If Dictator Obama Imposes Martial Law, Police and Military Need to Disobey Obama’s Orders

It seems that the either clueless or criminal Ben Bernanke continues to want to print more money, keep interests rates at near-zero and cause more and more inflation, and kill all those of us who are not of the bankster-elite billion-dollar-bonus class, the rest of us who just want to  live our lives and want to be left alone. But, because of the Bernanke-Bush-Obama policies that will only lead to economic collapse, and the only prevention of which is decentralization of everything, there will be much society chaos in the coming months or years. America has quickly become a police state, and it really is up to the people to prevent the chaos.

The occurrences of police intrusions, abuses and assaults, trespassings, break-ins and murders of innocent human beings and private property have been increasingly pervasive in the news. It is extremely disturbing, and as I have mentioned, one cure for this problem is the removing of government’s monopoly in community policing, and allowing open, free competition in the fields of community policing and security, as well as removing government controls on weapons ownership and possession.

We now have a mindset amongst the government-monopolized police of viewing the citizens as the enemy, and that all citizens should be viewed as suspects, and as presumed criminals. This mindset is being reinforced by the “War on Terror,” the War on Drugs and the war on private gun ownership.

The Nazi-neanderthal mentality of S.W.A.T. teams breaking into private property, private homes, murdering, terrorizing and stealing, to do with student loan defaults and other such non-violent offenses, is all too common now. The government is desperate for more money that it can’t get enough of from counterfeiting printing.

The “Us vs. Them” mentality amongst today’s police forces is also seen now in the U.S. military. U.S. military officers have been using psy-ops on U.S. senators, as described in this article, and, given that senators supposedly represent the American people, then this is a sign that the military now views the people as the enemy. As I wrote here,

Psy-ops are generally used on foreign government agents or diplomats to influence their emotions and decisions to become favorable to one’s own ends. Psy-ops are often used on the enemy during times of war; given that the senators being targeted in those operations represent the American people, it gives the appearance that the U.S. government perceives Americans as the enemy. This is usually what happens when a government – through its monopolistic power – grows in its size and power, and its existence becomes more self-serving.

Although much of this so-called “War on Terror” was well-planned out years prior to 9/11, the George W. Bush Administration’s implementation of those plans, which is not a “War on Terror” but a War on Civil Liberties, and was based solely on knee-jerk, emotional reactions to 9/11 and not on reason and common sense, has contributed a great deal to the increasing paranoid government agents’ mentality of viewing everyone with suspicion. Bush’s PATRIOT Act removes the right to presumption of innocence, the right to due process, and “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,” and the right to be free from suspicion-less searches of persons and property.

The Nazi-like procedures that remove our right to presumption of innocence will be used by governments — federal, state and local — for other reasons including political ones, not just to “protect us from terrorists.” (Of course, the government will never protect us from terrorists as long as it continues to trespass on foreign lands murdering innocents and destroying their property, homes and businesses, destroying their way of life, their peace, their liberty, all of which is what provokes the foreigners to act against us. The U.S. government has been trespassing, murdering, invading and occupying those foreign territories for a century, and I think that many Americans just don’t know this history.)

As I have noted in the past, especially in my message to Tea Partiers, that I link to constantly, these civil liberties intrusions will be used by subsequent U.S. White House administrations against the American people, and I am being proven right. First there’s student loan defaults, and then there’s business regulation violations (such as producing “illegal raw milk,” etc.), and soon the reasons will be political.

Will the Bush DHS “Fusion Centers” be used as places for political oppression? According to Wendy McElroy, they already have been:

Maryland: Fifty-three nonviolent political activists, including antiwar and anti-death penalty activists, were labeled as terrorists and actively surveilled for 14 months.

Minnesota: Eight anarchist protesters who planned to protest the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis were preemptively arrested and charged with terrorism. In Minnesota, a crime can become terrorism if it disrupts the conduct of government.

Texas: A leaked intelligence bulletin from the North Central Texas Fusion System asked police officers to report on Islamic and antiwar lobbying groups.

Missouri: Supporters of third party presidential candidates, pro-life activists, and conspiracy theorists were targeted as potential militia members.

Virginia (pdf): A terrorism threat assessment included certain universities as breeding grounds for terrorism, including historically black colleges.

A more comprehensive list of fusion abuse is available in the ACLU’s Survey of Reported Incidents (pdf). See also the ACLU’s interactive map for what’s happening in your state.

And now, the military and the police are merging, not officially of course (at least not yet anyway). The militarization of the police is everywhere, with armored tanks and military assault weaponry, and those embarrassingly idiotic camouflage outfits. All this spells big trouble for us in America, especially if there really is going to be a major economic collapse, civil unrest, looting and rioting. Obama the typical statist politician who loves power and more power — he will grab any opportunity available to him to impose martial law, even though we already are in a police state.

And now, thanks to the Bush-Obama wars, we have returning veterans, many of whom suffer from PTSD and are angry, disillusioned and bitter, and not at all inhibited in taking it out on others, who are joining local police forces in droves. I have mentioned here about rampant sexual assault in the military — and that’s male against male as referred to in this article — (but also against females as well). And such military personnel also include the “Kill Team,” with a mentality of viewing other human beings as subhuman and worthy of being assaulted, tortured, mutilated and murdered, and for the “thrill” of doing so. According to one soldier, “Everyone just wants to kill people at any cost.” In fact, some of the recruits have included past gang members and felons.

If we have military people beating each other up, and sexually assaulting each other, then how could Americans possibly be safe not just with local police forces having so much authority and power now, but in the case of military-police martial law? As I wrote here,

When seeing that Libyan leader Col. Gaddafi had turned his military against protesters, rebels and civilians, as well as other leaders doing the same thing in other countries such as in Bahrain, some commenters have suggested that such tyrannical violence could never happen here in the United States.

However, there already is precedence of that in America, so those who say “It can’t happen here” are incorrect. As economist and historian Thomas DiLorenzo has noted, during the mid-19^th Century War to Prevent Southern Independence, President Abraham Lincoln’s army murdered hundreds of military conscription protestors in the North, and

“Lincoln illegally suspended the writ of Habeas Corpus and imprisoned tens of thousands of Northern political critics without any due process; shut down hundreds of opposition newspapers…censored all telegraphs; rigged elections; imprisoned duly elected members of the Maryland legislature along with Congressman Henry May of Baltimore and the mayor of Baltimore; illegally orchestrated the secession of West Virginia to give the Republican Party two more U.S. senators; confiscated firearms in the border states in violation of the Second Amendment….”

And all that was in addition to Lincoln’s army and its co-conspirators murdering tens of thousands of innocent, unarmed civilians, mostly in the South.

Jacob Hornberger has noted several times how many amongst the American Founders opposed the idea of a standing army (See here, here, and here.). A standing army is destined to be made into the president’s personal army, which was the case with Wilson, FDR, Bush and Obama especially. Hornberger noted here how the standing army might very well be used to crack down on protests of angry Americans in the case of an extremely severe economic downfall.

As I noted in my article on martial law,

Now, one of the most important documents in American history, the Declaration of Independence, notes that we are all equal under the law and have inherent, inalienable rights to life and liberty. My interpretation of those rights is that each individual has the inherent right to one’s own life and has a right to be free from the aggression of others. And that means that everyone has a right to be left alone and a right to presumption of innocence, unless and until someone suspects an actual individual of some actual violation against some other individual’s life, person or property. These are “inalienable” rights in that no one may take them away.

However, the whole concept of martial law is based on the suspension of these inherent rights, in which one’s rights to freedom of movement, speech and presumption of innocence and so on are suspended, without actual suspicion of crimes, without due process. That means that, if individuals’ rights to life and liberty are inalienable, then any government-imposed suspension of those inalienable rights would be crimes committed by agents of the State.

My recent article on “civil disobedience” and “disobeying dictators,” was mainly in reference to disobeying regulations and mandates, such as in health care and energy, with suggestions of individual and state nullification of federal orders. I also mentioned undoing the statists’ government-expansionist and imperialist policies, such as closing foreign U.S. military bases, eliminating the income tax and eliminating economic regulations, allowing for greater individual and economic freedom and toward the expansion of businesses and the creation of jobs. I also mentioned how the citizens need to “crack down” on criminal government employees, from local police to other agents of the state who are committing crimes against citizens.

But, in that article, I wasn’t really suggesting to people to be “disobedient” in the case of confrontations between police and citizens, i.e. something that might be considered “disorderly conduct” or “resisting arrest,” and so on. I don’t want people to take risks like that. However, my point with this post today is, I am suggesting that government officials, including police and military, disobey commands from their superiors to do things that they know are mainly for the purpose of suppressing political dissent, speech, non-violent protest, or otherwise behaviors in which an individual is clearly not a threat to anyone.

When the White House tapes of several presidents in meetings and phone conversations were made public, and I heard several excerpts on various radio programs, the one that really stood out was with Richard Nixon speaking to a governor on the phone. I can’t find this on the Internet, but I remember hearing Nixon telling the governor to do something, maybe having to do with Vietnam protests, I’m not sure, and Nixon telling the governor, “Now that’s an order. I’m ordering you to…”

Now, does the president have that authority to order a governor to do something? I don’t think so. If you go by the Constitution, then the president is the “commander in chief” of the armed forces, so, supposedly he has the authority to order anyone under his command in the forces to do what he orders. Governors, however, are clearly civilian government officials, not military.

Here is what I’m getting at. If Obama does attempt to impose martial law, then, I believe that it is the duty of the governors to disobey the president’s orders. If there really is “civil unrest” and social “chaos,” and rioting, then it really is the duty of each individual to protect oneself from anyone who is committing acts of violence. But, in the case of unrest and rioting, such martial law on top of the already police state in which America currently finds itself will be exacerbated by the violence that the police and military will unleash against the people.

I know there are some good and decent people amongst our various police forces and military in America, people who understand the ideas of liberty, presumption of innocence and property rights, and it really is up to those people to disobey the orders of their commanding officers, orders to violate the rights of innocent people, which basically is what martial law is. I am suggesting that the governors of the states should disobey Obama’s orders, and that members of police and military also engage in acts of disobedience.

But the bottom line is, we wouldn’t have all the problems we have now if there weren’t the centralization of power that now rests in Washington. Centralization and central planning is always destructive of the people’s liberty, and of the country’s economic activity, destructive of growth and prosperity, and can only lead to Leviathan tyranny. To protect ourselves, we really need to view the federal government for what it is: an invading and occupying foreign government.

That is why the states need to restore their independence and sovereignty and separate themselves from the DC dictators, in the same way that the Soviet Union necessarily had to break up, and why we need to get rid of central planning in money and banking (i.e. Federal Reserve), and we we need to get rid of central planning in “national security.”