Martial Law in the United States? Military Starts Mission Oct 1

Written by:
Alejandro Botticelli
Published on:
Sep/26/2008

The commonwealth of Kentucky seizing domain names, the state of California banning home schooling, our banking sector in crisis as the US Government is about to embark on a $700 billion bailout of Wall Street, and now martial law in the United States?

Beginning in October the Army will have an "active unit" stationed in side the United States. This will be the first time for this happening in the US. Not to mention it's breaking posse comitatus. Why is this happening? Why are we worried about civil unrest now?

Polidics explains:


"Martial law" is a euphemism for military dictatorship. When foreign democracies are overthrown and a junta establishes martial law, Americans usually recognize that a fundamental change has occurred. . . . Section 1076 is Enabling Act-type legislation-something that purports to preserve law-and-order while formally empowering the president to rule by decree.

More expressly, SourceWatch explains further about the process that has allowed this to come about:

The John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2006 (PL 109-364), "named for the longtime Armed Services Committee chairman from Virginia," was signed October 17, 2006, by President George W. Bush. The Act "has a provocative provision called 'Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies'," the thrust of which "seems to be about giving the federal government a far stronger hand in coordinating responses to [Hurricane] Katrina-like disasters," Jeff Stein, CQ National Security Editor wrote December 1, 2006.

"But on closer inspection, its language also alters the two-centuries-old Insurrection Act, which Congress passed in 1807 to limit the president's power to deploy troops within the United States ... 'to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy'," Stein wrote.

"But the amended law takes the cuffs off" and "critics say it's a formula for executive branch mischief," Stein wrote, as "the new language adds 'natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident' to the list of conditions permitting the President to take over local authority - particularly 'if domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.'"

"One of the few to complain, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., warned that the measure virtually invites the White House to declare federal martial law. ... It 'subverts solid, longstanding posse comitatus statutes that limit the military's involvement in law enforcement, thereby making it easier for the President to declare martial law,' he said in remarks submitted to the Congressional Record on Sept. 29."

While the idea of martial law being enforced in the US might sound almost along the lines of science fiction, who would have thought just last week that a state governor would begin seizing website domains simply because....well....he could!  He's starting with online gambling URLS.  Next he'll be seizing dating site domains perhaps since they "do not conform with family values"?

In California, probably the most liberal of all states, parents are being turned into criminals for teaching their own children. California courts have held that  parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children. The decision stunned parents of the state's roughly 166,000 homeschooled children. The Justice stated, '"A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation."  The message: get in line, or go to jail. Anyone scared, yet?

Relating to fear, bank failures seem to be the norm these days.  If the FDIC were to run out of money, that might indeed be enough of a reason to enforce martial law....and probably vote for the Green Party.

Election Day cannot come fast enough, but will a new administration be enough?

Assuming of course we are not already in a state of....well....martial law.

----

Alejandro Botticelli, Gambling911.com

Politics News

Euro Books Claims Clinton Clearly Debate Winner: 8 Point Shift

Euro Books Claims Clinton Clearly Won Debate: 8 Point Shift

European wagering outlets are on board with Clinton as the winner and, indeed, the markets shifted from 63 percent to 69 percent immediately following the record-setting television showdown.

Nitrogen Sports Confiscation of Clinton Pantsuit Debate Bet Not so Cut and Dry

Betting on Monday night’s first US Presidential Debate between GOP nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton was not without its controversies.

First Presidential Debate Ratings Come in at Over 80.5 Mil: Odds Were at 97.5

The 80.5 million number, spread across 12 channels, had not yet counted PBS or CSPN ratings, which were expected to be nominal.

Hillary Clinton Odds of Becoming Next President Rises 6 Percent After Debate

Hillary Clinton Odds of Becoming Next President Rises 6 Percent After Debate

The betting markets reacted almost immediately following Monday night’s first US Presidential Debate between GOP nominee Donald Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton....

First Debate Odds: Trump’s Blue Tie Pays 2-1, Clinton Pantsuit Pays 16-1

With online gambling sites in a mad frenzy to get their First Presidential Debate odds up, the choice of outfit by both the GOP and Democratic nominee demonstrate why this is not your typical Presidential Debate.

Syndicate