Closing Walmarts

Closing Walmarts


Over the past week or two we’ve seen that at least five Walmarts have closed for six months due to “plumbing problems”.
If the Hoover Dam broke, that might cause a “plumbing problem” that would take more than six months to fix

However, there are no plumbing problems in modern buildings that requires six months to repair.  Modern contractors could easily bulldoze an entire Walmart store, rip the concrete slab and all the underground plumbing, and rebuild a new Walmart on the same site in less than six months.

More, Walmart is all about the money and stores closed for six months wouldn’t seem to make any money.

Thus, the “plumbing problem” excuse for store closings is clearly a blatant lie.

Given that Walmart has given its employees only a few hours notice that they would soon be unemployed, Walmart has created a serious public relations problem that won’t be easily forgotten or erased.  Alienating the public to any degree has got to be bad for business.   Walmart’s conduct has been so inexplicable and heavy-handed that I can’t imagine any modern, major corporation behaving with such indifference to the public–unless that corporation was under some powerful compulsion to do so.


The most disturbing implication in Walmart stores closing with such indifference to public opinion (Walmart doesn’t even appear to care that we know they’re lying), is that Walmart is not concerned about future repercussions.  Walmart acts as if it’s indifferent to the idea of being in business six months from now.

Walmart is clearly up to something.  You can bet that “something” is tied to the US government and perhaps Jade Helm.

Until today, I haven’t seen a plausible explanation for the Walmart closings.

However, here’s a video below that strikes me as plausible.   I can’t guarantee it’s true.  However, the speaker doesn’t look like a flake or “conspiracy nut”.   He seems credible.  He argues that the Walmart stores are being closed to the public in order to become military supply depots.  His explanation, although surprising, seems to make some sense.  IF his argument were true, it would imply that the government intends to impose some version of martial law before the end of this year and probably within the next few months

When it comes to imposing martial law, I’m a skeptic.  The nation of Iraq is about the size and population of Texas.  Our entire military could barely control Iraq during a period of over eight years.  The military nearly bankrupted itself on Iraq.  I infer that our military would have at least as much trouble subduing Texas as it had controlling Iraq. If so, how could the military impose martial law on all 50 States?

I understand that government can impose martial law in limited areas for a relatively short duration, but I can’t yet understand how our government could impose martial law across the entire nation, or even half of the nation.  In fact, I suspect that in the event of a real economic collapse, the chaos would be so widespread that most of the American people would be screaming for martial law to protect them against their neighbors (rather than against the government)–but wouldn’t be able to get much of help from the US military.

More, if the US military were tasked with imposing martial law in the US, it could not continue to serve as some sort of “international police force” charged with keeping other nations under control.  Once the US military starts trying to subject the American people to martial, “rogue” nations around the world will see that as a green light to invade their neighbors.  I can’t see how our government can subject us to martial law without losing much of its military and economic powers in foreign countries.  Again, that conclusion compels me to doubt that martial law (except possibly in limited areas) is likely within the US.

Even so, we live in “interesting times” and nothing seems inconceivable any more.

In any case, here’s the video.  See whatchu think.

video  00:03:03