BUSH DECLARES MARTIAL LAW

Well not yet, but some have been warning that the foundations for Martial Law in the United States were laid by the Reagan Administration when by Executive order, FEMA was given broad powers to be used against Americans should there be a "crisis" such as "violent and widespread internal dissent or national opposition against a US military invasion abroad."

FEMA, whose main role is disaster response, or so it is said, is also responsible for handling US domestic unrest. From 1982-84 Colonel Oliver North assisted FEMA in drafting its civil defense preparations. Details of these plans emerged during the 1987 Iran-Contra scandal. They included executive orders providing for suspension of the constitution, the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA. As yet, of course, we have seen no attempt by the current administration to implement such extensive measures, but then internal dissent and national opposition against a US military invasion abroad isn’t yet what it might become. We seem to have no choice but to trust the Executive branch which has cried Wolf[owitz] too often to interpret threats to National Security objectively.

Bush continues to exploit his role of Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces and continues to let the line between military command and civilian dictatorship appear very fuzzy. According to a Boston Globe report today, Bush, in signing the bill outlawing the torture of detainees left an option open to break that law if he wants to – because he’s the Commander in Chief.

''The executive branch shall construe [the law] in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President . . . as Commander in Chief," Bush wrote, adding that this approach ''will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President . . . of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."

I think it’s clear that there could be situations in which the extraction of information by vicious means could indeed avert mass carnage, although the record of accuracy of such “extractions” is poor. The reality however is that we have a President who is quite willing to create scenarios, using bad data, ignoring good data and outright lies. Who knows what may be portrayed as a threat to national security by an administration with a record of deception, thirst for aggression and hatred of dissent?

The evidence that this President considers himself well above the law and justifies that by using a war he created for the purpose is quite clear. If there is no intent to shift the US toward a Constitutional dictatorship, using extraordinary means resembling martial law; if there is no plan to cut a road through the law to get at an enemy created for the purpose of cutting a road through the law, the Bush administration has shown no more evidence than dismissive smirks and smug dismissal of public doubt.