Constant's pations

If it's more than 30 minutes old, it's not news. It's a blog.

Monday, October 30, 2006

America's Dubious Martial Law Plan

The United States government recently passed legislation authorizing the President to more easily declare martial law. However, the US does not, at present, have sufficient resources or logistics infrastructure to timely support a credible threat of martial law.

"As an American it really feels odd to enter peoples homes and question them, and with the authority that if they don't want to cooperate, I can detain them. This is what martial law would be like." Ref

Ref: Former President under arrest for prison abuse.

* * *

Martial law as a threat to dissuade public insurrection or rebellion is a separate matter from using military force to suppress a domestic civil war. Neither a national threat of force, nor imposition of martial law can credibly be implemented. The time required to requisition resources, train/deploy troops is far less than the President would require to, on a whim, impose martial law.

Civilian population numbers are instructive. One analogy is the illegal immigrants, possibly numbering between 20-40 million. One limitation on the United States in managing the illegal immigrants is the inability to credibly transport the illegal aliens: The transportation requirements are insufficient. Indeed, the US civilian population is approximately ten-times the number of illegal aliens; the limitations preventing a mass deportation of illegal immigrants would limit the ability of the US government to credibly threaten to arrest and transfer tens of millions of Americans.

The United States does not have sufficient logistical support to adequately manage relatively small-scale demonstrations. Generally, troops and law enforcement personnel are transferred from one state to another to support fairly short duration security issues.

Planning for martial law would require extensive coordination. To successfully implement a fairly benign volunteer effort to support the international Olympics can take upwards of six years to plan. The event is generally within a small geographic space within one city. Using the Olympic planning as a benchmark, assuming each state had 10 cities requiring lockdown or management, martial law would, on order of magnitude be easily 500-times the logistics support and planning of the Olympics. This has yet to be started, much less tested successfully, nor demonstrated in Louisiana.

* * *

The American government’s war on drugs is an instructive and useful analogy. On scale and duration, the drug war has proved an utter failure. The US government would similarly be expected to fail when martial law was implemented.

Just as the US government has illegally delegated responsibility to the Iraqis to meet milestones – which only the US can credibly be held to account per Geneva – local civil authorities are similarly in no position to accept, nor physically support a laundry list of federal government requirements. At best, the martial law would have to be phased in, but this defies the objective of martial law: An immediate order to solve a problem.

* * *

DHS has a trucking-liaison program whereby truckers communicate suspicious activity. This indicates that DHS, JTTF, and DOJ do not have enough independent resources to adequately manage the roads, patrol the railways, or monitor bridges.

Local law enforcement can be deployed to key logistics centers; however during a national emergency, these personnel are likely to be deployed to sites with structural damage.

The American labor shortages is a problem. The United States does not have enough government personnel or sufficiently trained first responders or augmentees to credibly support extended martial law; nor does it have sufficient financial resources to credibly backfill positions vacated by first responders.

* * *

The Statutory Language

For a quick summary: go here Here are some of the statutes cited in the act:

Section 333 of Chapter 15 is renamed: "`333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law.'."

Section 334: amended by inserting `or those obstructing the enforcement of the laws' after `insurgents'.

Chapter 152: Adds "Sec. 2567. Supplies, services, and equipment: provision in major public emergencies"

Section 12304: Conforming Amendment- Section 12304(c)(1), (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 functions 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'.

Section 334 of Chapter 15 is renamed: `CHAPTER 15--ENFORCEMENT OF THE LAWS TO RESTORE PUBLIC ORDER'.

- -

Here is the language which raises doubts about the intent of the entire bill. Note closely the language explicitly Chapter 152 adds a new section:

`(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)).'.

The problem is that 5170 relates to a declaration for a natural disaster. The bill, as enacted, expressly excludes this provisioning from requirements of section 5170, suggesting the use of combat forces is not intended to have anything to do with natural disasters, but something else.

- -

Notice the inconsistency between the express requirements of the act; and the conditions upon which the Congress-Executive will take action. Congress would be well advised to review the current state of lawlessness, and contrast the Act's language:

`(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.

Ref: Title 10 § 333

The Act's language is easily satisfied by this President's (a) signing statements; (b) illegal Military Commissions Act; (c) failures to comply with the Constitution in re FISA-NSA violations; (d) Geneva Convention violations in re rendition and GTMO satisfies these conditions; and (e) Obstruction of DoJ OPR investigations into illegal FISA-NSA abuses. The President's conduct satisfies the elements within the act.

- [1] The President "hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession";
- [2] US civilians, because of the illegal domestic surveillance, have been "deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law";
- [3] Because of DOJ Staff obstruction and threats against state officials in re State level investigations of Verizon alleged illegal violation of privacy statutes, "the constituted authorities of that State or possession are unable . . . to protect that right, privilege, or immunity . . ."; and
- [4] The President refuses, through his signing statements, to fully enforce the law: "opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws"

Reconsider what the White House Press secretary said, and you'll see the above elements have been well satisfied with previous fatal admissions. It's as if the President is using a checklist to violte the law, implement rebellion, and pretend it is something else.

- -

Also, of concern is this language:
`(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;

By analogy, if State officials were to conclude that further support of contracts with the US government would amount to an illegal war crime, the President could use the lawful refusal by the state officials to support war crimes, as the basis to illegally seize the State assets, and compel their delivery, regardless their support for additional war crimes.

Further, even if the President and SECDEF were to engage in illegal combat, as they are doing, or unlawful use of state resources to further war crimes, the Act expressly creates an illegal power which would circumvent this Geneva prohibition:
`(2) The Secretary may provide supplies, services, and equipment under this section only to the extent that the Secretary determines that doing so will not interfere with military preparedness or ongoing military operations or functions.

US military preparedness is already affected; and ongoing military operations and functions have been degraded because of illegal warfare. It remains to be explained how, in the vacuum of non-existent supplies, the President or SECDEF will compel any state entity to meet a standard the SECDEF and President are unwilling to provision or budget.

The President, through willful, reckless disregard for his oath of office, is circularly creating the conditions he may conclude warrant imposition of martial law. This is analogous to illegally delegating to the President unreviewable power to declare any war crime he commits the basis for the President to commit more war crimes.

The act's language describes conditions which already exist, but have not precipitated martial law indicating the US government is selectively ignoring US government-led rebellion against the Constitution. This suggests the criteria are not credible benchmarks, but are designed to appear to be linked with lawful conduct, but will be loosely, selectively interpreted.

One legal challenge to this bill would be whether the President, after signing the bill, has failed to apply the bill to the consequences of his war crimes, rendition, prisoner abuses, and illegal domestic surveillance. The broader issue, in light of Katrina, is whether the President himself can be shown in similar disasters to effectively fail to meet the statutory intent. Once Congress chooses to do nothing, this malfeasance by the President can be the basis for State Officials to Lawfully prosecute the President.

The updated statutes would legally classify the President's conduct [Ref: Title 10 Chapter 15 Section 333] as a conspiracy to implement an illegal insurrection/rebellion against the US Constitution. [This blog has other information related to this illegal GOP rebellion against the Constitution: here]

Please ask your Members of Congress and candidates to comment on, and contact the Judiciary Committee Minority Staff, requesting the Attorney General appoint a special counsel to review the ongoing violations by this President of the act he signed into law:

___ What is the President's planned defense to a State-initiated effort to prosecute the President?

___ What is the reason the President is not taking measures to suppress the insurrection he is leading against the US Constitution?

___ How does the President classify "inaction" as meeting the Statutory intent of the language he signed into law?

___ Given the Article II oath of office requirements to enforce the law, how does the President explain his refusal to use all means at his disposal to end his illegal insurrection against the US Constitution?

Failure of the Attorney General to explain in writing why he is not investigating this President's illegal conspiracy/insurrection/rebellion against the US Constitution, would implicate the Attorney General in Title 28 violations.

* * *

Putting Martial Law Into Effect

If martial law were declared, the problem would be enforcement. The terms of no travel, restricted travel, or curfew would have to be modified to permit irregular work shifts, late night food and fuel deliveries.

If civil authorities were to restrict travel to emergency personnel, the lock down could not adequately last for more than a few days. Civilians would still have to travel to get food, engage in day to day health care. If civilians are confined to their neighborhoods, and prevented from working, the electricity, sewage, and water systems would quickly fall apart.

* * *

Martial law plans are likely to rely on demonstrations of force, a period of severe lockdown, and then a quick orchestrated withdrawal by civil authorities. Anything longer is not sustainable nor is it credible, and would invariably incite domestic civil opposition.

* * *

It is likely that the net transition of personnel from current work positions will result in a net loss to economic output. This fails to capture the larger impacts associated with increased inspections.

Should personnel be transported en masse, rail reallocation would likely disrupt chemical, construction, and materials, increasing the costs, while reducing the net flow and sales of goods. This will adversely impact corporate profit margins, and increase unemployment.

* * *

There are two analogies which prove instructive of what the United States is likely to do, should martial law be implemented: Iraq and Katrina.

Although personnel, if they are adequately supported and pre-positioned, would provide excellent first shows of force, the United Stats lakes the depth and breadth of personnel to adequately sustain long term martial law. Iraq shows the ease with which combat forces can be deployed; the problem is the sustainability of that show of force when the United States fails to preserve civil society of fuel, sewage, and water. If, as is expected, US combat forces substantially interfere with day to day work schedules, implement roadblocks, and engage in house to house searches and personnel seizures, American workers are less likely to venture to their work centers as is the case with Iraq.

* * *

To credibly support a near term implementation of martial law – within 2 years – the United States government would have to immediately begin a gradual ramp-up of military training. This is unlikely. For each month the United States delays the training-start, pushes back the time when 1M troops would be available, as is needed, to successfully contain Iraq. The United Sates is orders of magnitude larger.

US combat forces in Iraq have relatively high morale, but they show signs of questioning the legality of their orders. American national guard and domestic law enforcement are likely to ask the same questions soon after the initial order of martial law.

* * *

The National Security Council is concerned that, should there be sustained violations of the laws of war, and other illegal conduct by the American government, there could be pockets of guerrilla warfare within the United States. Despite control of the air in Afghanistan and Iraq, smugglers regularly infiltrate arms to insurgents.

How martial law is implemented will be as important as the conditions preceding declaration. The President has the authority to federalize state resources to support a long-term effort. However, if martial law was pretextual, State and local officials would soon reconsider whether their continued support for martial would or would not subject them to criminal prosecution.

* * *

Martial law would have an immediate impact on commerce, as we saw after 9-11: Commercial airline traffic ground to a halt.

* * *

Civilians are expected to find inspiration from others similarly under military rule in Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Despite more than fifty years of abuse at the hands if the Israelis, Palestinians are still hopeful their pockets of resistance will make a difference.

American Civilians

American civilians are in a position to lawfully gather evidence of ongoing war crimes planning. If this lawful discovery process is thwarted, American civilians are sufficiently adept to adjust their methods, and with renewed vigor lawfully monitor illegal government activity.

The American government cannot successfully dissuade the legal community or civilians from asserting their rights, even if they are detained and habeas is suspended. Interrogators at Guantanamo were unsuccessful in convincing Pakistani civilians to assent to threats of abuse; some of the civilians knew the laws better than the American military personnel, and well knew what they were entitled or not required to do.

Recent experiences in Afghanistan, Iraq, Eastern Europe, and Guantanamo has fundamentally undermined the American government’s ability to inspire a civilian population en masse to blindly follow or assent to the threat of force. Unlike the immediate post 9-11 era when civilians and civil authorities could be expected to defer judgment to the central government, the situation has reversed and civilians are more confident that any use of force is more likely linked with illegal activity.

The President’s whole scale destruction of the Constitution has inspired a generation of Americans to revisit the Federalist Papers, Constitution, case law, DOJ OPR standards, laws of war, and rules related to law enforcement management and oversight. It is likely that the JTTF will be hard pressed to easily persuade Americans to blindly accept direction, as was the case with 9-11,

* * *

The terms of martial law are likely to be vague, confusing, and incite American civilian opposition, not to mention additional international rebuke and scorn. The conditions observed in Louisiana do little to inspire confidence the American government could credibly organize federal resources, nor ensure local first responders are fully supported.

The greatest risk to imposing martial law is the threat, and failure, of use of force to mange the civilian population. Civilians cannot credibly be managed when they still must go to work, travel from their homes to their place of worship, and engage in day to day commerce. This says nothing about their purposes of living in the United States: To enjoy their lives as they freely choose.

This nexus is not likely to demonstrate to many civilians that the US military has superiority over civilians; at worst, it will do exactly what we’ve seen in Iraq: Inspire and embolden the civilian population to identify the American government and civil authorities as the problem, not the likely pretext to enact martial law.

If martial law were imposed, the civilian population would be hard pressed to understand that the benefits of the lockdown would justify interference with their ability to acquire food, engage in commerce to pay mortgages, or go about their daily activities to support their children’s education. The labor shortages and drain of intellectual expertise seen in Iraq would not be unexpected in the United States.

It is a secondary, but equally important consideration which nations would be involved in their repatriation and new life. The US government should reasonably expect capital movements out of the US markets, and a commensurate loss in tax revenues.

The downward spiral of tax revenues is juxtaposed with the expected increase costs associated with implementing martial law.

* * *

Martial law, even if it were credibly implemented, would hardly stand international support. Foreign fighters have already been reported observing key American infrastructure, and are well placed to engage in cross border raids. The Mexican border is sufficiently porous to prevent the United States from sufficiently locking down the border, or preventing raids into the expected detention centers.

* * *

The current plans related to martial law implementation are outdated, and as with Katrina and Iraq, are based on assumptions which have not been credibly interfaced with academia and the civilian leadership. Although SETA contractors have sufficient PhD and materials-logistics planners to conduct feasibility studies and simulations, the simulations fail to capture the fundamental shift in American psyche. Americans are not, as the simulations assume, passive robots who will cower on the basis of public service announcements. The lessons of the Iraqi and Afghan insurgents are sufficiently robust lessons for casual Americans to realize that the American government’s power is finite and exhaustible.

* * *

Planners overestimated the loyalty of American government personnel to the ongoing, spreading rebellion against the Constitution. Although government personnel have mortgages and may fear prosecution if they actively oppose the President's illegal policies, they are not blindly receptive to having civilian peers needlessly killed on a pretext which destroys the Constitution. Rather, they do have a credible legal defense in that they would have joined a lawful movement to protect the Constitution from what may be viewed as a domestic insurrection by the government against the Constitution. Charges of treason are not applicable in domestic disputes or civil war.

The NSC studies have underestimated the foreign support for defections, and the material support outsiders would offer to ensure Americans are sufficiently resourced to defy and prevail over any attempt to impose martial law.

Force planers have poorly considered the lessons of the failed war on terror, and have insufficiently considered the legal competence of American civilians, and their commitment to remove themselves from unlawful efforts to impose martial law. Leaks related to the NSA and unlawful rendition and prisoner abuse scandals have yet to be analyzed, much less factored into the martial law planning.

* * *

American youth are sufficiently competent, as the lessons of Iraq show, to challenge the legality of their efforts, and question whether the martial law is or is not consistent with Constitutional requirements and oath of office. Although martial law may be possible in cases of rebellion or invasion, American youth are sufficiently astute to comprehend when they have been given a pretext, or a bonafide reason for the martial law.

Foreign fighters are well positioned and prepared to ensure martial law fails. American combat troops are sufficiently dispersed, poorly trained, and insufficiently provisioned to permit martial law from being competently implemented.

Once the writ of habeas is suspended, American civilians will not longer have a reason to fear what may or may not happen: The American government will have done it; there is nothing an American civilian will be able to do to defend themselves in court. The United States has already illegally used force without effect; Americans can hardly be expected to expected different results in the Continental United States.

American civilians should be expected to withdraw support form the Government, engage in combat operations: They would rather stand fighting for their rights, than being locked away indefinitely like GTMO prisoners.

* * *

The American government’s problem was the illegal passage of the Military Commissions Bill. American citizens comprehend that this is one of the final steps before the government proposes to impose martial law.

The passage of the bill is form a position of desperation and weakness. All Americans observing this failed American government have ever reason to be cynical: The results and plans have been wholly at odds with American government’s leaders’ forecasts.

The threat of martial law has a greater effect than what is likely to be a failed implementation. Martial law, if imposed, will be a signal for Americans that the government has exhausted lawful options to govern.

Given the logistics limitations, Americans are not likely to take a threat of Martial Law seriously as a bluff; rather, they’ll use the threat as the legal foundation to lawfully remove the government from office and replace the existing Constitution with something which would prevent the abuse. There remains a credible alternative Constitution ready for discussion and public discussion.

* * *

The Constitution, when originally drafted in the 1700s covered a region far smaller than today’s America. The civilian population growth has outpaced civil authorities’ ability to timely manage and implement martial law. Iran and Afghanistan have demonstrated to Americans the limitations of American power; and Katrina has demonstrated the limitations of American competence.

* * *

Martial Law Plan Weaknesses

The Martial law plans fail to credibly discuss how the martial law would be implemented; nor does it sufficiently transition back to civilian control. The 2006 nexus of failures in Iraq and Louisiana, combined with the well publicized abuses in Guantanamo, on top of the illegal military commissions bill hardly puts the American government in a favorable negotiating position.

Current plans insufficiently consider the prospect of foreign assistance, and the resiliency of American civilians to competently train their peers to engage in robust, and sustained guerrilla warfare. American civilians are prepared to engage in sustained combat operations to protect the Constitution, and are prepared to outlast a demoralized American government.

* * *

American Government Flaws

American force planners are not used to preparing force packages against American civilian targets. A mobilized citizenry, when it sees the American failure to successfully employ force, will likely be inspired to take up arms. This decision is only after the American government has illegally employed force.

American government efforts to create the illusion that it is suppressing an insurrection are not likely to succeed. American citizens have enough questions about 9-11 to blindly accept a speedy decision to target fellow Americans. Rather, a credible debate will have likely begun over whether the initial incident was an American government-fabricated ruse to justify illegal abuse of power, as Hitler did in Poland in 1939. The question will be whether the US government is or is not seen to be in active rebellion against the US Constitution. The problem the US government has is that it has already taken legal steps in this direction: Openly advocating continued illegal rebellion and insurrection against the US Constitution, in defiance of 5 USC 3331. An Article III court might be persuaded that the American civilian response to the American government’s use of force was a lawful defense, especially given the enormity of the breakdown in flaw and order, and open defiance of the Attorney General, DoJ Staff, US Attorneys, and President of their Constitutional obligations.

Force planners fail to comprehend that the American citizenry has a higher loyalty to the Constitution than the American government. Force planners and analysis have a transitory loyalty to their job, not the document they derive their legal authority. If planners were credibly as loyal to the Constitution as they might want others to believe, they are in a poor position to explain why they continue to provide direct material support for this ongoing illegal insurrection against the Constitution.

NSC analysts and contractors have a choice. The burden is not on the American civilians. The issue will be when the contractors and American government personnel choose to remove themselves from the illegal insurrection against the Constitution, and choose to stand with their fellow Americans to protect the Constitution.

Ultimately, Article III courts will be returned to their equal standing before the Constitution. American civilians are well adept at continuing to gather evidence of which American personnel and contractors have engaged in illegal insurrection or unlawful support for war crimes. American civilians are equally capable of detecting and reporting through the open media information related to illegal planning, or unlawful imprisonment of American civilians.

* * *

Upon legal review, the issue before the court will be to what extent Martial law was imposed as a smokescreen to dissuade lawful prosecution of the President. Regardless what level of force and decimation the American government attempts to impose on American civilians, foreign fighters working with other members of the UN General Assembly remain fully prepared to provide humanitarian intervention, and lawfully prosecute American leaders who illegally abuse American civilians.

International actors are not likely to view the imposition of Martial Law in 2006 as an internal affair, but as a smokescreen to dissuade needed oversight of alleged war criminals in the United States government. Geneva would apply to foreign fighters who lawfully intervene to provide humanitarian assistance to American civilians in their lawful opposition to the US government’s illegal rebellion against the Constitution. Given the illegal US military Commission Bill, foreign fighters are expected to inflict like abuses against specific government personnel including the DOJ Staff Counsel and their families. Aircraft, drugs, and weapons smugglers have sufficient countermeasures and allies in the DoD and DoJ to successfully penetrate US airspace, land, and lawfully render to The Hague alleged war criminals working in the Executive Branch.

American civilians and government agents can be prosecuted once martial law is ended. Martial law is not a green light to commit war crimes. Rather, it is a government effort to ensure stability. American civilians and civil leadership will be inspired to break ranks with the government, and joint forces to protect the Constitution, when they see that martial law is being used as a pretext to commit abuses and outrages upon civilians.

* * *

There will be several factors which American civilians will consider:

___ Is the President being successfully, lawfully prosecuted for war crimes

___ How is the illegal American government rebellion against the Constitution and rule of law adjudicated before The Hague

___ How many DoJ Staff counsel have been prosecuted and disbarred for violating their oath of office and endorsing illegal war crimes and unlawful abuse

___ Is the imposition of Martial law a pretext to avoid lawful Article III oversight of Executive branch abuse of power

___ Is there a lawful basis to deny the writ of habeas corpus

___ Has the imposition of martial law been used as the basis to pass illegal laws further eroding American civil liberties

___ Has the Government threatened to use force against innocents

___ Has actual force been used domestically against American civilians without effect

___ Is the imposition of martial law being used to support an illegal insurrection against the US Constitution, or support an unlawful partisan attack on the rule of law

___ To what extent has the DOJ OPR been denied the right to review DoJ Staff working papers related to the legislation and oversight of Martial law

___ Is DoJ OPR thwarted from reviewing working papers; denied access to DOJ Staff; or otherwise prevented from reviewing the legal basis for the decisions

___ Has the Attorney General properly exhausted all other options; and correctly complied with his reporting requirements to Congress [Ex: Title 28]

___ To what extent have American civilian efforts been thwarted to gather evidence of misconduct, war crimes, or other human rights abuses by JTTF, DoJ Staff counsel, or detention center jailers.

___ Are international inspectors given the opportunity to review prison conditions of the detainees

___ What is the impact on civilian incomes, ability to procure food, and access sewage, water, and electricity

___ Have American government personnel been given plausible explanations for their orders; or are the orders illegal, contrary to the Constitution, and wholly inconsistent with the intent of Martial Law

___ Are the terms of the Martial Law understandable; or are the requirements, rules, and other conditions confusing or unreasonable

___ Can the claims of the benefits and successes of the Martial law be independently verified by independent observers

___ Has the American media been overtaken by government loyalists; and has foreign media transmission been jammed; how have foreign reports of events been interfered with or adjusted

___ Does the Government credibly explain how they will implement martial law, yet they are unable to explain why they cannot deport a smaller number of illegal immigrants

___ Does the Government credibly explain why, despite its failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Louisiana, it should be expected that Martial Law can be expected to prevail

___ Do American citizens get a sense that US combat forces understand they are killing American civilians; and that their conduct could be prosecuted

___ How clear is the government with their plans to provide Amnesty, or prevent enforcement of 42 USC 1983

___ What types of civil leaders are deported or jailed; what is the basis for attorneys being deported or detained: Political leaning, types of cases, expertise in law, academic background, standing the bar.

___ Does the government have a credible plan to get troops and equipment

___ Is there a reasonable plan to support personnel movements, but not affect commerce

___ Why should we expect the results to be different than what we saw in Louisiana, Katrina, or Afghanistan

___ Law enforcement does not respond to routine calls. Why should Americans believe that they’ll be available for a higher priority, whole scale implementation of martial law: Where are they physically going to come from

___ How will the martial law terms be enforced

___ Can the US government credibly maintain security despite the poor discipline problems within JTTF, DoJ, and the DoJ Staff

___ What method will be used to ensure that the authorities implementing martial law do not abuse power

___ Once the Constitution is effectively suspended, and illegally abrogated, does the US government have a plan to prevent the situation, in the future, from deteriorating; or is the way forward a new Constitution that will more effectively challenged government power

___ Given the many years required to put into effect a small Olympics support movement, how will the American government implement martial law on a national scale

___ There are problems with voter ID cards. How will the authorities credibly screen and review American civilians at roadblocks.

___ Has the National Security Council discussed why they believe guerrilla warfare is a problem; given the known risks in Iraq, but fails to address these issues, why should Americans believe the governing authorities under Martial Law will achieve a better result than in Iraq;

___ If better results are expected, what is the basis for the difference;

___ If there are difference between Iraq and the United States, has the civil authority explained why these lessons learned were not applied to Iraq to prevent civil war

___ Have the force planners adequately considered the impact to their retirement funds if martial law were implemented

___ What is the expected drop in property value

___ How will the disruptions to commerce, contracts, and commercial transactions be managed

___ How effectively have the planners managed economic impacts on trade

___ Is the lead time to train law enforcement and combat troops credible to implement martial law; or is the lead time too long to justify confidence that imposing Martial Law is an imminent, credible threat

___ How successful are foreign fighters around the globe in decimating American military interests and reserve forces needed to sustain martial law

___ To what extent are American combat forces able to prevent smugglers from any nation on the planet from delivering weapons to training camps

___ When foreign nationals see that the American government is willing to impose abuse upon its civilians, does the American leadership comprehend that foreign fighters may likely consider they have nothing to lose by directly engaging isolated, demoralized combat forces located in remote corners of the globe

___ Does the American leadership comprehend that foreign fighters may view the imposition of martial law as a green light to impose retaliation in a like manner against American embassy personnel and suspected undercover CIA operatives placed by Abraxis

___ Do American civil authorities comprehend that man pack systems to shot down commercial airliners have advanced, and counter measures can be remotely overridden using methods the NSA cannot detect

___ How many foreign fighters have the addresses of DoJ Staff counsel and their family members for purposes of lawfully rendering them to The Hague

___ How effective are foreign fighters in capturing evidence related to American war crimes

___ Has the Embassy fiber optics communication system been successfully penetrated

___ How much resistance to the illegality fails

___ Does the American leadership have an explanation for their award fees to SETA contractors for martial law, but there exist no credible assumptions related to American civilian resistance to human rights abuses

___ Why should the American civil leadership accept the estimates of the number of expected American government defections to those who support the Constitution

___ Why should anyone believe that the US government officials’ defiance of the rule of law, illegal insurrection, or unlawful cooperating with others to impose martial law will not face sanctions at The Hague

___ Why should anyone believe that the American government can timely train personnel to support Martial Law, given the abysmal training provided to US combat troops in Iraq: How many combat losses was that today, and funerals at Arlington?

___ Does the American government have an explanation why classified plans related to imposing Martial Law are outdated, and wholly inconsistent with the lessons related to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Katrina

___ How will the US government credibly put martial law into effect

___ Which standards will the American government use to guide the civil authorities

___ What will be the exceptions to martial law

___ If the civil courts are disbanded, what method will be used to decide whether the exceptions are reasonable; or whether there should be a uniform standard

___ Will the orders include a “shoot on sight” of children below 7 years old

___ How does the American government explain the killing of Iraqi children; should Americans expect anything different in the United States; if there is a difference, is there an explanation for the discipline problem in Iraq

___ Where is the United States going to get the ammunition to implement martial law

___ Does the United States have a contingency plan if foreign fighters working in Palestine attack weapons plants in Israel

___ How does the United States propose to prepare for martial law without anyone knowing about it

___ Given the leaks related to rendition, Guantanamo, and the NSA, what method will the US use to silence those who discuss illegal use of military combat forces

___ Why is it permissible for the US government to plan acts of outrages against innocent American civilians, but it is not permissible to discuss these plans?

___ What will be the preferred method of the United States government in executing American civilian children: Gas, bullets, hanging, suffocation, live burial, drowning, burning, forced disposal in meat grinders

___ Is there a credible plan to prevent the children from screaming as they are thrown into the pits

___ Does the US government expect American children to be brave, and accept their sentence, and jump into the pit silently

___ What will the method of resolution be if a member of the DOJ Staff accidentally has one of their children detained, and they go missing: Is there a method to ensure that some American children are not going to be targeted, but others are appropriately placed on the target list

___ What types of psychological counseling will be offered to the American troops who are ordered to destroy American homes, burn children, or commit grave outrages against civilians

___ Please discuss the method the American government plans to implement to ensure that some American children are not affected by the Martial Law, but the “correct” children are appropriately targeted

___ Will American combat troops be given higher or lower priority than American civilian leadership at the hospitals

___ How will sniffles, flu, and seasonal cramps be considered on the medical emergency list: If a civilian leader implementing martial law has an ache, will they be given a helicopter ride to Walter Reed

___ If there are fuel shortages, will sick children have to walk to the hospital; or will it be acceptable for the Military Combat forces to roll over American children as has been the practice in Iraq

___ How much money will American combat forces give American families if their children are accidentally run over by a tank: $200?

___ Who is on contract to provide the perimeter security to the detention centers

___ Where will the overflows go: Prison ships floating in Gulf of Mexico?

___ What if there is a sewage problem on the floating prison ships: Will the captain solve the problem; or will the American children detained on board be forced to endure conditions of Guantanamo?

___ Will water boarding be used to silence American children?

___ How many American children deaths will be the “threshold point” which the force planners assume will not occur; what is the basis for this number; what happens if the actual number of civilian deaths exceed this number

___ Is SAIC, Lincoln Group on contract to spin a nice story about Martial Law; will the videos be identified as being a “Video News Release”?

___ Which contractors have secret contracts to monitor internet communications related to martial law

___ Will power outages be regulated, or will they be random

___ If there are food shortages at the detention camps, do the Americans have an explanation for how they plan to support the martial law

___ Given the failure of the US troops to secure the US-Mexican border, why should we believe the results will be different elsewhere

___ How many contractors have offshore headquarters so they can avoid litigation for their assistance for abuses committed against children

___ Is there a reason why companies like Halliburton have headquarters overseas

___ What is going to prevent foreign fighters from lawfully attempting a humanitarian intervention

___ Will the UN be closed to prevent the world from seeing the decimation

___ Where will the new UN Headquarters be

___ If the global warming continues, has there been any consideration for putting the new UN headquarters in a warm climate like Norway or the North Pole

___ Will Santa bring gifts to the children at the detention centers

___ How will Strategic Command track the movement of Santa as he approaches the detention centers: Will it be a live linkup

___ What if the big bad laser systems accidentally shoot down Santa: Will he come back next year?

___ Will the foreign media be given the chance to interview detainees

___ If there is a concern for detainee rights (as an excuse to prevent photographs), how do the American civil authorities explain the solitary confinement centers

___ How long will American civilians have to pack their bags: 1 hour, 10 minutes, three weeks

___ How many pounds of luggage will American civilians be allowed to carry to the detention centers

___ Can American civilian children take more than one toy to the detention center

___ The US plans to construct moon bases. What is the plan to enforce martial law on the Moon. What if there are aliens are the back side of the moon – does the US have a plan to prevent the aliens from training foreign fighters?

___ Once the writ of habeas corpus is revoked, is there any other credible threat the DoJ Staff may impose; or must you admit you’ve run out of options?

___ What’s the back up plan if martial law fails?

___ What is the scapegoat the US government officials plan to blame if the plan fails to work

___ What happens if the American population refuses to cooperate with Martial law?

___ Given the abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, why should any American believe that the US government officials are going to treat Americans differently; if there is a different treatment plan, this would mean that Prisoners of war in Eastern Europe are not being treated consistently with how their civilian counterparts are being treated, and would amount to a war crime. Please discuss the Abraxas effort to cooperate with discovery in identifying which CIA personnel were instrumental in providing the training to those implementing martial law at the American detention centers.

___ What is the plan of the US government to destroy evidence related to war crimes

___ Are the US attorneys cooperating with the DoJ planning to destroy evidence related to abuses at the martial law detention centers

___ What is John Yoo’s view on the Martial Law plan: Did he wear nice shoes and a shirt when he met with Addington; or were they walking around in their underwear like he-man Cheney

___ What will happen if someone moves Laura’s furniture again; will Laura invite a Congressional page to help her rearrange the furniture at the hotel

___ What is the plan of the DOJ Staff to defend the civil authorities who impose martial law

___ Without an insurrection or invasion, why should anyone at The Hague believe that the imposition of martial law was lawful; or that the writ of habeas was appropriately denied

___ Where in the Constitution does it say the Congress has the power to abrogate the Constitution

___ What is going to be done to mitigate the conditions that would otherwise make martial law inevitable

___ What is the reason the factors and conditions that would precipitate martial law could not be mitigated in a proactive way; what assumptions about the failure of law and order are the planners assuming. The real problem has been their failure to effectively govern and adequately manage the factors they circularly argued mandated martial law to support their illegal rebellion against the US Constitution. What is to say these conditions have not already been allowed to occur, by design, under an Administration intent on finding a pretext to attempt to implement martial law.

___ When will the plans to train, and deploy troops be put into effect

___ How can Martial Law be implemented so long as troops are tasked for two live combat theaters, and are on standby around the globe. Where are the troops going to compel from to credibly enforce martial law; as opposed to failing to use force, and emboldening foreign fighters to take advantage of the failure. Or is this failure part of the plan to justify greater abuses against American civilians?

___ Which standards and success criteria will be used; why should these plans and criteria be believe to exist given its been three years since the 2003 Iraq invasion, but the President has just gotten around to issuing the same for Iraq.

___ What are the standards DoJ, DHS, and DoD plans to oversee Martial Law. How will DoD laws of war program 5100.77 be factored into the force planning to implement martial law. How will troops be governed. Will 5100.77 apply; or will US troops be immune to UCMJ?

___ What is the funding ramp, training profile, and the expected training requirements for US domestic security to support Martial Law. Why should the training plan be expected to achieve better or worse results than we’ve seen in Iraq. What is to say American civilians might not do the unexpected as is the case in Iraq: Join with foreign fighters, protect the Constitution, and lawfully end the illegal US government rebellion against the US Constitution?

___ How long is Martial Law expected to last before there are economic impacts. What is the expected relationship between loss of GDP/GNP for each successive month Martial Law is imposed. Please discuss the planning assumptions used in Iraq and why the expected economic forecasts have or have not been realized; and why the forecasts are or are not relevant to the US approach.

___ Will American civilians be tried without courts martial

___ What is the excepted maximum capacity of the detention centers; where are the backup detention centers; and which countries have agreed to accept American civilians if there are overflows

___ How will the ICRC be incorporated into the planning, visits, and detention center monitoring.

___ How will foreign fighter attempts at humanitarian intervention be handled before the United Nations General Assembly

___ What is a “successful” Martial Law; how was this definition decided; when was the definition updated in light of the Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, Eastern European Detention centers

___ Will domestic Non-official cover [NOC] CIA agents and civilian contractors be given immunity for their implementation of illegal martial law abuses; will their defenses before The Hague be funded by Congressional Appropriations; or may these promises of immunity be unrecognizable before an international war crimes tribunal?

___ What is to say the conditions leading to martial law are a breakdown of civil order; what if the conditions are a breakdown in American governance, or an illegal rebellion by the US government against the US Constitution, as we currently have. What is going to prevent the US from imposing summary justice on hundreds of thousands of Americans as was the case in Rwanda. If this is not possible or foreseeable, why are we discussing the possibility of Martial Law?

* * *


American contractors engaged in martial law contingency planning know, or should know, that the assumptions they are using are not realistic. The results of Iraq and Afghanistan have been unreasonably explained away.

DoD and DoJ personnel involved with these plans have yet to explain which conditions they plan to mitigate; and which conditions they plan to use as a pretext. DoJ OPR has been ineffectively been given access to the NSA-DoJ interface issues related to the ongoing coordination to put these plans into effect.

The threat of Martial Law in the United States is hoped to have a greater chilling effect on American conduct than the actual imposition of martial law. Planners know there are insufficient resources, trained troops, or backup forces to adequately support combat operations, forced detentions, and engage in commercial transactions.

Planners have incorrectly assumed that backup forces and reserves will be augmented by other forces, but have failed to consider how a failed national martial law might inspire and incite the very guerrilla warfare they hope to combat. Planners have incorrectly assumed that national guard units will blindly obey orders; or that media reports of abuses will not inspire American citizen backlash.

The Contingency plans fail to consider the possibility there may be a US government created in absentia; or a New Constitution created to lawfully replace the defective system of laws which permitted the illegal US government rebellion against the Constitution.

There is no credible basis to believe the US government can successfully implement or enforce martial law as DHS, DoD, and DoJ have planned. The American citizens know this. There are insufficient resources, equipment, and screening procedures to adequately implement simple community events; there is no prospect these procedures could be quickly implemented nationwide, as would be required for martial law.

Martial Law cannot be implemented out of the blue, requiring time to train personnel to implement martial law. There are many planning actions, likely considered illegal and subject to disclosure, that would be known: Plans, detention center fabrication, passage of legislation, and training of civilian augmentees. Each of these has been accomplished, but the US Government cannot credibly put this plan into effect.

A failure to successfully use force against American civilians may embolden foreign fighters to target US interests around the globe. NSC should consider the lessons of Iraq, and ask why they are concerned about guerrilla warfare from a nation that, until a few years ago, would have blindly followed the RNC rebellion to commit grave breaches of Geneva at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and in Eastern Europe. Something with the National Security Council credibility has changed, and the NSC has yet to fully explain their concern for something never considered a credible threat: How does the NSC explain why guerrillas in the United States can plan their operations, be unknown to the NSC; yet the NSC martial law plans have been openly mocked for their absurdity and flawed assumptions.

Martial law plans fail to correctly factor economic impacts, disruption to property values, or how the American civilian population might lawfully resist illegal American government rebellion against the Constitution.


Force planners should explain to the Committee how they plan to put martial law into effect.