PDA

View Full Version : Military training in streets of America forrrr?



revelarts
07-10-2012, 07:06 PM
military in the streets?
<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yQ1KRkDwj34?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yQ1KRkDwj34?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

Gaffer go to the 10:30 mark you'll get a kick out of that.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/i5Aszid4Tlk?feature=player_embedded" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

interment camp procedures?


U.S. Army course authorizes use of deadly force, internment camps during U.S. civil disturbance
In a damning new 115 page self-learning course from the U.S. Army Military Police School at Fort McClellan originally issued in April 2006, we learn that the military has a detailed and brutal plan in store in times of mass civil unrest in the United States. This likely comes as no surprise to readers of End the Lie (http://endthelie.com/2011/12/07/investigating-kbr%E2%80%99s-fema-camp-%E2%80%9Cnational-quick-response-team%E2%80%9D/) who are familiar with my work on the military’s Internment/Resettlement Operations manual (http://endthelie.com/2012/05/02/exposed-military-internmentresettlement-operations-manual/) (video is also embedded below), my coverage of the designation of civilian internee in military literature (http://endthelie.com/2011/12/09/smile-you-are-a-civilian-internee/), my coverage of KBR’s so-called “National Quick Response Teams,” (http://endthelie.com/2011/12/07/investigating-kbr%E2%80%99s-fema-camp-%E2%80%9Cnational-quick-response-team%E2%80%9D/) and the FEMA “National Responder Support Camps.” (http://endthelie.com/2012/02/28/fema-preparing-national-responder-support-camps-eerily-similar-to-kbrs-national-quick-response-team/)


However, this document (embedded below), originally published on July 6 by Public Intelligence (http://publicintelligence.net/usamps-civil-disturbance-operations/), reveals some quite disturbing and clearly institutionalized practices which can and will be used in a time of civil unrest.
It is important to note that this document specifically states, “The same operational procedures that apply to the operation of installation confinement facilities [see above video] and treatment of detainees apply to these temporary facilities except that those policies and procedures establishing training, employment, mail and correspondence, and administrative discipline requirements will not apply.”
However, the course cites Field Manual (FM) 3-19.40 (http://publicintelligence.net/u-s-military-police-internmentresettlement-operations-manual/), originally issued in August of 2001, which appears to be the earlier version of the FM 3-39.40, originally published in February of 2010. Obviously since this edition of the course is dated April 2006, FM 3-39.40 didn’t exist at the time it was written.
At this point it is also noteworthy to point out that the document says, “The Army will not operate facilities for confinement, custody, or detention of civilian personnel apprehended for violation of local or state laws as long as civil confinement facilities, operated by the Department of Justice, state, or local agencies are sufficient to accommodate the number of persons apprehended.”
Therefore, it appears to be the case that military detention facilities will not be used unless there are not sufficient facilities operated by the DOJ, state or local law enforcement. At least we can hope to be thrown in a dangerous, filthy, and overcrowded “civil confinement” facility instead of a military internment camp.
If the military does set up detention facilities, “These facilities will be operated only until custody of the persons detained can be transferred to and assumed by civil authorities. They will not be used for the confinement of persons charged or convicted under civil jurisdiction.”
However, this was written long before the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2012 and the indefinite detention sections included which allow the military to hold Americans without charge or trial indefinitely (http://endthelie.com/2011/12/16/crushing-disinformation-surrounding-indefinite-detention-of-americans-under-the-ndaa/). These above guidelines have almost certainly been removed having been given this power when Obama signed the NDAA (http://endthelie.com/2012/01/01/happy-new-year-obama-signs-ndaa-codifies-indefinite-detention/).
While a judge indeed stepped up against the indefinite detention sections of the NDAA (http://endthelie.com/2012/05/18/pushing-back-against-tyranny-judge-rules-indefinite-detention-sections-of-ndaa-unconstitutional/), I seriously doubt that this decision would be honored in a time when the military is actually rolled out to quell civil unrest.
The course is designed for operations inside the continental United States (CONUS) or outside the continental United States (OCONUS) in cases of civil disturbances when “the President is advised by the highest officials of the state that the situation cannot be controlled with nonfederal resources available.”
The “control force,” as these military police groups are referred to in the course, is mandated “to help restore law and order and to help maintain it until such time as state and local forces can control the situation without federal help.”
In other words, there is no restriction in terms of how long these forces can remain in a given area helping “restore law and order.”
The course clearly states that these soldiers will not just be used “in subduing the disturbance” which is what one might expect. Instead, they are actually going to be carrying out law enforcement activities.
This is incredibly important because while the act of “subduing the disturbance” would, likely, be defensible under Posse Comitatus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act) and the Insurrection Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act), it is much harder to defend the military “helping to detain those responsible for [the disturbance].”
Speaking of the fact that, “the control force may have to actively participate, not only in subduing the disturbance, but also in helping to detain those responsible for it,” the course states that, “Control force commanders are authorized and directed to provide such active participation, subject to restraints on the use of force.”
It appears that the law enforcement role of the military will be far from negligible seeing as, “Commanders are authorized to use non-deadly force to control the disturbance, to prevent crimes, and to detain persons who have committed crimes; but the degree of force used must be not greater than that reasonably necessary under the circumstances.”
Of course, the degree of forced which is “reasonably necessary under the circumstances” is usually quite different in the eyes of the police and military compared to how the individuals actually receiving the “non-deadly force” see it.
One of the most disturbing aspects of this course comes when they are dealing with the use of deadly force.
Some of the policies regarding the use of deadly force which the military will observe are: give an order to halt, warning shot will not be fired, when a firearm is discharged it will be fired with the intent of rendering the person(s) at whom it is discharged incapable of continuing that activity or course of behavior prompting the individual to shoot, shot will be fired only with due regard for the safety of innocent bystanders and in the case of holstered weapons, a weapon should not be removed from the holster unless there is a reasonable expectation that use of the weapon may be necessary.
You read that right; there will not be a warning shot. At least they’ll tell you to halt before they make your face look like a watermelon dropped off a third story roof onto cement.
The course outlines when deadly force is justified and gives the following circumstances, only one of which need be fulfilled. However, they do state, “The use of deadly force is authorized only under conditions of extreme necessity and as a last resort when all lesser means have failed or cannot be reasonably be employed.”
The circumstances in which deadly force is justified are:
(a) Self- defense and defense of others. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to protect law enforcement or security personnel who reasonably believe themselves or others to be in imminent danger of death or serious bodily harm.
(b) Assets involving national security. When deadly force reasonably appears necessary to prevent the actual theft or sabotage of assets vital to national security. DoD assets shall be specifically designated as “vital to national security” only when their loss, damage, or compromise would seriously jeopardize the fulfillment of a national defense mission. Examples include nuclear weapons; nuclear command, control, and communications facilities; and designated restricted area as containing strategic operational assets, sensitive codes, or special access programs.
(c) Assets no involving [sic] national security but inherently dangerous to others. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to prevent the actual theft or sabotage of resources, such as operable weapons or ammunition, that are inherently dangerous to others; i.e., assets that, in the hands of an unauthorized individual, present a substantial potential danger of death or serious bodily harm to others. Examples include high risk portable and lethal missiles, rockets, arms, ammunition, explosives, chemical agents, and special nuclear material.
(d) Serious offenses against persons. When deadly force reasonably appears necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offense involving violence and threatening death or serious bodily harm. Examples include murder, armed robbery, and aggravated assault.
(e) Arrest or apprehension. When deadly force reasonably appears to be necessary to arrest, apprehend, or prevent the escape of a person who, there is probably cause [sic] to believe, has committed an offense of the nature in (2) through (4) above. [It is unclear which offenses this is referring to specifically, although it seems that by (2) and (4) they might mean “Enforce the laws of the United States” and “Protect federal property and functions.” The (2) and (4) immediately above this section do not seem to be relevant.]
(f) Escapes. When deadly force has been specifically authorized by the Heads of the DoD Components and reasonable appears to be necessary to prevent the escape of a prisoner, provided law enforcement or security personnel have probable cause to believe that the escaping prisoner poses a threat of serious bodily harm either to security personnel or others.
The course delves into significant details, even getting into the specific lethal and non-lethal weapons to be used and how they will be used.
The document even describes in detail the weapon carrying positions of safe-port arms which another military manual (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/19-15/CH8.htm) remarked, “is quite effective when making a show of force. In this elevated position, bayonets can be seen by participants in the rear of the crowd. The sight of bayonets can create an impression of strength and numerical superiority. “
However, I guess we can we be thankful that the document states that “the danger of intentional or accidental injury to demonstrators or fellow control force personnel prevents such use [of rifles with fixed bayonets] except with extremely violent crowds.”
The use of bayonets seems to be a mostly psychological weapon in terms of crowd control unless deadly force is being used since they note, “The primary value of the rifle or the rifle with bayonet attached is the psychological impact on the crowd.”
Interestingly, it seems that marksmen who will be selected to fire upon Americans first will be chosen beforehand in order to groom them for being able to murder their fellow men and women.
“Fire by selected marksmen may be necessary under certain circumstances,” explains the document. “Marksmen should be pre-selected, trained, and thoroughly instructed. They may be placed on vehicles, in buildings, or elsewhere as required.”
The most disturbing description is probably that of “full firepower” which is described as the “most severe measure of force that can be applied by Soldiers.”
Full firepower is “that of available unit firepower with the intent of producing extensive casualties. This extreme measure would be used as a last resort only after all other measures have failed or obviously would be impractical, and the consequence of failure to completely subdue the crowd would be an imminent overthrow of the government, continued mass casualties, or similar grievous conditions.”
No stone is left unturned in this document, so if you have the time I recommend that you take it to explore all of what is divulged in order to best understand what powers the military already has at their fingertips.
Did I forget anything or miss any errors? Would you like to make me aware of a story or subject to cover? Or perhaps you want to bring your writing to a wider audience? Feel free to contact me at admin@endthelie.com with your concerns, tips, questions, original writings, insults or just about anything that may strike your fancy.


More at EndtheLie.com - http://EndtheLie.com/2012/07/06/u-s-army-course-authorizes-use-of-deadly-force-internment-camps-during-u-s-civil-disturbance/#ixzz20GPd1JRr

Gaffer
07-10-2012, 07:18 PM
I was just at that site reading the same stuff. Interesting, but I think he's off base. I think they are actually training for iranian and hezbo insurgents within the US. Of course I wouldn't put it past he who must not be named to use the opportunity to then move against the American people and usurp power. A crisis should not go to waste.

gabosaurus
07-10-2012, 07:20 PM
Not to worry. Probably just some crazy Republicans playing with their guns again.

jimnyc
07-10-2012, 07:29 PM
Not to worry. Probably just some crazy Republicans playing with their guns again.

Do you ever enter a thread to just discuss a topic, or add anything? Seems all you do is troll anymore looking to rile people up.

gabosaurus
07-10-2012, 07:41 PM
If you attempt to grasp the entire scope of what has been offered, you realize how ridiculous the militarist view of this is. You also have to take into account who originally came up with this idea. And how often it was used on a limited scale.


In a damning new 115 page self-learning course from the U.S. Army Military Police School at Fort McClellan originally issued in April 2006, we learn that the military has a detailed and brutal plan in store in times of mass civil unrest in the United States.

It should come as no surprise that Obama is just as much of a power seeking militant as Dubya was.

logroller
07-10-2012, 07:52 PM
Do you ever enter a thread to just discuss a topic, or add anything? Seems all you do is troll anymore looking to rile people up.

Ummmm. Shes not alone in that behavior; only her position.

aboutime
07-10-2012, 08:23 PM
I was just at that site reading the same stuff. Interesting, but I think he's off base. I think they are actually training for iranian and hezbo insurgents within the US. Of course I wouldn't put it past he who must not be named to use the opportunity to then move against the American people and usurp power. A crisis should not go to waste.



Gaffer. Why do I feel a sudden urge to say "Thanks Rahm!"

Of course. What hasn't been mentioned, or told by the author of the thread is. Our Military has been training for just those kinds of things since.....Vietnam, and our needs to begin to understand how to fight in the streets of Urban settings.
So...instantly. The Conspiracy Theory Junkies start sprouting up like a field full of sun flowers, or where somebody planted MaryJane, and left it there to be harvested by the Mentally deranged who now call themselves Liberal Politicians.

revelarts
07-10-2012, 09:28 PM
Gaffer. Why do I feel a sudden urge to say "Thanks Rahm!"

Of course. What hasn't been mentioned, or told by the author of the thread is. Our Military has been training for just those kinds of things since.....Vietnam, and our needs to begin to understand how to fight in the streets of Urban settings.
So...instantly. The Conspiracy Theory Junkies start sprouting up like a field full of sun flowers, or where somebody planted MaryJane, and left it there to be harvested by the Mentally deranged who now call themselves Liberal Politicians.
Viet Nam? I don't know ATime.

USNORTHCOM attained initial operational capability on Oct. 1, 2002, and full operational capability on Sept. 11, 2003.



Brigade homeland tours start Oct.
3rd Infantry’s 1st BCT trains for a new dwell-time mission. Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active Army
By Gina Cavallaro - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Sep 30, 2008 16:07:12 EDT
<form id="hidden"> </form> The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.
Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.
Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.
It is not the first time an active-duty unit has been tapped to help at home. In August 2005, for example, when Hurricane Katrina unleashed hell in Mississippi and Louisiana, several active-duty units were pulled from various posts and mobilized to those areas.
But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.
After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one....



http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/


...“We’re excited about obtaining a ready and capable team that we can quickly activate and deploy as part of a federal response package when responding in the aftermath of catastrophic events,” Boatner said. “This response force will not be called upon to help with law enforcement, civil disturbance or crowd control, but will be used to support lead agencies involved in saving lives, relieving suffering and meeting the needs of communities affected by weapons of mass destruction attacks, accidents or even natural disasters.”...

But they've gutted the posse comitatus with the warner act and other regs in 200x. So all we've got keeping troops off the streets legally is the commanders word.

A bit different than drills after viet nam.

red state
07-10-2012, 09:47 PM
Do you ever enter a thread to just discuss a topic, or add anything? Seems all you do is troll anymore looking to rile people up.

Yeah...I'm thinking of going back to the other site cuz it seems that the trolls have followed me here. HA! Just kidding, of course, the moderation (so far) is what will keep me here. I suppose every site has it usual lil' libbie loser lemming trolling around. The "other site" would be perfect for this troll....not that I'd wanna lose a troll to laugh at (just as long as they don't breed).

ConHog
07-10-2012, 09:50 PM
Ummmm. Shes not alone in that behavior; only her position.

That's different............. somehow

gabosaurus
07-10-2012, 10:12 PM
Yeah...I'm thinking of going back to the other site cuz it seems that the trolls have followed me here. HA! Just kidding, of course, the moderation (so far) is what will keep me here. I suppose every site has it usual lil' libbie loser lemming trolling around. The "other site" would be perfect for this troll....not that I'd wanna lose a troll to laugh at (just as long as they don't breed).

At any site where one opinion predominates, those who hold differing opinions are labeled as "trolls." I went to a site for female baseball fans once where the staff were predominately east coast residents. Mostly Yankees and Orioles. I was eventually cast out as a "Dodgers troll."

In saying that the "other site" is perfect for me, I am guessing that the conservative moderators of such board are more likely to give me the boot for my opinions. Which would place them in line with other boards I have been on. Some of which have allowed me to make less than a dozen posts. I have also been banned from liberal boards. For not being liberal enough. (hey! it happened! )

I take a lot of shots at Jim (and he at me), but the truth is that he is the best and fairest administrator of any board I have ever been on. I am 28 years old and have been "trolling" message boards since I was 13. If Jim wasn't fair about allowing open discussion, I wouldn't still be here almost 10 years later.

Oh, and I am married to a very conservative Republican. We don't discuss politics.
It's like Ann Coulter once said when asked about dating a Democrat -- "my politics stop at the bedroom door."

ConHog
07-10-2012, 10:17 PM
At any site where one opinion predominates, those who hold differing opinions are labeled as "trolls." I went to a site for female baseball fans once where the staff were predominately east coast residents. Mostly Yankees and Orioles. I was eventually cast out as a "Dodgers troll."

In saying that the "other site" is perfect for me, I am guessing that the conservative moderators of such board are more likely to give me the boot for my opinions. Which would place them in line with other boards I have been on. Some of which have allowed me to make less than a dozen posts. I have also been banned from liberal boards. For not being liberal enough. (hey! it happened! )

I take a lot of shots at Jim (and he at me), but the truth is that he is the best and fairest administrator of any board I have ever been on. I am 28 years old and have been "trolling" message boards since I was 13. If Jim wasn't fair about allowing open discussion, I wouldn't still be here almost 10 years later.

Oh, and I am married to a very conservative Republican. We don't discuss politics.
It's like Ann Coulter once said when asked about dating a Democrat -- "my politics stop at the bedroom door."

28? for the 8th time? I KNOW you posted the other day that you graduated HS in 1993. :poke:

you're still hot

oh and as to what you posted. I never understood why anyone would only want one opinion heard on a message board. BORING.............

gabosaurus
07-10-2012, 10:20 PM
28? for the 8th time? I KNOW you posted the other day that you graduated HS in 1993. :poke:

you're still hot

oh and as to what you posted. I never understood why anyone would only want one opinion heard on a message board. BORING.............

If I said I graduated in 1993, it was a dumb blonde mistake. Probably provoked by my husband trying to mess me up.
I was born in 1984, graduated high school in 2002 and college in 2006.
But yes, I am still hot. :cool:

ConHog
07-10-2012, 10:26 PM
If I said I graduated in 1993, it was a dumb blonde mistake. Probably provoked by my husband trying to mess me up.
I was born in 1984, graduated high school in 2002 and college in 2006.
But yes, I am still hot. :cool:

I would need photographic evidence, preferably of the bikini variety.

revelarts
07-11-2012, 08:31 AM
northcom news interview
In a barely noticed development, a US Army unit is now training for domestic operations under the control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. An initial news report in the Army Times newspaper last month noted that in addition to emergency response the force “may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control.” The military has since claimed the force will not be used for civil unrest, but questions remain. We speak to Army Col. Michael Boatner, future operations division chief of USNORTHCOM, and Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive magazine. [includes rush transcript]

Guests:
Col. Michael Boatner (http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/col_michael_boatner), Future Operations division chief of USNORTHCOM.

Matthew Rothschild (http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/matthew_rothschild), Editor of The Progressive magazine.




Tuesday, October 7, 2008



reporter MATTHEW ROTHSCHILD:

Well, I’m very concerned on a number of fronts about this, Amy. One, that NORTHCOM, the Northern Command, that came into being in October of 2002, when that came in, people like me were concerned that the Pentagon was going to use its forces here in the United States, and now it looks like, in fact, it is, even though on its website it says it doesn’t have units of its own. Now it’s getting a unit of its own.

And Colonel Boatner talked about this unit, what it’s trained for. Well, let’s look at what it’s trained for. This is the 3rd Infantry, 1st Brigade Combat unit that has spent three of the last five years in Iraq in counterinsurgency. It’s a war-fighting unit, was one of the first units to Baghdad. It was involved in the battle of Fallujah. And, you know, that’s what they’ve been trained to do. And now they’re bringing that training here?

On top of that, one of the commanders of this unit was boasting in the Army Times about this new package of non-lethal weapons that has been designed, and this unit itself is going be able to use, according to that original article. And in fact, the commander was saying he had even tasered himself and was boasting about tasering himself. So, why is a Pentagon unit that’s going to be possibly patrolling the streets of the United States involved in using tasers?

AMY GOODMAN: Colonel Boatner?

COL. MICHAEL BOATNER: Well, I’d like to address that. That involved a service mission and a service set of equipment that was issued for overseas deployment. Those soldiers do not have that on their equipment list for deploying in the homeland. And again, they have been involved in situations overseas. And having talked to commanders who have returned, those situations are largely nonviolent, non-kinetic. And when they do escalate, the soldiers have a lot of experience with seeing the indicators and understanding it. So, I would say that our soldiers are trustworthy. They can deploy in the homeland, and American citizens can be confident that there will be no abuses.

Reporter MATTHEW ROTHSCHILD:

Well, you know, that doesn’t really satisfy me, and I don’t think it should satisfy your listeners and your audience, Amy, because, you know, our people in the field in Iraq, some of them have not behaved up to the highest standards, and a lot of police forces in the United States who have been using these tasers have used them inappropriately.

The whole question here about what the Pentagon is doing patrolling in the United States gets to the real heart of the matter, which is, do we have a democracy here? I mean, there is a law on the books called the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act that says that the president of the United States, as commander-in-chief, cannot put the military on our streets. And this is a violation of that, it seems to me.

President Bush tried to get around this act a couple years ago in the Defense Authorization Act that he signed that got rid of some of those restrictions, and then last year, in the new Defense Authorization Act, thanks to the work of Senator Patrick Leahy and Kit Bond of Missouri, that was stripped away. And so, the President isn’t supposed to be using the military in this fashion, and though the President, true to form, appended a signing statement to that saying he’s not going to be governed by that. So, here we have a situation where the President of United States has been aggrandizing his power, and this gives him a whole brigade unit to use against US citizens here at home.

AMY GOODMAN:
Colonel Michael Boatner, what about the Posse Comitatus Act, and where does that fit in when US troops are deployed on US soil?
COL. MICHAEL BOATNER:
It absolutely governs in every instance. We are not allowed to help enforce the law. We don’t do that. Every time we get a request — and again, this kind of a deployment is defense support to civil authority under the National Response Framework and the Stafford Act. And we do it all the time, in response to hurricanes, floods, fires and things like that. But again, you know, if we review the requirement that comes to us from civil authority and it has any complexion of law enforcement whatsoever, it gets rejected and pushed back, because it’s not lawful.
AMY GOODMAN:
Matthew Rothschild, does this satisfy you, editor of The Progressive magazine?
MATTHEW ROTHSCHILD:
No, it doesn’t. One of the reasons it doesn’t is not by what Boatner was saying right there, but what President Bush has been doing. And if we looked at National Security Presidential Directive 51, that he signed on May 9th of 2007, Amy, this gives the President enormous powers to declare a catastrophic emergency and to bypass our regular system of laws, essentially, to impose a form of martial law.

And if you look at that National Security Presidential Directive, what it says, that in any incident where there is extraordinary disruption of a whole range of things, including our economy, the President can declare a catastrophic emergency. Well, we’re having these huge disturbances in our economy. President Bush could today pick up that National Security Directive 51 and say, “We’re in a catastrophic emergency. I’m going to declare martial law, and I’m going to use this combat brigade to enforce it.”

COL. MICHAEL BOATNER:
The only exception that I know of is the Insurrection Act. It’s something that is very unlikely to be invoked. In my thirty-year career, it’s only been used once, in the LA riots, and it was a widespread situation of lawlessness and violence. And the governor of the state requested that the President provide support. And that’s a completely different situation. The forces available to do that are in every service in every part of the country, and it’s completely unrelated to the — this consequence management force that we’re talking about....




http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/7/us_army_denies_unit_will_be

ConHog
07-11-2012, 09:07 AM
northcom news interview
In a barely noticed development, a US Army unit is now training for domestic operations under the control of US Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command. An initial news report in the Army Times newspaper last month noted that in addition to emergency response the force “may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control.” The military has since claimed the force will not be used for civil unrest, but questions remain. We speak to Army Col. Michael Boatner, future operations division chief of USNORTHCOM, and Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive magazine. [includes rush transcript]

Guests:
Col. Michael Boatner (http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/col_michael_boatner), Future Operations division chief of USNORTHCOM.

Matthew Rothschild (http://www.democracynow.org/appearances/matthew_rothschild), Editor of The Progressive magazine.




Tuesday, October 7, 2008

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/7/us_army_denies_unit_will_be



Rev, this may surprise you but this is why I got out when I did. I did see a possibility that Obama might at some point order American soldiers to fire upon Americans , and I want no part of that.

Not that I believe he's evil and out to take over as military dictator, but rather b/c I can see some doofuses starting a revolt rather than simply voting against the guy and I can see Obama over reacting by using the military.

revelarts
07-11-2012, 11:42 AM
Rev, this may surprise you but this is why I got out when I did. I did see a possibility that Obama might at some point order American soldiers to fire upon Americans , and I want no part of that.

Not that I believe he's evil and out to take over as military dictator, but rather b/c I can see some doofuses starting a revolt rather than simply voting against the guy and I can see Obama over reacting by using the military.

that does surprise me,
Not to say your for any of that type of thing, just that it would be apart of your reason to leave.

red state
07-11-2012, 11:44 AM
Rev, this may surprise you but this is why I got out when I did. I did see a possibility that Obama might at some point order American soldiers to fire upon Americans , and I want no part of that.

Not that I believe he's evil and out to take over as military dictator, but rather b/c I can see some doofuses starting a revolt rather than simply voting against the guy and I can see Obama over reacting by using the military.

yep...that's my definition of EVIL. Defuse a revolt because of his trampling on our freedoms, dictating everything with the push of a pen and then call on martial law to save his re-election. As with New Orleans during Katrina, the National Guard actually upheld the Constitution for the most part....it was the local liberal authorities who conducted themselves unworthy of their office (or badge). B.O. is extremely evil....which is why he is so secretive and misleading. For some, it took almost 4 years in office to see through. For others (such as myself) the evil was evident IMMEDIATELY! For a few, they will always be lil' libbie loser lemmings and wouldn't know evil or honor if it bit them in the @$$....and it will eventually.

I hadn't thought about it in a while but I'm thinking more and more lately that we may have to drag B.O.'s sorry @$$ out of the White House kicking and screaming like a the boy he is before he turns the keys over. That, my friend is plenty enough reason to REVOLT. Was it not Jefferson who said that occassional revolt is good for the health of our nation? We had and are still paying for the liberal revolt back in the 60's so now it is our turn.

ConHog
07-11-2012, 11:46 AM
that does surprise me,
Not to say your for any of that type of thing, just that it would be apart of your reason to leave.

it was a part. small part, but still a part. I'm not sure if I could have accepted an order to fire on US citizens if it was given.

revelarts
07-11-2012, 11:58 AM
yep...that's my definition of EVIL. Defuse a revolt because of his trampling on our freedoms, dictating everything with the push of a pen and then call on martial law to save his re-election. As with New Orleans during Katrina, the National Guard actually upheld the Constitution for the most part....it was the local liberal authorities who conducted themselves unworthy of their office (or badge). B.O. is extremely evil....which is why he is so secretive and misleading. For some, it took almost 4 years in office to see through. For others (such as myself) the evil was evident IMMEDIATELY! For a few, they will always be lil' libbie loser lemmings and wouldn't know evil or honor if it bit them in the @$$....and it will eventually.

I hadn't thought about it in a while but I'm thinking more and more lately that we may have to drag B.O.'s sorry @$$ out of the White House kicking and screaming like a the boy he is before he turns the keys over. That, my friend is plenty enough reason to REVOLT. Was it not Jefferson who said that occassional revolt is good for the health of our nation? We had and are still paying for the liberal revolt back in the 60's so now it is our turn.

Frankly I think a armed revolt would play into the oligarchs hands. and give an excuse to put the country on lock down. the only people to be hurt would be military police and armed civilians and bystanders.
the Congressmen, senators, buracrats, fat cat bankers, heads of all the agencies, and corporations will hunker down an wait for the smoke to clear and try to get back on the horse again.

IMO there's not critical mass of people yet that know what going on. there needs to be a Sizable hunk of the police and military on board as well as other citizenry before a major shift can happen outside of the ballot boxes. If enough people revolted in the sense that we did several general strikes, like No we are not Going to pay X tax, we are not going to arrest people for X. w are not going to take peoples Guns. We are not going to comply with X regulation. And as police and judges we will not Enforce X law the congress does not have the Authority. We will not deploy to Country X the order is illegal.

And if a few brave and honest judges, juries and state prosecutors managed to put a few feds in jail for illegal activity that has affected their state that would help to.

In my wishful imagination few push backs along that line would shake the "leadership" to it's core. and let them know who they are working for.

red state
07-11-2012, 11:44 PM
I agree, I was merely stating what will need to be done IF and when B.O. refuses to turn the keys over or tries to do what the New Orleans mayor did during Katrina. We should have SHOUTED aloud for what "THEY" did to the good people of New Orleans but nothing was heard about it and our media is much to blame.


Frankly I think a armed revolt would play into the oligarchs hands. and give an excuse to put the country on lock down. the only people to be hurt would be military police and armed civilians and bystanders.
the Congressmen, senators, buracrats, fat cat bankers, heads of all the agencies, and corporations will hunker down an wait for the smoke to clear and try to get back on the horse again.

IMO there's not critical mass of people yet that know what going on. there needs to be a Sizable hunk of the police and military on board as well as other citizenry before a major shift can happen outside of the ballot boxes. If enough people revolted in the sense that we did several general strikes, like No we are not Going to pay X tax, we are not going to arrest people for X. w are not going to take peoples Guns. We are not going to comply with X regulation. And as police and judges we will not Enforce X law the congress does not have the Authority. We will not deploy to Country X the order is illegal.

And if a few brave and honest judges, juries and state prosecutors managed to put a few feds in jail for illegal activity that has affected their state that would help to.

In my wishful imagination few push backs along that line would shake the "leadership" to it's core. and let them know who they are working for.

red state
07-11-2012, 11:47 PM
Rev., Check out Oathkeepers...I think you and the members here who have "honorably" served in the military or our justice system will be interested in checking them out or supporting them.

gabosaurus
07-11-2012, 11:53 PM
Rev, this may surprise you but this is why I got out when I did. I did see a possibility that Obama might at some point order American soldiers to fire upon Americans , and I want no part of that.


Geez, what president would ever been stupid enough to approve something like that?

http://www.maniacworld.com/kent-state-shooting.jpg



I agree, I was merely stating what will need to be done IF and when B.O. refuses to turn the keys over or tries to do what the New Orleans mayor did during Katrina. We should have SHOUTED aloud for what "THEY" did to the good people of New Orleans but nothing was heard about it and our media is much to blame.


What a twisted and revisionist memory you have about Katrina. :rolleyes:
Dems spent a lot of time worrying about what to do if Dubya refused to abdicate. Nothing ever came of it.

fj1200
07-12-2012, 03:11 PM
Geez, what president would ever been stupid enough to approve something like that?

http://www.maniacworld.com/kent-state-shooting.jpg



So, Nixon approved Kent State? Who knew? :dunno:

ConHog
07-12-2012, 03:19 PM
So, Nixon approved Kent State? Who knew? :dunno:

It certainly would be news to Nixon that he approved sending in the Ohio National Guard.

ConHog
07-12-2012, 03:20 PM
Geez, what president would ever been stupid enough to approve something like that?

http://www.maniacworld.com/kent-state-shooting.jpg




What a twisted and revisionist memory you have about Katrina. :rolleyes:
Dems spent a lot of time worrying about what to do if Dubya refused to abdicate. Nothing ever came of it.

I know you can read Gabby, so therefor I KNOW that you have read my posts where I have said that it is idiotic to believe that Obama won't move aside when his time is up. Of course he will.

red state
07-12-2012, 04:28 PM
Geez, what president would ever been stupid enough to approve something like that?

http://www.maniacworld.com/kent-state-shooting.jpg

What a twisted and revisionist memory you have about Katrina. :rolleyes:
Dems spent a lot of time worrying about what to do if Dubya refused to abdicate. Nothing ever came of it.

Nothing twisted or inaccurate about my recollection of history: Law abiding citizens were stripped of their guns while thugs, rapist, theives and murderers did what they pleased in "safety areas of relocation".

Reminds me of the fires, violence, property destruction and UNLAWFUL mob activity that the scum at Kent were part of....or the rape, drugs, and $#!TTING on cars with destruction of property that went on during almost EVERY ORGANIZED 'occupy' movement. Yeah...my recollection is twisted about as much as your ethics and reality of things are honorable or accurate. Just another follower of the Occupier/Organizer we have in the White House!

red state
07-12-2012, 04:52 PM
I wonder how many of these scum spat upon our soldiers coming back from Vietnam? Most of these soldiers at that time of the war were DRAFTED, yet these scum usually claimed to be protesting the DRAFT...were they so stupid that they didn't realize that they were spitting on the very victims that they hoped to avoid. Did they not realize that is was not a Republican (or NIXON) who introduced the Draft? No....because like MOST of today's lil' libbie loser lemmings, they are pure-D-Stupid!!!

Fact is, the draft that most hippies protested was put into place by LBJ. Like most liberals in office, LBJ did this a month before he knew that he'd be out of office. I hate to say this but the protest of babies being killed by OUR "baby killers" was not the reason for hippies and other loser bums protesting...it was their cowardly, "passive" character. There were many who didn't believe we should be there BUT they did their best and served honorably ANYWAY! Another fact that should really make your @$$ itch is this: in 1973, the draft ended and the U.S. converted to an All-Volunteer military. Who was president in '73? You need a hint? OK...I'll take it for granted that you know that one so I'll ask you another question: Which president announced an amnesty for draft evaders? I'm not going to do your homework for you or provide links....you need to learn history for yourself [NOT spout off your own 'PERSONAL' history]. That alone is what is wrong with most liberals...they simply regurgitate that same ole mis-informed/ill-informed rhetoric.

Look, I believe we should not have been in Vietnam and I don't believe we should be in ANY muSLUM nation right now. After 911, we should have stationed 30% of our troops on the borders and CONTROLLED the border as a war zone because that is EXACTLY what it is. We don't need troops (ours or foreign) in our towns (especially heartland towns) when we can get plenty of practice (REAL PRACTICE) on our borders!!!

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
07-22-2012, 02:40 PM
Originally Posted by ConHog
Rev, this may surprise you but this is why I got out when I did. I did see a possibility that Obama might at some point order American soldiers to fire upon Americans , and I want no part of that.

Not that I believe he's evil and out to take over as military dictator, but rather b/c I can see some doofuses starting a revolt rather than simply voting against the guy and I can see Obama over reacting by using the military.





yep...that's my definition of EVIL. Defuse a revolt because of his trampling on our freedoms, dictating everything with the push of a pen and then call on martial law to save his re-election. As with New Orleans during Katrina, the National Guard actually upheld the Constitution for the most part....it was the local liberal authorities who conducted themselves unworthy of their office (or badge). B.O. is extremely evil....which is why he is so secretive and misleading. For some, it took almost 4 years in office to see through. For others (such as myself) the evil was evident IMMEDIATELY! For a few, they will always be lil' libbie loser lemmings and wouldn't know evil or honor if it bit them in the @$$....and it will eventually.

I hadn't thought about it in a while but I'm thinking more and more lately that we may have to drag B.O.'s sorry @$$ out of the White House kicking and screaming like a the boy he is before he turns the keys over. That, my friend is plenty enough reason to REVOLT. Was it not Jefferson who said that occassional revolt is good for the health of our nation? We had and are still paying for the liberal revolt back in the 60's so now it is our turn.

BO will not go gracefully. He sees himself as a Revoluntionary Godlike figure hellbent on correcting America's evil character.
He is a true believer in his magnificent and majestic destiny!
Remember that, --HE "WILL BE MORE FLEXIBLE AFTER THE ELECTION", COMRADE.
THAT ONE OFFGUARD STATEMENT SHOULD BE SCARING THE LIVING HELL OUT OF ALL THE CITIZENS YET IT BARELY EVEN REGISTERED A SMALL BLIP ON THEIR SCREENS AND IS FORGOTTEN OR ITS IMPORTANCE SCOFFED AT NOW BY 95% OF THOSE THAT EVEN HEARD OF IT AT ALL!--Tyr

red state
07-23-2012, 10:26 AM
BO will not go gracefully. He sees himself as a Revoluntionary Godlike figure hellbent on correcting America's evil character.
He is a true believer in his magnificent and majestic destiny!
Remember that, --HE "WILL BE MORE FLEXIBLE AFTER THE ELECTION", COMRADE.
THAT ONE OFFGUARD STATEMENT SHOULD BE SCARING THE LIVING HELL OUT OF ALL THE CITIZENS YET IT BARELY EVEN REGISTERED A SMALL BLIP ON THEIR SCREENS AND IS FORGOTTEN OR ITS IMPORTANCE SCOFFED AT NOW BY 95% OF THOSE THAT EVEN HEARD OF IT AT ALL!--Tyr


Yep...there's NOTHING graceful or honorable about this ONE. Tyre, the FREE stuff, at the WEALTHY people's expense, is a very big "blip in the screens" that many can't keep their eyes off of. The voice of liberals haunt me. Famous quotes such as the one below (which is my personal favorite right now).

“Education is a WEAPON whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.” No, libs have it wrong/LEFT, as usual, because TRUE and well balanced education is a SHIELD to protect against those who would re-write history and the libs are notorious at re-writing history!!

“We don't let them have ideas. Why would we let them have guns?” YES, a free society is an armed, protected and independent society that does not fear to express opinion, or detest to the abuses of gov. or is limited to the safety that gov. so inadequately provides.

or how about this one.... "the only thing we have have to fear is fear itself." What kind of statement is that after folks are starving, banks are failing and leaders such as Roosevelt extend the crisis (just as B.O. is doing today during our current crisis). Don't get me wrong...I'm no Bush lover at all because he was nothing more than a politically correct, corrupter of the Constitution who was weak on the border. But in comparing Bush II to Bush III (the ONE currently "occupying" the White House) is similar to comparing George's castor oil with honey to a solid heaping dose of just plain ole nasty Castor Oil...and a lot of it! They both taste terrible but the latter is simply unbearable (if you're a REAL American that is....some like the taste Obama castor oil or, for a better analogy, Obama turd sandwiches on rye). No, with or without mustard, we much more to fear than fear itself. Roosevelt, who was left of center was a big reason that we have much of the problems of today and with B.O. being extremely LEFT, having NO center AT ALL, I fear it possible to see him 'serve' 12, 20 or 40 years (by the stroke of the executive privilege pen). The only difference in what Roosevelt did, when he legally broke an honorable tradition started by the GREAT GENERAL WASHINGTON, and what B.O. may do is that B.O. will do it illegally with the invention of millions of new and instant voters. In addition, B.O. has purposely ruined business, prolonged the agony of our economy and has more hoards at his disposal who are eager to accept B.O.'s lies in exchange for free stuff (NOT FREEDOM).

The only thing good that came our of Roosevelt's administration was his taking the advice of his generals and dropping the 'BIG ONE' on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The same could be said for B.O.'s allowing the S.E.A.L.s to take out the pirates and that SOB OBL! Still, both calls way back then, as well as recently, were NO-BRAINERs!!! The bad thing with both is that we have a much bigger gov. and less and less freedom. We also have less prosperity with the chosen one and to be perfectly honest, people do not feel as safe as they once did. Now that we have only two branches of gov., I see only one branch if this "chosen one" is not stopped.

Both FDR and our current, long named president [Barack 'Berry' Hussein Obama Soetoro] are dangerously close to what could have been or could very well be a dictatorship...or worse! Just as in Roosevelt's period (a crucial period in American history), Americans were all to eager to abandon the principles of economic, religious and individual liberty which our nation was founded upon. Just before FDR, we had been experimenting with socialism but not to the extent that Roosevelt implemented with welfare, abusive government, and limits to trade/business. After FDR, we continued our search of One Nation Under FREE stuff rather than One Nation Under GOD and we're dearly paying for it. This new system did much to hamper or outright replace the AMERICAN way of life which had existed up to that time. The "welfare" before then was Americans helping Americans through churches and even perfect strangers. Good or bad, Roosevelt would have been our first socialist president (and possibly our last president had his health and our representatives not did something to fix this problem. I would very much like to see our Supreme Court have term limits (AFTER BEING VOTED IN TO SERVE) because we have seen how un-elected or multi-terms serve us. Once again, and for almost ALL issues, our founding fathers were truly wise in their warnings:

[When voters discover a way to VOTE themselves into prosperity at the expense of others,
that will herald the end of our Great Republic.]

I fear that we've reached our final destination an confirmed Ben Franklin correct once again.