Part 1 of 2: Surviving Martial Law

http://hegrins.blogspot.com/2010/12/part-1-of-2-surviving-martial-law.html ^ | 12/7/10 | Jason Garbush

[broken_arrow1]

ping

[Renegade]

Rule #1

Shoot them before they shoot you !

[backwoods-engineer]

IBTZ.

At the very least, In Before The FEMA Camps Discussed.

Although I believe CWII will happen, I don't think the US Military will be the aggressor.

[SpinnerWebb]

weather coordinated by crooked individuals

Either the author is a believer in Rove's Machine (tm), or he is an unedited hack blogger.

Either way, he's lost all credibility.

[backwoods-engineer]

See tagline.

[STD]

Yippie

[buccaneer81]

Considering earlier last month Berkeley students almost beat a police officer to death because of talks about raising tuition at a state ran school,

Has the author never heard of the late 1960s? Methinks he's naive and or hysterical.

[HeadOn]

Ping for later

[Vendome]

IBTZ +1

[jackv]

ping

[Hacklehead]

Why should I listen to a guy who was homeless for years?

[Cletus.D.Yokel]

Crawl space with 2 lines of cinder blocks spaced 1 foot apart. A single window to lay my browning in (30-inch goose barrel) and a 1911 to back-up while I’m reloading the semi-auto.

Fully planned and expecting a grenade to get me out.

[Jim Noble]

Although I believe CWII will happen, I don't think the US Military will be the aggressor.

There cannot be a civil war unless the armed forces split.

There can be a zombie apocalypse (my personal bet).

There can be futile rebellious gestures, crushed by real soldiers and marines.

But to have CWII, you have to divide the chain of command and split the officer corps, so both sides believe they are doing right and are willing to order men to their deaths to prevail.

This is more of a possibility than many believe. The Supremacy Clause, and treason among the members of the ruling class, make a split over the legality of orders from the C-in-C a real possibility.

But, as of now, it isn't very likely, IMO.

Do watch out for zombies, however. THAT is the real danger.

[DCBryan1]

Their oath is to the CONSTITUTION, not to any man or Administration.

[DCBryan1]

Their oath is to the CONSTITUTION, not to any man or Administration.

[Jim Noble]

Their oath is to the CONSTITUTION

Correct.

And when the President (a constitutional officer) signs a treaty, which is then ratified by the Senate (as described in the constitution), which the constitution calls "the Supreme Law of the Land", and that treaty violates the constitution or attempts to alter it, what is the right thing for a commissioned officer to do?

[verity]

This BS seems to emerge on a continuing basis.

[oneolcop]

"Martial law" means military law. How can a military force that is composed of 1/2 of one percent of the population control a country of 300,000,000 people who do not wish to be controlled.

Now, if the term "martial law" means dictatorship, that''s another matter.

[Free Vulcan]

They can’t. Drop a million troops into this country and they will disappear like they never existed. They’ll be outnumbered 10,000 to 1. The logistics is impossible.