The Ugly Specter Of Martial Law

The government is even planning to buy off the loyalty of the troops with a Christmas bonus this year -- January's salary a month early. Gee, I wonder why? Could it be the government is worried about how checks might be distributed in the dark? Or is it a form of coercion to ensure troops show up for work for which they have already been paid to perform?

-- Mr. Nugget (nugbuttet@BetterMousetrap.com), April 10, 1999

Answers

Reporting doesn't get any finer than this. Mr. Farrah leaves out no details!

-- Mr. Nugget (nugbuttet@BetterMousetrap.com), April 10, 1999.

Minus the hysteria, we're left with an interesting question: Should those in government whose responsibility it is to control possibly serious social unrest, have contingency plans just in case? If contingency plans are a good idea, is it better to start making them well in advance of their necessity, or better to risk losing control in a chaotic situation? As a people, do we prefer rioting and looting to safety and organization?

Wait! wait! these are the *wrong* questions. I've got it now! The evil government is out to control us. Yep, that's it.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 10, 1999.

I agree Flint. Martial law will seem like manna from heaven to those in the worst affected large cities. The only question is will there be enough military personnel to maintain law and order.

-- a (a@a.a), April 10, 1999.

Flint -- 20/20 did an hour-long program on the refugees last night. Over and over they pointed out that the refugees had been living basically the same lives that Americans do. (I didn't see them do this for the Rwandan refugees...)

Isn't it possible that these images of 'regular' people living in chaos will be used to persuade Americans to accept temporary martial law just before the century rollover? To scare Americans into going along with it for at least as long as it takes to see what types of computer problems do crop up?

-- shy ann (shy@really.shy), April 10, 1999.

While there are plenty of articles posted about martial law, from Gary North to WorldNetDaily, the *Guard* actually has their own page:

www.ngaus.org/ngmag/main199.htm

-- Whetherman (whetherman@storm.warning), April 10, 1999.

do the math guys:

600,000 active duty military minus deployed forces = what? c.200,000 actually available in CONUS.

plus 500,000 National Guard.

comes to a grand total of 700,000 additional bodies to use for law enforcement / imposition of martial law.

NYC metro area has in excess of 20,000 cops already - to institute absolute martial law figure they'd have to be reinforced by at least a factor of 5 (counting support personnel) or require an additional 100,000 troops in support.

okay, so they manage to institute martial law in the seven largest metropolitan areas. What happens to the rest of the country.

as to the question concerning pay: they'll pay the troops early for the same reason that the government contributes to family housing for married soldiers - because troops are better able to concentrate on the job at hand, when they know that their families are being taken care of.

Arlin Adams

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), April 10, 1999.

shy ann:

If you were in charge, how would you handle this? Martial law is invariably reactive -- not imposed until it's pretty clearly necessary. But it must be imposed very quickly in that case, since mobs and riots form spontaneously and spread rapidly. That means the enforcers of martial law must be well staged, on the spot and with deployment plans ready.

That's a tricky balancing act for something very unusual. We accept neighborhood fire houses, and firemen always at the ready because quick response is crucial when a fire breaks out. If you were in charge of martial law, you'd need to deal with public reaction to military forces more or less conspicuously stationed at the ready. For most ordinary citizens, this presence might be comforting, and for rioters, it might prove good discouragement. And then you have the likes of Farah and the venomous government-haters seen often on this forum. Not an easy situation to manage.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 10, 1999.

So then, could it be true??? These reported sightings, in the wilderness of the west, of huge new compounds, complete with razorwire fencing, barracks, field hospitals, etc.? The unmarked, or is that UNmarked, military machinery discovered in various out-of-the-way small towns throught the west? The black helicopters raids in various cities?? The road sign tarps with 'closed by military' accidently discovered in California? The Give-a way of our National Parks by exectuive order! The documented coverup or "SPIN", even as recently as yesterdays "drill" by NERC?? {Link here today) I'm extremely impressed by some of the folks here who continue to insist on bump-in-the-road senerio. I think I will call them NEROites. But personally I ain"t fiddlin' around.

-- spun@lright (mikeymac@uswest.net), April 10, 1999.

I can think of little which seems more horrific than the imposition of martial law in this republic. I know it has happened before, and it may well happen again. Some, or perhaps a majority, might welcome it. Circumstances might make it semm necessary, or even unavoidable. But it is an excess, perhaps only matched or exceeded by the excesses of those who behave in such a fashion as to make it seem necessary. I ask that you remember some of the previous statements of the sitting president, something about "when there's too much freedom, you have to take steps to limit it." Consider the possibilities of martial law under this administration, and it SHOULD concern you.

Of course, Flint will be happy if the trains run on time... .

-- (li'ldog@stillontheporch.com), April 10, 1999.

Martial Law will not be a good situation. The Constitution will be suspended, for 6 months at least, and replaced with Martial Rules. The chain of command will move all the way down to local state police and city/town police, who will operate under these orders. People will be ordered around at the will of the *police* and any and all goods, stockpiles, vehicles, food, gas, generators, etc, etc, can and will be confiscated if they feel they have a larger need for it. There will be no court order required to enter any building or dwelling, and anyone who gets in the way or refuses to cooperate will be arrested.

-- Whetherman (whetherman@storm.warning), April 10, 1999.

"The National Guard is being required to mobilize without the use of telephones, radio or television to get the word out. Sounds like Washington is expecting the worst." (snip)

This is from Jan. , I seem to remeber that the troops are not going to mobilize. It's a communication drill. Kind of like what NERC had the power co.'s do yesterday.

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), April 10, 1999.

Yes, that's right, it was to be a drill for communications testing. They are planning to use HF radio for communicating between all units nationwide, in case of interruption of current systems. HF radio would only require a generator or battery pack at each outpost. But of course they need to test this plan out and solve any glitches. They would not be going to all this trouble if they felt confident that there would be no major interruption of power or phones.

-- Whetherman (whetherman@storm.warning), April 10, 1999.

Whetherman:

The original NERC drill document implied that such drills should be a normal part of operations. It's always wise to be prepared for emergencies. Contingency plans are for *contingencies*. These are things we can't predict, and don't necessarily expect. For most of us, preparations are contingency plans. They are insurance. Most of us do a lot of things just in case. Not because we expect problems, but becuase we want to be ready if problems arise.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 10, 1999.

Right Flint, I should have been more specific. I was actually commenting on the National Guard HF radio plan. And it certainly is proper to have such a contingency plan.

-- Whetherman (whetherman@storm.warning), April 10, 1999.

Here are two of the articles from last January:

The Ugly Specter of Martial Law .....Joseph Farah
the Ugly Specter of Martial Law

y2k and the National Guard ...... Joseph Farah
y2k and the National Guard

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), April 10, 1999.

Flint implies that the idea that "government is evil" is false, and an extreme point of view. But isn't it the recognition of government as an, albeit necessary, evil, that inspired the principle of "balance of powers?" Our "republic" is a de facto empire. Look at Rome. It's hard not to see the transition from Republic to Empire as inevitable. Read "Whetherman's" post about the realities of police rule. That's an everyday way of life in much of the world. It CAN happen here. And resistance with shotguns and deer-rifles against microwaves and helocopter gunships will only add another "terrorist threat" for them to justify their authoritarian violence with. It's over. We fell asleep at the wheel a long time ago, and it's over. There might be a nasty civil war about it, if I've underestimated potential resistance. But it looks pretty over to me. Maybe democracy will have it's day again in a thousand years. Maybe not. But the fact is, most people are more concerned about whether their favorite sitcom will still be playing in the New Order, than whether they'll be able to vote or speak their mind in public.

If you want to see the kind of world that's coming, read Brave New World. Or watch "Matrix." It's a socialist hive. It too, will come to an end, but it will be a long wait.

Dano

-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), April 10, 1999.

Just a Thought!!

My local State is also going to pay all their employees & pensioners for January 2000 in December 1999.

With respect,am I to infer that it is to prevent a strike by employees or civil unrest from the grey panther brigade

OR

could it be that the Council haven't got complete faith in their bank operating as normal ??

-- Chris (griffen@globalnet.co.uk), April 10, 1999.

Dano,

"But isn't it the recognition of government as an, albeit necessary, evil, that inspired the principle of "balance of powers?"

No doubt dude, our founding fathers told we the people it was our DUTY to babysit our leaders & to keep them in line.

Although I don't really agree with the rest of your post. I don't think it's too late YET. We still have a VOICE. We the people still have more POWER than we realize.

We need to be UNITED, in order to be most effectively heard.

BTW--- back on topic....does there have to be Martial Law in order to call out the National Guard? Why is it assumed that this is the case? If the power went down in certain inner city areas, I for one would like to see the National Guard assisting local police. This would protect many. This is one of the things I gladly spend my tax dollars upon. If certain *problems* are handled quickly, I would think these things would be easier to contain.

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), April 10, 1999.

Deborah, No there doesn't have to be martial law to call out the National Guard, and in fact they have been used many times to help or interfere with local problems. But they weren't in full charge to do anything they pleased in those cases. What we are talking about here is a declaration of National Emergency, by the President, and the enactment of Executive Orders. These executive orders are not secret and can be viewed on the web, but I don't have a URL for you. Maybe someone else does. Anyway, under Executive Order Martial Law, the whole scene changes and now the National Guard or other "police" authority can proceed to do all the things I mentioned above.

Dano, Don't be too sure that this will all end up in some sort of horrible dictatorship. I have seen speculative scenarios where once the dust settles, in a couple of years, we'll all be back in a Colonial system of government, just like we began. What comes around, goes around, so why not? Wouldn't you love to be peacefully raising tobacco in Virginia again, and shipping it off to England for a king's ransom?

-- Whetherman (whetherman@storm.warning), April 10, 1999.

Whetherman,

Can you post some of those scenarios (and anything else you like on this topic)? I need something to keep my spirits up. Thanks.

Deborah,

Thanks for that bracing "wake up!" slap in the face. I needed it. Maybe freedom and dignity are not yet obsolete.

I like you people.

Dano

-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), April 10, 1999.

Archive of President Clinton's executive orders can be found at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky_govdocs/19981223_govdoc_index_exe .shtml

-- marsh (armstrng@sisqtel.net), April 10, 1999.

The presumptive purpose of martial law is to maintain public order and safety during unusual periods of disruption. If Y2K is more than the often repeated "bump-in-the-road" or "three-day-storm" then martial law would be a reasonable and needed aid to restoring normal living conditions.

The only problem I can see with martial law is that Truman is no longer in the Whitehouse, and instead we have a President who is halfway between John Gatti and Musolini.

-- Don't Take (government@face.value), April 10, 1999.

The 'ugly specter' isn't martial law per se, but rather any situation for which martial law is an appropriate response. If God forbid we need it, we'll welcome it.

My only political concern is that Waffling Willie will take so long to make up his mind to declare it, that it'll be too late to do any good.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 10, 1999.

This is such an ancienttopic. But, since some of you oldies haven't brought the other significant factor into this thread yet, then I guess I'll have to, if only for the sake of clarity for the newbies.

We all know there are not enough regular and reserve military, as well as police to enforce martial law in this country, that is if they would even co-operate when the time came to do things we don't want to discuss here in a free country.

So, what's a dictatorship/facist regime/totalitarian govy to do?

Bring in foreign troops! BINGO! It's going on right here and now. Do an internet search, read all about it. Dig it and nuff said.

-- (mass@delusions.com), April 11, 1999.

Actually, martial law is going to be enforced by space aliens. Don't believe me? Just search the internet.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 11, 1999.

Actually, Flint, Pardon The Correction, But That Would Be "Martian Law".

-- The Tall Man (mortuary@phantasm.com), April 11, 1999.

Dano,

In reference to your 'we fell asleep at the wheel' post. I really wanted to say I understand how you feel. Some days I think it's too late too. Didn't mean to 'slap' you. If we are not vigilant, the day could come when it IS too late. Sounds nutty, but Jefferson didn't think so.

I'm glad there are people like you (& many others here) who care & say so. This is one of the Liberties that if used responsibly ensure our continuing freedom.

-- Deborah (infowars@yahoo.com), April 11, 1999.

Could someone give a net address for supplying confirmed information that we are preparing to bring foreign troops here to enforce martial law?

-- Mumsie (Lotsakids@home.com), April 11, 1999.

Mumsie, it was a joke. Don't take all the fun out of it.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 11, 1999.

No worries. Martial law won't be needed. Air power solves all such problems. Ground troops are ruled out, since somebody might get hurt, and every vote counts. Collateral damage will be regretted.

I hope I'm joking.

-- George (Orwell@animalfarm~.edu), April 12, 1999.

"The 'ugly specter' isn't martial law per se, but rather any situation for which martial law is an appropriate response. If God forbid we need it, we'll welcome it.

My only political concern is that Waffling Willie will take so long to make up his mind to declare it, that it'll be too late to do any good.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), April 10, 1999."

Flint,

I just picked this post out at random as an example of the consistent unmitigated drivel that you expose us to. You are naieve in the extreme. I really am trying to be kind.

"If God forbid we need it, we'll welcome it."

Yes YOU and all the other CNN-Brainwashed sheeple WILL welcome it - as I've said over and over this is the agenda being played out here.

PROBLEM / REACTION / SOLUTION

the problem - artificially created/exacerbated, foreign excursions/meddling, instability/disorder wanted. y2k is the icing on the cake here.

reaction - you are seeing it now, on all media. you are being pre- programmed to welcome the solution (Flint, as you can see above has already accepted his fate [snip] "We'll welcome it."

solution - we all know what this is, the subject of this thread.

THE UK AND CANADA ARE BEING OPEN ABOUT THIS - THE CITIZENS KNOW MARTIAL LAW WILL BE A REALITY.

In contrast the USA are pussyfooting around - the herd is asleep, eh Flint?, no need to disturb their slumber until the witching hour.

More.

More priceless drivel from Flint.

Brace yourselves for this classic.

Are you ready?

"My only political concern is that Waffling Willie will take so long to make up his mind to declare it, that it'll be too late to do any good."

Oh really Flint? You think ol' Willie doesn't know EXACTLY what he's doing? Your stupidity is truly monumentally, staggeringly, astounding. True, exquisite, pure, unbridled stupidity. Quite rare these days to see such stupidity on a single thread.

You are actually pre-empting the president here Flint. you WANT him to declare Martial Law ahead of time.

Unbelievable.

There is no hope for you Flint.

Sorry.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 12, 1999.

Will someone who's spouting off about the Constitution being "suspended" please provide some evidence?

And I'll warn you right now that you'd better not wave some Executive Orders under my nose while saying "See! It's all in Klinton's Emergency Order EOs!" becase then I will tear your argument to little bits, starting with the fundamental fact that all EOs derive their authority from the office of the Presidency, which derives its authority from the Constitution. EOs are subservient, not superior, to the Constitution, and thus cannot suspend it.

So exactly how do you (or the people from whom you copied) come up with the idea? Hmmmm?

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), April 12, 1999.

No Spam,

If I may, for Weatherman,

Martial Law imposes constraints on Citizens - normal rules of law are suspended, or, more accurately, superceded by martial law, martial rules if you like - i.e. curfews, restrictions on ingress/egress for city-dwellers, imprisonment without trial, the usual suspects - ergo, by definition, the Constitution no longer applies - thus, No Spam, in the real world it is SUSPENDED.

Attempt to take this apart by all means - you know the nitty gritty EO's by heart.

You cannot take apart my reasoning, or the reality of what is going to happen this year.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 12, 1999.

Andy,

... and your _evidence_ is ... ?

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), April 12, 1999.

If what Flint says is "priceless drivel," then I guess I'm into "drivel." I know that most people, at some time or another, have a fear of the government taking control. We who have seen what dictators have done in the past, remember too well. But, this is the U. S., and I say it won't happen.

This is a vast country, and full of contrary individuals who sometimes refuse to do anything they're told, even if it's in their own interest, or what they wanted to do in the first place. I'm not always happy with police, or military tactics, but given a choice between their protection, or looting masses of crazies, I'll choose NG, or police anyday as the lesser of two evils. I had rather endure the NG, troops, or Martial Law than some of the people out there just waiting for things to collapse so they can go on a rampaging spree.

There are people on this forum I agree with totally, and others I seldom agree with, but many of those I don't agree with, have said they would never go peacefully in being run over by the government, nor would I. We are in complete agreement there. But being herded out like Kosovars, is not the same thing as being protected from the criminal element that would love to take advantage of a Y2K situation.

-- gilda jessie (jess@listbot.com), April 12, 1999.

No Spam,

Take apart my argument as you promised. we are all waiting.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), April 12, 1999.

I was looking for the Executive Order Regarding Martial Law.

I went to the link.

Can Anyone tell me which one it was or the date. There are tons of Executive orders.

Thanks,

Father

-- Thomas G. Hale (hale.t@worldnet.att.net), April 12, 1999.

Father Thomas,

Here is a site that has many links that should provide you with an answer:

Martial Law

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), April 12, 1999.

The concern about prepayment of January checks would have to do more with the lack of compliancy in the banking and communication system as almost all if not all military checks are distributed through direct deposit and not mail. 80%+ (can't remember the exact figure) of Social Security/SSI and medicare/caide check are also direct deposit. National Guard in Washington state is entirely direct deposit - as is no direct deposit account - no pay. Believe other states are the same as all pay comes from Indianapolis pay master.

-- Valkyrie (anon@please.net), April 12, 1999.

Andy,

For the third time: Where is the _evidence_?

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), April 12, 1999.

Ray,

Please doublecheck what you recommend. The "Y2K & Martial Law" site to which you link has the same carelessness about legal information as so many of the other martial law postings and sites I've seen. Its first link, supposedly to laws on the books about national emergencies, is to a site listing Executive Orders, the first 11 of which, issued by President Kennedy, have all been revoked by later Presidents. Apparently these sites just copy the same errors from each other over and over and over without bothering to check whether what they're copying is correct.

- - - - - - - -

Father Thomas,

As one who has spent some time reading various Executive Orders on an hobby basis, let me caution you that they are often revised, amended or revoked by later EOs issued by later presidents. In order not to find yourself having relied on out-of-date information, please check the legal status of any EOs you investigate, in the printed Federal Register at a library or at Federal Register - List of Executive Orders at http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/eo.html (which covers only EOs issued by President Kennedy and later).

Many of the web sites critical of Executive Orders, President Clinton, or both have apparently copied out-of-date information from each other without doing basic fact-checking. As a result, these critics all too often base their arguments on obsolete presidential orders that are no longer in effect (in some cases, haven't been in effect for more than 28 years).

Part of President Clinton's popularity comes from backlash against the critics who've attacked him without factual basis.

I want to see sound factual basis for criticism of Clinton (or another president). That would mean that some of the current anti-Clinton slanders favored in this and other forums would disappear, but the remaining critiques would have greater credibility and not be lost amid the moise -- a net plus for the citizenry.

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), April 12, 1999.