Bush Signs Bill Enabling Martial Law

Discussion in 'The Study' started by Bob Hubbard, Oct 28, 2006.

  1. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    Bush Signs Bill Enabling Martial Law

    Posted by kdawson on Saturday October 28, @04:42PM
    from the maybe-sweden dept.


    An anonymous reader writes to point us to an article on the meaning of a new law that President Bush signed on Oct. 17. It seems to allow the President to impose martial law on any state or territory, using federal troops and/or the state's own, or other states', National Guard troops. From the article: "In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law. It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions." Here is a link to the bill in question. The relevant part is Sec. 1076 about 3/4 of the way down the page.
    http://slashdot.org/
     
  2. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    Some interesting replies:


    All I can say is.....this.
    If this new law is used, remember, warnings were sounded long in advance.
     
  3. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    For those interested, heres the bill:
    =======

    SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMER-
    GENCIES.
    (a) USE OF THE ARMED FORCES AUTHORIZED.--
    (1) IN GENERAL.--Section 333 of title 10, United States
    Code, is amended to read as follows:
    " 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and
    Federal law
    "(a) USE OF ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC EMERGENCIES.--
    (1) The President may employ the armed forces, including the
    National Guard in Federal service, to--
    "(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United
    States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or
    other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or
    incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the
    United States, the President determines that--
    "(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent
    that the constituted authorities of the State or possession
    are incapable of maintaining public order; and
    "(ii) such violence results in a condition described in
    paragraph (2); or
    "(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic
    violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such insurrec-
    tion, violation, combination, or conspiracy results in a condition
    described in paragraph (2).
    "(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition
    that-- "(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or
    possession, as applicable, and of the United States within that
    State or possession, that any part or class of its people is
    deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named
    in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted
    authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse
    to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that
    protection; or
    "(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the
    United States or impedes the course of justice under those
    laws.
    "(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State
    shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the
    laws secured by the Constitution.
    "(b) NOTICE TO CONGRESS.--The President shall notify Congress
    of the determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A)
    as soon as practicable after the determination and every 14 days
    thereafter during the duration of the exercise of that authority.".
    (2) PROCLAMATION TO DISPERSE.--Section 334 of such title
    is amended by inserting "or those obstructing the enforcement
    of the laws" after "insurgents".
    (3) HEADING AMENDMENT.--The heading of chapter 15 of
    such title is amended to read as follows:
    "CHAPTER 15--ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS TO
    RESTORE PUBLIC ORDER".
    (4) CLERICAL AMENDMENTS.--(A) The tables of chapters
    at the beginning of subtitle A of title 10, United States Code,
    and at the beginning of part I of such subtitle, are each
    amended by striking the item relating to chapter 15 and
    inserting the following new item:
    "15 Enforcement of the Laws to Restore Public Order ... 331".
    (B) The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 15
    of such title is amended by striking the item relating to sections
    333 and inserting the following new item:
    "333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law.".
    (b) PROVISION OF SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND EQUIPMENT.--
    (1) IN GENERAL.--Chapter 152 of such title is amended
    by adding at the end the following new section:
    " 2567. Supplies, services, and equipment: provision in major
    public emergencies
    "(a) PROVISION AUTHORIZED.--In any situation in which the
    President determines to exercise the authority in section
    333(a)(1)(A) of this title, the President may direct the Secretary
    of Defense to provide supplies, services, and equipment to persons
    affected by the situation.
    "(b) COVERED SUPPLIES, SERVICES, AND EQUIPMENT.--The sup-
    plies, services, and equipment provided under this section may
    include food, water, utilities, bedding, transportation, tentage,
    search and rescue, medical care, minor repairs, the removal of
    debris, and other assistance necessary for the immediate preserva-
    tion of life and property.
    "(c) LIMITATIONS.--(1) Supplies, services, and equipment may
    be provided under this section--
    "(A) only to the extent that the constituted authorities
    of the State or possession concerned are unable to provide
    such supplies, services, and equipment, as the case may be;
    and "(B) only until such authorities, or other departments or
    agencies of the United States charged with the provision of
    such supplies, services, and equipment, are able to provide
    such supplies, services, and equipment.
    "(2) The Secretary may provide supplies, services, and equip-
    ment under this section only to the extent that the Secretary
    determines that doing so will not interfere with military prepared-
    ness or ongoing military operations or functions.
    "(d) INAPPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN AUTHORITIES.--The provision
    of supplies, services, or equipment under this section shall not
    be subject to the provisions of section 403(c) of the Robert T.
    Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
    5170b(c)).".
    (2) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.--The table of sections at the
    beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end
    the following new item:
    "2567. Supplies, services, and equipment: provision in major public emergencies".
    (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--Section 12304(c)(1) of such title
    is amended by striking "No unit" and all that follows through
    "subsection (b)," and inserting "Except to perform any of the func-
    tions authorized by chapter 15 or section 12406 of this title or
    by subsection (b), no unit or member of a reserve component may
    be ordered to active duty under this section".
     
  4. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    A mirror of the original article is available here. Due to the original being overwhelmed with traffic, I am mirroring the article here as well.


    ==========

    Bush Moves Toward Martial Law
    Written by Frank Morales
    Thursday, 26 October 2006

    In a stealth maneuver, President Bush has signed into law a provision which, according to Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont), will actually encourage the President to declare federal martial law (1). It does so by revising the Insurrection Act, a set of laws that limits the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States. The Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C.331 -335) has historically, along with the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C.1385), helped to enforce strict prohibitions on military involvement in domestic law enforcement. With one cloaked swipe of his pen, Bush is seeking to undo those prohibitions. Public Law 109-364, or the "John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007" (H.R.5122) (2), which was signed by the commander in chief on October 17th, 2006, in a private Oval Office ceremony, allows the President to declare a "public emergency" and station troops anywhere in America and take control of state-based National Guard units without the consent of the governor or local authorities, in order to "suppress public disorder."

    President Bush seized this unprecedented power on the very same day that he signed the equally odious Military Commissions Act of 2006. In a sense, the two laws complement one another. One allows for torture and detention abroad, while the other seeks to enforce acquiescence at home, preparing to order the military onto the streets of America. Remember, the term for putting an area under military law enforcement control is precise; the term is "martial law."

    Section 1076 of the massive Authorization Act, which grants the Pentagon another $500-plus-billion for its ill-advised adventures, is entitled, "Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies." Section 333, "Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law" states that "the President may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States, the President determines that domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of ("refuse" or "fail" in) maintaining public order, "in order to suppress, in any State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy."

    For the current President, "enforcement of the laws to restore public order" means to commandeer guardsmen from any state, over the objections of local governmental, military and local police entities; ship them off to another state; conscript them in a law enforcement mode; and set them loose against "disorderly" citizenry - protesters, possibly, or those who object to forced vaccinations and quarantines in the event of a bio-terror event.

    The law also facilitates militarized police round-ups and detention of protesters, so called "illegal aliens," "potential terrorists" and other "undesirables" for detention in facilities already contracted for and under construction by Halliburton. That's right. Under the cover of a trumped-up "immigration emergency" and the frenzied militarization of the southern border, detention camps are being constructed right under our noses, camps designed for anyone who resists the foreign and domestic agenda of the Bush administration.

    An article on "recent contract awards" in a recent issue of the slick, insider "Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International" reported that "global engineering and technical services powerhouse KBR [Kellog, Brown & Root] announced in January 2006 that its Government and Infrastructure division was awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to support U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in the event of an emergency." "With a maximum total value of $385 million over a five year term," the report notes, "the contract is to be executed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers," "for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities to augment existing ICE Detention and Removal Operations (DRO) - in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S., or to support the rapid development of new programs." The report points out that "KBR is the engineering and construction subsidiary of Halliburton." (3) So, in addition to authorizing another $532.8 billion for the Pentagon, including a $70-billion "supplemental provision" which covers the cost of the ongoing, mad military maneuvers in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places, the new law, signed by the president in a private White House ceremony, further collapses the historic divide between the police and the military: a tell-tale sign of a rapidly consolidating police state in America, all accomplished amidst ongoing U.S. imperial pretensions of global domination, sold to an "emergency managed" and seemingly willfully gullible public as a "global war on terrorism."

    Make no mistake about it: the de-facto repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act (PCA) is an ominous assault on American democratic tradition and jurisprudence. The 1878 Act, which reads, "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both," is the only U.S. criminal statute that outlaws military operations directed against the American people under the cover of 'law enforcement.' As such, it has been the best protection we've had against the power-hungry intentions of an unscrupulous and reckless executive, an executive intent on using force to enforce its will.

    Unfortunately, this past week, the president dealt posse comitatus, along with American democracy, a near fatal blow. Consequently, it will take an aroused citizenry to undo the damage wrought by this horrendous act, part and parcel, as we have seen, of a long train of abuses and outrages perpetrated by this authoritarian administration.

    Despite the unprecedented and shocking nature of this act, there has been no outcry in the American media, and little reaction from our elected officials in Congress. On September 19th, a lone Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) noted that 2007's Defense Authorization Act contained a "widely opposed provision to allow the President more control over the National Guard [adopting] changes to the Insurrection Act, which will make it easier for this or any future President to use the military to restore domestic order WITHOUT the consent of the nation's governors."

    Senator Leahy went on to stress that, "we certainly do not need to make it easier for Presidents to declare martial law. Invoking the Insurrection Act and using the military for law enforcement activities goes against some of the central tenets of our democracy. One can easily envision governors and mayors in charge of an emergency having to constantly look over their shoulders while someone who has never visited their communities gives the orders."

    A few weeks later, on the 29th of September, Leahy entered into the Congressional Record that he had "grave reservations about certain provisions of the fiscal Year 2007 Defense Authorization Bill Conference Report," the language of which, he said, "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." This had been "slipped in," Leahy said, "as a rider with little study," while "other congressional committees with jurisdiction over these matters had no chance to comment, let alone hold hearings on, these proposals."

    In a telling bit of understatement, the Senator from Vermont noted that "the implications of changing the (Posse Comitatus) Act are enormous". "There is good reason," he said, "for the constructive friction in existing law when it comes to martial law declarations. Using the military for law enforcement goes against one of the founding tenets of our democracy. We fail our Constitution, neglecting the rights of the States, when we make it easier for the President to declare martial law and trample on local and state sovereignty."

    Senator Leahy's final ruminations: "Since hearing word a couple of weeks ago that this outcome was likely, I have wondered how Congress could have gotten to this point. It seems the changes to the Insurrection Act have survived the Conference because the Pentagon and the White House want it."

    The historic and ominous re-writing of the Insurrection Act, accomplished in the dead of night, which gives Bush the legal authority to declare martial law, is now an accomplished fact.

    The Pentagon, as one might expect, plays an even more direct role in martial law operations. Title XIV of the new law, entitled, "Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Legislative Provisions," authorizes "the Secretary of Defense to create a Homeland Defense Technology Transfer Consortium to improve the effectiveness of the Department of Defense (DOD) processes for identifying and deploying relevant DOD technology to federal, State, and local first responders."

    In other words, the law facilitates the "transfer" of the newest in so-called "crowd control" technology and other weaponry designed to suppress dissent from the Pentagon to local militarized police units. The new law builds on and further codifies earlier "technology transfer" agreements, specifically the 1995 DOD-Justice Department memorandum of agreement achieved back during the Clinton-Reno regime.(4)

    It has become clear in recent months that a critical mass of the American people have seen through the lies of the Bush administration; with the president's polls at an historic low, growing resistance to the war Iraq, and the Democrats likely to take back the Congress in mid-term elections, the Bush administration is on the ropes. And so it is particularly worrying that President Bush has seen fit, at this juncture to, in effect, declare himself dictator.

    Source:
    (1) http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/091906a.html and http://leahy.senate.gov/press/200609/092906b.html See also, Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, "The Use of Federal Troops for Disaster Assistance: Legal Issues," by Jennifer K. Elsea, Legislative Attorney, August 14, 2006

    (2) http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill+h109-5122

    (3) Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International, "Recent Contract Awards", Summer 2006, Vol.12, No.2, pg.8; See also, Peter Dale Scott, "Homeland Security Contracts for Vast New Detention Camps," New American Media, January 31, 2006.

    (4) "Technology Transfer from defense: Concealed Weapons Detection", National Institute of Justice Journal, No 229, August, 1995, pp.42-43.


    © Toward Freedom
    Original URL: http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/
     
  5. Shizen Shigoku

    Shizen Shigoku Purple Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2004
    Messages:
    344
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    28
    "Summer 2008
    The "Defense of America" Act is passed authorizing the use of Military forces on American soil for the purpose of assisting underarmed and overwhelmed Civilian police forces."

    Happened a little sooner than you thought, huh?
     
  6. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    Yup. Sad, eh?


    Sadder will be the day that US troops are again used against it's own citizens...a day looking to be closer now, than a few weeks ago.
     
  7. FearlessFreep

    FearlessFreep Senior Master

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2004
    Messages:
    3,088
    Likes Received:
    96
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    Phoenix, Arizona
    I thought of linking to that article but....cribbing the whole slashdot summary and some of the posts?
     
  8. michaeledward

    michaeledward Grandmaster

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,063
    Likes Received:
    82
    Trophy Points:
    158
    Wow ... I am so Surprised.

    To think that George W. Bush would usurp more power.

    Well, knock me over with a feather.


    By the way, did I say I was voting against any incombent this cycle.
     
  9. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    We've pulled stuff from Slashdot before (same infos in their RSS feed), and I thought a few of the gazillion responses interesting.
     
  10. Bob Hubbard

    Bob Hubbard Retired

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • Founding Member
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2001
    Messages:
    47,249
    Likes Received:
    764
    Trophy Points:
    248
    Location:
    Land of the Free
    My question is, is it too late to stop them?
     
  11. Hand Sword

    Hand Sword Grandmaster

    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    Messages:
    6,545
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    158
    Location:
    In the Void (Where still, this merciless GOD torme
    About 140 yrs too late. Mr. Lincoln's presidency, actions and results gave "federal" all the power, and a precedant to use.
     
  12. Makalakumu

    Makalakumu Gonzo Karate Apocalypse

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Messages:
    13,887
    Likes Received:
    232
    Trophy Points:
    173
    Location:
    Hawaii
    With 80% of the voting being done on electronic voting machines? Perhaps. Although, it doesn't seem to matter who is in power nowadays. The globalist agenda always seems to prevail.
     
  13. TonyMac

    TonyMac Orange Belt

    Joined:
    May 25, 2006
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Actually Mr. Jacksons actions did that. He shoud be impeached postumously so we can take power back from the executive branch.
     
  14. shesulsa

    shesulsa Columbia Martial Arts Academy

    • MartialTalk Mentor
    • LifeTime Supporting Member
    • Martial Talk Alumni
    Joined:
    May 27, 2004
    Messages:
    27,172
    Likes Received:
    460
    Trophy Points:
    193
    Location:
    Not BC, Not DC
    Most likely, yes.

    The very fact that the Supreme Court has gotten away with their ammending of the Laws of Eminent Domain without severe civil unrest indicates (to me, anyway) that we are all too lazy and too ill-prepared to fight our government on any level ever again.

    It's all downhill from here, folks.
     
  15. mrhnau

    mrhnau Senior Master

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Messages:
    2,269
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    108
    Location:
    NC
    There is that great American trait of optimism I've love and cherish LOL

    If you are passionate about it, write your congressmen. Make a fuss. Tell them about it and get other people involved. No good sitting here crying about it if you refuse to do anything about it, including the minimal "write your congressmen".

    Me, I'm not expecting the militia to bang down my door. I do find it disturbing that the reality of that situation is a bit more. What frightens me more is not this administrations handling of this law, but the next couple of administrations. Perhaps it can be dealt with/revoked before they get their hands on it. There is a little group out there called the Supreme Court that is supposed to handle these kinds of things. Its worked well for over 200 years so far. Had its bumps along the way, but its still working. And I'm wagering its going to work a while longer, despite rampant pessimism and negativity. They live in this country too, and they don't want it ruined (especially for when they do leave office).

    I'm not going to spend alot of time wringing my hands and crying that "its all downhill from here". Sorry, I can't do that. Maybe thats the optimist side of me, but I have faith in the system of government we have in place. Its worked with Democrats, its worked with Republicans. Rough parts abound, but overall it works well.
     
  16. Stan

    Stan Green Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Messages:
    118
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    What do we do from here? What if letter writing and attending local protests and talking to our neighbors doesn't work? Do we just give up then and say to ourselves, "Well, we gave it a good try. I guess we'll just have to live without freedom."

    I mean it. Either this board is prone to massive and frequent hyperbole about the lengths the US government is willing to go to (which I do not believe), or we are very close to a situation where we will have to resist tyranny. What if speaking out isn't enough? Do we give up, or do we do something else?123
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

bush moves toward martial law article frank morales