Home

Concerns about deployment of military on U.S. soil growing -- while mainstream media buries its head in the sand: Naomi Wolf

Submitted by BuzzFlash on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 9:40am.

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Naomi Wolf

The following is the spin of military spokespeople in response to questions about the deployment of the First Brigade on US soil for the first time in over 200 years.  

The Army Times initially reported that the First Brigade would handle domestic crowd control and subduing 'unruly individuals' and that they had 'lethal and nonlethal technologies' to do so. Then it issued a correction declaring that the 'nonlethal' package was not for domestic crowd control. Then after a hue and cry was raised by many citizens, Northern Command (NorthCom) offered a wholesale revision of their mission – and the mainstream media is eating it up. Here is an excerpt from the articled linked to in the previous sentence: 

Despite conspiracy theories that this could be a first step toward martial law in the U.S., there won't be tanks on Main Street or active-duty troops putting down demonstrations. That is barred by federal law banning the military from being used on U.S. soil for domestic law enforcement. 

Instead, the soldiers of the 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Stewart, Ga., have been training to back up civilian authorities in providing medical care and dealing with chemical, biological, high explosive or nuclear attack. 

Not only does this entirely contradict the first Army Times reports, it also egregiously misrepresents to readers the status of US law in regards to this deployment. Yes, there are laws against military policing on US streets -- they are part of both the 1807 Insurrection Act and 1879's Posse Comitatus Act -- but the Defense Authorization Act of 2007 gutted them. 

Congress restored some limitations on the President's ability to deploy troops to engage in military policing in 2008 -- but President Bush issued a signing statement declaring he did not feel bound by those limitations. He also can direct these troops -- and the National Guard, and Blackwater -- to engage in military policing of civilian populations simply by verbally and unilaterally declaring a national emergency of whatever kind he wishes.  

Unfortunately, the US Army spokespeople are parsing their words and misleading us. And, whatever the stated mission is today, the fact remains that military up the chain of command report to the Commander in Chief -- not to Congress or to you and me, and not to the Governors as most of the National Guard do. 

Why do I insist on raising an alarm about this deployment in spite of a great deal of opposition and criticism? (Though I am grateful, too, for a great deal of support.) I insist on raising an alarm because I am aware of world events and not just blinded by American recent history.

In Zimbabwe, a nominal democracy, President Mugabe sent troops to harass, arrest and even kill voters during a closely contested election. Mugabe's challenger called off his own supporters, telling them they should not risk being killed just in order to vote.  

In Sierra Leone, a nation I visited shortly after elections, during a fragile democratic voting process troops and militias were both deployed by the contesting political parties to intimidate, beat and arrest voters. In Azerbaijan, troops were sent to intimidate the opposition during the elections -- and now there is no meaningful opposition. Don't trust me -- ask Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International. Troops are sent by leaders in power, even in weakening democracies, to intimidate voters, arrest and harass opposition leaders in tightly fought elections, all over the damn world.

And nothing, nothing, nothing prevents the First Brigade from being positioned around poll locations, intimidating or silencing or threatening or worse those who challenge their voting outcome or their having been purged from the rolls. This at a time when Prof. Mark Crispin Miller of NYU and Robert Kennedy and many others are documenting MILLIONS of voters being systematically purged from rolls -- overwhelmingly by Republican actions -- and early voting is already showing machines flipping selections from Democrat to Republican, and voters becoming upset.

I am having a surreal experience with the mainstream media, as well, as I try to raise questions. A source at The Philadelphia Inquirer says that nothing has appeared on the wires about the First Brigade -- so they can't cover it. A source at The New York Times says they are 'looking into it' -- but no coverage yet. "The Today Show" asked if I was a 'fear-monger' and 'paranoid' for raising alarms and reproduced NorthCom's soundbite intact about the First Brigade being here to help with communities affected by weapons of mass destruction -- but did no independent reporting of their own. I know from hearing from citizens across party lines that I am not the only American concerned about what information the Army may have about such threats to lead to this deployment now -- the first time since the Indian Wars that troops have been sent onto US soil.

If you would like to see how average Americans are responding to the news about the deployment of the First Brigade, check out some of the posts from readers on a military-oriented Web site that posted the recent Colorado Springs Gazette article on the subject: 

'Since 9/11 the Department of Homeland Security has spent billions to prepare civilian law enforcement, local fire departments and civilian agencies to deal with such [crises]. This smells of despicable mission creep for the Armed Forces. In the late 1980's, I participated in several exercises focused on "counter insurgency" operations that specifically dealt with demonstrators and civil unrest. Backing up law enforcement officials is a end run around Posse Comitatus and this should be exposed for what it is, unconstitutional.' 

'Just why is a combat brigade being tasked for these scenarios and not Chemical, Biological and Nuclear Warfare commands? Medical Commands? Construction Battalions? 

'This seems much too similar to the use of troops to put down the Bonus March of WW I veterans in which Army Troops fired on and killed veterans in DC protesting the government's failure to pay their promised [bonuses].' 

'This job can AND SHOULD be handled by National Guard troops (domestic issues).' 

'This smells...no, it stinks. Posse Comitatus is in place for very valid reasons. This looks like pre-positioning equipment in preparation for a fight.

      'The Defense Authorization Act of 2006 empowers the president to impose martial law in the event of a terrorist "incident," if he or other federal officials perceive a shortfall of "public order," or even in response to antiwar protests that get unruly as a result of government provocations.

      'The terms "incident" and "public order" are left wide open to interpretation under the Military Commissions Act...' 

"Just why is a combat brigade being tasked for these scenarios and not Chemical, Biological and Nuclear Warfare commands? Medical Commands?

Construction Battalions?"

     'Back in the late seventies I was apart of a force that had a similar responsibility, except we were trained to handle "civil disturbance", thank god we were never needed. This is not the first time something like this has happened, the only difference, we were Arty. Every Batt. had to train so many troops, from Inf. to Medical. I enjoyed it, we all did because for the time we were apart of it, we were exempt from all duty. To have the troops on stand-by is not a problem, to deploy the troops to take over civil responsibilities is...'

'This is quite disturbing. 4000 troops may not be enough to impose martial law on an entire country, but they could do it to a moderately sized city.' 

'There is already a group to do this its called the National Guard Civil Support team. They are all over the country and are more trained than these rotating people will ever be.' 

'As a former member of the 10th Civil Service Detachment/Weapons of Mass Destruction, I do feel a bit insulted. The unit is a full time National Guard unit that was in place for two years before the 9/11 attacks. We were trained to do exactly what this article says this combat brigade is being trained to do. Is this another example of the services not talking to each other, or are these commanders really that ignorant of the world around them?' 

'Reorganize FEMA and keep the Combat Military out of the picture. Our Combat troops are for Combat. SeaBees are Construction Battalions that have the expertise for disaster related occurrences. They understand support missions and are the best in the world when it comes to Can-Do.

If the Combat Military has to become involved, it means Martial Law is a scribble away with the pen. 

'If we actually need this Brigade, take it away from the Combat Army and assign it to the SeaBees.'

'Did anyone catch the articles in the Army Times in September about this. The first article on 8 Sept. mentioned the Oct 1 deployment was to be prepared for any civil unrest during the election. The Next article I read on line around 26 Sept Changed 3 times in one day. From explaining about the extensive training they have received in IRAQ, the new non lethal weapons for use against (American Citizens) for civil unrest to a final article of they just here to help for emergencies.' 

"Despite conspiracy theories that this could be a first step toward martial law in the U.S., there won't be tanks on Main Street or active-duty troops putting down demonstrations. That is barred by federal law banning the military from being used on U.S. soil for domestic law enforcement."

     'Did you read the Army Times article?

Have you read the Military Commissions Act 2006?

Have you read the Military Budget Act of 2007?

Have you read the Patriot act?...

     'What they are saying is that the local, state and federal police departments can't handle a crisis?' 

'If you're reading these posts, you've already read the words "mission creep," "end-run around Posse Comitatus" and "unconstitutional"'. 

'I joined the Navy to make sure NO GOVERNMENT WOULD NEVER DEPLOY TROOPS ON OUR SOIL. Why did you join? I believe every Governor should recall all National Guard troops to defend your states.... This detachment must stand down. This is an illegal order.' 

So don't take the warning from me. Take it from many these patriots in military circles.

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION

Buy Naomi Wolfe's latest book, Give Me Liberty: A Handbook for American Revolutionaries (Paperback), from BuzzFlash.com.

We recommend watching the just-released free online documentary of Wolf's "End of America." It's alarming and persuasive.

Bookmark/Search this post with:
buzzflash buzzflash | delicious delicious | digg digg | yahoo yahoo | technorati technorati
Technorati Tags:

» login or register to post comments | printer friendly version

it happened too fast

Submitted by bugjackblue on Thu, 10/23/2008 - 4:56pm.
It's my belief that republican strategists were planning on throwing this election from the start. It was intended to be a re-run of 1976. Otherwise they would never have let their weakest candidate, and moreover a guy they don't like or trust, get the nomination. The idea was McCain would lose to Hillary, the economy would collapse on her watch, she'd take the fall for it, and then we'd get Romney or Huckabee as Ronald Reagan pt 2. And McCain, like the sacrifical lamb Bob Dole in '96 would happily take the bullet for the team. But they miscalculated on two things: 1) that Obama, who apparently must not be totally in their bag, would get the nomination; and 2) that their willful gross mismanagement of all and sundry would bring it all down BEFORE the election. Thus, they're desperate now to win. And McCain can't even keep it within the 3-4 points they need to get away with the vote-flipping program. That seems to be the margin for flipping as established in the congressional wave of '06 where so many Democrats got in by a couple of points when the exit polls showed margins of 5-6 points Dem. The fix was indeed in but it wasn't big enough and the Ds won a bunch of seats they were supposed to lose in squeakers after the adjustment. However as a result of McCain's ineptitude this time the real margins as evidenced by the exit polls are going to be much too large and in too many places to be rigged effectively so they've got to go to Plan C. That brigade is going to be used. It would not be stationed here if they were not planning on actually using it. Question is: for what? It's surely not disaster relief. If so, they would have been deployed before hurricane season, not in October. I can see maybe four possibilities, one of which is actually a good reason but not very likely. One is sensible and possible but I somehow doubt it's what they have in mind. The other two are more in keeping with what Bush/Cheney have demonstrated as their modus operandi over the years. 1) If a black man is elected, white separatist militias may go nuts. Unfortunately, this is far too enlightened a rationale for ANYTHING this whitehouse might do. 2) The economy goes into total collapse and the banks all shut their doors. Rioting might indeed result, and it might be sensible to augment national guard and paramilitary with actual military, but again this just doesn't sound right to me. The rioting would not be persistent enough over a long term to justify permanent deployment of this unit. The aggrieved mob would eventually go home and sulk once they realized nothing they did is going to help their plight. 3 & 4) For this unit's permanent deployment to make sense, the expectation must be that protracted insurrection is likely and an occupying force is needed to suppress said insurrection over the long haul. What might cause such a "revolution?" The same thing that causes it in other countries-- the (usually correct) perception by the masses that the installed govt is illegitimate or alien. That's when an underground forms and becomes active. Two obvious ways for this to happen here: 1) cancel an election; 2) declare McCain the "winner" regardless of the outcome. It may be too late for #1 (though you never know.) However #2 is very possible. Have you seen the Youtube video with Stephen Spoonamore? Except this time the margins are too large and no one will accept this as a legitimate result. It would definitely result in widespread rioting, which would justify martial law, state governors might be reluctant to deploy their own national guards in such a cause, and the whitehouse would need an army brigade plus Blackwater (who would by the way probably start hiring separatist militia as their staffing requirements exploded.) The insurrection would then continue indefinitely and thus martial law and suspension of the posse comitatus rule (and eventually habeas corpus and all your other "rights") can be justified. I would think secario #4 is the most likely amongst these given the proclivities demonstrated so amply by the gang in charge.
» login or register to post comments

scenario!

Submitted by bugjackblue on Fri, 10/24/2008 - 11:50am.
Oops. My fevered conspiracy-riddled unrealistic immature brain was in such a hurry to post my paranoid gloom-and-doom-mongering that I let a spelling error slip through. I hate when that happens! As per the comment below about the army refusing to follow a commander-in-chief's orders-- it is my understanding that people will generally do whatever they are paid to do. Especially when the penalty for not doing so is a court martial, loss of career and pension, and probably a long jail sentence. In order for mutiny to work, a significant percentage of the crew must reach consensus to rebel so that some critical mass great enough to persuade those who are not on board with the mutiny to stand down is attained. That the highest-ranking generals might have privately talked W out of gross folly in invading Iran (and we really don't know that this is the case) is not necessarily any indicator of what rank-and-file grunts, black, white, latino, asian, whatever, would do when given direct orders and threatened with court martial if they should disobey. Especially in a moment of chaos and passionate emotion which the eruption of insurrection would entail. Yeah, let's hope it doesn't happen, but it certainly could. The only thing that constrains these guys in the whitehouse is concern over whether they believe they can get away with something. There is no difference whatsoever between them and any other dictatorial or wanna-be dictatorial junta from history except context. It's been historically harder to get away with this sort of thing in America otherwise they would have gotten far more fascistic already. And it looks like they've been very busy laying the groundwork for further venture in this direction. Just because something can be labeled "conspiracy theory" (which of course this can be) doesn't mean that a conspiracy doesn't really exist. MANY conspiracies, some relatively overt and some far more secretive, some more benign and unfortunately some far nastier, do indeed exist everywhere around us. And the W whitehouse gang is the epitome of that nasty secretive cabal. They'll do it if a) they believe they need to, and b) they believe they'll get away with it. Hopefully one or both of these rationales fail and so they decide it best not to go through with it, but they sure as hell could and it's not at all unreasonable to consider the possibility.
» login or register to post comments

Lets get serious

Submitted by Yosemitesam on Fri, 10/24/2008 - 10:31am.
Ok apparently some of you love to scare yourself with conspiracy theories. Their are three reasons not to worry. Time to review some facts about our military. The US military is approximately 23% black and the officer corps is 17% black. There is no way Black officers are going along with denial of an Obama win. Plus each officer swears an oath to the constitution. The white and black officers would never support a military coupe---it goes against everything they have been taught. The few crazy officers that might go along with such an idea would quickly be over powered by the sane officers. We are not a Banana republic with poorly trained officers that can be easily bought or swayed. Second Bush is a lazy president, too lazy to go to staff meetings after starting the Iraq war. He is too lazy to organize or lead a coupe. He wants to go home to Crawford and drink his life away. The only person smart and energetic enough to do anything is Rove and if he put together some group of Neocon conspirators the good guys (the officer corps) would quickly dispatch them. But who would lead this so called conspiracy not the Joint Chiefs they have no use for Bush. In a world of instant communication via cell phones the idea of deluding our Military to coral and detain citizens is some weird extreme left wing wet dream. Third the patriotic Americans would never allow a military take over; it is not a matter of thousands protesting it would be tens of millions. Obama will be our next president and life will go on. The NeoCons will get drunk election night and have a new President to slam. Now lets get to work fixing our problems.
» login or register to post comments

STUPID PEOPLE

Submitted by mizzy03 on Wed, 10/22/2008 - 8:46pm.
There are not only two candidates!!!!! Are Americans that stupid?!!!!
» login or register to post comments

Don't tread on me!

Submitted by mrmikemrmike on Wed, 10/22/2008 - 4:00pm.
It is funny. I read these comments only to find those so blind to the facts of America's continuing struggle to remain free. Some Democrates feel McBama is the answer and some Republicans O'cain is the man. As the economy swirls down the drain sucking our country into National Socialism, I wonder if I should start camouflaging myself in a blackshirt or a brownshirt. It will be for my own protection, screw the rest of you non-patriots who cannot understand how history repeats itself. How there is no difference between the two candidates that voted for the Military Commisions Act, that voted for new FISA, that voted for the bailout. Well I am a 40 year old white Danish-American. And eventhough the NAZI's killed off half my natural born Danish kin, as I remember it. That is what my American Grandmother told me, I remember it now... I also remember 20 years ago what it felt like to hear the 21 gun salute at my Father's funeral. What I wish I could say to him. I didn't exactly know. But if it was now. It would be, "Dad, what a wasted sacrifice of your life and our family's. These people do not care enough to study anything. They think freedom's a football game in a league with two teams. I wish you didn't have to go Dad, because these people don't deserve freedom. They deserve the tyranny they get. Stupid stupid people. They deserve the democrats and the republicans, these Bipartisan Fascists who back corporations not the people. See you when it's over, Pops."
» login or register to post comments

ggg

Submitted by brg8 (not verified) on Thu, 11/27/2008 - 2:36pm.
العاب-شات-العاب بنات-العاب باربي-العاب مغامرات-العاب سباق دراجات-العاب ذكاء-العاب متنوعة-العاب قص الشعر-العاب تلبيس-العاب تلوين-العاب ديكور-العاب مطاردات سريعة-العاب رياضية-العاب تلبيس عرايس-العاب طبخ-العاب حربية-العاب قتالية-العاب افلام كرتون-العاب مكياج-العاب سباق سيارات-العاب ورق-العاب اطفال-منتديات-مركز تحميل برق-منتديات اسلامية-فنادق-صور-صور بنات-مسلسلات-صور انمي-اخبار الفن-صور فنانين-افلام-اناشيد اسلامية-خواطر رومانسية-شعر-قصص-صور سيارات-مصارعة حره-نكت-العاب منتديات-برامج كمبيوتر-توبيكات-كتب-برامج جوال-مقاطع بلوتوث-مسجات-نغمات نوكيا-ثيمات نوكيا-فوتوشوب-ازياء-حلويات-تربية الاطفال-الطب البديل-علم النفس-دردشة صوتية-تحميل العاب-روايات احلام-روايات عبير-العاب bratz-العاب الجاسوسات-العاب الفتيات الخارقات-العاب توم وجيري-مسجات حب-مسجات شوق-مسجات عتاب-مسجات فراق-مسجات زعل-مسجات حزن-مسجات حزينة-مسجات رومانسية-مسجات غرام-مسجات مضحكة-دردشة بنات-منتدى بنات-دردشة-منتدى الغلا-مواضيع عامة-تعارف-حوار-فضائح-قصائد-فيض الخواطر-قصص وروايات-عالم الحياة الزوجية-معجنات-صحة-ديكور-عالم حواء-منتدى الصور-تصاميم-صرقعه-برامج-توبيكات ماسنجر-ارشيف-الارشيف
» login or register to post comments

What Bush Wanted

Submitted by urthsong on Wed, 10/22/2008 - 5:12am.
Bush/Cheney/McCain, ETAL were bound and determined to bomb-bomb-bomb Iran. They had to shelve it. Why counldn't they do it? Because there was too much opposition. Naomi Wolf is right to sound the alarm. The intent of the Bush administration, if they can get away with it, is to subdue those un-American Americans who support the Constitution, human rights, justice and sensible policies. They've been trying to create a military and paramilitary that can see liberal Americans as enemies. They've even built prison facilities to hold many of them, us. Never forget that the Prince Group, parent corporation of Black Water, COO, Joseph Schmitz, is married to the sister of Jeb Bush's wife, keeping it all in the Bush family. So we need to understand that. The problem is the same as bombing Iran. We won't go along with it. Whistleblowers and members of our military come forward as good citzens to reveal what is being done. After Iraq, they probably thought it was a lead pipe cinch. But with years living with the mess they've made, most of us aren't in a cooperative mood, including much of the military. We must turn again and again to our Constitution and treaties and to our strong foundation of democratic values where our salvation lies. That "damned piece of paper" is our hope. Pat Williams
» login or register to post comments

Don't Panic

Submitted by banjobailey on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 8:17pm.
It is very important that our citizens do NOT panic over the prospect of martial law in the event of a stolen election. First of all, this election will not be stolen because Obama has known from the beginning that the only way he can win is if an overwhelming number of people show up at the polls. This will happen. It is already happening. It happened in the primaries. Only through an overwhelming number of voters showing up, can he win. This will nullify the Republican efforts - why? Because they have only been able to steal our elections because the people simply DID NOT show up to vote. That is the truth. Look at the numbers of people who have voted in the past. Paltry. Only through a massive turnout will Democrats win in ANY election and only Obama can bring that about - and he IS. Show up. Turn out. Get every single person you know to vote. WE WILL WIN. These Republicans have only been able to steal our elections because the rest of us sat on our butts. We show up. We vote. We claim our votes in the exit polls and NO MATTER how many digital criminal changes take place, we CANNOT be denied. This is our moment. This is our time. Get GOING!!!!
» login or register to post comments

just a sec

Submitted by hello there on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 5:22pm.
they have it too good to screw it all up now. i doubt they'd force their hand and expose themselves just yet. i agree with tinker_toy: obama's willing to play ball.
» login or register to post comments

Perhaps it has to do with our neighbors to the north

Submitted by pjmjr63 on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 3:08pm.
Perhaps it has to do with our neighbors to the north [and their proven ~20% of the world's oil reserves]: The Deployment of US Troops inside Canada http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8323 Is the Annexation of Canada Part of Bush's Military Agenda? http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=174
» login or register to post comments

Where there is a will,

Submitted by ernieson on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 1:35pm.
there is a way. The Rethugs have the will and they will find any way they can to steal an election.
» login or register to post comments

Lady Astor speaks to us....

Submitted by kjlovell on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 1:29pm.
After addressing Parliment.
» login or register to post comments

The above should have been a reply to the comment below.

Submitted by kjlovell on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 1:57pm.
Let me know if you get the comment....
» login or register to post comments

Don't Panic -- Think

Submitted by mknick on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 1:20pm.
I hate to interrupt everyone's doomsday scenarios, but you really do need to think about this a little before you indulge in martial law fantasies: A batallion consists of at most 1,500 troops. I object to using military of any kind against American civilians, but a batallion is not enough to "secure" even one large US city, to say nothing of putting down insurrections from coast to coast. Then too, this scenario requires us to believe that the Joint Chiefs of Staff would countenance an order to put down protests with the Army. If you think they would do so simply on the command of George W. Bush, you are dreaming. They are not puppets or robots; for example, they have refused to play along with Bush's ambitions in Iran. They will just not cooperate with martial law over a contested election result. Finally, remember that Bush and the entire Republican machine exist as an extension of corporate interests. Do you think that the people who pay for that party would prefer the complete meltdown of American society to an Obama administration? Martial law is bad for business. This isn't Africa or South America, and the consequences of such chaos would hit corporations hard. The Patriot Act, the Defense Authorizatons Act, and Bush's signing statements are heinous enough without having to ruin our credibility with ridiculous conspiracy theories. Let's stick to reality -- it will be challenging enough to deal with.
» login or register to post comments

"A batallion consists of at most 1,500 troops."

Submitted by Triangle Bill on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 8:19pm.
I may be mistaken but I thought Naomi Wolf's and other's earliest writings about this deployment it was a brigade, not a batalion- there's a BIG difference- A US Army brigade is ~3,000 to 5,000 soldiers. Whereas a batalion is typically 300 to ~1,000 soldiers. Personally I don't want to entertain doomsday scenarios either but I would argue that if you combine thousands of soldiers working in concert with all levels of local authority from state troopers down to county sheriffs (look at what local authorities did at the recent RNC convention, busting down doors and busting heads, for what people were 'thinking' about doing...), combined with the fact that the vast majority of this country's citizenry is willing to believe ANYTHING they're told (WMD's being launched into the US by unmanned aerial drones by Saddam Hussein...), and you run that equation and the answer is that they could probably lock this puppy down pretty tight if they took a mind. No doubt this gov't has run numerous scenarios, models, and have all sorts of off the shelf contingency plans... My 2 cents. ---there's a very thorough description of the structure of the US Army at- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_army#Force_Structure_and_Unit_History_Branch
» login or register to post comments

LADY ASTOR SPEAKS....

Submitted by kjlovell on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 3:45pm.
After addressing Parliment, Lady Astor tells the citizens they don't have anything to fear from Adolph Hitler.
» login or register to post comments

You may be right but

Submitted by sander on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 2:43pm.
Everything in steps. I would submit that 1500 heavily armed professional soldiers would be quite an intimidating sight for anyone. Perhaps 1500 isn't enough to secure one town, but the moment people rose up against them the reinforcements would step in and you can bet things would be "secure" then. This entire concept of having our troops walk our street as a secuity force should scare the hell out of everyone. But like everything else in this country, people won't get it until they are watching the tanks drive down their street.
» login or register to post comments

I'm not so sure mcINSANE won't "win"

Submitted by kjlovell on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 1:08pm.
I'm still not so sure the reTHUGlicans won't steal another (3rd) presidential election. Today the rsm (reTHUGlican stream media) cnn was saying the race is "too close to call" since when is 11% too close to call??? With the military getting ready to patrol US streets to keep people under control, voter fraud by the gop I am not so sure the DIPSTICK and his DIPSTICK with LIPSTICK won't "win".
» login or register to post comments

This is plausible

Submitted by clichy1950 on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 12:59pm.

While I fully agree that Obama has been ordained by the powers that be (to eviscerate Social Security like a Republican could never get away with like Clinton destroyed welfare ahead of bankruptcy "reform") these guys don't want to take the chance of their past actions being revealed.

Maybe people believe that Americans won't tolerate troops taking action against Americans but look at the rhetoric being used in this election and think about a couple of things.

The McCain/Palin campaign and the GOP echo chamber are repeating over and over again that Obama is linked to domestic terrorists through Bill Ayers. The few people who remember the Weather Underground remember bombings and so to them this could be a valid point.

However, I think the wording is insidious and here's why. Equating Obama and his supporters with domestic terrorism, as a somewhat immediate threat to "The Homeland," provides the necessary meme to justify some sort of martial law AFTER the election if Obama wins.

Think of it. The popular vote is too overwhelming for there to be widespread manipulation of machines without some sort of response from people in the jurisdictions where the vote tampering would have to occur. Instead, martial law can be declared on the basis of NSPD 51 as the government's response to DOMESTIC TERRORISTS taking over the government through legitimate elections.

Remember Kissinger's response to the election of Allende that led to Chile's 9/11? He saw no reason why a certain country should be allowed to "go Marxist" merely because "its people are irresponsible." The country cited was Chile and the electorate had just legitimately and democratically elected Salvador Allende as president (The Trial of Henry Kissinger, Hitchens, p55).

What followed for the people of Chile was economic desperation and ultimately on 9/11/1973 the violent overthrow of Allende by Pinochet during which Allende was murdered with weapons provided by the CIA through diplomatic pouch.

The red meat crowds that gaze adoringly on Sarah Palin as she spews her hate speech and her veiled encouragement to kill Obama are more than willing to believe that Obama has been financed by some foreign "other" group that seeks to take over the US government through his election. The people who support Obama are viewed as dirty, fucking hippies and believe me, we are expendable in the glazed over eyes of the fundamentalist flock.

The gnashing of teeth that follows implementation of Bush's NSPD and its corresponding Homeland Security Directive will be deafening. Just as every act that Hitler took was preceded by a legal cover document, so too every act that this junta has planned for us has been documented and is on the books ready to be implemented.

The German people ultimately could not say they were ignorant of what Hitler had planned for the Jews and other outside groups and neither will anyone in the media in this country be able to absolve themselves of complicit guilt in the tragedy that I believe is about to be visited upon our country, our constitution, our life as a republic.

Peace,

Matt Carmody
Cornwall, NY

» login or register to post comments

militia

Submitted by edpell@bestweb.net on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 12:39pm.
It is time for county militias armed to the level of anti-aircraft weapons and anti-tank weapons with tanks and artillery. And for State militias armed with all the weapons available to the federal government, nuclear tipped ICBMs, fighter aircraft, bombers, satellite surveillance and communications, etc... If we are to fight for our freedom we need a full set of weapons and training to use them.
» login or register to post comments

The third stolen election

Submitted by Chabuka on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 12:38pm.
is what this is all about..(some speculated it was in response to the economic meltdown)....but I believe they will announce John McCain and Sarah Palin the "winners" of the election...when the whole country knows that Barack Obama is on track to win in a landslide....If they steal the election, again..what will we have left to loose, as a country? (Certainly not our democracy..!)
» login or register to post comments

We don't have to respond with violence

Submitted by cagey on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 12:26pm.
There's a lot of speculation about a violent response to yet another stolen election, and there no doubt would be some elements that would take to the streets in violent ways. There are non-violent ways to respond as well - a general strike, especially by transportation workers would bring the nation to a halt. And there aren't enough military personnel to disrupt peaceful demonstrations in EVERY AMERICAN CITY. A tax revolt would take our money right out of government hands. And we could appeal to other nations to put sanctions on the US and take other actions to hamstring our "government". They want us to get angry enough to riot, but we don't have to take the bait.
» login or register to post comments

I predicted ten years ago

Submitted by Paul Revere on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 12:05pm.
I predicted ten years ago that since America's foreign policy has been mostly fascist for many,many years, that it was just a matter of time , when they could get away with it, that our domestic policy would have no other choice than become fascist. Now looks like the time that they can get away with it, unless enough Americans like Naomi Wolfe, wake up and put a stop to it.
» login or register to post comments

Concerns?

Submitted by floridaguy2816 on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 10:50am.
I don't want to make light of this serious problem, but...concerns? You betcha. It is going to happen. Period. There is too much at stake for those running the world economy to let Obama take the reins of American policy--domestic, foreign, military, economic, etc. Too much at stake. According to the elite, Obama cannot be trusted to have fully bought into their agenda. He's too unpredictable. So maintenance of the coup is in place. There will be overwhelming voter turnout (which McCain concedes will favor Obama in the popular vote), but the election will be given to McCain. There will be immediate outrage and protest and even some rioting, but as is evident...that will be supressed and all will go back to "normal" within weeks. Mark the words of those of us who are considered "paranoid" or "conspiracy theorists," this IS going to happen.
» login or register to post comments

LOL

Submitted by tinker_toy on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 12:20pm.

Obama is one the boys, don't worry. He wouldn't have gotten this far if his white masters thought he was a threat.

Obama is a neocon as much as McCain is. He voted to fund the war, he wants to escalate Afghanistan, bomb Pakistan, "listen to the commanders on the ground" in Iraq (just like Bush) and defend Israel. He wants to give Collin Powell a role in his White House, yes, war criminal Collin Powell.

Obama also voted for the bailout, the FISA bill, etc. he's a Republican clone, despite his pretty rhetoric. He wants to keep the Bush Secretary of the Treasury in the job.

It amazes me to see how many millions are being fooled by this fraud. The power of propaganda kills, devastates.

» login or register to post comments

Their prisoners do not

Submitted by Atmost11 on Tue, 10/21/2008 - 10:26am.
Their prisoners do not deserve the Geneva Conventions - but they voluntarily give them Geneva Conventions. So they "could" do crowd control but they voluntarily won't, and they cite Posse Comitatus which isn't still in effect.
» login or register to post comments