Never Waste A Good Crisis. ~ Hillary Clinton

You Never Want A Good Crisis to Go To Waste. ~ Rahm Emmanuel

Maybe they should have added, "especially when you can create one."

Think the "Stimulus Package" we just had to have to prevent the collapse of our banks is helping? Not on your life, as a story from CNBC so aptly states. How do you think "Hope and Change" is working out for the 81 banks that have been forced to close their doors? The following video is included in that piece, and bears watching.

But can the prediction that we will "lose some 1,000 institutions over the next two years" be a good sign? Consider that the banks we'll lose are the smaller, local, privately owned banks, considered small business, that traditionally aid in the operation of small businesses via loans and specialized banking services to the communities in which they are based. Also consider that the larger institutions are the ones most in the tank with Wall Street and the White House as well as the Federal Reserve, and we begin to see an emerging pattern here that leans toward a nationalized banking system, especially since the only institutions actually getting the help from our government are those larger banks.

We keep hearing from the MSM and the RCI's (aka Liberals/Socialists) that they are seeing signs of recovery, but no one else seems to see it. Just because they say it is so doesn't make it real. However, they feel that if they say it is improving, enough people will buy into it to actually make it appear to happen. Unfortunately, that isn't the case in the real world. By forcing more business closures, they create more unemployment, and more dependence on the government for unemployment compensation, etc., and, along with adding more people to the government payroll, they create a breakdown in the normal "capital based" system, and even more dependence on government.

Next, keep in mind that there are rumblings around the country, including in the halls and backrooms of Congress, of a manufactured financial meltdown early in September. While the new administration, through its unconstitutionally appointed czars, is now blaming last years September 11 $550 billion run on money markets (Truth Behind TARP and the Bailout) on "panic" and "investor fears", the truth is they still don't have a clue as to who actually perpetrated the run. And now the true figures are coming out. It seems the overall run totaled over $5.5 trillion, actually started a week prior but in smaller amounts, and continued even after Bernanke dropped the limits on the amounts that could be withdrawn at one time. Yet there hasn't been an influx of money back into those money markets accounts, so the "fear" theory seems very hollow as an explanation. And after all the outrageous current and proposed spending by our new leader and his minions in Congress with borrowed and unsecured money, what can we expect to come next? If there is another run, where do we then borrow enough to prop up the banking industry? And how? Another TARP? Another "bailout"?

As smaller banks are hung out to dry and closing, and bigger banks are buying them up on money we don't have borrowed from our government, how long can the banking industry remain "independent" from government control? And what happens if we have another "Great Depression"? Are people in this country as tough and self-sustaining as they were eighty years ago? Certainly not. And even then many were dependent on the government for jobs and sustenance, but our government wasn't in the type of debt they are now until AFTER the collapse. So is this the new crisis that they will "not waste", as Rahm Emmanuel has stated, and the move to complete the takeover of our nation? With all the new proposed government spending programs, like Cap and Trade, Health Care, and those that have already failed, like Cash for Clunkers, and the willingness of the left to bus in plants to the Town hall meetings. But back to the potential for a "manufactured crisis".

While the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids military involvement in domestic law enforcement without congressional approval, martial law has been implemented several times in our history, most recently in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Who can order it? It is stated on the US Constitution online that, "it is often argued that only Congress can declare martial law, because Congress alone is granted the power to suspend the writ. The President, however, is commander-in-chief of the military, and it has been argued that the President can take it upon himself to declare martial law. In these times, Congress may decide not to act, effectively accepting martial law by failing to stop it; Congress may agree to the declaration, putting the official stamp of approval on the declaration; or it can reject the President's imposition of martial law, which could set up a power struggle between the Congress and the Executive that only the Judiciary would be able to resolve." This becomes very moot considering the President's own party now controls Congress, and most likely would support him if he orders martial law. And what can prompt it? In the opinion of the Supreme Court in ex parte Milligan (71 US 2 [1866]), "If, in foreign invasion or civil war, the courts are actually closed, and it is impossible to administer criminal justice according to law, then, on the theatre of active military operations, where war really prevails, there is a necessity to furnish a substitute for the civil authority, thus overthrown, to preserve the safety of the army and society; and as no power is left but the military, it is allowed to govern by martial rule until the laws can have their free course. As necessity creates the rule, so it limits its duration; for, if this government is continued after the courts are reinstated, it is a gross usurpation of power. Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction. It is also confined to the locality of actual war."

The next question becomes, what would close the courts? A financial crisis would certainly do it, especially the president orders it. But if it is to be "confined to the locality of actual war", then how is it that a natural disaster brought on the order as in the case of Katrina? Simple, the Governor of Louisiana ordered it, as was within her rights under their "state of emergency law". Martial law can also be applied in serious cases of internal dissension; the army (National Guard in the states, unless they are under the command of the Department of Defense) authorities may take over the administrative and judicial functions, and civil safeguards (e.g., habeas corpus and freedom of speech) may also be suspended. Where the civil courts remain open, even if their orders are executed by the military, martial law is not applicable. The federal government is limited in applying martial law by the provision of Article 1, Section 9, Subsection 2, of the Constitution, which concerns the suspension of habeas corpus. In most U.S. states, martial law may be proclaimed when deemed necessary for the public's safety. However, the U.S. Supreme Court in ex parte Milligan (1866) ruled that military trial of civilians when the civil courts were functioning was unconstitutional.

Now let's take a brief look at what, other than a banking crisis, could be used to initialize martial law, and to what end. How about a medical crisis of immense proportion? Something like "swine flu" for example. The Health and Technology czar, Dr. Blumenthal, just released a report stating that "30,000 to 90,000" could die from swine flu in the US alone this year. Yet nothing on the CDC site states that, nor does the IHS, WHO or anyone else. What is the truth of it? An average of 36,000 Americans die annually from the H1N1 flu, with some serious peaks of as many as 45,000. Granted, the swine flu is a "novel" flu, meaning that it can morph with other varieties and become more serious, but there is no indication that is happening. So why the panic? Why talk about making it mandatory that we take the two shots to immunize ourselves? The way I see it, to prepare us for something more sinister.

Let me explain, and give you a few more facts. As I mentioned earlier, there is scuttlebutt all over the place about a "financial crisis", but what if they can't make it materialize? They need a backup plan to allow them to order martial law. Rep. Paul Broun (GA) seems to be the only one talking openly about it from inside the beltway. At a Town Hall meeting in Athens GA, he called, "Democratic health care reform plans "a stinking, rotten fish." And now we hear there is a move to push it through as a "tribute" to Ted Kennedy. He also spoke of a "socialistic elite" - Obama, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid - who might use a pandemic disease or natural disaster as an excuse to declare martial law. "They're trying to develop an environment where they can take over," he said. "We've seen that historically." Wouldn't a national health crisis be enough to get it done?

Don't believe they can make it happen? Then why were there 20,000 of our returning military ordered to Ft. Benning, GA. to participate in training for deployment across the US "in the event of a natural disaster, to quell public unrest, or for other reasons"? And why has that number been increased to 80,000? Will they actually march against US citizens? Are they to provide the training for the "National Civilian Security Force" as well? Will UN forces be added to strengthen their numbers? Oh, and in case you missed it, Obama has ordered that 9-11 be a "day of service" instead of a day of mourning. I also expect him to announce the implementation of this "Force" on 9-11, provided he can stage one of the scenarios I've mentioned (or others which I don't have any real solid knowledge on, just rumor so far). And just who will be this new "Force"? We've seen them out and about at Town Hall meetings across the country already. ACORN, SEIU and other unions, and a dozen other organizations that openly support anything Obama wants. The plans being implemented across this land are eerily similar to those of FDR, in spite of the fact none of them worked to end the "Great Depression", and the plans in operation today are failing as well. What finally raised us from the national insolvency of the "Depression" was WWII, but we weren't near $12 trillion in debt as a nation then.

"The New Deal is plainly an attempt to achieve a working socialism and avert a social collapse in America; it is extraordinarily parallel to the successive 'policies' and 'Plans' of the Russian experiment. Americans shirk the word 'socialism', but what else can one call it?" ~ H.G. Wells ~ The New World Order, 1939 (We know how that eventually worked out for them.)

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, it was planned that way". ~ Teddy Roosevelt

And so it seems the plans are all in place, and the American public is still, for the most part, asleep. Will they wake up in time to help those of us who are already wide awake and fighting against this advancing oppression of socialism? Or is it already too late to stop it? So I say again,

WAKE UP, AMERICA!!

WE'RE BEING SOLD DOWN THE RIVER!!!

Like a snowball headed for hell.

ALL PHOTOS, GRAPHICS, CLIPART AND LOGOS USED ON THIS SITE ARE THE PROPERTY OF THEIR SPECIFIC OWNERS AND ARE USED WITH FULL PERMISSION OF THOSE OWNERS. A NUMBER OF PHOTOS USED AS BACKGROUNDS AND CLIPART BELONG TO THE OWNER OF THE CHEROKEE PARKS SITE AND MAY NOT BE COPIED OR USED IN ANY WAY WITHOUT SPECIFIC WRITTEN PERMISSION. PLEASE CLICK THE EMAIL BUTTON ON THE HOME PAGE TO REQUEST PERMISSION FOR USAGE OF PHOTOS, GRAPHICS AND CLIPART DISPLAYED ON THIS SITE, OR GO TO THE LINKS PAGE FOR USAGE REQUESTS REGARDING LOGOS, CLIPART, PHOTOS AND GRAPHICS FROM THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS.