Skeptic Project

In the interest of Rox's new push to get us to do some more, non-Zeitgeist, debunking I'm reposting an article I wrote a little while back. I think all the information is well represented, and someone even reblogged this from me a few days ago:

Recently [June 29, 2010] on the Conspiracy Science facebook wall, a poster by the name of John Smith put up a wall post which read as follows:

Interesting.

The man writing it says interesting stuff in the beginning: “…Army’s 2008 Modernization Strategy report, which predicted near constant
conflicts in the future, both overseas and at home.” Anyone heard of this?

Martial Law Survival - New manual reveals what you can do to prepare

www.martiallawsurvival.com

Martial Law - How to survive the coming martial law in America

You can follow the link in the post above to see the website John was trying to point the members of the group to. As is clear from the link title itself, the entire page that we are directed to is fundamentally an advertisement for a book called Understanding and Surviving Martial Law . Now, this book is based around the basic premise that Martial Law, or a government take over of the United States via the military, is impending. I am, here, not so much concerned with demonstrating that this assumption is flawed, but rather am taking issue with the tremendously unethical presentation of the website as a whole.

The website is geared to plays upon the fear of its readers to sell its product. Essentially, the website is trying to use people’s worries about a tyrannical government in order to extort profit. This, in my own opinion, is highly unethical business practice, and it is entirely founded upon remarkably lax presentation of fact. This is highly obvious when one starts to read the website. The author writes

A year ago I had what I thought was the best job in the world. I was a political advisor to a very powerful elected official in a pretty safe district. I not only had an insider’s perspective on how legislation was really passed, I was even able to tweak laws to favor our constituents. I didn’t think there was anything wrong with what I was doing, after all, we were elected by the people and they wanted us to deliver for them.
What I want to point out here is that the website does not offer us any shred of credibility. All we have is the author’s word that he is who he says he is. The author even appeals to the readers emotions by stating how he was working for his constituents. The reader is lead to believe that the author was in a government position, and thus an insider, and that the reader can then trust the author. The problem is, however, that we have no way to verify that this is actually the case. In the very first paragraph, then, the reader should immediately be on guard. Even a web search fails to turn up any information on the supposed author of the website (and the author of the book in question) Sam Adams. The author’s identity remains highly dubious and we must be cautious as we proceed.

Sam Adams continues with his website by telling the following story

One cold, snowy January evening I was working late and ran across a report I probably never should have seen… the Army’s 2008 Modernization Strategy report, which predicted near constant conflicts in the future, both overseas and at home. An entire Command (NorthCom) had been created to deal with ‘natural or man-made’ emergencies, consisting primarily of battle-hardened soldiers from Iraq and Afghanistan who could “use some of the skills they acquired in the war zone” to deal with “civil unrest and crowd control” here… in the United States!

This is truly chilling, if it checks out. The document Sam Adams mentions is easy enough to look up, and we can begin to verify his claims. Readers can find the document here. When reading the document, however, we find a slight misrepresentation of the document very readily on pages 5-7. The Army’s Modernization Strategy Report actually mentions how the world has changed from a world of super-power conflict to one where smaller conflicts are continuing to break out on smaller scales and as the result of various pressures. The document does not actually state that the US Army is expected to be involved in these conflicts, but rather that a renewed security policy is necessary, and that the military needs to modernize in order to meet the changing threats in the world. This is nothing revolutionary, and indeed very true. Since the end of the Cold War there have continued to be many smaller scale wars such as Kosovo and Bosnia. Furthermore, I could not find any mention of “Northcom” anywhere in the document. Furthermore, the “quotes” he uses are nowhere to be found in the document. This is more than a little disingenuous on the part of the author.

Adams continues on by claiming:

One of the first things you used to learn in boot camp is the Posse Comitatus Act, which was created 200 years ago to make sure the military was never used against the citizens. But, for all practical purposes, this law has now been completely negated through Executive Orders issued by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama(1).

Now, there is a reference here which takes the reader of the site here. This is the place where mention of NorthCom actually appears, and the document explains the difficult position between Posse Comitatus and securing against terrorist attacks. However, the document does not do away with this statute, and instead only lists a series of instances where the military has been called into duty on domestic soil including the LA riots. However, the document ends by stating:

Realistically, there are two viable options available to accomplish the vision set forth in the

NSS, NMS, and National Strategy for Homeland Security. Either the status quo can be

maintained with attendant risks or the PCA can be modified along with Army force structure in

order to deal more effectively with an increased Army role in domestic emergencies. A

dedicated and trained rapid-reaction capability should be planned and budgeted to actively

support civil authorities when a state or federal agency is disrupted beyond its capacity. This

force should be highly trained to effect a speedy restoration of order until civilian authorities are

capable of maintaining operations independently. This rapid-response force, when not

responding to a natural or man-made disaster, should be actively engaged operationally or

exercised in local, state, or federal government contingency drills. Operationally, this force

could be employed randomly at the nation’s borders and at critical infrastructure to augment

civilian authorities. This random saturation of forces would keep an element of surprise present

to a potential adversary. (Page 20)

While we can actually debate whether or not this is a good idea from a political standpoint, what we can clearly see is that any use of the US military would be subordinate to the operational command of civilian authorities. This is not martial law, and indeed we find that the author has further been disingenuous about his citation. This document revisits the historical usage of military units domestically and does not advocate for the total dismissal of Posse Comitatus but supports a military unit (distinct from standard military operations) to serve as an emergency force in the event of large riots or natural disaster. This is, in itself fairly prudent considering that if civilian authority is disrupted, there is little to help keep things under control (read: safe). There is no advocation for the direct and permanent installation of a military government in this document, and thus no martial law.

And possibly the worst maneuver taken by this author is as follows:

“Look, if you’re thinking this is all just conspiracy hype, just consider for a moment some recent headlines:

“44,000 UN Troops Train in US in operation Agile Provider”
“Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke Warns of Martial Law if Bailout Not Approved”
“General Barry McCaffery Confirms Thousands of Foreign Troops Are in the US to Assist with Domestic Emergencies”
“Federal Government Collecting GPS Data on Every American Household”
“Homeland Security Report Leaks; Tax Protestors, Abortion Opponents Are Terrorist Suspects”
Pennsylvania Chapter of NAACP Urges Martial Law
H.R.645 and the New FEMA Concentration Camps
The last one, H.R.645 was part of the plan I had read before and actually calls for Homeland Security to build no fewer than 6 national facilities for holding civilians. Trust me when I tell you that there is a plan in place for the suspension of all Constitutional Rights of Americans. The plan includes “interning” certain segments of the population if such a national emergency arises.”

I was unable to locate a single one of these headlines in a news search going back indefinitely. Indeed, there are even some spelling errors in these supposed “headlines.” The author offers us nothing of citation to verify that he is telling the truth about these headlines, and thus there is no reason we should accept this blatant fabrication as truth. This is dishonesty in the highest degree, and should alert all readers that the author is out and out lying. And when we check the document H.R. 645 there is no mention of “holding civilians” in the sense of a detention camp. Instead, the document lays out a plan to have facilities ready in the event of an emergency and thus try to mitigate the problems faced after Hurricane Katrina when hurricane victims were held at the superbowl because the government lacked enough facilities to shelter them. This is not the kind of “FEMA Concentration camp” scenario the author portrays it as, but rather a responsible, and necessary precaution in the event of further natural disasters that displace people from their homes. This is yet another gross misrepresentation on the part of the author.

This webpage is a shameless, dishonest ad for a $50 book about something for which there is no evidence. What I wanted to address was the level of dishonesty on this site and to caution readers to always look for citations and ways of verification for the information being forwarded. And it is good practice to follow up on citations, when given,not only to gain better insight on what is being discussed, but to make sure the author is held accountable for what they write. In the case of “Martial Law Survival” we find not only no accountability for the information presented, but a highly unethical business practice. By lying about a serious situation, the author is attempting to make an emotional case for why people should buy his book, even after giving no proof of who he is and that the situation he says is coming actually is.

Look, if you’re thinking this is all just conspiracy hype, just consider for a moment some recent headlines:

Read: The mainstream media lies except for when it benefits me.