Is this the way Hitlers Germany startes out

Discussion in 'News Articles' started by zaraster, Oct 1, 2008.

  1. zaraster

    zaraster Member

    167
    0
    16
    Mar 19, 2008
    Ennis
    By Chuck Baldwin
    October 1, 2008
    NewsWithViews.com

    According to the Army Times (dated Tuesday, September 30, 2008), "Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT [Brigade Combat Team] will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks."

    The article continued by saying, "But this new mission marks the first time an active unit has been given a dedicated assignment to NorthCom, a joint command established in 2002 to provide command and control for federal homeland defense efforts and coordinate defense support of civil authorities.

    "After 1st BCT finishes its dwell-time mission, expectations are that another, as yet unnamed, active-duty brigade will take over and that the mission will be a permanent one."

    The Times column also reported that the Army brigade "may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control . . ." It seems that the Army's new domestic duties also include "traffic control" as well as subduing "unruly or dangerous individuals."

    The brigade will be known for the next year as a Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF (pronounced "sea-smurf").

    I am assuming that the planners and promoters of this newfound function for the Army brigade envision the Army assisting local first responders in dealing with natural emergencies such as hurricanes, earthquakes, and the like. Good intentions notwithstanding, to assign domestic police duties to the U.S. military is extremely disturbing.

    To understand my concern for this new "homeland Army brigade," it is important that we rehearse the principles of liberty as they relate to standing armies.

    One of America's most sacred principles has always been that the U.S. military was never to be used for domestic law enforcement. The fear of standing armies ran very deep in the hearts and minds of America's founders. The tyranny and misery inflicted upon the colonies by British troops weighed heavily upon those who drafted our Constitution and Bill of Rights. In their minds, the American people would never again be subjected to the heavy weight of army boots. Furthermore, they insisted that America would have a civilian--not military--government.

    And after the fiasco of the abuse of federal troops in the South following the War Between the States, the doctrine of Posse Comitatus was enacted into law. The Wikipedia online encyclopedia says this about Posse Comitatus:

    "The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services ... from exercising nominally state law enforcement police or peace officer powers that maintain 'law and order' on non-federal property. . . .

    "The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. . . .

    "The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act substantially limit the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement."

    The Posse Comitatus Act was passed in 1878 and was universally accepted as being a very just--and extremely important--law of the land.




    But in 2006, President George W. Bush pushed a Republican-controlled Congress to pass the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, which included a section titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies." This section provided that "The President may employ the armed forces to restore public order in any State of the United States the President determines...." In effect, this bill obliterated Posse Comitatus.

    When the Democrat-controlled Congress passed the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, however, the restrictions of Posse Comitatus were restored. But when President Bush signed the Act into law, he attached a signing statement (Executive Order) indicating that the Executive Branch did not feel bound by the changes enacted by the repeal. Translated: President Bush wiped out Posse Comitatus by Executive Order.

    Now, just a few months after expunging Posse Comitatus, President Bush has authorized an Army brigade to be assigned the new role of dealing exclusively with domestic law enforcement and related duties. This evokes serious questions.

    Who will give the order to send U.S. troops against American civilians, and under what circumstances? What will the rules of engagement be? How will "unruly" and "dangerous" be defined? How will soldiers be asked to deal with "crowd" or "traffic" control? And perhaps the biggest question is, Once we begin to go down this road, where will it lead?

    For several years, the federal government has been accumulating to itself more and more authority that was historically understood to reside within the states and local communities. More and more, our police departments have taken on the image and tactics of the armed forces. And to a greater and greater degree, the rights and liberties of the American people are being sacrificed on the altar of "national security." It seems to me that to now ascribe law enforcement duties to the U.S. Army only serves to augment the argument that America is fast approaching police state status.

    If Hurricane Katrina is the template that our federal government is using as a model for future events, Heaven help us! Do readers remember how National Guard troops were used to confiscate the personal firearms of isolated and vulnerable civilians shortly after that hurricane devastated the New Orleans area? Do you remember how representatives of the federal government were calling upon pastors and ministers to act as spokesmen for gun confiscation? Is this what the new Army brigade is preparing for? And do President Bush and his military planners envision an even broader role for military troops on American soil?

    Add to the above rumors of thousands of plastic caskets--along with thousands of portable prison cells--being shipped and stored across the country, and one is left to ask, Exactly what is it that our federal government is planning?

    I think there is an even bigger question, What exactly will members of our armed forces do if and when they are commanded to seize Americans' firearms, arrest them at gun point, or even fire upon them? How many soldiers and Marines love liberty and constitutional government enough to resist such orders, should they be given? And how many officers would resist issuing such orders?

    Remember, it is the job of the armed forces to kill people and blow up things, not to do police work. Then again, Presidential administrations from both major parties have been using the U.S. military as U.N. "peacekeepers" for decades now. So, was all of this preparation for what is yet to take place in the United States?

    God forbid that any of the above should actually take place in our beloved land, but I believe it would be naïve to not see that the actions and attitudes of the federal government over the past several years do nothing to assuage such fears.
     


  2. Leper

    Leper Active Member

    731
    0
    36
    Sep 28, 2008
    More in a long list of scary stuff that threatens our freedoms.
     
  3. wildcat

    wildcat Member

    67
    0
    6
    May 3, 2008
    After WWII, we asked the Germans why they did not oppose the Hitler regime dragging their country down---Soon, after the USA becomes a cesspool, other countries will be asking the same question to our survivors. What will our answer be?
     
  4. zembonez

    zembonez TGT Addict

    4,765
    0
    36
    Feb 22, 2008
    Republic of Texas
    It's not as far fetched as we might like to hope for. Our society is in a state of decay and apparently, the majority of our population is willing to sit on their dead asses and wait for the government to "save" them. It's unbelievable how stupid our population has become since the 1960s.
     
  5. oldguy

    oldguy Well-Known

    1,787
    0
    36
    Mar 6, 2008
    Certainly we are moving in the direction of a rich/poor society, illegal immigration (slave labor) outsourcing,loss of manufacturing, poor trade deals, nation building, we are bleeding money to other countries much of the money under the new bail out bill will go out of the USA..., I'm 65+ and never seen such corruption in our corporations and government we are as a nation in deep trouble and I'm concerned what it will require to pull us out will not be pretty.:banghead:
     
  6. Major Woody

    Major Woody Active Member

    568
    0
    36
    Sep 12, 2008
    Good read. Those people sitting on their a$$es think the govt will save them. Well, off to the camps where they work to eat. I have talked to some LEO's and military and most will not do that. But Cheney's army of Balckwater and Wackenhut and other "contractors" may. I will have to treat those people as an armed robber trying to take my property that I have a God given right to possess. I would rather die than go to the camps because once you are in shackles, it will be a lucerfierian nightmare. How the Jews hated themselves for not fighting back as they burned in the furnaces. KLBJ 93.7 FM - Austin's Rock EntryID=102450 watch Rep Brad Sherman on C-Span.
     
  7. SIG_Fiend

    SIG_Fiend Administrator TGT Supporter Admin

    7,262
    15
    38
    Feb 21, 2008
    Austin, TX

    Private security contractors have garnered a somewhat undeserved reputation of being "private armies" that serve no purpose except their own financial gain. True, there have been some greedy individuals that have done some unethical things in their positions within certain PSC organizations, however that isn't necessarily indicative of the policy of the entire company. The real problem is that the demand for experienced and professional people to fill specialized roles (diplomatic security, etc)....basically the demand out there in the sandbox is far exceeding the "supply". The special ops groups out there and specialized agencies tasked with dealing with such tasks (DSS for example), they are a select few individuals however there aren't nearly enough to handle all the tasks out there. Blackwater has garnered much ill-deserved reputation. While I have no doubt there were probably a few unscrupulous individuals within that company that cut costs to maximize profit, at the expense of contractor safety, at the same time the entire company isn't to blame. One interesting thing to note is that their founder, Eric Prince, has every Blackwater recruit sign an oath to PROTECT the United States Constitution (that's what I've heard anyways). In my opinion that is not indicative of someone that is looking to subvert anyone's rights.

    The need for private security contractors? Many people can't understand the "need". In the case of Iraq, we are talking about a country that we've sent only as much as ~140,000 troops to.......to control a country populated by over 29 MILLION........a country who's size (169,000sq. mi) is larger than the state of California (163,000sq. mi) of which CA's population is ~36 million. Now imagine trying to control a population of 36+ million with just 140,000 men, and in a state the size of California even during peace time. A daunting task by itself. Then take thousands of the population, stir the pot with jihad against America, some IED's, RPG's and mortars for good measure, and then imagine how difficult the task may be. Couple that with the fact that there are likely less than 10-15,000 specialized personnel in country (that's my best guesstimate) to handle all of the serious tasks like diplomatic security. BTW, the DSS which is involved in diplomatic security in many cases, they only have approximately 1400+ agents, and that is to cover anyone in the WORLD they might be tasked to cover, and not just Iraq or Afghanistan.

    Basically what I'm getting at is that when it comes to PSC's, things aren't so black and white. I don't doubt there is corruption in some of these organizations, however they aren't all bad and aren't all out to do nothing except subvert our constitutional rights. Don't fall into the generalization "trap" that the libs use to justify their illogical positions on most situations. Don't get me wrong, I'm always on the lookout and ever vigilant in keeping my eyes out for those that may try to subvert my freedom, however all PSC's aren't "bad" as the media has conditioned us to believe. The good ones out there are simply paying these highly skilled and experienced individuals commensurate to their abilities to perform specialized tasks.
     
  8. Texas1911

    Texas1911 TGT Addict

    May 29, 2017
    Austin, TX
    The Jews didn't know to fight back, and those that did often met the inevitable fate. The depths of which the Germans went to mask their intentions, and the lack of situational awareness amongst the selected peoples, combined to form the situation we are all aware of. Most people could not fathom the inhumanity of the Holocaust.

    Much to the same manner in that no one can fathom anything happening to US superiority and US citizen rights.
     

Share This Page