Title: Special army unit ready to be deployed on American soil just before Nov.. elections Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Jul 29, 2010 Author:e-mail Post Date:2010-07-29 14:13:30 by Jethro Tull Keywords:None Views:3057 Comments:53
Special army unit ready to be deployed on American soil just before Nov.. elections (Update)
Note: An update has been posted at the end of the article.
In October of this year, one month prior to the November midterm elections, a special army unit known as 'Consequence Management Response Force' will be ready for deployment on American soil if so ordered by the President.
The special force, which is the new name being given to the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, has been training at Fort Stewart , Georgia and is composed of 80,000 troops.
According to the Army Times,
They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack.
The key phrase is 'may be called upon to help with civil unrest.' (AP Photo/David Longstreath).
This afternoon a local radio talk show host reported that he had been in contact with a member of the military. This military source stated that the armed forces have been alerted to the strong possibility that civil unrest may occur in the United States this summer, prior to the midterm elections of 2010.
The source described this as 'our long, hot summer of discontent' that could be eerily reminiscent of the summer of 1968 when riots broke out in many of our largest cities.
However, the summer of 2010 could well be much worse due to the players involved. In 1968 the major players were war protesters. This time, the outrage simmering beneath the surface of American society involves a broad cross-section of the heartland, and most of them are heavily armed.
It is highly unlikely that these citizens would ever initiate armed conflict of any kind. In their view, gun rights are for self-defense--and for defense against tyrannical government, which our Founders regarded as the most dangerous force on earth.
However, it has become clear that other groups may well initiate violence in order to start an 'incident' that would give Obama and a rogue Congress a reason to implement martial law, confiscate the citizens' guns, enforce curfews, and suspend all future elections until such time as it is deemed 'safe' to proceed with human liberty as encapsulated in the right to vote.
Tea Party members, for example, have been warned in recent days that members of Andy Stern's SEIU union and members of the organization formerly known as ACORN plan to infiltrate Tea Party gatherings in order to incite some sort of incident that could result in armed conflict.
In addition, all indications point to a humiliating defeat for the Democrats and Obama in November. Not only will the House in all likelihood transfer to Republican control, but it is increasingly possible for the Democrats to lose the Senate as well.
And there are Leftwing groups in this country that would use whatever means necessary to prevent that from happening.
ACORN has already gone underground, changing its name so as to fly beneath the radar screen. How many people will the group register to vote illegally?
And with Obama's plan to naturalize between 10 and 20 million illegal aliens, a brand new voter base for the Democrats will be in place prior to November.
Add to this the growing unrest over continued high unemployment, the coming spike in interest rates and inflation, and the still-boiling outrage over the manner in which Obama and the Democrats shoved ObamaCare down the throats of the citizens, and all of the ingredients are present for a major F-5 tornado to sweep across the heartland.
To what extent would soldiers use deadly force during such 'civil unrest' should the Consequence Management Response Team be utilized? During the anti-war riots of the 1960s they killed student protesters. What about now?
The military source cited by the radio host today was asked this very question. He would merely say that the culture of the U.S. military is changing--half support Obama and the other half are dead-set against him.
His conclusion? There is no way to know for sure if they would obey an order to open fire on ordinary citizens.
Update: The Cato Institute published this warning when the program was launched in its first phase in 2008 (the program has been updated and expanded since 2008). The Founders insisted that standing armies were never to be used against American citizens on our own soil, no matter what violations of this principle have occurred in the years following. In the spirit of the Patriots and of real journalists government must be questioned constantly and held to intense scrutiny in order to preserve liberty.
Well folks here it is, the special force Obama wanted using our own military. For any of you my age, remember Hitler's Nazi's prior to WW2 !!
Sorry Obama lovers you're getting this too. He said during his run for president he wanted this special force for control during internal matters in our country! Looks like he's got it....
Not sure who wrote this last part but use the Army Times link to read the actual article. If they are not going to use the non-lethal package in the US that leaves only the lethal methods.
The article about the "special force" from the army times is legit. But I wonder about the claim that somehow they're going to be deployed during or around election time. Just need more confirmation before I'm going to jump on the ol' bandwagon on this one.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
It just dawned on me....a "special" army unit. You know, the kind that shows up with craft paper, crayons and who all get awarded Big Important Medals for things like successfully going to the restroom without help!
Now, now I can relax. Whew!
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
There were "defectors" and challengers to the Iraq/Afghanistan deployments during Dubya's reign, if I recall.
A military *should* in fact, not be divided regardless of who is in charge. So probably, yes, they would have went with what Dubya, or any other President, ordered most likely. That they're divided now, is huge, if its true.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
I don't think anybody is unaware at this point that the MSM and this Junta are trying to demonize the anti-government protesters. To our advantage though, is the fact that we have no central authority. They can call us everything except late for dinner, and it still won't stop people from protesting or meeting. That's the beauty of decentralization.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
The special force, which is the new name being given to the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 3rd Infantry, has been training at Fort Stewart , Georgia and is composed of 80,000 troops.
80,000 troops are going to quell and cower 300 MILLION people? I sure hope it hasn't come to that. Even if only 5% of those 300 million refuse to bow down that's 15 million. Surely 15 million can overcome 80,000, at least one would hope so.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
He (Gordon Duff) also implies that forcibly removing Obama, a Constitution-hating, on-the-down-low, crackhead Communist, is an attack on America, Mom, and apple pie. I swear these military people are worse than useless. Just look around at the condition of the country and tell me if they have fulfilled their oaths to protect the nation from all enemies foreign and domestic. OsamaBinGoldstein posted on 2010-05-25 9:39:59 ET (2 images) Reply Trace
I wouldn't sweat it too much. They're 11 Bravo. Not the sharpest knives in the drawer if you catch my meaning. In times of real war, 11B is filled in by the bulk of men without too much regards for intelligence (though, there is some, if you're highly qualified as a physicist or doctor or whatever, you'll probably go somewhere a bit more benign). In times of peace, 11B is where they put the kids who couldn't quite figure out how to hold their pencils to take the ASVAB test.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
Nah, we'll be fine. It's hard to marginalize a large segment of society, especially a large, heavily armed segment of society. I think everybody is nervous as hell about this election and are going to be watching it really friggin' closely. Lots of scrutiny. The last thing a Junta wants, is lots of video cameras and folks with guns showing up.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
Recording can help. Ultimately though, the Junta kind of disregards reality, even the reality of film and videotape. I've never seen such a consistently Orwellian bunch in my life, didn't think that doublethink was actually possible as a consistent practice.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
It would be a mistake to give them what they want.
Yes, but I have a feeling that if "we" retain reason and don't fall into their goading little traps, they'll just send somebody out in "our" name and get it started regardless. Just a hunch.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
Obummer wants to create and rule a fascist police state, it would be a mistake not to fight that.
And this is true as well.
I'm on the fence about it honestly. I'd prefer peaceful means, but if we remain peaceful as I pointed out in my previous post, they'll just send out a proxy in "our" name and get it started anyway I'm betting. And then there's the whole "ok, we don't fight, they do what they want, and now we're in a jam" thing. They may want violence now (and I strongly suspect that they do), but we're damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Bit of a sticky wicket really.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
I'm on the fence about it honestly. I'd prefer peaceful means, but if we remain peaceful as I pointed out in my previous post, they'll just send out a proxy in "our" name and get it started anyway I'm betting. And then there's the whole "ok, we don't fight, they do what they want, and now we're in a jam" thing. They may want violence now (and I strongly suspect that they do), but we're damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Do nothing and evil wins. Take action, roll the dice, and see what happens.
...they'll just send somebody out in "our" name and get it started regardless.
But you can spot and deal with the more amateurish SEIU goon types.
Against real professionals, it would be much harder. But those little cameras can do a lot to help repudiate a poseur or a provocateur who tries to grandstand in front of a camera to blacken the target group's image.
I'd guess that the Tea folk have considered this already and have some ideas about how to deal with goons and disruptors and such.
I think you mean George I and Clinton's establishing the framework first of course.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
I was thinking somebody a bit more...professional...than union goons. Yeah, they're easy to spot.
But those little cameras can do a lot to help repudiate a poseur or a provocateur who tries to grandstand in front of a camera to blacken the target group's image.
Totally agree. When faux anti-government protesters were sent out a few months back, cameras caught them (and guys held signs around the fakers, pointing them out). At least in pics that I saw.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
George I started the middle east campaigns, Junior simply tried to impress dad by going bonkers after 9/11 and invading...of all places that had nothing to do with it, Iraq. George I, being a former CIA guy, was quite keen to expand the "national security state", Dubya was just following in his footsteps. Clinton, of course, established the principles that it's perfectly ok to gun down your own citizens, as well as continuing keeping middle east tensions high by his random bombings.
Your Achilles heel is Dubya. But we've been over this before, probably pointless to rehash it.
That was Junior's doing in early October of 2008
That I agree with. The 2008 article referenced doesn't really back up the main article (this thread) claims that this is being planed for 2010.
My point being, if the same exact orders would have been issued by Junior, whatever those have been or are going to be, under the exact same circumstances, conditions, etc. and et al., there would be no political rift like that that might cause issues for the PTB.
Disagree. Soldiers, by and large, know that it's a grave sin to turn their guns on their own countrymen. Generally speaking, soldiers are geared to serve the country, not the "leader" and their loyalties remain to the nation as a whole as opposed to individual "leaders". Hence the reason the military didn't just flip Carter the bird when he was de-funding them (for example). They have individual political beliefs, but (generally) those take a back seat to duty to country while they're in uniform.
When you get to the point that some will, and some won't, instead of "none will", you're at the starting point of the previous Civil War. Which is what, I believe, is the important grain to take from the notation of 'there's a rift' mentioned in this piece.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
I'm not disagreeing, what I'm stating, again, is that when it gets to the point that you have a large amount of soldiers that *will* turn against their own citizenry (beyond a small unit or two, there's always insane people in the ranks), and a division is now apparent in the ranks, that portends bad things. Confederate soldiers were, just a week prior to the outbreak of the civil war, U.S. soldiers (or rather, respectively, soldiers/militia from their state of origin). Union soldiers, sent to kill other Americans were, just a week prior to the civil war, U.S. soldiers (or rather, respectively, soldiers/militia from their state of origin).
When I was in the military what I stated was by and large true (of course, there probably were minor exceptions). There were even polls sent around, what in the 1990's by the Clinton administration, that asked the "would you turn your guns on your fellow citizens" and the vast majority answered "no way, go to hell for asking".
That most likely is changed now, but that's the point, if it's changed, then we're at the point of being on the cusp of civil war.
Remember, even the Chinese had units lining up to battle each other during Tienanmen Square when they were being ordered to mow down their own, and they are far more brainwashed than Americans could ever lay claim to being. No matter the "hand that feeds you", it's a tough sell when you're ordered to gun down your friend's grandmother.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
As far as the msm is concerned, the anti-government folk are all racist inbread yokel hicks who rarely wear shoes. They've been casting that image forever, it's not like it means anything at this point. The 11% of Americans who are pro-progressive don't need convinced that we're all a bunch of hillbillies, and they're not changing any of the anti-government protester minds by continuing their mindless chants. It would be for show only I think, if they did that.
Which doesn't mean they wouldn't of course.
The real problems will come when they send out agents to actually commit violence in "our" name (not at a rally, but when they send out a team to blow up something and claim it was us), when it becomes apparent that we're not likely to strike first. Then the "crack down" starts in earnest, and most likely, lots of violence from all sides. I have an strange suspicion that this is what's going to happen.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC
I still hold that gunning down "them thar ferriners" is different than gunning down your dad's golfing buddy. And I don't think the military et. al. is at that point (nor, does the article), though apparently a sizable number are, hence the divisions.
The cops being conditioned to hate us (clearly, they have been) started during Nixon's reign if I'm not mistaken. SWAT teams, the first push to militarize the local police, didn't that start on his watch? Or was it a few years earlier (I honestly can't remember)? Give a bunch of Barney Fife's a bazooka and an attitude of "use it at will!" and you're just asking for trouble. The police intelligence hiring standards were lowered in the 1990's (Clinton's doing), such that if you did a bit too well on the entrance exams, you were disqualified from police service. Why would that ever be considered a good thing to do, unless you wanted the cops just smart enough to use their equipment, but dumb enough to be easily brainwashed and incapable of questioning orders?
9/11 of course consolidated all of this, which I believe was the plan all along, the legislation for 9/11 was clearly pre-written, pre-edited and vamped a thousand times over, just waiting for an 'event' to put it in place. Dubya of course loved putting it in place, but I can guarantee you that it was already inked in final copy before he took the oath of office the first time through. End of the day, we've been sold down the river leading up to this oncoming freight train confrontation since at least the end of the Vietnam war.
"The more artificial taboos and restrictions there are in the world, the more the people are impoverished.... The more that laws and regulations are given prominence, the more thieves and robbers there will be." - Lao Tzu, 6th century BC