Is Martial Law Coming to a State Near You?

Here in the Philippines, we'd experienced Martial Law. I do hope that if a state in under such Law, the leader will not become a dictator..

I am surprised that the White House did not time the release of the H1N1 Vaccine with the Rose Garden Press Conference and all the Doctors in their White Robes. It would have been great to see Nancy Pelosi, Barney and all of the Congress get their vaccines in unison.

When is this guy Deval Patrick up for re-election? This guy needs to get booted out as quickly as the next election. I hope that the people in Mass are paying as much attention you are.

2010. There is no strong republican contender thus far.

i am speechless

I'm not - I'm VERY vocal. I'll be the first to be locked up.

i'll send you a care package lol

State laws are still required to conform to the United States Constitution; states have many rights, but suspending the Constitutional rights of it's citizens isn't among them. I'm hoping there will be a class action suit against the state and the legislature.

It get's worse... check out this video on youtube.com. Some of the scariest stuff I've seen to date; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jPC6S5Xwzg&feature=related

Police nation? Over the FLU???

Hardin, Montana bids to be new Guantánamo Bay

Hardin wants to rehouse detainees in disused prison to boost jobs and prospects


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/27/hardin-montana-guantanamo-detainees

http://www.bighorncountynews.com/editorial.html

What a wild ride

I’ve heard it all now, and what a conspiracy theory it has become.

In the last couple of days, people from around the country have been calling and e-mailing me with stories that make Hardin look like something from an episode of Twilight Zone.

Some of the lies that are floating around out there are so strange they I cannot believe that any rational human being could believe such garbage.

Let’s take a look at perhaps the most widely circulated e-mail to claim that Hardin was under martial law.

According to that e-mail, 12 black Mercedes SUVs rolled into town sporting Hardin Police Department logos.

There were only three, and yes, they did have police department decals. From a public relations standpoint it was a disaster, and APF probably realized that.

The e-mail goes on to say that a private security force is already patrolling the town. They had several people stopped yesterday. Also, it appears that they are building some type of heavy duty gate at the entrances of our town.

The email also said, “I am also told by a reliable source that today one of the managers at a local business in Hardin was visited by this new private security force which is now the new Hardin Police Department. He is an avid hunter and they came to inform him that they had a list of all firearms that he owned; this includes all the residents of our town, and that he would need to take his guns down to have them put a marking device on them.”

Would the businessman that said that please step forward?

Doesn’t anyone believe in getting facts before they spout a bunch of garbage?

One of the articles being e-mailed around the country about Hardin said, “In an interview with one of the city council members, he stated that this new H1N1 shot which has not been tested will be mandatory and if a resident of our town refuses, they will be taken to our prison where they will be quarantined.”

I doubt one of the city’s council members said this, but if one did would he or she please step forward?

This whole situation is warped.

As usual, people are overreacting to the possibility of a pandemic. People seem to be terrified that anyone who isn't vaccinated for H1N1 is going to spread it to the rest of the population.

I don't think I've had a flu shot for 30 years and I've never really gotten the flu. If I were told I had to be vaccinated, I would do my best to find out more. I do think some folks are overly frightened of almost everything involving the government; I'm very concerned at the proliferation of privately run prisons and private security forces like Blackwater.

The private sector does not do everything better. There are some things in which I would rather have civil servants, who at least are held back sometimes by public opinion.

As usual, people are overreacting to the possibility of a pandemic. People seem to be terrified that anyone who isn't vaccinated for H1N1 is going to spread it to the rest of the population.

I don't think I've had a flu shot for 30 years and I've never really gotten the flu. If I were told I had to be vaccinated, I would do my best to find out more. I do think some folks are overly frightened of almost everything involving the government; I'm very concerned at the proliferation of privately run prisons and private security forces like Blackwater.

The private sector does not do everything better. There are some things in which I would rather have civil servants, who at least are held back sometimes by public opinion.

To answer your question from the title, martial law is coming soon. That is why all TV's were switched to digital from analog so that law enforcement will not have any interference on their analog channels.

hmmm... interesting thought!!

This is very interesting for a couple of reasons and I think I detect a pattern . From what I can see the law "is designed to clarify the authority of government and the rights of citizens in the case of a public health crisis." So basically it comes into effect in a crisis situation and in that crisis situation the state assumes total authority, the complete monopoly on violence.

If you remember in 1984, the states exist in a state of perpetual warfare and that allows them to control their populations. The issue here is not just the law, but the fact that crises can be manufactured and people made to believe in them so that these laws can then come into effect.

It's like the terror threat. They (the powers that be) manufacture a threat to get people on board with a thing, and I think the Patriot act is an expression of this (I have no idea who's behind all this btw and this is just conjecture). I would say W4L, that the thing you should worry about is not so much the law, which you can do little to change (more's the pity) but be wary of being told about emergencies and and crises and giving into that narrative. That is dangerous.

If you think about it, all of us have learnt that this is the way power societies work; manufacture crises in order to bring in emergency powers, or then over-blow crises to do the same, but we very rarely believe it because we find it difficult to believe that there are actually people out there mad enough for power to do that; problem is that these people, these powerful sociopaths exist, and very rarely do they exist in the public view (Hitler was an exception). Tell me what you think of my little theory.

How about this remedy... wash your hands - cough or sneeze into your sleeve. If you're sick - STAY HOME!

I DO get the flu shot every year AND vaccinate my kids for it. The swine flu shot may have even been a consideration - until they suspended the mercury level allowance.

People should never be forced to inject ANYTHING into their bodies that is questionable.

Changez - we don't always agree - but we do here!

i think they voted to do the right thing to force people to get the vaccination if its necessary. other peoples lives are in jeopardy because of it.

this is taking the bush era of fear mongering to a whole new level...apparently THAT is the "change" we voted for.

The "change" we voted for just won the peace prize - announced bright and early this morning.

Am I missing something or did he withdraw the troops from Iraq last night???????

Alright Elmiko - YOU just put the word out there that makes the whole thing un-American - thanks you.

In America - people are not FORCED into untested vaccinations.

they have indications on the effectiveness of it so its not entirely untested. it has similarities to a regular flu shot but some slight alterations. children are already required by law to get regular flu shots before attending school anyway. numbers wise it will get worse if people are not vaccinated. the country can't afford that.

children are not required by law to get flu shots before attending school

they have indications on the effectiveness of it so its not entirely untested. it has similarities to a regular flu shot but some slight alterations. children are already required by law to get regular flu shots before attending school anyway. numbers wise it will get worse if people are not vaccinated. the country can't afford that.

And martial law is a good thing, too, I suppose? This is obscene, and all things considered, I continue to find good reasons for my decision to emigrate from the US to Israel.

This is not posting in the right spot - it is in response to Spike up top!

Exactly ... thank you for the comment. Yes, people are frightened of the thought of a spread of H1N1 but this is not the first time it has hit this country- but rather the third.

The State of Massachusetts giving one man the right to send police forceably into a home and then gather up those who refuse to do what they are told because of a state of emergency and that is a blanket troubling bill.

This has always been a State where the elected officals have breezed with ease, so to speak...until this year. People are growing in number against this - even Democrats think it went too far - and they are saying they will refuse any form of mandatory vaccine laws. It has not been fully tested, we are talking about our lives, our children's lives.

http://www.physorg.com/news172252051.html

last sentence: "...I do think that parents need to learn as much as they can about these issues in order to make the best decisions for their kids. With that said, here are some links that offer more details about vaccines and autism."

The CDC's vacciene has an alarming amount of thimerasol -which almost half mercury, and was rushed to distribution. While the CDC also claims that they are making a few without the ingrediant ... that number is limited.

Two things... Parents should never be forced to give their child a FLU vaccience. It is not the same as a polio shot and it does not always work - hence, increasing the danger to children. A few years ago the flu vacciene realeased was wrong. No one immunized had protection against the flu anyway the strain changed.

Then there is the issue of giving one man the power to make there decisions. THAT is without question - scary.

Its the economy, stupid! If the US succumbs to economic decline martial law on a national level is a possible outcome. I have seen both sides of American economy in DC, New York and LA. Homeless folks just a few blocks from the White House at McPherson Square was there 7-8 years back.

At this moment the US has tremendous leverage over others in R&D. And it is still far ahead of others in drawing immigrants. Consequently, the gloom scenario of democracy stifling martial law is very unlikely in the foreseeable future.

But the US may one day have to taste the bitter medicine the Republicans mostly had promoted worldwide to bludgeon democracy in so many developing countries!

Cleanliness is next to Godliness. Personal hygiene is the biggest safeguard against disease. The swine flu scare has to a certain extent been able to instill this concept in the teeming illiterate millions in the poorer countries. WHO should launch a more aggressive campaign on primary health care than billions spent on tertiary care. Smoking, lack of potable water, poor hygiene and grandiose armament hemorrhage poorer more than anything else.

Looks like things may have changed in Hardin, Mt...
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/hardin_montana_puts_jail_deal_with_appf_on_ice.php?ref=mp

so the whole thing was a scam?

yocash

I'm utterly speechless, and that's a hard for me! We have had cases in TX where HIV infected people knowingly infected people and the most they were sentenced for were mere months. Now a silly flu, which can be dangerous if not treatened, is causing hysteria. My aunt was given a typical vaccination when she was a little girl....I believe it was 1938, and that year only, that vaccination made hundreds of thousands children sterile. I know that was a very long time ago, but I have had my kids had bad reactions to vaccinations. I still vaccinate my kids, but I always worry about them, especially since there is some speculation that autism is caused by vaccination, and my 5th child has autism. In Texas, there was a lot of talk about making girls get Gardisil vacs. It is for cervical cancer. I didn't want my girls get the vaccination. I'm glad it was only strongly recommended....I haven't taken the flu shot though in a high risk profession because I am leery of the safety of them. WriteForLife:congrats on the high view #'s!!!!SO jealous. ASHER KADE VIA MOBILE

I'm with you on this one, Write4Life. Massachusetts is way out of line on this one.

I take Vitamins, work out, and wash my hands before eating. I am also careful about wiping my eyes, mouth or nose with my unwashed hands, especially during flu season. The last time I had the flu was ...let's see...must have been in the late 1980s when the Army mandated flu shots.

Now, having said all that, it's not the dead virus in the H1N1 vaccine that worries me, not at all - it's the mercury, the detergents, and the spermicide. Not to mention the things we may not even know about yet. Why do vaccines *need* these things? THAT should be the question the mainstream press asks, not simply engaging in name-calling toward those of us who doubt the need for having mercury or spermicide injected into our bodies.

Thank s Punditty and good point - I should have mentioned the content of the vaccination in the story but the point is beyone H1N1 - it is signing it inot law so it really can be pulled out whenever the Governor wants to do so. PEople will argue that it will never happen.

Never happen is a comment I would never give any credibility to. It usally happens soon after the person utters the comment.

I added the contents regarding the mercury to the comments...I should have put it in the article too.

Hey, nice to have you at my dinner table today!

Would that it be so simple as to vote them out at this point. But due to the fact that none of those representatives were "duly elected" in the slightest, any such bill that the Governor would sign most likely would be fundamentally null and void anyway in the process.

Since in order to have a truly representative government, those representatives cannot in any manner accept any "foreign" sponsorship or outside of the state or district in which they represent campaign contributions.

So I would say, as with Arizona, you have a state capitol full of nothing more than "misrepresentatives" and pretenders in office, and nothing more. Like those on Capitol Hill in Washington. None of them "duly" elected at all.

And that is what Paul Revere would be shouting from his horse at this point. "TREASON, TORIES IN OFFICE."

And in order to replace Senator Kennedy, what should have been done is revert to the Constitutional provisions for the election of senators, which would take the partisanship and corporate interests somewhat out of it if all states also would revert back to such measures, and there would be true "representation" of the state's interests once again, without the political corruption of big business in the process.

And that would be for a special session of the legislature to be called in order to appoint someone to fill Kennedy's slot. Not a general election of the people at all, since senators actually were meant to represent the states. And not the Governor either, since that truly would result in political biases even more so than the fact that the two mainstream parties have also hijacked the government of Massachusetts outside Constitutional parameters and the intent of the founders, who did not believe in any outside affiliations for public office, including "corporate" political parties.

If you doubt me read the speech of the first President, George Washington, upon leaving office whose "cautions" actually were directed at the situation in which we find ourselves today. With 'corporate' representation, rather than a legal one.

And per a previous article regarding your difficulty with an insurance provider, I thought you had stated that you were a resident of New York, and not Massachusetts at all? So what gives?

And it is most likely that Massachusetts, as with Arizona and other states throughout the nation, has absolutely no regulation instituted over those insurers that are incorporated within the state, and no complaint procedures or fraud investigations into their practices with respect to their policy provisions and honoring those "consumer" products, or even over the plans which are marketed in that state.

Nor does it most likely monitor the provisions which are actually provided under its universal health care plan, and is providing benefits also to non-Americans and Canadians, especially, that visit there with the Massachusetts residents then picking up the tab for those foreign visitors in the process. Who they have every right to pass legislation providing that no health care facility is to "obligate" the state for payment for medical care and costs for foreigners without first demonstrating that the care was for emergency treatment, and not discretionary such as cases of the flu, where a doctor's visit at lower cost could have been easily arranged.

And that is proveable by the time the visit occurred quite easily, if it is within business hours. And also by the treatment provided itself.

So there are solutions, and it is again the state negligence in effecting that "universal" health care option without the needed restraints and supervision of the provision of that care that seems also to be Massachusetts problem.

Who instead are now crying wolf to the Feds and wish to illegally now transfer that authority by supporting this federal national health care fiasco. Which is not the Feds job at all, and will further compromise the health of all Masschusetts residents, I guarantee, in dealing with the federal bureaucracy, which is far more great and insulated than even the state's.

Which is simply negligence and treason, to have so fundamentally abridged their legal duties and jobs in what has occurred there as has progressively in all other states with state provided care.

And I would imagine there are county hospitals in Massachusetts, which should be the first step in providing such care, that if at all possible under the specific medical condition involved, that such care be provided at country, rather than private, facilities.

After all, these measure were supposed to be for catastrophic needs of those unable to get insurance for any reason. Not measures to feed the corporate health care industry, but to care for the basic needs of the citizenry, after all.

And the states, of course, have absolutely no authority to abridge the Bill of Rights, not even in the interests of public safety, but to provide the option of immunization for any of those that wish to partake of it. Especially since many of these vaccine programs now are causing are using live viruses and thus also sometimes causing the very diseases they were meant to prevent, or other complications.

And so as with most, this legislations is fundamentally flawed, and unconstitutional. And any American well within their rights to refuse upon incarceration if need be, any such provisions.

And laws like these are why are jails are now so full. Because when you legislate outside and attempt to restrain those "unalieanable" rights of Americans guaranteed in our Constitution as "God given" and not "government given" at all, you make criminals out of the populace that simply are asserting their lawful and legal rights.

And it appears those in public office more and more are the criminals and sociopaths, that much is clear, in their deluded and tyrannical continued power trips which are now making those jails increasing full of not simply the felony and true criminals, but your average Americans more and more each and every day.

Ross - I agree with BOTH of your comments 100%

Paul Revere never made the midnight ride, it was a nice story to put in history books, and if you think marshall law is coming to Mass. you obviously are unaware of how things work. Keep writing though, even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.

Where did you go to school HMMHMMHHMMM?

Colonial America, April 18-19, 1775 Paul Revere's Midnight Ride

In the spring of 1775, most of the Massachusetts Patriot leaders had taken refuge in outlying communities, fearing arrest by British officials. Remaining in Boston were two physicians, Benjamin Church and Joseph Warren, the latter serving as the group’s leader in Samuel Adams' absence. Paul Revere, a trusted messenger, also stayed in the city, tended his business interests and as unobtrusively as possible, kept an eye on the soldiers stationed in the city.

Revere became suspicious in mid-April when he noticed that British landing craft were being drawn out of the water for repairs — a clear indication that something was afoot. On the 16th he made a trip to Concord, a key community because it was the temporary home of the Provincial Congress and also a storehouse for militia guns, powder, and shot. He warned the residents there that redcoats were likely to be dispatched in the near future to seize the town’s arms supply. Revere’s warning was taken to heart and the townspeople began to hide arms and valuables in barns, wells, and the neighboring swamps.

On his return home, Revere met with Patriot leaders in Charlestown and agreed on a plan to provide notice about the route the British would take to reach Concord. This was a necessary precaution because there was considerable doubt that Revere or others would be able to get out of Boston at the crucial time.

Revere agreed to arrange for the placement of signal lanterns in the belfry of Old North Church where they could have been easily seen across the Charles River. If one lantern were displayed, the British would be advancing by land over the Boston Neck, then north and west to Concord. If two lanterns were hung, the redcoats would have chosen to cross the Charles by boat to Cambridge, then west to their target.

The former route was unlikely because the soldiers would be clearly visible marching down the Neck, eliminating any element of surprise. The latter plan offered opportunities for concealing movement under cover of darkness and was five miles shorter than the alternative.

Revere resumed his activities in Boston, but in the early evening of April 18, he received word from a stable boy that the British were preparing boats for crossing the Charles. In short order, two other sources confirmed the initial report.


At about 10 p.m., Warren decided that warning had to be given to Sam Adams and John Hancock, who were wanted by British authorities and were likely candidates for the gallows. A young shoemaker, William Dawes, was sent by the land route through Roxbury, Brookline, and Cambridge.
As insurance against Dawes’ capture or detention, Revere took the water route out of Boston, but his effort almost failed at its inception. Revere had forgotten cloth rags to muffle the sound of the oars for the passage across the Charles. Any noise created the risk of alerting the crew of the Somerset, a man-of-war at anchor on the river. Legend says the crossing was accomplished when a resourceful boatman acquired a petticoat from his girlfriend and used that garment to wrap the oars.

On arriving in Charlestown and gaining his mount, Revere narrowly escaped capture by two British soldiers and had to alter his route to the north. He pressed on to Lexington where he found Hancock and Adams at the home of Jonas Clark. Revere was joined by Dawes, who had successfully slipped past the guards on Boston Neck, and a third man, Dr. Samuel Prescott, a resident of Concord.

Before the trio could cover the five miles between Lexington and Concord, they encountered a roadblock manned by redcoats. Responding to the urgency of the moment, they proceeded to break through. Prescott used his intimate knowledge of the countryside to his advantage and successfully eluded capture - he was the only one of the three to complete the journey and deliver the alarm to Concord.

Dawes initially appeared to have escaped his pursuers, but was thrown from his horse and captured. Revere was taken prisoner and during his interrogation deliberately provided greatly inflated numbers of militiamen awaiting the British at Concord.

During the ride back to Lexington, Revere and his captors heard shots fire and church bells ring throughout the area — events that gave some credence to Revere’s report of colonial preparations. Fearing for their safety, the British released Revere, but took the precaution of giving him a tired horse to slow his return to Lexington.

Revere later joined Hancock and Adams on their retreat into the countryside, but made a frantic return to a Lexington tavern where Hancock had inadvertently left some valuable papers. As dawn broke, Revere departed from the town with the valuable documents in hand and rode past militiamen in the process of assembling. A short time later he could hear shots and see smoke in the distance, the opening round in the struggle for independence.

you want to back that up with proof?

stfflyhalf,

And you obviously don't read black and white, or English isn't your primary language. Believe what you wish, but the legislation provided the very real possibility.

Paul Revere did, indeed, make his ride, though I doubt it was midnight. If you have some references to offer, to the contrary, I'd be interested in seeing them...

Write4Life, Shocking, but not surprising! I'm speechless because all my worst nightmares, like bad Hollywood movies, seem to be coming true before my eyes. I frankly no longer feel safe to live in this country and worry about the future of my children and grandchildren.

We've watched it happen and many of us screamed in the streets to prevent some of this insanity, but were ignored. The Patriot Act gave sweeping powers to various authorities while stealing our constitutional rights, the unwarranted spying on U.S. citizens and sophisticated surveillance capabilities, huge and mega-funded military/industrial/prison complex and "police-ification" of America (as we saw recently in actions against peaceful protests in Philadelphia at G20 and White House), and we're paying for unnecessary wars and shameful bailouts and sending billions in aid and weaponry all over the world--while our personal security and net worth has waned.

I lead a natural lifestyle, using alternative healthcare options, eat as organic as possible without chemicals and pesticides, and stay away from doctors and medications and rarely get the sniffles. I have enough mercury in my dental work that I won't tolerate more in my diet or vaccines, especially those rushed to market by profiteering big pharma over some flu fear frenzy. And now immunizations apparently becoming compulsory by our government--under the threat of martial law?

The motives are very suspicious, indeed. Will our lives be a reenactment of George Orwell’s 1984? Or are they already?

- jongleur

Jongleur - you bring up the G20 summit. Billie did an excellent article on that - bringing a person's video to allvoices with his permission.

Now that did not seem to receive very much press. It was nuts and the fact that the police acted the way they did was a clear violation of their rights.

For those who believe this will not happen in their days on this planet in the grand ole USA - I would suggest they read the article Billie posted. I'd bet with a great sum of money - the people protesting at the G20 were not radical right wingers.... so this has nothing to do with left and right - but more an exploitation of our liberties.

A link to BorderExplorer's post if it was missed by anyone:

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/4282398-the-police-are-rioting-a-report-from-the-g20-streets-pittsburgh-2009

This is bothersome. I don't know if its legal or not. Of course it doesn't have to be legal or constitutional if it is an emergency. Indeed all we would need for massive rights violations is a situation where politicians thought they wouldn't suffer any political consequences by doing so. During World War II FDR and company knew good and well that putting Japanese Americans in concentration camps (yes that's the term FDR himself used to describe those facilities on nationwide radio in 1944) was unconstitutional they did it anyway because they knew could get away with it. At the same time FDR went out of his way to praise the patriotism and respect the rights of German and Italian Americans because they had millions of votes. There were only about 500,000 Japanese Americans so FDR didn't give a damn about their rights. We'll see rights violations if the politicians think they can get away with it.

we already see rights violations and they are already getting away with it..think the patriot act for one example

Dear President Obama, aka elmiko, children do NOT have to have flu shots - it is completely the parent's decision. Additionally, the vaccination has a lot of really horrible crap in it.... So, I can see only one solution- give it to yourself, your Congress and YOUR KIDS and if a few years they are doing well... we can start proper testing. If you are so right about the outbreak - it will only be you left - and then that would be just fine too because "indications on the effectiveness of it" is not enough of a sure thing to inject into the veins of my children.

Bad injections have caused birth defects, death, etc...So, once again, please use your family as guinea pigs, not mine.

*note I now know what knocking on the door sounds like; thank you for that brilliant example.

*note This is the first time I've seen FOX anything online from a conservative in over a year. I try to avoid FOX, but libs are quick to flash ya some FOX. I try not to watch.

body= As much as I railed against martial law during the Bush martial law scare (Remember when ppl claimed he was going to use martial law as an excuse to stay in office past his term?), if this thing goes full blown pandemic, martial law may be needed. The concern would obviously be prolonged use. Once people experience martial law, they may get too used to it. It will probably be abused. We've seen abused martial law in New Orleans, and it was ugly. The real fear would be the next use of martial law. Would the next use of martial law be enacted at the drop of a pin?

Martial law is supposed to be used in the absence of civil government. Is the Massachusetts government planning a vacation for the upcoming flu pandemic? Does the vaccine not work? What is the chance of martial law being enacted at all?

As for cops knocking on the door, who would not want a vaccine that would save them from a pernicious flu? It would certainly be outside of democracy to force people to take it, but it would be outside of intelligence to not take it. Correct me if there is something I'm not seeing. Is the vaccine dangerous? Would you take it?

"Once people experience martial law, they may get too used to it. "

how do you get used to martial law?

the major problem with this whole swine flu thing is the numbers do not add up to a pandemic

http://www.latimes.com/news/health/la-sci-swine-flu22-2009oct22,0,3172233.story

"Influenza-like illnesses, presumed to be mostly H1N1 influenza, continued to increase on college campuses last week, according to data from the American College Health Assn. There were 7,099 new cases reported among college populations totaling nearly 3.4 million students, a 9% increase from the previous week.

That makes the total for the academic year 47,000 cases. There were also 13 hospitalizations among college students last week, bringing the seasonal total to 78. No deaths have been reported.

the operative word here being PRESUMED which, if you ask me, is akin to assumed…so lets ASSUME that all these cases are h1n1, does 78 students being hospitalized out of 47,000 add up to a pandimic?

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/04/28/regular.flu/index.html

Since January, more than 13,000 people have died of complications from seasonal flu,


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/24/MNFP1AAB4V.DTL&tsp=1

Swine flu has killed more than 1,000 people in the United States since April


13,000 people died from the seasonal flu in 4 months and the swine flu has killed “more than a thousand” in 7 months….does this add up to a pandemic ?

How do people get used to anything? Though longevity and/or repetition. People become tolerant. How does a wife become used to abuse?

It's not pandemic and the preparation for it being pandemic is likely to be a waste. I'm already aware of that. It's a what-if scenario.

a wife does not become use to abuse she succumbs to it due to a sense of hopelessness ...they are two different things....i don’t think americans would get used to or succumb to their liberties being so dramatically subverted…they need to stick with their slow erosion plan…lol

a what if scenario? that’s as good as any explanation i have been able to ascertain

A pandemic of H1N1 would be a drop in the bucket compared to the regular seasonal flu. It's mild, and only mildly contagious. I've had it. Don'worry... be happy...

That's what I've heard. That actually anchors her point too. Then why martial law and what-not?

To test the waters in case they want to declare martial law in any emergency.

Being this is Massachusetts - testing the water was pretty darn easy. They rolled over and said "no liberties needed here..."

A pandemic of H1N1 would be a drop in the bucket compared to the regular seasonal flu. It's mild, and only mildly contagious. I've had it. Don'worry... be happy...

Believe me, I'd rather have H1N1 (and as I said, I have) than risk something like Guillain-Barre, which is excessively nasty.

[Comment deleted by user]

BIG difference between the two. Give me liberty or give me death is NH. Massachusetts - is very Democratic.

Sorry, I deleted my question before looking. I was going to add that NH is a libertarian hotbed.

"a wife does not become use to abuse she succumbs to it due to a sense of hopelessness"

Getting used to is growing accustomed to. To succumb is more immediate. It may involve acknowledgment. You succumb to an order. One can succumb to something, and then get used to it. You can grow accustomed to something and finally succumb.