What are the circumstances, in the U,S., for Bush to declare Martial Law?

[Bobbieo]

[SusanaMontana41]

1. Another terrorist attack on U.S. soil

[cali]

6. Wrong. A terrorist attack

unless it was of monumental proportions would not enable bushy to declare Martial Law. Anyway, this is just fear mongering on the left. Not that much different from the cries of "terra, terra, terra" that emanate from the right.

[theboss]

11. I love how fear-mongers think that a government that can't evacuate a city

is somehow capable of instituting martial law on a country of 300 million armed idiots?

Seriously....how are you going to control the Bronx?

Christ...I don't think you could have controlled Vegas this weekend. How many weapons do you think were in that city on Saturday night?

[cali]

27. I really have nothing but scorn

for this type of melodramatic fear crap.

[SutaUvaca]

8. That, or civil unrest here at home.

The Executive orders were lined up some while back, making it easier for Chimpster to call up Martial Law.

And a belated welcome to DU from another relative newcomer. :)

[Fovea]

2. BUsh is the deciderer

and he will decide when. The ides of March is my guess.

[Altean Wanderer]

15. Yes, Webster Tarpley is predicting a new false flag event ...

by then to justify a massive bombing attack on Iran. If that happens (and I certainly hope for all of us that it doesn't), I can easily see martial law being implemented. That'll be the end of the charade of America as a Democratic-Republic, as Frank Zappa opined in the 80's.

This Sping may be VERY interesting. I think an attack around the new moon of April is much more likely than in March. That gives the Bush fascists a bit more time to "catapult the propaganda" (Bush's words) justifying an attack on Iran. And if a new Gulf of Tonkin or 9-11 (esp) like false-flag event blamed on Iran happens, then the war will happen. You may want to consider buying Iodine now :-(

[Eurobabe]

23. Fuck, why isn't the EU all over this??

I just asked my husband this morning, why aren't the EU nations shitting about Asshat's huffin & puffin towards Iran?

They are FOOLS not to take this clown seriously!!!

[Altean Wanderer]

38. Yes, it's like they don't believe Bush/Cheney would be crazy enough

and for a long time I agreed. But the mere fact that the US now has 2 aircraft carrier groups off the coast of Iran, with a third on the way, indicates that someone means business. It looks like Bush/Cheney feel they must implement the PNAC plan of total domination, come hell or WWIII, before they leave office. Though if an attack on Iran occurs, it won't much matter who is president. Here's recent letter to the editor I wrote:

You can hear it coming, getting louder and louder. Bush/Cheney and the press echo chamber are once again ‘catapulting the propaganda’, this time to justify attacking Iran. I hope the American people don’t get fooled again, because the consequences of attacking Iran would, as Tom Engelhardt writes in his article “Thelma and Louise Imperialism”, make Iraq look like “an hors d’oeuvre before a banquet of catastrophe”. Besides, according to the IAEA, there is no evidence of an Iranian nuclear weapon program. Though the Iranian president is a bit of a nutcase, he certainly doesn’t want to provoke a war with the US, which is fully capable of laying utter ruin to Iran. If Iran wants a nuke, it’s as a deterrent, which is fully understandable given Bush’s invasion of Iraq. A war with Iran would inflame the entire Middle-East and risk a nuclear response from Russia and/or China, who have extensive energy and economic ties with Iran. Imagine what would happen to the US economy if 30% of the world’s oil trade was shut down for several months. Gasoline could shoot up to $5.00 / gallon overnight – but that would be the least of our worries.

To help stop a war with Iran before it begins please contact your Congressman and ask him/her to support H.J. RES 14, which would prohibit the administration from attacking Iran without the express permission of the US Congress. If we don’t restore some checks and balances on Bush/Cheney now, they’ll drive us over the cliff of doom.

[Eurobabe]

46. H.J. 14 lacks teeth, did you read the clause b requirements?

SECTION 1. REQUIREMENTS CONCERNING THE USE OF MILITARY FORCE AGAINST IRAN.

(a) Rule of Construction- No provision of law enacted before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution shall be construed to authorize the use of military force by the United States against Iran.

(b) Requirements- Absent a national emergency created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories or possessions or its armed forces, the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress, prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran.

This leaves the door WIDE open for another terra attack, claim the Iranians are behind it and voila, :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: way!

[Altean Wanderer]

76. Yes, you're right, but it's all we've got at the moment n/t

[Eurobabe]

140. Then why can't they introduce something better?? They are giving Bush an out

with that damn clause, because he will MAKE another terrorist attack magically appear!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

37. Webster Tarpley is a jackass ex-LaRouche guy.

He has all the credibility of burnt toast. Please.

[Altean Wanderer]

39. You're wrong.

He's renounced LaRouche and now focuses on the global elite and false-flag terrorism. I saw him speak recently and I thought for the most part he was very well informed and right on.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

45. Oh, so he's *renounced* LaRouche.

Good for him. I suppose a lot of ex-Bushites have renounced Bush too, but that doesn't mean that they aren't fuckwits for having supported him in the first place.

now focuses on the global elite and false-flag terrorism.

Hold up, I thought you said he *renounced* LaRouche and his gibberish.

I saw him speak recently and I thought for the most part he was very well informed and right on.

That's the most charitable description of a LaRouchie (or ex-LaRouchie as the case may be) I've ever heard. But more power to the 9/11 trooth movement for taking in the castoffs of other failed, ridiculous movements.

[Altean Wanderer]

73. Explain to me how WTC-7 was "pulled" in the context of the ...

official story of 9-11. You can't. There wasn't time to rig it with explosives ON 9-11 itself, with all hell breaking loose nearby. That means WTC-7, at the very least, was set up with explosives before 9-11. The owner, Larry Silverstein, is on tape saying they decided to pull it. Unless you address that you have no business criticizing the 9-11 truth movement. Sure, there are some nutcase theories out there, and among the most bizzare is the official story.

Watch "Oil, Smoke and Mirrors":

http://www.oilsmokeandmirrors.com

and THEN we'll talk about who is and isn't a nutcase.

[MonkeyFunk]

77. nonsense

For some reason, people with no knowledge or experience assume "pull" means to use controlled demolition. It doesn't.

He meant "pull the firefighters" out of the building. To "pull the plug" on the efforts, as it were.

The building was badly damaged by falling debris, the equivalent of two giant earthquakes next door, and a large fire.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MonkeyFunk]

90. cointelpro mole?

LOL

and "pull" does NOT clearly mean to bring a bilding down by controlled demolition.

And you really believe that a process that normally takes weeks - preparing a building for CD - occurred on that one hectic day, in a burning building? C'mon...

[Altean Wanderer]

95. No I don't believe it was rigged in one day...

it was rigged over a long period of time before 9-11. Just like the Patriot Act was written months before. Consider who had offices in that building. I have a link somewhere that proves that there were no fire fighters in WTC-7 just prior to the time Silverstein said they agreed to pull it. Have you seen the film of WTC-7 coming down? It's a classic controlled demolition. There are many good DVD documentaries out there on this, have you studied any? BTW, I'm not a pod-person. Those were real planes that hit the main towers. I exercise discernment.

I know - it's hard to believe that some, hopefully rogue, element of our own government could be complicit in 9-11, but the evidence favors that conspiracy theory over the official story, which is equally a conspiracy theory.

Tell me, if Bush and company lie about EVERYTHING, why do you believe their account of 9-11, which is the basis of EVERYTHING they've done since, including attacking Iraq and putting in place the infrastructure of a future police state?

[MonkeyFunk]

100. Because the fact

that those buildings collapsed due to damage is not just something I heard from the Bush administration. I saw it happen on TV, as did millions of others, and thousands saw it happen live.

I don't believe many of the things the Bush administration has to say about 9/11 - what they knew or should have known about the impending attacks, what they did to prevent them, etc.

But I believe the WTC towers fell because hijacked jet airliners hit them, WTC 7 fell because it was badly damaged that day, a hijacked plane crashed in Pennsylvania, and a hijacked plane flew into the Pentagon. There is plenty of evidence for those facts beyond "Bush told me".

But... there's a forum here for such discussions, and this isn't it.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

92. "I don't know what really happened"

Indeed you don't. This is one side effect of getting your information from unmedicated shithats on the interweb.

Something is very fishy about WTC-7, and I think there's something very fishy about you.

Why must you insult MonkeyFunk's chosen career as a fisherman? Have you no shame? He comes from a long line of fisherman, and they will not stand for your deranged insults, the Fishermans' Union's connections to the CIA not withstanding.

[MonkeyFunk]

97. thank you

I can't help it if I smell like cod. :cry:

I try rubbing lemons on my breasts a la Susan Sarandon in Atlantic City, but I just smell like citrusy fish.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

99. Mmm... Citrusy fish...

Must... make... salmon burger... with lemon...

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

86. Right.

and THEN we'll talk about who is and isn't a nutcase.

Lyndon LaRouche is a nutcase. Followers of Lyndon LaRouche are either woefully misguided or are themselves nutcases. 9/11 doesn't enter into it. As for the rest of your demented nonsense, there's a perfectly good Demented Nonsense forum on DU. I suggest you make use of it.

[Bucky]

105. WTC-7 wasn't pulled, but your leg is sure getting pulled pretty good here.

Please ignore the MIHOPers. They're not fully attached.

[NoPasaran]

111. Sounds like

Sounds like he's renounced LaRouche, but not LaRouche's insane, paranoid world view.

[theboss]

3. Dude...our military can't control Baghdad with 125,000 troops...

How are they going to control Cleveland?

[villager]

5. I think that's the question -- he could "decide" it, but who would go along?

It might only succeed in the "final fracturing" of these once-United States...

[Blue Fire]

122. Cleveland Rocks!!!

:headbang: :yourock: :headbang: :yourock:

[Cleita]

4. You are expecting him to think logically?

He could declare martial law anytime he likes for whatever trumped up reason Karl Rove comes up with.

[UnyieldingHierophant]

7. Civil unions in NJ!

:)

[SutaUvaca]

12. LOL!

And welcome to another newish DUer.

I know another Steeler fan displaced down to Florida, who just happens to be half of a "civil union" herself.

[UnyieldingHierophant]

34. Thanks!

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Under the facade of legitimacy, a "national crisis" wherein you

would have obvious "panic in the streets", a breakdown of law and order, perhaps commerce being suspended or halted as well as transportation. It could be regional or national in scope. It could be an event like 9-11, it could be an asteroid hitting the earth, it could be a weather emergency, it could be a public no confidence in the currency (including runs on the bank), looting of stores for supplies, etc. Anything that is either a riot or something on its way to one.

Under the "Bush doctrine", martial law could be imposed almost anything imaginable. Like impeachment.

[Boogie]

10. Three days til election day in 2008.

He can't let anybody win and then challenge him in the Supreme Court so it will have to happen before election day.

[Bobbieo]

13. At least some of you guys on DU are considering the prospect that he

just might declare martial law to stay in power.

[cali]

14. The rest of us know how to use our brains

and some of us are none too fond of fear mongering. whether it comes from the left or the right, it still stinks like week old fish.

[Boogie]

22. You don't think it's a possibility?

That Bush will do anything to remain in power? I mean come on, you don't gather together that much power to merely give it away, especially if the person you are giving it to is from the opposing party. History dictates that dictators do not merely acquiesce to giving up their power.

[cali]

26. No. The odds of it happening are astronomically small.

And your knowledge of history seems a bit slight if you think that it's likely to happen. Nixon accrued power for the exec branch- they didn't call it the Imperial Presidency for nothing- but he didn't survive his own misdeeds. Neither will bush. And honestly, think logically; how on earth could bush expect to impose Martial Law? He doesn't have the forces to do that in a nation with 300,000,000 million people- alot of them well armed. I can tell you one thing, it wouldn't fly in my state. My governor wouldn't do it and neither with the guard, and I doubt my state is the only one.

It's just ridiculous this bullshit fear-mongering. Fucking melodramatic, soap opera crap.

Oh yeah, and I don't agree that bushco's a dictator.

[Boogie]

29. I hope you are right.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

43. It is effectively impossible to impose martial in the United States.

While it might be possible to impose something resembling martial law in some small part of the country for a short period of time, it is basically impossible for it to be done on a large scale and over any long period of time. The resources simply do not exist to implement it. It isn't even remotely within the realm of possibility. Not that would stop many people here from pretending otherwise. See any of the hyperparanoid threads about FEMA prison camps for examples of this nonsense.

[Fovea]

74. Smedley Butler

[MonkeyFunk]

30. No

I don't think it's possible.

First, even postponing elections does not eliminate them. The constitution requires them, even if not held on the appointed day.

Second, I don't think he WANTS to stay in power. I think he hates being President, and can't wait to get out.

Third, I've been hearing this every election since he became President, and it hasn't come to pass yet.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

110. Why must you constantly insult week old fish?

What have week old fish ever done to you? Week old fish are simply looking for the truth and trying to get some answers to all of these unanswered questions. "Week old fish" is a deliberate mistranslation of the original Farsi "Weak geriatric mollusks" anyway. Sheesh, do you believe everything Bushco tells you?!?

[seriousstan]

16. Yes, the same ones who were SURE he would do it in 2002, 2004, 2006........

[MonkeyFunk]

18. and fear-mongers on the left

predicted he would do it in 2002, and 2004, and 2006....

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

94. Still waiting for the next false flag terror operation.

Geez, with Bush's approval at 30% and Cheney nearing single digits you'd think these evil geenyusiz could get it together to detonate a fucking truck bomb or something... SOMEWHERE in America.

Much of the 9/11 shithattery is predicated on pretending that the last two years didn't happen.

[Warpy]

17. My guess is that they'll do a false flag operation

when the investigations start to get too hot for them. They'll try to dissolve Congress to make it all go away and use some fabricated attack stunt to justify it.

[MonkeyFunk]

33. even under martial law

there's no provision for "dissolving congress". It won't be done.

[Warpy]

36. He'll try

[Marie26]

40. How?

This is the missing link in the martial law conspiracy theory. How, exactly, is Bushco going to do that? They don't have a military left, most National Guard troops are stationed abroad - how is he going to force 300 million people to live under martial law?

[kestrel91316]

59. He's got the backwash with their guns to back him up.

I suspect they are champing at the bit for the opportunity.

[Marie26]

66. Nah.

How's he going to organize "the backwash"? Are there special backwash training camps I'm unaware of? He's only got 30% support now, and far far far fewer people would actually support a declaration of martial law. And even that contingent of loons is completely unusable because they're not in an organized force. How does he get the random loons to secure New York City? That's just totally impossible.

[kestrel91316]

138. All he has to do is sit back and let the backwash do what they

are champing at the bit to do.

There's more than a few of them that are itching to be able to start knocking off everyone they know to be liberal. I see enough on other boards to fear these people.

[MonkeyFunk]

41. I doubt it

anything's possible of course, but I think it's mostly just fear-mongering and irrational paranoia.

[kestrel91316]

56. No provision? Since when would or could that stop him if he

decided he wasn't interested in playing by the rules anymore. All he needs is enough loyal military (the fundie whackjob contingent) to close the Capitol to entry, and that would be that.

Round up Democratic members of Congress and ship them off to Gitmo.

Before you know it, he's got the Republic of Gilead. And enough fundie whackjobs in place around the country to keep it that way.

[MonkeyFunk]

61. sorry

that's an insanely paranoid notion, and one that's been floating around since 2001, and nothing even approaching it has ever come to pass.

This President will leave office at the end of his term, and a new, duly elected President will take his place.

[cali]

80. What nonsense.

And I'm trying to be polite. No way he could pull that off. the country- and don't forget it's awash with National Guard soldiers, guns and ex-soldiers, would revolt immediately- so would more than half of the regular armed forces. If you think they'd tolerate Congress being dissolved- you're nuts.

[kestrel91316]

137. Well I FERVENTLY HOPE you're right. But I no longer put

ANYTHING, however farfetched, past these people.

[theboss]

54. How? With what army?

With what authority?

Give me the "how" in all this.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

98. Right

Cause losing both houses of Congress wasn't enough of an impetus for another false flag operation. Right. They've just been waiting since 2001 for the right time.

If 9/11 was a false flag operation, why the fuck haven't we seen another one since then, even as Dubya and the entire Republican organization was either ousted by voters or sent to jail via the Abramoff scandal, etc.

Why haven't we seen a faked Iranian terror attack? A faked Iraqi militant terror attack outside of Iraq? A faked Venezuelan terror attack?

[Warpy]

113. A tame GOP Congress and a lack of investigations

might have something to do with it. Remember, this is a hypothetical that hinges on investigations getting too close to the truth and damaging too many of the inner circle. There was no reason for this while Congress was rubberstamping everything the inner circle wanted.

I doubt they planned 9/11. The anthrax letters were more their style, though.

It won't take a huge amount of people to pull off a false flag bio or chemical attack. It won't take many people to pull off a false flag dirty bomb (which may not be dirty, after all).

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

115. So where is it, after all these years?

If it's so goddamn easy, and they're so up for it, why hasn't it happened since? Because Congress was rubber stamping Bush?

Bush LOST CONGRESS. They knew it was on the line for a long time before the election. Where was the bio/chem terrorist attack then? Are you seriously telling me that these brilliant terrorist masterminds have been reduced to scaring people with orange alerts?

[EVDebs]

19. Just the fact you can ask that with a straight face and not be laughed out of DC

tells me democracy in the US is now one foot on a banana peel and the other in the grave.

[Marie26]

20. Well, he'd need an army first.

And since every available troop is in Iraq/Afganistan right now, I'm not too worried about martial law in the US. How would he even enforce it?

[theboss]

21. Remember when Clinton was going to declare Martial Law over Y2K?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14645

Ah...those were the days.

There really is no difference between left-wing kooks and right-wing kooks. They are the same breed of animal.

[cali]

32. Great Find!

I almost think this subject deserves it's own thread- kooky left wing fear mongering, I mean.

[Initech]

24. I think if he had the opportunity, he would no matter what the circumstances are.

That's just how fucking crazy this leadership is.

[Done]

25. That's classified information dude...

strictly on a need-to-know.
:yoiks:

[dkofos]

28. The next election

[AtomicKitten]

31. an impending attack that they know about

Jeb signed the precursor for Martial Law in Florida four days BEFORE the 9/11 attack.

edited due to snark

[cali]

35. You're using Worldnut Daily as a source?

Makes the Inquirer look like the NYT.

[AtomicKitten]

44. OK, here you go.

http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20011008.htm
http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/martial_law_florida.htm

Better? Let me know if this doesn't suit you and maybe I can help you search for the point I'm making.

Edited due to snark.

[AtomicKitten]

47. more

http://martiallaw911.info/insidejob2.htm
http://www.eionews.addr.com/psyops/news/jebknew.htm
http://www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd227.htm
http://www.safehaven.com/forums-22547.htm

[MonkeyFunk]

49. LOL

no Rense and freemasonry watch aren't better than world nut daily.

[AtomicKitten]

51. wow --- most people don't know

that Jeb Bush signed the precursor to Martial Law four days BEFORE 9/11, and you DU'ers are going to take issue with sourcing when I have offered a plethora to choose from? Are you claiming what I posted is not true?

This demonstration of snarkiness just to be contrary is a black eye to DU. Really, really pathetic.

From the horse's mouth:

EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER
01-261

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard has the statutory responsibility to provide support to law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disasters; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard has the responsibility to provide training support to law-enforcement personnel and community-based organizations relating to counter drug operations; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard must train to meet such responsibilities; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard is funded for any such training by budgetary appropriation or grants before any such training; and

WHEREAS, the Florida National Guard must conduct such training in active service of the state, as defined by Section 250.27, Florida Statutes (also known as active military service and state active duty) for members of the Florida National Guard to be covered by Section 250.34, Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, as Governor, I may delegate the authority contained in Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes, to order training to help respond to civil disturbances, natural disasters, and counter drug operations to The Adjutant General of the State of Florida; and

WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the State of Florida that I delegate such authority, so that the Florida National Guard is adequately trained to meet its obligation to help respond to civil disturbances, natural disasters, and counter drug operations and so that members of the Florida National Guard performing such training are covered by Section 250.34, Florida Statutes; and

WHEREAS, the Governor may order the Florida National Guard to provide extraordinary support to law enforcement upon request and such a request has been received from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) to assist FDLE in performing port security training and inspections.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, JEB BUSH, as Governor of Florida, by virtue of the authority vested in me by Article IV, Section 1(a) of the Florida Constitution, and by Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes, and all other applicable laws, do hereby promulgate the following Executive Order, to take immediate effect:

Section 1.

Based upon the foregoing, I hereby find that the public welfare requires that the Florida National Guard train to support law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disasters and to provide training support to law-enforcement personnel and community-based organizations relating to counter drug operations.

Section 2.

I hereby delegate to The Adjutant General of the State of Florida all necessary authority, within approved budgetary appropriations or grants, to order members of the Florida National Guard into active service, as defined by Section 250.27, Florida Statutes, for the purpose of training to support law-enforcement personnel and emergency-management personnel in the event of civil disturbances or natural disasters and to provide training support to law-enforcement personnel and community-based organizations relating to counter drug operations.

Section 3.

The Florida National Guard may order selected members on to state active duty for service to the State of Florida pursuant to Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes, to assist FDLE in performing port security training and inspections. Based on the potential massive damage to life and property that may result from an act of terrorism at a Florida port, the necessity to protect life and property from such acts of terrorism, and inhibiting the smuggling of illegal drugs into the State of Florida, the use of the Florida National Guard to support FDLE in accomplishing port security training and inspections is "extraordinary support to law enforcement" as used in Section 250.06(4), Florida Statutes.

Section 4.

The Adjutant General shall not place members of the Florida National Guard into active service for longer than necessary to accomplish the purposes declared herein.

Section 5.

This Executive Order supersedes Executive Order Number 01-17. Executive Order Number 01-17 is hereby revoked.

Section 6.

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

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and have caused the Great Seal of the State of Florida to be affixed at Tallahassee, the Capitol, this 7th day of September 2001.

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

[MonkeyFunk]

55. I think

you mischaracterize or misunderstand it.

The fact that only nutjob websites refer to the imposition of martial law in florida on Sept. 7th backs up my position.

He signed an order making the imposition of martial law easier.

If Florida was in fact under martial law, what were the effects of it? Where were the troops? Was there a curfew? Were rights curtailed? Tell me what actually became of this "martial law" that was imposed.

[AtomicKitten]

60. it was the precursor to it

please feel free to dismiss the gravity and implications of it if that makes you feel superior in some demented way

[MonkeyFunk]

63. Tell me

please. What was the actual result of this imposition of martial law in Florida that you claim occurred.

What rights were curtailed. Where were the soldiers? What changed in Florida?

[cali]

53. You're kidding right?

Do you know what a reputable source is? Clue: Rense would NOT be it.

[AtomicKitten]

57. please feel free to peruse the actual executive order posted above

[MonkeyFunk]

67. You realize

that if you posted an article from RENSE in LBN, it would be locked, right?

[AtomicKitten]

71. edited just for you

I'm off to take the dog to the park. Please feel free to PM me with any further complaints about links, grammar, opinion, etc. that sticks in your craw. I am here for you.

[MonkeyFunk]

72. and yet

you won't answer the simple question I asked three times:

What was the result of this imposition of martial law that you believe occurred? Where were the troops stationed? Who were these troops? What extra-legal restrictions were placed on the citizens of Florida? Curfews? Travel restrictions?

[AtomicKitten]

79. I've answered it repeatedly and will do so ONE MORE TIME

I posted this information for consideration. You clearly are a skeptic; others find the TIMING of this PRECURSOR to Martial Law (my abundant apologies for not being more specific to suit you).

You have registered your skepticism and disbelief. Got it. So what? I know many, many others who find this tidbit of information interesting in the yet to be investigated catastrophic event in this country.

[MonkeyFunk]

82. Where have you answered it?

What was the result of this imposition of martial law?

Surely something as ominous as what you suggest had some actual consequences, right? What were they?

[AtomicKitten]

83. My point was the TIMING of the precursor to Martial Law.

Why do you expect me to argue the basis for YOUR skepticism? That is YOUR point, made and acknowledged.
Many others find the timing - FOUR DAYS BEFORE 9/11 - suspicious.

[MonkeyFunk]

85. I'm not asking you

to argue for my skepticism. I'm asking you to explain what the result of this so-called imposition of martial law was.

If there was absolutely nothing that resulted from it, why was it done? What was it meant to accomplish? Why even bother?

The fact is, there was absolutely no consequence to this imposition of martial law because it never occurred.

[AtomicKitten]

89. somehow MY point escapes you

The fact is, there was absolutely no consequence to this imposition of martial law because it never occurred.

Martial Law was not effected, the paperwork to make it happen, the precursor to Martial law, DID happen. It is the timing of the latter - coincidental or not - that is MY point here. 'Kay? You are working overtime trying to crucify me for offering it up here for discussion.

This is truly exhausting. It's like arguing with my precocious pre-teen.

[MonkeyFunk]

91. Well

if you're this evasive with your pre-teen, then I can understand why it frustrates you.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

109. Well...

If you use the same "logic" with your pre-teen that you're using with us, let me just tell you from experience that you're in for one hell of a full-fledged-teen experience.

[Altean Wanderer]

135. Monkey Funk is funked up and its not with music

it's about as productive arguing with him as with a Freeper.

[Marie26]

58. This is the actual order

No one's going to buy those sources, sorry. The EO didn't declare martial law, it just allowed Nationl Guard troops to train to assist during a natural disaster/hurricane.

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

[MonkeyFunk]

65. Yep!

I was hoping the person asserting this would find this on his or her own, but the big old boogey-man of "MARTIAL LAW!" is far more fun than the truth.

[AtomicKitten]

68. I not only "found" it, I posted it above already.

Snarkiness is fun!

[Marie26]

69. Then you know it doesn't say

what the consiracy site headlines are claiming it says. There's no declaration of martial law in that order.

[MonkeyFunk]

70. So please tell me

this is the third time I've asked: what was the actual result of this so-called imposition of martial law in Florida?

You swear it occurred - so what happened? How many troops were used? What extra-legal restrictions were enacted?

[AtomicKitten]

75. you are more than welcome

to dismiss the implications of this; that is your prerogative. However, the timing of it does incite suspicion in others.

I posted the information for consideration.

Done and done.

[MonkeyFunk]

78. And what you posted

doesn't say what you think it says.

And why keep avoiding the relevant question - what actually occurred as a result of this so-called imposition of martial law?

[Mz Pip]

42. With what?

I can't imagine that even if the troops were brought home they would want to take part in rounding up our own citizens.

This country is to big, too diverse and the population has too many guns for anything like Marshall Law to work on a large scale.

It won't happen.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Madspirit]

96. Miz Pip said it all PERFECTLY. n/t

[DoyBoy]

118. Do the likes of Blackwater (et al) ring a bell? n/t

[MonkeyFunk]

120. You seriously

believe they're going to impose martial law on 300,000,000 people with hired contractors?

God, I swear it seems that people believe that somehow one's liberal credentials are enhanced by believing the most unlikely scenarios will come to pass.

[Mz Pip]

125. If securing Iraq is expensive

I can only imagine the cost of 'securing' the whole United States with hired guns. We pay our military personnel pennies in comparison to what anyone from the private sector would get.

We've got a big enough deficit already. :eyes:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[kestrel91316]

48. He can do it any time he pleases, for any reason or no reason at all.

He's The Decider, remember?

[jmowreader]

50. I don't think he ever would

I've seen way too many of this kind of post on DU recently: either Bush is going to declare martial law Real Soon Now, or the Army is going to launch a coup.

There are a few things that must be addressed here:

We know that CinC Bunnypants is most worried about two things: his legacy, and his own ass. He's worried about his legacy in ways Bill Clinton, who was supposedly concerned about nothing but, could have never dreamed. What works for us in this instance is that Shrub really doesn't want to go down in history as the first and only president to attempt to declare martial law but to be rewarded by having his whole inner circle lined up against the wall and shot by his security detail.

We also know that the only way he could realistically enforce martial law is to use local police forces. Endstrength of the US military is about 1.6 million. If you threw in the National Guard and Army Reserve, plus the Individual Ready Reserve (soldiers who finished their active duty commitments but not their initial eight-year service obligations, and hence are liable to recall to active duty), you're MAYBE looking at 3.5-4 million. That's enough to secure the liberal strongholds of California, New York (right now you may commence rolling on the floor--if you were to create New York City as an independent state, the State of New York would be a landmass with political leanings just a touch to the right of Idaho) and Massachusetts. But what of the rest of the country? I'll tell you: you're looking at 47 states who are armed to the teeth, uninhabited by major federal troop concentrations, and HIGHLY unlikely to accept martial law. Worse: there are a whole lotta people in those states who know how to be soldiers because military service is still very popular in those states. Get out, serve your country, see the world for three or four years, then come back and grow America's wheat for the rest of your life. But the point is, he can't enforce martial law without using every small-town police force in America, and most of them won't do it.

Let's talk military coup for a second. The best soldiers in America are the Secret Service. To get Bush you'd have to go through them, and they would come out shooting. The military is understandably reticent to shoot other Americans, especially police officers which the Secret Service basically are.

Like it or not, the only way we're going to get rid of Bush is for him to piss off about half of the Republicans in the Senate. Twenty solid Republican votes to convict--four "insurance" votes would be nice--would solve all of our problems.

[theboss]

52. Or just wait 22 months

There seems to be this notion that the Bush Presidency is never going to end.

It is. In fact, we are in the home stretch right now.

[Bobbieo]

62. Hope you are right!!!!!!

[jmowreader]

81. It doesn't NEED to "never end"

The problem with figurehead presidents like the one we've got now, is that the people behind the scenes who really are the president don't have to go away.

Look at Shrub. The vast majority of his inner circle came out of his dad's administration, Reagan's or Ford's. Nothing says they can't change presidents and keep going. McCain would keep them. So would Giuliani or Romney.

[theboss]

84. And Clinton had advisors from Carter

And Hillary would have advisors from Bill.

In fact, any Democrat would have a staff made up of ex-Clintonites.

How does impeachment change that?

[jmowreader]

103. It doesn't; however...

Ford, Reagan and Bush 41's administrations were all ate up with people who should be running license plate presses, not the country.

WhenI'm elected president I will hang a 30x40 photograph of a license plate press in every room of the White House as a reminder of what should happen to you when you run the country like a banana republic.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

88. Right.

I'm sure Obama or Hillary or whoever will get right on top of giving Negroponte his old job back as soon as they're elected.

[Bucky]

104. You could spend all day responding to hysterical posts here.

There will be no coups, no delayed elections, no impeachment and removal, no false-flag faux terrorist attack on the US, and no imposition of martial law. We will trudge along slowly through the mud until the next election and the installment of a sane administration--whereupon the real work of cleaning up Bush's multiple messes will begin.

I'm not so sure there won't be any attempted terrorist attacks on the US in the next few years. They've been well trained over in Iraq (note the recently improve shoot-down rates for helicopters), the region is becoming more destablized, and certainly whoever masterminds a direct hit on the Great Satan will be hailed as a hero by his extremist comrades. It certainly could get uglier in the coming years and the terrorists won't quit hating us when Bush leaves office.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

107. Why do I get the feeling...

...that a lot of the hysterics are going to be disappointed by the peaceful transfer of power in 2009?

[theboss]

108. The right-wingers were in January, 2001

I used to listen to Jim Quinn's show in Pittsburgh. He had his audience completely convinced that Clinton was never going to leave office.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

112. Jim Quinn? Is that fossil still around?

I haven't lived in western PA since about '97. I have vague reccolections of his nonsensical rantings about Clinton. As I recall, he made Honsburger sound like Ghandi.

[roamer65]

64. He can try it, but it will be the end of the republic.

They don't have enough troops to hold the country together. I would expect the secessions to begin fairly quickly.

[treestar]

93. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows the President to

declare martial law.

[DoyBoy]

119. There's nothing in the Constitution that lets...

the President declare preemptive war or use signing statements or use mercinaries or torture etc. etc. ad nausium. But, he has.

[davis889]

101. March on Washington D.C ?

Every one has been saying that 9-9-09 will be the V- for Vendetta event of our life time; it is pretty interesting. I have heard a lot about this, does anyone know if this is real. Here is a link to that board- dontcomply.com/message/post2238/aspnn/339.html

[theboss]

102. We apparently have very different definitions of "everyone"

What the hell are you talking about?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

106. I don't know what *your* goat entrails predict...

...but *mine* predict that it will be 10-0-09, and my goat entrails have never been proven wrong! I don't trust your goat entrails as far as I can spit.

[NoPasaran]

114. September 9, 2009?

Nutters angry with President Hillary Clinton's administration?

[Mz Pip]

127. Maybe Hillary

will be the one to declare Marshall Law. :sarcasm:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[Madspirit]

116. The Dahli Lama

It's like when they asked The Dahli Lama what he thought would happen on the Millennium New Year...Y2K...with all the doomsayers, etc.

He said, "I expect it will be another year, much like any other year."

There will be no coup. There will be no martial law. There are 100s of millions of people in America and many with their own guns. As I always say, paranoia requires a certain amount of vanity. No one WANTS to round us up. What would they do with us? These little young baby soldiers aren't going to come back home from war and start rounding up their families and neighbors and friends, etc.

This is paranoia at it's worst and ugliest. Give me a break People.
Lee

[The Wizard]

117. A bug up his ass

He's the Decider.

[Rex]

121. He has all the pieces in place at the moment to declare ML anytime he wants to.

With the suspension of Habeas Corpus, we have entered the scenario needed for ML. Sad, but true.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

124. Yes, all the pieces are in place...

...in Iraq.

You do realize that martial law requires a military presence, right?

[Rex]

126. Not really, just the illusion of a military presence.

Yes everything is in place in Iraq, except for the extra 500 thousand troops needed to control Iraq. It would be much easier over here in America, than Iraq.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

129. Right.

Because America is so much smaller and less populous than Iraq.

[Rex]

131. Lol, man you're funny!

Iraq and America are two totally different places as far as 'control' goes. :rofl:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

136. Yes, yes, and everybody is stupid except you.

The American "sheeple" will most certainly bow down before your fictitious, nonexistent, unachievable martial law. Cause we're all dumb 'cept you, right?

[MonkeyFunk]

128. every president since Washington

has had the so-called "pieces" in place to declare martial law.

Actually being able to enforce it is a different proposition altogether.

There will be no declaration of martial law, and it doesn't make you more of a liberal to believe there will be.

[Rex]

130. Not like now, but thanks for trying.

What a ridiculous thing to say. I doubt at all they will declare ML...and never would I question if someone was more or less liberal by which way they thought on the issue. :eyes:

[MonkeyFunk]

132. Bush has

no practical power to impose martial law.

I said what I did about liberal credentials because for years the far left has been chicken-littling every possible worst-case scenario, and getting a bunch of high-fives from other tinfoilers.

[Rex]

133. So the far left is getting high fives from other tinfoilers?

Making them tinfoilers as well? Look, I don't care what the far left thinks it is doing right now, right now Bush and his evil friends are trying to start another war. That is what matters and if declaring ML makes it easier, than brother watch out. And, for the record, I don't think Bush will ever try to enforce ML. Why? They have everything they need right now. I don't see impeachment happening and we shall see about Iran.

[MonkeyFunk]

134. yes

we'll see.

I believe an attack on Iran is possible. A full-out war is very unlikely. Impeachment and conviction is next-to-impossible.

Of course, things can change.

[Blue Fire]

123. He stands a better chance of getting a BJ

from a willing WH intern who's actually hot!:P

[in_cog_ni_to]

139. The scenario that Scott Ritter gave on Randi Rhodes today made a LOT of sense to me. If the psycho

attacks Iran, a barrel of oil will go up to $150.00-$200.00 a barrel. Gas prices here will be way overpriced for most people to afford, gas will be rationed, a major recession/depression will set people off and THAT is when the Martial Law will be declared. CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE over high gas prices will spark the Martial Law.:scared: