View Full Version : Defending Yourself against Americans
A Critical Decision
by Michael Gaddy
by Michael Gaddy
Recently by Michael Gaddy: Battle Rifle Basics
Members of all branches of the United States Military will soon be facing a most critical decision. The European Union Times is reporting here that Obama is using the deployment of additional troops to Afghanistan to cover for the movement of some 200,000 troops, presently on duty in countries other than Iraq and Afghanistan, to USNORTHCOM to prepare for the "expected outbreak of Civil War within the United States before the end of winter."
It would appear those who call themselves "public servants" believe the people they supposedly serve have become dissatisfied with their job performance and will resort to some form of civil disobedience, which will necessitate military intervention. According to the article, Obama believes the reason for this civil unrest to be an expected "implosion" of this country’s financial systems. Should these events occur, members of the military would be forced to decide whether they would support their government, which gave hundreds of billions to government cronies in the financial sector, or their country.
A prudent man would speculate if the government so fears coming civil unrest, will they move to seize firearms throughout the country and use these military forces along with law enforcement to do so? I believe the answer can be found in the events surrounding the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Government forces there not only seized firearms from private citizens but also relocated many citizens against their will.
Millions of Americans have prayed for the safety of the military as they fight the government’s wars all over the planet. Many believe the military to be defending the country from enemies that would take our weapons and our freedoms. What will their actions be when the US military becomes that enemy? Will the military willingly participate in such acts? Such are questions the future holds.
The government has spent decades defining those who oppose its unlawful exploits as enemies of the state. Those who can or will not differentiate between the government and the country have fallen hook, line and sinker for this demonization of those who demand the government operate within the constraints of the Constitution and moral law. Most of those who blindly support the illegal actions of the government have been bought and paid for with the taxes of those who actually produce something. Unfortunately, primary among those bought-and-paid-for entities are law enforcement and the military.
Both political parties have conducted this demonization of true Patriots. While the democrats have been traditionally anti-gun and liberty, the republicans bought into the program with the fascist Patriot Act and the illegal, unconstitutional War on Terror. The two dominant political parties in this country are two wings of the same vulture: blatant in-your-face socialism. There are no answers to our problems to be found in either political party.
Many on the right have bought into the ideas expressed by leaders of the military that all who oppose the state and its illegal agenda should be treated no differently than the "insurgents" the military has been facing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nowhere is that better illustrated than here where a law enforcement publication is advocating military tactics promoted by General David Petraeus be used against those whom the state defines as its enemies. While the article in Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement speaks specifically of gangs and drug activity, don’t forget the Department of Homeland Security has defined millions of patriotic Americans and veterans as possible domestic terrorists in its report sent to LE agencies on April 7th of 2009. If you wonder if you fit the definition of possible domestic terrorist, you should check here.
If the European Union Times report is correct and Obama is moving to strengthen USNORTHCOM with anywhere near the numbers mentioned, indicates the fedgov fears its own citizens much more than it fears al Qaeda. Either the government is anticipating a total financial breakdown, there are plans to confiscate firearms, a new false flag event is in the works, or any combination of the three. Either way, they plan on this event occurring before spring of 2010.
On the minds of many Americans and politicians is exactly how will the military and law enforcement react if told to confiscate firearms or move American citizens to FEMA camps.
Consideration must be given to the militarization of law enforcement entities in this country over the past few decades and our gradual decline into a police state, thanks to the bogus War on Terror. That being said, some police blogs such as this one indicate not all law enforcement personnel are on board with these illegal and corrupt practices. When considering possible actions of military personnel one must be aware of the felons and gang members who became part of the military when recruiters were falling short of their goals. Nothing could be better for a felon or a gang-banger than to actually be ordered to commit crimes with impunity. At some point in time, any true American serving in the military will be forced to ask themselves exactly what and whom they are defending and exactly what became of the "home of the free?"
What will be the reaction of the soldier from Colorado who is confiscating guns and placing so-called domestic terrorists in detention camps in Ohio when he gets word other soldiers are doing the same to his family and friends back home? Who will soldiers and law enforcement officers side with when push comes to shove: the government who has given over a trillion dollars to their cronies in the financial industry, failed to provide their brother/sister veterans competent medical care, denied disability benefits, denied compensation for treatment as prisoners of war, placed single parents in confinement and taken their children, or their family and friends who have lost their jobs and are seeing their homes and farms foreclosed by the same bankers who received huge bonuses from the bailout money? If military and law enforcement personnel begin to side with the citizens, will the fedgov call in United Nations forces to subdue those who cherish personal freedom and will fight to retain it?
Regardless of which series of events occur, Americans will be the losers. Brace yourselves and prepare, this is going to get real ugly.
December 7, 2009
Michael Gaddy [send him mail], an Army veteran of Vietnam, Grenada, and Beirut, lives in the Four Corners area of the American Southwest.
GreenScoutII
12-07-2009, 11:09
That is a horrifing scenario. I hope nothing like that ever comes to pass. I tend to think that the presence of literally hundreds of millions of firearms in the hands of tens of millions of private citizens might be a strong deterrent to this kind of thing.
As you might recall, this very fact contributed strongly to the Japanese not attempting to invade the US mainland during WWII.
There is a reason the Swiss have a low crime rate and high satisfaction rate. Just got done reading Unintended Consequences... great book.
I live in a heavily military area and have all my life (father was Army, etc). Years ago, the military was respectful, polite, etc. Nowadays, all I see are a bunch of thugs who are trying to be too machismo. Kinda sad. I hope they don't come knocking on my door. I pray I'll never have to end anothers life again, but if it comes, I am prepared...
Besides, that's always a good excuse to buy more ammo right?! HAHA.
I picked up on this a week or so ago, I don't know yet if there is anything to it, but being on the inside I'll find out soon. I will say there have been a few things that seemed odd to my even before I read this. We'll just have to see how it plays out.
I for one made the "Critical Decision" Years ago when I said that I would "support and defend..." nothing has changed that.
iamhunter
12-07-2009, 11:32
scary stuff. This is why every american should get an AR-15, stockpile some ammo, and learn how to shoot it.
is there a ? that asks would you take up arms against American citizens or something to that effect when you enlist now?
seems I heard that from one of our boys in Iraq (we have several family members there and in Afganastan)
It only took the very first paragraph to raise my BS Flag. Politicians tend to avoid war (especially civil ones), not start them.
iamhunter
12-07-2009, 11:44
It only took the very first paragraph to raise my BS Flag. Politicians tend to avoid war (especially civil ones), not start them.
are you kidding me? Every that has ever taken place has been started by a politician.
This article seems pretty unrealistic to me as well, but saying politician's don't like war is ridiculous.
+1,,
and all you have to do is look at your local police force and see the para military gear, automatic weapons and armored vehicles to see how the government fears it's people.
I have an Uncle who is a Colonel something another in the pentagon. he has told us before that the shit will hit the fan in our lifetime. And only fools trust in their government.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 11:49
Years ago, the military was respectful, polite, etc. Nowadays, all I see are a bunch of thugs who are trying to be too machismo.
Seriously? You must be looking at a different military than I am.
Seriously? You must be looking at a different military than I am.
I don't see any thugs either. I fly these guys all over the place, see probably a hundred a day when at work (at a minimum) and don't remember seeing a single one I would classify as a thug. They are all respectful, helpful and gracious.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 12:07
Gaddy's essay is based on a story in the EU Times (http://www.eutimes.net/2009/11/obama-orders-1-million-us-troops-to-prepare-for-civil-war/) that reports Russian military analysts have reported to Putin that Obama has secretly ordered the USNORTHCOM commander to secretly increase forces under his command to 1 million in order to confront a pending civil war. The entire article is one conspiracy theory after another run amok.
I think Obama is the worst disaster our country has ever had to face. But I'm having a pretty hard time finding any credibility in this.
Ranger353
12-07-2009, 12:14
[ROFL1] Seriously. Really, seriously. Are you shitting me? This is the most ridiculous thing I have read in months, maybe years.
First off, the EU is the last group of nuts and rocks anyone should be listening to. The EU has an interest in making the U.S. economy unstable, they are becoming our primary global competitor for oil and money, second only to China.
Second, get a grip dude. There are safe guards in place to prevent the scenario depicted above from happening. Even during the L.A. Riots in 1992 the Defense Dept. had limitations placed against the forces on the ground to prevent violations of Posse Comitatus. Only the conspiracy theory wackos that don't bother to read the fine print buy into those stories, do your research and read before cycling those things around.
It is a entertaining read, very humorous. [ROFL2]
I'm still stocking up on MRE's, asswipe, and dental floss...
Years ago, the military was respectful, polite, etc. Nowadays, all I see are a bunch of thugs who are trying to be too machismo. Kinda sad.
Thugs?
You do realize the militarys job is killing people and breaking things?
War isnt pretty or nice.
You want pretty and nice in uniform, look for boy scouts and girl scouts.
are you kidding me? Every that has ever taken place has been started by a politician.
This article seems pretty unrealistic to me as well, but saying politician's don't like war is ridiculous.
You are totally right, but you know what I mean.
"expected outbreak of Civil War within the United States before the end of winter."
Someone needs to add a few layers of tin foil to their hat.
I flew a local training mission with General Renuart a couple weeks ago. He didnt seem to be worried about the upcoming civil war. In case you didnt know, Gen Renuart is the 4-Star in charge of Northcom.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 12:23
First off, the EU is the last group of nuts and rocks anyone should be listening to. The EU has an interest in making the U.S. economy unstable, they are becoming our primary global competitor for oil and money, second only to China.
The OP never referenced the EU. What was referenced was the EU Times, an online newspaper. Big difference.
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 12:25
is there a ? that asks would you take up arms against American citizens or something to that effect when you enlist now?
No.
Seriously? You must be looking at a different military than I am.
Guess I am. Sure there are still good guys... I just don't run into them as often as I used too. And yes, when in uniform, they are topnotch most of the time. But when it's a day off or they don't have to go in... Drugs, booming stereos, beating up wives, cursing up a storm, etc. I'm gettin old in my young age! HAAHA.
Ranger353
12-07-2009, 12:38
The OP never referenced the EU. What was referenced was the EU Times, an online newspaper. Big difference.
Oh yea! The EU Times is world renowned for there informative information sources. Give me a break. [ROFL1]
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 12:49
Oh yea! The EU Times is world renowned for there informative information sources. Give me a break. [ROFL1]
Ah, no shit. Isn't that pretty much what I said? There's still a big difference between a collective of countries and a friggin online newspaper.
Troublco
12-07-2009, 12:57
Guess I am. Sure there are still good guys... I just don't run into them as often as I used too. And yes, when in uniform, they are topnotch most of the time. But when it's a day off or they don't have to go in... Drugs, booming stereos, beating up wives, cursing up a storm, etc. I'm gettin old in my young age! HAAHA.
The military is, as it has always been, a cross-section of part of our society. You're always going to have some of whatever is going on elsewhere. When in uniform, they better be dotting their I's and crossing their T's though. Even then, I have in the past lost my patience once or twice with some real idiot while I was in uniform. I shouldn't have, I'm not proud of it, but it happens once in a while.
What bothers me the most is that the article wasn't broken up into easily readable paragraphs. Paragraphs are our friends. Hey, it ain't easy being anal.....
A Critical Decision
by Michael Gaddy
Recently by Michael Gaddy: Battle Rifle Basics
Members of all branches of the United States Military will soon be facing a most critical decision. The European Union Times is reporting here that Obama is using the deployment of additional troops to Afghanistan to cover for the movement of some 200,000 troops, presently on duty in countries other than Iraq and Afghanistan, to USNORTHCOM to prepare for the "expected outbreak of Civil War within the United States before the end of winter."
It would appear those who call themselves "public servants" believe the people they supposedly serve have become dissatisfied with their job performance and will resort to some form of civil disobedience, which will necessitate military intervention.
According to the article, Obama believes the reason for this civil unrest to be an expected "implosion" of this country’s financial systems. Should these events occur, members of the military would be forced to decide whether they would support their government, which gave hundreds of billions to government cronies in the financial sector, or their country.
A prudent man would speculate if the government so fears coming civil unrest, will they move to seize firearms throughout the country and use these military forces along with law enforcement to do so? I believe the answer can be found in the events surrounding the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Government forces there not only seized firearms from private citizens but also relocated many citizens against their will.
Millions of Americans have prayed for the safety of the military as they fight the government’s wars all over the planet. Many believe the military to be defending the country from enemies that would take our weapons and our freedoms. What will their actions be when the US military becomes that enemy? Will the military willingly participate in such acts? Such are questions the future holds.
The government has spent decades defining those who oppose its unlawful exploits as enemies of the state. Those who can or will not differentiate between the government and the country have fallen hook, line and sinker for this demonization of those who demand the government operate within the constraints of the Constitution and moral law.
Most of those who blindly support the illegal actions of the government have been bought and paid for with the taxes of those who actually produce something. Unfortunately, primary among those bought-and-paid-for entities are law enforcement and the military.
Both political parties have conducted this demonization of true Patriots. While the democrats have been traditionally anti-gun and liberty, the republicans bought into the program with the fascist Patriot Act and the illegal, unconstitutional War on Terror. The two dominant political parties in this country are two wings of the same vulture: blatant in-your-face socialism. There are no answers to our problems to be found in either political party.
Many on the right have bought into the ideas expressed by leaders of the military that all who oppose the state and its illegal agenda should be treated no differently than the "insurgents" the military has been facing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nowhere is that better illustrated than here where a law enforcement publication is advocating military tactics promoted by General David Petraeus be used against those whom the state defines as its enemies.
While the article in Guns and Weapons for Law Enforcement speaks specifically of gangs and drug activity, don’t forget the Department of Homeland Security has defined millions of patriotic Americans and veterans as possible domestic terrorists in its report sent to LE agencies on April 7th of 2009. If you wonder if you fit the definition of possible domestic terrorist, you should check here.
If the European Union Times report is correct and Obama is moving to strengthen USNORTHCOM with anywhere near the numbers mentioned, indicates the fedgov fears its own citizens much more than it fears al Qaeda. Either the government is anticipating a total financial breakdown, there are plans to confiscate firearms, a new false flag event is in the works, or any combination of the three. Either way, they plan on this event occurring before spring of 2010.
On the minds of many Americans and politicians is exactly how will the military and law enforcement react if told to confiscate firearms or move American citizens to FEMA camps.
Consideration must be given to the militarization of law enforcement entities in this country over the past few decades and our gradual decline into a police state, thanks to the bogus War on Terror. That being said, some police blogs such as this one indicate not all law enforcement personnel are on board with these illegal and corrupt practices.
When considering possible actions of military personnel one must be aware of the felons and gang members who became part of the military when recruiters were falling short of their goals. Nothing could be better for a felon or a gang-banger than to actually be ordered to commit crimes with impunity. At some point in time, any true American serving in the military will be forced to ask themselves exactly what and whom they are defending and exactly what became of the "home of the free?"
What will be the reaction of the soldier from Colorado who is confiscating guns and placing so-called domestic terrorists in detention camps in Ohio when he gets word other soldiers are doing the same to his family and friends back home?
Who will soldiers and law enforcement officers side with when push comes to shove: the government who has given over a trillion dollars to their cronies in the financial industry, failed to provide their brother/sister veterans competent medical care, denied disability benefits, denied compensation for treatment as prisoners of war, placed single parents in confinement and taken their children, or their family and friends who have lost their jobs and are seeing their homes and farms foreclosed by the same bankers who received huge bonuses from the bailout money?
If military and law enforcement personnel begin to side with the citizens, will the fedgov call in United Nations forces to subdue those who cherish personal freedom and will fight to retain it?
Regardless of which series of events occur, Americans will be the losers. Brace yourselves and prepare, this is going to get real ugly.
December 7, 2009
Michael Gaddy [send him mail], an Army veteran of Vietnam, Grenada, and Beirut, lives in the Four Corners area of the American Southwest.
The military is, as it has always been, a cross-section of part of our society.
Agreed Sir and thank you for your service!!! My question now becomes, is society tettering towards the edge of bottoming out? lol.
Rhetorical question.
Batteriesnare
12-07-2009, 13:12
Even though I don't find much credibility in this article (cited sources ect.) it does not surprise me that people are thinking in this manner. Just like everything, consider the source, and prepare for the worst.
Troublco
12-07-2009, 13:35
Agreed Sir and thank you for your service!!! My question now becomes, is society tettering towards the edge of bottoming out? lol.
Rhetorical question.
Thank You.
The way I figure it, every generation thinks that the next one is letting things go to hell in a handbasket. Personally, I think there is some truth to this and some of the usual "Not the way we did it!". I think Basic Training has gotten WAY too lax from the stories I've heard that last few years, but then I heard the same thing when I went through. Things change, people change, not always for the better! How do you tell when you've hit bottom? (Sometimes, I think we've hit bottom and are in the process of digging.)
How did the Colonists determine when they'd had enough?
Or did more people actually have a spine then?
Maybe all this is just proof that life has gotten too easy, and when people don't have to struggle at least a little for their existence most of them get LAZY and want someone else to do their thinking for them. Ignorance is bliss, or so I've heard....
I'll do my own thinking, thank you. And protect my own family. I can fix my own stuff, hunt and process my own meat, cook my own food, etc etc.
The problem is, how many people can? How many could if they had to?
(Reminds me of a joke I heard awhile back. Something along the lines of "I don't need to stock up on food. I have a gun, and most people who live around here don't....Kind of a dark joke. But when would it stop being a joke?)
If loud music and cursing makes someone a thug, it is probably a good idea to re-evaluate what that word really means to you. I understand though, because I often have to remind myself that just because someone is being loud or obnoxious, doesn't necessarily mean they are a bad guy.
Troublco and Sturtle, I agree completely. Wasn't trying to start a fight with my use of the word "thug". Troubleco made some very valid points. It's great to be able to have good conversations with people without getting personal.
Some more of my thoughts... if we (generic use) would have to hunt/process for ourselves, I daresay a majority of the population would be up @$#^% creek. I am not a hunter but I do remember my first time out with some friends who are heavy hunters. They taught me how to gut, field, and cook the quarry. Eye opening experience. One that I would certainly enjoy if I ever came to the point where I had to hunt for sustenance.
I understand the conscious thought of "it was better in the old days" type of thinking but I do think it has some truth to it. Agreed that BASIC is a joke nowadays. I got to run a SWAT course with some buddies when I was back in Texas during my undergrad years, that was harder than BASIC. Plus, all the PC and not wanting to hurt people feelings nowadays are just... grr, about to start ranting...
It's not just the loud music, cursing, and drinking that ticks me off. I understand that's a persons way of life and all that jazz. I just think it's the culmination of that behavior and then the total switch when they put on the uniform. The thuggish behavoir when they are responsible for themselves and their family and then the upstanding citizen switch that is made when the uniform is donned. I hope that makes sense. It's just not the way I was raised to respect life, liberty, etc. I am who I am regardless of my uniform or lack thereof.
As far as fixing my own stuff... I'd be up a creek, took me a while to figure out how to post pictures! HAHA.
Most peeps buy there meat at the store wher NO animals were hurt...LOL
SA Friday
12-07-2009, 14:13
I have more than a few living relatives that survived serious problems; WWI, WWII, and the dust bowl/great depression combined. I've spoken to them regularly about those times and how society handled them.
They just laugh about what we see as a crisis now a days.
It's about perspective. We are not in trouble yet, and concocting it won't help anything. That's what this article is; drama for the sake of sales.
There is nothing wrong with our current military. God knows I've delt with the bottom of the barrel in the military for the last 11 years, and local PD's WISHED they had it as good in normal society as the military society. We've recently witnessed non-deployed Conus based GIs risk their lives for each other, and that was no fluke. You are lucky if a witness sticks around after a mugging or killing in civilian society. I think I'll stick with the thugs.
Most peeps buy there meat at the store wher NO animals were hurt...LOL
What?! You mean they are hurt?! I'm calling PETA! HAHA.
SA FRIDAY. Agree with your last paragraph.
SA FRIDAY. Agree with your last paragraph.
First we are thugs and you think todays military is sad.
Now you say you agree with SA Friday.
Make up your mind.
He didn't say the military is thugs, he said the military has thugs in it.
I've only seen one military guy acting like an a-hole personally.
Go down to Colorado Springs and ask around on the streets and I bet you'll get a whole different vibe than you get from here (this board).
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 14:40
He didn't say the military is thugs, he said the military has thugs in it.
No, he said all military people he sees are thugs.
Nowadays, all I see are a bunch of thugs who are trying to be too machismo.
BigBear's follow on remarks lead me to believe he really doesn't mean what he wrote in that first post.
Wow... I really need to start looking at what I write. Let me clarify before I get butchered.
My statement was to read that I am tending to see more and more unpleasant behavoir from the military personell I am in contact with. I lived on Ft. Springs, Ft. Benning, Ft. Knox, and now am outside of Ft. Carson. I do support our military whole heartedly and really wish that I could serve (broke my neck in a car wreck as a highschooler and they won't let me in now... grrr, I know a guy missing a kidney who gets to serve). I mentioned that there are some good guys in the military (as three generations of my family served) but there are also some not so good folks (such as ex-cons). To me, in my opinion, my statement simply meant to imply that I seem to see more and more behavoir that I would not expect from a military person.
My sincere apologies if I've stepped on someones toes. That was not my intention.
And Hoser, do I know who or have offended you in some way? Every post I make you seem to find something to yell about. I apologize to you Sir if I have wronged you in some way. Just ask for clarification on topic in the future and I'll be more than glad to try to sort out my mind.
Too Late,, you are now in the Roasting Pan,,,LOL
Too Late,, you are now in the Roasting Pan,,,LOL
Well, I tried. Just use BBQ sauce with garlic and herbs and I should turn out ok.
Maybe a Little Chianta with some Farva Beans
Wow... I really need to start looking at what I write. Let me clarify before I get butchered.
Don't you sometimes wish your computer chair could eject you out of trouble like an ejection seat in a jet? I know I do. [Beer]
Bailey Guns
12-07-2009, 15:09
BigBear's follow on remarks lead me to believe he really doesn't mean what he wrote in that first post.
My statement was to read that I am tending to see more and more unpleasant behavoir from the military personell I am in contact with. I lived on Ft. Springs, Ft. Benning, Ft. Knox, and now am outside of Ft. Carson. I do support our military whole heartedly and really wish that I could serve (broke my neck in a car wreck as a highschooler and they won't let me in now... grrr, I know a guy missing a kidney who gets to serve). I mentioned that there are some good guys in the military (as three generations of my family served) but there are also some not so good folks (such as ex-cons). To me, in my opinion, my statement simply meant to imply that I seem to see more and more behavoir that I would not expect from a military person.
My sincere apologies if I've stepped on someones toes. That was not my intention.
See...I can respect that. And I appreciate the clarification, Bear.
Every post I make you seem to find something to yell about.
PM sent.
SA Friday
12-07-2009, 15:22
Just a side note on my previous post:
I have a Great Aunt alive and kickin. She lives with her daughter and son in law at one of my families houses that's been in the family for going on 100 years now. It's next to the St Vrain between Estes and Longmont.
She's 108.
Dying in your 70's or early 80's is dying young in my family. My great Uncle Dale was a farm kid in Nebraska during the dust bowl and great depression, and fought in WWII. He's still alive. His youngest sister is still alive too and saw most of the above. Some seriously amazing stories from them. The rest of the siblings only recently died. I knew both sets of my great grand parents on my mother's side. All four died at the ages from 92 to 94. My great grandpa Harvey used to tell me stories of how the wild west wasn't the wild west of movies. Everyone had a gun, some carried them, some didn't. Nobody ever shot anyone, and gunfights were only things of tabloid books published at the time. Mostly just hard working people giving a shit about each other.
Anyway, I've derailed this thread enough...
Mostly just hard working people giving a shit about each other.
I didn't take a course on this in college, so I'm unfamiliar with what you are talking about. ;)
PM sent.
Replied. Thank you.
BailyGuns, thank you and your welcome.
Wow SaFriday, you have some good genes I guess. Oldest person I can think of in my family was 101 and that was a great-great aunt. Most of mine are out of the game around mid 80's early 90's. Farm family.
Thread permanently derailed. [Beer]
If the government ever wanted to use the military to pacify the people of the U.S., they would have to go all out and bring the entire military might to bear on us.
They'd need armor, aircraft, and everything else in the toybox because we outnumber them by a great deal.
Folks who don't think it can happen need to remember this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2gNwzav3hQ
and they wonder why the lack of respect for LE.
Why they always have to start these things in winter.....
Napolean,, Hitler,, Red Dawn,,,,, Hello....
[Tooth]
Troublco
12-08-2009, 00:04
Troublco and Sturtle, I agree completely. Wasn't trying to start a fight with my use of the word "thug". Troubleco made some very valid points. It's great to be able to have good conversations with people without getting personal.
Didn't think you were. I'm just taking advantage of an opportunity to vent the spleen. I do agree with SA Friday. I prefer the company of other military people, or basically like minded folks which is why I like forums like this one. I really have a hard time giving a tinker's damn for a large portion of people in general.
Always makes me think: The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.
Herdin' cats, and favoring center.....
Troublco
12-08-2009, 00:06
Why they always have to start these things in winter.....
Napolean,, Hitler,, Red Dawn,,,,, Hello....
Well, on the positive side, "They" didn't win any of those.
Of course, they did make it mighty uncomfortable for the other side in the meanwhile.....
tackspitter
12-12-2009, 12:42
Heres another article response I found about this . I thought It was interesting enough to add here.
IS OBAMA REALLY PREPARING FOR CIVIL WAR?
By Chuck Baldwin
December 11, 2009
NewsWithViews.....com
According to an obscure report in the European Union Times (EUTimes.net), "Russian Military Analysts are reporting to Prime Minister Putin that US President Barack Obama has issued an order to his Northern Command's (USNORTHCOM) top leader, US Air Force General Gene Renuart, to 'begin immediately' increasing his military forces to 1 million troops by January 30, 2010, in what these reports warn is an expected outbreak of civil war within the United States before the end of winter.
"According to these reports, Obama has had over these past weeks 'numerous' meetings with his war council abut how best to manage the expected implosion of his Nation's banking system while at the same time attempting to keep the United States military hegemony over the World in what Russian Military Analysts state is a 'last ditch gambit' whose success is 'far from certain.'"
The EU Times article continues by saying, "To the fears of Obama over the United States erupting into civil war once the full extent of the rape and pillaging of these peoples by their banks and government becomes known to them, grim evidence now shows the likelihood of this occurring much sooner than later."
The Times story goes on to say that there are "over 220 million American people armed to the teeth and ready to explode."
The Times article concludes by saying, "Though the coming civil war in the United States is being virtually ignored by their propaganda media, the same cannot be said of Russia, where leading Russian political analyst, Professor Igor Panarin has long warned that the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the US is heading for collapse."
Many of us would be inclined to pooh-pooh such a story, but then there is this column from Bloomberg.com entitled "Arming Goldman With Pistols Against Public," written by Alice Schroeder. According to Ms Schroeder:
"'I just wrote my first reference for a gun permit,' said a friend, who told me of swearing to the good character of a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker who applied to the local police for a permit to buy a pistol. The banker had told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist uprising against the bank."
There is no doubt that the American people have good reason to despise these international banksters epitomized by Goldman Sachs. Even one of Goldman's poster-boys, Henry Paulson, US Treasury secretary and former Goldman CEO, admitted that the American people were fed up. Schroeder quotes Paulson as saying, during testimony to Congress last summer, "[People] were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system."
Schroeder correctly opines, "There you have it. The bailout was meant to keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the firm's revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay employee bonuses."
Schroeder concludes her column by saying, "And if the proles [proletariat: plebs, working class, peasants] really do appear brandishing pitchforks at the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe rooms with their firearms."
So, do Wall Street and Russian analysts know something that we don't know? Is this why George W. Bush initiated USNORTHCOM to begin with? Is this why Barack Obama is beefing up USNORTHCOM? This would help explain the reports of all those potential detention camps that have been constructed (including the abandoned military installations that have refurbished security fences, guard towers, etc., around them). Has the American people's disgust with these crooks and thieves within the federal government and Wall Street reached a boiling point?
There is no question that people are angry, and for good reason.
The fraudulent financial policies of the Federal Reserve and its lackeys in the White House and Congress have literally bankrupted the country. Real unemployment is most likely over 20%. Taxes (along with costly fees, regulations, restrictions, penalties, mandates, etc.) at every level are going through the ceiling. America's jobs have been outsourced. Barack Obama continues G.W. Bush's irresponsibilit....y, digging America deeper and deeper into foreign entanglements, at the cost of trillions of dollars and thousands of lives. The IRS continues to harass and harangue honest citizens, squeezing them like the proverbial turnip. And now, add the insanity of a global climate treaty being hammered out in Copenhagen, and a universal health care bill being rammed through Congress, and the outlook is even gloomier.
I feel very comfortable in saying that the usurpations of power, the encroachments upon liberty, and the arrogant tax-and-spend policies emanating from Washington, D.C., and Wall Street these days are far more egregious than what George Washington and the boys were enduring in 1775-76 at the hands of the British Crown. There is no doubt in my mind that if Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and Sam Adams were alive today, they would have given cause for the Goldman Sachs banksters to retreat to their bunkers years ago!
The fact is, we do need a revolution! But not a revolution of anarchy and pitchforks. (The history of France should be ample evidence of the futility of this strategy.) We need a revolution of the individual states: to reclaim their sovereignty and fight for the liberties of their sovereigns (We the People). That is exactly what our forefathers did in '76.
America's founding document (the Declaration of Independence) declares that our states are "free and independent." And so they are. We are not "one nation" with one all-powerful central government. We are a confederation of nation-states, united in a voluntary union, with each State reserving to itself the power and authority of self-........determination, and ceding to the federal government limited, specifically delineated duties and limitations-....-limitations that have been totally ignored to the point that, for all intents and purposes, our once-great constitutional republic has been thoroughly expunged. Therefore, it is NOW time for the states to stand up to this meddlesome, every-growing tyranny that is known as Washington, D.C., and defend the rights and liberties of their citizens!
What Dr. Ed Vieira (an attorney with 4 earned degrees from Harvard, who has successfully argued cases before the US Supreme Court) wrote a few weeks ago should serve as a template for every State governor and legislature that truly cares about liberty. See Ed's column here.
As Vieira says, the states should resurrect their militias. Many--if not all--states have the legal authority for such entities in their constitutions. In some states they are called the State Guard. Some plainly use the word "militia." Whatever they are called, they need to be activated. And all that is necessary for this to be accomplished is the order of the governor. It's that simple!
And as Vieira said, states need to adopt an alternative currency-....-including, and most especially, gold and silver. In other words, they need to develop their own private economies, complete with their own banks and exchange mediums. They also need to reject the multinational agribusiness and develop their own in-State agricultural and energy businesses.
I would dare say that the first State that determines to follow Vieira's sagacious counsel (and rumblings of this have already begun in states such as Alaska, Oklahoma, Texas, Montana, New Hampshire, Indiana, Tennessee, South Carolina, etc.) would have so many liberty-loving patriots flock there that its economy would explode with prosperity-....-resulting in a domino effect of many other states following suit--and the revolution that this country so desperately needs would indeed take place. Furthermore, such a revolution would be constitutional,.... lawful, moral, and, yes, in compliance with the laws of Nature and of Nature's God.
In the meantime, is Barack Obama really worried about civil war? He might be. It is my observation that Washington politicians and bureaucrats are the most paranoid people on the planet. The problem is--as with most power-hungry Machiavellians-....-their paranoia often translates into more oppression and less liberty for the citizenry. And if this is true, it simply means that the states need to hurry up and do what needs to be done!
http:......../......../........www.........newswithviews.........com/........baldwin/......baldwin554.htm
MichiganMilitia
12-12-2009, 13:59
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/
..problem solved. I'm know what side I'm on. Do you?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.