FactWatch: Is America moving towards martial law?

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

qlcoach Commented, in the section "Sharing evidence in favor:"

"The Bush Administration has been bad for America. The good thing is that in America there are checks and balances against political abuse. Our recent presidential elections are an excellent example of how trends are changing. As I have stated before, the inner journey transcends, cultural, political, social, and economic systems. Please see my new Hub: Faith, Hope, Light. Sincerely: Gary Eby, author and therapist."

The comment was relocated here, to the Comments area.

Hi again, qlcoach! I believe you are correct in this, and that the problems in the world are the multi-headed result of people getting away from their own Divine nature. However, that analysis is even more abstract than some of the apparent resultants, including political scenarios like this, and are therefore even tougher to pin down and prove. In the interest of raising public awareness and generating action, this FactWatch Hub must stick to demonstrable facts and evidence - and neither analyses nor beliefs are evidence. I personally think your point is valid; nevertheless, I think that valid points needn't be argued, but will become self-evident to most people when enough facts are present. By working exclusively in fact, my hope is that we can get past the divisive nature of opinion-based arguments and debate (rhetoric), which is usually divisive and ineffectual.

Thanks for your comment.

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

In the "Share evidence in favor:" section, Misha wrote:

"LOL people in Germany and in Russia thought they were safe, too. Do we learn anything?"

Thanks for your Comment, Misha! I've moved it here to the Comments section - FactWatches use HubPages' Comments modules a little differently, and it can be a little confusing at first. Again, thanks for participating!

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

In the "Share evidence in favor:" section, Chef Jeff wrote:

"Nothing would surprise me in an administration that deals out fear like hippies dealt out drugs in the 1960's. The Republicans need fear in order to get elected, and when elected they use fear to drive their agenda.

When the Democracy that was once briefly ancient Greece died, it was fear that killed it."

The comment was relocated here, to the Comments area.

Thanks for your Comment, Chef Jeff! Please have a look at the new FactWatch Hubs and what they are - they're a little different than regular Hubs, and can be great for allowing people to increase awareness and fix the system.

http://hubpages.com/hub/FactWatches-A-new-kind-of-

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

In the "Share evidence in favor:" section, Chef Jeff wrote:

"I was watching with great anticipation yesterday (Sept 24th) as Bush went on TV and as McCain "suspended" his campaign. I was afraid that some national crisis was about to be proclaimed, and that the election would also be suspended indefinitely.

I half expected Bush to declare martial law and put the nation under military control, using the bailout crisis as his basis for acting. You notice he did use the word "panic"? Would he use a panic as the catalyst for action?

I still wouldn't put it past him, and I am preparing for the worst.

Today I heard several Republicans in our town talking about revolution, of being so upset with their party that they believed it was time to put things right, either by peaceful means, or by other means. I have no idea if this is how this thing is playing out in other parts of the nation, but I can only wonder, and worry, that the American People are fed up to the point of making drastic changes outside of the ballot box."

The comment was relocated here, to the Comments area.

Thanks for your comment, Chef Jeff! I'm not entirely sure McCain /did/ suspend his campaign. Have a look:

http://qurl.com/vld3v

I could get into which candidate is doing the right thing, but as far as I can tell none of them are. Some seem to be quite a bit closer than others, and that's respectable I suppose. But in the context of the bank bailout, we're swapping around pieces of debt (promisory notes) and calling it money, and we've got an estimated 800 concentration camps on U.S. soil that aren't even making it on as a campaign issue. I'm really not sure anyone in the presidency /can/ do the right thing - the last one who tried to get us back on actual money was shot in the head within four months... and the money was quietly recalled shortly afterwards.

According to my research, drastic changes outside the ballot box would be appropriate. They've been happening for about 150 years to pull things out of shape and make them thoroughly lawless and unConstitutional, and I wish I could see how voting would fix that. Fortunately, there are nonviolent means of resolving the situation. Have a look!

http://www.gemworld.com/USAvsUS.htm

Thanks for your comment!

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

In the "Share evidence in favor" section, sandra rinc Commented:

"

It's been in the making for a while. I am suprised that no one has commented here yet.

You are from California too, so you see this materialize in front of your eyes. Most of this is very scary. Not that I sit at home scared or anything like that...yet.

One questin that I always find myself asking is. Who voted for Bush in the last election?

I find maybe one in 100 who voted for him. I wonder if someone could dig up the dirt there too."

I've moved your Comment here to the Comments area - FactWatch Hubs use the Comments module in a new and different way.

That's a little difficult, as the information is rather closely-held. Seems like that's what we're getting from the Executive branch lately - a lot of taxes, and tight lips on what they're up to... unless it's rhetoric.

You raise a good point. But I'm not sure it's really necessary to know that to make sense of it all - didn't we establish that it really didn't matter who was in office with JFK? I'd still like to know what the government-contracted voting machines are up to - I know it's the mainstream media that tallies up the votes, and named George W. Bush as the President when not enough of the votes had been counted yet. Fox News started it, and within minutes the rest of them followed suit rather than lose the story.

Thanks for your Comment, sandra. It's nice to know that others are seeing this too.

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

Sandra,

While it's possible that he might suspend the election, I think it's unlikely. Big moves like that would only generate bad PR among the citizens, and it wouldn't allow him to do anything he isn't already able to do. I'd suspect more low-key attempts, like vote fraud, at least for a little while longer. But it doesn't really matter who's in office - they're working for the same people.

One of the whole reasons the recent banking "bailout" scandal is so ironic is because the federal government actually works /for/ the banks, not the other way around. Not the banks that are supposedly getting "bailed out", though. The national debt is owed to a small group of obscenely wealthy bankers, who took the U.S. off of real money in the 1930s. Now we're using federal reserve notes, which are promissory notes, admissions of debt... basically IOUs. And it's literally impossible to pay off a debt with IOUs. (Which is why the so-called "bailout" is just a lot of paper-shuffling on a grand scale... you can't "bail" anyone out with IOUs, although you can tax people to oblivion that way.) These bankers run the private organization known as the Fed, which print FRNs out of thin air and "lend" them out to the federal government - at interest. This is why the U.S. can't get out of debt. The private holdings of federal U.S. citizens - and ownership of the federal citizens themselves - is the collateral for these federal reserve notes. Basically, the whole country's mortgaged to these bankers... and according to my research they've been preparing to repossess it since the 1930's.

This year America celebrates it's 75th anniversary of the suspending of its Constitution, with the President in absolute charge of the three branches of the federal government, under military authority in his role as Commander-in-Chief. This is according to the U.S. Senate. Have a look:

http://www.barefootsworld.net/war_ep.html

As you'll notice, this includes the power to declare martial law at any time. It could theoretically have happened at any time since 1933, as it's all legal. What it isn't, is right, appropriate nor lawful, and while soldiers and people with more guns than you will tend to go along with whatever is written down and passed as legislation, it's the duty of soldiers, courts and citizens to defy an order that is unlawful. Of course, most people don't know this and think that if a bill is passed, it simply becomes a law - regardless of whether it has legitimate scope of authority, derivation of authority, and jurisdiction. So not going along with this can feel a little like swimming against the current nowadays, because people don't recognize the law or how government is designed to work. And ultimately, that's what's allowing this to happen - people choosing to remain ignorant.

I'm glad you're not.

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

See the video that's been added, above, for your answer.

Satori Hub Author 3 years ago

In the "Share evidence in favor" section, success_89 wrote:

"theres alot of things going on within our nation that do seem to make anyone beleive that martial law may be just around the corner, you never know"

The Comment has been moved here, to the Comments area.