“AN EVERYDAY OCCURRENCE”
by Michael Gaddy, ©2016, blogging at The Rebel Madman
(May 10, 2016) — About this time last year, there was much speculation on a projected military operation that would be carried out within the confines of the United States that was being called Jade Helm 15. Here is what the Washington Post had to say about that operation last September.
“The military exercise Jade Helm 15 generated enough conspiracy theories this year that it garnered mockery on late-night television, commentary from presidential candidates and reaction from the Texas governor. The basic thrust of the concerns: The military was laying the groundwork for martial law — if not now, then sometime in the future.”
Then TV commentator Jon Stewart, in support of his master, the US Government, gave this admonition to Governor Abbot of Texas who had ordered the Texas State Guard to monitor the US military in his state.
“Oh dear Lord, Yet another waste of Texas funds that could have been spent on actual threats, like your infamous chainsaw massacres. Texas, it’s not that I don’t find it adorable that your governor thinks your State Guard could take on the United States military. It’s like a little dog growling at a big dog, or an 8-year-old picking a fight with the Predator.”
In one way, Stewart was correct; There is very little the people could do were they to be subjected to martial law and what could only be termed an invasion into their state by military forces. Of course, we have been told for decades belief in such an event constitutes being a “conspiracy nut.” Who in their right mind would believe the troops everyone supports blindly would ever invade a state and implement the wishes of the government over the people? Of course, when it happened in New Orleans after Katrina, that was an anomaly, right?
What would be the reaction today if a sitting president was to order the military into a state and destroy all forms of civilian authority? What if he/she confiscated the firearms of anyone they thought to be disloyal to the central government? What if local and state police were relieved of their duties and put out of work? What if the military went into a courtroom in said state and arrested the presiding judge and when that judge resisted and questioned their authority to do so, he was attacked, pistol whipped and put into prison without any charges being filed—ever? What if the mayor of a city was arrested without charges? What if civilians who openly protested such actions were shot in the streets? What if the military closed or suppressed any factions of the press who were deemed disloyal? What if many more unconstitutional, criminal acts were perpetrated on the citizens of a state?
On many occasions, local authorities have been asked what they would do if the federal government were to perform such acts on the citizens they have sworn an oath to protect and defend. The pat answer from those who lack the courage to address the question is: “That could never happen here.” But, it has already happened and the majority of people in this country rate the president who perpetrated these crimes on citizens of a state as one of the country’s very best.
In the early part of 1861, Maryland became very strategic to Abraham Lincoln and his beloved Union. If Maryland were to secede and join the Confederate states that had already seceded, Washington, D.C, the capital of the Union, would find itself in a very precarious position. While Lincoln was traveling to Washington in anticipation of his inauguration, he had been informed of a possible plot in Maryland to assassinate him. History shows this plot was ferreted out by Alan Pinkerton, who donated money to the alleged conspirators, and Lincoln slipped into Washington, D.C. in disguise.
In May of 1861, the state of Maryland was invaded by Union Army forces under the command of General Benjamin Butler. Lincoln had previously placed the decision on suspending the Writ of Habeas Corpus with the military—a clear violation of the Constitution. But, when it comes to violating the Constitution, Lincoln was a tyrant and a master politician, and to that point in history he has no equal.
According to Charles B. Clark of the Maryland Historical Magazine in September of 1959, citing from public records of the period 1861-1865, on May 13, 1861, General Benjamin Butler, with 1,000 Union troops, occupied the city of Baltimore and instituted martial law. Arbitrary arrests of citizens immediately became the order of the day. All shipments South were halted. The treatment of the citizens of Maryland became totally bizarre. Under the command of General Dix, barber poles were banned because they contained the color red which was considered to be symbolic of the Confederacy. A broadside, alleged to have been signed by General Dix, commanded all people with red beards, hair or moustaches to “dye them blue.” (Source: Raphael Semmes, “Vignettes of Maryland History, Maryland History Magazine XL No. 1 (March 1945), p.51)
All exhibitions of anything relating to the Confederacy were forbidden. This included any “flag, banner, ensign or device of the so-called Confederate States… or any of them deemed and taken to be evidence of a design to afford aid and comfort to the enemies of the country.” So much for the First Amendment.
General Butler then turned his attention to disarming the public. Over 2,700 privately owned firearms were seized including “all manufactories of arms supplies and munitions.” Obvious encroachment of the Second Amendment.
All of those troops under General Butler had to be quartered somewhere, so private property was seized for the purpose. A violation of the Third Amendment.
Obviously, private homes had to be searched by military authorities in order to confiscate the aforementioned weapons. Since martial law had been declared and the civilian courts shut down, no search warrants were issued. A clear violation of the Fourth Amendment.
With the civilian courts suspended and with hundreds of people being detained and Habeas Corpus eliminated, the people were imprisoned for alleged serious crimes, including treason, without the presentment of a Grand Jury. A violation of the Fifth Amendment.
Some of those imprisoned in early 1861 were detained indefinitely, without formal charges, with many not released until after the war. Obviously, there were no speedy or public trials and those who were tried by a military court were certainly not given an impartial jury of their peers. A violation of the Sixth Amendment.
The right of “trial by jury” was eliminated and the “common law” was ignored. A clear violation of the Seventh Amendment.
Being arrested by military officials, denied a trial and imprisoned for years certainly constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment.” So, the Eighth Amendment was trashed by Lincoln and his minions as well.
Certain rights, retained by the people, were trodden asunder in the mad rush to prevent the people of Maryland from voicing their opinion on secession. Therefore, the Ninth Amendment was also obliterated.
The fact the Tenth Amendment was destroyed with the military invasion of a sovereign state goes without explanation. In fact, the invasion of Maryland, and then Missouri by Union military forces, constituted treason on the part of Lincoln, the Radical Republicans in Congress and military personnel. Article III, Section III defines treason as “levying war” against them [The States].
Yes, the Constitution states federal forces can be called to “execute the laws of the Union or “suppress insurrections” in Article 1, Section 8, but one must remember the original Constitution was amended with the Bill of Rights. It states that very clearly in the Preamble of that document as noted here:
“The Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added:...”
Therefore, the Bill of Rights is “declaratory and restrictive” clauses on the original Constitution.
Article IV, Section IV of the original Constitution outlines the parameters under which the central government can enter a state in order to “enforce the laws” or “suppress insurrections.” Stated clearly, the legislature, or the governor, if the legislature cannot be convened, must request central government intervention in the event of domestic violence. This article also guarantees to each state a “republican form of government.”
Lincoln’s army destroyed a republican form of government in Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, other states in the North and the Southern states as well. For all of this Lincoln has a monument in Washington, his picture on our currency and coin and is considered one of our “greatest” presidents. The Republican Party of today is proud of its Lincoln heritage, referring to the party as “The Party of Lincoln.” Also, many in the party celebrate each year with a “Lincoln Day Dinner.” Coincidentally, Democrats love to point out their political relationship to Lincoln as well.
Abraham Lincoln was not the first person to run for president under the Republican Party banner. The first was John C. Fremont who ran under the banner, “Free Men! Free Soil! Fremont” in 1856. Abraham Lincoln would relieve General Fremont of his command of the Department of the West early in November of 1861 when Fremont issued orders freeing the slaves in Missouri and refused a direct command by Lincoln to rescind his proclamation emancipating the slaves. This sort-of kicks the idea of Lincoln being anti-slavery right in the keister, does it not? Why don’t the Republicans refer to themselves as the “Party of Fremont?” At least Fremont had the courage of his convictions and didn’t fold to political pressure like a 50-cent pocket knife.
Over the course of the past 7 plus years, I have received countless emails bemoaning the travesty that has been the Obama administration. As terrible as Obama has been—and he has been terrible—absolutely nothing he has done can hold a candle to the travesties against our Constitution and Bill of Rights that was an everyday occurrence during the Lincoln administration.
Although the revision of true history began to occur shortly after the war was over, there were literally hundreds of books written detailing the crimes of Lincoln and the Radical Republicans during the war; in the South, in the Border States, and in the North. Suddenly, near the end of WWII, with a few noted exceptions, the crimes of Lincoln began to be whitewashed by authors, court historians, academia, the media and members of our political class. I believe this occurred when our government became hostage to the National Security Complex and the pursuit of empire among those in public office instead of strict adherence to our Constitution.
Lincoln and the Republican Party, heavily influenced by rabid Socialists such as Marx, Engels, Charles A. Dana, Joseph Weydemeyer, Ivan Turchaninov, Horace Greeley and others, perfected the socialist type of warfare on the people of the South and then turned that same scorched-earth policy loose on the American Indians in the West.
American politicians at the end of WWII saw the necessity of such tactics as the road to Empire and therefore it was essential they deify the man who brought that form of warfare to the American continent and suppress all mentions of the tyranny of his administration.
The national debt soared during the Lincoln administration, just as it has under every war for empire since 1945. Our freedoms and liberty as stated in our Bill of Rights have received a withering fire from politicians who owe their money and power to the military/industrial/congressional/international banking complex. Those rights have been almost totally extinguished, especially since 2001. We owe it all to the fine example set by King Abe the First. All hail!