How to Control or Conquer America! By: Caleb

How to Control or Conquer America! By: Caleb

Glenn Beck has been describing a scenario that is playing out without much concern of most Americans for the most part. Only about 3 million Fox News and subsequent Beck viewers and maybe a few million more are concerned; BUT overall everyone is more concerned with making Christmas fun, or the house payment, car payment, food payment, and basically survival. Or as I like to put it, apathy caused by religious devotion to the status quo- materialism instead of Nationalism.

So far the government has USURPED: the presidency, the congress, the media, the war department, corporate concerns, healthcare, Wall Street and the banks, etc. Now the FDA will USURP the food growers, distributors, victory gardens, and home-grown food supplies, all in the name of Food Continuance and Safety.

The next step will be FEMA- and for what ever reason they will find- Martial Law. I believe it will start on a small scale. A city somewhere will have issues that require quick attention and there will be a State of Emergency declared. The results will be Law Enforcements need for the National Guard. I suspect that the State suffering from this “Emergency” will have just “deployed” their National Guard and the surrounding Guard Units will have also been deployed. Therefore the only “choice” is to call FEMA in for the State of emergency (my best quess: Detroit, somewhere in California or Seattle (valley flooding) , they will of course need “agents” to quell the “RIOT” and bring “Order”. Their “sole” choice will quite possibly be United Nations Peacekeepers that will just happen to be readily available- maybe “training” in the area.

Therefore, we need to understand Martial Law in America. There have been many times when Martial Law has been declared in the United States of America- this establishes what is called “Precedence” which is a term in the legal field for Rules established through Court cases that have gone before. One of the most cited cases was the Civil War, Lincoln declared Martial Law. Most of the Rule of Law for Martial Law came out of this issue.

The Case for presedence is: “ex parte Milligan”
The date was: September 15, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln imposes a Congressionally-authorized state of martial law in America. Through this Act, Lincoln suspended “habeas corpus” nationwide. This brought the suspension of "prisoners of war, spies, or aiders and abettors of the enemy," and other groups such as “draft dodgers”. A challenge was issued called ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]), which resulted in the United States Supreme Court ruling it as unconstitutional since the “habeas corpus” was suspended.

According to ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]): "Martial law is the will of the commanding officer of an armed force, or of a geographical military department, expressed in time of war within the limits of his military jurisdiction, as necessity demands and prudence dictates, restrained or enlarged by the orders of his military chief, or supreme executive ruler." In Layman terms: a regional commander can impose martial law in the location he/she controls, as they see fit. Again in ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]): "The officer executing martial law is at the same time supreme legislator, supreme judge, and supreme executive. As necessity makes his will the law, he only can define and declare it; and whether or not it is infringed, and of the extent of the infraction, he alone can judge; and his sole order punishes or acquits the alleged offender."

The Back Story is as follows: Mr. Lambden Milligan, (this is proivded by http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html) for whom the case is named, was arrested in Indiana as a Confederate sympathizer. Indiana, like the rest of the United States, was part of a military district set up to help conduct the war. Milligan was tried by military commission and sentenced to die by hanging. After his conviction, Milligan petitioned the Circuit Court for habeas corpus, arguing that his arrest, trial, and conviction were all unconstitutional. What the Supreme Court had to decide, it said, was "Had [the military commission] the legal power and authority to try and punish [Milligan]?"

Resoundingly, the Court said no. The Court stated what is almost painfully obvious: "Martial law ... destroys every guarantee of the Constitution." The Court reminded the reader that such actions were taken by the King of Great Britain, which caused, in part, the Revolution. "Civil liberty and this kind of martial law cannot endure together; the antagonism is irreconcilable; and, in the conflict, one or the other must perish."

This did not mean that a president could not declare Martial Law, in fact they said the President may declare a state of martial law if the civil authority is not able to control or function, at that time martial law is considered constitutional is necessitated. In ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]): "If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."

The Following are a list of Historical examples of Martial Law:
1. In 1812, General Andrew Jackson imposes martial law on recently liberated encampment at New Orleans. Jackson extended the declaration to include the radius of four mile immediately around the camp. Because Jackson had not received official notice he maintained Martial Law. A local judge notified Jackson of a writ for habeas corpus for a prisoner accused and arrested for sedition. Because Andrew Jackson disagreed with the judge, jackson had him arrested. Following the War, when local civil authority had been restored to the region, the same judge declared a fine of $1000.00 on Jackson. The fine was paid by Jackson but later reimbursed to him by Congress.

2. Eighty years later in the year 1892, in the State of Idaho, in the mining city of Coeur d'Alene. There was a miners' rebellion. A group of angry miners had blown up a mill, were shooting at workers that violated the strike. This explosion caused a four-story building and resulted in the killing of one. Because of this mayhem, the owners of the mine, requested that the State of Idaho's governor declared martial law. Somewhere in all this, there was a request for deployment of federal troops to act as backup for the State of Idahos guardsmen. Subsequently, there were over six hundred people arrested, which was reduced to a few dozen of just the ring leaders, they were tried in civil court. During their internment the ring leaders formed what became known as the “Western Federation of Miners”.

3. Fast forward to 1914: Martial Law ends the 'Coal Field Wars” of the State of Colorado. After a decades of conflicts in the region they developed into a strike in Ludlow the date was 1913. The Governor of the State of Colorado's National Guard had been called to break up the strike. The resulting peace was temporary as the guardsmen succumbed to greed and avarice and started becoming more loyal to the Companies that owned the mines. This resulted in fighting between both groups and a proclamation of martial law had to be issued by the Governor of Colorado. This forced President Woodrow Wilson, to send federal troops which ended the rioting.

4. Governor of California, Frank Merriam declared the dockyard of San Francisco under Martial Law in 1934, the reason for the declaration was "riots and tumult" caused by the dock worker's strike. At one point Governor Merriam had threatened to declare city-wide Martial Law. California's National Guard came in and re-opened the San Francisco docks. The California guardsmen had the power to “arrest and detain” and turn them over to civilian courts. Following the 1906 earthquake in San Francisco, the Presidio troops were posted city-wide to protect the dynamite that was being used to blowup buildings which might catch fire stopping further fires from spreading. The National Guard was told to shoot any looters in the city. An official declaration of martial law was never made but this historical incident is used as an example none the less.

5. In 1941, while Hawaii was still a U.S. Territory Martial Law was declared after the Japanese assault on Pearl Harbor. Because many of the island natives and residents were of Asian descent they were under suspicion. This act was subsequently officially condemned by a federal judge for the islands stating, "Governor Poindexter declared lawfully martial law but the Army went beyond the governor and set up that which was lawful only in conquered enemy territory namely, military government which is not bound by the Constitution. And they ... threw the Constitution into the discard and set up a military dictatorship."

6. After Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in August 26, 2005. There was a city-wide declaration of martial law. The local authority was unable to carry out their job. Louisiana doesn't recognize martial law but does recognize “a state of public health emergency”. During this type of Emergency the governor has authority to: suspend laws, order evacuations, and limit the sales of items such as alcohol and firearms. There was a limitation of the order which stated, it was to end on September 25, 2005, "unless terminated sooner."

According to the http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_mlaw.html, “There have been many instances of the use of the military within the borders of the United States, such as during the Whiskey Rebellion and in the South during the civil rights crises, but these acts are not tantamount to a declaration of martial law. The distinction must be made as clear as that between martial law and military justice: deployment of troops does not necessarily mean that the civil courts cannot function, and that is one of the keys, as the Supreme Court noted, to martial law.”