Law of War, War of Law.
Related to the functional legal merging of Gain of Function Research, Dual Use Research of Concern, offensive/lethal chemical and biological weapons, defensive/prophylactic medical countermeasures, US Department of Defense, US Department of Health and Human Services, United Nations, World Economic Forum, World Health Organization and Bank of International Settlements.
A few months ago, Reader A emailed me information about the relationship between martial law and civil law.
Reader A had been listening to a Lee/McInerney/Callender podcast:
He did some digging and located the 1907 Treaty at the Hague — Convention Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, including Section III, Military Authority Over the Territory of the Hostile State:
Art. 42. Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army.
Reader A wrote that Hague Convention Article 42 reminded him of General Orders No. 100: promulgated by President Abraham Lincoln April 24, 1863, commonly known as the Lieber Code, at Section 1. Article 1.
A place, district, or country occupied by an enemy stands, in consequence of the occupation, under the Martial Law of the invading or occupying army, whether any proclamation declaring Martial Law, or any public warning to the inhabitants, has been issued or not.
Martial Law is the immediate and direct effect and consequence of occupation or conquest.
Reader A also sent a link to a DOJ Office of Justice Programs 1989 report on Martial Law in Times of Civil Disorder.
Martial law is justified when civilian authority has ceased to function, is completely absent, or has become ineffective. Further, martial law suspends all existing laws, as well as civil authority and the ordinary administration of justice. In the United States, martial law may be declared by proclamation of the President or a State governor but such a formal proclamation is not necessary.
Reader A concluded:
Thus, there is no requirement for public notice nor the presence of an occupying force, but simply a surrender to an “occupying State” to effect martial law. This we have done with the International Health Regulations (2005)…
What strikes me as challenging is that during this occupation, at the smallest town square, even the traffic courts are now captured and the rules for martial law courts now apply.
I agree with your conclusion. I think that was the point all along, since the mid-1940s — to figure out how to take over a country without any armed invasion or announcement of occupation, by occupying it from within gradually, over decades of legal changes and changing how the people in positions of authority think of themselves, their country and their relationship to the people.
Since early June when Reader A and I had that exchange, I haven’t had time to dig into the military or martial law thread, because I’ve been trying to get a better grasp of how Davos Man pulled off the controlled demolition of American and other nation-states’ civil law, constitutional law, criminal law and administrative law systems over the last century, and how those human-written, human-revised legal systems align with or violate natural law and Divine law principles.
Last night, Reader B sent me a copy of the Department of Defense War of Law Manual, 2016 edition, with a note:
During a time of War, all actions taken by Officials will be viewed and judged against the larger background of the Conflict. Legislators and other officials, in all capacities, including supporting personnel, would be well advised to obtain, and read, the DOD Law of War Manual.
My very cursory understanding from Reader A’s June emails was that once the conflict of government against people is openly understood as a war and military law is officially put into effect, it further empowers the government and disempowers civilians.
Reader B seems to be suggesting the opposite: that under military law, the government officials will be subject to accountability in a way that they aren’t currently under constitutional, civil and criminal laws that have been suspended through the January 2020 declaration of public health emergency that’s still in effect, renewed July 15, 2022 by HHS Secretary/World Dictator Xavier Becerra for its latest 90-day extension.
The practical effect of martial law — whether legally favoring murderous governments or favoring civilians trying to defend themselves from murderous governments — may lie in where the military commanders’ allegiance rests.
If the military commanders are loyal to the people and the Constitution, then the murderous government officials will be subject to military law accountability enforced by the military.
But if the military commanders ally with the government, then the people will be subject to military apprehension, detention, executions, etc. enforced by the military on behalf of the murderous government officials.
Thus the coercion of weak ranking officers by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, and the purge from the US military of trained, experienced, Constitutionally-loyal soldiers.
Although explicit public notice has not been given, the American people have been under legal occupation and martial law as implicitly declared through the PREP Act declarations that began Jan. 31, 2020.
But the occupying force is technically not exterior to the US government.
The occupying force is the US government itself, which has simply switched off allegiance to the US Constitution and the American people, and switched on allegiance to the globalist cabal and their complex interlocking — and sometimes self-contradictory — framework of international treaties and conventions.
This relates to several Presidential Executive Orders on globalized, militarized public health/population control frameworks, bioweapons development, Artificial Intelligence and Presidential authorization for foreign troops to control American civilians on US soil, as signed in the last decade, including 13674 (Obama, 2014); 13732 (Obama, 2016); 13747 (Obama, 2016); 13859 (Trump, 2019); 13887 (Trump, 2019); and 13961 (Trump, 2020).
Figuring out who precisely the ‘occupying force’ is, matters a lot.
Because, to the extent the US is under occupation, and for the duration of the occupation, the martial law of the occupying force is the controlling law and the military courts are the controlling judicial tribunals.
Is the current occupying force the US government, in which case United States martial law has been in effect since January 2020?
Or is the occupying force the United Nations, and if so, what is the martial law of the United Nations?
Has a new Rule of Engagement document been drafted — under the 2003 Handbook on United Nations Multidimensional Peacekeeping Operations or some other policy document — specifically for purposes of a UN Peacekeeping mission deployed on American soil since January 2020?
And if so, where is that document and what are its provisions?
Of note, the United Nations states at the landing page for Rules of Engagement:
The Rules for individual missions are not published in publicly available documents.
C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (1977 printing), at p. 169:
…It is easy to think the State has a lot of different objects — military, political, economic and whatnot. But in a way things are much simpler than that.
The State exists simply to promote and protect the ordinary happiness of human beings in this life. A husband and wife chatting over a fire, a couple of friends having a game of darts in a pub, a man reading a book in his own room or digging in his own garden — that is what the State is there for.
And unless they are helping to increase and prolong and protect such moments, all the laws, parliaments, armies, courts, police, economics, etc., are simply a waste of time.
In the same way the Church exists for nothing else but to draw men into Christ, to make them little Christs. If they are not doing that, all the cathedrals, clergy, missions, sermons, even the Bible itself, are simply a waste of time.
God became Man for no other purpose…