At 05:45 PM 10/16/2001 -0500, measl@mfn.org wrote:
On Tue, 16 Oct 2001 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
According to Pravda, the US is now under martial law
For all intents and purposes, we are.
Well, no. "Martial law" usually implies that civil authorities have been replaced or overriden by military command, and that civilian law is not in effect, having been replaced by orders from a military command structure; and it's usually imposed on formerly hostile territory, or territories considered very close to conflict spatially or temporally. That has not happened in the US, except arguably at the ground zero site, and even there it sounds like it's civilian police officers and elected officials, not military officers, who are setting policy. Unconstitutional, in many cases? I think so. Martial law? No, that's not accurate. That term has historically meant a lot more that some National Guard troops in the airports. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles@well.com "We have found and closed the thing you watch us with." -- New Delhi street kids