Cookies

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.
Showing posts with label martial law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label martial law. Show all posts

Thursday, January 23, 2014

Collapse Scenario: A Civil War or World War Three?

Would You Prefer a Civil War or World War Three? This is the question from Dave Hodges on International Forecaster, who wrote this thought provoking article.  I still think it is much more likely for the collapse to be caused from economic conditions and if severe enough will cause societal breakdown and a possible military response by the government for control, especially of population centers and resource centers, but Dave Hodges gives us some things to ponder, even if they are so terrible in nature.   

This is what Dave say's:   America is on a collision course with a brutal civil war. We can argue if the coming civil war will be conventional or guerrilla. However, many of us feel that we have reached the point of no return and that civil strife is unavoidable. A political solution to our multiple issues would have been my preferred choice, but that ship sailed a long time ago. I know that the cognitive dissonance crowd will not believe this, however, nobody from that mindset can answer the most important question in the debate based upon the present circumstances: If a civil war was not inevitable, then explain how the military and this administration are going to get past the fact that this “false flag” President has fired over 200+ military command officers?

And there is a second important question: Why have 14 state governors restructured their respective state military organizations so that they are not under the control of Obama?

A Military Rebellion Is Unavoidable

Whenever 200+ leaders of any organization are fired in a short period of time, the person doing the firing has formed a group which opposes them. These military leaders had great influence and close ties over those that they have commanded. Obama just did not fire over 200+ military commanders, he alienated, tens if not hundreds of thousands of military personnel who based their professional loyalty to their military commanders and they will resist their foreign born Commander-In-Chief as a result of this betrayal of trust.

This is not a question of some of us in the media who desire for this happen. We have no say in the matter. And father time is defeating many of us, as several of us are too old to fight and too fat to run! It is not up to us as these conditions, which are ripe for a civil war, were forced upon our nation by Obama and his handlers.

Some Questions for the Fence-Sitting Sheep

Do you not think the executive officers under the command of the fired military leaders understood the issues behind the firing of their commanding officers? Was not the entire command structure in Afghanistan alienated from Obama when McChrystal was fired, largely over rules of engagement? Do you not think that all service personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan understand that this buffoon of a President increases their chances of not coming home alive, because of Obama’s treasonous rules of engagement which endangers American soldiers?

Do you not think that if many of us in the alternative media can find evidence of a massive Russian troop buildup, including the presence of Russian heavy equipment on our soil, that the military is not already resentful of the fact that they have to wet nurse these future martial law enforcing troops and that they are from a nation that has repeatedly threatened to nuke America in the past 15 months? Do you think our military commanders are looking forward to the participation of Chinese and Russian soldiers in the upcoming RIMPAC war games?

Do you not think that the upper echelon of the military is not scared to death that in a time of civil unrest, or civil war, that we have 200,000 troops, stationed in foreign countries, who will not likely get home? Do you think the Generals in the Pentagon do not know the commanders in Afghanistan, or Iraq? Do you not think there are not close personal relationships in and among our military leaders stationed around the world and there is not an overall awareness in the military that the President is playing for the other side? Do you sheep really believe that the next time our noncommissioned officers send another young American home in a body bag because of the President’s rules of engagement, that the resentment towards this administration does not grow exponentially? Do you not think that present active duty personnel do not hear from their veteran friends who have come back home, that the Obama administration now refers to veterans, in DHS documents, as domestic terrorists and that Obama is going after their guns because he fears them?

If we can find out about Obama’s fake birth certificate and his anti-American sentiment, do you not think that our troops have not learned these lessons a long time ago? Most American military commanders are loyal to each other and have been trained to risk their lives on behalf of their fellow soldiers. Why do you think that when someone from the executive branch flies into Afghanistan, that the troops must be disarmed because of previous shooting incidents?

Does anyone really believe that our military enjoys sleeping with the enemy? And who do you think they blame? After considering all of these facts, do you sheep still believe that it will not take much provocation to get the troops to act against the modern day KGB in America (i.e. DHS)? Hell, even Ray Charles could see this is fertile breeding ground for a civil war! If this was Stalinist Russia, these military officers would have been shot in the back of the head. Fortunately for these 200+ deposed military commanders, our modern communications system would make it impossible for Obama to purge the military in the same manner as Stalin did without incurring the ire of an entire nation.

However, the end result is the same. The military is being purged because it will not act against the American people and you can take that to the bank. The best we can hope for in the present set of circumstances, is a military coup and that, my friends, never ends well and I lose sleep over this possibility. If we do not change course, our greatest fears will be realized because the sides are already drawn and it will not be long until all hell breaks loose across our country.

An Epic Struggle Is Taking Shape

In one corner, we have the DHS led federal agencies accompanied by their muscle; the Chinese, the Russians and the Canadians. If this group prevails in the upcoming struggle, Mao will have to forfeit his title as the most murderous dictator in world history. There are members of the NWO who do not want two stones left together in this country. They want as many of us to die as possible (see the Georgia Guide Stones). They want to leave no trail of the traditional American notions of freedom and independence because these notions are a formidable roadblock to the lethal scientific dictatorship being installed on this planet. Americans are in the crosshairs of history.

American Christians will soon become the most hunted game on the planet because we represent freedom, autonomy and obedience to God’s laws and not blind obedience to the dictates of genocidal leaders. In our corner, the other corner, we have a large segment of the American military and some of the American citizenry, largely veterans,who will oppose the attempts to finalize the tyranny being installed across the planet. This is an all-stakes, winner-take-all battle. Soon, even the sheep are going to be forced to choose sides.

No Pleasant Alternatives

The coming conflict will not have a good outcome no matter who wins. If the military and the American citizens prevail, all we will likely accomplish is to replace one brutal dictatorship with another. If the other side wins, there is nowhere that will be safe.

All of us will become, by definition, an endangered species. Fourteen Governors Have Acquired Some Temporary Courage Against Tyranny I have previously written that I have recently spoken with a high ranking military officer who was fired because he would not help DHS to completely control a fully integrated state-to-state national guard organization. He was unwilling to voluntarily hand the keys to the car to a communist such as Obama whom he perceived as someone who was dedicated to the destruction of this country. This officer’s resolve was shocking, but now I understand why. In retrospect, he was lucky that he was only fired.

Why has DHS armed to the teeth? The answer is simple, Obama is facing opposition to not only his failed policies like Obamacare and he is facing the possibility of organized military resistance at the state level in several locations. There is presently an armed uprising directed at him by the select governors of 14 different states and that number is continuing to grow. To the previous point I raised as to why Obama is moving to nationalize the National Guard Forces, the answer is simple. Fourteen governors are militarily organizing against Obama. States such as Alabama, Georgia, Kansas, Minnesota, Tennessee, Virginia, Louisiana and South Carolina, are saying no to the increasing level of tyranny. These state military entities have been structured in such a way that they cannot become federalized. This is highly significant because the vast amount of federal/DHS resources used to federalize local police forces is now being undermined in these 14 states.

Obama Is Not Just Facing An Armed Rebellion From the Military

Fourteen state governors have reestablished State Defense Forces which includes any and all militias and the national guard. The authority over these troops does not rest with the President and he is furious. Obviously, these 14 governors are talking and planning amongst each other because their actions are so uniform and have happened in such a narrow time frame, that their actions are clearly an act of insubordination to Obama. In 14 states, the 10th Amendment still has life. These actions by the 14 governors are one short step away from armed rebellion. I am confident that any and all attempts on the part of the Hessian troops on American soil to move against dissident Americans and to enforce martial law will be militarily opposed in these 14 states. When will 14 governors militarily opposed to Obama become 30, become 40?

I cannot overstate how significant this development is. We are “One shot heard around the world” from all hell breaking lose.

Conclusion

It is clear that the peoples’ closest elected representatives have had enough of this criminal organization as have our military. All citizens in the 36 states who are not militarily rising up against Obama, need to demand the same actions from their respective governors. Obama cannot act against a nation that is unified against him. However, this does mean that the bankers will push for WWIII to bring about their desired result if an internal takeover of America cannot be accomplished.

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

What Will The Coming Civil Unrest Look Like

What Will The Coming Civil Unrest Look Like, written by Dave Hodges on the Common Sense Show, 30 November 2013.  This is a good read.  We are know instinctively and intellectually that something bad is coming be it an economic collapse, some type of societal breakdown fueled by inflation,......or externally caused by being drawn into a world wide war or hit by terrorist organizations or even terrorist states.  We live in dangerous times.  I feel very bad for families with small children - they are most at risk, yet they are the hope for the future but will need help, good fortune and God's grace to survive.   Teach your young ones well. Not just to survive but to be good citizens with values and morals.  Without further ado, Mr. Hodges article:

According to a survey conducted by the Adelphi University Center for Health Innovation, 55 percent of Americans believe that the government will come to their rescue when the proverbial poop hits the fan because your big brother really cares. Literally, every alternative media outlet could show conclusive proof that an EMP was going to wipe out the power grid. We could conclusively prove that nuclear bombs were going off in 39 American cities in the most horrific false flag attack in world history and it would not make any difference to 55% of all Americans because of their cognitive dissonance.

In Part One of this series, I detailed how the present administration, through Executive Order 13603, is positioning itself to impose martial law and subsequently control all food and food production. Part One further pointed out that despots use the control of food, and subsequent starvation of millions, as a means to subjugate an unruly population.

The United States is staring at an economic collapse in the face with its $17 trillion dollar deficit, $238 trillion dollars of unfunded mandates (e.g. social security, Medicare, etc.) and a one quadrillion dollar derivatives debt in which the governments of the world are being forced to assume in the form of the “bailouts”. Even if Obama and his bankster puppet masters never had any intention of executing a false flag event in order to put this country into martial law in order to fully complete the coup d’état that is already underway, a crash is coming. The banks are going to collapse, the people will riot, there will be food shortages, whether they be planned or unplanned. I do, however, believe that food will undoubtedly be used to control the unruly masses, despite the DHS and their new found friends in the Chinese and Russian armies which are on our soil.

Are you prepared? At the bottom of this article, I will visually demonstrate to the reader with real time examples of human behavior in groups, how each of us is going to be in very grave danger when the collapse comes. But first, let’s analyze America’s present level of individual and collective preparedness.

How Prepared Is America?

Last year, the Adelphi University research center tells us that 53% of all Americans do not have a three day supply of nonperishable food and water in their homes. FEMA and DHS are not about serving the needs of the American people; These agencies are about preserving the status quo of the powers that be. But don’t try and tell that to 55% of the citizens of this country.

Most Likely Causes of a Societal Breakdown

As the TV show by the same name, there are literally a 1,000 ways to die. The following six events represent some of the most likely events which would mortally wound our society.

1. World War III

2. False flag attack as a result of a series of nuclear explosions

3. False flag attack as a result of a chemical and biological attack

4. EMP attack

5. Military coup resulting in civil war

6. Economic collapse

America’s Level of Preparedness

A brief summation of the Adelphi study reveals the following:

44 percent don’t have first-aid kits

48 percent lack emergency supplies

53 percent do not have a minimum three-day supply of nonperishable food and water at home

55 percent believe local authorities will come to their rescue if disaster strikes

This means that 56% of those with first-aid kits, 52% of those with emergency supplies, and 47% of those who have more than three days worth of water, will be victimized by those who have not properly planned. Please allow me to put this into a real number for you. Over 130 million teenagers and adults will be in the streets seeking to obtain life-sustaining resources in a very short time following the disaster event. This is a train wreck starting to happen.

Time Frame for Societal Breakdown

Those that would be fortunate enough to survive the initial event, or series of events, would face the following timetable of events.

In the first one to two days, all shelves would be emptied of food, water, guns and medical supplies. There will be no resupply as nothing will be shipped.

On the beginning of the third day, individuals will be in the streets scavenging for anything they can find that will keep themselves and their families alive. If there is a loss of power, many will die as a result of exposure to the elements.

By the fifth day, desperate people will organize into collectives (i.e. gangs) and will go house to house looking for stored supplies from the half that has somewhat prepared. Neighborhoods will begin to organize themselves into local vigilante groups for protection from local gangs who have become desperate. This is the day that many of the police walked off the job in New Orleans in order to protect their families. Groups of police could become the most dangerous groups in society.

In the days that follow, nobody can be trusted. There will be people who will dress up in official looking uniforms (e.g. military, national guard, police) in order to gain entry into a fortified home.

The game changing event will be a civil war. Not only will you have to deal with marauding hordes of resource deficient people, you could also be caught in the crossfire between two, or more warring armies.

Casualty Rates

1. World War III. The casualty estimates dating back to the 1960′s and 1970′s related to an all-out nuclear war was placed at 150 million Americans or at 80-85%.

2. False flag attack as a result of a series of nuclear explosions. The casualty rate is indeterminable and would depend of the number of cities involved and their relative populations and the size and placement of the nuclear device. Generally speaking, one nuclear device in a city the size of Phoenix would kill 20,000 to 100,000 people. Many more would die in the upcoming weeks due to the effects of radiation.

3. False flag attack as a result of a chemical and biological attack. The casualty rates are indeterminable.

4. EMP attack. The Naval War College tells us that within two years of a power grid take down, that 90% of us would be dead.

5. Military coup resulting in civil war. The casualty rates of war as well as civilians victimizing each other would be impossible to calculate. Conservative estimates would place the rate at 5% to 25%.

6. Economic collapse. It is impossible to exactly determine. I think a safe bet would place this event in the category of an EMP attack in which the effects would only be felt for a month. The government would be able to establish order following a brutal crackdown. However, in our weakened state, we would be inviting an invasion. A civil war could break out as well.

What Will the Riots Look Like?

NORTHCOM, DHS, FEMA and the Russians have all practiced on quelling domestic disturbances and conducting gun confiscation. Even the elite have gathered their own private armies in preparation for the same civil unrest.

Unfortunately, DHS is not releasing any videos which demonstrate the severity of the civilian uprising that they are practicing for. However, we do have some Black Friday drills which exemplify how crazy it will get in the first few hours of a societal breakdown.

This article contained a You Tube video about people acting like animals during a Black Friday pre-Christmas sales shopping spree and was included to make the argument that if people will act like animals with depraved indifference towards the welfare of their fellow human beings in the first few minutes of a Black Friday sale, what will they do when it comes to food, water and guns?



Conclusion

At minimum, there is an economic collapse in our near future with the massive debt which is unsustainable. The presence of the NDAA and EO 13603 speaks to the government’s plans to deal forcefully with any disturbances. The preparation by DHS is unmistakable with its acquisition of over two billion rounds of ammunition and 2700 armored personnel carriers. And when we see foreign troops (e.g. the Russians and the Chinese), we should all be gravely concerned.

To the 55% who are clueless, take out an insurance policy and begin to store food, water guns and ammunition. To everyone else, who has at least some idea of what is going on, begin to reach out to your neighbors because you will need the additional safety that numbers can bring.

Friday, November 1, 2013

Purging the Military In Preparation for Martial Law?

I have not been one to see a conspiracy behind every bush. But when there is an unprecedented firing of senior military officers, AND, people from my old life telling me that they believe a purge of non-loyalist military officers is a deliberate plan to setup the military with loyalist commanders who will have no problem with the suspension of the Constitution or implementing martial law inside the United States,...well, I sit up and take notice. The first part of this post is from The Blaze, listing the senior Military Officers that have been fired or forced to retire, be it for legitimate or illegitimate reasons, who knows for sure.

Nine senior commanding generals have been fired by the Obama administration this year, leading to speculation by active and retired members of the military that a purge of its commanders is underway.

Retired generals and current senior commanders that have spoken with TheBlaze say the administration is not only purging the military of commanders they don’t agree with, but is striking fear in the hearts of those still serving.

The timing comes as the five branches of the U.S. armed forces are reducing staff due to budget cuts, and as U.S. troops are expected to withdraw from Afghanistan next year.

“I think they’re using the opportunity of the shrinkage of the military to get rid of people that don’t agree with them or not tow the party line. Remember, as (former White House chief of staff) Rahm Emanuel said, never waste a crisis,” a senior retired general told TheBlaze on the condition of anonymity because he still provide services to the government and fears possible retribution.

“Even as a retired general, it’s still possible for the administration to make life miserable for us. If we’re working with the government or have contracts, they can just rip that out from under us,” he said.

Retired U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely, an outspoken critic of the Obama administration, said the White House fails to take action or investigate its own, but finds it easy to fire military commanders “who have given their lives for their country.”

“Obama will not purge a civilian or political appointee because they have bought into Obama’s ideology,” Vallely said. “The White House protects their own. That’s why they stalled on the investigation into fast and furious, Benghazi and Obamacare. He’s intentionally weakening and gutting our military, Pentagon and reducing us as a superpower, and anyone in the ranks who disagrees or speaks out is being purged.”

A Pentagon official who asked to remain nameless because they were not authorized to speak on the matter said even “young officers, down through the ranks have been told not to talk about Obama or the politics of the White House. They are purging everyone and if you want to keep your job — just keep your mouth shut.

The Nine Military Commanders Fired This Year by the Obama Administration

Gen. Carter Ham, Army. Served as head of the United States African Command during the bloodshed in Benghazi, Libya when four American citizens, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens and two retired Navy Seals, were murdered by militants on Sept. 11, 2012. Senior military officials told TheBlaze Hamm was extremely critical of the Obama administration, including when reinforcements were not sent to help the U.S. citizens under attack in Benghazi. Hamm “resigned and retired” in April 2013.

Rear Adm. Charles Gaouette, Navy. Commander of Carrier Strike Group Three. He recently served as deputy commander of the U.S. Naval Forces, U.S. Central Command. He was in charge of Air Craft Carriers in the Mediterranean Sea the night of the Benghazi assault on Sept. 11, 2012. Under testimony, he told Congress there may not have been time to get the flight crews to Benghazi, but left the door open when he told Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) under cross-examination that he could have launched aircraft to the destination. He was later accused of using profanity in a public setting and making at least two racially insensitive comments. While he was cleared of any criminal violations under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he still faced administrative penalties that have ended his career.

Maj. Gen. Ralph Baker, Army. Major General Baker served as commander of the Joint Task Force-Horn at Camp Lamar in Djibouti, Africa. According to several military officials who spoke to TheBlaze, he was also involved in some aspect with the Benghazi incident Sept. 11, 2012. He was relieved of command and fired for allegedly groping a civilian, but no assault charges or sexual misconduct charges were filed with military JAG officials.

Brigadier Gen. Bryan Roberts, Army. General Roberts took command of Fort Jackson in 2011. He was considered a rising star in his field and served in Iraq during his service as the commanding officer of the 2nd Brigade Combat Team. He was the deputy commanding general of the United States Army Recruiting Command at Fort Knox, Ky. He was relieved of duty and fired for adultery — still on the books in the United States Code of Military Justice but rarely since President Bill Clinton’s indiscretions.

Maj. Gen. Gregg A. Sturdevant, Marine Corps. Director of Strategic Planning and Policy for the U.S. Pacific Command and commander of the aviation wing at Camp Bastion, Afghanistan. He was a highly-decorated Marine with two Naval and Marine Commendations, two Naval and Marine Good Conduct medals, as well as the Air Medal with a gold star. He was one of two commanding officers suddenly relieved of command and fired from the military for failure to use proper force protection at the camp after 15 Taliban fighters attacked Camp Bastion on Sept. 14, 2012, resulting in the deaths of Lt. Col. Christopher K. Raible, 40, and Sgt. Bradley W. Atwell, 27.

Maj. Gen. Charles M.M. Gurganus, Marine Corps. Regional commander in the Southwest and I Marine Expeditionary Force in Afghanistan. Highly decorated with a Defense Superior Service Medal, two Legion of Merit with Valor, and three Meritorious Service Commendations. According to several military officials, Gurganus questioned having to use Afghan security patrols alongside American patrols after two officers were executed at their desk and a platoon was lead into an ambush on the front lines.

Lt. Gen. David Holmes Huntoon Jr, Army. Served as the 58th Superintendent of the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. He graduated from the same academy in 1973 and had served in Senior Planning and Education Services through the majority of his career. He was “censored” for “an investigation” into an “improper relationship” according to the Department of Defense. Nothing was released to the nature of the improper relationship. Nothing was even mentioned if an actual investigation even took place.

Vice Adm. Tim Giardina, Navy. Deputy Commander of the United States Strategic Command. He was commander of the Submarine Group Trident, Submarine Group 9 and Submarine Group 10, where every single one of the 18 Nuclear Submarines with Nuclear Trident Missiles of those three groups were in his command. This commander earned six Legions of Merit, Two Meritorious Service Medals, two Joint Service Commendation Medals, and several other medals and ribbons. He is under criminal investigation for the alleged use of counterfeit gambling chips, while playing a poker game at a western Iowa casino.

Major Gen. Michael Carey, Air Force. Commander 20th Air Force in charge of 9,600 people and 450 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles at three operational wings and served in both Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Carry was fired October 11, 2013, for “personal misbehavior,” according to ABC News. Pentagon and Air Force senior officials have remained relatively tight-lipped about Carry’s firing.

The Second article is from Selwyn Duke, by way of an old friend of mine. The title is: Is Obama Creating a Martial-law-ready Military?

What kind of leader wants a military more loyal to himself than to the rule of law?

And why?

These are two questions to ponder when considering the strange happenings in the armed forces since Barack Obama took office.

Let's start with a hypothetical. Let's say you were a hard-left-wing commander in chief who wanted the military firmly in your corner. You'd certainly note that our armed forces have been a bastion of conservatism and Christian faith, and you'd know that its members generally weren't very fond of you. So how would you go about changing this?

Some years ago I met a very young, all-American looking white fellow who had just exited the military. His reason was that he hadn't been advanced the way he believed he should have been, and he wasn't going to remain in the armed forces if it provided no future. Now, one interpretation here is that he was a millennial with an inflated opinion of himself (he didn't strike me that way, though). Yet there is another interpretation.

The Obama administration has given affirmative action in the military a dose of steroids, promoting minorities and women -- and, I believe, homosexuals and lesbians -- at the expense of white men. By the way, is this yet another reason why Obama wanted homosexuals to be able to serve openly? After all, you can't target them for special treatment if you don't know who they are.

But the point is this: if I were that hypothetical hard-left-wing leader, I'd know that one way to change the military's political climate is the same way you do it in the nation at large.

Demographic manipulation.

White men generally vote Republican, white military men even more so, and white military men who are practicing Christians, well, that's a recipe for a left-behind left. Minorities, women, atheists and the LGBT* crowd, however, are reliable liberal constituencies. So what would I do if I were that hard leftist?

I'd create a military climate friendly toward groups that are my constituencies and hostile toward those that aren't.

And I'd do more than subordinate white men to other groups in the promotion process. I'd clamp down on Christian expression -- which had often been robust in the military -- and punish servicemen who transgressed against my separation-of-church-and-everything policy. I'd let the world know that as far as homosexuality goes, the armed services are open for monkey business. I'd also force military personnel to be politically correct not just about sexuality, but also Islam, so that they were confronted with the choice of saying things they don't believe or career damage. After all, good people might rather leave the service than live a lie. And I'd issue instructional materials characterizing traditionalists as a threat, so that the low-information servicemen may believe it and the more savvy would feel further alienated.

The goal here is to create a situation in which traditionalists will be encouraged to leave the military or not enlist in the first place. Of course, this method can't bleed out all the red-blooded, but it can shift the balance. It can ensure a few things:

• The number of leftist fellow travelers in the armed forces will be as great as possible.

• As many of the rest as possible will be apolitical, mind-numbed types who wouldn't question unconstitutional orders.

• The remaining traditionalists would be outnumbered by the first two groups and in a don't ask-don't tell predicament. And having been denied promotions, they'd have little institutional power.

At the same time that I was transforming the body, I'd also have to gain control of the head. To this end I would look to replace as many generals as possible with those I believed would do my bidding. For once I owned the military head, body and soul, I could really dream that impossible dream.

Anyway, that's what I would do were I that hypothetical hard-left-wing leader.

Incidentally, they're all things Barack Obama has already done.

As for the generals, note that the two-star general who oversaw our arsenal of intercontinental missiles, Major General Michael Carey, was just fired, becoming "the latest in a string of recent high-profile firings of top U.S. generals," as Reuters puts it. Talk-show-host Michael Savage discussed this on his Friday program and was very suspicious about the Air Force's reluctance to provide a reason for canning the man who oversaw our nuclear weapons -- the service only said that the general was terminated for undisclosed "personal misbehavior." As for me, I'll just repeat my opening questions:

What kind of leader wants a military more loyal to himself than to the rule of law?

And why?

Whatever your conclusions, there is of course a mundane explanation for all of this. Leftists truly believe in their insane diversity dogma and quite reflexively try to socially re-engineer whatever they can sink their claws into, be they universities, neighborhoods, businesses or even the entities charged with protecting their compassionate selves. And in this age of increasing corruption and decadence, it wouldn't be surprising to find generals transgressing against military code. Yet given that Barack Obama is a shadowy figure with a penchant for hiding his past (college records, etc.); that he has had avowed communists in his administration (Van Jones, Anita Dunn); that he seemed to belong to Chicago's socialist New Party in the 1990s; and that, according to former Occidental College acquaintance and ex-Marxist John Drew, Obama was a flat-out "Marxist Leninist" who believed in old-style communist revolution, well, one's imagination can conjure up some interesting scenarios.

Saturday, October 19, 2013

Is the Possibility of Martial Law Now Higher?

I was forwarded another article for comment with a reader asking, "Is the possibility of Martial Law now higher since these and other allegations have came out?"

The article he sent me is an article written by Nancy Smith (see bio at end of this post) who interviewed a writer concerning allegations of the military is being re-configured to conduct operations inside the U.S., and Generals who were being forced to retire if they could not pass a litmus test on readiness to kill Americans, presumably during martial law.

This may be too far out of touch with reality for some people to accept, me included, however I am now being more open minded as recent things such as the potential shut down of our economy (and government) and calls by some legislators such as buffoon turned Congresswomen turned buffoon Shirley Jackson Lee calling for the President to implement martial law. Her idea was to get the military to attack the anti-obama demonstrations, like the veterans demonstration at the World War II memorial after the shameful shutdown of this open air monument. And there is the precedent of the Executive Office using the IRS to go after political enemies.......Plus another thread is new reports on the US Army teaching classes on the radical extremist and political hate groups which included Christian and Family oriented groups.

So I'll post Ms Smith's article and let everyone decide for themselves.

If the government does default the national debt, which would be a perception not a numbers based standard accounting practices reality, what would happen if the Stock Market tanked? What is welfare cards could not charged with federal money and 46 million people could not buy groceries?......

Nancy Smith's article, titled: "Nobel Peace Prize Nominee Jim Garrow: Our Generations’ Paul Revere?"

It’s not like Jim Garrow was looking for the job. But that didn’t stop a retired U.S General from calling him at 5 in the morning a few weeks ago with some ominous news that the General wanted to get out the public, but who also knew he would literally risk his life if he went public with a startling allegation.

The allegation: The president of the United States is asking active-duty officers to pass a “litmus test” to continue their service to our country.

The test: Will you open fire on American citizens if so ordered?

We’ve all seen the headlines lately regarding gun control legislation, shooting rampages and now drone strikes on American citizens. To say it can all become a bit disconcerting would surely be an understatement.

However this news takes the danger to a whole new level. As a long-time friend of the General, Jim Garrow agreed to spread the word, as well as promised to keep the General’s name secret. Since he first posted the info on his Facebook page on January 20, 2013, the story went viral and was picked more than 100 news agencies including: FOX News 19 in Cincinnati-Ben Swann, Operation Freedom Show-Dr. Dave Janda, Next New Network-Gary Franchi, The Examiner, World Net Daily, Alex Jones, and Before It’s News, just to name a few.

One of those news outlets is now Politichicks, because I recently had the honor of interviewing Dr. Garrow via telephone from his home in Canada.

So just who is Jim Garrow?

James Garrow, PhD. is an educator, businessman and author. He has been a college president, a principal of a teachers college, has an earned doctorate degree as well as been given an honorary doctorate from North Carolina College of Theology. He is also the founder of the Bethune Institute, which operates hundreds of schools throughout China. The children of many of China’s top elite in the military and politics attend his schools.

As if that weren’t enough, three years ago Dr. Garrow was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work through a group called Pink Pagoda Girls. PPG combats female gendercide by rescuing baby girls that are slated for infanticide or abandoned due to the Chinese government’s one child policy. According to his website, Garrow and his group have personally helped to save the lives of nearly 50,000 baby girls!

It Started With A Magazine. What led Dr. Garrow to make such an ominous statement began a number a years ago when Dr. Garrow sat on the board of Crisis Magazine, a Catholic magazine based out of Washington DC. While there he became friends with some of the other board members including Bill Bennet, Secretary of Education under Reagan, Alexander Haig, Sec. of State under Reagan, Bill Simon, Sec. of the Treasury under Nixon and Ford, and others. It was through them that he became acquainted with a particular high ranking military officer and over time the two became good friends.

That is why when Dr. Garrow received a phone call from him saying that he had an important message that needed to get out to the American people in a safe way, Dr. Garrow took it to heart. This now-retired military general went on to say that he had been recently contacted by a close friend, who happened to be another high-ranking military officer who was currently still serving. He called the retired general to tell him that although it was unexpected, he, too, was now retiring and leaving the service. He went on to say that this was not his choice but that he was basically being “shown the door” because he was being asked a question, and depending on how he answered seemed to be the deciding factor as to whether he was to stay or leave.

“Here is the question we are being asked: ‘If in a scenario the military were called upon to go and confront people who were armed, American citizens, who would not relinquish their arms, in spite of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, would you follow the command to fire on American citizens?’”

The general told Dr. Garrow that this officer was completely flummoxed at the question and answered ‘No, I would not fire on American citizens.’ He was then forced to resign his commission immediately.

“It has nothing to do with right or wrong, Constitutional or unconstitutional any longer… They are looking for blind allegiance,” Garrow said. He said to watch the headlines for more like himself being replaced in “untimely exits”. He also said that some might choose to remain silent and try to stay in to see what they can do from the inside.

China’s Influence Grows in U.S. To Dangerous Level. Dr. Garrow and his source talked about several other topics over the next hour. These included how China desperately wants America disarmed. He said, “It’s no secret that we owe an enormous debt to China that will be almost impossible to repay.”

“With China in great need of energy resources and the USA rich in coal, natural gas, oil and farmland, we are being parceled off and promised to the Chinese as a form of debt repayment. This is why you are seeing the systematic closing of our mines, refineries, and family farms, etc. through govt. regulation. Once they are closed the Chinese will have permission to come in and run them since no one else will be using these facilities. But the Chinese are very much afraid retaliation by an armed American citizenry. As a result the Chinese fear they will not see their debt repaid. They have offered to help with whatever means necessary to disarm the public.”

Media Hopelessly In the Tank for Obama. Another topic the two discussed was how baffled he and others in the military are by the sycophantic support of the unofficial fourth branch of government, the media. What used to be the vetting watchdogs of corrupt politics have now become the Obama “cheerleaders.” This is why Dr. Garrow was sought out as a trusted messenger to alternate media sources and anyone who will listen. The request to not have this generals’ identity divulged is being taken very seriously. He cited a number of other high-ranking military officials that have shown up dead from bizarre accidents or mysterious suicides when they decided to go public with anti-American government information…

Launches Contest to Give Away 1,000 FMK Handguns. So for now Dr. Garrow will continue to get this message out as best he can. He feels it is important for all citizens to be armed and prepared at this time, and he’s doing more than just talking about it. He is putting his money where his mouth is by joining forces with Next News Network, Gun Owners of America and FMK Firearms to give away 1,000 9calibre FMK Generation 2 handguns through his Pink Pagoda Girls program. Contestants just need to be over 18 and register with his site: http://www.pinkpagodagirls.com/ FMK Firearms is an American owned company and engraves every gun with the Second Amendment.

Our modern day Paul Reveres are sounding the alarm Americans. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

Ohio PolitiChick Nancy Smith has been very active raising her family of six children and only in the past few years has she become active in politics beyond just the basics. Nancy realized several years ago that our country was headed in the wrong direction on just about every measurement available, and that sense of drift was brought into focus with the 2008 election of President Obama.

Since her options were somewhat limited due to her family's needs, Nancy poured herself into "working from the kitchen table" and built a worldwide base of 5,000 friends on facebook from a wide-variety of backgrounds. That exposure led to a role as a regular contributor on the Conservative Commando Radio Show, and most recently, to a role as a national contributor on Politichicks.tv.

Nancy is a graduate of Northern Arizona University. She and her husband Ron and their family reside in northeast Ohio. You can find Nancy on http://facebook.com/nancysjustright and on twitter @nancysjustright.

Then we have this warning on coming Martial Law

Ex-US Navy SEAL Ben Smith joins Fox News and drops a bombshell on the US government by revealing that the government itself is creating the conditions necessary to impose martial law here in America. This is a must watch video for those who feel martial law is merely believed by conspiracy theorists. Veterans and US Navy SEALS see the same thing!





Monday, June 10, 2013

Worrisome Federal Law Enforcement Involvement in Tennessee




A reader sent me a link to this article entitled "Fed Govt Takes Over Tennessee Festival", published June 3, 2013 by The Liberty Paper, which is a website I have never heard of until now.  The picture of the Department of Homeland Security marked armored vehicle was from this website also.  If you look closely underneath the ":Homeland Security" letters you will see the marking "Immigration and Customs Enforcement". 

While I support the Federal Bureau of Investigation "pre-staging: around events likely to draw terrorist's atention,....radical islamists, the home grown variety or just crazies,.....I wonder what Homeland Secuity in general and specifically Immigration and Customs Enforcement has to do with an event in Nashville.  

NASHVILLE- The American public has become increasingly cautious towards the Department of Homeland Security. The federal agency has come under increased scrutiny for purchasing 1.6 billion rounds of high powered ammunition and stockpiling heavily armored vehicles to be used in the streets of America.

US Congressman Huelscamp (R-KS) has asked the DHS multiple times why they needed to purchase these bullets and tanks* and the DHS refuses to answer him and other members of Congress who are demanding answers. Proponents of big government say it is for our protection, but it is important to recall that our militia and army protect us from any foreign invasion according to the constitution.

*UrbanMan's comment:  Tanks? The above picture is an armord personnel carrier, while it has firing ports which I can't understand, it is certainly not a tank with a main cannon nor any machine gun's mounted.  

This is not the job of non-elected federal bureaucrats armed with weapons, which are outlawed to all American people accept themselves. The DHS has had its eye on Tennessee recently. A federal grant was given to the state to purchase drones. The grant spurred legislative action in the state of Tennessee to block drone activity as it was delivered during the same time of the Obama Administration’s drone controversy.

In a developing story the DHS and FBI are said to be taking over Nashville, Tennessee’s CMA Festival, which is the largest country music event in the world. Downtown hospitality industry management have warned their staff to be careful when entering and leaving the city for work, not to bring backpacks, or look suspicious in any way because DHS and FBI agents will be conducting searches and seizures. As the city prepares for the festival DHS and FBI agents have already been seen around the downtown area blocking off bridges and bringing in equipment.

Being a Southern state, Tennessee residents tend to hold a certain disdain for the federal government while holding the principle of state sovereignty in high regard. This is especially the case when they take over their capital city without regards to their Fourth Amendment rights, and push their elected Sheriffs out of the way to set up shop.

UrbanMan's comment:  "Pushng elected Sheriffs out of the way?"  Yes, there is much debate about Sheriffs in certain states,...Colorado, Maryland and Deleware(?) who have publically stated that they cannot and/or will not enforce new draconian state firearms restrictions, and the anti-gun state governmental machine who are furious about this.  There are state bills on their respective legislative floors to diminish the powers of Country Sheriffs,...this is troubling to say the least.  In any event, it bears watching from a freedom and an implementation of martial law point of view.  Protection of the public and federal agencies over steping their statutory authorities are a fine line.

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Just How Likely is Martial Law?

How likely is Martial Law?  Ten fold more likely than it was at the beginning of the century, that's how likely. Thanks to Long Island Press and Steve for forwarding this to us.


The manhunt for the Boston Marathon bombing suspects offered the nation a window into the stunning military-style capabilities of our local law enforcement agencies. For the past 30 years, police departments throughout the United States have benefitted from the government’s largesse in the form of military weaponry and training, incentives offered in the ongoing “War on Drugs.” For the average citizen watching events such as the intense pursuit of the Tsarnaev brothers on television, it would be difficult to discern between fully outfitted police SWAT teams and the military.

UrbanMan's Note: Didn't we see US Army HMMWV's with Military Police logos patrolling the Boston streets during the lock down? Likely they were from Fort Devens. I wonder what their authority was?

The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.

The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule: Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.

Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, calls the rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” and says, “It’s quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”

A defense official who declined to be named takes a different view of the rule, claiming, “The authorization has been around over 100 years; it’s not a new authority. It’s been there but it hasn’t been exercised. This is a carryover of domestic policy.” Moreover, he insists the Pentagon doesn’t “want to get involved in civilian law enforcement. It’s one of those red lines that the military hasn’t signed up for.” Nevertheless, he says, “every person in the military swears an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States to defend that Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic.”

One of the more disturbing aspects of the new procedures that govern military command on the ground in the event of a civil disturbance relates to authority. Not only does it fail to define what circumstances would be so severe that the president’s authorization is “impossible,” it grants full presidential authority to “Federal military commanders.” According to the defense official, a commander is defined as follows: “Somebody who’s in the position of command, has the title commander. And most of the time they are centrally selected by a board, they’ve gone through additional schooling to exercise command authority.”

As it is written, this “commander” has the same power to authorize military force as the president in the event the president is somehow unable to access a telephone. (The rule doesn’t address the statutory chain of authority that already exists in the event a sitting president is unavailable.) In doing so, this commander must exercise judgment in determining what constitutes, “wanton destruction of property,” “adequate protection for Federal property,” “domestic violence,” or “conspiracy that hinders the execution of State or Federal law,” as these are the circumstances that might be considered an “emergency.”

UrbanMan's Note: The title "commander", in my opinion would mean a Company Commander at the lowest level. That means a Captain, likely in is mid's 20's having the unilateral power to execute military operations in a civilian environment. This is very concerning.

“These phrases don’t have any legal meaning,” says Afran. “It’s no different than the emergency powers clause in the Weimar constitution [of the German Reich]. It’s a grant of emergency power to the military to rule over parts of the country at their own discretion.”

Afran also expresses apprehension over the government’s authority “to engage temporarily in activities necessary to quell large-scale disturbances.”

“Governments never like to give up power when they get it,” says Afran. “They still think after twelve years they can get intelligence out of people in Guantanamo. Temporary is in the eye of the beholder. That’s why in statutes we have definitions. All of these statutes have one thing in common and that is that they have no definitions. How long is temporary? There’s none here. The definitions are absurdly broad.”

The U.S. military is prohibited from intervening in domestic affairs except where provided under Article IV of the Constitution in cases of domestic violence that threaten the government of a state or the application of federal law. This provision was further clarified both by the Insurrection Act of 1807 and a post-Reconstruction law known as the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (PCA). The Insurrection Act specifies the circumstances under which the president may convene the armed forces to suppress an insurrection against any state or the federal government. Furthermore, where an individual state is concerned, consent of the governor must be obtained prior to the deployment of troops. The PCA—passed in response to federal troops that enforced local laws and oversaw elections during Reconstruction—made unauthorized employment of federal troops a punishable offense, thereby giving teeth to the Insurrection Act.

Together, these laws limit executive authority over domestic military action. Yet Monday’s official regulatory changes issued unilaterally by the Department of Defense is a game-changer. The stated purpose of the updated rule is “support in Accordance With the Posse Comitatus Act,” but in reality it undermines the Insurrection Act and PCA in significant and alarming ways. The most substantial change is the notion of “civil disturbance” as one of the few “domestic emergencies” that would allow for the deployment of military assets on American soil.

To wit, the relatively few instances that federal troops have been deployed for domestic support have produced a wide range of results. Situations have included responding to natural disasters and protecting demonstrators during the Civil Rights era to, disastrously, the Kent State student massacre and the 1973 occupation of Wounded Knee.

Michael German, senior policy counsel to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), noted in a 2009 Daily Kos article that, “there is no doubt that the military is very good at many things. But recent history shows that restraint in their new-found domestic role is not one of them.”

At the time German was referring to the military’s expanded surveillance techniques and hostile interventions related to border control and the War on Drugs. And in fact, many have argued that these actions have already upended the PCA in a significant way. Even before this most recent rule change, the ACLU was vocal in its opposition to the Department of Defense (DoD) request to expand domestic military authority “in the event of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high yield explosive (CBRNE) incidents.” The ACLU’s position is that civilian agencies are more than equipped to handle such emergencies since 9/11. (ACLU spokespersons in Washington D.C. declined, however, to be interviewed for this story.)

But while outcomes of military interventions have varied, the protocol by which the president works cooperatively with state governments has remained the same. The president is only allowed to deploy troops to a state upon request of its governor. Even then, the military—specifically the National Guard—is there to provide support for local law enforcement and is prohibited from engaging in any activities that are outside of this scope, such as the power to arrest.

Eric Freedman, a constitutional law professor from Hofstra University, also calls the ruling “an unauthorized power grab.” According to Freedman, “The Department of Defense does not have the authority to grant itself by regulation any more authority than Congress has granted it by statute.” Yet that’s precisely what it did. This wasn’t, however, the Pentagon’s first attempt to expand its authority domestically in the last decade.

Déjà vu

During the Bush Administration, Congress passed the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill that included language similar in scope to the current regulatory change. It specifically amended the Insurrection Act to expand the president’s ability to deploy troops domestically under certain conditions including health epidemics, natural disasters and terrorist activities, though it stopped short of including civil disturbances. But the following year this language was repealed under the National Defense Authorization Act of 2008 via a bill authored by Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) who cited the “useful friction” between the Insurrection and Posse Comitatus Acts in limiting executive authority.

According to the DoD, the repeal of this language had more to do with procedure and that it was never supposed to amend the Insurrection Act. “When it was actually passed,” says the defense official, “Congress elected to amend the Insurrection Act and put things in the Insurrection Act that were not insurrection, like the support for disasters and emergencies and endemic influenza. Our intent,” he says, “was to give the president and the secretary access to the reserve components. It includes the National Guard and, rightfully so, the governors were pretty upset because they were not consulted.”

Senator Leahy’s office did not have a statement as of press time, but a spokesperson said the senator had made an inquiry with the DoD in response to our questions. The defense official confirmed that he was indeed being called in to discuss the senator’s concerns in a meeting scheduled for today. But he downplayed any concern, saying, “Congress at any time can say ‘we don’t like your interpretation of that law and how you’ve interpreted it in making policy’—and so they can call us to the Hill and ask us to justify why we’re doing something.”

Last year, Bruce Afran and another civil liberties attorney Carl Mayer filed a lawsuit against the Obama Administration on behalf of a group of journalists and activists lead by former New York Times journalist Chris Hedges. They filed suit over the inclusion of a bill in the NDAA 2012 that, according to the plaintiffs, expanded executive authority over domestic affairs by unilaterally granting the executive branch to indefinitely detain U.S. citizens without due process. The case has garnered international attention and invited vigorous defense from the Obama Administration. Even Afran goes so far as to say this current rule change is, “another NDAA. It’s even worse, to be honest.”

For Hedges and the other plaintiffs, including Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, the government’s ever-expanding authority over civilian affairs has a “chilling effect” on First Amendment activities such as free speech and the right to assemble. First District Court Judge Katherine Forrest agreed with the plaintiffs and handed Hedges et al a resounding victory prompting the Department of Justice to immediately file an injunction and an appeal. The appellate court is expected to rule on the matter within the next few months.

Another of the plaintiffs in the Hedges suit is Alexa O’Brien, a journalist and organizer who joined the lawsuit after she discovered a Wikileaks cable showing government officials attempting to link her efforts to terrorist activities. For activists such as O’Brien, the new DoD regulatory change is frightening because it creates, “an environment of fear when people cannot associate with one another.” Like Afran and Freedman, she too calls the move, “another grab for power under the rubric of the war on terror, to the detriment of citizens.”

“This is a complete erosion of the rule of law,” says O’Brien. Knowing these sweeping powers were granted under a rule change and not by Congress is even more harrowing to activists. “That anything can be made legal,” says O’Brien, “is fundamentally antithetical to good governance.” As far as what might qualify as a civil disturbance, Afran notes, “In the Sixties all of the Vietnam protests would meet this description. We saw Kent State. This would legalize Kent State.” But the focus on the DoD regulatory change obscures the creeping militarization that has already occurred in police departments across the nation. Even prior to the NDAA lawsuit, journalist Chris Hedges was critical of domestic law enforcement agencies saying, “The widening use of militarized police units effectively nullifies the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878.”

This de facto nullification isn’t lost on the DoD.

The DoD official even referred to the Boston bombing suspects manhunt saying, “Like most major police departments, if you didn’t know they were a police department you would think they were the military.” According to this official there has purposely been a “large transfer of technology so that the military doesn’t have to get involved.” Moreover, he says the military has learned from past events, such as the siege at Waco, where ATF officials mishandled military equipment. “We have transferred the technology so we don’t have to loan it,” he states.

But if the transfer of military training and technology has been so thorough, it boggles the imagination as to what kind of disturbance would be so overwhelming that it would require the suspension of centuries-old law and precedent to grant military complete authority on the ground. The DoD official admits not being able to “envision that happening,” adding, “but I’m not a Hollywood screenwriter.”

Afran, for one, isn’t buying the logic. For him, the distinction is simple.

“Remember, the police operate under civilian control,” he says. “They are used to thinking in a civilian way so the comparison that they may have some assault weapons doesn’t change this in any way. And they can be removed from power. You can’t remove the military from power.”

Despite protestations from figures such as Afran and O’Brien and past admonitions from groups like the ACLU, for the first time in our history the military has granted itself authority to quell a civil disturbance. Changing this rule now requires congressional or judicial intervention.

“This is where journalism comes in,” says Freedman. “Calling attention to an unauthorized power grab in the hope that it embarrasses the administration.” Afran is considering amending his NDAA complaint currently in front of the court to include this regulatory change. As we witnessed during the Boston bombing manhunt, it’s already difficult to discern between military and police. In the future it might be impossible, because there may be no difference.

UrbanMan's Note: There is a large potential for a confrontation between local National Guard and Reserve units and the Active duty military deployed to the communities that the NG and Reserve live in. More likely if the Active Duty military is perceived as being heavy handed or ends up killing a few civilians. The government's first recourse is to recognize ths potential and to activate then deployed National Guard and Reserve unit's far away from their home communities and states.

Thursday, May 2, 2013

Is the Chance of a Collapse Decreasing?

Are you one of the preppers who has started to slow preparation for, or even days go by when you are not thinking of a potential collapse? I have several friends of mine who either say or do things to indicate a general belief that the chance of a major SHTF is decreasing. One of my friends bought a very expensive dining room set and the other a small sports car. Me? It was like "Dude's, are you kidding me? Now is not the time to incur more debt especially with items that will have no intrinsic value if the economy tanks.

This prompted me to ask some more people I know who are prepping if they thought there is better possibility that an economic collapse is being delayed and/or potentially could be staved off.

One guy told me that fuel prices, food and other commodities costs are all holding steady. Interest rates still at historic lows, so he is optimistic that a collapse can be avoided. I reminded him that I, too, hope for the best, but still prepare for the worst.

Another person says it looks like the federal government is solving the funding problem, finding ways around sequestration and it is more likely some problems will be resolved even given the vast diferences between the two parties in power. I didn't even reply to this but I sure as hell thought "What planet are you living on?"

Here's my short list just on recent events that tell me different, that point to ignored problems and an increased likelyhood of a coming collapse,....and in fact the longer it is put off my sleight of hand programs, policies or artificial money coming into play, the bigger and deeper the collapse will be.

CNN Money is reporting that England's economy is falling back. The United Kingdom's debt has rating has been downgraded to 'AA+' from 'AAA', due to the lack of growth, annual deficit and growing debt - and no prognosis to get better. In fact, the prognosis for England is dim, with recesson appearing on the horizon.

Lack of Food. Here in the states we see several large cities with food banks for the truly needy about empty. I am not talking about the "welfare cheats" but the absolute desperate who rely on community food banks to eat.

Severe Environmental conditions in the U.S. with overall Exceptional Drought conditions and some places experiencing the worst drought in the last 100 years. The heartland is producing less and less food while the demand is greater and this of course is a recipe for increased prices. We have over 47 million Americans on food stamps with another estimated 12 to 15 million that are eligible. There is a huge government effort to get these people signed up. Regardless of how you see this program, the simple fact is that we can't afford it. To be sure there are some people who think we can afford it, and a host of other spending as well.

U.S Cities falling. Large and medium U.S. cities, such as Detroit MI, Dayton OH, Las Vegas NV, Fresno CA, Chicago IL, El Paso TX, Sanford FL, Newark NJ, Philadelphia PA and I am sure others are all facing one or more problems relating to deficit spending, increased local taxes, abandoned buildings, shrinking population (tax base), growing debt usual associated with decreased revenue and increased pension outlays, increased crime and violence which will increase yet because of por economic conditions and reduced law enforcement budgets.

Even after gun control legislation failed, all over the United States there is an ammunition shortage that is really unprecedented. From a couple of my geographically diverse friends, common calibers such as .22LR, 9mm, .38 Spl, .40 cal, .223, and .308 are practically impossible to buy. Other calibers like .300 Win Mag, 7mm, and .243 are available. There has been a reported shortage of 12 gauge buckshot, but slugs are still routinely available. BTW, keep your eyes and ears tuned for another round of anti-second amendment laws to be proposed.

On the precious metals market there has been panic buying of physical gold and silver, as China, Russia, India and others started increasing their physical gold purchase. Preppers are telling me that their local shops don't have Silver bullion. The main reliable precious metals has been silver coins for melt value. Prices will go up before the supply gets stabilized, if it does get stabilized. Buy it while you can.

The Possible Collapse scenario of terrorist strikes of a very significant nature or smaller terrorist strikes which would prompt widespread martial law are higher today than they were three weeks ago with the much publicized terr bombing at the Boston Marathon and the lesser publicized event at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Watts Bar Nuclear Plant where a security guard had a chance contact with, and interdicted an armed trespasser who inserted by boat onto the property. Shots were fired, no casualties. Trespasser withdrew. All we all know that Islamic terrorists would like nothing more than to target U.S. Nuclear, conventional power and chemical plants with the emphasis being on chemical and nuclear due to their serious contamination issues.

All in all, I'd say that the collapse is much more likely now, and in fact, we just may be heading unimpeded to towards SHTF.  Don't be the ostrich who has it's head in the ground.

Sunday, April 14, 2013

Government on Alert for Radical Extremism

Received this from a reader: "UrbanSurvivalSkills, be aware that the Federal Government is moving to put the Military, most likely the Army, into a martial law posture to respond to civil disturbance, food riots, population control and weapons-food confiscation. The Army is briefing their leaders on radical extremism of Citizens. My son is a Military policeman and is concerned about what he says is rampant misunderstanding of the Army's role inside the United States. He says that many of his fellow soldiers believe that not only can the Army be deployed against the civilian population but should be deployed against citizens. My son is going to get out of the service this fall and he sent me a flyer that say's, verbatim: There is no way to be 100% certain that an individual is becoming radicalized to the point that they may be considering violent action. However, recent experiences show that there are certain warning signs, or early indicators, worth review. The indicators that if observed would be a pre-disposition to radicalization and violence:"

Complains about bias

Advocates violence beyond what is “normal”

Exhibits abrupt behavioral shifts

Needs empowerment

Is socially withdrawn

Believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia

Is frustrated with mainstream ideologies

Experiences personal crisis and does not properly recover

Demonizes others freely

Lacks positive identity with country, unit, family, or friends

Exhibits sudden reclusiveness

"My son is a college grad and level headed. If he is concerned, so am I. Just as soon as I can manage a week off I am heading to my hunting cabin in (state deleted) just in case something stupid happens." (name removed)."


UrbanMan replies: While I do not like the belief in the Army, institutional or individual, that the Army has a role on policing or enforcement in the United States, I have a tendency to believe that what your son sent you was a pretty routine brief about violent bent people that are a part of every organization,..from the military, to law enforcement, to common businesses, and of course the Post Office.

I'm not trying to drag the military down, but the doors are not being busted down with people trying to enlist. The military's back ground checks for enlistment probably leave a lot ot be desired, therefore with 600,000 people in uniform you are bound to get some type of "radicals" be they gang bangers, white supremists, or just plain haters,......not to mention some devoid of the capacity for basic reasoning.

Again, I think this is a routine effort to "protect the force", to educate military personnel to keep an eye out for high potential violence doers. However, I am somewhat skittish about today's military especially their key leaders and the road our Federal government has taken with disregard for individual rights and vastly increased regulation across all commodity and business lines. Therefore, I'll remain one of those who are waiting to be convincned one way or the other that this may be preparation for martial law.

Thank your son for his service to the nation. And regarding your cabin,.....it may be a a good idea to make it your Bug Out location, so preparing it so could be a wise decision.

And so I thought it ended,...until reports out of Colorado where a DHS sponsored law enforcement threat briefing brought to light more Government oriented targeting of "radicals".  From PersonalLiberty.com

"The Department of Homeland Security and the military have, in reports published over the past
several years, equated a large segment of the U.S. population with terrorists for simply expressing
displeasure of the nation’s course, preparing for disaster or even paying in cash. DHS and the Barack Obama regime are aided in this endeavor by government propaganda arm mainstream media and organizations like the Southern Preposterous Lie Center (aka Southern Poverty Law Center)."

Their belief coming from a report from a letter from Undersheriff Ron Trowbridge of Prowers County Sheriff’s Office:

"On April 1, 2013 I attended training in La Junta, Colorado hosted by the Colorado State Patrol (CSP).  The training was from 12:00 pm to 4:00 pm and covered two topics, Sovereign Citizens, and Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs.  I was pretty familiar with motorcycle gangs but since we often deal with the so-called sovereign citizen groups I was interested to see what they had to say.  The group consisted of police officers, deputies, and CSP troopers.  There were about 20 people in attendance.

Trooper Joe Kluczynski taught a 2-hour section on sovereign citizens.  Kluczynski spent most of his
two hours focusing on how, in his view and apparently the view of Homeland Security, people turn
to the sovereign citizen movement.  Kluczynski started off by saying there are probably some
sovereign citizens in this room and gave a generalized list of those groups that have sovereign
citizen views.  Among those groups, Kluczynski had listed, were those who believe America was
founded on godly principles, Christians who take the Bible literally, and “fundamentalists”. 
Kluczynski did not explain what he meant by “fundamentalists” but from the context it was clear he
was referring again to those who took the Bible literally or “too seriously.”

While Kluczynski emphasized that sovereign citizens have a right to their beliefs, he was clearly
teaching that the groups he had listed should be watched by law enforcement and should be treated
with caution because of their potential to assault law enforcement.  Kluczynski explained why he
believed these groups were dangerous saying they were angry over the election of a black president.

When someone in the group suggested the failing economy was probably much more to blame,
Kluczynski intimated that those who are not going along with the changes in America will need to
be controlled by law enforcement.  Kluczynski even later questioned some of the troopers present if
they were willing and prepared to confiscate “illegal” weapons if ordered to.

Kluczynski’s assignment with the CSP was an Analyst for the Colorado Information Analysis Center,
(CIAC).  CIAC is funded by Homeland Security funds and run by the CSP.  Kluczynski said he gets
his information from the Department of Homeland Security.  Kluczynski said he was leaving the CSP
at the end of that week (March 29, 2013) to begin his new career with Homeland Security.  I thought
he was perfect for the job.

Ron Trowbridge
Undersheriff
Prowers County Sheriff’s Office
April 5, 2013


Okay, another thing to list as indicators,...lets keep our eyes out for anymore nonsense like this and any reason to think it may be Government directed or sponsored as opposed to some individual's perspective.  I would be concerned if this ass clown Kluczynski does not get counseled by his management if for nothing more than this statement "those who are not going along with the changes in America will need to
be controlled by law enforcement:........pretty damn scary thought pattern here. 

Saturday, April 6, 2013

The Coming Collapse - A Marxist Plan?

From my sources, General Boykin is a widely respected retired Army General. When he talks people need to listen. While I am not convinced there is a plan or a conspiracy to take this country into Marxism, I do think that the direction this country is heading is on a direct azimuth to a economic collapse.

3-Star retired Army Green Beret General William G. Boykin laid out a step-by-step plan, that was posted on RedFlagNews, he says is the model of how Fidel Castro instituted Marxism in Cuba, Mao Zedong in China, Stalin in Russia and Hugo Chavez in Venzeula:

1.  Nationalize major sectors of the economy

2.  Redistribute wealth

3.  Discredit opposition

4.  Censors opposing viewpoints

5.  Control gun ownership

6.  Develop a constabulary force to control civilian population

The surge of bullet-buying confirmed by the federal government purchase estimates run into the billions of bullets,  even as the U.S. military scrimps to find training ammo is raising lots of questions about the government’s so-far unexplained actions.

But a video that has been around since last year is being forwarded across the Internet as an explanation.

The six minutes recorded by Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, retired, warns that America is well along the pathway that other societies have used to bludgeon and beat their populations into submission to socialism. Even to the point of establishing a “constabulary force” to control the people.

Maybe those bullets do have a destination.

Boykin now is executive vice president of Family Research Council. But during his military career, he was one of the original members of the U.S. Army’s Delta Force. He ultimately commanded those elite warriors in combat operations. Later, Boykin commanded all the Army’s Green Berets as well as the Special Warfare Center and School.

In all, Lt. Gen. Boykin spent 36 years in the army, serving his last four years as the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence.

On the video, Boykin explains simply that he knows the standard process for creating a socialist or Marxist state because he studied it as a military officer.

His concern is that the six steps “done in every Marxist insurgency” now “are being done in America today.” He lists them:

1. nationalize major sections of the economy (the corporate bailouts),

2. redistribute wealth (the man appointed to head Medicare said health care is “nothing but a redistribution of wealth”),

3. discredit opposition (Boykin said he’s “never been so angry” as when the Obama administration called returning vets, pro-lifers and others a terror threat),

4. censorship (since old guard media already was in line, Obama’s censorship has been through “hate crimes” legislation aimed at Christian pastors and others),

5. gun control (see Washington’s present agenda), and

6. a constabulary force.

That would be “a force that can control the population,” Boykin warned.

To those who say that isn’t present in the U.S., he responds, “Let me remind you that prior to the election (in 2008) the president stood up and said if elected he would want a national civilian security force as large as and well-funded as the military.”

WND reported on Obama’s demands at the time for a “civilian national security force.”

What Obama actually said was: “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” he said. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”


Wednesday, March 13, 2013

Will The Government Confiscate Food or Guns first?

We received this question from William...."I'd like you're opinion on whether the government will confiscate food supplies from commercial places and from the population. A friend of mine got me into prepping for TEOTWAKI and he told me there is presidential orders that would allow the government to confiscate food during emergencies. I understand the gun confiscation issue. The government would have a hard time trying to get guns from people who will just hide them. But it would be hard to hide food or hide your gardens. "

UrbanMan's comment: William, the government is more likely to try to control or nationalize food supplies commercially before they suspend the 4th amendment and confiscate food from individuals. This is simply based on resources available to effect control. Based mostly on an Executive Order signed by Obama in March of last year, titled National Defense Resources Preparedness, there is a belief that the Government now has the power to seize civil transportation assets, farm equipment, farm facilities (producing and processing), food resources, fertilizers, and even utilize the population in forced labor schemes. This, in my mind, could only come about in a large, chaotic collapse.

You are also right that efforts to control or confiscate food would probably come before gun confiscation, which would simply cause large scale violence even civil war. Plus the adege of "controlling the food, controlling the population comes to mind". One could envision a program of turning in guns, ammunition and other related items in order to get access to government controlled food.

You can read the NDRP executive order here, however the crux is in how the government intreprets any law.   Before the government conducts large scale food confiscation scheme, there would probably be a media campaign, psychological operations if you will, calling for people to "share" food stocks and capabilities, painting people who fail to comply as "food horders" and essentially pitting neighbors against neighbors.

However there is a movement in the government, to use someone else's term, called "Regulation Nation", that is restricting individuals rights to sell, trade or even produce food products. This follows a general orientation of government, especialy in the last four years, to restrict common and long standing freedoms.

Good luck trying to research you way into determining what powers the FDA and various levels of governments possess under the banners of "Food Safety", "Wholseale and Retail Food production and distribution",....again much if it is in how the government intreprets their powers.

Some agricultural communities see government regulation as a threat to their existing freedoms. The below article, taken from Food Renegade.com depicts the town of Sedgwick, Maine and their efforts to maintain their rights.

A small portion of the article:

Sedgwick, Maine has done what no other town in the United States has done. The town unanimously passed an ordinance giving its citizens the right “to produce, process, sell, purchase, and consume local foods of their choosing.” This includes raw milk, locally slaughtered meats, and just about anything else you can imagine. It’s also a decided bucking of state and federal laws.

This isn’t just a declaration of preference. The proposed warrant added, “It shall be unlawful for any law or regulation adopted by the state or federal government to interfere with the rights recognized by this Ordinance.” In other words, no state licensing requirements prohibiting certain farms from selling dairy products or producing their own chickens for sale to other citizens in the town.

What about potential legal liability and state or federal inspections? It’s all up to the seller and buyer to negotiate. “Patrons purchasing food for home consumption may enter into private agreements with those producers or processors of local foods to waive any liability for the consumption of that food. Producers or processors of local foods shall be exempt from licensure and inspection requirements for that food as long as those agreements are in effect.” Imagine that–buyer and seller can agree to cut out the lawyers. That’s almost un-American, isn’t it?

A selection of comments on the article:

I’m not one of the “lawyers here” but my observation is that when the local law chooses to prohibit more than the rest of the state, nation or organization they will usually get by with it. It is when local law moves to allow more latitude that the trouble starts.

For example, I can imagine that if a county in PA would take a Humbolt, CA position on raw milk, the state would take an it’s-up-to-them position. But if local law in an area moved to allow raw butter, cream, kefir & yogurt… I’m sure it would not get to first base.

Still, I say Kudos to the fine folks of Sedgwick Maine. Their common sense bravery warms the heart of every awake American. If nothing else, their move will bring the ridiculousness of the situation to the consciousness of another percent or so of Americans. One American at a time the tipping point will be reached.

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Government Preparing for the Collapse with Large Ammunition Purchases?

E-mail received recently:  "I am concerned about the humongous ammunition purchase by the Government (non-military). I saw reports about how much ammunition they use a year and the figures did not add up. If they use 15 million rounds in one year, it would take over 100 years to use the 1.6 billion rounds they are buying. What are you thoughts as to the Government preparing for a crackdown? I have also read reports of tractor-trailer trucks transporting loads of signs that read 'Martial Law in Effect". All this is stunning and scary news. Interested in what you have to say."

UrbanMan's comments: First of all, I have seen nothing of Martial Law signage. Sounds like an internet legend to me unless there are some verifiable sources. Second of all, the Government does have some plans for internal civil operations to quell disturbances and react to terrorist attacks, just like they have contingency plans to invade about every country of the face of the earth. This is what they do,...create "what if" plans. And it is concerning that it seems like the government has taken the stand that it is okay to kill American citizens outside and inside of this country using drones or other means. But I don't think the large ammuniton purchase is in preparation for civil war or whatever.

Here is an the report from Fox News about the large ammunition purchase by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS):

The Homeland Security Department wants to buy more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition in the next four or five years. It says it needs them -- roughly the equivalent of five bullets for every person in the United States -- for law enforcement agents in training and on duty.

Published federal notices about the ammo buy have agitated conspiracy theorists since the fall. That's when conservative radio host Alex Jones spoke of an "arms race against the American people" and said the government was "gearing up for total collapse, they're gearing up for huge wars."

The government's explanation is much less sinister.

Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as "strategic sourcing contracts," which help the government get a low price for a big purchase, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga . The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.

Dixon said one of the contracts would allow Homeland Security to buy up to 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years for its training facilities. The rounds are used for basic and advanced law enforcement training for federal law enforcement agencies under the department's umbrella. The facilities also offer firearms training to tens of thousands of federal law enforcement officers. More than 90 federal agencies and 70,000 agents and officers used the department's training center last year.

The rest of the 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition would be purchased by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the federal government's second largest criminal investigative agency.

ICE's ammunition requests in the last year included:

- 450 million rounds of .40-caliber duty ammunition

- 40 million rounds of rifle ammunition a year for as many as five years, for a total bullet-buy of 200 million rounds

- 176,000 rifle rounds on a separate contract

- 25,000 blank rounds

The Homeland Security ammo buy is not the first time the government's bullets purchases have sparked concerns on the Internet. The same thing happened last year when the Social Security Administration posted a notice that it was buying 174,000 hollow point bullets.

Jonathan L. Lasher, the agency's assistant inspector general for external relations, said those bullets were for the Social Security inspector general's office, which has about 295 agents who investigate Social Security fraud and other crimes.

UrbanMan again: A friend of mine in one of the largest federal law enforcement agencys told me that if everyone agent/officer shot every firearms qualification (very unlikely), and received their maximum ammunition allocation, that they would expend 12 million rounds a year. This is not counting the academy training, nor the high levels of ammuntion expended by their tactical units. This is only one agency so the 15 million rounds a year is extremely low counting all the federal law enforcment agencies.

While I don't think the government is planning on a need for this ammunition in the streets of America, a secondary effect of such a large ammunition buy may just result in much less ammunition so the preppers can get any.  The shrill cry for draconian gun control also had an effect in ammunition stocks in gun stores,  sporting goods stores and on-line sources becoming scare.   

Thursday, February 7, 2013

Effects of Gun Ban Proposals

Received this through e-mail:  Urbanman, I thought you would be tickled to get this update from the Southland. My friend recently sold one of his DPMS carbines and six magazines to someone for $3,000. He bought the carbine for around $850. This kind of shows you the value of guns when the SHTF and we are straight bartering. My friend told me someone else wants a carbine so he may sell another one as well. $6,000 would buy a truckload of food. Sure am glad I don't have to buy one of those since I already have an AR-15, but my primary gun is my old Ruger Model 77 in .308 Win. But by God what kind of desperation does a man have to have to spend $3,000 on a rifle?

UrbanMan's comments: I have been getting report after, e-mail after Pm on the prices from all over. It is crazy. Good thing most of us, and those reading this, probably have plenty of both AR type rifles or something suitable for protection and enough ammunition to last. Some friends of mine from Arizona and Texas are telling me they can't buy .223 ammunition in any of the sporting good stores. Another told me P-magazines for AR's were going for $100 each,.....$100 each!! I bought mine for around $12 each. And yet another gent told me that AR prices at a gun show were $2,700 to $3,600. All because of some anti-constitutionalists want to take away our guns! Here is one account that was forwarded to me by a friend:

......AR15's went from $1000 to $3000 in a few hours. .223 caliber ammo went from $300 to $900 in the same time period. There is absolutely nothing left of any quality at the wholesale level. I mean zero. People are completely freaked out. I cannot tell you what it was like on my way out the door. Completely out of control.

I personally don't think anything will make it through the House or the Senate. This will be done via executive order. Legal or not. It will be challenged in court, but will have about the same outcome as the Health Care Bill challenge. I have been in the weapons industry for over 30 years now and never seen anything like this. I wonder about all of these people buying weapons, ammo, and magazines. I seriously doubt that many know how to effectively use them defensively, much less offensively. They just think they need them because someone told them that they are not going to be able to buy them anymore. Kind of like a Cabbage Patch Doll going on sale on Black Friday.

The powers that be have a game plan. Plain and simple. They cannot execute the game plan until we are disarmed. There are a series of steps that will take place to achieve that goal. They have already played many of those cards out behind the scenes unknown to most. Did you know that you cannot import a gun part or round of ammunition into this country that meets their description of "non-sporting' anymore? What does that mean? There are about a thousand more regulations in place that most have not a clue exist.

The next card to play is one that they are mulling around now. That will be the requirement that you register you weapon (assault or not) with them for your safety. No charge at first of course. Next will be ammunition (via taxes) and magazine control. After they get a handle on that, they will simply make it a Federal offense to own them. They will not come around and pick them up. That will be too dangerous. They will just prosecute you when they catch you with them. There will be a few people made example of and that will take care of the masses.

Some of this will be done via random road check points and routine traffic stops. The game plan will be executed by DHS, TSA and local law enforcement that agrees to comply. The FEDS will use the almighty dollar as a carrot to entice them to cooperate. Now the massive purchases of ammunition, arms and armored vehicles by DHS, TSA and the existence of those FEMA Camps should start to make more sense to you.

I often hear some say they will hide or bury their weapons. If you do that, you might as well not have one. It would be worthless then. I am starting to wonder how many of the NRA guys really mean what they say, "Pry it from my cold dead hands." I would venture to say that most would cut and run at the first sight of authority. Take that and the fact that we are completely unorganized and you will start to see that we are very vulnerable. Internet and telecommunication control starting make more sense to you now?

We are not quickly approaching uncharted waters, we are in them. Like I said before, you are going to have to decide whether you are a man (or woman) or not, just shortly. When I look around at most customers, I suspect that is typically not the case.

One has to spend a lot of time to decide whether or not to comply. End of story. This is my country, not theirs.

I think back a few years ago, when I was having dinner with a "seasoned" combat vet who was a gun ship pilot during the Vietnam War and he said something that has always stuck with me. "Give up your weapons and you are a dead man". The look in his eye and the tone of his voice always stuck with me.

I know what I think I have, but then I have not had to confront anyone that demanded that I disarm myself until now. Especially someone employed by my government with a gun and handcuffs. It does however; make me take another long look at a poster I have on the wall in my office of an unarmed person kneeling at the edge of a ditch filled with dead bodies during WWII being shot in the back of the head by a German Nazi officer.