Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

National News
See other National News Articles

Title: ‘US NATIONAL GUARD’S DRILLS IN PUBLIC AIMED AT DEALING WITH DOMESTIC ‘DISSIDENTS’’
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.infowars.com/us-national ... ling-with-domestic-dissidents/
Published: Apr 27, 2015
Author: Paul Joseph Watson
Post Date: 2015-04-27 07:40:51 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 172
Comments: 22

US Army field manuals admit that public drills are aimed at dealing with political dissidents that need to be “reeducated to gain a new appreciation of US policies,” Paul Joseph Watson, Infowars Editor at Large told RT’s In the Now.

RT: The police in the US are accused more than ever now of militarization. A video has appeared online showing armed national guardsmen conducting exercises near a children’s playground in Virginia. We contacted the infantry brigade – here’s what they told us: coordination was made with the Staunton Police Department, these are freshers who are training on basic military subjects like drill and ceremonies, basic first aid, military courtesies and the guns they carry are replicas. What is wrong with it?

Paul Joseph Watson: What is wrong with that is the fact that they are doing it not on base but in public. And we have to put this in the context of a spate of videoswhich have emerged in the recent weeks with not only National Guard but US Army troops in some cases working with police conducting these public drills which in some cases, not in this case but others, are based around crowd control and civil unrest. And the line they always give us that it’s designed for overseas combat, foreign operations. But if you then read the US Army’s actual manuals that they release, it’s clear that it’s for dual purpose, it’s for “dissidents” on US soil. So the media regurgitate this claim that all these drills are just foreign operations. Yet they are doing it in public, in plain sight, while privately in their own field manuals admitting that it’s to take on “dissidents within the continental US.” That’s why people are concerned about it and a lot of our audience is National Guard or former or current US military. They are concerned about these public drills. They didn’t enlist to police the US people which is a lot of this seems to be geared towards.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

#2. To: Ada (#0)

They didn’t enlist to police the US people which is a lot of this seems to be geared towards.

Yes they did.

Remember the oath, "ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC"????

Cynicom  posted on  2015-04-27   9:34:40 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Cynicom (#2)

So much for Posse Comitatus.

Ada  posted on  2015-04-27   12:50:37 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Ada (#9)

So much for Posse Comitatus.

I don't think Posse Comitatus applies to the National Guard.

GreyLmist  posted on  2015-04-27   14:15:22 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: GreyLmist (#11)

I don't think Posse Comitatus applies to the National Guard.

You are corrected. I was referring to the first sentence which referred to US Army field manuals.

"US Army field manuals admit that public drills are aimed at dealing with political dissidents that need to be “reeducated to gain a new appreciation of US policies,”

Ada  posted on  2015-04-27   16:58:17 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 15.

#16. To: Ada. Cynicom, 4 (#15)

Paul Joseph Watson at infowars.com: They didn’t enlist to police the US people which is a lot of this seems to be geared towards.

Cynicom at #2: Yes they did. Remember the oath, "ENEMIES, FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC"????

Ada at #9 to Cynicom at #2: So much for Posse Comitatus.

Me at #11 to Ada at #9: I don't think Posse Comitatus applies to the National Guard.

Me at #12 to All: Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia ... The Act does not apply to the National Guard under state authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within its home state or in an adjacent state if invited by that state's governor.

Ada at #15 to Me at #11: You are corrected. I was referring to the first sentence which referred to US Army field manuals. "US Army field manuals admit that public drills are aimed at dealing with political dissidents that need to be “reeducated to gain a new appreciation of US policies,”

All comments at The National Guard conduct exercises near a children's playground in Virginia - YouTube posted at the infowars article. Virginia National Guard, 116th Infantry unit interviewed about the exercise in the first 23 seconds. At 4:13-5:20, Watson mentions the alleged Military manuals and preparations for martial law.

First of all, the alleged field manuals (supposedly leaked to the public) aren't linked or even specified at either of those two sources, except among the discussion Comments at infowars where FM 3-39.40 "Internment and Resettlement Operations" (February 2010) is said to be the document at issue. Found another source (selfrely.com) that referenced a zerohedge.com article for info on that, in association with alleged Military doc ATP 3-39.33 "Civil Disturbances" (April 2014). Although there is a .mil site linked at zerohedge.com for the ATP doc, the linked site for the FM doc there is not an official .mil source. I searched for the word "dissident" in pdf files for both of the alleged docs at info.publicintelligence.net but that word wasn't found. Those publications are purportedly copies of Distribution Restriction/classified material, so I'm not certain, without viewing and comparing authentic docs, that the info is fully accurate. However, the pdf for the claimed ATP doc mentions Posse Comitatus and exceptions to it 5 times pertaining to Federal forces (in Chapter 2 and the References section). The pdf for the claimed FM doc mentions Posse Comitatus 4 times (in Chapter 10 and the References section). Scanning through it and especially Chapter 7 (Confinement of U.S. Military Prisoners), it seemed to be mainly focused on 1. Federal MPs/Military Police in foreign regions, 2. MPs and Martial Law conditions here where civil government is unable to function properly (due to disasters, rioting and such) and 3. MPs regarding detention of Military personnel in court martial offense situations.

My response-concern wasn't to dispute what you posted -- just that people, for their own best safety, shouldn't overestimate Posse Comitatus protections as applicable to State directed Guard forces or to the Coast Guard either (even though it acts Federally as a militarized revenue collector, etc.).

Like Cynicom noted, our Military does take an oath to guard against domestic enemies -- not just foreign enemies. With Law Enforcement/Police and State officials so often acting Unconstitutionally as rogues and also as enablers of situations that could escalate regionally into a disastrous crisis, in additioin to our State Militias being numerically low compared to what they should be according to law ... all of that increases the chances of Martial Law being enacted Congressionally for Federal forces to intervene someplace here. Surely most Americans wouldn't prefer that foreign forces like NATO's or the UN's were substituted for our own. If the alleged American "dissidents" in question of being rounded up were Constitution subverters, how much objection would there be then if our Military, State and Federal, were tasked with incarcerating them? How fast would the Communistic media, here in America and abroad, spin it as "killing their own people" if they were fired upon by subversives of the Constitution and had to return fire to defend themselves?

GreyLmist  posted on  2015-04-28 00:01:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 15.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest