Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Chuck Norris Warns of Rebellion, Martial Law if America's COVID Strategy Doesn't Change
Source:
Western Journal/WND
URL Source: https://www.westernjournal.com/chuc ... f_content=conservative-tribune
Published: Mar 27, 2020
Author: Carmine Sabia
Post Date: 2020-03-30 10:55:01 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 5465
Comments: 32
The nation is gripped with coronavirus panic, but there is also fear about what is going to happen to our freedoms and our economy once the crisis is over. This pandemic has taken its toll on the United States and that is not lost on conservative actor Chuck Norris, who published an Op-Ed for WND on Monday wondering how long it would be until we were under martial law. The actor said he believes in “being prudent and also being peaceful” but, he added, he had “tough questions” to ask. Norris said he was concerned by the growing lockdown orders and curfews being enforced by law enforcement limiting citizens’ movements. “If the need for citizen confinement grows, and the restrictions increase, where does it end? And what excessive burden are we then placing upon law enforcement to corral even half of Americans (150 million)?” he asked. TRENDING: Frmr Obamacare Chief Pushes Panic, Tells 360K People Hospital Is Out of Ventilators - It Wasn't “And if even the smallest transgression of confinement restrictions ends up being a misdemeanor, how will officials handle tens of millions of them?” Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus And if that were to happen, not only would the hospitals be overrun with police officers, but there would also be fewer people to enforce the lockdown. But what is more frightening, as Norris stated, is that if the lockdown lasts for five weeks or longer, citizens could fight back. “How long can we allow Americans, who are a freedom-loving people and patriots, to be under ‘lockdown’ in their own homes without working?” Norris asked. “Many scientists and specialists are even now calling the federal government to a five-week national lockdown? Do we expect the majority to simply comply? Will they have the resources and wherewithal to go the distance without resistance?” These are frightening questions, but the fact is that American citizens are used to being free and they are now being subjected to draconian restrictions on their liberties. State governments have taken control of the lives of millions of people, telling us where we are allowed to go, what time we have to be home and whose jobs are essential to the state. Normally, taking that kind of control of a nation would take a war, but no one fired a shot and we handed over all of our rights. Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who you may remember from his promotion of ninth-month abortions or his blackface scandal, has closed churches in his state. Is there any American freedom more fundamental than the right to worship when and where we want to? No one is saying that some restrictions are not needed, but to many, it appears we have given the government too much power too quickly. Americans are playing along for now, but the question is how much longer are they going to allow these infringements to stand? And is the government going to “give” all of our rights back after the nation’s mayors and governors have spent a month acting as kings? That should never be a question we have to ask in America. But it may be the most important one. We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
(Edited)
Chuck – Never fear for the Oath Keepers will be Near. Or will they? I have read nothing about the Oath Keepers in years. Have you – Deckard? Please let me know … I distinctly remember at the time that they were your glorious warriors united to protect us all from the immediately impending dastardly actions by the U.S. government when it was preparing to commit all nature of atrocities against we the citizens. You used to give me hell in those olden days for continuing to expose them for what they were and calling the attention to everyone that they had been labeled as one of the largest radical antigovernment groups in the U.S. at that time. Was it you who was spreading the hysteria about the Jade Shield Operation in Texas and how the Oath Keepers would protect us all? I think so … Ah, “those were the days my friend” – a different fear-mongering rumor from you each day. Wait … It’s the same thing you have continued to do throughout these many years – and what you are doing today … Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? And of course – Deckard also knows. And you can bet that he will continue to tell you – each and every day …
From Deckard's thread I did not conclude there was any mention of Oath Keepers. The inferred point of that thread reads here: Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus
Thank you for taking time to inform me of the one thing you did not conclude from Deckard’s thread. In your apparent very detailed and comprehensive reading from Deckard’s, in which Deckard stated here that: While Deckard posted in the header that Carmine Sabia wrote the article. … were you not able to conclude that in reading this Deckard thread – one of a multitude of – Deckard’s threads – that Deckard quite often gets confused where he presents the wrong information or presents lies by others. And therefore from reading Deckard’s threads – one cannot always arrive at a proper conclusion. With conclusion being defined at merriam-webster.com as: In concluding your conclusion, you state: That of course was only one. Perhaps you overlooked a more imported stated – not inferred – point in the article which was the lead in premise: With premise being defined here as: I did follow the stated proposition: … with “another premise” which was also “inferred to follow” and “lead to a conclusion.” Now it is quite obvious – or it most definitely should be – that you came on this thread to chastise me and point out that I committed a wrong. Consequently, I now politely ask you to please tell me exactly how you feel I did that. Thank you …
Definitely not true at all. What I stated from the thread was what I believe the author (Norris) was trying to confer to the reader in that his concern about the officers getting this virus was of great concern. What becomes of society when the officers are in a hold due to their inability to perform their duties as they become seriously ill? You have got to come to the realization that this virus spares noone regardless of their social standing.
Goldilucky: Definitely not true at all. Okay – I can accept that. Furthermore, officers [police] are already getting this virus and more will continue to do so eah day – as also will be the States’ National Guard called up and the U.S. Army personnel from the Corps of Engineers. How much more under “Martial Law” – something I believe will not happen – can the virus be a threat than it is already” I will listen … Realizing that the summary is used for most important emphasis of a point, I am therefore going repost for you here the last four sentences in this article authored by Carmine Sabia and then ask questions. Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article? Then I will ask you again to explain to me why you felt me bringing up the Oath Keeps and their pledge to deal with martial law was uncalled for. Rspectfully …
That is an easy one. From Deckards link to Norris's actual article. He says "most critical" So it is primarily about martial law. And most critical of all, as I'm sure it is being pondered in the rooms of the White House as well as the corridors of Congress: How long can we allow Americans, who are a freedom-loving people and patriots, to be under "lockdown" in their own homes without working? Many scientists and specialists are even now calling the federal government to a five-week national lockdown? Do we expect the majority to simply comply? Will they have the resources and wherewithal to go the distance without resistance? Do we not eventually expect small rebellions or even massive ones to occur in the not-so-distant future if growing requests for lockdowns and deprivations persist? And what will it take for state officials to tip over the morphing milieu of chaos to create the need themselves (based upon the pretense of protection) to call on military intervention and enact martial law? Does that really sound so far-fetched when freedom-loving Americans across our union are being asked to sacrifice their wages, their welfare and stay confined to their homes for weeks on end?
#21. To: A K A Stone (#17)
Stone: That is an easy one. From Deckards link to Norris's actual article. He says "most critical" So it is primarily about martial law. Thank you – That is what started this whole exchange when I tried to explain this to goldilucky. It’s all about martial law and not the cops getting the virus. Do we not eventually expect small rebellions or even massive ones to occur in the not-so-distant future if growing requests for lockdowns and deprivations persist? And what will it take for state officials to tip over the morphing milieu of chaos to create the need themselves (based upon the pretense of protection) to call on military intervention and enact martial law? Does that really sound so far-fetched when freedom-loving Americans across our union are being asked to sacrifice their wages, their welfare and stay confined to their homes for weeks on end? “… to call on military intervention and enact martial law? Does that really sound so far-fetched …” It does to me. Military intervention is now already occurring in numerous instances across the country without “enacting martial law.” There is evidence of this everyplace. Martial law has not been needed for military intervention. I am in agreement with Marco Rubio on this. Does this make me a “red coat?” 😊 Respectfully
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#5. To: Gatlin (#2)
#7. To: goldilucky (#5)
(Edited)
Goldilucky: From Deckard's thread I did not conclude there was any mention of Oath Keepers. Chuck Norris wrote the article. Author: Carmine Sabia a reasoned judgment. goldilucky: The inferred point of that thread reads here:
Norris pointed out that if police are expected to enforce the curfews, they too could become stricken with coronavirus The nation is gripped with coronavirus panic, but there is also fear about what is going to happen to our freedoms … A proposition from which another is inferred or follows as a conclusion. The nation is gripped with coronavirus panic, but there is also fear about what is going to happen to our freedoms …
#8. To: Gatlin (#7)
(Edited)
Now it is quite obvious – or it most definitely should be – that you came on this thread to chastise me and point out that I committed a wrong.
#9. To: goldilucky (#8)
(Edited)
Gatlin: Now it is quite obvious – or it most definitely should be – that you came on this thread to chastise me and point out that I committed a wrong.
Goldilucky: What I stated from the thread was what I believe the author (Norris) was trying to confer to the reader in that his concern about the officers getting this virus was of great concern.
I have posted at least three times that Norris is not the author of the article that is the subject of this thread. I will now again repeat: Carmine Sabia was the author of this article. She provided a link to an Op-Ed that Norris has published in WND. This article by Carmine Sabia is about Rebellion and Martial Law [The Title]. Goldilucky: What becomes of society when the officers are in a hold due to their inability to perform their duties as they become seriously ill?
Since you posed the question, you obviously have considered a possible answer. So, I probably have no different one than you arrived at. Goldilucky: You have got to come to the realization that this virus spares none regardless of their social standing.
You are reaching extremely far out there with your supposition here, Lady – Whatever makes you think I have not? Is there any American freedom more fundamental than the right to worship when and where we want to?
No one is saying that some restrictions are not needed, but to many, it appears we have given the government too much power too quickly.
Americans are playing along for now, but the question is how much longer are they going to allow these infringements to stand?
And is the government going to “give” all of our rights back after the nation’s mayors and governors have spent a month acting as kings?
That should never be a question we have to ask in America.
But it may be the most important one.
#17. To: Gatlin (#9)
Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article?
Replies to Comment # 17. Gatlin: Now, after careful consideration, will you please tell me if martial law is the primary concern expressed or is Norris’ “concern about the officers getting this virus” the primary concern of this article? And most critical of all, as I'm sure it is being pondered in the rooms of the White House as well as the corridors of Congress: How long can we allow Americans, who are a freedom-loving people and patriots, to be under "lockdown" in their own homes without working? Many scientists and specialists are even now calling the federal government to a five-week national lockdown? Do we expect the majority to simply comply? Will they have the resources and wherewithal to go the distance without resistance? On Monday, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted, albeit with a spelling error, requesting everyone stop sharing misinformation about the use of martial law to maintain stability in this ongoing crisis. He wrote, “Please stop spreading stupid rumors about marshall law. COMPLETELY FALSE. We will continue to see closings & restrictions on hours of non-essential businesses in certain cities & states. But that is NOT marshall law.”
End Trace Mode for Comment # 17.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]