Saturday, April 30, 2016

How likely is Martial Law in America? Here's What Happens Under Martial Law

Image result for funny pictures 2nd amendment founders   Image result for funny pictures 2nd amendment founders

by:MIchael DePinto

We're entering into an age of deception and betrayal, by our own government."– James Wesley Rawles
"The march towards martial law is something that is often ignored by the general public, often labeled as Quackery or something belonging on conspiracy websites. But what's happening in this country is exactly what our founders warned us about, and martial law is something they took very, very seriously." – SGT 

The SGT Report writes: 
If you're not familiar with who James Wesley Rawles is, he's the New York Times best-selling author of Patriots: A Novel of Survival in the Coming Collapse and the editor. No stranger to prepping, Rawles says, "Let the learning and the preparation begin, because time is running out! It's time to hunker down and get ready to ride out the storm because it's coming."
The signs of the police state now enveloping the people of the United States are all around us. From the Patriot Act to the Military Commissions Act to the NDAA s.1867 to endless Executive signing orders, the threat to our liberties has never been greater. And the source of most of these threats is not an external enemy, it's our own government, says James Wesley Rawles. 

Rawles: "We're verging on a society that's a police state at this point. And people need to wake up, and they need to get themselves prepared. If they're going to move overseas, they should take the gap, soon. If they're going to hunker down in the States, they need to get their beans, bullets and band-aids squared away, now. Because those windows of opportunity are closing."
Jones: "Are you getting chills? What I mean is, ten years ago I used to feel the urgency, but now, it's blowing me away."
Rawles: "The immediacy of it is almost overwhelming at this point. When I drafted my first novel 'Patriots' back in 1990-91, people looked at it as sort of wild speculation. But a lot of it in there has come to pass. We're living in increasingly dangerous times. We're entering into an age of deception and betrayal, by our own government. And people need to recognize that. And if they're not scared right now, they're not paying attention."

Memo Outlines Obama's Plan to Use the Military Against Citizens
Congress Declares Martial Law As Dollar Rapidly Collapses
Obama Signs Executive Order Permanently Implementing Martial Law
Rawles went on to say that he has consulting clients within the US government, military and intelligence agencies that are looking to him for advice on where they should relocate, "There's a lot of anxiety both inside and outside of the government right now."
Rawles warns:
"If the internationalists, the Globalists have it their way, they'll take away our right to keep and bear arms as well. There's a large push underway at the supra-national level for the small arms and light weapons treaty which if enacted would essentially erase our Second Amendment." See for yourself.


I have news for Americans: Internationalists are already stationed here on U.S. soil. If the American military doesn't follow orders and act against its own citizens, there are plenty of U.N. soldiers here that will. For each person that doesn't have a plan that goes beyond, "From my cold dead fingers…" let me ask you something: When Obama confiscated the guns and Second Amendment rights of 260,381 American Veterans, how come they didn't put up a fight? 
After all, they were men and women trained in the art of war… and yet they still didn't fight. They knew better… otherwise, it would have been from their cold dead fingers indeed. 

All You Need To Know About Obama's Coming Gun Grab
How Will You Respond When They Come For YOUR Guns? Better Think it Through!
If They Come For Your Guns, Do You Have A Responsibility To Fight?
Veterans: Obama is Coming For Your Guns, and he Will Get Them!
Mass Shootings Have Skyrocketed 700% Under Obama – Why?

In the meantime, however, the coming collapse could be so severe, especially if the power grid were to go down (which Rawles says would mean that the power brokers have lost control of their 'controlled collapse'), the result could be absolutely catastrophic. A massive die-off situation could result in which literally half of the American population could perish in just one winter.
Offgrid Survival writes:

"The march towards martial law is something that is often ignored by the general public, often labeled as Quackery or something belonging on conspiracy websites. But what's happening in this country is exactly what our founders warned us about, and martial law is something they took very, very seriously."
What is martial law? If you're looking for a definition, then Martial Law basically means using state or national military force to enforce the will of the government on the people. Under a declaration of martial law, Constitutional freedoms and liberties are suspended, and civilians are no longer entitled to their civil rights. It basically allows the government, or a tyrannical politician, to shred the Constitution and impose its will through military force. Take a look!

Alex Jones uncovers one of the most detrimental plans facing humanity today. In this shocking Report, Alex details the government's insidious plan to put its own citizens under martial law to strip them of all rights. Now the government is issuing subliminal propaganda via the Ad Council who claims it does not know how a newscast mentioning martial law in the midst of an outbreak ended up in an AARP ad.  


History of Martial Law in the United States of America
"Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." – Winston Churchill
In one way or another, there have always been tyrants who have used the power of government to suppress and control the public. But if we are looking for specific examples of Martial Law being used inside the United States, we don't have to look very hard or far to find them.
Using the strictest definition of the term, we can see the roots of martial law in America take hold during the lead up to the Revolutionary war. Although there were many reasons for the war, including resistance to taxes imposed by the British parliament, the main catalyst was England's decision to use military troops to enforce everyday law throughout the colonies.

The beginning of the end? The Civil War Ushers in a Strong Central Government through Martial Law Enforcement
Flash forward a hundred years, and many of the most egregious examples of martial law can be found throughout the civil war. While today's history books largely ignore the real reasons for the war or the many atrocities committed by President Lincoln, the facts of what really happened cannot be disputed.
The reason we have lost so many of our liberties can be tied directly to the Civil War.
On September 15, 1863, President Lincoln imposed Congressionally-authorized martial law. While history contends the war was fought to end slavery, the truth is, Lincoln by his own admission never really cared about freeing slaves. In fact, Lincoln never intended to abolish slavery, his main interest was centralizing government power and using the federal government to exert complete control over all citizens. The abolishment of slavery was only a byproduct of the war; it actually took the 13th amendment to end slavery, since Lincoln actually only freed Southern slaves, not slaves in states loyal to the Union.

During the Civil War, Lincoln continually violated the Constitution, in some cases suspending the entire Constitution that he swore to uphold.  
  • He suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus without the consent of Congress.
  • He shut down newspapers whose writers displayed any dissent to Union policy or spoke out against him.
  • He raised troops without the consent of Congress.
  • He closed courts by force.
  • He even imprisoned citizens, newspaper owners, and elected officials without cause and without a trial.
Our founders were very wary of using the military to enforce public policy, and concerns about this type of abuse date back to, and largely influenced, the creation of the Constitution. The founders continually warned about using military force to uphold law and order; unfortunately, most Americans are rather ignorant of history and are even more ignorant to what our actual founders intended when they created the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Top of Form
What will happen under Martial law?
The actual words martial law will probably never be used.
The first thing you will likely see is a declaration of a "State of Emergency." This may be done nationally, in cases of war or large-scale terrorist attacks; or it may happen locally as witnessed in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
In August of 2005, New Orleans was declared a disaster area and a state of emergency was declared by the governor. This allowed state officials to order evacuations and forcefully remove residents from their homes, suspend certain laws, confiscate firearms, and suspend the sale of items like liquor, firearms, and ammunition.
In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans police, the U.S. Marshalls Office, and the Louisiana National Guard forcibly confiscated over 1,000 legal firearms from law-abiding citizens.
Depending on the reasons behind the declaration you may also see:
The suspension of the Constitution, probably starting with the first and second amendment.

  • Suspension of Habeas Corpus: Imprisonment without due process and without a trail.
  • Travel Restrictions, including road closures and possibly, even quarantine zones.
  • Mandatory Curfews and Mandatory Identification.
  • Automatic search and seizures without a warrant. 
When can Martial Law be enacted?
When Martial Law can be enacted is a pretty touchy subject, largely because our founders never intended the federal government or a standing army be permitted to take such actions. Unfortunately, most people accept these unconstitutional activities and are more than willing to give up their essential liberties in exchange for peace of mind and not having to think for themselves.
This is something Benjamin Franklin warned about when he famously wrote,

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." 
How likely is martial law in the United States?
Let's face it, this country is a ticking time bomb. From widespread social unrest, crime and violence to a growing national debt which includes an entire subset of our population that depends on government assistance to exist, the writing is on the wall: Trouble is coming.
Article posted with permission from The Last Great Stand.


Sheriffs Call for Defying Unconstitutional Gun Control: Feds “The Greatest Threat We Face”

Image result for funny pictures 2nd amendment founders  Image result for funny pictures 2nd amendment founders

by:Mac Slavo

As the federal government continues in its quest to restrict the rights of gun owners across the country, local law enforcement is stepping up their response.
For many, it is one of a line in the sand against a bevy of agencies based in Washington, and partnering state agencies, who have violated the constitution.
The still-growing Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), headed by former Sheriff Richard Mack, is standing up to these infringements, and saying no.
Of course, it has the attention of the indoctrinated Big Government folks, who are apt to see a group of law enforcement officials standing up for the rule of law as – what else, a potential threat.

via the Washington Post:
[A] group called the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association is intent on strictly enforcing their view of the U.S. Constitution … “its ambition is to encourage law enforcement officers to defy laws they decide themselves are illegal.” In essence, they are troubled by the overreach of the federal government in matters concerning guns, taxes and land management, and founder Richard Mack has described the federals as “the greatest threat we face today,” and his association as “the army to set our nation free.” 

[…] At the association’s 2014 convention, dozens of sheriffs signed a declaration that they would not tolerate any federal agent who attempted to register firearms, arrest someone or seize property in their counties without their consent.
At a recent training for local police, the CPI reported, Mack declared that “gun control is against the law” and that his goal was to sign up about one-fourth of the nation’s sheriffs to join the association… find a true constitutional sheriff who’ll tell the federal government, ‘You’re not going to abuse citizens anymore.’” 

Of course, it is his backbone and conviction that has the system worried – along with his ability to activate what is arguably the most powerful group in the nation at the ground level – the nation’s 3,000 or so sheriffs, who are elected and serve as the highest law enforcement official within the county unit.
Richard Mack, who successfully staved off federal encroachment at the Supreme Court level back in the 90s, described his CSPOA association as “the army to set our nation free.”
The media has been quick to demonize the fiery rhetoric for these constitutional-minded members of law enforcement. But the battle is grounded in sound ideology, and a principle that literally millions of Americans are prepared to fight for.
Last year, a police chief from a tiny East Texas town went on a rant warning President Obama that further attempts to impose gun control would “cause a revolution in this country.” It is entirely possible that this is no exaggeration or bravado:

“Now Mr. Obama, you need to understand what the 2nd Amendment is for. It is not for hunting. It is there for the American people to protect themselves against the criminal element, to protect themselves against terrorists and radical ideology, and it’s also there to protect us against a government that has overreached its power.”
“You are not our potentate, sir. You are our servant. And you were elected to serve and protect us first. And I suggest, sir, since you’re a constitutional expert, that you better review your history on the Constitution and understand that we are a free people. And we are subject to no one other than the almighty God and Jesus Christ the King. And as such, sir, I strongly encourage you to trust the law-abiding American citizen, because we won’t fail you and we won’t let you down. But if you try to disarm us, sir, then you will cause a revolution in this country to occur. So please revise your thinking, because we are not your enemy, the law-abiding gun owner in this country.”

Richard Mack’s case originated from his defiant stand when he was sheriff of Graham County in Arizona and an attempt was made to get local LEOs to perform background checks for the federal government under the Brady Bill. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia led the decision upholding the stand for the 2nd Amendment under the 10th Amendment – marking one of the most constitutionally-sound decisions in recent history

Mack struck a blow for states’ rights in the 1990s as a sheriff from Graham County, Arizona, when he and a sheriff from Montana challenged the Brady Bill’s interim requirement that local law enforcement agencies perform background checks on gun buyers. The Supreme Court ruled in Mack’s favor, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing the opinion affirming the states’ sovereignty under the 10th Amendment
[…]Mack said “the government was forcing me to participate in a gun control scheme that I knew was unconstitutional. When all law enforcement is forced into that position by state or federal legislators, which one do we side with? And I believe there is a proper way to conduct oneself in knowing the difference between enforcing stupid laws and enforcing the principles of the Constitution.”

“[W]hen all the courts are against you, all the legislators are against you, where else do you go? I believe to the local county sheriff…and if that means standing against the federal government, then so damn be it.” 

Article posted with permission from Mac Slavo

Eyewitness: There was no “Standoff” in Oregon

Image result for STANDOFF" at the Malheur Refuge

by: Tim Brown 
Standoff = "A deadlocked confrontation between antagonists."

An eyewitness to what took place at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Oregon concerning those protesting the DC government's unconstitutional usurpation of land has said that there was no standoff in Oregon.
Deb Jordan, co-host of The Pete Santilli Show, took to Facebook to convey that she witnessed absolutely no standoff in Oregon.
"Did you know there was never a "STANDOFF" at the Malhuer Refuge in Harney County Oregon?" Jordan wrote. "The Oregon Standoff is a myth created by the press at the command of the FBI, Sheriff David Ward, and Judge Steven Grasty who acted under direction of Oregon Governor Kate Brown. Governor Kate Brown's office controlled the narrative right down to what David Ward and the FBI would say to the press."
Image result for oregon governor kate brown
oped: Kate Brown is a member of the #LGBTQ community...she has a agenda and it isn't pro Bill of Rights Freedom of speech unless it fits her perverted agenda anti-Christian...note: Oregon's governor, Kate Brown, has been married to a man since 1997. The gay community still claims her as their own, and she still claims them.

So, if there was no standoff, what exactly occurred? Jordan gives us an interesting insight that the press failed to report.
"At no time were the men and women unable to communicate freely with law enforcement -- actually the opposite occurred," she penned. "They traveled freely from County to County. They traveled freely in and out of the town of Burns and met with local authorities on an almost daily basis. Most, including Ammon Bundy, shook hands with and had meals in local establishments with law enforcement and FBI present who were having a meal at the same establishment at the same time. They traveled freely to buy groceries, and shop in local clothing stores. They went to meetings in town, and yes, they even attended local church services on Sundays. They met in the homes of many local citizens."

She added that she didn't observe law enforcement or protestors treat one another as if they were frightened.
"I saw them engage in civil conversation," she wrote. "I saw them shake hands. I saw them smile and laugh. I saw them interact on a level that was anything but hostile or threatening."
Additionally, while the mainstream media was reporting that the people were not only frightened, but wanted militia and those who were a part of the protest to leave, Jordan saw something completely different.
"Hotels and businesses were appreciative of the much needed business, and were happy to do that much needed business with their new found friends," she said. "Hugs and thank you's were the norm."

Even the media were not frightened to cover the story there.
"I asked other Media persons if they were frightened to be there and they all said, 'No'!" Ms. Jordan said. "Some even said it was kind of boring. Some said they didn't understand why the FBI and David Ward insisted that people were terrified."
It's because their every move and words were being orchestrated, not just by Kate Brown's office, but also from Washington, DC.
"At no time was there a hostile law enforcement presence at the Refuge," Jordan continued. "The most terrifying things that happened was in the form of an ambush designed by the FBI and OSP that ended in violence, and a counter protest after the fact where LEO failed to constitutionally protect the protestors from harm."
While it is true that we have even referred to the Oregon protest as a standoff, Jordan's comments are valid. She was on the ground there and guns were not drawn or brandished about and threats made. Of course, there were statements made that protesters would defend themselves with their weapons, but they made no direct offensive threats to members of local police, state police or federal agents.

People should keep this in mind as upcoming trials will most likely attempt to build on the already trumped up charges and labeling of patriots as "lawless and violent" have been used to keep those seeking to uphold the Constitution and call out a corrupt government in jail.
If you're looking to see how you can support the political prisoners being held by the DC government, click here for a full list of those you can help with links.