WendyMcElroy.com

It is October 1st. The mechanism for martial law to be imposed domestically by the American military at the whim of the feds is now in place; that mechanism is loaded and cocked and pointed at your head; it will be fired at the discretion of federal authorities. American soldiers the 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team -- who have been trained to kill, remember, and are fresh from long duty in Iraq -- are ready to aim their weapons at American citizens who disobey and, so, constitute an "unruly crowd." Vis-a-vis the U.S. military, dissenting Americans will have the same status as the Iraqi population has 'enjoyed' for several years now. (For more detail on the authorization of using U.S. military against U.S. crowds , please read a recent article in the Army Times.)

I've blogged about this de facto, unofficial and illegal repeal of the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 that prohibits the federal military from taking on police duties within American borders. (For last Sunday's post click here; for the post from the Monday before click here.) I have no doubt that the federal government does not want to use this power. It would much rather have a population who obeys -- albeit with a grumble -- than a population it must brutalize into submission. Such brutalization causes irksome backlash from those who still care for civil liberties; it makes the mask of humanitarianism slip away from the grotesque face of government, revealing the feds to be nothing more than the self-serving savages they are. The feds would rather have your obedience than your broken body. For one thing, how can they tax a corpse?

But if you refuse, I also have no doubt they will use the military against protesters should it seem necessary to quash a real threat to their power. There is no reason for the "dwell-time mission" -- a code name that authorizes martial law imposed by the military -- to specifically include language on the control of both crowds and "disruptive individuals" if using that power is not part of Plan B. (Plan A is your obedience.)

Of course, there are many more than two possible ways for the federal government to handle a public that has become increasingly disconnected from, cynical about and enraged with those 'in authority.' What, oh what to do about people who aren't willing to believe government elites any more, who insist upon saying "no!" and doing so in the public streets they've paid for?

An alternate path -- or, rather, an intermediate stage before martial law -- is the path taken this week by the government of Mauritania. According to a report in Agence France-Presse, "The prime minister appointed by Mauritania's military junta which
seized power in August announced Tuesday that the government is to ban
all protests in the country."

I don't claim to know what the U.S. government is intending to do. But if there is election unrest, either before or after the event, one plausible reaction would be to ban all protest in the name of public safety and preserving the 'integrity' of the electoral system. If that were to happen, it would be sold as non-partisan because both sides would be prohibited from exercising the rights of free speech and free assembly; of course, we all know trashing the rights of 100% of the people rather than 49% makes it all okay...it makes it all fair. Martial law will be sold to the American public as a measure necessary to restore peace. After all, ain't nothin' so peaceful as a dead man.