Are we under martial law?


PDA






firearms_instructor
June 7, 2004, 08:51 PM
I'd like to hear definitive answers on this, preferably backed up by references any of us can check. It's a simple question, folks. I don't know the answer for sure, but I have an opinion. I'd like to hear from the legal scholars out there.

Or is this question the "third rail"?

Red pill? or blue pill?

If you enjoyed reading about "Are we under martial law?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Third_Rail
June 7, 2004, 08:59 PM
Did I hear my name? :D :D :D

To answer your question, no I don't believe we are under martial law per the "dictionary" definition. Are we getting there? I'll tell you come this November.

itgoesboom
June 7, 2004, 09:09 PM
I don't think that we are under martial law, yet. I see our leaders being faced with that decision before too long.

Call me optimistic, but I still have hope that our great country can turn itself around peacefully through the processes laid out in the constitution. Hopefully Americans will wake up this November, and look beyond next couple of short years, and concentrate on where America can end up.

I see this election as being the turning point in our history.

If Kerry is elected, most of my hope will have disappeared.

I.G.B.

Sean Cloherty
June 7, 2004, 09:23 PM
AFAIK there is no power of "Martial Law" to be applied by the government of the U.S. against the citizens. It would seem to be something that a conquering miilitary would impose.

I am not naive enough to think that the government wouldn't exercise or usurp powers not arrogated to them in the USC. In fact I think that about >70% of the FED.GOV is probably illegal. But that's only when I forget to take my medicine. :rolleyes:

firearms_instructor
June 7, 2004, 09:51 PM
But what if we were under martial law, and the feds just hadn't announced it because they didn't want everyone to know? What if we under under a quasi- clandestine martial law (don your tinfoil hats if you got 'em), and the feds just didn't want to make a big deal out of it? What if this has been going on since, say, the Civil War?

C'mon, guys, lets see some RESEARCH, the truth has got to be out there somewhere. I'd like to see Supreme Court cases, etc.

El Tejon
June 7, 2004, 09:55 PM
General Tejon reporting. Despite the best efforts of some provisions of the Patriot Act we are not under martial law.

Keep watching the skies!:scrutiny:

Blackcloud6
June 7, 2004, 10:03 PM
I think "martial law" is for B movies. No such thing as far as I know.

Art Eatman
June 7, 2004, 10:08 PM
Wuz I seriously curious about ML and its provisions, I'd go Googling...

:), Art

mtnbkr
June 7, 2004, 10:19 PM
But what if we were under martial law, and the feds just hadn't announced it because they didn't want everyone to know?

If that were the case, would it even matter? How would that be different "normal, everyday life"?


Chris

Group9
June 7, 2004, 10:20 PM
You guys need to get out of the house and go to some countries where there really are no freedoms. I have never appreciated that US as much as when I was coming back after spending time in other countries.

Martial law? ***?

itgoesboom
June 7, 2004, 10:21 PM
Here (http://www.fact-index.com/m/ma/martial_law.html) is a place to start.

I guess Martial Law can't be imposed while the courts are operating.

HHmmmmmmm.

I.G.B.

Kes
June 7, 2004, 10:23 PM
IIRC, there is an actual, official state known as "martial law" that's provided for somewhere in government policy.

We aren't in "martial law", but we are in a "state of emergency" (and have been for a couple decades, I think); while in a state of emergency, the President can declare martial law at any time.


This is all off the top of my head, so somebody please correct me if I'm wrong. :)

Sean Cloherty
June 7, 2004, 10:40 PM
The only power to change our constitutional republic (not democracy:banghead: ) is found here:

Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

The President is the chief LEO for the nation. As such he is charged with upholding the law, not suspending it and implementing rules of his own.

Other than that the only relevant portion of the USC would seem to be regarding people imprisoned.

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

Kes
June 7, 2004, 10:46 PM
More information about martial law:

http://www.gunowners.org/fs9905.htm#IV

According to this document it's only been used twice - both times by President Lincoln. However, I seem to recall it was also used in Hawaii during WW2....

:confused:

firearms_instructor
June 7, 2004, 11:23 PM
Can anyone explain the significance of the gold fringe around the US flag flown in federal courts?

The_Antibubba
June 8, 2004, 01:56 AM
The real question is: Are we already dead and in Hell, and nobody has told us?:scrutiny:

Don Gwinn
June 8, 2004, 08:23 AM
The gold fringe? It has varying significance depending on how pliable your relationship with reality is.

To you, me, the judge and pretty much everyone else, it means there's a nice decorative fringe on the flag. Not to my taste, but whatever. It has no effect upon any legal matter whatsoever.

To Dale Gribble and the Heimlich County Militia, it means something about the admiralty that makes the court's jurisdiction in domestic matters null and void. This is why tax-evaders got the reputation of talking about the gold fringe--a lot of them thought they'd found a loophole. It's silly, but that's what they thought.

But what if we were under martial law, and the feds just hadn't announced it because they didn't want everyone to know? What if we under under a quasi- clandestine martial law (don your tinfoil hats if you got 'em), and the feds just didn't want to make a big deal out of it? What if this has been going on since, say, the Civil War?

Well, sure, that makes sense. We are under martial law, and they just haven't told us. They allow free speech, free association, protests, marches, people out past curfew, the RKBA and all the rest so we won't catch on. Maybe they're waiting for us to throw that one last really rockin' kegger so they can throw us out and foreclose on the Molon Labe frat house!
Double Secret Martial Law Probation!
:uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh:

FPrice
June 8, 2004, 08:27 AM
"But what if we were under martial law, and the feds just hadn't announced it because they didn't want everyone to know?"

Don Gwinn "may" have beat me to it but I was wondering if this was anything like "Double Secret Probation"?

FWIW, I do not think we are under martial law or anywhere near it. But in some (many - ?) cases some people's/agencies actions may be mistaken for martial law.

Sean Cloherty
June 8, 2004, 08:54 AM
Whoops - I was wrong! It appears that we are instituting it a little bit at a time. So no we are not under martial law, but the conversion is in progress.


Boston's public transportation will now start random searches.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/06/08/t_to_check_packages_bags_at_random/

If you go to the link - please also vote here in the survey.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/06/08/tsurvey/

For once I am glad that my job is moving to New Hampshire and that I will be driving 140 miles a day instead of relaxing on the commuter train.:uhoh:

El Tejon
June 8, 2004, 09:12 AM
Double secret probation?

Meanwhile in Dean Ashcraft's office, flag with fringe in the corner:

"Who put fizzies in the pool? THR, sir

Who was out partying with the Bush daughters? El Tejon from THR, sir.

Who sent a dead bear to the alumni association dinner? THR, sir.

Who stays up all night cleaning guns and scanning the skies for black helicopters loaded with jackbooted pumas from the UN? THR, sir.

There's only way to deal with them--DOUBLE SECRET MARTIAL LAW!"

:neener:

WT
June 8, 2004, 10:18 AM
The Territory of Hawaii was under martial law from Dec. 1941 to sometime in 1944. Civilians were tried in military courts for various "civilian" offenses. The Supreme Court eventually overturned most of the convictions. However, for awhile in WW2, the military ran the Hawaiian Islands.

sm
June 8, 2004, 10:32 AM
There's only way to deal with them--DOUBLE SECRET MARTIAL LAW!" :neener:
IIRC John Belushi's character in "Animal House" explained this well in his infamous "When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"...Rant.

I think we are supposed to use Old Continentals with suicide doors ...

WE are being "infringed upon" ...I wouldn't call it Martial Law.

cuchulainn
June 8, 2004, 10:32 AM
But what if we were under martial law, and the feds just hadn't announced it because they didn't want everyone to know? I doubt the feds are thinking about hiding martial law. It is not necessary for the feds to declare martial law, even secretly, to get to a point that our fathers would have thought looked like martial law. Only our silence and inaction are necessary.

Diggler
June 8, 2004, 12:36 PM
Leave the house only to work, or for specific necessary excursions...

Limits on spending...

Everything I do is watched...

Overall loss of freedom...









Oh, I thought you said MARITAL law!!

firearms_instructor
June 8, 2004, 03:54 PM
Here's what some people have to say about the gold fringe. If they're full of BS, please show me where I can find a FACTUAL REFUTATION. I am willing to do my own research if someone can point the way to definitive facts.

I'm not interested in opinions, I'm looking for hard-hanging evidence, because I really want to know the truth about this, no $h*t. If the federal courts are operating under Admiralty or quasi-martial jurisdiction, I need to know for sure. If the gold fringe has NO significance, I need to know. Facts. Please. Check out what some folks are saying about this:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/flag.htm
http://user.icx.net/~drherb/fringe.html
http://www.banned-books.com/truth-seeker/1994archive/121_5/ts215b.html
http://www.fourwinds10.com/news/05-government/G-US-constitution/2004/05G-03-12-04-the-gold-fringed-flad.html
http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/flag.htm
http://www.freedomradio.us/articles/other/flag.htm
http://www.barefootsworld.net/uscivilflag.html

Some background on this: I have heard federal judges say (mostly off-the-record) that the Constitution is "irrelevant". I want to know if this is merely judicial arrogance, or do the b******ds know something we don't, and aren't planning to clue us in?

JohnBT
June 8, 2004, 04:19 PM
Has this topic been made an Urban Legend yet? Here's a little something from 1996, but I'm sure there're some older posts out there.

JohnBT...the BT stands for 'buy tinfoil' this week.
_______________________________

http://flagspot.net/flags/us-fring.html

"Recently, I have received several inquiries privately regarding the symbolism of the fringe displayed on indoor US Flags, especially in courtrooms. I received the following data sheet from the Flag Research Center regarding this question and I quote it here in its entirety:

FRINGE ON THE UNITED STATES FLAG?

For many years rumors have been spread through the United States concerning the origin and meaning of the gold fringe which frequently decorates the Stars and Stripes. It has been claimed that such fringe is without proper authorization; that it is symbolic of the end of the gold standard as the basis for United States currency; or that it indicates the substitution of admiralty courts and martial law for common law courts and procedures, as part of a conspiracy supposedly instigated by Communists, Jews, Masons, liberals, feminists, homosexuals, or other "un-American" groups.

The Flag Research Center has not conducted a thorough investigation of all the claims being made about fringe, many of which are spread by radio talk programs, cassette tapes, lectures and other non-written forms. Nevertheless its unique resources allow the Center to state the following with certainty:

Available evidence seems to suggest that the claims made about fringe on the United States flag are intended to promote the political ends -- including elimination of income taxes, re-establishment of the gold standard, and denial of legal rights to women, non-Christians, and non-Caucasians -- of those who spread those rumors.

From the standpoint of history and law, fringe on a flag has no symbolism. While each individual is free to interpret the meaning of fringe, it has no inherent or established universal symbolism.

While fringe is frequently used on military flags and in formal settings (parades, public meetings, offices of government officials, courts, inaugurations, dedication ceremonies, etc.), it is also widely used in the private sector. Examples of private usage of fringe on flags in the United States extend back for 200 years.

Fringe is and always has been a purely decorative addition -- an optional enhancement of the beauty of a flag, added on a discretionary basis when the flag is purchased. In the private sector and for non-military government uses, use of fringe is like the choice of polyester or nylon over cotton or wool for the flag itself -- simply a matter of enhancing the appearance of the flag.

Title Four of the "United States Code" which defines the Stars and Stripes neither prescribes nor proscribes the use of cords and tassels, heading, sleeve, fringe, and other accessories to the flag. It is universally recognized that the symbolic aspect of the flag is inherent in its colors and symbols, not in the physical characteristics of the flag or the things (like fringe) added to it when it is displayed.

Admiralty courts deal only with maritime contracts, collisions at sea, and similar naval questions, not with normal civil and criminal cases. There is no symbol in the United States which indicates an admiralty court. While international treaties require that ships display the national flag, maritime flags never have fringe.

Martial law is not mentioned in the United States constitution nor has martial law ever been proclaimed in the United States. The use or non-use of fringe on a United States flag in a court has nothing to do with the jurisdiction of the court or with martial law.

Data Summary Sheet No. 1 3/95
(c) Copyright 1995 by the Flag Research Center; All Rights Reserved.

Dave Martucci, 6 December 1996"

El Tejon
June 8, 2004, 04:19 PM
'Are these patriots kooks?" Yes, for the most part. Some are looking for a magic talisman that will protect them in a complex world. Some are actually well-meaning patriotic individuals who are mad as wet hens (hey, I said "wet hens" does that trigger admiralty law?:D) about the Welfare State and the necessary loss of freedom that serves its interest.

Most cases it is just not knowing or understanding why the Rules of Civil Procedure cited in a Red forfeiture case have to do with Admiralty law via the U.S. Code and history. Ahhh, Admiralty in Red, something nefarious is afoot, Dale! No, just the USA doing what he is required to do, giving due process (notice) before scooping up property.

Many judges consider the Constitution without force as the Supreme Court and Congress had to destroy it in order to create an anti-Constitution in its place which bolsters the advance of the Welfare State. Just as administrative agencies, such as ATFE, consider statutes without force as they have the power to reinterpret to do as they so choose.

Some courts have fringe on the flags because that is what the bailiff ordered because she thought it was "pretty" or "would give color to the room." Some have fringe on the flag because that is what was on sale or the court administrator sent them.

The flag is not a magic talisman that controls jurisdiction. Man, that was long, I need a shave. Where's my Occam's Razor?:D

El Tejon
June 8, 2004, 04:24 PM
No symbols for admiralty courts???

John, well, not exactly. A federal court in Hammond, Indiana has a chrome-plated oar that the judge puts up when hearing Admiralty matters.

"Raise the silver oar!" *Squawk* Pieces of eight (thousand pound cold rolled steel)! Polly want a steel barge! Ahoy, mateys, it's that scurvy dog Oprah in her frigate off the port bow, swooping down on Long Beach, Indiana to raid and plunder. Arrr, pretty bird.

JohnBT
June 8, 2004, 04:32 PM
Going back to your first question: "Are we under martial law?"

No. The civil courts are still functioning and I've not seen any military courts trying American citizens.

Where in the world did you get such an idea?

John

firearms_instructor
June 8, 2004, 04:44 PM
"Many judges consider the Constitution without force as the Supreme Court and Congress had to destroy it in order to create an anti-Constitution in its place which bolsters the advance of the Welfare State. "

"A federal court in Hammond, Indiana has a chrome-plated oar that the judge puts up when hearing Admiralty matters."

- Are you serious?

I'm not an attorney, I don't know if you're pulling my leg here or not. *** is a "Red forfeiture case"?

Just so you know, I try to give everyone the benefit of the doubt until I know the facts. I've heard some unusual legal theories lately, and I'd really like to know the facts.

Given the behavior of most feds and rulings made by federal judges, I am left wondering if the Constitution is still in effect or not? And if it is, how did so many federal judges and agents fail to get the memo?

El Tejon
June 8, 2004, 04:48 PM
firearms,

Martial law means the military carries on government or exercises control over civilians in domestic territory. I guess how you come down on Jose Padilla may answer this one.:D

Admiralty law is that which the Congress or the Federal courts (sitting in admiralty--put up the silver oar) declare would apply. All federal courts, yes, even those way the heck out in Colorado (Red) have admiralty jurisdiction via 28 U.S.C. ยง1333. Procedure, such as used in forfeiture is governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Spplemental Admiralty Rules (the Supremes, who write them, combined them to save time/money). This is where the militia boys always freak out, but it's just the court doing what they are required to do. Occam's Razor.

Federal courts have admiralty jurisdiction via the United States Code, not magic talismans like an oar or a fringed flag. Heck, the judge could have a peg leg, a parrot on his shoulder, an eyepatch, and say "Arrrr" but that does not mean Admiralty law prevails his hearing a patent injunction hearing.

Most admiralty law is tort and contract law. Disputes over harbors, shipping containers, salvage (this is big in Florida, no?), contracts, etc. are heard here in federal court when the judge puts on his Admiral's cap (like Nelson or like the Skipper and hits the attorneys with his hat:D). Some disputes are heard in state courts as well.

'Red Forfeiture case" means a civil forfeiture case in Colorado. One of those website thingies had a breathless listing of a notice of forfeiture in Red (Colorado means red is Spanish, do not tell the THR Border Guards, but there are entire states named in Spanish). Anytime you see that United States v. one Motorola cell phone, that's just the USA scooping up property for the government so that DEA or whoever can use it or sell it.

The website seemed to think that the court's following the rules of civil procedure was somehow proof of something sinister.:rolleyes:

firearms_instructor
June 8, 2004, 08:12 PM
OK, let me make sure I got this straight:

1) We are not under martial law (except maybe Jose Padilla?);
2) The gold fringe around the flag has no legal significance; and
3) The Constitution is still valid (sort of)(void where prohibited)?

Whew! I feel better already, I think...

[firearms_instructor puts tinfoil down and steps back slowly...]

For a moment there, I thought I could see the violence inherent in the system, and I was considering feeling oppressed...
:uhoh:

twency
June 8, 2004, 09:20 PM
Regarding the gold fringe kerfuffle, and the list of websites posted above (purporting to show something meaningful about the use of gold fringed flags in courts), I find the following explanation plausibly simple, and satisfying Occam's test:

From ushistory.org (http://www.ushistory.org/betsy/flagetiq.html#3):

The gold trim is found on ceremonial flags, to be used indoors and for ceremonies only. They originally were used on military flags. The fringe has no specific significance, but is considered completely within the guidelines of proper flag etiquette. There is nothing in the flag code indicating that the fringe is for federal government flags only. The Internet contains many sites that claim that the fringe indicates martial law or that the Constitution does not apply in that area. These are entirely unfounded (usually citing Executive Order 10834 and inventing text that is not part of the order) and should be dismissed as urban legends.

Oh, and for those not yet initiated into the ancient and occult mystical knowledge which is Occam's Razor, behold:

Occam's Razor (http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/OCCAMRAZ.html)

-twency

_________
"The parent who complained, Karen Young, doesn't want fish-shaped toy guns in her house because she accidentally shot an ex-boyfriend one time when the gun she was beating him with went off."

Sean Cloherty
June 9, 2004, 02:39 PM
Been a long time since I had to break out my high school Espanol, but AFAIK, red is rojo and colorado is colored.

Jeez, that sounds politically incorrect now. Perhaps we should change the name.

Group9
June 13, 2004, 01:40 AM
Can anyone explain the significance of the gold fringe around the US flag flown in federal courts?

Because it makes the flag look prettier?

twency
July 7, 2004, 10:39 PM
Because it makes the flag look prettier?


ding-ding-ding

I think we have a winner.


-twency

Shanghai McCoy
July 7, 2004, 11:20 PM
Hmmm,my advice to you all is to start drinking heavily...;)

El Tejon
July 7, 2004, 11:28 PM
Shanghai, drink heavily? FOR THE LOVE OF GOLD FRINGE THEY GOT SHANGHAI TOO!!!

You see drinking is exactly what the UN zombie bears and pumas WANT us to do--drink. That way they can poison our precious bodily fluids!!! I haven't brushed my teeth in two months because of the mind control drugs that the blue-helmeted pumas sneak into the water supply.

Shanghai, put those scissors down and stop trimming the fringe off the flag in my office and get over here and feed me the belt to my machine gun.

Trebor
July 8, 2004, 04:24 AM
You see drinking is exactly what the UN zombie bears and pumas WANT us to do--drink.

So, what gun and load is best for UN zombie bears and pumas. Do the bears have the cute little blue berets?

MrAcheson
July 8, 2004, 09:39 AM
We are not under martial law. We are legally at war however because of various congressional authorizations of force that have been passed. Yes an authorization of force is considered a de facto declaration of war by the courts, it just doesn't have the phrase "we declare war" in it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Are we under martial law?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!