backup to Homeland Insecurity. They have talked about assistance to first responders and emergency backup for large scale policing. It is supposed to make us feel better that they, themselves, will not provide policing specifically. I will do a bit more reading and post a thread about what I find tomorrow. This is important aspect of where this administration may head as we move closer to 11/04 and possible ouster.

I'd hate to see the day when that shell starts cracking, but I cannot say that I will be surprised.

[sistersofmercy]

36. This stems from a remark Tommy Franks made in Cigar Aficionado

which was and I'm paraphrasing, "If there is another major attack on the US or its one of allies then martial law would be declared." Someone posted it about 2 weeks ago.

[theboss]

38. Clinton was going to use Y2K to declare martial law

That's honestly the only time I've heard anyone discussing martial law.

Here is my question to the paranoid among us:

We don't have enough troops to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan. There are about 1 Billion guns floating around this country. Who is going to enforce martial law and how long are they going to be alive to do it?