Skip to comments.Video: Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens?
Posted on 01/24/2013 10:33:04 AM PST by TXnMA
On the first thread on this subject, MestaMachine challenged me with:
"All Nobel Prize nominees are not exactly trustworthy. "
I had the same concern -- so I checked out his Facebook postings. Jim Garrow appears to be as right-wing, pro-Constitution, pro 2nd Amendment as a good FReeper.
In fact, Garrow just posted a link to a video that is far better than the article I posted. In it, he is interviewed, (for some 20 minutes) and it is 100% ANTI-0bama. And, on many subjects, he "rips Øbozo a new one"!
Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens?
Watch the whole video. Garrow talks about much more than guns -- and he (an obvious expert on China) talks at length about Øbozo's ties with China -- and reveals the fact that (behind his back) the Chinese call Øbozo "Monkey Man" and consider him to be a traitor to the United States of America!
IMHO, this video is a "Must-see"!
Direct link to the video:
Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens?
Has there been any legitimate source confirmation for this? So far it is just a bunch of blogs and facebook.
” Obama to Top Brass: Will you fire on American Citizens? “
Clinton had people asking that back in the day.
He didn’t like the answers he got.
IMO, this video should go viral!
Kent State comes to mind (different scenario, though)
There’s a reason they are dumbing down our armed forces with militant females and illegals.
Watch the video --straight from the source's mouth -- and he discusses HIS "recently-retired, top-level military source" (whom he knows personally) at length.
Then, decide for yourself...
None that I have seen. But the lack of it seems to matter little to many worked up about it.
I did watch the video. It isn’t ‘straight from the sources mouth’, it is from someone claiming to have an unnamed source of whom he refuses to reveal. He provides no confirmation other than his story.
Garrow is someone who his own bio has been in question for a long time. He was only a Nobel nominee, a dime a dozen. If I recall, he was nominated by WND readers, who published his book so they had a stake in this resume enhancement. There have been stories questioning his involvement in the human trafficking movement and his claims of how many he has rescued.
Let’s add to this that, frankly, a lot of crap stories come from a lot of what seems legitimate sources. Even here, every day I see long time freepers posting wacked out conspiracies (latest was CIA hitman nuns in Sandy Hook). Even Drudge now posts stories from Infowars... good grief.
This story needs to have actual sources, not ‘unnamed’ sources of whom aren’t being revealed. It also needs independent confirmation. These used to be the basic rules of journalism and should be the bare minimum in judging if a story is real or just a ‘story’.
So if the Obama Admin is now doing this, where are the former military officers rejected for advancement who have come forward confirming this?
dumbing down and QUEERING.
You get a good percentage of the military queered, ie, in inherent rebellion to God,
and you have a force that could be told to violate any sense of human decency.
I believe Hitler did this as well with his SS.
Those people in Tiananmen Square assumed their army would not fire on its own people. I would not make the same mistake. Sounds like Panetta plans to staff the front lines with Sandra Flukes.
Per an examiner.com article covering an extensive interview with the Dr, the Dr said his source heard it from somebody ELSE in the military.
Said source had left the military.
So its one step removed, unless the Dr’s source also ran across a questionnaire or other means of asking.
If anyone wants the link, I can FRmail it.
Now what does reason have to do with anything?
Your common sense is showing again.
Fly-by’s are getting rich psyching out the Right with hairball stories sourced with hot air alone.
No one doubts much coming out of this lawless regime, but truth and accuracy are still required, and the sources of these two requirements matter.
I enjoyed the video. I thought the China discussion at the end was very interesting. I bet they do worry about a gun being behind every blade of grass.
The video was as close to the source of at least four FR articles as I was able to get -- so WYSIWYG...
I guess time will tell if this story has basis in fact.
FYI, an Admin Mod pulled this thread -- and then, apparently, Jim had them restore it -- for whatever that counts...
"The Dr." does have extensive background in China, so I found his discussions of China and its relation with (and reservations about) Øbozo to be interesting.
I had never heard of Jim Garrow until my wife shared (on Facebook) the article in my prior post. So, some FReepers may be ahead of me on the "Jim Garrow crediblity curve". That's fine with me; at 75, I'm not yet too old to welcome a new learning experience.
Clarification of my post about the video:
The Dr’s sources source is the one who had left the military.
The Dr’s source is still in.
Send letters/emails to any and all retired military who had officer rank and ask them if they had run across requirements such as this.
Then post results here.
We need to know how widespread this is, or if its localized, or a single point source (such as a left-wing military think tank )
I’m not certain our military these days would be as loathe to harm fellow Americans as the one under Clinton was.
Yes, Panetta plans to do “Amazingly bottom of the barrel stupid” stuff that will harm things that I cannot even imagine at this time.
Stevie Wonder could see that coming.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.