Economic Collapse As Precursor To Open Plan For Martial Law?

Economic Collapse As Precursor To Open Plan For Martial Law?Many fear recession, bank run, strike on Iran or terror attack could signal green light for state of emergencyPaul Joseph WatsonPrison PlanetThursday, August 16, 2007 The open announcement of a program on behalf of the federal government that is recruiting clergy to aid the authorities in "quelling dissent," gun confiscation and forced relocation in the event of martial law has many worried that the current economic plunge could be the precursor for a state of emergency in America.A KSLA 12 news report out of Louisiana confirmed a story we originally broke last year - that religious leaders are being enrolled into a federal program that trains them how to "quell dissent" and make people obey the government in the aftermath of a declaration of martial law following a mass casualty terror attack or a natural disaster.Watch the video.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-BtWhs8qlgA convergence of events logically leads to a conclusion that only the most naive observer would deny - that an upcoming crisis may be in the pipeline that will signal the green light for such provisions to be enacted. World stock markets continued to plunge today despite billions in liquidity being pumped into the system by governments in Europe, Asia and the U.S.With a prolonged slump leading to fears of a recession on the horizon, many worry that a run on the banks could cause chaos on American streets and give the government an excuse to enact sate of emergency procedures that Bush recently codified into law with his Presidential Decision Directive of May 9th.Others see the designation of Iran's military wing as a terrorist organization by the White House as an ominous indication that a military strike is being finalized, as five U.S. aircraft carriers circulate the Persian Gulf.An attack on Iran could also be preceded by a terror attack on U.S. soil which would lead to the suspension of the U.S. constitution and the implementation of a military form of government, as General Tommy Franks warned of in November 2003.Readers reacted with horror to the confirmation of the martial law plan and even those that routinely dismiss our stories as overhyped or exaggerated expressed their deep concern."I'll be the 1st to admit I'm not big on conspiracy theories but after seeing that news report, I'm scared juiceless," commented one."I am a liberal who owns many many guns, and this is exactly why," remarked another.RELATED: Feds Train Clergy To "Quell Dissent" During Martial LawCopyright © Prisonplanet.com. All rights reserved.Printed from: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/augus...ic_collapse.htm

America's Pastors: Preachers of Truth or Promoters of Tyranny?Chuck BaldwinLew Rockwell.comThursday Aug 23, 2007
Once again, the burden of responsibility to help maintain America's liberty rests upon the shoulders of the men in the pulpits. That should not surprise us, because it has always been this way. Part of what made America great was old-fashioned, tell-it-like-it-is, no-nonsense preaching. Most of what we hear today is a bunch of mealy-mouthed, pussyfooting, ear-tickling, don't-offend-anyone preaching, which has largely contributed to America's current slippery slope into the sewer. But if you thought it could not get any worse, guess again.A startling television news report from Shreveport, Louisiana has revealed a sinister plot hatched deep inside the diabolical brain cells of the Bush administration to use America's pulpits as promoters of tyranny. That is a strong statement, I know. But it is true.According to KSLA television in Shreveport, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intends to use America's preachers to help pave the way for martial law in the event of another terrorist attack upon the United States.The KSLA report begins, "Could martial law ever become a reality in America? Some fear any nuclear, biological or chemical attack on U.S. soil might trigger just that. KSLA 12 has discovered that the clergy would help the government with potentially their biggest problem: Us."The report continued by saying, "[G]un confiscation is exactly what happened during the state of emergency following Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, along with forced relocation. U.S. Troops also arrived, something far easier to do now, thanks to last year's elimination of the 1878 Posse Comitatus act, which had forbid regular U.S. Army troops from policing on American soil."If martial law were enacted here at home, like depicted in the movie, The Siege, easing public fears and quelling dissent would be critical. And that's exactly what the 'Clergy Response Team' helped accomplish in the wake of Katrina."The report went on to say: "[C]lergy response teams would walk a tight-rope during martial law between the demands of the government on the one side, versus the wishes of the public on the other. 'In a lot of cases, these clergy would already be known in the neighborhoods in which they're helping to diffuse that situation,' assured Sandy Davis. He serves as the director of the Caddo-Bossier Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness."For the clergy team, one of the biggest tools that they will have in helping calm the public down or to obey the law is the bible itself, specifically Romans 13."Dear Reader, are you getting this?In order to convince American citizens to surrender their firearms to the government during a time of martial law, DHS is enlisting the assistance of America's pastors. According to the DHS, my job as a church pastor, is to tell my congregation that, according to Romans 13, they must surrender their firearms when the government asks them to do sf course, faithful readers of this column know that I have already addressed the Romans 13 question.For those who are ignorant of Romans 13, let me address the issue bluntly: According to Romans 13, every citizen is only bound to obey his or her governing official to the degree that the governing official does not violate the duty of the citizen to obey the "higher powers" which, for Americans, are God and the U.S. Constitution. In other words, no Christian can be ordered to disobey God, and no American citizen can be ordered to disobey the U.S. Constitution. Properly understood, Romans 13 teaches that each and every governing official (including the President of the United States and all those under him) must submit to the U.S. Constitution.Article VI, Paragraph 3 of the U.S. Constitution states, "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution."So, what does the Constitution say regarding the disarmament of American citizens? The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution could not be clearer: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."Did you get that? "[T]he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." [Emphasis added]Therefore, any attempt to disarm the American people must be viewed as an act of tyranny and must be resisted.The right to keep and bear arms is rooted deep in American history. I remind readers that it was the attempted gun confiscation of the colonists' arms, which had been cached at Concord, Massachusetts, that directly precipitated the beginning of America's fight for independence.America's founders were clear on this subject. Our first President, George Washington, called our firearms "the people's liberty teeth." Our third President and author of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson, said, "No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain their right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government."America's founders spoke unanimously on the subject. Patrick Henry said, "The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun." Samuel Adams said, "The said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."And what did the Lord Jesus Christ tell His followers on this subject? Jesus said in Luke 11:21, "When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace." Did you see that? Jesus said that in order for a man's goods to be "in peace" it was necessary that he be ARMED. Now, I don't know about you, but I will take the word of Jesus over the word of a DHS official anytime.Furthermore, Jesus told his disciples in Luke 22:36, "[H]e that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."Upon hearing the words of Jesus, Simon Peter responded by saying, "Lord, behold, here are two swords." (vs. 38) That means at least two of Jesus' disciples were armed with swords (the 1st Century equivalent of a modern handgun, something used for personal protection), and Jesus did not rebuke them or ask them to surrender their swords. He merely said, "It is enough."I realize that after Simon Peter used his sword to cut off the ear of the man as soldiers came to arrest Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus told him to "put up thy sword." But notice, He did not tell him to "give up" his sword; he merely told him it was not time to use it, because it was in the plan and providence of God that Jesus be taken to Pilate, that He might be crucified for our sins.Don't tell me that the Bible teaches pacifism, because it doesn't. I am a Christian, and I am a pastor. And I agree with Charlton Heston who said that they could have his guns "over my cold, dead hands." If DHS believes that I will ask my congregation to give up their firearms, they are grossly mistaken.It also needs to be pointed out that, apparently, DHS must already be planning to declare martial law in the United States or else this kind of advanced strategy would not even be necessary. Why would they already be asking pastors to be prepared to request their church members give up their guns if they did not intend to declare martial law?Now, what every single church-going Christian in America should immediately find out for themselves is, What does my pastor intend to do? Will he ask me to surrender my guns, or not? I highly encourage every reader who currently attends church to ask your pastor this question RIGHT NOW.Of course, the next question Christians need to ask themselves is, What will I do if my pastor says he would ask me to surrender my guns to the government? I suggest that every church member in America settle this matter right now. And if you discover that your pastor would indeed ask you to surrender your guns (or equivocate by saying he would have to "pray about it") if asked to do so, you should immediately leave that church and find a pastor who believes the Bible and supports the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, if you do not currently own a firearm, you might want to heed the words of Jesus and go buy one.So, once again, the burden of responsibility to help maintain America's liberty rests upon the shoulders of the men in the pulpits. Will we be preachers of truth or promoters of tyranny?
Copyright © Prisonplanet.com. All rights reserved.Printed from: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/augus...0807Pastors.htm

Neocons, the Bible, False Flags and Martial LawGeorge Washington's BlogFriday Aug 17, 2007
By now, you have probably heard that the government has been training ministers to convince their congregations to submit to government authority in the event of a martial law crackdown, based upon Romans 13 (see also this).Fundamentalist Christians argue that Romans 13 states that Christians must submit to government authority, since the government is divinely empowered and sustained. This is actually the argument which Adolph Hitler used in order to convince the German churches to follow him and his policies.However, Romans 13 does not teach subservience. Rather, as explained by a Baptist minister, Romans 13 actually says something very different: "Paul … said, ‘Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.’ Meaning, our obedience to civil authority is more than just ‘because they said so.’ It is also a matter of conscience. This means we must think and reason for ourselves regarding the justness and rightness of our government's laws. Obedience is not automatic or robotic. It is a result of both rational deliberation and moral approbation. Therefore, there are times when civil authority may need to be resisted. Either governmental abuse of power or the violation of conscience (or both) could precipitate civil disobedience."The Bible therefore requires that Christians resist imposition of martial law based upon false pretenses or upon an abuse of power.(Article continues below)Similarly, Romans 13 teaches that any government that is a "terror to good works" is acting beyond its authority and must be resisted.Therefore, Romans 13 compels us to resist and remove from power elements of the U.S. government which participated in the 9/11 attacks or are planning to carry out further false flag attacks.And remember that neoconservatives use religion to manipulate people, even though they themselves are usually not religious. So the government hacks pushing Romans 13 as an excuse for fascism and government-sponsored terror likely do not themselves even believe in the Bible.Note: Please pass this on to every Christian you know.This is not meant as an attempt to convert non-Christians to Christianity. 85% of the American population identifies itself as Christian, and millions more identify themselves as Jewish. Therefore, it is aimed at the vast majority of Americans who already believe in the Bible, or those who wish to reach them. If you are an atheist, mocking Christians will not help to persuade them of your view - it will just make them defensive. But educating them about what their own faith really teaches might help to persuade them.
See also this.Copyright © Infowars.net All rights reserved.Printed from: http://infowars.net/articles/august2007/170807Neocons.htm

Will Bush cancel the 2008 election?Harvey Wasserman & Bob FitrakisOnline JournalWednesday Aug 1, 2007
It is time to think about the "unthinkable."The Bush administration has both the inclination and the power to cancel the 2008 election.The GOP strategy for another electoral theft in 2008 has taken clear shape, though we must assume there is much more we don't know.But we must also assume that if it appears to Team Bush/Cheney/Rove that the GOP will lose the 2008 election anyway (as it lost in Ohio 2006), we cannot ignore the possibility that they would simply cancel the election. Those who think this crew will quietly walk away from power are simply not paying attention.The real question is not how or when they might do it. It's how, realistically, we can stop them.In Florida 2000, Team Bush had a game plan involving a handful of tactics. With Jeb Bush in the governor's mansion, the GOP used a combination of disenfranchisement, intimidation, faulty ballots, electronic voting fraud, a rigged vote count and an aborted recount, courtesy of the US Supreme Court.A compliant Democrat (Al Gore) allowed the coup to be completed.In Ohio 2004, the arsenal of dirty tricks exploded. Based in Columbus, we have documented more than a hundred different tactics used to steal the 20 electoral votes that gave Bush a second term. More are still surfacing. As a result of the King-Lincoln-Bronzeville federal lawsuit (in which we are plaintiff and attorney) we have now been informed that 56 of the 88 counties in Ohio violated federal law by destroying election records, thus preventing a definitive historical recount.As in 2000, a compliant Democrat (John Kerry) allowed the coup to proceed.For 2008 we expect the list of vote theft maneuvers to escalate yet again. We are already witnessing a coordinated nationwide drive to destroy voter registration organizations and to disenfranchise millions of minority, poor and young voters.This carefully choreographed campaign is complemented by the widespread use of electronic voting machines. As reported by the Government Accountability Office, Princeton University, the Brennan Center, the Carter-Baker Commission, US Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) and others, these machines can be easily used to flip an election. They were integral to stealing both the 2000 and 2004 elections. Efforts to make their source codes transparent, or to require a usable paper trail on a federal level, have thus far failed. A discriminatory Voter ID requirement may also serve as the gateway to a national identification card.Overall, the GOP will have at its command even more weapons of election theft in 2008 than it did in Ohio 2004, which jumped exponentially from Florida 2000. The Rovian GOP is nothing if not tightly organized to do this with ruthless efficiency. Expect everything that was used these past two presidential elections to surface again in 2008 in far more states, with far more efficiency, and many new dirty tricks added in.But in Ohio 2006, the GOP learned a hard lesson. Its candidate for governor was J. Kenneth Blackwell. The secretary of state was the essential on-the-ground operative in the theft of Ohio 2004.When he announced for governor, many Ohioans joked that "Ken Blackwell will never lose an election where he counts the votes."But lose he did . . . along with the GOP candidates for secretary of state, attorney general and US Senate.By our calculations, despite massive grassroots scrutiny, the Republicans stole in excess of 6 percent of the Ohio vote in 2006. But they still lost.Why? Because they were so massively unpopular that even a 6 percent bump couldn't save them. Outgoing Governor Bob Taft, who pleaded guilty to four misdemeanors while in office, left town with a 7 percent approval rating (that's not a typo). Blackwell entered the last week of the campaign down 30 percent in some polls.So while the GOP still had control of the electoral machinery here in 2006, the public tide against them was simply too great to hold back, even through the advanced art and science of modern Rovian election theft.In traditional electoral terms, that may also be the case in 2008. Should things proceed as they are now, it's hard to imagine any Republican candidate going into the election within striking distance. The potential variations are many, but the graffiti on the wall is clear.What's also clear is that this administration has a deep, profound and uncompromised contempt for democracy, for the rule of law, and for the US Constitution. When George W. Bush went on the record (twice) as saying he has nothing against dictatorship, as long as he can be dictator, it was a clear and present policy statement.Who really believes this crew will walk quietly away from power? They have the motivation, the money and the method for doing away with the electoral process altogether. So why wouldn't they?The groundwork for dismissal of both the legislative and judicial branch has been carefully laid. The litany is well-known, but worth a very partial listing:The continuation of the drug war, and the USAPATRIOT Act, Homeland Security Act and other dictatorial laws prompted by the 9/11/2001 terror attacks, have decimated the Bill of Rights, and shredded the traditional American right to due process of law, freedom from official surveillance, arbitrary violence, and far more.The current attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, has not backed away from his announcement to Congress that the Constitution does not guarantee habeas corpus. The administration continues to act on the assumption that it can arrest anyone at any time and hold them without notification or trial for as long as it wants.The establishment of the Department of Homeland Security has given it additional hardware to decimate the basic human rights of our citizenry. Under the guise of dealing with the "immigration problem," large concentration camps are under construction around the US.The administration has endorsed and is exercising its "right" to employ torture, contrary to the Eighth Amendment and to a wide range of international treaties, which Gonzales has labeled "quaint."With more than 200 "signing statements," the administration acts on its belief that the "unitary executive" trumps the power of the legislative branch in any instance it chooses. This belief has been further enforced with the administration's use of a wide range of precedent-setting arguments to keep its functionaries from testifying before Congress.There is much more. In all instances, the 109th Congress and the public have rolled over without significant resistance.Most crucial now are Presidential Directive #51, Executive Orders #13303, #13315, #13350, #13364, #13422, #13438, and more, by which Bush has granted himself an immense arsenal of powers for which the term "dictatorial" is a modest understatement.The framers established our government with checks and balances. But executive orders have accumulated important precedent. The Emancipation Proclamation, by which Lincoln declared an end to slavery in the South, was issued under the "military necessity" of adding blacks to the Union Army, a step without which the North might not have won the Civil War. Franklin Roosevelt's Executive Order #8802 established the Fair Employment Practices Commission. Harry Truman's Executive Order #9981 desegregated the military.More to the point, FDR's Executive Order #9066 ordered the forcible internment of 100,000 people of Japanese descent into the now infamous concentration camps of World War II.There is also precedent for a president overriding the Supreme Court. In the 1830s, Chief Justice John Marshall enshrined the right of the Cherokee Nation to sovereignty over its ancestral land in the Appalachian Mountains. But President Andrew Jackson scorned the decision. Some 14,000 native Americans were moved at gunpoint to Oklahoma. More than 3,000 died along the way.All this will be relevant should Team Bush envision a defeat in the 2008 election and decide to call it off. It's well established that Richard Nixon -- mentor to Karl Rove and Dick Cheney -- commissioned the Huston Plan, which detailed how to cancel the 1972 election.Today we must ask: who would stop this administration from taking dictatorial power in the instance of a "national emergency" such as a terror attack at a nuclear power plant or something similar?Nothing in the behavior of this Congress indicates that it is capable of significant resistance. Impeachment seems beyond it. Nor does it seem Congress would actually remove Bush if it did put him on trial.Short of that, Bush clearly does not view anything Congress might do as a meaningful impediment. After all, how many divisions does the Congress command?The Supreme Court, as currently constituted, would almost certainly rubber stamp a Bush coup. If not, like Jackson, he could ignore it as easily as he would ignore Congress.What does that leave? There is much idle speculation now about what the armed forces would do. We also hear loose talk about "90 million gun owners."From the public side, the only conceivable counterforce might be a national strike or an effective long-term campaign of general non-cooperation.But we can certainly assume the mainstream media will give lockstep support to whatever the regime says and does. It's also a given that those likely to lead the resistance will immediately land in those new prisons being built by Halliburton et. al.So how do we cope with the harsh realities of such a Bush/Cheney/Rove dictatorial coup?We may have about a year to prepare. Every possible scenario needs to be discussed in excruciating detail.For only one thing is certain: denial will do nothing.
Copyright © Infowars.net All rights reserved.Printed from: http://infowars.net/articles/august2007/010807Bush.htm

(Wakka;15927)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71Jux68F_AQ
Good Video Brother

(tim_from_pa;16059)
None of this surprises me. Even back in the 80's I remember watching a video from a controversial ministry that showed police coming into a small church (maybe a private, home one) and telling people to hand over their bibles. I forget what the rationale for that was, but the spirit was the same. It's basically getting the swat team ready and overuse of power to arrogantly display their might in blatant rebellion against the constitution.I know that many people on this site believe that unrepentant people are burned to ashes in the afterlife and destroyed. But I must confess, it's things like this that makes me hope that from the greatest despot down to the military crackpots that would do this stuff will end up there burning forever, and that there will be an eternal hell. Nothing would give me more pleasure than to see them wreathing in pain there. But then again, I'm not God. I guess I have to repent now.
No doubt brother!!!ray3: