Notice: This website may or may not use or set cookies used by Google Ad-sense or other third party companies. If you do not wish to have cookies downloaded to your computer, please disable cookie use in your browser. Thank You.

Friday, August 24, 2012

Is The Army Preparing for an Internal Conspiracy?

I think I am at least on the fringe of Govenment Conspriacy thinking - meaning I am not pre-disposed to see conspiracies in every shadow.  While many of my friends read "Malicious Government intent" into about any news report, I tend to think that most of the information needed to make a proper analysis is missing in most cases, other words, we are only seeing one side of the story.   Having said that, the story below, sent to me by a friend, worries me.

Army colonel ignites firestorm with article on crushing a 'tea party insurgency'


A retired U.S. Army colonel who now teaches modern warfare to soldiers at the University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. has co-written an article with a Civil War expert that has ignited a firestorm today among those increasingly concerned about what some say is a distinct anti-civilian tone that has infected much of the military and Homeland Security since 2009.

Retired Col. Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber, Associate Professor of History at the University of Kansas, co-wrote an article for Small Wars Journal on a 2010 Army report titled, "U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 - 2028." The report describes how the Army will respond to threats "at home and abroad" in the coming two decades and in doing so has made clear that a monumental cultural shift has occurred in the thinking of those at the top levels of military command.

This shift has some government watchdogs worried, particularly given that Benson is using the platform provided at Fort Leavenworth to educate military personnel in his vision of the nature of modern warfare in America.

According to the vision articulated by Benson, future warfare will be conducted on our own soil. The military will use its full force against our own citizens. The enemy will be average citizens whose values resonate with those articulated by the tea party.

The fictitious scenario used in the Army report as a teaching tool is a future insurrection of "tea party activists" in South Carolina.

As the scenario goes, the tea party group stages a takeover of the town of Darlington, S.C. The mayor is placed under house arrest and prevented from exercising his duties. The police chief, the county sheriff, and other law enforcement officials are removed from office and told not to interfere. The city council is dissolved.

The governor of the state, who had previously expressed solidarity with tea party goals, does little to address the situation. A news conference is called by the new town leaders, all tea party activists, who tell the media that due to the failure of central government to address the concerns of the citizens, the Declaration of Independence has been re-imposed and the local government has been declared null and void.

From the report: When the leaders of the group hold a press conference to announce their goals, they invoke the Declaration of Independence and argue that the current form of the federal government is not deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed” but is actually “destructive to these ends.”

Therefore, they say, the people can alter or abolish the existing government and replace it with another that, in the words of the Declaration, “shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups.

Several items of interest are to be noted in the scenario the Army uses to describe the tea party activists -- "right wing," "extremists," "insurrectionists," all of whom are lumped together with militias and organizations that are considered "racist" and "anti-immigration."

By contrast, those who oppose the tea party are referred to as "mainstream." The obvious question that arises is why would this sort of scenario, with its obviously biased and skewed portrayals, be presented as a teaching tool to military personnel? Why would the U.S. military consider the tea party to be "extremist" or "insurrectionist?" And why would the tea party be classified together with groups that are "racist, "anti-immigration," and "extremist right wing?"

In the numerous tea party rallies that have occurred across the nation no racism was noted by any observer. Speakers included persons of all races and ethnic backgrounds. No sentiment was expressed against legal immigration but outrage was directed toward those break the law and enter the country by illegal means.

And the charge that the tea party is extremist right wing is difficult to justify given that the main thrust of the movement is the protest against runaway government spending that has placed the nation on the brink of economic ruin due to its enormous and unsustainable debt.

Yet repeatedly since the election of Barack Obama in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has referred to the tea party as "potential homegrown terrorists." Why? Not a shred of evidence remotely suggests that the tea party has any connection whatsoever with terrorists.

Yet some of President Obama's closet longtime friends have not only been associated with terrorism but actively participated in it, such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who as members of the Weathermen from the 1960s and 70s bombed federal buildings that resulted in the deaths of police officers. But if one listens to the rhetoric emanating from the White House, DHS, and now the U.S. military, one gets the impression that none of the president's friends ever posed a threat to the country but hundreds of thousands of tea party activists are ticking time bombs lying in wait to unleash a nuke on an American city at the drop of a hat.

The brainwashing against conservatives by this administration has had a definite impact on the military. One analyst who works for retired U.S. Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely told this reporter that now over half of Pentagon personnel are solidly in Obama's corner and share his values and world view. And with the publication of the Benson and Weber article, it is now clear that the U.S. Army considers it a valid proposition to assume that a future civil war will be sparked not by extremist Islamists with dirty bombs or left wing insurrectionists inspired by Alinsky or Ayers but by the tea party and the conservatives who participate in it.

UrbanMan's comments:  I'm sorry if the political bent in the last part of the article offends any readers.   I did reach out of a few people I know within DoD and DHS and ask them their opinions.  Some of the opinions I am not going to post due to their velmency, however there was a general consensus that while none of them had direct knowledge of the Army preparing for internal insurgencies, several expressed opinions that this train of thought (and preparation) was plausible within today's Army leadership.  

One opinion, in particulary, said that this scenario would most likely pit the National Guard against the regular Army as the National Guard is geographical oriented and therefore loyal to a population center and would have very little patience for martial law effecting their families.  And that for this reason the regular Army would be the action arm for any operations within the U.S. with the National Guard deployed far from their local areas.  But he also said that the National Guard is pretty worn out from continued combat deployments. He continued that indicators of Army intentions would be a reduction of the National Guard's combat capabilities (read funding) and changes in the chains of command.

I sincerely hope this Examiner article is just a case of an Army Officer thinking way outside the box, but then again why does anyone think there is a chance of an American insurgency?  What would spark this?  Why would anyone even think the Army could be used against other Americans?


  1. Back in the 90's a Naval Officer was caught travellingb around to combat units, supposedly for his masters thesis, asking questions such as is it wrong to put US troops directly under UN command. The last question was if the US banned private ownership of firearms, and certain groups held out, would you open fire on US citizens. When this was exposed, he backtracked, but could not explain why he was on official orders, and traveling with official sanction, which he wouldn't be doing to complete his education, especially traveling cross branches ie. Army, and Marine bases.

  2. I get a very sick and saddening feeling when I think about this, and out of my moral fiber, I reject this dastardly pernicious influence which is lurking in the darkness. [It would seem] We are all under assault, in one way or another, by those traitors whom would send our own kin to the slaughter house, but whom would cower behind their own power to preserve their hegemony over US, the free people, all while swinging the axe of violence and manipulation to destroy our people and to separate us via blind fear and pain. Make no mistake and do not be fooled by propaganda, We AMERICANS, do not seek war or destruction, but rather we yearn for peace and prosperity. But how can this come about when we are conspired upon by the very institutions we set up to aid us in our pursuit for happiness? How can we stomach the betrayal of our trust and faith in OUR public servants? How can we accept the outright lies and misdirections regarding the events that have unfolded, the constant unnatural terror which is force fed to us, and the black flag operations that are covertly waged over our minds? Do we truly live in the same country our forefathers built? Or do we have something else wielding power over our lives? Is this a Constitutional Republic? Or has this governance become something else, something far more deleterious to our natural inclination for personal liberty and freedom? What choices do we have to build a better world for our offspring?
    I know that in my heart, I will do what is right, what is just, what is pure in intent so as to protect my family against tyranny and repression. I guess the question for all free peoples reading this is, to what extent will we go to preserve a free future? I do not think the current course will lead us to such prosperity. I pray that I am wrong, that this hiccup in the American Experiment is righted, like a capsized vessel, and that we can recover our original bearings while we navigate these treacherous waters.
    God Bless these United States of America.

    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not traitor, he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared."
    - Cicero, 42 B.C.

  3. Very well stated there comes a time when we as a nation of people.Must come together and say enough is enough,and if nesscessary. Take back what our founding FATHERS intended for us as nation of people. STARTING FIRST WITH LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THEN WASHINGTON.WE THE PEOPLE MAKE A NATION OR BREAK IT. ITS OUR SONS AND DAUGTHERS WHO SHED THEIR BLOOD FOR OUR NATION.AND THOSE IN WASHINGTON DONT CARE BUT PROFIT FROM IT. ENOUGH SAID FOR NOW.

  4. Maybe I'm on the outside looking in here, or the inside looking out... I am similar with this type of scenario training. The names here really don't matter for training purposes. It could be called the Coffee Party. But they do chose names that seem plausible. And yes, if a bunch of tea baggers took over my town, arrested my mayor and sacked the police force, I'd load up every gun I have with a couple buddies and a pickup truck and round the little nut bags up. Army wouldn't have to worry about a thing!

    HOORAH - Armed Liberals!

  5. Considering that in Afghanistan they're a step above cavemen, and can beat both the Russians and Americans with improvised explosives and 50 year old AK's while borrowing their neighbors bullets. I think that American citizens can beat any military force on our own turf. We have more guns and ammo in America than every country combined. I would almost feel sorry for any army that tries to suppress or invade American citizens.

    1. I hate to say this, and don't take it wrong, but as a group Americans are soft and weak both physically and mentally. In the Middle East, and Asia they still taste the weather, and a large portion still labor outside, most Americans go from climate controlled home to climate controlled car to climate controlled office/work location. I work outside most of the year, but almost all of my social circle is indoor bred, and raised. We are as a country\culture accustomed to at least 3 good meals a day, regular rest, long leasure time, and driving from point A to point B, where we will wait while someone emppties their cart, and loads the kids while we block traffic to get that closer parking space. Yes we are well armed, but most of us couldn't run 3 mile if we had to, and would probabily stroke out if we needed to move by foot more than 10 miles in one day. I maintain a slightly higher fitness level due to a ongoing reserve commitment, but am the exception not the rule
      RANT OFF.

  6. BlueHost is ultimately one of the best web-hosting provider with plans for any hosting requirements.