I like Ralph alot, that said, he is in Alex Jones territory here.

Alex Jones has been babbling about martial law since the last century. About 40% of what he says is fact, the rest is these same facts strung together on some highly paranoid string.

This goverment is by far the most powerhungry and corrupt in the western world, but they're not that crazy. ... I think and hope.

It's amazing though that the democrats do absolutely nothing. I mean, the republicans spent 50 million dollars trying to impeach clinton for some lame marital affair. You wonder at what kind of leverage the bible thumpers have behind the scenes.

I agree with you bcglrf, I believe the elections will go on as planned. There have been no moves to lead people to believe that it's inevitable that bush would suspend the elections, but it is a completely legitimate concern that people should not discard.
As for the martial law and the right to bear arms I don't think you can compare the weapons that Iraqis might have at their disposal with that of what Americans might have. Iraqis had and possibly still have access to the stock piles of military weapons and explosives that were just sitting around at the time of the invasion. Theres also the possibility that some are being equiped by nations such as Iran. Thats a far cry from what many if not most Americans have access to let alone even know how to use. In addition to that the American public has already proven themselves to be too apathetic to do any real fighting. Most people don't even have the motivation to pick up a phone and voice their concerns to their local congressmen let alone pick up a rifle or resist in any physical way.
Lastly, and I hate this thought, but what if bush actually did suspend the elections. Would the hardcore bush loyalists actually fight to keep him in office for...well as long as he saw fit, and do so under the thought that its for the "protection" of this country. Not all Americans would be fighting on the same side.

As for the right to bear arms, hunting rifles and pistols won't take this nation back. There might be a few folks out there, maybe even a few hundred that might have a formitable arsenal stored in their basement but nothing can stop the mechanized forces of this country. In my opinion the "Right to bear arms" is a moot point.


I don't think one can argue that martial law would be effective in the US at the same time as arguing how ineffective it is in Iraq. The guys fighting against the alliance in Iraq would envy the kind of weapons many American civilians keep around their homes. I'm pretty confident the next election will proceed on schedule.

>> ^bcglorf:
I would say this is fear mongering, only from the left this time. Bush and Cheney might be crazy enough to do something like this, but the right to bear arms will be what stays their hand. They aren't so ignorant as to realize that even martial law couldn't stop the resulting uprising from a president with the lowest approval ratings ever calling off an election.

You could be right bcglorf,
but after the things that this president has done over the last 7 years I don't think it's fear mongering at all. He has proven himself and those around him to be completely power hungry as well as 100% untrustable. At this point I wouldn't put anything past him. As for the right to bear arms, hunting rifles and pistols won't take this nation back. There might be a few folks out there, maybe even a few hundred that might have a formitable arsenal stored in their basement but nothing can stop the mechanized forces of this country. In my opinion the "Right to bear arms" is a moot point.

I would say this is fear mongering, only from the left this time. Bush and Cheney might be crazy enough to do something like this, but the right to bear arms will be what stays their hand. They aren't so ignorant as to realize that even martial law couldn't stop the resulting uprising from a president with the lowest approval ratings ever calling off an election.

>> ^Constitutional_Patriot:
In my opinion it seems that they are building up to this anyway....
Remember that secret meeting the house of representatives had on March 13, 2007 that Dennis Kucinich refused to attend because of his opposition to the content?
It's been leaked that the meeting referred to impending martial law, handling opposition to the government in the event of an uprising, safehavens for congress people in such event, what will happen to Americans that may oppose the "rule of law" from the Federal govt and the "unavoidable" merger between countries of the North American continent.


Refusing to attend THAT? Inconceivable! He should have attended with a hidden recorder.

In my opinion it seems that they are building up to this anyway....

Remember that secret meeting the house of representatives had on March 13, 2007 that Dennis Kucinich refused to attend because of his opposition to the content?

It's been leaked that the meeting referred to impending martial law, handling opposition to the government in the event of an uprising, safehavens for congress people in such event, what will happen to Americans that may oppose the "rule of law" from the Federal govt and the "unavoidable" merger between countries of the North American continent.

Yeah, I think intentionally collaborating with terrorists for a new attack in October to try to scare people is likely. They want to have the trials for the Guantanamo detainees in September, though through their own incompetence (and with some help from the Supreme Court ruling), that's already looking unlikely. Petraeus is supposed to come back and report to Congress on Iraq in September, most likely late September.

Declaring martial law and cancelling elections is too ham-handed. Even Fox viewers will think that's a crock. They've been careful not to push the war too hard (i.e. no draft), for fear it becomes the focus of people's attention.

Martial law would have the same effect, waking people up finally.

It's all going to be about using every extended power of Bush's to try to make the political landscape favorable for McCain, or in their uniquely neocon mindset, to try to get people afraid of terrorists again, thinking that will automatically benefit them.

More likely.

October Surprise terror attack. Bush reluctantly agrees to martial law in times of uncertainty. Bush hailed as hero. America becomes a police state.

Whoa, simmer down there boiling water. Fiscal irresponsibility and nation-building are Democratic "things", too. Democrats have proven to be interventionists. Have we forgotten about Wilsonian interventionism? Woodrow Wilson believed every man had the right to self-determination and further believed it was America's duty to protect democracy throughout the world. Wilson sent troops to Mexico to proclaim martial law during a revolution. He was quoted saying his efforts were to "teach Latin Americans to elect good men." And, let us not forget his interventionist role in Europe which aided in the Versailles Treaty. We know how that ended for us.

What about Franklin Roosevelt? Hey, tell me which right-wing mouthpiece publication is responsible for this quote: "Franklin Roosevelt relished his nation-building" Fox News? Nope. The New York Times did in regards to his interventionist policies in Haiti. FDR even said "I wrote Haiti's Constitution myself, and if I do say it, it was a pretty good little Constitution."

What about Lyndon Johnson in Vietnam? The Vietnam War has been categorized as LBJ's war. But, our involvement with Vietnam started during the cold war, which started to be realized when Harry S. Truman tried to contain communism in Southeast Asia in the 50s. And, hell, JFK was guilty of increasing financial aid and advisory assistance in South Vietnam. He fully adopted the National Security Action Memorandum 52 which was left over from the Eisenhower Administration that read in regards to South Vietnam: "The U.S. objective and concept of operations stated in the report are approved: to prevent communist domination of South Vietnam; to create in that country a viable and increasingly democratic society, and to initiate, on an accelerated basis, a series of mutually supporting actions of a military, political, economic, psychological and covert character designed to achieve this objective."

Will that do or should I continue?

>> ^lesserfool:
In reply to this comment by Pprt:
[...]
I'm asking anyone who questions the USA's action: do you think your armed forces exist to harm you... or to protect you?
The armed forces exist to protect US interests. This doesn't mean that they always do that in effect. It also does not mean that they are making me safer.


As I said in my original post, lesserfool, the US is at war with people who don't wear a uniform. They are unidentifiable.

The conception of "war" must change. We aren't in WWI trenches with bayonets here, we're dealing with anonymous individuals operating in frequently independent cells. At times, extraordinary measures must be taken in order to gather information from detainees. Logically, it may be worth the risk to harm an innocent man than to permit the death of dozens of innocents.

Undoubtedly, some sadists have been put into circumstances when they have abused their authority, and they are not without accountability. Martial law is usually more severe than civilian.

Soldiers and those who have chosen a military volition are willing to sacrifice their lives for their country and for you. I return to my original question: do you trust that your military force is working for you, or against you?

"Lock your doors, buy some guns, and pray for martial law"
Jello Biafra

Alternative scenario.

The Democratic race ends, the super delegates break for Barack Obama in droves and Hillary's campaign is over. Barack offers a AG position to John Edwards, who surprisingly accepts, he picks Ron Paul as his vice-president. Ron Paul states that he cannot possibly accept the position, but Obama gives an astounding speech about unifying the parties to work for a better America, and that needs a man of Paul's caliber. Ron Paul accepts to rousing applause from Barack and the people. The campaign is underway.

However right on the eve of election results Barack Obama is assassinated at a political rally, within 30 minutes of the incident the CIA and FBI report that it is the work of Al Qaeda operatives, mass arrests occur across the country. President Bush reluctantly comes forward and states that it is necessary to under these heavy times to impose martial law on the citizens for their own safety.

The terrorists who killed Barack Obama are found to be an Iraqi, Afghani, Iranian and a North Korean. America starts bombing Iran and North Korea. Political dissent at home is suppressed due to 'National Security' concerns. Legislation is pushed through to allow The Bush Administration to continue under a special emergency mandate for preservation of the United States. Congress and Senate is dissolved. Retroactive protection and pardons are given to Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove and others.

A few kids hiding in a cellar scour footage of the assassination, raising large questions about the governments validity of events surrounding the assassination of Obama, they put together a video called "THEY FUCKED US aka Loose Change 3", however a covert CIA/FBI raid on their residence takes place over concerns of Terrorist activity. All evidence is destroyed. The kids are all killed due to an accidental and erroneous weapon discharge. Firemen report hearing explosions at the scene of the crime.

Bush commemorates a Barack Obama monument, making a long winding speech that he will continue to protect all of us and Barack would have support him in this. He tears slightly, his voice wavering a but as he recalls the times he used to see Obama's speeches live expressing here to unheard of admiration for the man, stating that all he is doing is for Obama.

The election results released later showed Obama winning an overwhelming landslide.

Executive order 51 FTW.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

>> ^choggie:
hmmmm, my prediction is some false flag op that speeds along further the fear of "terrorists" to the point that martial law is declared and never lifted-perhaps biological this time...

hmmmm, my prediction is some false flag op that speeds along further the fear of "terrorists" to the point that martial law is declared and never lifted-perhaps biological this time-
Basically all the worst parts of the Bible, which most will interpret as some divine affirmation, then lock down.
By 2015-19, a good portion of the earths population will be dead, and those left will be conveniently relocated to very nice places called protected cities.

Ohhhh the election!!
It doesn't matter who wins, the machinery is in place to fist fuck the majority, regardless of ideals, morality, principles and sensibilities....
welcome to the New World Order, meatbots!!!

And dag, once again, why do you give a fuck?? Aren't you on prison island?? Besides, you continually buy into the cult-of-personality, anyone-is-better-than-Bush fan club, just like the most idyllic of dreamers here on the sift....

If you consider folks here on the sift, who live in America, as an adequate cross-section of everyone in America, we're fucked.