This is an email I wrote, expanding on my thought process of this morning. If you know anyone who is in law enforcement at any level, or anyone in the military, or anyone who knows anyone in these communities, please forward it to them. It may make a difference.
In this email I am going to describe a problem, and propose a solution.
This email
is 4 pages printed, but will take most less than five minutes (plus
whatever time you spend reading links). The highlights are underlined
or in bold (or both).
This email
is 4 pages printed, but will take most less than five minutes (plus
whatever time you spend reading links). The highlights are underlined
or in bold (or both).
The
problem is very simple: our system of checks and balances with respect
to domestic use of force by the national government seems to be eroding.
Obama seems to have built what amounts to a private army, and has
signaled that he is prepared to ignore the law on numerous occasions.
problem is very simple: our system of checks and balances with respect
to domestic use of force by the national government seems to be eroding.
Obama seems to have built what amounts to a private army, and has
signaled that he is prepared to ignore the law on numerous occasions.
The solution is simple as well: relevant agencies need to decide in advance not to cooperate with him (or any of his successors).
I will suggest several very
specific and simple policy guidelines at the end, which I will underline
to make scanning this email easier for those in a hurry.
I will suggest several very
specific and simple policy guidelines at the end, which I will underline
to make scanning this email easier for those in a hurry.
As
you may have recently read, the Department of Homeland Security, and
various Federal agencies that are neither directly law enforcement nor
military have been on a
buying binge.
According to best guesses, in the last 12 months or so some 1.6 BILLION
rounds of ammunition have been bought, much of it hollow point. Hollow
point, to be clear, is not used for target practice, since it shoots the
same as standard ammunition,
but costs more.
you may have recently read, the Department of Homeland Security, and
various Federal agencies that are neither directly law enforcement nor
military have been on a
buying binge.
According to best guesses, in the last 12 months or so some 1.6 BILLION
rounds of ammunition have been bought, much of it hollow point. Hollow
point, to be clear, is not used for target practice, since it shoots the
same as standard ammunition,
but costs more.
The
National Weather Service bought 46,000 rounds of hollow point
ammunition. The Social Security Administration bought 174,000 .357
magnum rounds. This is all—or was—public
record.
National Weather Service bought 46,000 rounds of hollow point
ammunition. The Social Security Administration bought 174,000 .357
magnum rounds. This is all—or was—public
record.
The DHS has been buying
weapons grade explosives,
bullet proof checkpoints, 7,000 military grade fully automatic .223
rifles (presumably some combination of M-4’s and M-16’s), over 2,700 of
the same
mine resistant armored vehicles
used for counter-insurgency in Iraq, and specially requisitioned
targets showing pregnant women, elderly women, and children. The
targets were manufactured for them, to their specifications. Take my
word on the rest of
it, but look at
this link.
weapons grade explosives,
bullet proof checkpoints, 7,000 military grade fully automatic .223
rifles (presumably some combination of M-4’s and M-16’s), over 2,700 of
the same
mine resistant armored vehicles
used for counter-insurgency in Iraq, and specially requisitioned
targets showing pregnant women, elderly women, and children. The
targets were manufactured for them, to their specifications. Take my
word on the rest of
it, but look at
this link.
This should worry us.
Consider
the phrase many of us grew up with: “Call out the National Guard”. The
go-to agency in any civil unrest, any disaster, was first and foremost
the National Guard,
which was designed very explicitly to be under the control of the
Governor of each State. Let us grant that the threat of civil unrest is
sufficient to warrant extensive preparation. It is unclear why that
would be the case, but let’s grant it. Why is that
money, those bullets, and all this preparation going to the Department
of Homeland Security?
the phrase many of us grew up with: “Call out the National Guard”. The
go-to agency in any civil unrest, any disaster, was first and foremost
the National Guard,
which was designed very explicitly to be under the control of the
Governor of each State. Let us grant that the threat of civil unrest is
sufficient to warrant extensive preparation. It is unclear why that
would be the case, but let’s grant it. Why is that
money, those bullets, and all this preparation going to the Department
of Homeland Security?
Obama
said in 2008 he wanted a private army. This is very much like what a private army would look like.
said in 2008 he wanted a private army. This is very much like what a private army would look like.
Now, I would like you to watch
this video,
showing just how far even normal Law Enforcement can go, either under
stress, or direct order. What it shows, if you did not watch it, is
ordinary sheriff’s deputies physically abusing an
old lady who refused to surrender her gun. It shows mass confiscations
of weapons from law abiding citizens.
this video,
showing just how far even normal Law Enforcement can go, either under
stress, or direct order. What it shows, if you did not watch it, is
ordinary sheriff’s deputies physically abusing an
old lady who refused to surrender her gun. It shows mass confiscations
of weapons from law abiding citizens.
At the
risk of stating the obvious, if you take guns away from law abiding
citizens, you make the risk of crime and disorder larger; you make your
job harder; you make the
situation more dangerous, not less. You take away allies, and create
enemies, all while abusing your authority and the rule of law.
risk of stating the obvious, if you take guns away from law abiding
citizens, you make the risk of crime and disorder larger; you make your
job harder; you make the
situation more dangerous, not less. You take away allies, and create
enemies, all while abusing your authority and the rule of law.
I
support Law Enforcement. I know most of them are honest, conscientious,
and want to do the right thing. I also have seen firsthand how, under
the stress of completely
new situations, conflicting instructions, and a feeling of being
overwhelmed, they can become obsessed with control to the exclusion of
all else, including use of force policies, and even the law. The same
applies for our military.
support Law Enforcement. I know most of them are honest, conscientious,
and want to do the right thing. I also have seen firsthand how, under
the stress of completely
new situations, conflicting instructions, and a feeling of being
overwhelmed, they can become obsessed with control to the exclusion of
all else, including use of force policies, and even the law. The same
applies for our military.
Please read through the following paragraph. I will document my claim at the end.
The Army, as best we can determine, has built what it terms “resettlement” camps, which are surrounded by barbed wire, and has made detailed contingency plans for dealing with non-compliant prisoners within them.
They seem plainly to be intended for American citizens, since the
relevant protocols reference both detaining civilians, and getting
Social Security Numbers.
The Army, as best we can determine, has built what it terms “resettlement” camps, which are surrounded by barbed wire, and has made detailed contingency plans for dealing with non-compliant prisoners within them.
They seem plainly to be intended for American citizens, since the
relevant protocols reference both detaining civilians, and getting
Social Security Numbers.
The document outlining the running and outfitting of these camps is an Army document, and can be read
here. A short video detailing the more salient contents can be viewed
here. I have vetted this as well as I can, and it appears both to be an official document, and one taken seriously at high levels.
Here is more discussion, if you like. Snopes apparently won’t touch it.
here. A short video detailing the more salient contents can be viewed
here. I have vetted this as well as I can, and it appears both to be an official document, and one taken seriously at high levels.
Here is more discussion, if you like. Snopes apparently won’t touch it.
Student
of history know that freedom has been rarely earned and rarely
retained. They know that internal relocation has been a very common
means of attaining complete political
control of a nation. It disrupts communal living and production
patterns, and delivers a citizenry entirely dependent on the State. The
modern “concentration camp” was invented by Lenin, and copied by
Hitler. Bill Ayers and his Weathermen dreamed of an
extensive system of camps that would have looked pretty much EXACTLY
like this (where they figured millions would have to die).
of history know that freedom has been rarely earned and rarely
retained. They know that internal relocation has been a very common
means of attaining complete political
control of a nation. It disrupts communal living and production
patterns, and delivers a citizenry entirely dependent on the State. The
modern “concentration camp” was invented by Lenin, and copied by
Hitler. Bill Ayers and his Weathermen dreamed of an
extensive system of camps that would have looked pretty much EXACTLY
like this (where they figured millions would have to die).
Students
of Barack Obama know one thing with certainty: virtually nothing in the
life story detailed in his books can be verified. What we do know is
that Frank Marshall
Davis was, on Obama’s own account, an important mentor in his youth,
and that Davis was a lifelong, card-carrying Communist who dreamed of
fomenting what he would have called a “revolution”, and the rest of us a
coup d’etat.
of Barack Obama know one thing with certainty: virtually nothing in the
life story detailed in his books can be verified. What we do know is
that Frank Marshall
Davis was, on Obama’s own account, an important mentor in his youth,
and that Davis was a lifelong, card-carrying Communist who dreamed of
fomenting what he would have called a “revolution”, and the rest of us a
coup d’etat.
We know
that Obama has surrounded himself with radicals all his life. All
Communists want to end liberal government. They view it simply as a
phase on the global march to
a global tyranny they, with characteristic duplicity, call “freedom”.
All Communists want tyranny, fear, and an economic wasteland. It is a
creed of pure hatred, as seen EVERYWHERE it has been implemented. Many
times I have talked with people who grew up
in Communist nations, and the look of pain that covered their faces
when I asked about the government told me everything I needed to know.
that Obama has surrounded himself with radicals all his life. All
Communists want to end liberal government. They view it simply as a
phase on the global march to
a global tyranny they, with characteristic duplicity, call “freedom”.
All Communists want tyranny, fear, and an economic wasteland. It is a
creed of pure hatred, as seen EVERYWHERE it has been implemented. Many
times I have talked with people who grew up
in Communist nations, and the look of pain that covered their faces
when I asked about the government told me everything I needed to know.
We
are at a point where it is quite reasonable for intelligent men and
women to consider that Obama has in fact taken action in the direction
of overturning the rule of
law in this nation.
Consider his recent proclamation, issued through his chosen orator Eric
Holder, that he has the right to order the murder of an American on
American soil, without
asking anyone’s permission. This is unprecedented in American
history.
are at a point where it is quite reasonable for intelligent men and
women to consider that Obama has in fact taken action in the direction
of overturning the rule of
law in this nation.
Consider his recent proclamation, issued through his chosen orator Eric
Holder, that he has the right to order the murder of an American on
American soil, without
asking anyone’s permission. This is unprecedented in American
history.
There
is something distancing about a drone strike. For those involved, it
likely feels more like a video game. You don’t hear the explosion, or
feel it, or smell it. But
has Obama not in principle said he can order someone’s throat slit, or
someone pushed in front of a moving train, or thrown from a helicopter?
Is there a difference in principle between killing someone you could
have arrested, and arresting them then killing
them? If so, it’s two shades of the same gray.
is something distancing about a drone strike. For those involved, it
likely feels more like a video game. You don’t hear the explosion, or
feel it, or smell it. But
has Obama not in principle said he can order someone’s throat slit, or
someone pushed in front of a moving train, or thrown from a helicopter?
Is there a difference in principle between killing someone you could
have arrested, and arresting them then killing
them? If so, it’s two shades of the same gray.
Here is
my proposed solution: all military—Active, Reserve, and National
Guard—and all Law Enforcement—City, County, State, and Federal—need to
adopt two core principles they
will not violate:
my proposed solution: all military—Active, Reserve, and National
Guard—and all Law Enforcement—City, County, State, and Federal—need to
adopt two core principles they
will not violate:
1)
Refuse to carry out forcible relocations.
If you have to “save” people against
their will, then either you weren’t saving them, or their freedom was
worth more to them than their lives, which should be their choice.
Simple policies could be deployed for those who refuse “assistance” in
the event of a disaster; for instance, a standardized
statement could be read to them summarizing the possible cost of their
decision. An example would be: “ I understand you to be saying that you
are denying transportation and relocation. We can neither guarantee
your safety, or any response at all should
your situation become critical. Given this, do you grant that you
accept these terms as a condition of refusing relocation?”
Refuse to carry out forcible relocations.
If you have to “save” people against
their will, then either you weren’t saving them, or their freedom was
worth more to them than their lives, which should be their choice.
Simple policies could be deployed for those who refuse “assistance” in
the event of a disaster; for instance, a standardized
statement could be read to them summarizing the possible cost of their
decision. An example would be: “ I understand you to be saying that you
are denying transportation and relocation. We can neither guarantee
your safety, or any response at all should
your situation become critical. Given this, do you grant that you
accept these terms as a condition of refusing relocation?”
All the camps in the world won’t do any good if people can neither be forced nor tricked into going in to them.
2)
Refuse to carry out gun confiscations.
The Second Amendment is quite clear
in taking it as a core postulate that the government cannot be
everywhere all the time, and that the final line of defense is with the
individual, and his or her own prior preparation. This is PARTICULARLY
true in times of crisis. We all saw both looting
and the effective use of firearms for defense of life and property as
recently as Hurricane Sandy.
Refuse to carry out gun confiscations.
The Second Amendment is quite clear
in taking it as a core postulate that the government cannot be
everywhere all the time, and that the final line of defense is with the
individual, and his or her own prior preparation. This is PARTICULARLY
true in times of crisis. We all saw both looting
and the effective use of firearms for defense of life and property as
recently as Hurricane Sandy.
Even
though they have been done, gun confiscations are clearly illegal, and
should be treated as such, REGARDLESS of any claimed authority on the
part any Federal or
State agency.
though they have been done, gun confiscations are clearly illegal, and
should be treated as such, REGARDLESS of any claimed authority on the
part any Federal or
State agency.
To this I would add a possible third provision, which is that all DHS units, and all military units called in to help
with whatever disaster someone created–and which caused the mass panic/chaos–should answer to the Governors of the States where they are operating, not the Federal Government. Our system is very clear in drawing these lines, with good reason.
with whatever disaster someone created–and which caused the mass panic/chaos–should answer to the Governors of the States where they are operating, not the Federal Government. Our system is very clear in drawing these lines, with good reason.
National
Guard units can be “Federalized”. I would submit that even though I am
aware of no precedent for it, that Federal units can be “State-ized.”
Federal units refusing
to comply would be unwelcome, and potentially refused entry by National
Guard units, and defecting regular military.
Guard units can be “Federalized”. I would submit that even though I am
aware of no precedent for it, that Federal units can be “State-ized.”
Federal units refusing
to comply would be unwelcome, and potentially refused entry by National
Guard units, and defecting regular military.
Most
Americans value our system. They value our freedom. Even those who
continue to vote Democrat (or turn a blind eye to Republican
encroachments on the Constitution) assume
that since we have been free for 200 years, that it is inevitable that
we will remain free, and that these issues do not matter. They are
complacent. Historically, complacency has often led to disaster. Let
that not be our fate.
Americans value our system. They value our freedom. Even those who
continue to vote Democrat (or turn a blind eye to Republican
encroachments on the Constitution) assume
that since we have been free for 200 years, that it is inevitable that
we will remain free, and that these issues do not matter. They are
complacent. Historically, complacency has often led to disaster. Let
that not be our fate.
Please
forward this particularly to friends and acquaintances who are in the
military or law enforcement communities, and generally to anyone else
you feel may have an
interest.
There is no need to sign anything. This is not a petition. I just
want the people who might be involved to decide in advance who they are,
and what their proper roles
are. Even a substantial uncertainty on the part of Obama and those
around him about the loyalty of our troops to an unConstitutional agenda
may be enough to protect us. 7,000 assault rifles is a lot for an
agency not tasked with law enforcement, but it’s
not a lot compared to the arsenal wielded by the American people.
forward this particularly to friends and acquaintances who are in the
military or law enforcement communities, and generally to anyone else
you feel may have an
interest.
There is no need to sign anything. This is not a petition. I just
want the people who might be involved to decide in advance who they are,
and what their proper roles
are. Even a substantial uncertainty on the part of Obama and those
around him about the loyalty of our troops to an unConstitutional agenda
may be enough to protect us. 7,000 assault rifles is a lot for an
agency not tasked with law enforcement, but it’s
not a lot compared to the arsenal wielded by the American people.
There
is nothing foreordained about our future, for good or ill. We are
creating it NOW with what we choose to do, and choose not to do.
is nothing foreordained about our future, for good or ill. We are
creating it NOW with what we choose to do, and choose not to do.