Things to come:
Bill Gertz reported this week on a memo outlining Obama’s plan to use the military against citizens – a memo from 2010. Remember how the blogs and many of us out here were ringing the alarm bells on Obama’s stance that he could use the military and drones against American citizens? Remember how we were marginalized and called crazy for it? Turns out, ‘crazy’ is relative.
This particular beat has the potential to kill us – literally. It portrays Obama’s vision for potentially using the US military against American citizens on American soil. From the Pentagaon, comes a directive on military support to civilian authorities which details what critics say is a troubling policy that envisions the Obama Administration’s potential use of military force against Americans. It took three and a half years to surface, buried by the Obama Administration, the military and the media. It entails provisions on support to civilian fire and emergency services, special events and the domestic use of the Army Corps of Engineers. Then it goes off the rails Constitutionally.
The memo goes on to outline the use of military and arms against Americans in the event of domestic unrest. In fact, Obama considered employing this during the Bundy standoff in Nevada. I contend, he wasn’t done baking this dictatorial cake – it wasn’t ready for prime time, yet. A defense official who opposes the memo was quoted as saying, “This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens.” Why hasn’t any military official openly stood up against this? Tell me, is the fate of America and her citizens less important than your rank, pensions and benefits? Have you put such a low price on your integrity that selling out your fellow Americans is so convenient? 30 pieces of silver has so many valuations these days.
“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under emergency authority,” the directive states.
“In these circumstances, those 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” under two conditions.
The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.” (my emphasis)
“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the directive states.
Military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest. (my emphasis)
Please pay special attention to what I emphasized above. That first bolded phrase takes authority away from the states and local authorities and institutes military control in an emergency. In other words – martial law. It strips us of our rights and protections.
It should now be painfully apparent to anyone paying attention why there has been a buildup of SWAT teams nationally. Why every teeny, tiny burg out there now has military weapons and vehicles and why every government agency is now armed to the teeth. American citizens are in the crosshairs of their own government. Obama and company are seriously prepping for a scenario that will implement martial law and give them precedence to kill and round up Americans they deem a threat. You can call it paranoia or anything you want – it’s happening in front of us and we are allowing it:
In the name of security, we have invited in a militaristic demon. Because political leaders fear the grassroots in America — they fear the American people — they will utilize drones, military, weapons… whatever it takes to maintain their status quo. They’ll employ everything and anything but the US Constitution. This directive IS the smoking gun that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that the Obama Administration views each of us as a threat, especially those who are Constitutional Conservatives and align with the Tea Party.
The global economy is withering quickly because it was just a manifestation of late-stage cheap oil. Now we’re in early-stage of expensive oil and a lot of things that seemed to work wonderfully well before, don’t work so well now. The conveyer belt of cheap manufactured goods from China to the WalMarts and Target stores doesn’t work so well when the American customers lose their incomes, and have to spend their government stipends on gasoline because they were born into a world where driving everywhere for everything is mandatory, and because central bank meddling adds to the horrendous inflation of food prices.
This is a society in deep danger that doesn’t want to know it. The nostrum of an expanding GDP is just statistical legerdemain performed to satisfy stupid news editors, gull loose money into reckless positions, and bamboozle the voters. If we knew how to act we would bend every effort to prepare for the end of mass motoring, but instead we indulge in fairy tales about the “shale oil miracle” because it offers the comforting false promise that we can drive to WalMart forever (in self-driving cars!). Has it occurred to anyone that we no longer have the capital to repair the vast network of roads, streets, highways, and bridges that all these cars are supposed to run on? Or that the capital will not be there for the installment loans Americans are accustomed to buy their cars with?
“The difference between communism and socialism, except in the way of achieving the same ultimate goal: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism by voting. Its’ the same difference between murder and suicide.” - Ayn Rand
Membership and influence is growing because the New York based Communist Party USA’s rhetoric appeals to the lowest denominator, to those who are already on welfare, illegal aliens, and permanent residents coming from third world dictatorships, and union members who are controlled by communist leaders. A constant and highly successful propaganda is waged by the Democrat Party and progressive elites, using the communist slogans of “hope and change,” “forward,” “social justice,” “environmental justice,” “white-privilege,” and “income inequality.”
Saul Alinsky described in his book, Rules for Radicals, the eight levels of control necessary to create a socialist regime. Healthcare, welfare (food, housing, income), and educationmust be controlled by the state.Religion must be made irrelevant by removing it from government and schools. Guns must be confiscated in order to create a police state. Create as much poverty as possible. Poor people are easier to control. Explode national debt to unsustainable levels by out of control spending fueled by new and suffocating taxes that create more poverty. Use escalating class warfare rhetoric to fuel the division between “rich” and “poor,” causing discontent. Malcontent would then drive the welfare poor to rebel against the “greedy rich” who “do not pay their fair share,” and to demand that they be taxed more.
Having lived under socialism/communism, I know from first-hand experience that five-year plans were a joke. We constantly struggled to find basics because not enough finished goods and food were produced to satisfy demand. For example, a Soviet factory that was scheduled to produce 50,000 tractors in 1930, managed to build only 3,000. The factory received the “Order of the Camel” for “breaks in the plan and wastage.”
The important questions about communism are:
The important questions about communism are:
- Was there equality and democracy under communism?
- Did everyone experience the same and equal quality of life and the “the good things of life?”
- Was the struggle between classes non-existent?
- Were classes abolished forever?
As a police state, there were three organizations that ruled any communist country: administrators who ran the affairs of the country, the Communist Party who gave directives for national policy and publicity from its centralized position, and the political police who watched over the communist loyalty and compliance of the citizenry.
If you think such a practice of loyalty watch and speech compliance is dead, consider the city of Barcelona, from the state of Catalonia, Spain, who created recently the “Anti-rumor Agency” and certified 436 “anti-rumor” volunteer agents to catch and punish those whose beliefs are not in line with the “consensus,” with “groupthink.” “The agents will patrol the streets, butt into certain conversations, and spread politically correct information.”
“Groupthink” is the “consensus” established and highly publicized through MSM by self-appointed moral know-it-alls, suppressing any evidence that might question the “consensus,” stereotyping, demonizing, and denigrating anyone with a divergent opinion or view.
Anyone who questions and disagrees with the global warming/climate change or any other “consensus” is a “denier,” “flat-Earther,” “creationist,” “xenophobe,” “homophobe,” “bigot,” “racist,” or “fascist.” Charles Krauthammer reported in his “Thought Police on Patrol” how 110,000 individuals signed a petition to “his newspaper not to carry any more articles questioning the fact of man-made global warming.”
If you think such a practice of loyalty watch and speech compliance is dead, consider the city of Barcelona, from the state of Catalonia, Spain, who created recently the “Anti-rumor Agency” and certified 436 “anti-rumor” volunteer agents to catch and punish those whose beliefs are not in line with the “consensus,” with “groupthink.” “The agents will patrol the streets, butt into certain conversations, and spread politically correct information.”
“Groupthink” is the “consensus” established and highly publicized through MSM by self-appointed moral know-it-alls, suppressing any evidence that might question the “consensus,” stereotyping, demonizing, and denigrating anyone with a divergent opinion or view.
Anyone who questions and disagrees with the global warming/climate change or any other “consensus” is a “denier,” “flat-Earther,” “creationist,” “xenophobe,” “homophobe,” “bigot,” “racist,” or “fascist.” Charles Krauthammer reported in his “Thought Police on Patrol” how 110,000 individuals signed a petition to “his newspaper not to carry any more articles questioning the fact of man-made global warming.”
Is it not despicable to prey on people’s “feelings” of poverty, economic inequality and insecurity (caused by the administrations’ economic policies) by promoting the utopia of communism as desirable alternative to the “failed and unjust” capitalism?
People, who are ignorant and frightened every day by the MSM, buy into communist dogma, slogans, and rhetoric. Illegals are an easy sell because they don’t know anything else but tyranny and are enchanted by the generous welfare that, they think, comes from the ever full government coffers. Minorities who are told every day they have been slighted by prejudice and injustice buy into the deliberately deceptive communist rhetoric as well.
Inequality and injustice cannot be wiped out by destroying one successful economic model and replacing it with a failed economic model just because some charismatic promoter says it will succeed this time because the right people are in charge. At the end of the day, communism is still a form of totalitarianism no matter how you slice it.
So why would greatly reducing carbon emissions at power plants lead to the “killing of our economy”? Vitter said it’s pretty simple.
“To reduce carbon emissions like that so dramatically, we’d have to get rid of a lot of abundant, cheaper sources of energy right now, starting with coal and many other fossil fuels. Those are the most efficient, the most low-cost forms of energy we have. So we’re simply displacing that for higher ways of producing electricity,” he said.
“So energy costs are going to go up significantly. When you do that, it’s a toll on the economy. It’s basically a tax on consumers and a tax on the economy, so it’s going to slow economic growth even more.”
Vitter said 40 percent of the nation’s electricity comes from coal, which is expected to take the hardest hit if these regulations take hold. He said the green-energy movement cannot begin to replace the lost energy capacity expected from these regulations and added there’s really nothing to replace coal that is even remotely competitive on price.
“So we’re going to pay much higher prices,” Vitter said. “A big hit to consumers and to families and a big hit to businesses in terms of costs. That means fewer jobs.”
Also see:
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar