Is this possible?

With all of the unrest and tension between and within nations, a large war could start.

Under the staged war, Obama can lock his position in office and cancel the 2012 elections.

Civilians would feel cheated and hopeless, carrying aggression towards the failed system.

The global elite would have their hand up their puppet, while pulling strings on society.

The reaction to this would likely be civil unrest in america, martial law goes into effect.

all the dominoes fall....

Anythings possible. Thanks for putting the possibilities out there though, because this truly could happen.

People would fight, but by then (now...) we wouldn't stand a chance... I would be more apt to hide and cover with enough to survive til all the stuff blew over. All depends on how old the kids are too!...

reply to post by ConspiraCity


Yes it is possible, but this is the exact same thing that people screamed was going to happen with W. I find the likelihood very unlikely...chances are the military, or civilians, or both, would revolt

Originally posted by ConspiraCity
....martial law goes into effect.

They would not come over the tv's and radio's and simultaneously broadcast/announce to 300+ Million people that martial law has gone into effect. This would absolutely be counter-productive to what martial law is.

How would announcing martial law has been put into effect maintain public order and safety?

Definition of MARTIAL LAW

1: the law applied in occupied territory by the military authority of the occupying power

2: the law administered by military forces that is invoked by a government in an emergency when the civilian law enforcement agencies are unable to maintain public order and safety
Merriam-Webster

We are already under martial law and have been for over a decade (there are varying degrees). What more proof do you need than the "News" agency with the highest ratings getting away with telling lies without any consequences?

Psyops operatives covertly infultrated CNN and other news agencies in the 90s. It was news... briefly.

My point is communications would be taken over first ... and the public would not be informed that any degree of martial law had been implimented. When they stopped all air traffic over the CONUS after 9-11 ... that was a degree of martial law, because only the military were permitted to fly.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


Just as was predicted in EVERY election cycle since the Truman years.

It's a masturbatory fantasy for people who want to live the "romance" of living in an occupied territory. That's all it's ever been, and it's all it will ever be.

But! Kudos on correctly spelling "martial." I've seen it mangled so often.

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by ConspiraCity

 

Just as was predicted in EVERY election cycle since the Truman years.

It's a masturbatory fantasy for people who want to live the "romance" of living in an occupied territory. That's all it's ever been, and it's all it will ever be.

But! Kudos on correctly spelling "martial." I've seen it mangled so often.

haha, yeah I by no means would want it. It just crossed my mind and I was just wondering.

It just seems the global tension is reaching a breaking point, so I feel its at least a little more plausible.

I could also just be over processing things like I tend to do normally, however.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


A big mistake frequently made on sites like ATS, is the notion that real life plays like a novel, or at least a movie. That you have these dudes (call 'em the NWO, TPTB, whatever you want) who are carefully tweaking this or that little thing to get exactly the result they want, and it all unfolds as planned in some great, brilliant, devious design. As if the world were some story being told before our eyes. It's a pretty understandable thing, since this is basically how humans translate the information they accrue from the world.

The reality is less romantic, but possibly quite a bit more frightening. Everything you see in the world is the result of literally billions of people doing whatever random crap they do. For every "master plan" there's someone else's master plan... or just someone with no plan at all runs over the guy with the plans... oops. Basically everything you see that seems to "bear fruit" is there because of a truly Sisyphean effort to get it there.. .and has the high chance of some random schmuck going "lol nope" and tearing it all down in a few minutes.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


Martial law will only be as successful as the manipulation of the soldiers/police force doing the oppressing as well as the media manipulation of the public perception of the event.

reply to post by ConspiraCity


Here is food for thought.



Think about if they declared martial law they could never pull it off or could they? First they would create a need like a food shortage and then the system would fall apart in all major urban centers. Then they would help but at a great cost. They would need safety zones for the aid workers and that means no guns. People would flock to hand them in for a chance to eat. Some would head for the hills and form smaller groups. These would be very easy to handle with very few troops.




If this is right and I do mean "IF". It will have to happen very soon because the more people prepare the less likely it will work. If I was TPTB this is what I would do. It would work but only in a ever shrinking time frame.

reply to post by Subjective Truth


Martial Law, if declared, would only need to be instituted in four places.

New York City
Los Angeles
Washington, DC
and take your pick for the fourth - Chicago, Atlanta, Seattle, Portland, or San Francisco.
For control of the highway system, securing either Detroit or Independence, MO would be important as well.

Entire states are effectively unimportant "dead zones" - the upper states for instance (Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas) all together have about the same population as Los Angeles / Orange county. Alaska, Hawaii, and Utah fall into this category as well.

Most unrest is contained in the major cities; they have large populations and make an effective locus for incomers. Thus the goal would be to pacify the urban territories, with semi-regular "check-ups" in second-tier cities such as Detroit, Miami, Houston, Milwaukee, etc.

This results in "the enemy" (to borrow the term that would be used) being scattered and isolated outside the major points; and in such a huge nation as ours, they couldn't really set any meaningful "rally points."

It's true that no military - even our own - could effectively occupy the United States (calm yourselves, Nugentians, it's geography, not your Beretta) . However they would not NEED to do so; they simply need to take and secure a few major points to lock everywhere else down, effectively.

However... if the entire Egyptian military could not secure Cairo, what chance does our military have with just Los Angeles, let alone the rest of those?

reply to post by ConspiraCity


Definately on the cards, I reckon they will do "anything" to try and stop Ron Paul taking office. There is going to be corruption on a scale never seen before "in an election" in 2012 IMO.

Possibilities:
Marshal law
Vote rigging
Or even an assasination attempt.

What worries me is who is looking after RPs security?

I really hope he gets into office, but its difficult to see