PDA

View Full Version : Obama only wants military leaders who ‘will fire on U.S. citizens’... V



Ponce
22nd January 2013, 08:21 AM
Like I said..........we will have merdenaries on our shores (traying) controlling the people.......it will be easier to kill mercs than our own people.
================================================== ========


On Monday, renowned author and humanitarian Dr. Jim Garrow made a shocking claim about what we can expect to see in Obama’s second term.

Garrow made the following Facebook post:

I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new “litmus test” in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. “The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not.” Those who will not are being removed.
So, who is the source?

Garrow replied: “The man who told me this is one of America’s foremost military heroes.”

Understand, this is not coming from Alex Jones or Jesse Ventura, or from anyone else the left often dismisses with great ease.

Garrow is a well-respected activist and has spent much of his life rescuing infant girls from China, babies who would be killed under that country’s one-child policy. He was also nominated for Nobel Peace Prize for his work.

His bio on Amazon.com reads:

Dr. James Garrow is the author of The Pink Pagoda: One Man’s Quest to End Gendercide in China. He has spent over $25 million over the past sixteen years rescuing an estimated 40,000 baby Chinese girls from near-certain death under China’s one-child-per-couple policy by facilitating international adoptions. He is the founder and executive director of the Bethune Institute’s Pink Pagoda schools, private English-immersion schools for Chinese children. Today he runs 168 schools with nearly 6,300 employees.

This comes on the heels of Sunday’s report in the Washington Free Beacon (WFB) that the head of Central Command, Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis is being dismissed by Obama and will leave his post in March.

The WFB article states:

“Word on the national security street is that General James Mattis is being given the bum’s rush out of his job as commander of Central Command, and is being told to vacate his office several months earlier than planned.”

Did Gen. Mattis refuse to “fire on U.S. citizens?”

http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/shock-claim-obama-only-wants-military-leaders-who-will-fire-on-u-s-citizens/32343/

madfranks
22nd January 2013, 09:21 AM
Not that I doubt that many (maybe most) in the military would fire upon the people if ordered to do so, but I'm so sick of these "un-named military heroes" saying these things. I can claim the same thing, that an anonymous five star general told me this or that, yada yada.

Ponce
22nd January 2013, 10:39 AM
You must remember that many of us have been in the military so that we do know how to use what will be used on us, is only a matter of taking what they have and to turn it around pointing the other way.........

V

lapis
22nd January 2013, 01:36 PM
Our threads may need to be merged. Here's mine from last night: Author Jim Garrow claims Obama wants military leaders who 'will fire on U.S. citizens (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?66741-Author-Jim-Garrow-claims-Obama-wants-military-leaders-who-will-fire-on-U-S-citizens)

There's been a few other places covering it. Here's the link for Prison Planet's story:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/nobel-peace-prize-nominee-obama-asks-military-leaders-if-they-will-fire-on-us-citizens.html

[SNIP]

Concerns over US troops being given orders to fire on American citizens in the event of mass gun confiscation first arose in 1995 when hundreds of Marines at 29 Palms, California were given a survey as part of an academic project (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1088237/posts) by Navy Lieutenant Commander Ernest Guy Cunningham which asked the Marines if they would, “Fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the United States government.”

The survey was subsequently leaked because many of the Marines who took it were shocked by the tone of the question.

The US Military has clearly outlined innumerable civil emergency scenarios under which troops would be authorized to fire on U.S. citizens.

In July 2012, the process by which this could take place was made clear in a leaked US Army Military Police training manual for “Civil Disturbance Operations” (PDF (http://info.publicintelligence.net/USAMPS-CivilDisturbanceOps.pdf)) dating from 2006. Similar plans were also outlined in an updated manual released in 2010 (http://www.infowars.com/leaked-u-s-army-document-outlines-plan-for-re-education-camps-in-america/) entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations.

The 2006 document outlines how military assets will be used to “help local and state authorities to restore and maintain law and order” in the event of mass riots, civil unrest or a declaration of martial law.

On page 20 of the manual, rules regarding the use of “deadly force” in confronting “dissidents” on American soil are made disturbingly clear with the directive that a, “Warning shot will not be fired.”

Given that second amendment advocates are now being depicted as dangerous terrorists (http://www.prisonplanet.com/drill-characterizes-disgruntled-second-amendment-advocates-as-terrorists.html) by the federal government and local law enforcement, Garrow’s claim is sure to stoke controversy given that Americans are seeing their gun rights eviscerated while the federal government itself stockpiles billions of bullets (http://www.prisonplanet.com/dhs-buys-200000-more-rounds-of-ammunition.html).

Last week, Gloversville Mayor Dayton King warned (http://www.prisonplanet.com/mayor-predicts-waco-style-standoff-in-response-to-obama-gun-confiscation.html) that any federal gun confiscation program could lead to a “Waco-style standoff” in rural areas of America.

palani
22nd January 2013, 02:38 PM
We are indeed fortunate that most officers don't do their own killing. They order others (enlisted .. nco) to do it for them.

Therefore, it is those others you must worry about most.