Obama: "Weapons of war have no place on our streets".

I think what he meant to say was that “weapons of war have no place on our streets”… in the hands of the slaves.

Well Obama *DID* say something like this..............

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

That plank in the future president's platform was quickly removed, but evidently not discarded. It seems that it was merely safely tucked away until a more opportune time.

Now we see, perhaps, then-Candidate Obama's intent re-emerging -- not through the creation of a voluntary service program, but through the co-opting of various government agencies to suppress those whom this administration perceives as enemies.

Remember Obama's Civilian National Security Force?

And many victims of this full blown authoritarian-totalitarian agenda actually voted *for* and *still* support Obama !!

The "Perfect" Posse Comitatus bypass.

Obama Civilian Security
www.youtube.com...

Our police are better armed than many countries militarys.Only occupational forces need armored vehicles imo.

I knew exactly what the thread would contain and point out before I opened it and I must say that I fully agree.

The U.S. SWAT and "law enforcement teams" makes the feared Ukrainian Berkut units comparatively look like an underfunded peasant force.

Does it seem strange to anybody that a large number of these vehicles have "rescue" printed onto the side whilst their sole job is likely the complete polar opposite?

- good to hear you american boys still have a sense of humour eh then?

I won't disagree with the slight hypocrisy of Obama's statement, but a lot of this equipment has a legitimate and historically justified purposes.

When you have a such a large population of individuals, with incredibly high densities and you ask a comparatively small force to police them, you make up for the numerical disadvantage by being better equipped.

Now this numerical disadvantage isn't always the case, but their current policies on equipment does allow them to be effective when the situation requires it.

I saw a lot of pictures of officers in protective gears wielding clubs, yes with some weapons, but remind me last time the US occupied a foreign country with melee weapons alone?

I see a lot of standard issue equipment that has some modern flare to it, though the tracked tanks do seem a bit excessive

Just to conclude, I am not defending OBama's statement, just pointing out that the comparison illustrated is a bit unfair.

I'm really starting to think that this bloke just makes crap up to piss people off. If he's talking hardware, then he is an outright liar and/or oblivious to reality.

If he's talking software, then he must have had a blonde moment and forgotten about the constant overuse of Propaganda within mainstream media to sway public opinion (not just US either).

Typical POTUS patsy, just like those who came before him - your office is a global joke.

originally posted by: MDDoxs
When you have a such a large population of individuals, with incredibly high densities and you ask a comparatively small force to police them, you make up for the numerical disadvantage by being better equipped.

Especially true when they start handing out gold stars.

Too much of this "problem" rests at the feet of state and local officials. Yes ... the Feds should have known better than to transfer weapons of "war" to the states ... but the state could have said, "No tanks ... err ... uhhh ... thanks."

You can see in those photos that the cops have become a paramalitary force. What do you think they're afraid of?

When it gets down to the jiggy ... and lines of communication are cut ... a lot of people are going to die. They're going to be Americans who forgot the responsibilities of citizenship.

I think this is a result of your gun loving mentality, the cops also want the latest, biggest guns too. If i was a police officer in America, I would also want to be in cursing in an armored truck, wearing the latest body armor knowing that there are a large number of lunatics with high powered assault rifles and crates of ammunition they all bought on the internet or their local toy shop.

A pathetic hypocrite or madman?

Many know what I choose.

The only reason he Doesn't want weapons of war on the streets is because when the war starts in the streets he knows that he is in for a spanking from the people. His private army will be outnumbered, outgunned.

I can not even put into words how much I Despise this pitiful excuse for a human being.

Peace

a reply to: Snarl

ever notice how the heaviest armed police are usually around when you have leftist protesters?

I had this pointed out to me once, and I can't help but recognize it whenever I see it.

originally posted by: MDDoxs
I won't disagree with the slight hypocrisy of Obama's statement, but a lot of this equipment has a legitimate and historically justified purposes.

When you have a such a large population of individuals, with incredibly high densities and you ask a comparatively small force to police them, you make up for the numerical disadvantage by being better equipped.

Now this numerical disadvantage isn't always the case, but their current policies on equipment does allow them to be effective when the situation requires it.

I saw a lot of pictures of officers in protective gears wielding clubs, yes with some weapons, but remind me last time the US occupied a foreign country with melee weapons alone?

I see a lot of standard issue equipment that has some modern flare to it, though the tracked tanks do seem a bit excessive

Just to conclude, I am not defending OBama's statement, just pointing out that the comparison illustrated is a bit unfair.

You are right, it is unfair, it is unfair to run military hardware in the urban environ.

It is unfair for the police to run around by the hundreds pointing loaded "assault weapons" at unarmed civies.

It is unfair for them to put every single civie around them in danger so they can pretent to be soldiers.

It is unfair for those that couldnt make it, or didnt have the balls to join the military to play soldier against the American public.

You are absolutely right, it is entirely unfair.

Well...If you wanna intimidate your enemy you got to look intimidating...they succeed in that.

Then the questions just is...Who is the enemy?

originally posted by: NonsensicalUserName
a reply to: Snarl

ever notice how the heaviest armed police are usually around when you have leftist protesters?

I had this pointed out to me once, and I can't help but recognize it whenever I see it.

So have I, I have never seen the occupy response to the tea party gatherings.


I think I know the reason though, the left do many extreme things, thinking their ends justify any means. The right purchase their permits in advance, show up park neatly, speak with respect and clean up their own trash and take it with them when they leave.

Ever seen the difference between the before and after picks of a lefty rally and a righty rally?

It is a stark difference.

a reply to: MDDoxs

I know that both terrorists and mass murderers are stepping up their gear but you need to look at this "historically"

I won't disagree with the slight hypocrisy of Obama's statement, but a lot of this equipment has a legitimate and historically justified purposes.

As you say, then you will see that these people plan, they know what the police has to use against them and they will exploit their weaknesses to give them an advantage. They choose places which are undefended and have the longest police reaction times and try to make sure that they do what they set out to by having the right equipment and means to do so.

I think that alot of shootings and attacks would have ended exactly the same had the police had military grade weapons and equipment - the main way to stop an incident of this nature is either to make sure it doesn't happen in the first place or to make sure that you are there immediately to stop them - I don't think that this hardware helps achieve either of these goals.

I don't want to list incidents off of the top of my head but I suggest you recall some if you wish and think of the difference that this equipment could have made over the difference that a faster reaction time and better prevention rate would make.

Do hope the cops realize that in an all out battle real soldiers avoid being too near armor,they are bullet magnets.

" Obama said. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Isn't that what the National Guard once was,before a certian president made them a part of the Armed forces? I seem to remember that they were refered to as citizen soldiers. Now they are used as if they are regular army.

a reply to: oblvion

eh; I think you might be right about that in some sense; certainly seems like most right-wing protests are better organized in some ways. Left-wing protests are mostly started by students and young-activist types, who are more likely to be radicals.

see right-wing protests in greece and europe, younger protesters have more energy to take radical action.

though there is an interesting take I found online:

ordinary-gentlemen.com...

originally posted by: NonsensicalUserName
a reply to: oblvion

eh; I think you might be right about that in some sense; certainly seems like most right-wing protests are better organized in some ways. Left-wing protests are mostly started by students and young-activist types, who are more likely to be radicals.

see right-wing protests in greece and europe, younger protesters have more energy to take radical action.

In America we have a very long tradition where the young are usually more to the left, and the older are more to the right.

Churchill best sums it up in this quote, "if you're a liberal when you are 20, you have no heart, if you are a liberal at 30 you have no brains."

So I guess that makes a lot of sense in that context.

As the young are full of piss and vinegar, and the more experienced have already raged against the machine, and learned the lessons that come from experience.

Very good point.

a reply to: gladtobehere

Welllllllllllllllll, arrogant, warmongering, genocidal, globalist stooge . . . pathological Narcissist-in-Chief, Destroyer-in-Chief, Pathological-Liar-In-Chief . . .

a major bit of compliance against that

would be for you to keep your evil looking mug off the streets!

If there was ever a Nobel Price for Hypocrisy, he could certainly win it hands down--wellllll, except for Hillary.