Military Preparing for Martial Law

[Mr.Hoppes]

While I do in all honesty respect where you are coming from, I find it highly unlikely that the federal government will start dragging people out of their homes and ordering their execution when I wake up tomorrow. There were precursors to the Holocaust, and if you are concerned about an event like that happening again, you should probably look into them. Whats the old saying "History repeats itself".

The problem is those precursors look obvious when looking back and just a small thing when it is happening. The fact is We are on the slope now, and it's just a matter of time until it does happen.

As much as I hate the global warming commercial with the train, it is like that. A good portion of the population thinks "it isn't going to happen tomorrow, so I won't worry about it". The problem with that thought pattern is by the time it is realized, it is too late. Or the next generation pays for their parents not paying attention and acting to prevent.

And yes I am one of the tin foil hat group.

 

[dburkhead]

Those are basically Hitlers steps (summed up) in rise to power. While you interpret us as working on some of those, I disagree. While there is some mindless following of barack, there are PLENTY of people out there that question him. Hence our conversations right now. What group of society has he publicly denounced? What group of society has he disbanded? What political parties has he disbanded? How would legalizing 12 million illegal aliens(which I assume you are speaking of Mexicans) gurantee him 12 million more democrats?

Hitler's steps? Considering that the UN didn't even exist then, I suggest you look again.

So you not think there were plenty of people who questioned Hitler right up until the time the Secret State Police started making them dissappear (not in the night but in broad daylight)? Silencing of dissent was not a precursor. It was a result.

What group of society has he publicly denounced? Pretty much anybody who disagrees with him. His denouncement is far more sweeping than just a handful of ethnic groups. And the particular genius of taking the economic crisis, which Republicans have been warning about for years and which stems in large part from policies the Democrats pushed and had made into law, and blaming it on the Republicans: much like Germany's economic woes of the 20's were blamed on the Jews.

Did you read what I said about disbanding political parties--more sophistication than the Nazi's--leave them in place as a scapegoat but render them totally impotent.

As for what effect amnesty for 12 million illegal aliens (and I said "illegal aliens" not "Mexicans." Although a significant percentage, probably a majority, are probably Mexican, please do not put words in my mouth) hear hoofbeats, expect horses not zebras. Look at how groups like that have historically voted--particularly with the aggressive assistance of groups like ACORN--and get a good idea what to expect from the future.

 

[dburkhead]

The problem is those precursors look obvious when looking back and just a small thing when it is happening. The fact is We are on the slope now, and it's just a matter of time until it does happen.

As much as I hate the global warming commercial with the train, it is like that. A good portion of the population thinks "it isn't going to happen tomorrow, so I won't worry about it". The problem with that thought pattern is by the time it is realized, it is too late. Or the next generation pays for their parents not paying attention and acting to prevent.

And yes I am one of the tin foil hat group.

While I won't say "exactly" this is pretty close.

One thing, the "precursors" to the US going totalitarian will not be the same as those of Nazi Germany, of Communist Russia, of Communist China, of Castro's Cuba, of the shift of Rome from Republic to Empire, of the collapse of Athenian democracy, of The Terror in France, of, well, any historical example. That we're not following the exact same steps of any one of them does not mean we're "safe." All it means is that the current path is different from previous ones, just as the previous ones were different from each other.

What we're seeing now has elements of both Nazi Germany and Revolutionary France (some of the Dems rhetoric about Republicans bears a disturbing similarity in theme and tone to way "Nobles" were decried during The Terror).

It's very, very disturbing and complaceny or the belief "it can't happen here" is the best way to ensure that it _does_ happen here. Maybe Obama's not the one to finally tip it over. Maybe it will be the next one, or the one after that. But if we don't take action now to stop it, then it will tip over.

 

[03mustgt]

Hitler's steps? Considering that the UN didn't even exist then, I suggest you look again.

So you not think there were plenty of people who questioned Hitler right up until the time the Secret State Police started making them dissappear (not in the night but in broad daylight)? Silencing of dissent was not a precursor. It was a result.

What group of society has he publicly denounced? Pretty much anybody who disagrees with him. His denouncement is far more sweeping than just a handful of ethnic groups. And the particular genius of taking the economic crisis, which Republicans have been warning about for years and which stems in large part from policies the Democrats pushed and had made into law, and blaming it on the Republicans: much like Germany's economic woes of the 20's were blamed on the Jews.

Did you read what I said about disbanding political parties--more sophistication than the Nazi's--leave them in place as a scapegoat but render them totally impotent.

As for what effect amnesty for 12 million illegal aliens (and I said "illegal aliens" not "Mexicans." Although a significant percentage, probably a majority, are probably Mexican, please do not put words in my mouth) hear hoofbeats, expect horses not zebras. Look at how groups like that have historically voted--particularly with the aggressive assistance of groups like ACORN--and get a good idea what to expect from the future.

League of Nations no longer exists, hence the UN. I am not being racist at all, and I am not trying to infer that you are, I just dont understand how you can judge how a large segment of an ethnic group will vote.

 

[03mustgt]

While I won't say "exactly" this is pretty close.

One thing, the "precursors" to the US going totalitarian will not be the same as those of Nazi Germany, of Communist Russia, of Communist China, of Castro's Cuba, of the shift of Rome from Republic to Empire, of the collapse of Athenian democracy, of The Terror in France, of, well, any historical example. That we're not following the exact same steps of any one of them does not mean we're "safe." All it means is that the current path is different from previous ones, just as the previous ones were different from each other.

What we're seeing now has elements of both Nazi Germany and Revolutionary France (some of the Dems rhetoric about Republicans bears a disturbing similarity in theme and tone to way "Nobles" were decried during The Terror).

It's very, very disturbing and complaceny or the belief "it can't happen here" is the best way to ensure that it _does_ happen here. Maybe Obama's not the one to finally tip it over. Maybe it will be the next one, or the one after that. But if we don't take action now to stop it, then it will tip over.

So what are you going to do to stop it? Please enlighten me on your plans.

 

[dburkhead]

League of Nations no longer exists, hence the UN. I am not being racist at all, and I am not trying to infer that you are, I just dont understand how you can judge how a large segment of an ethnic group will vote.

League of Nations was not the UN and the two are not really comparable so simply substituting one of the other is not a significant judgement.

I can "judge" how a large segment of an ethnic group will likely vote (note that the wording here is slightly different from yours) based on how that ethnic and economic group (both are factors) has generally voted in the past.

Must the same way I expected close to Obama getting 95% of the "black vote."

 

[dburkhead]

So what are you going to do to stop it? Please enlighten me on your plans.

Several steps:

Raising awareness of the danger (as in sounding the alarm).

Fighting to retain our rights in various venues. Often little things, trying to counter the propaganda against folk of a conservative or libertarian bent. Including things like attempting to counter anti-gun propaganda and, hopefully sway a portion of the folk who's position on those issues has not crystallized.

Being politically active in an effort to sway people already in office away from more dangerous avenues into avenues safer for Freedom in the United States.

Encourage others to do all of the above.

Preparing for various SHTF scenarios including the possibility that my efforts, combined with those of others, ultimately fail.

Having a GOTH plan in place.

(And, no, I am not going to say anything about the details of the plans in those last two points.)

 

[Turtle]

hmmmm muslim president..... muslim enemys..... and Bin Ladin said his next attack wasnt a bomb, but an attack on americas financial system...... Whatever is the cause? I think its working.

I honestly hope Obama does not repeat history in any way.... I honestly pray He saves this country that I LOVE! But I will not be a sheep and I will be prepared just in case my hopes and prayers go un-answered.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Please tell me you are in no way shape or form trying to compare Barack Obama to Adolph Hitler. Second, when congress hands over total power to the president, then I may be worried. Please, do not compare anything that is going on in the United States to the Holocaust, IMO it is an insult to the survivors and those who died during those times.

What I am saying is that a charismatic, well-spoken candidate who stands against everything upon which this country was founded has been elected to the highest office in a presently semi-free nation. He has a Congress that is of his same party and damn-close to a filibuster- and veto-proof majority in at least one house of that Congress. The present administration and some past administrations as well have set up tools such as the "Patriot Act" to allow him to name anyone he chooses as an "enemy combatant" and deny them all of our rights, including habeus corpus. We have precedent to capture and hold prisoner American citizens who have done nothing wrong, solely because of their ancestry, something out of their control. It is much more "politically correct" to do likewise to people because of a choice they've made as to how to spend their money (guns, in this case), and this slick talking empty suit that's about to take office next month has a strong record against us and our rights.

Adolf Hitler did not start throwing Jews (and others) in gas chambers and ovens on day one; rather he got himself elected to a high office, slowly built his power, whipped up his citizens against a particular group he called "dangerous" and we all know the result. The parallels between the two are striking, but considering we know the past and elected him anyway, no, I'm not saying Barack Obama is Adolf Hitler.


I think that unchecked, he's far more dangerous.

Blessings,
B

 

[Bill of Rights]

League of Nations no longer exists, hence the UN. I am not being racist at all, and I am not trying to infer that you are, I just dont understand how you can judge how a large segment of an ethnic group will vote.

By and large, they will vote for the "good guys" that gave them that power, not for the "bad guys" who wanted to keep them out.

Simple enough? (No sarcasm, just that the reasoning to me seems very clear.)

Blessings,
B

 

[EliteCageFighting]

What I am saying is that a charismatic, well-spoken candidate who stands against everything upon which this country was founded has been elected to the highest office in a presently semi-free nation. He has a Congress that is of his same party and damn-close to a filibuster- and veto-proof majority in at least one house of that Congress. The present administration and some past administrations as well have set up tools such as the "Patriot Act" to allow him to name anyone he chooses as an "enemy combatant" and deny them all of our rights, including habeus corpus. We have precedent to capture and hold prisoner American citizens who have done nothing wrong, solely because of their ancestry, something out of their control. It is much more "politically correct" to do likewise to people because of a choice they've made as to how to spend their money (guns, in this case), and this slick talking empty suit that's about to take office next month has a strong record against us and our rights.

Adolf Hitler did not start throwing Jews (and others) in gas chambers and ovens on day one; rather he got himself elected to a high office, slowly built his power, whipped up his citizens against a particular group he called "dangerous" and we all know the result. The parallels between the two are striking, but considering we know the past and elected him anyway, no, I'm not saying Barack Obama is Adolf Hitler.


I think that unchecked, he's far more dangerous.

Blessings,
B

+1

 

[jeremy]

I have been sitting on the fence watching this here is my two coppers thrown in.

Just remember that if you’re committing the military you fully understand we WILL be doing what we are allowed to do under the Constitution, UCMJ, and the Laws of Land Warfare. Have a little faith in the NCOs, and Officer's of OUR military to know the right and proper thing to be done. We are professional and educated personnel. IT is not uncommon to find average soldiers who are more versed in the Constitution and the amendments than the average person on the street. We DO know what constitutes an illegal order and are trained and prepared on how to handle the situation if it would arise.

I will say again I feel a lot better knowing the military is doing this instead of one of the alphabet agencies. Would you rather this tasking hit BATFE, of how about the FBI, or the DEA? How would you feel about them having this kind of power and ability? Given a choice between the LEO and the military doing this kind of thing I'll take the military any day. Track records speak volumes between which will do the less evil.
The military has had the power and the ability to usurp this country of ours for over 200 years. Have we done that? Just remember that that sometimes there are people that are COMMITED to this place we all call home.

We do this as a choice and a love of country. We are damn sure not doing this to become Bill Gates rich.

Even the Romans understood the wolf's role in society.

 

[EliteCageFighting]

Just remember that if you’re committing the military you fully understand we WILL be doing what we are allowed to do under the Constitution, UCMJ, and the Laws of Land Warfare. Have a little faith in the NCOs, and Officer's of OUR military to know the right and proper thing to be done. We are professional and educated personnel. IT is not uncommon to find average soldiers who are more versed in the Constitution and the amendments than the average person on the street. We DO know what constitutes an illegal order and are trained and prepared on how to handle the situation if it would arise.

I was in the military, and they provide very little training in this area. Just because YOU know, doesn't mean every soldier knows. If you know what constitutes an illegal order, you'd know the military policing civilians is unconstitutional unless we are under Martial Law.

If the laws are being changed to allow this, or we are under Martial Law, then you would no longer be breaking the law and would be required to follow a lawful order whether you want to or not.

Would you rather this tasking hit BATFE, of how about the FBI, or the DEA? How would you feel about them having this kind of power and ability? Given a choice between the LEO and the military doing this kind of thing I'll take the military any day. Track records speak volumes between which will do the less evil.
The military has had the power and the ability to usurp this country of ours for over 200 years. Have we done that? Just remember that that sometimes there are people that are COMMITED to this place we all call home.

How about "None of the above"? If you are truly committed to this country, you would see what an outrage it is for you to even be thinking of policing US citizens.

We do this as a choice and a love of country. We are damn sure not doing this to become Bill Gates rich.

Again, maybe YOU aren't doing it to get rich, but some ARE doing it to get out of bad situations or lives.

Even the Romans understood the wolf's role in society.

And if you have 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, guess what they're having!

 

[03mustgt]

What I am saying is that a charismatic, well-spoken candidate who stands against everything upon which this country was founded has been elected to the highest office in a presently semi-free nation. He has a Congress that is of his same party and damn-close to a filibuster- and veto-proof majority in at least one house of that Congress. The present administration and some past administrations as well have set up tools such as the "Patriot Act" to allow him to name anyone he chooses as an "enemy combatant" and deny them all of our rights, including habeus corpus. We have precedent to capture and hold prisoner American citizens who have done nothing wrong, solely because of their ancestry, something out of their control. It is much more "politically correct" to do likewise to people because of a choice they've made as to how to spend their money (guns, in this case), and this slick talking empty suit that's about to take office next month has a strong record against us and our rights.

Adolf Hitler did not start throwing Jews (and others) in gas chambers and ovens on day one; rather he got himself elected to a high office, slowly built his power, whipped up his citizens against a particular group he called "dangerous" and we all know the result. The parallels between the two are striking, but considering we know the past and elected him anyway, no, I'm not saying Barack Obama is Adolf Hitler.


I think that unchecked, he's far more dangerous.

Blessings,
B

The beauty of our country is that there are checks and balances. Why do you think he is far more dangerous? The parallels are not striking, just you make them fit. IMO one of the only things they have in common is that they are both good public speakers.

 

[EliteCageFighting]

U.S. troops may be deployed in Arizona, Southwest U.S.

Phoenix Business Journal - by Mike Sunnucks

U.S. Defense Department plans to deploy as many 20,000 U.S. troops within the U.S. for homeland security and anti-terrorism efforts could result in a significant number being placed or having some kind of presence in Arizona and the Southwest, according to security experts.

There have been threats against the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix, the Hoover Dam on the Arizona-Nevada border as well as the Las Vegas Strip and Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). Arizona is also home to U.S. military intelligence operations at Fort Huachuca and has become a focal point with border security efforts along the Mexican border.
The Washington Post recently reported the Pentagon plans to have up 20,000 U.S. troops placed in domestic locations with the charge of responding to security matters.

Some of those troops -- which are under the U.S. Northern Command -- have already been active in Arizona, helping with security efforts along the Mexican border.

The Colorado Springs, Colo.-based Northern Command was created after 9/11 and is geared towards homeland security and civil defense within the U.S.

Civil libertarians on the left and right wonder what role the U.S. troops deployed on U.S. soil will play in security efforts and point to long-held precedents against having the military be involved in law enforcement matters.

The Northern Command has also been deployed to help with natural disasters such as hurricanes and has partnered with state national guard units, including Arizona’s, on various programs, according to Defense Department information.

“The military’s deployment within U.S. borders raises critical questions that must be answered,” said Jonathan Hafetz, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project. “What is the unit’s mission? What functions will it perform? And why was it necessary to deploy the unit rather than rely on civilian agencies and personnel and the National Guard?” asked Hafetz in a statement.

A number of security experts and others declined comment but others expect a fair number of domestically deployed troops to have a presence in the Southwest because of the Mexican border and some high-profile targets.

 

[4sarge]

Original

Als die Nazis die Kommunisten holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Kommunist. Als sie die Sozialdemokraten einsperrten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Sozialdemokrat.
Als sie die Gewerkschafter holten,
habe ich nicht protestiert;
ich war ja kein Gewerkschafter.
Als sie die Juden holten,
habe ich geschwiegen;
ich war ja kein Jude.
Als sie mich holten,
gab es keinen mehr, der protestieren konnte.

Translation

When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews,
I remained silent;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qokaikEvkt0&feature=related"]YouTube - First They Came For... Trailer[/ame]

 

[Bill of Rights]

I was in the military, and they provide very little training in this area. Just because YOU know, doesn't mean every soldier knows. If you know what constitutes an illegal order, you'd know the military policing civilians is unconstitutional unless we are under Martial Law.

If the laws are being changed to allow this, or we are under Martial Law, then you would no longer be breaking the law and would be required to follow a lawful order whether you want to or not.

How about "None of the above"? If you are truly committed to this country, you would see what an outrage it is for you to even be thinking of policing US citizens.

Again, maybe YOU aren't doing it to get rich, but some ARE doing it to get out of bad situations or lives.

And if you have 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, guess what they're having!

It struck me that he was saying that IF anyone has to do something like this, it is better that it be the military than one of the other alternatives.

Further, martial law or not, the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land and thus, there are still unConstitutional orders, illegal orders. Put more simply, if a military commander was to tell his troops to walk into a mall in suburban America (just a mall, no terrorist activity or any other issues ongoing that are of concern) and shoot every third person they saw to death, that would be an illegal order as well as unConstitutional. Those troops would be fully within their rights to refuse to obey that order and possibly to relieve their commander of his command. That's a pretty clear, obvious example. The more difficult ones would be violations of posse comitatus, etc. especially with the lines blurred as they have been.

03mustgt, I didn't write the original post. You can deny the points made all you like, and I'm sure you're not going to agree with me about Obama until it is far too late for you to do so. The old saying is true, I think: There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Good luck. You'll need it.

Blessings,
B

 

[Rattlesnake46319]

I notice that no one chose to flex their 'google-fu' on these videos. A little search for military+training+swansboro and this is what I got.

Marines on Main Street

Instead folks chose to strap on their tinfoil hats and start flippin'. Perhaps INGO isn't the community for me. The "tinfoil hattery to useful information" ratio seems to be heading in a direction that doesn't interest me.

 

[03mustgt]

It struck me that he was saying that IF anyone has to do something like this, it is better that it be the military than one of the other alternatives.

Further, martial law or not, the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land and thus, there are still unConstitutional orders, illegal orders. Put more simply, if a military commander was to tell his troops to walk into a mall in suburban America (just a mall, no terrorist activity or any other issues ongoing that are of concern) and shoot every third person they saw to death, that would be an illegal order as well as unConstitutional. Those troops would be fully within their rights to refuse to obey that order and possibly to relieve their commander of his command. That's a pretty clear, obvious example. The more difficult ones would be violations of posse comitatus, etc. especially with the lines blurred as they have been.

03mustgt, I didn't write the original post. You can deny the points made all you like, and I'm sure you're not going to agree with me about Obama until it is far too late for you to do so. The old saying is true, I think: There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

Good luck. You'll need it.

Blessings,
B

Blind, I actually just had my eyes checked and they said I see pretty darn good! I would say I am more realistic than blind, I will admit there is a possibility for something like this to happen, however slim it may be, it could happen. I am no Nostradamus, and i have been wrong before and will undoubtedly be wrong again, but i would like to think the safeguards put in place by our founding fathers will hold strong when we need them.

 

[techres]

I notice that no one chose to flex their 'google-fu' on these videos. A little search for military+training+swansboro and this is what I got.

Marines on Main Street

Instead folks chose to strap on their tinfoil hats and start flippin'. Perhaps INGO isn't the community for me. The "tinfoil hattery to useful information" ratio seems to be heading in a direction that doesn't interest me.

This article, which you linked, says:

Asked if residents should be concerned about the military acting as a police force, he said, "It's a new world. It's a new world." Other Marines made similar comments.

Marine officers prevented additional direct conversations with their trainees, and also prevented WorldNetDaily from talking with people who had been searched.

Contrary to their statements that the Marines searched only vehicles with the "volunteer" sign in the window, cars without the sign were observed being searched at the checkpoints -- some with small children who appeared frightened.

Where's the tin foil in that piece of news? And if they had found something illegal during an illegal search? Or if they had opened my trunk and found that my Ak does have real ammo in my mags?

Hmmm.... Don't need huge tin foil to see the inherent problems here.