Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A “Vision” of the Future
by Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber The U.S. Army’s Operating Concept 2016-2028 was issued in August 2010 with three goals. First, it aims to portray how future Army forces will conduct operations as part of a joint force to deter conflict, prevail in war, and succeed in a range of contingencies, at home and abroad. Second, the concept describes the employment of Army forces at the tactical and operational levels of war between 2016 and 2028. Third, in broad terms the concept describes how Army headquarters, from theater army to division, organize and use their forces. The concept goes on to describe the major categories of Army operations, identify the capabilities required of Army forces, and guide how force development should be prioritized. The goal of this concept is to establish a common frame of reference for thinking about how the US Army will conduct full spectrum operations in the coming two decades (US Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 – 2028, TRADOC Pamphlet 525-3-1, dated 19 August 2010, p. iii. Hereafter cited as TD Pam 525-3-1. The Army defines full spectrum operations as the combination of offensive, defensive, and either stability operations overseas or civil support operations on U.S. soil).
A key and understudied aspect of full spectrum operations is how to conduct these operations within American borders. If we face a period of persistent global conflict as outlined in successive National Security Strategy documents, then Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil. Army capstone and operating concepts must provide guidance concerning how the Army will conduct the range of operations required to defend the republic at home. In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor. Under present law, which initially stemmed from bad feelings about Reconstruction, the military’s domestic role is highly circumscribed. In the situation we lay out below, even though the governor refuses to seek federal help to quell the uprising (the usual channel for military assistance), the Constitution allows the president broad leeway in times of insurrection. Citing the precedents of Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War and Dwight D. Eisenhower sending troops to Little Rock in 1957, the president mobilizes the military and the Department of Homeland Security, to regain control of the city. This scenario requires us to consider how domestic intelligence is gathered and shared, the role of local law enforcement (to the extent that it supports the operation), the scope and limits of the Insurrection Act--for example maintaining a military chain of command but in support of the Attorney General as the Department of Justice is the Lead Federal Agency (LFA) under the conditions of the Act--and the roles of the local, national, and international media.
The Scenario (2016)
The Great Recession of the early twenty-first century lasts far longer than anyone anticipated. After a change in control of the White House and Congress in 2012, the governing party cuts off all funding that had been dedicated to boosting the economy or toward relief. The United States economy has flatlined, much like Japan’s in the 1990s, for the better part of a decade. By 2016, the economy shows signs of reawakening, but the middle and lower-middle classes have yet to experience much in the way of job growth or pay raises. Unemployment continues to hover perilously close to double digits, small businesses cannot meet bankers’ terms to borrow money, and taxes on the middle class remain relatively high. A high-profile and vocal minority has directed the public’s fear and frustration at nonwhites and immigrants. After almost ten years of race-baiting and immigrant-bashing by right-wing demagogues, nearly one in five Americans reports being vehemently opposed to immigration, legal or illegal, and even U.S.-born nonwhites have become occasional targets for mobs of angry whites.
In May 2016 an extremist militia motivated by the goals of the “tea party” movement takes over the government of Darlington, South Carolina, occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council, and placing the mayor under house arrest. Activists remove the chief of police and either disarm local police and county sheriff departments or discourage them from interfering. In truth, this is hardly necessary. Many law enforcement officials already are sympathetic to the tea party’s agenda, know many of the people involved, and have made clear they will not challenge the takeover. The militia members are organized and have a relatively well thought-out plan of action.
With Darlington under their control, militia members quickly move beyond the city limits to establish “check points” – in reality, something more like choke points -- on major transportation lines. Traffic on I-95, the East Coast’s main north-south artery; I-20; and commercial and passenger rail lines are stopped and searched, allegedly for “illegal aliens.” Citizens who complain are immediately detained. Activists also collect “tolls” from drivers, ostensibly to maintain public schools and various city and county programs, but evidence suggests the money is actually going toward quickly increasing stores of heavy weapons and ammunition. They also take over the town web site and use social media sites to get their message out unrestricted.
When the leaders of the group hold a press conference to announce their goals, they invoke the Declaration of Independence and argue that the current form of the federal government is not deriving its “just powers from the consent of the governed” but is actually “destructive to these ends.” Therefore, they say, the people can alter or abolish the existing government and replace it with another that, in the words of the Declaration, “shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.” While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups. At the press conference the masked militia members’ uniforms sport a unit seal with a man wearing a tricorn hat and carrying a musket over the motto “Today’s Minutemen.” When a reporter asked the leaders who are the “red coats” the spokesman answered, “I don’t know who the redcoats are…it could be federal troops.” Experts warn that while these groups heretofore have been considered weak and marginal, the rapid coalescence among them poses a genuine national threat.
The mayor of Darlington calls the governor and his congressman. He cannot act to counter the efforts of the local tea party because he is confined to his home and under guard. The governor, who ran on a platform that professed sympathy with tea party goals, is reluctant to confront the militia directly. He refuses to call out the National Guard. He has the State Police monitor the roadblocks and checkpoints on the interstate and state roads but does not order the authorities to take further action. In public the governor calls for calm and proposes talks with the local tea party to resolve issues. Privately, he sends word through aides asking the federal government to act to restore order. Due to his previous stance and the appearance of being “pro” tea party goals the governor has little political room to maneuver.
The Department of Homeland Security responds to the governor’s request by asking for defense support to civil law enforcement. After the Department of Justice states that the conditions in Darlington and surrounding areas meet the conditions necessary to invoke the Insurrection Act, the President invokes it.
(From Title 10 US Code the President may use the militia or Armed Forces to:
§ 331 – Suppress an insurrection against a State government at the request of the Legislature or, if not in session, the Governor.
§ 332 – Suppress unlawful obstruction or rebellion against the U.S.
§ 333 – Suppress insurrection or domestic violence if it (1) hinders the execution of the laws to the extent that a part or class of citizens are deprived of Constitutional rights and the State is unable or refuses to protect those rights or (2) obstructs the execution of any Federal law or impedes the course of justice under Federal laws.)
By proclamation he calls on the insurrectionists to disperse peacefully within 15 days. There is no violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. The President appoints the Attorney General and the Department of Justice as the lead federal agency to deal with the crisis. The President calls the South Carolina National Guard to federal service. The Joint Staff in Washington, D.C., alerts U.S. Northern Command, the headquarters responsible for the defense of North America, to begin crisis action planning. Northern Command in turn alerts U.S. Army North/Fifth U.S. Army for operations as a Joint Task Force headquarters. Army units at Fort Bragg, N.C.; Fort Stewart, Ga.; and Marines at Camp Lejuene, N.C. go on alert. The full range of media, national and international, is on scene.
“Fix Darlington, but don’t destroy it!”
Upon receiving the alert for possible operations in Darlington, the Fifth Army staff begins the military decision making process with mission analysis and intelligence preparation of the battlefield. (Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield is the term applied to the procedures performed by the intelligence staff of all Army unit headquarters in the development of bases of information on the enemy, terrain and weather, critical buildings and facilities in a region and other points. Army units conduct operations on the basis of this information. The term is in Army doctrine and could be problematic when conducted in advance of operations on U.S. soil. The general form of the initial intelligence estimate is in figure 1.) In developing the intelligence estimate military intelligence planners will confront the first constraints on the conduct of full spectrum operations in the United States, as well as constraints on supporting law enforcement. The analytical steps of the Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield, or IPB, must be modified in preparing for and conducting operations in the homeland.
The steps of the IPB process are: define the operational environment/battlespace, describe environmental effects on operations/describe battlespace effects, evaluate the threat/adversary, and determine threat/adversary courses of action. (PSYOP was changed to Military Information Support Operations, MISO, by Secretary of Defense directive in June 2010.)
While preparing terrain and weather data do not pose a major problem to the G-2, gathering data on the threat and under civil considerations for intelligence and operational purposes is problematic to say the least.
Estimate (FM 2-01.3, p. 7, chapter 1)
Executive Order 12333, United States Intelligence Activities, dated 4 December 1981, relates mostly to intelligence gathering outside the continental United States. However, it also outlines in broad terms permissible information-gathering within the United States and on American citizens and permanent resident aliens, categorized as United States persons. (The executive order included in its definition of “United States persons” unincorporated associations mostly comprising American citizens or permanent resident aliens; or a corporation incorporated in the United States, except for a corporation directed and controlled by a foreign government or governments. The basic thrust of the rules and regulations concerning intelligence collection and dissemination are focused on protecting American citizens’ Constitutional rights. These rules and regulations are focused, properly, on support to law enforcement. They do not contain much guidance concerning the conduct of full spectrum operations such as the situation facing the corps. While the best practice as described in FM 3-28 is to retain just enough for situational awareness and force protection the situation facing the corps strains the limits of situational awareness and could place the G2 and commanders at some risk once the dust has settled in the aftermath of an operation within the homeland.) The Fifth Army intelligence analysts will have a great deal of difficulty determining tea party members’ legal status. Because the Defense Department does not collect or store information on American civilians or civilian groups during peacetime, the military will have to rely on local and state law enforcement officials at the start of operations to establish intelligence data-bases and ultimately restore the rule of law in Darlington.
Using all intelligence disciplines from human intelligence to signals intelligence, the Fifth Army G2 and his staff section will collect as much information as they need to accomplish the mission. Once the rule of law is restored the Fifth Army G2 must ensure that it destroys information gathered during the operation within 90 days unless the law or the Secretary of Defense requires the Fifth Army to keep it for use in legal cases (Field Manual 3-28, Civil Support Operations, pp. 7-13. The FM cites Department of Defense Directive, DODD, 5200.27). Because of the legal constraints on the military’s involvement in domestic affairs and the sympathies of local law enforcement, developing the initial intelligence, a continuing estimate, and potential adversary courses of action (what the insurrectionists holding Darlington and surrounding areas might do in response to Army operations) will be difficult. (The closest guidance on handling information collected in the course of civil disturbance operations is in Department of Defense Directive 5200.27 and Department of Defense Directive 5240.1R. These directives state: “Operations Related to Civil Disturbance. The Attorney General is the chief civilian officer in charge of coordinating all federal government activities relating to civil disturbances. Upon specific prior authorization of the Secretary of Defense or his designee, information may be acquired that is essential to meet operational requirements flowing from the mission as to DOD to assist civil authorities in dealing with civil disturbances. Such authorization will only be granted when there is a distinct threat of a civil disturbance exceeding the law enforcement capabilities of State and local authorities.”)
Fifth Army terrain analysts continue using open sources ranging from Google maps to Map-quest. Federal legal restrictions on assembling databases remain in effect and even incidental imagery, aerial photos gathered in the conduct of previously conducted training missions, cannot be used. Surveillance of the tea party roadblocks and checkpoints around Darlington proceeds carefully. Developing legal data-bases is one effort, but support for local law enforcement is hindered because of problems in determining how to share this information and with whom.
Despite these problems, receiving support from local law enforcement is critical to restoring the rule of law in Darlington. City police officers, county sheriff deputies and state troopers can contribute valuable local knowledge of personalities, customs and terrain beyond what can be found in data-bases and observation. Liaison officers and non-commissioned officers, with appropriate communications equipment must be exchanged. Given the suspicion that local police are sympathetic to the tea party members’ goals special consideration to operational security must be incorporated into planning. Informally communicating to the insurrectionists the determination of federal forces to restore local government can materially improve the likelihood of success. However, informants sympathetic to the tea party could easily compromise the element of surprise. The fact that a federal court must authorize wire taps in every instance also complicate the monitoring of communications into and out of Darlington. Operations in Darlington specifically and in the homeland generally must also take into account the possibility of increased violence and the range of responses to violence.
All federal military forces involved in civil support must follow the standing rules for the use of force (SRUF) specified by the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. Much like the rules of force issued to the 7th Infantry Division during operations in Los Angeles in 1992 the underlying principle involves a continuum of force, a graduated level of response determined by civilians' behavior. Fifth Army must assume that every incident of gunfire will be investigated. (Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction, CJCSI, 3121.01B, Standing Rules of Engagement/Standing Rules for the Use of Force for US Forces. There are many similarities between rules for the use of force and rules of engagement, the right of self-defense for example. The fundamental difference is rules of engagement are by nature permissive measures intended to allow the maximum use of destructive combat power appropriate for the mission. Rules for the use of force are restrictive measures intended to allow only the minimum force necessary to accomplish the mission.) All units involved must also realize that operations will be conducted under the close scrutiny of the media.
Operating under media scrutiny is not a new phenomenon for the U.S. military. What is new and newsworthy about this operation is that it is taking place in the continental United States. Commanders and staffs must think about the effect of this attention and be alert when considering how to use the media. The media will broadcast the President’s proclamation and cover military preparations for operations in Darlington. Their reports will be as available to tea party leaders in Darlington as they are to a family watching the evening news in San Francisco. Coupled with a gradual build-up of federal forces in the local area, all covered by the media, the effect of this pressure will compound over time and quite possibly cause doubt about the correctness of the events in Darlington in the minds of its’ citizens and the insurrectionists who control the town. The Joint Task Force commander, staff and subordinate units must operate as transparently as possible, while still giving due consideration to operational security. Commanders must manage these issues even as they increase pressure on the insurrectionists.
The design of this plan to restore the rule of law to Darlington will include information/influence operations designed to present a picture of the federal response and the inevitable defeat of the insurrection. The concept of the joint plan includes a phased deployment of selected forces into the area beginning with reconnaissance and military intelligence units. Once the Fifth Army commander determines he has a complete picture of activity within the town and especially of the insurrectionists’ patterns of behavior, deployment of combat, combat support and combat service support forces will begin from Forts Bragg and Stewart, and Camp Lejuene. Commanders will need to consider how the insurrectionists will respond. Soldiers and Marines involved in this operation, and especially their families will be subject to electronic mail, Facebook messages, Twitters, and all manner of information and source of pressure. Given that Soldiers and Marines stationed at Forts Bragg and Stewart as well as Camp Lejuene live relatively nearby and that many come from this region, chances are they will know someone who lives in or near Darlington. Countering Al Qaeda web-based propaganda is one thing, countering domestic information bombardments is another effort entirely.
The design and execution of operations to restore the rule of law in Darlington will be complicated. The Fifth Army will retain a military chain of command for regular Army and Marine Corps units along with the federalized South Carolina National Guard, but will be in support of the Department of Justice as the Lead Federal Agency, LFA. The Attorney General may designate a Senior Civilian Representative of the Attorney General (SCRAG) to coordinate the efforts of all Federal agencies. The SCRAG has the authority to assign missions to federal military forces. The Attorney General may also appoint a Senior Federal Law Enforcement Officer (SFLEO) to coordinate all Federal law enforcement activities.
The pace of the operation needs to be deliberate and controlled. Combat units will conduct overt Show of Force operations to remind the insurrectionists they are now facing professional military forces, with all the training and equipment that implies. Army and Marine units will remove road blocks and check points both overtly and covertly with minimum essential force to ratchet up pressure continually on insurrectionist leadership. Representatives of state and local government as well as federalized South Carolina National Guard units will care for residents choosing to flee Darlington. A focus on the humanitarian aspect of the effort will be politically more palatable for the state and local officials. Federal forces continue to tighten the noose as troops seize and secure power and water stations, radio and TV stations, and hospitals. The final phase of the operation, restoring order and returning properly elected officials to their offices, will be the most sensitive.
Movements must be planned and executed more carefully than the operations that established the conditions for handover. At this point military operations will be on the downturn but the need for more politically aware military advice will not. War, and the use of federal military force on U.S. soil, remains an extension of policy by other means. Given the invocation of the Insurrection Act, the federal government must defeat the insurrection, preferably with minimum force. Insurrectionists and their sympathizers must have no doubt that an uprising against the Constitution will be defeated. Dealing with the leaders of the insurrection can be left to the proper authorities, but drawing from America history, military advice would suggest an amnesty for individual members of the militia and prosecution for leaders of the movement who broke the law. This fictional scenario leads not to conclusions but points to ponder when considering 21st century full spectrum operations in the continental United States.
The Insurrection Act does not need to be changed for the 21st century. Because it is broadly written, the law allows the flexibility needed to address a range of threats to the Republic.
What we must consider in the design of homeland defense or security exercises is translating the Act into action. The Army Operating Concept describes Homeland Defense as the protection of “U.S. sovereignty, territory, domestic population, and critical defense infrastructure against external threats and aggression, or other threats as directed by the president” (TD Pam 525-3-1, p. 27. Emphasis added.) Neither the operating concept nor recently published Army doctrine, FM 3-28 Civil Support Operations, goes into detail when considering the range of “other threats.” While invoking the Insurrection Act must be a last resort, once it is put into play Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas. The Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment. While real problems and real difficulties of such operations may not be perceived until the point of execution preparation will afford the Army the ability to not be too badly wrong at the outset.
Being not too badly wrong at the outset requires focused military education on the nuances of operations in the homeland. Army doctrine defines full spectrum operations as a mix of offense, defense and either stability or civil support operations. Curriculum development is a true zero sum game; when a subject is added another must be removed. Given the array of threats and adversaries; from “commando-style” raids such as Mumbai, the changing face of militias in the United States, rising unrest in Mexico, and the tendency to the extreme in American politics the subject of how American armed forces will conduct security and defense operations within the continental U.S. must be addressed in the curricula of our Staff and War Colleges. (The Kansas City Star, 12 September 2010, “The New Militia.” The front page story concerns the changing tactics of militia movements and how militias now focus on community service and away from violence against the government. Law enforcement agencies feel this is camouflage for true intentions. The story covered armed paramilitary militias in Missouri and Kansas.)
The Army must address the how to of intelligence/information gathering and sharing, liaison with local law enforcement and conduct of Information Operations in focused exercises, such as UNIFIED QUEST, given a wider range of invited participants. The real question of how to educate the Army on full spectrum operations under homeland security and defense conditions must be a part of an overall review of professional military education for the 21st century. We cannot discount the agility of an external threat, the evolution of Al Qaeda for example, and its ability to take advantage of a “Darlington event” within U.S. borders. How would we respond to this type of action? What if border violence from Mexico crosses into the United States? The pressure for action will be enormous and the expectation of professional, disciplined military action will be equally so given the faith the American people have in their armed forces. The simple fact is that while the Department of Justice is the Lead Federal Agency in these operations the public face of the operation will be uniformed American Soldiers. On a TV camera a civilian is a civilian but here is no mistaking the mottled battle dress of a Soldier with the U.S. flag on his or her right sleeve.
The table of organization and equipment of Fifth U.S. Army/Army North must be scrutinized. The range of liaison parties that must be exchanged in the conduct of operations on American soil is extensive. Coordination with federal, state and local civil law enforcement and security agencies is a vital element in concluding homeland operations successfully. The liaison parties cannot be ad hoc or last minute additions to the headquarters. At a minimum such parties must routinely exercise with the headquarters.
In 1933 then Colonel George Marshall criticized the education that the Army Command and General Staff College provided as inadequate to “the chaotic state of affairs in the first few months of a campaign with a major power” (From a 1933 letter from COL GC Marshall to MG Stewart Heintzelman, cited in a report on the US Army Command and General Staff College conducted in 1982 by MG Guy Meloy. The report is held in the Special Collections section of the Combined Arms Research Library, Fort Leavenworth, KS.) We must continue on the path of ensuring the avoidance of the “chaotic state of affairs” in the opening moments of future campaigns, defending the nation from within and without. As Dr. Sebastian L. v. Gorka wrote in Joint Forces Quarterly (p. 33), “[N]o concepts are immune to critique and reappraisal when it comes to securing the homeland.”
Melissia wrote: The military prepares and plans for lots of unlikely scenarios.
I agree. The Teat Party has yet to display any violence.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/02/justice/georgia-militia-arrests/index.html?hpt=hp_t2 Tea party members caught plotting to commit domestic terrorist acts.
Similarly, a member of the Tea Party attacked a Democrat rally in Houston, Texas.
Melissia wrote: The military prepares and plans for lots of unlikely scenarios.
I agree. The Teat Party has yet to display any violence.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/02/justice/georgia-militia-arrests/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Tea party members caught plotting to commit domestic terrorist acts.
Similarly, a member of the Tea Party attacked a Democrat rally in Houston, Texas.
Spoiler:
.
The article you posted, they were not Tea Party members.
Spacemanvic wrote: From another thread, people wondered about the possibility of a civil war. The US military is already thinking that:
No, the people that wrote that paper are thinking of that. Read the second paragraph, especially this:
In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor.
Melissia wrote: The military prepares and plans for lots of unlikely scenarios.
I agree. The Teat Party has yet to display any violence.
The OWS crowd however......
1.) The teat party? That sounds like a sexy party. I'd like to get up on that.
2.) I'd like to think that the US Military prepares for every imaginable and many unimaginable scenarios. I'd like to think that if Aliens landed in Spain and sailed over here in Spanish Galleons, and they were hostile, psychic, and shot eye-beams that shattered your bones with a stare, and Elvis Presley was their leader, someone in the Pentagon could immediately go "OK, look in Binder 427, page 52, and flip to page 75 for the Elvis contingencies; should be something about peanut butter, banana, and Quaalude cannons".
3.) Hey, wait a minute. Did you mean it was the Tea party that didn't display any violence? Like, Rand Paul's people?
Spacemanvic wrote: From another thread, people wondered about the possibility of a civil war. The US military is already thinking that:
No, the people that wrote that paper are thinking of that. Read the second paragraph, especially this:
In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor.
Melissia wrote: The military prepares and plans for lots of unlikely scenarios.
I agree. The Teat Party has yet to display any violence.
The OWS crowd however......
3.) Hey, wait a minute. Did you mean it was the Tea party that didn't display any violence? Like, Rand Paul's people?
So great you brought that up. Yet another FAIL:
Here's video of her attacking Rand Pauls SUV as it arrived right before she got taken down:
This video was sent to RedState by an anonymous witness at the event. It shows what Valle was doing when the Paul supporters grabbed her. No one chased her around the car. She was never in front of the car. As you can see in the video, Valle reached in the candidate’s window with her “RepubliCorp” sign and shoved it in his face. Several supporters in Paul shirts have her surrounded at that point, and a man in a suit is the first person to actually intervene physically. It’s hard to tell from the video, but it could be that the man in the suit was with Paul’s security staff.
Toward the end of the video, you see several Paul supporters asking a police officer to come intervene. It was Paul supporters who told Profitt to back off. It was Paul supporters who brought the police. Contrary to the growing narrative on the left, this video clearly shows that Valle was not the victim of a conspiracy to “take her out.”
Spacemanvic wrote: From another thread, people wondered about the possibility of a civil war. The US military is already thinking that:
No, the people that wrote that paper are thinking of that. Read the second paragraph, especially this:
In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor.
If they are studying the possibility......
they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
Spacemanvic wrote: From another thread, people wondered about the possibility of a civil war. The US military is already thinking that:
No, the people that wrote that paper are thinking of that. Read the second paragraph, especially this:
In this paper, we posit a scenario in which a group of political reactionaries take over a strategically positioned town and have the tacit support of not only local law enforcement but also state government officials, right up to the governor.
If they are studying the possibility......
they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
And yet again, I agree, the Tea Party isnt a violent movement.
Wish same could be said about the unwashed OWS masses though.....
Spacemanvic wrote: Here's video of her attacking Rand Pauls SUV as it arrived right before she got taken down:
I think you might have linked the wrong video. All I see in that one is a woman trying to hand him a placard and then being ganked by the crowd. It was in slow motion and everything, but I still missed it.
@Spacemanvic, Oh no she shoved a poster at a car, she totally deserved to get forced to the ground and stomped on. You don't think it is at all going overboard when she's already restrained to stomp on her a few more times?
Yes, petty fascists are usually willing to victimize themselves over any incident of physical confrontation while they pursue policies that violently steal the property of the poor so that the wealthy can gorge themselves on these earnings.
If there was a civil war now, wouldn't the whole rest of the world help out?
I remember the Confederates wrongly thought that the British would assist them.
But I reckon if its most of America vs the Young earth, racist, science denying hicks that make up about 35 million people in the US, then pretty much everyone else in the world would want to pitch in this time..
mattyrm wrote: If there was a civil war now, wouldn't the whole rest of the world help out?
I remember the Confederates wrongly thought that the British would assist them.
But I reckon if its most of America vs the Young earth, racist, science denying hicks that make up about 35 million people in the US, then pretty much everyone else in the world would want to pitch in this time..
Even France and Japan!
That would be some fun times for sure. Imagine the UN trying to force a no fly zone over the US. Or the UN supporting their insurgents against the government.
I also find it hilarious (well, mostly sad) that the same person who calls the OWS a violent organization went to talk about the Bonus Army positively and complain about the "Progressives" that used violence against it.
Seriously, the Bonus Army were called communists and all other manner of things back in the day. They were accused of being violent and trying to stage a coup, and everything else.
Not only do we see someone not capable of understanding history, but who has contorted that history to affirm their own ugly and vile beliefs while simultaneously doing the same to present day events.
I don't know if you're familiar with academia, but it tends to involve the "study" of lots of things that don't need study because the phrase "publish or perish" is very appropriate.
Spacemanvic wrote: Contrary to the growing narrative on the left, this video clearly shows that Valle was not the victim of a conspiracy to “take her out.”
The only person I've ever heard describe that narrative is you. Throw in the two varying descriptions of Valle's behavior (Approaching window is not an attack.), and its quite clear that you're trying to paint your favored side as the "real" victims.
They're tired of the government spending, unless they're spending to bail out the banks it seems.
Notice at 1:12, now what could they mean by "a revolution is brewing"?
Does the US military still have its plans for defeating a British invasion from Canada? Or a Japanese attack on the Panama canal In many ways, this article is silly. Of course the military plan for this, better than sitting around doing nothing.
Heck, they probably have plans for invading Wales or Luxembourg
TheHammer wrote: I also find it hilarious (well, mostly sad) that the same person who calls the OWS a violent organization went to talk about the Bonus Army positively and complain about the "Progressives" that used violence against it.
Seriously, the Bonus Army were called communists and all other manner of things back in the day. They were accused of being violent and trying to stage a coup, and everything else.
Not only do we see someone not capable of understanding history, but who has contorted that history to affirm their own ugly and vile beliefs while simultaneously doing the same to present day events.
I feel sad :(
Here's the thing though:
The Bonus Army wasnt violent. There was a "fear" expressed by the government that the movement could turn violent.
On a final note, there is always talk of revolution in the USA. I remember during the Clinton years how the militia were going to march on Washington or have an uprising in Oregon or the El Paso librarians were going to kill 10 judges or blow up the local FBI building or something like that Some people in America don't like to see a Democrat (even a pretend one) in office. They take it personally
Yes, and the OWS is a horribly violent organization of violence! That's why there's all this blood staining the streets!
It has nothing to do with New York dumping homeless people into the OWS camps, or any aberrant behavior or anything! Let's just make them all out to be violent scum so that we can ignore all the actual real life violence that takes place.
TheHammer wrote: Yes, and the OWS is a horribly violent organization of violence! That's why there's all this blood staining the streets!
It has nothing to do with New York dumping homeless people into the OWS camps, or any aberrant behavior or anything! Let's just make them all out to be violent scum so that we can ignore all the actual real life violence that takes place.
Come on, azazel! Don't you know that it is a complete accident that a large uprising of old white people came together at the same time as a black man was elected president, and that the policies that advocate for benefit the very people who fund them!
TheHammer wrote: Come on, azazel! Don't you know that it is a complete accident that a large uprising of old pasty white people came together at the same time as a black man was elected president, and that the policies that advocate for benefit the very people who fund them!
Keep lying to yourself Spacemanvic, maybe eventually if you lie to yourself enough, it'll become TRUE that no tea party member has done politically motivated violence.
Frazzled wrote:Like I said...coockoo. Its like saying the Labour Party does the foul bidding of Tim Hortons.
You're right. It must be a coincidence that the Tea Party movement was hijacked in its early stages, to begin demanding everything that its funding sources have ever dreamed of.
deathholydeath wrote: Dakka OT is on a roll! 2 threads locked and another on its way in less than a day! Weeee!
I can't help but think after a while, Red sees these threads and wishes some of these damn Americans would get off Dakka, and get on their rascal scooters and go off to buy some hamburgers and ammunition, already.
sirlynchmob wrote: they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.
It is, however, an interesting look at how they intend to diffuse the situation. There are a few problems with it I can see, (it all goes out the window if the US Army suffers a perceived [not necessarily actual] defeat) but it's a fairly well thought out plan.
sirlynchmob wrote: they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.
That can't be right, 'cause in 1812 it was Plan A.
sirlynchmob wrote: they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.
Contingency? The US has invaded Canada twice already lol.
Neither went very well. Most eventful thing to come from it was the destruction of Toranto
TheHammer wrote: Yes, and the OWS is a horribly violent organization of violence! That's why there's all this blood staining the streets!
It has nothing to do with New York dumping homeless people into the OWS camps, or any aberrant behavior or anything! Let's just make them all out to be violent scum so that we can ignore all the actual real life violence that takes place.
Fascist.
It's not blood they're staining the streets with, according to family of mine in New York. It seemed a lot of them felt the need to gak and litter all over the streets, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AustonT wrote: I had really expected one of the provinces to join our happy union by now. I wouldn't give up a single payer system either though.
I wouldn't mind if New Brunswick joined the U.S. It's a gorgeous up there and that's where a lot of my family is from.
The first time I saw this I thought it said racist scooter. And I was like "what's a racist scooter" then you said Segway. And I was like "yeah I guess that works." then I reread it and felt silly.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I was thinking more like Alberta or BC.
New Brunswick is awesome. It's like Maine and New Hampshire, but with proper healthcare and social services. Actually, I take that back, a little. I think Maine has a better system than NH does.
sirlynchmob wrote: they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.
Contingency? The US has invaded Canada twice already lol.
Neither went very well. Most eventful thing to come from it was the destruction of Toranto
Wait, we attacked the Italian fleet?
The invasions of Canada failed because they didn't have Texans. Duh!
The US government received $15m from England for, among other things, closing the boarder with Canada to stop it. The public backlash nearly led to President Johnson's Impeachment.
DHS and US Military Make Final Preparations Before Announcing Martial Law
August 8, 2012
Informants and military personnel are coming forth anonymously to confirm that martial law “is right around the corner.” However, right now we are under a silent martial law and citizens are reporting strange and unexplainable activity from the US armed forces and multiple federal agencies that point to a covert preparatory operation to completely lock down America in the very near future.
Sources from multiple locations across the nation have independently confirmed that the US military are repositioning soldiers in conjunction with allied foreign troops in the initial stages of martial law.
The US military are secretly moving massive amounts of “equipment” across the country consistently for more than a year. In Phoenix, Arizona, tractor-trailers transporting tanks on public highways have been spotted. One witness stated that he saw these flatbeds multiple times in the month of June. Eye witness reports are coming primarily from the northern and southern Border States.
Peter Santilli, an ex-marine informant who was a specialist in aviation deployed weapons, explains that a refrigerated truck, allocated by the administration department on base, was directed to the commissary, where the unsuspecting driver believed that he was transporting food. The weapon was placed at the head of the trailer, and covered up with either food stores (like cans of soup) or body bags. In the event that the truck is stopped en route, the weapon would be well hidden and go undetected by inspectors on the public highways.
Santilli, who was assigned to ride in the cab of the truck with the driver, says that his orders were to make sure the truck arrived at its destination. If there were problems concerning potential civil unrest, he was to radio into his superiors for aid by either air or ground support. Should the situation warrant serious attention; crowd control methods would be implemented.
One possible scenario was the use of cluster bomb units (CBUs) that will emit upon detonation, a “sleep and kill” chemical weapon that will not disturb infrastructure, but is lethal to all living things within the effected zone. Santilli describes these particular 3 unit CBUs as shaped like water-heaters with a coned top and plunger-like device. Once deployed in the air, a parachute assists these CBUs to the targeted area. And when detonated, a deadly chemical gas will kill every human and animal in the specified cordoned area.
The acquisition of armory by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and contracts for bullet-proof glass for check-point booths to be positioned strategically throughout the nation on public highways have heightened awareness that the US government is preparing for a well-planned domestic military action. DHS armored vehicles have been sighted on highways in Kentucky.
When citizens attempt to capture the activity on film, some have their cameras confiscated; sometimes after a physical altercation.
On Google Maps, where known military bases were once visible, some strategic areas are now blurred out.
John (a pseudonym) was contracted by DHS to “fill in caves, mines and block trails”. Now these measures are being stepped up, as independent contractors are being brought to mountainous regions and told to block all entrances into the mountains, by way of caves and other areas where people could possibly “hide out in the hills” during a riot situation under declaration of martial law.
Forested areas in states like Montana, Missouri and Arkansas are being closed to the public while military activity is being witnessed by locals. Those commercially contracted civilians working in these areas are allocated parallel shifts and compartmentalized projects to provide for an intelligence controlled operation.
One informant relayed an incident where he was detained on a forest road by unidentified “paramilitary” officials that seized his rifle from the rack on the back of his vehicle.
Another source said that while traveling in a national forest park, he and his party were met by what appeared to be a military police officer who demanded that they turn back.
Residents in Pine Mountain, Georgia and Spruce Mountain, Nevada have had confrontations with US armed forces. When travelling in public national forested areas, military police with “automatic weapons” say that locals cannot gather wood in surrounding forested spaces (as they have traditionally done for decades). One man in particular had his rifle forcibly confiscated by unidentified armed men.
On dirt roads leading to the Lassen National Forest reserve, paving is being laid over the gravel roads. The locals know that secret underground drilling or tunneling is being conducted. Whenever they enter the park, they are quickly escorted out by heavily armed and quite menacing persons. Even once abandoned logging roads are beginning to see activity again.
Information coming out of reserve units in Arizona is that they are being put on official alert. Military personnel are being told by superiors not to schedule vacations and prepare to be on-call and on-duty indefinitely. According to one informant, these new assignments are not providing for deployment overseas, but rather for domestic service with the intimation that these deployments may have relation to civil unrest expectations.
In Lake Havasu, Arizona, and Colorado Springs as well as Fort Collins, Colorado, locals are coming forth to report that local fires may have been lit by foreign troops; specifically Russian forces that have been spotted in the area. These Russian troops are believed to be stationed at Fort Carson, Colorado.
Military drills, a.k.a. urban warfare, have been played out in many states by the Pentagon and other branches of the US armed forces.
In Plainville and Worchester, Massachusetts, surprised citizens witnessed last “Wednesday evening. . . military helicopters descended on the vacant Wood School [in] the late hours of the night in a scene that might have appeared to simulate the United States’ special forces attack on Osama bin Laden’s compound last year.” Many locals had their homes swooped down upon by black helicopters in an obvious display of military dominance over the general public.
Residents saw helicopters landing near Worcester Memorial Auditorium in Lincoln Square. Local newspapers were flooded with “telephone calls and e-mails . . . curious about what was happening.”
The local police claim they were unaware of the drills.
A US Army spokeswoman made a half-hearted apology for “any inconvenience or unforeseen disturbance.”
In Hollywood, Florida, DHS and the Hollywood Police Department have taken part in Master Rappelling training exercises (MPTE) with Blackhawk helicopters scheduled over various government-owned buildings. Details concerning the drills are being kept from the public for “security reasons”.
MPTE are special operations to teach law enforcement and military techniques in tactical rope and rappelling skills that can be used in helicopter deployment and advanced tactical training.
Just this month, foreign troops were caught at a Wal-Mart . They were travelling in what were described as “large government vans”.
Law-enforcement battalions have been created out of Camp Pendleton, California, consisting of specialized military police (SMPs) that would be deployed to assist in any event of civil disturbance, handling of detainees, use biometrics to identify suspects and conduct forensic work. Their assistance is not limited to conducting DUIs and writing speeding tickets in an effort to re-brand the Marine Corps as being more involved with average work now allocated to local law enforcement.
Moving around in white, unmarked vans, strange troops have been seen purchasing food and water at another Wal-Mart in Franklin, Indiana. Parading in military personnel fatigues where drone activity has been reported in Oklahoma City and black helicopters were spotted hovering over a construction site.
According to documents from the RAND Corporation, a planned event concerning a Police Stabilization Force within the US will be “a mix of military and police forces to deal with a range of threats.” The study explains:
• What the response should be
• The creation of a high-end police force
• Costs for this military/police collaborative force
Estimates are $637.3 million annually and including many federal agencies including: the US Marshals Service, the US Secret Service, the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) in the Department of State, and the US Army’s Military Police.
There is a media blackout concerning the “state of emergency” (code for martial law) that Anaheim, California residents have been under since the murder of a man by local police.
While protests have been conducted, residents say that “outsiders” are infiltrating peaceful demonstrations to stir up violence and ensure local and military police action against them.
While city officials are gearing up for “another large incident” and “another riot” protesters are coming forth to voice their distain at the “infiltrators” that attended a protest that ended with the fatal shooting of two Latino men.
During protest marches in Anaheim, the white, unmarked vans have resurfaced. This time unidentified “police” detained protesters and placed them into these vans.
Disclose.tv – Is Anaheim Under Martial Law ?
The increased activity across the nation in conjunction with the mounting citizen reports of seeing military on their streets, conducting urban warfare drills, and spotting foreign troops have prompted public interest in the US government’s plans to enact a full-scale martial law in America – expected by the end of this year.
The more attention that is brought to these sightings and the more people come forward with information, the safer the American public will be. The US military have orders to shoot and kill all dissenters. They are being trained to confiscate guns and detain people in “internment” or FEMA camps. For the sake of continuity of government, they are being told to turn on their own fellow Americans.
Remember now people. We're coming for all of you. Being an american will not save you if you start shooting at us
It is said that a jackalope may be caught by putting a flask of whiskey out at night. The jackalope will drink its fill of whiskey and its intoxication will make it easier to hunt.
Texas is OURS!!!!!! What Texan going to turn down free whiskey? -->Insert evil laughter<--
edit
Fusion Centers are for Law Enforcements and such. They call us and we wheel in with "DA WATER CANNON" ---.insert evil laughter<---
It is said that a jackalope may be caught by putting a flask of whiskey out at night. The jackalope will drink its fill of whiskey and its intoxication will make it easier to hunt.
Texas is OURS!!!!!! What Texan going to turn down free whiskey? -->Insert evil laughter<--
Curses our weakness has been discov...hey someone left this bottle here. Well, we can't let it spoil gulp gulp gulp. Dude whats with the net?
whembly wrote: @Jihadin: What about dem Fusion Centers we've been hearing about?
If I have to put on an earring and fuse with Frazz, not even Chuck Norris will be able to save you.
Unless you mean the nuclear type. And it's everyone's god given right to have a tokamak in their basement. You can have my plasma containment unit when you pry it from my 6000 degrees K dead fingers.
Located in states and major urban areas throughout the country, fusion centers are uniquely situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public safety, fire service, emergency response, public health, critical infrastructure protection, and private sector security personnel to understand local implications of national intelligence, thus enabling local officials to better protect their communities. Fusion centers provide interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government. They conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing while assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.
Located in states and major urban areas throughout the country, fusion centers are uniquely situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public safety, fire service, emergency response, public health, critical infrastructure protection, and private sector security personnel to understand local implications of national intelligence, thus enabling local officials to better protect their communities. Fusion centers provide interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government. They conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing while assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.
whembly wrote: @Jihadin: What about dem Fusion Centers we've been hearing about?
If I have to put on an earring and fuse with Frazz, not even Chuck Norris will be able to save you.
Unless you mean the nuclear type. And it's everyone's god given right to have a tokamak in their basement. You can have my plasma containment unit when you pry it from my 6000 degrees K dead fingers.
Google up "Fusion Center"... put on your tinfoil while you're at it...
whembly wrote: @Jihadin: What about dem Fusion Centers we've been hearing about?
If I have to put on an earring and fuse with Frazz, not even Chuck Norris will be able to save you.
Unless you mean the nuclear type. And it's everyone's god given right to have a tokamak in their basement. You can have my plasma containment unit when you pry it from my 6000 degrees K dead fingers.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
Google up "Fusion Center"... put on your tinfoil while you're at it...
Meh. Makes sense. When I was an elected official, it was one of the little things they had us do, so that there would be a clear chain of command in an 'emergency'. This is old news.
Coolyo294 wrote:Only if the Chinese invade Anchorage first.
The Aleutians should do. I'll bring the T-51bs, you bring the thermonuclear holocaust.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.
Wait, what are we talking about again?
Not sure. I was talking about talking about the right to keep and bare doomsday devices. The forums laughed at me, but now *I* BARON IVEAGH will do the laughing! BWA HA HA HA HA!
You don't need no oil,
nor a tokamak coil
solar stations provide Earth with juice.
Power beams are sublime,
so no one will mind
if we cook the occasional goose.
These arguments are holy without merit, in any kind of fact, it is pure racism against President Obama, if a white democrat got in (ala Bill Clinton or equivalent). We would not here this kind of rhetoric. If this is the ONLY argument the right wingers can put up "If you elect who we don't like there will be civil war" I truly pray the President Obama gets in office for four more years, because the alternative I bare not even thinking about, this stuff is scary. The objections the right has against women's rights to abortion, free access to birth control and the right to have ultimate say over their lives and their reproductive capabilities is truly scary.
I have been raised by parents who believe in equality for all people and that the debates that are going on in the states at the moment have very little traction else were in the world.
sirlynchmob wrote: they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.
Contingency? The US has invaded Canada twice already lol.
Neither went very well. Most eventful thing to come from it was the destruction of Toranto White House burned to the ground.
Jihadin wrote: Its cold up there..........but they have oil........
You know, a war with China would be an excellent excuse to annex Canada.
Only if the Chinese invade Anchorage first.
Um... have you been to Anchorage?
Every one of 'em are packing heat... EVERY. ONE. OF. THEM.
That sounds about right. I know that if I lived in the middle of Kodiak terrotory, I would never carry less than a .357 magnum, and even then the only reason I wouldn't carry anything even larger than that is because I'm a wuss and can't reliably hit anything if the kick is greater than 180 grain.
mattyrm wrote: If there was a civil war now, wouldn't the whole rest of the world help out?
I remember the Confederates wrongly thought that the British would assist them.
But I reckon if its most of America vs the Young earth, racist, science denying hicks that make up about 35 million people in the US, then pretty much everyone else in the world would want to pitch in this time..
Even France and Japan!
Couldn't help but think other nations would jump in. If not for economic interests then to knock down the US a rank or 2.
Wonder what China would want to do? Stay out of it just make money out of a "lend lease" program.
Help the US government or try to knock the US into the stone age?
Located in states and major urban areas throughout the country, fusion centers are uniquely situated to empower front-line law enforcement, public safety, fire service, emergency response, public health, critical infrastructure protection, and private sector security personnel to understand local implications of national intelligence, thus enabling local officials to better protect their communities. Fusion centers provide interdisciplinary expertise and situational awareness to inform decision-making at all levels of government. They conduct analysis and facilitate information sharing while assisting law enforcement and homeland security partners in preventing, protecting against, and responding to crime and terrorism.
Poppabear wrote: These arguments are holy without merit, in any kind of fact, it is pure racism against President Obama, if a white democrat got in (ala Bill Clinton or equivalent). We would not here this kind of rhetoric. If this is the ONLY argument the right wingers can put up "If you elect who we don't like there will be civil war" I truly pray the President Obama gets in office for four more years, because the alternative I bare not even thinking about, this stuff is scary. The objections the right has against women's rights to abortion, free access to birth control and the right to have ultimate say over their lives and their reproductive capabilities is truly scary.
I have been raised by parents who believe in equality for all people and that the debates that are going on in the states at the moment have very little traction else were in the world.
Pure racism? I guess that's why EVERY poll taken in any state in the US, regardless of lattitude shows a majority of people liking Obama on a personal level, but disliking how ineffective his policies are. It's funny, because in your clumsy attempt to paint 80 million people as racists, you show what an ignorant bigot you yourself are.
Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.
And I can think of a half-dozen 'white democrats' who are far more despised than Obama in the eyes of the right. It's funny how you don't even pause to consider Obama's background as a radical racist... I guess we can't talk about that though, since it's the wrong kind of racism.
Actually... yeah. A lot of it IS about racism, both against blacks and against Muslims-- the reason why so many people try to label Obama a Muslim is because that way they can bash him harder (also because he's black, and apparently darker skin tone is associated with Islam with many people).
Silverthorne wrote: Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.
So you are happy for people who don't have the same gods as a group who doesn't like contraception, abortion etc to have their (possibly non-) religious freedoms quashed because group A doesn't like it?
Are you happy that blacks can now vote, women can own property, get jobs and so on? Pretty sure all those were frowned on by large groups of people, often large religious groups, at some point in history. Just because the rules handed down to mankind via some stone tablets, or visions, or however your god chooses to communicate with his followers says "thou shalt not", doesn't mean everyone else should have to suffer from it.
You'd rather everyone pay for child support, foster homes etc for the millions of unwanted children that not providing "free" or subsadised contraception, birth control etc would result in? Because I can tell you right now that the cost for supporting that would be orders of magnitude higher than the current provisions.
Besides, the seperation of church and state is to ensure that everyone is treated the same, no matter what way they face to pray, not to enforce one group's rules on everyone else.
Melissia wrote: Actually... yeah. A lot of it IS about racism, both against blacks and against Muslims-- the reason why so many people try to label Obama a Muslim is because that way they can bash him harder (also because he's black, and apparently darker skin tone is associated with Islam with many people).
Yet those same people voted for him in 2008. Strange...
The charge of racism has been thrown around so much recently for such nonsensical things its meaning is lost. Disagreement with Oabam policies means you are racist, and should feel bad.
Silverthorne wrote: Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.
So you are happy for people who don't have the same gods as a group who doesn't like contraception, abortion etc to have their (possibly non-) religious freedoms quashed because group A doesn't like it?
Are you happy that blacks can now vote, women can own property, get jobs and so on? Pretty sure all those were frowned on by large groups of people, often large religious groups, at some point in history. Just because the rules handed down to mankind via some stone tablets, or visions, or however your god chooses to communicate with his followers says "thou shalt not", doesn't mean everyone else should have to suffer from it.
You'd rather everyone pay for child support, foster homes etc for the millions of unwanted children that not providing "free" or subsadised contraception, birth control etc would result in? Because I can tell you right now that the cost for supporting that would be orders of magnitude higher than the current provisions.
Besides, the seperation of church and state is to ensure that everyone is treated the same, no matter what way they face to pray, not to enforce one group's rules on everyone else.
Do you support abortion on demand at any point in the pregnancy? Are you in support of partial birth abortion? What about medical care for babies that survive partial birth abortion? Guess which President does, and which party does.
Abortion is a tricky issue. I see what both sides say and I think both have merit, or at least one side isn't totally fething stupid like when they talk about gay marriage.
Both sides concede an inch in the debate, either, since it'll weaken their position. It isn't that liberals believe in partial birth abortion, but as soon as they say that those are illegitimate they will then lose ground on the issue and have to defend those that question why abortions an hour before they become partial birth abortions aren't also wrong, etc.
Instead of bitching about abortion, why don't those on the right propose an economic and public health policy that would lessen the need for them? Abortion tracks closely to income, neighborhood, and education so why not work to improve those so that there are fewer actual abortions? People against abortion get so focused on it alone that they can't see the forest from the trees.
And, yeah, Silverthorne stop being stupid. Race and racism is a huge part of the modern right in this country. And while I'm not a Christian my reading of the New Testament leads me to believe that Christians should be a lot more upset about all the gross military spending that we do instead of paying for birth control.
TheHammer wrote: Abortion is a tricky issue. I see what both sides say and I think both have merit, or at least one side isn't totally fething stupid like when they talk about gay marriage.
Both sides concede an inch in the debate, either, since it'll weaken their position. It isn't that liberals believe in partial birth abortion, but as soon as they say that those are illegitimate they will then lose ground on the issue and have to defend those that question why abortions an hour before they become partial birth abortions aren't also wrong, etc.
Instead of bitching about abortion, why don't those on the right propose an economic and public health policy that would lessen the need for them? Abortion tracks closely to income, neighborhood, and education so why not work to improve those so that there are fewer actual abortions? People against abortion get so focused on it alone that they can't see the forest from the trees.
And, yeah, Silverthorne stop being stupid. Race and racism is a huge part of the modern right in this country. And while I'm not a Christian my reading of the New Testament leads me to believe that Christians should be a lot more upset about all the gross military spending that we do instead of paying for birth control.
I ask that question every time I see you post, so...
Hammer does have a point. Instead of screaming about abortions, why not address the underlaying issues that lead to them? It seems that a lot of this is trying to come ot terms with the symptom rather than the disease.
It's like gun control: other countries that have similar cultures and gun laws do not seem to have this problem on anywhere near the scale of hte US. So what is the underlying cause?
I ask that question every time I see you post, so...
Hammer does have a point. Instead of screaming about abortions, why not address the underlaying issues that lead to them? It seems that a lot of this is trying to come ot terms with the symptom rather than the disease.
It's like gun control: other countries that have similar cultures and gun laws do not seem to have this problem on anywhere near the scale of hte US. So what is the underlying cause?
I thought you had me on ignore after I corrected all your fail posts where you blamed autocorrect and websites that don't exist for your own blatant errors and fallacies.
yea but it can't stop a wiener dog fart. When the time comes for Greater Texas to stake its claim on 2/3 of the present day US we're resorting to WMWD as a first strike!
Jihadin wrote: Nothing sharper then a dog fart.....let the fart games begin!! .....also keep in mind everyone...all your coffee's belong to me when we take over
Here have some chickory coffee. Its just a little...strong. (runs away and watches J's head start spinning and his body shoot into orbit like a deflating balloon).
Jihadin wrote: Frazz....I drink coffee 24/7....from all over the world......
Son (can I call you son? You're younger than 200 right?) chickory coffee makes Turkey coffee taste like Canadian coffee which itself should in no way be confused with Kenyan coffee.
Black, just black, nothing like sugar, cream or milk in my coffee.
On topic:
Doesn't suprise me, local National Guard used the local airsoft teams for training for this exact thing. Airsofters had a blast 'rebelling', and I think the National Guard quite enjoyed it too.
Poppabear wrote: These arguments are holy without merit, in any kind of fact, it is pure racism against President Obama, if a white democrat got in (ala Bill Clinton or equivalent). We would not here this kind of rhetoric. If this is the ONLY argument the right wingers can put up "If you elect who we don't like there will be civil war" I truly pray the President Obama gets in office for four more years, because the alternative I bare not even thinking about, this stuff is scary. The objections the right has against women's rights to abortion, free access to birth control and the right to have ultimate say over their lives and their reproductive capabilities is truly scary.
I have been raised by parents who believe in equality for all people and that the debates that are going on in the states at the moment have very little traction else were in the world.
Pure racism? I guess that's why EVERY poll taken in any state in the US, regardless of lattitude shows a majority of people liking Obama on a personal level, but disliking how ineffective his policies are. It's funny, because in your clumsy attempt to paint 80 million people as racists, you show what an ignorant bigot you yourself are.
Also the 'right' doesn't have a problem with women's right to access birth control, we have a problem with being forced to pay for it. If as a Catholic, you find abortion abhorrent, you should not be forced to subsidize a practice you consider shockingly immoral and sacrilegious. Your position would require that a woman's right to have other people pay for her day after pill trumps the freedom of religion for the largest single religious group in the country. How is that equality? No one is saying that they can't have access to the drugs. We are saying people of faith should not be forced by the government to do something they consider evil. Let's not mince words- you would abrogate the freedom of religion, a natural right of all Americans.
And I can think of a half-dozen 'white democrats' who are far more despised than Obama in the eyes of the right. It's funny how you don't even pause to consider Obama's background as a radical racist... I guess we can't talk about that though, since it's the wrong kind of racism.
Your rebuttal sounds a lot like the "if you don't tolerate my intolerance you have a problem..." Did you hear any of the birther arguments, or references to civil war etc when Bill Clinton was elected? I was a bit young but I've done some research and talked to my parents and American friends of my parents who say they have never experienced anything like the right wing rhetoric and outright racism currently in play in the States. Can I remind you that Canada, New Zealand, Australia and many countries in Europe have had free health care, free birth control and unfettered access to abortion for decades and it hasn't ruined their societies? And as for being Catholic? My Mum is Catholic, my step-father is Catholic and I am Catholic. I attend a Catholic highschool. My parents are re-married and my Mum is an academic (yes I know, more of those left-wing feminists that you'd rather not deal with). They are both pro-choice, advocates of free health care and education and staunchly anti any kind of ism. Point is...you guys are wrong...plain and simple. And Romney's going to lose...and I will continue to be grateful that I have been born and raised where I have been...Canada and New Zealand.
sirlynchmob wrote: they also are studying the possibilities of an alien invasion, a zombie outbreak, and invading canada again. Just because they are examine possibilities does not mean they are even remotely likely to occur.
I read somewhere that we've had a contingency plan to invade Canada in the books since the late 1700s.
Contingency? The US has invaded Canada twice already lol.
Neither went very well. Most eventful thing to come from it was the destruction of Toranto White House burned to the ground.
Fixed that for you.
Lol
However both happened. I meant the US destroyed Toronto during their invasion in 1813. In 1814 the British/Canadians had revenge on D.C.
Doesn't suprise me, local National Guard used the local airsoft teams for training for this exact thing. Airsofters had a blast 'rebelling', and I think the National Guard quite enjoyed it too.
Your rebuttal sounds a lot like the "if you don't tolerate my intolerance you have a problem..." Did you hear any of the birther arguments, or references to civil war etc when Bill Clinton was elected?
***No, he was from Arkansas and didn’t travel internationally until Secondary education level. Of Course, in addition to that Southern accent thing (and feeling our pain) he never had book publishers putting out that he was from another country either (and failing to correct them). Civil war? You missed all the Ruby Ridge/Oklahoma bombing fun then. You must be a youngin.
I was a bit young
***I’m shocked. I would never have guessed.
but I've done some research
***mmm yes. Tell me more.
and talked to my parents and American friends of my parents who say they have never experienced anything like the right wing rhetoric and outright racism currently in play in the States.
***Then your parents and their friends are ignorant or liars. Which is it?
Can I remind you that Canada, New Zealand, Australia and many countries in Europe have had free health care, free birth control and unfettered access to abortion for decades and it hasn't ruined their societies?
***I don’t know. Those sheep in New Zealand look a little…strange.
And as for being Catholic? My Mum is Catholic, my step-father is Catholic and I am Catholic. I attend a Catholic highschool. My parents are re-married and my Mum is an academic (yes I know, more of those left-wing feminists that you'd rather not deal with). They are both pro-choice, advocates of free health care and education and staunchly anti any kind of ism. Point is...you guys are wrong...plain and simple. And Romney's going to lose...and I will continue to be grateful that I have been born and raised where I have been...Canada and New Zealand
***Call me when you are old enough to work for a living.
Spacemanvic wrote: Here's video of her attacking Rand Pauls SUV as it arrived right before she got taken down:
I think you might have linked the wrong video. All I see in that one is a woman trying to hand him a placard and then being ganked by the crowd. It was in slow motion and everything, but I still missed it.
Your rebuttal sounds a lot like the "if you don't tolerate my intolerance you have a problem..." Did you hear any of the birther arguments, or references to civil war etc when Bill Clinton was elected?
***No, he was from Arkansas and didn’t travel internationally until Secondary education level. Of Course, in addition to that Southern accent thing (and feeling our pain) he never had book publishers putting out that he was from another country either (and failing to correct them). Civil war? You missed all the Ruby Ridge/Oklahoma bombing fun then. You must be a youngin.
I was a bit young
***I’m shocked. I would never have guessed.
but I've done some research
***mmm yes. Tell me more.
and talked to my parents and American friends of my parents who say they have never experienced anything like the right wing rhetoric and outright racism currently in play in the States.
***Then your parents and their friends are ignorant or liars. Which is it?
Can I remind you that Canada, New Zealand, Australia and many countries in Europe have had free health care, free birth control and unfettered access to abortion for decades and it hasn't ruined their societies?
***I don’t know. Those sheep in New Zealand look a little…strange.
And as for being Catholic? My Mum is Catholic, my step-father is Catholic and I am Catholic. I attend a Catholic highschool. My parents are re-married and my Mum is an academic (yes I know, more of those left-wing feminists that you'd rather not deal with). They are both pro-choice, advocates of free health care and education and staunchly anti any kind of ism. Point is...you guys are wrong...plain and simple. And Romney's going to lose...and I will continue to be grateful that I have been born and raised where I have been...Canada and New Zealand
***Call me when you are old enough to work for a living.
Again, your agurments holds no basis or merit, and it sounds like your speaking from a basic high school eduaction, as for working for a living, I dont, but I do work, in the terriortial reserves and have a part time job. But I'm only 18 so working for a living shouldn't really be a conern right now, which though, has no relevnce to this conversation. And is the only rebutal you can come to is "NO! Their lires", no, no their not. So I'm sorry, but you are inncorrect, why would they lie? They have first hand experiance, with unions and the government, but I guess their all liers to. And then you go on about something to do with sheep, so yea?
I think we'd see civil unrest either way. The US keeps getting more and more polarized and the politicians are really playing up to that. Romney could have picked a more moderate, widely respected running mate, but he went with Paul Ryan to look more tea partyish.
***I don’t know. Those sheep in New Zealand look a little…strange.
That's because the us recently sent FBI Agent Lou Cypher to aid in dealing with the Mega Conspiracy. His report suggests that something called the Gnu Orbital Domain is behind this attempt to spread peace and happiness, disrupting US Arms sales.
Jihadin wrote: But a bottle of whiskey would um....side line them awhile...weapon error be all over it
You know, the funny part is it takes more than a bottle to get one drunk? If you want to get one drunk, go for a keg of beer. They'll willingly drink it. Sheep are not known for being big into hard liqueur.
Good lamb, decent mutton. The trick hand to horn is to hit their never centers and temporarily paralyze them so you can tie them up more easily. And remember if you grab them below the hock they'll kick reflexively.
That's a small one. When I was a kid, old Knucklehead (our ram) smashed through a double layer of inch thick oak planks once we put a steel bar across his stall door to keep him from breaking out that way.
Red states are um.............................. yea, they don't even know, MOSTare religious nutjobs
Red States control the Coal, and the civilian firearms ;D
so a dying resource that mainly goes to China, but the Blue guys run the ports, der der der. Civilian vs gov issued is always a mismatch, plus with all our $$$ we can buy nice guns and not have to pull out the antique from grand dad
Red states are um.............................. yea, they don't even know, MOSTare religious nutjobs
Red States control the Coal, and the civilian firearms ;D
so a dying resource that mainly goes to China, but the Blue guys run the ports, der der der. Civilian vs gov issued is always a mismatch, plus with all our $$$ we can buy nice guns and not have to pull out the antique from grand dad
Not quite a dying resource, Wyoming (nations leading Coal 'producers') opened up two coal mines in the last five years, and this is just to my awareness, also most of the coal from wyoming stays stateside. Besides the Coal jobs are putting bread on the table, and paint on the minis . Besides I wasnt saying for the sake of rebelling on the firearms, just the fact that red states do have more civilian firearms per capita compared to blue states. Oh, Red states also have cowgirls if thats your taste of women
Wow. Lots of arrogance in this thread. Just remember that it was two nutjobs, a truck, and some agricultural goods coupled with a basic knowledge of chemistry that turned a federal office building into a pile of rubble.
BaronIveagh wrote: Wow. Lots of arrogance in this thread. Just remember that it was two nutjobs, a truck, and some agricultural goods coupled with a basic knowledge of chemistry that turned a federal office building into a pile of rubble.
Underestimate people at your peril.
And remember, two rednecks out there have used the exact same chemicals to blow up a tree
I love how people try and accuse others of not being able to type properly, when in matter of fact, I did, maybe an odd grammar mistake but again no basis to back yourself on ... and no, a gammar mistake does not count. But at least you tried ;D.
BaronIveagh wrote: Wow. Lots of arrogance in this thread. Just remember that it was two nutjobs, a truck, and some agricultural goods coupled with a basic knowledge of chemistry that turned a federal office building into a pile of rubble.
Underestimate people at your peril.
Really good point. Look what 19 guys armed with perfectly legal pocketknives did by thinking outside the box.
Really good point. Look what 19 guys armed with perfectly legal pocketknives did by thinking outside the box.
The US should get down on their knees and thank God those guys had a lousy idea of what to actually hit. I'd have put them on a LNG carrier and blown up all of NYC.
Really good point. Look what 19 guys armed with perfectly legal pocketknives did by thinking outside the box.
The US should get down on their knees and thank God those guys had a lousy idea of what to actually hit. I'd have put them on a LNG carrier and blown up all of NYC.
Indeed. While I'm sorry for the brothers in arms lost at the Pentagon, I'm ever so thankful that they chose it as a target for one of the aircraft. It kept possibly thousands of civilians alive, and if there was truly a structure in this world built to take something like that, it was the Pentagon.
Good lamb, decent mutton. The trick hand to horn is to hit their never centers and temporarily paralyze them so you can tie them up more easily. And remember if you grab them below the hock they'll kick reflexively.
I love how people try and accuse others of not being able to type properly, when in matter of fact, I did, maybe an odd grammar mistake but again no basis to back yourself on ... and no, a gammar mistake does not count. But at least you tried ;D.
Again, wrong.
I never accuse anyone of bad typing. I'm a two finger typist with bad proofreading skills. I have people for that.
Indeed. While I'm sorry for the brothers in arms lost at the Pentagon, I'm ever so thankful that they chose it as a target for one of the aircraft. It kept possibly thousands of civilians alive, and if there was truly a structure in this world built to take something like that, it was the Pentagon.
Millions. Not thousands. Millions.
A LNG carrier blast, set up right, would have been like the city had been nuked. The trick is to bring the temperature of the liquid gasses up just short of boiling in the containers, and then under a min or so before detonation, opening the valves and start dumping it overboard. In less then 30 sec you have a FAE 2 km wide. Ka fething boom.
A LNG carrier blast, set up right, would have been like the city had been nuked. The trick is to bring the temperature of the liquid gasses up just short of boiling in the containers, and then under a min or so before detonation, opening the valves and start dumping it overboard. In less then 30 sec you have a FAE 2 km wide. Ka fething boom.
LNG carriers store their cargo right at the boiling point, which is why there is always loss while in transit. If you want to cause one to explode you would simply disable whatever mechanism the vessel uses to cope with boil off, usually power generation or re-liquefaction. You wouldn't want to vent the gas prior to a pressure detonation because the external heat of the tanks would likely cause any vented gas to combust immediately (and likely prevent a pressure detonation); remember Boyle's Law? What this means is that turning an LNG into a giant FA bomb is very difficult, and potentially impossible*, you're talking about an aerial firestorm rather than an actual explosion. It would still be devastating, but not to the extent that it would kill millions; especially given that port areas tend to not be that densely populated.
You would probably have more luck simply venting the tanks, provided you could actually get aboard the ship; which is difficult when you're primary objective is to crash planes into things.
*And external explosion wouldn't work well either, as the gaseous NG would almost certainly combust very shortly after being vented. This is a case where the volatility of the stuff actually makes it more difficult to weaponize, rather than less.
BaronIveagh wrote: Wow. Lots of arrogance in this thread. Just remember that it was two nutjobs, a truck, and some agricultural goods coupled with a basic knowledge of chemistry that turned a federal office building into a pile of rubble.
Underestimate people at your peril.
What peril? If, as you say, the possibility of an uprising is high, and its fully within the capacity of ordinary citizens to achieve, it isn't a case of underestimation as there would nothing to be done to stop it short of military action; which isn't going to take place unless some series of domestic terrorist events occur.
You can call it arrogance if you want, but I'm just as keen to call you opinions on the matter a paranoid lack of perspective.
LNG carriers store their cargo right at the boiling point, which is why there is always loss while in transit. If you want to cause one to explode you would simply disable whatever mechanism the vessel uses to cope with boil off, usually power generation or re-liquefaction. You wouldn't want to vent the gas prior to a pressure detonation because the external heat of the tanks would likely cause any vented gas to combust immediately (and likely prevent a pressure detonation); remember Boyle's Law? What this means is that turning an LNG into a giant FA bomb is very difficult, and potentially impossible*, you're talking about an aerial firestorm rather than an actual explosion. It would still be devastating, but not to the extent that it would kill millions; especially given that port areas tend to not be that densely populated.
You would probably have more luck simply venting the tanks, provided you could actually get aboard the ship; which is difficult when you're primary objective is to crash planes into things.
The last part shows your sort of missed the point. The primary objective was to cause as much death and destruction as possible. And you just run it out through the gas heaters that raise it to 20 C . That's warm enough that external heat won't cause it to instantly combust. I'm not talking about just blasting a hole in the side of it and hoping for the best, I'm talking replacing the crew and executing a massive act of sabotage. Further, there are plenty of port areas with large populations these days. San Diego. New York City. Seattle. Honolulu. all have more than a million people within the effective blast range.
Look at Cleveland 1944. An LNG leak leveled a square mile of the city. This would be orders of magnitude larger.
What peril? If, as you say, the possibility of an uprising is high, and its fully within the capacity of ordinary citizens to achieve, it isn't a case of underestimation as there would nothing to be done to stop it short of military action; which isn't going to take place unless some series of domestic terrorist events occur.
You can call it arrogance if you want, but I'm just as keen to call you opinions on the matter a paranoid lack of perspective.
Well, let me posit this question: if the police either are neutralized or defect, and the governor refuses to use the national guard (either because they would be unreliable in this case, or because he has long backed the rebels position) who do you think they're going to call in? Un Peacekeepers?
Well, let me posit this question: if the police either are neutralized or defect, and the governor refuses to use the national guard (either because they would be unreliable in this case, or because he has long backed the rebels position) who do you think they're going to call in? Un Peacekeepers?
Ghostbusters?
That's a lot of "ifs" and "maybe"s in there.
I personally think if things have gotten that bad, you just call up Norad.
Well, let me posit this question: if the police either are neutralized or defect, and the governor refuses to use the national guard (either because they would be unreliable in this case, or because he has long backed the rebels position) who do you think they're going to call in? Un Peacekeepers?
Ghostbusters?
That's a lot of "ifs" and "maybe"s in there.
I personally think if things have gotten that bad, you just call up Norad.
Thing is that National Guard does train for this, they would just grab units from areas that have are not likely to support the cause. E.G. if its a rebellion based in New York, then units from both the midwest and western seaboard would be called in, admittedly this is depending on what the rebellion is about.
Thing is that National Guard does train for this, they would just grab units from areas that have are not likely to support the cause. E.G. if its a rebellion based in New York, then units from both the midwest and western seaboard would be called in, admittedly this is depending on what the rebellion is about.
Yeah, but with national movements, where will they get them, exactly. Hell, even California has some teapartiers. This is the thing that they're looking at, large scale movements not limited to one state. If, god help us, the tea party takes over, say, Richmond, sending in National Guard from just about anywhere could be iffy. It's bad enough at that point that you wouldn't be 100% on the regulars, let alone weekend warriors.
