[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Army Preps for Tea Party 'Terrorists' Publisher's Note: Senior Command staff at Ft. Knox contacted me on the date of publication. They confirmed that there was a security exercise at Ft. Knox this week. An officer in the security loop altered the scenario "in order to make it more realistic." The alterations were not approved at the Command level and were not used by the Installation Command Post. The officer who circulated the scenario through official channels has been identified and will "receive appropriate counsel." Further, Command staff noted, "An official investigation has been initiated to determine the manner in which this information was included in the exercise scenario. Fort Knox leadership is committed to continued positive associations with our community groups and organizations and will continue to work to enhance and improve those relationships." Commanders provided assurance that this type of scenario would not find its way into official circulation again. The fact that any officer would associate Tea Party folks with "white supremacists" armed with "military grade weapons" and "bomb making components," and believe that association would make this scenario "more realistic," is troubling, at best. We owe our gratitude to a handful of Patriots, who, at risk to their careers, came forth with this information and expected us to handle it honorably and accurately -- and we did just that. In regard to the verbatim scenario documentation we posted, even though those documents were not classified, Command staff asked that we remove them for specified security reasons. As our mission is not only to uphold our Constitution by holding those in positions of authority accountable to their oaths, but also to support our uniformed Patriots, I agreed to remove the documents from our Web site as requested. "The duty imposed upon [the president] to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed, follows out the strong injunctions of his oath of office, that he will 'preserve, protect, and defend the constitution.' The great object of the executive department is to accomplish this purpose; and without it, be the form of government whatever it may, it will be utterly worthless for offence, or defence; for the redress of grievances, or the protection of rights; for the happiness, or good order, or safety of the people." --Justice Joseph Story A few months back, the commander in chief of our Armed Forces, that erstwhile community organizer Barack Hussein Obama, denigrated a large cross section of Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement -- those who advocate for Essential Liberty and Rule of Law. Obama identified them as malcontents, "waving their little tea bags." Since then, the Obama administration and their Leftmedia sycophants have endeavored to characterize Tea Party attendees as rude, radical, racist, redneck, enemies of the state. They have attempted to tie high-profile acts of violence against the government to the Tea Party, including the pilot who crashed his plane into a Texas IRS headquarters. (Turns out, he was a Leftwing nut.) In fact, Americans who attend Tea Party rallies are from all walks of life, as noted in the Patriot Declaration, Patriots who are peacefully and constitutionally petitioning their government for redress. As I noted in my tax-day essay, Tea Parties are "not a call for revolution but for restoration -- a call to undertake whatever measures are dictated by prudence and necessity to restore constitutional Rule of Law." However, Obama's words do have consequences. This week, I was contacted by a number of civilian and military personnel (enlisted and officer ranks) who expressed concern about a military exercise scenario proposed for Ft. Knox, the U.S. Bullion Depository. (For the record, I called Ft. Knox security for an official comment and received the standard reply: "We are not authorized to discuss this exercise.") As with most such exercises, the Ft. Knox scenario outline occurred in stages, as if real time intelligence was being provided at various intervals. The first intel advisory I received was issued on Friday, 23 April 2010, and identifies the terrorist threat adversaries as "Local Militia Groups / Anti-Government Protesters / TEA Party." You read that right: "TEA Party"! The advisory states that plans for a demonstration may have been interrupted by "Federal and local law enforcement" raids on a "White Supremacists Organization," but "TEA Party organizers have stated that they will protest at the Gold Vault at a future date." Further, the intel advisory states, "Anti-Government - Health Care Protesters have stated that they would join the TEA Party as a sign of solidarity." In accordance with the exercise proposal, Ft. Knox post security is placed on high alert because, "these groups are armed, have combative training and some are former Military Snipers. Some may have explosives training / experience," and "a rally at their compound / training area is scheduled." Another intel update was issued on Monday, 26 April 2010, noting that the "rally at the Militia compound occurred," and "Viable threats ... have been made." The intel on the rally notes, "Many members were extremely agitated at what they referred to as Government intervention and over taxation in their lives. Alcohol use 'fanned the flames.' Many military grade firearms were openly carried. An ad hoc 'shoot the government agent' event was held with prizes (alcohol) given for the best shot placement." The report states further, "Components of bomb making are reported to have been on the site. Some members have criminal records relating to explosive and weapons violations." In response to the "immediate threat," the exercise stipulates, "local detention centers are being made ready for mass arrests." Both the "QRF I and QRF II" are placed on two hour recall, and the "5-15 CAV" was ordered to "draw weapons from holder and store in most available arms room," and "coordinate with MASA for immediate ammunition draw; have equipment readied for immediate use, i.e. vehicles staged and loaded IAW 5-15 CAV SOP; LMR's charged." QRF refers to Quick Reaction Force. QRF I is the 194th Armored Brigade. QRF II is the 194th Armored Brigade. The 26 April order gives specific instructions for the 5-15 CAV (a 16th Cavalry battalion) to have weapons, ammo, vehicles and communications at ready, and it places the other 2,200 members of the units on two-hour recall. In other words, these orders are to gear up for defending Ft. Knox against Tea Party folks and their co-conspirators who oppose nationalization of our health care sector. Now, for almost 30 years I have, on occasion, participated in the development and implementation of small and large scale military exercises within the U.S. and around the world. Such exercises are critical to the readiness of our forces, and the standard for the real time intel reports in these drills requires thinly veiled references to assets of existing or collateral threat vectors, communist regimes such as China and terrorist networks such as al-Qa'ida, etc. Perhaps the author of the Ft. Knox scenario should focus on a response plan for, say, an Islamic terrorist who attacks unarmed troops on his own post. (See Ft. Hood / Major Nidal Malik Hasan.) While the Ft. Knox exercise scenario is amateurish in its construct (meaning it appears to be composed by someone with not much experience in such matters), the fact that it made it out into official channels sets an ominous political precedent. The military officers and enlisted personnel with whom I spoke are all dedicated uniformed Patriots who are loyal, first and foremost, to their oath to "support and defend" our Constitution "against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Their concerns about this exercise mirrored my own. As one put it, the scenario "misrepresents freedom loving Americans as drunken, violent racists -- the opponents of Obama's policies have been made the enemy of the U.S. Army." They were equally concerned that it appears the command staff at Ft. Knox had signed off on this exercise, noting, "it has been issued and owned by field grade officers who lead our battalions and brigades," which is to say many Lieutenant Colonels saw this order before it was implemented. It's not likely that Ft. Knox Commanding General James Milano or Deputy Commander Col. David Teeples, or even the regimental and brigade commanders for the 16th Cav and 194th AB, actually read the exercise scenario, but that doesn't absolve responsibility for such an egregious example of political agendas infiltrating military exercise scenarios. One officer insisted, "The American people should require greater accountability of their commissioned officers, that they abide by their oath and never allow politically motivated propaganda like this exercise on any post or base again." Another observed, "Whether this is complacency by officers who do not see such orders as a problem, or worse, officers who recognize the problem but do not insist the orders are changed, this is a serious problem. We are discussing the training of American citizen soldiers in the use of potentially deadly force against a specific group of political dissenters. There is never a time in an officer's career in which he does not have a duty to apply critical thought to the orders he is given and asked to give. It is my opinion that any officer that has allowed these orders to persist, to reach the level of junior officers and soldiers, has demonstrated a lack of judgment or apathy towards what his duty requires of him. Either way, we should demand more of the commissioned officers, who we as a nation empower to lead our sons and daughters into battle." Indeed, and at best, the blatant malfeasance on the part of the individuals who composed this exercise reflects poorly on the uniformed services. The antidote to this patent misrepresentation of peaceable Patriots is to expose it with the Light of Truth. As our motto Veritas vos Liberabit affirms, the Truth shall set you Free!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 27.
#1. To: DeaconBenjamin (#0)
Do I believe the retraction? No. Do I believe buckwheat never gave such instructions to the military? No. Hasn't the bastard lied enough already to the masses for us to know he can't be trusted or believed? Hopefully this and other information will wake more voters up to the urgency of voting those presently in Congress OUT ... and come 2012 vote OUT the potus with the empty suit and empty head.
Which was the rally cry in 2008, to "vote OUT the potus with the empty suit and empty head", and look what it got us, more of the same. You cannot vote your way to freedom. In the course of your life, has government significantly retracted because of how you voted? I can think of one time, Reagan, but that was so short lived as to make heads spin, and then only in regards to taxation, while he on the other hand increased government on other levels. No, voting will get you nothing but more of the same, eventually you'll have to break the paradigm then have constructed in your head and see that it's a rigged system meant to give you the illusion of control, so that you lend your consent to continued rape. Until you get there, you'll keep advocating drinking hemlock in order to cure arsenic poisoning.
You cannot vote your way to freedom ... Perhaps you used a poor choice of words? As has always been our form of government, we CAN vote for freedom at all times, that is how the system was originated. Do we vote for freedom? Not since the Civil War. That being the case, the only other viable pathway to freedom is, once more, the path of Revolution or Civil War. You leave no other option. In the past election there were eighty million people that could have voted, but did not. Such inaction indicates to a thinking person that a large number of Americans realize the futility of voting. You state the failure of voting, and recognize the alternative.
No, the choice was correctly worded and precise. Incorrect. The original system ceded that rights belonged to individuals outside of any government, as inherent in our nature as human beings. Government cannot and could not grant a freedom, therefor you cannot by definition "vote for freedom at all times", since government cannot grant freedoms in the first place, it can only impede their exercise. Governments were instituted ONLY to guarantee the freedoms, not grant them, and existed only by the consent of the governed, and if they should stop performing that duty it was our right and obligation to *overthrow* that government and replace it with one compatible with original intent. Remember, a government that stops guaranteeing liberty is one that will not act for liberty, regardless of how you vote, ergo overthrowing that government was the solution the Founders recommended. Jefferson was quite clear about what was needed to water the tree of liberty. That is the system as it was originated, look it up. It is not I who leave no other path, it is your government that leaves no other path. They refuse to follow the simple rules we put down for them to follow, the Constitution. They are lawless. You cannot constrain them, I cannot constrain them, they are rogues and criminals. Vote all you want, and they'll just smile knowing that there is another sucker still participating in the charade and lending them sanction to continued wrong doing. I'll grant some of them, but I suspect that a lot of them are simply apathetic to most things. Not that it ultimately matters of course. Aye, that I do, thank you.
I have made a conscious note of what you post, how you respond to others, and how inconsistent you are. While you preach to others what to do, you are planning a totally different approach for yourself. Therefore, of the three alternatives you have given to the problem you now address, which one are you taking? 1) The sucker route, 2) the apathetic route; or 3) the runner route (by leaving the country). You might look down, Son ... the paint is getting close to putting you in the corner.
LOL! Yeah, I just go from one side to the next all the time. Yep. I'm urging others to engage in peaceful civil dissent, which is also what I plan to do and have stated as much countless times. I also have contingency plans in the event that this doesn't work, as should everybody. You seem to have no clue what I'm stating or saying, and further, you cannot answer my posts but need instead to make this personal. That's quite telling, you wish to remain a tool, and that's your choice. Don't blame others if they see that kind of action as foolish. YOU were the one who claimed that these were the only three routes. The fourth route is peaceful civil disobedience, which I even explicitly point out in post #14. If you had ACTUALLY followed my posts, which you clearly have not been, you'd see I've been urging this for months now. You know, if you'd ACTUALLY followed my posts. You overestimate your own reasoning abilities. You set up straw men to knock down and think you're entrapping others through it. It's the oldest rhetorical chestnut in the bag. Please, stop taking yourself so seriously, you're a light weight. Fact is, you were confronted with a reality that scares you, the reality that you have no real voice and control through the process you seem to adore. You're either going to have to come to terms with that, or you're going to continue being played for a fool. The choice is yours.
#42. To: SonOfLiberty (#27)
I acknowledge the 4th as being peaceful civil disobedience, but most of us prefer to stay and fight, if that becomes necessary. Very few will take your choice of running.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||