Shock claim: Obama only wants military leaders who 'will fire on U.S. citizens'

reply to post by bpg131313


I think you should research the population that was affected during Katrina, Detroit and Chicago aren't much different then New Orleans. Your logic here is flawed.

he's really going for it now! Get him out!

Originally posted by snarky412

Originally posted by Tw0Sides
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

I can hardly wait till tomorrow, when an Unknown Source says Obama came from Outer Space, to eat us all.

Really, Have all you People lost your ability of Critical Thinking.

First of all, this is a conspiracy site.....

Second, this was placed in the skunk works, not breaking news, sooooo

Here is some info on the bloke making the claim..
research-china.blogspot.com.au...

reply to post by NoJoker13


I was on a team that responded to the South after Katrina. I was outside Mobile, Alabama so I didn't actually see what happened in New Orleans. I did see the devastation in the Mobile area though.

My examples of Chicago and Detroit were only that, examples. Do I honestly think those cities would be targeted? I can find no reason to suggest that they'd be more likely than any other area.

I don't believe that the US military could move on any large area in the US without uprising occurring within the zone and outside the zone in other areas. The only way I could see them being effective is in a small area (one city) that has already been disabled by lack of energy, and a lack of resources entering the city.

It's the lower ranks who will decide how this would all play out. An order is only as good as the will of the troops to carry it out. They are the ones holding the weapons. While some would act on the orders, I know that others would not. That lack of cohesion in any advancement would instantly create chaos.

All in all, I guess we'll have to wait and see how things go. We're all watching and waiting.

reply to post by bpg131313



There is no need to fret or worry.
Americans will not fire on other Americans.
Katrina casualties were looters and
people breaking the law.
We are already under martial law via EO's.

I do not know how the current military is trained, however, when I was in the Marines, the biggest thing drilled into us was about the Mali Massacre. We recruits were told, unequivocally,"if you want to question a direct order, ask for it in writing",

It's quite effective, I questioned orders I was given a few times in the Marines, so I would ask for them in writing, as to be clear of the orders intentions. Funny thing is, they never wrote them down, nor tried to force me to follow said orders.

Of course this was 35 years ago, who knows what kind of training they get now, but I seem to recall it was part of the UCMJ .


So if you ARE in the military and given orders you are not comfortable with, just ask for them to be put in writing, for "clarity's" sake , would not want to get the orders wrong and such, you would be amazed how few orders are even written down, even the legit ones..............

ETA: if a superior does not write the orders as asked, you do NOT have to follow said order that was also in the UCMJ

reply to post by TrueAmerican


I will say that mine, whose been in a LONG time (over 20 years) is putting in retirement paperwork. He might have stayed in longer, with the economy what it is, but the military isn't anything like what it used to be. A few years ago, I would have said no military would ever do such a thing. I can't say that anymore. With all the training for unspecified stateside situations, I can believe this. Put this with the number of foreign troops training on our soil, and we have reason to worry.

Originally posted by thedigirati
I do not know how the current military is trained, however, when I was in the Marines, the biggest thing drilled into us was about the Mali Massacre. We recruits were told, unequivocally,"if you want to question a direct order, ask for it in writing",

The Mali Massacre? What was the Mali Massacre?

Or do you mean the My Lai Massacre, where as many as 500 women, children, and elderly people were murdered by the men of Company C, 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment, 11th Brigade, 23rd Infantry Division on 16 Mar 1968 in South Vietnam?

Goes hand-in-hand with the NYC draft law by the democrats to confiscate guns. Only one place needs to establish precedent to spread like wildfire.

Amazing there are no criminal penalties for violating the constitution.

It's quite effective, I questioned orders I was given a few times in the Marines, so I would ask for them in writing, as to be clear of the orders intentions. Funny thing is, they never wrote them down, nor tried to force me to follow said orders.

reply to post by thedigirati

Actually, I don't believe that anywhere in the UCMJ, is there a right to request an order in writing. Section 892, which pertains the failure to obey orders is as follows:

T
92. ART. 92. FAILURE TO OBEY ORDER OR REGULATION

Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) violates or fails to obey any lawful general order or regulation;

(2) having knowledge of any other lawful order issued by any member of the armed forces, which it is his duty to obey, fails to obey the order; or

(3) is derelict in the performance of his duties;

shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


/ex]Of course, one could whether the order is lawful. Case law is quite murky, although the Nuremberg trails set a precedent about the defense that I was "only following orders", when Nazis tried that defense.
I guess if I had been in that situation, I would have tried the same tactic you used, and if it worked, then great. If not, then who knows. In times of war, they may shoot you on the spot, and even if it is not legal, you're dead.I commend you for taking the tactic you took. It worked.
In today's environment, with POTUS issuing executive orders to kill American citizens, does any such order become "lawful". This is the quandary we are in today, with POTUS issuing these executive orders at will. In less "politically correct days", we would cal such a POTUS a DICTATOR.

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by MajorKarma

 

That was a pretty good post, and one that I agree with in the main. The only part I take issue with is the notion that Lincoln ordered his troops to fire on fellow citizens. I don't know of any instance during the Civil War where that occurred, but it's entirely possible that it did happen at some point - Lincoln was no saint.

In the war itself, soldiers from the USA were fighting foreign soldiers - soldiers of the CSA. They were not US soldiers, they belonged to an entirely different country altogether, which separated and established itself with the secession and subsequent confederation of the seceeded states.

The US DID invade this foreign country, this country DID defend itself, and then was forcibly annexed into the US. There was military rule and martial law for years after that annexation, which rule was never formally ended. I know these things because I formerly lived in Military District 2 of the occupied territories. At present I believe I am in Military District 1 of the occupied territories. The civilian citizens of those territories suffered egregiously at the hands of the US military immediately after the invasion (and for years afterwards), not just the CSA soldiers.

As far as I know, the former soldiers of the CSA were all disenfranchised, none ever repatriated, and none were ever extended citizenship in the US. For example, former confederate soldiers were never allowed to vote in US elections or hold office in the occupied territories.

Something, perhaps, to keep in mind for the upcoming Civil War II.

ETA: The Emancipation Proclamation was Lincoln's attempt to write law for a foreign country, and held about as much legitimacy as Obama writing law concerning muslims in France if he were to attempt such a thing.

edit on 2013/1/23 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)

You not only have your facts wrong and must be quoting one of those re-written history books the Carnegie Foundation paid for but you have given an excellent example of doublespeak.

Union troops did shoot and kill civilians and I know this because my great grandfather twice removed said they did. He also wrote that it was very dangerous to criticize Lincoln because he imprisoned elected officials and others long after the war for disagreeing with him. Moreover the crimes against the South before, during and after the war were has horrible as any done in modern history.

Nevertheless, I am not going to get copies of letters or argue this, you and those like you always believe what they like. And this my friend comes from a Former Marine Corp Officer.

Originally posted by MajorKarma

my great grandfather twice removed ... also wrote that it was very dangerous to criticize Lincoln because he imprisoned elected officials and others long after the war for disagreeing with him.

How did Lincoln manage to imprison people who criticized him or disagreed with him LONG AFTER the war?
Lincoln died on April 15, 1965. The war ended 9 May 1965.
Did he speak from the grave or rise from the dead when criticized?

And this my friend comes from a Former Marine Corp Officer.

So? Being a former Marine Corp officer means your word should be accepted as fact?

reply to post by bpg131313


I believe your living in a pipe dreams. An attack on the American public by the government is at this point an impossibility. I suppose it's okay to discuss fantasy but not with the hook of 'reality' attached to it. I mean I realize your saying the probability of this happening is low but even discussing troops having to make a choice is lunacy. Won't happen, well unless you tell your population the other half is out to get them and steal their jobs, or that their consolidating wealth. I wonder how it worked in Nazi Germany... hmmmm.

Originally posted by 1/2 Nephilim
reply to post by nenothtu

 

If the current condition of living, this illusion of consumer based, work force driven freedom is as good as it will ever get then kill me now. I mean that in all serious, things have got to get better one day and I have to maintain faith in that or I don't see a point in continue'ing to live.

I will go to they're FEMA camp without a peep.. but when the time comes to revolt I will be alive to see it. I won't die on my doorstep, as many will, at the hands of a teenager who has been given the "authority" to dictate my freedom. I'm not a martyr and frankly all the talk of "i'll die fighting" before the fight has even begun is abit dissuading.

History is full of examples where this strategy failed. This passive attitude is why we are in trouble in the first place.

www.presidency.ucsb.edu...

As for how those imprisoned by Lincoln remained in prison after the War and I I suspect you are eluding to, After His Death, I imagine for any number of reasons Lincolns death did not change their sentence and each served out their time or as concession to Lincoln's memory, those in control continued to punish his (Lincoln) and the Federalist detractors.

I must now add some that there are some undeniable parallels that are trying their damnedest to surface between President Barrack Obama and Abraham Lincoln:
The Presidents (Lincoln and Obama) took a sworn oath of office "to preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution of the United States; this oath is a prerequisite and requirement before anyone can take the office as President and Commander and Chief of our Armed Forces.

Nevertheless;
1) Lincoln ordered the military blockade of Southern ports. This was an act of War, an Act that only Congress was empowered to authorize.
1a) The Obama Administration has threatened Texas With a No-Fly Zone over its entire state over the Anti-TSA Legislation Texas was going to pass. Needless to say, the TSA is a blatant violation of various sections of our Constitution.
2) Lincoln ordered hundreds of Northern newspapers who dared to speak out against him to be shut down. And their owners and editors were arrested for disloyalty.
2a) The Obama administration is suffocating investigative journalism and pushing censorship of Facebook and YouTube at an alarming rate through the abuse of the Espionage Act of 1917, an act more prone to be used to protect government secrecy than national security.
3) Lincoln ordered the arrest of Ohio Congressman Clement Vallandigham for the crime of speaking out against him.
3a) Obama has had served 14 US Governors with National Security Letters (NSLs) warning that if their actions in attempting to form what are called State Defense Forces are not halted they will face “immediate” arrest for the crime of treason.
4) Ex parte Merryman, Lincoln suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus.
4a) Obama signed and enacted the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) which suspends all Constitutional Rights of Citizens including Habeas Corpus.
5) Lincoln sent Union troops door to door in areas of Maryland, a Union state, to confiscate weapons.
5a) Even now Obama is working hard on a plan that will result in having troops and/or law enforcement enter homes of private citizens to confiscate firearms. This is already happening under various legalized maneuvers by law enforcement and none should forget what Bush did after Hurricane Katrina.
6) The Lincoln administration allowed the taking of private property for public use without just compensation or due process of law.
6a) Obama has embraced, continued and expanded upon the United Nation Goals of Agenda 21 and the use of Imminent Domain, the RICO Act, Northwest Land Confiscation Act and now is maneuvering to sign the "Law of the Sea Treaty" which would give up US Sovereignty over its Seaways to the United Nations; some will point out that the LOST was defeated but you may be sure Obama and those with him are preparing for their next attempt at getting it enacted.
Since dead Union soldiers were stacking up like cordwood, they started burying them in Lee's yard. There were so many Union soldiers graves here, this was to become Arlington National Cemetery.
7) The Lincoln Administration routinely used water torture against the thousands of Union prisoners arrested and jailed without trail. This treatment was clearly "Cruel and unusual punishment".
7a) Obama has continued the Bush Administration Policies, including but not limited to the "Torture of Prisoners" and now with the "NDAA Bill" they can take you, torture you and kill you without trial or every even admitting they know anything about what happened to you behind the guise of "National Security". The Criminals have legalized their criminality.
8) Lincoln was Commander-in-Chief of an Army whose invasion of the South resulted in the deaths of 50,000 Southern Civilians.
8a)While Obama has not officially declared War on the American People (yet), the DEA and AFTA have murdered innocent civilians in the pursuit of their agendas. Meanwhile, in Iraq, Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern Countries innocent civilians have and continue to be murdered and now they are doing it by remote control using drones.

I could in fact make a much longer list of parallels between Obama and Lincoln, and I could get into the actions of the TSA and other Government Agencies which are both Unconstitutional, Treasonous and an utter violation of the Oath of Office take by Obama, all elected officials and Federal Employees; I could go into what is apparent that the Obama and the Federal Government are preparing for with their TSA, Police Check Points, Gun Grabbing and Registration efforts, Imploding of our Dollar and Run-away Spending but this is Cyber-Dust and I have ore important things to do.

Important update:

Interesting TV Interview with Garrow, the source of the story-



Helps his credibility imo.

reply to post by Urantia1111


you are right, and this is why i believe obama will either use satanic super soldiers like andy pero (montauk project) or foreign troops.

If you fear your military, you should. They are well trained, well armed, and battle hardened. However, before you question who they would be loyal to:
Google the demographic make up of the Military. Race, Religion, Social backgrounds, and economic backgrounds. That will let you know what kind of people are in the military.

They will obey the officers and civilian leaders appointed over them.
They will defend the Constitution.
And they will defend their families and homes.

Soldiers are not mindless drones. If they chose to serve our country, then they have enough love for it and her citizens to know right from wrong. That's why they do it, for them. Finally, ONLY LAWFUL orders have to be fallowed.

Originally posted by MajorKarma

You not only have your facts wrong and must be quoting one of those re-written history books the Carnegie Foundation paid for but you have given an excellent example of doublespeak.

Union troops did shoot and kill civilians and I know this because my great grandfather twice removed said they did. He also wrote that it was very dangerous to criticize Lincoln because he imprisoned elected officials and others long after the war for disagreeing with him. Moreover the crimes against the South before, during and after the war were has horrible as any done in modern history.

No, I said that I know of no instance where they shot their own citizens. It's possible that this occurred, but I don't know of it happening. I DO know of instances where they shot civilians of the CSA - but that was not their own citizens. Citizens of the CSA were citizens of a foreign nation, not the USA.

Lincoln did not live "long after the war", so I'm not sure how he went about these alleged imprisonments. I do know that Congress had a bad habit of squelching dissent for long after the war.

Crimes against the South during the war were crimes against a foreign nation. The CSA was NOT part of the US - that's sort of what Lincoln attacked them for... leaving the Union and forming their own.

Nevertheless, I am not going to get copies of letters or argue this, you and those like you always believe what they like. And this my friend comes from a Former Marine Corp Officer.

Unless you were a Marine Corps Officer during the Civil War, it's all academic now. I also had some great grandfathers participating in the war, on both sides. I think what yours said and what mine said may have had differing perspectives.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


Just a little clarification, if they can fire on American citizens, does that not mean they can shoot everyone who makes the world the what it is?(law makers, the house, Senate, the POTUS?) BUT, when people go into the military, they do take an oath to "Defend the Consitution against ALL enemies, forigen and DOMESTIC."

it sounds more like an OXYMORON if you ask me.