Are Congress and Obama Deliberately Inciting a New US Civil War?

Canadian Free Press ^ | March 20, 2009 | Sher Zieve

[LoneStarC]

With the events that have transpired over the last 58 days—since Obama and his adherents commandeered the US presidency—fear is now becoming the order of each and every day for many of We-the-People. ....... ....has led me to believe that both Congress and Obama are in the process of purposefully creating conditions that will lead to a revolution by We-the-People so that it and Obama can affect Martial Law and once and for all forcibly suppress the American people

[verity]

What is your definition of "free"?

[DuncanWaring]

Same here.

I’m “old enough to qualify for the Senior discount at Denny’s”, and I’ve never killed anyone, under any circumstances.

I’d really like to keep it that way.

[hiredhand]

Great post, spot on. Anything folks think they might need over the next few years, BUY NOW.

Yep! We know a LOT of people who see at least something unfavorable in the near future, and are purchasing things that are useful and of tangible value. While time might be short, it is NOT the time to discuss or argue tactics. It's time to acquire supplies and think strategically.

I'm mildly offended by the irony of it....mainly with people around me in my geographic areas. We've been accused by people who know us just a little better of being extremists, whackos, Jesus freaks, militia (PATENTLY UNTRUE!), extremists. These people are nice enough, but they still think we "ain't right". No big deal. Most of go through life living with at least a few others thinking we're strange in some way. But now these same people have rushed to me and those like me in droves because they're in a panic to procure weapons, ammunition and supplies. It offends me slightly. It offends me that they thought we were crazy until they didn't think we were crazy, and now expect us to share in a crisis that we told them was observable back when it was easy to ignore. There are too many of these people and they don't think strategically, or tactically. They seem to have the looking forward capacity and ability of a creature such as certain insects. I say certain insects because even some insects store up for hard times, and most mammals have this instinct. But NOT these people that I'm referring to!

They believe that which is simply unbelievable until it's right there...in their faces, and impossible to ignore...and then they think folks like us should share the crisis and that we have some obligation to assist them. We DON'T entirely see it this way though.

[central_va]

What is your definition of "free"?

I certainly don't feel free now, as a white male I have been targeted my whole life with AA, PC and onerous taxation. I have had it!!!!! Every bit of it unconstitutional.

[jersey117]

People are running scared. I related a crazy story on another thread yesterday. I was in the supermarket yesterday morning and this woman stopped me and my husband in the aisle and started a conversation about the high cost of food. Then, out of left field she started ranting about Obama and the cap and trade and how it's going to cost an extra $1300 a year in energy costs. She said a revolution is coming. She continued on about her husband in the construction union and how he's getting screwed out of annuity money by the government. It was surreal. I swear she was having a breakdown - totally over the edge. And my experience doesn't end there. After I left the supermarket I was walking down the strip mall to another shop and there were two older woman sitting on a bench. One said to the other "keep some money under your belt - we don't know what's coming."

There is a sense of dread out here that civil unrest is headed our way.

[verity]

Will “firing a shot in anger” solve the problem or be a Pyrrhic victory?

[DuncanWaring]

Probably the latter, unfortunately.

“Firing a shot in anger” is more likely, at this point, to rerun 1789 or 1917 than 1776.

[central_va]

Will “firing a shot in anger” solve the problem or be a Pyrrhic victory?

I have claimed no desire to fire at anything, the question was do I feel free.

The choice of firing shots or living as in my current state dictates, the jury is still out on that.

[verity]

Fair enough.

[mad_as_he$$]

That is why they added the POTUS clause was added relatively recently. One of the things that is not stressed enough is “lawful orders”. there is a small movement in the US Military to remind personnel of that. i still am not holding my breath if the SHTF happens.

[antisocial]

Bookmark

[Little Ray]

Relying on the “Civilian Security Force” would be suicidal in a Civil War scenario. About the only thing they could count on would be that the CSF would fight to the death, knowing what was waiting for them if they lost or were taken prisoner. The CSF wouldn’t have the training, morale, and equipment advantages that make insurgent encounters with our troops so incredibly one-sided.
If they really want this, they’d need a significant buy-in from the Armed Forces to win.

[bert]

The problem with the article is misunderstanding the problem. As with all media pieces, the writer considers the present action in a vacuum that excludes the past.

The present Democrat actions at the moment of economic crisis are:

1. Massive application of bandaids to self inflicted economic wounds

2. Damn the torpedo full speed ahead reckless attack with eurosocialist dreams.

The later will not happen because the calamity of the former will prevent.

The blind failure will result in the self destruction of American cities as the congregation of feral urbanites burn them down

[patriot preacher]

Why isn’t the real question will the military revolt when faced with armed citizens and orders from Obama to kill them?
____________

Hmmm... I thought that’s what I said...

[ebiskit]

“um not exactly:

I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

What comment are you responding to?

I made more than 1 on this thread.

It would be helpful within the confines of proper debate to at least do me the favor of a cut and paste.

Nevertheless, at the risk of anticipating your dissent, the UCMJ does provide for NOT following illegal/unconstitutional orders. . . FYI. . .

No, I don’t know the specific code, but I am aware of basic common sense.

As you should note in your quote, the affirmation to the Constitution comes first, not second, to allegiance to the CoC.

In the same spirit of the placement of the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

“according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice” . . . meaning his/her superiors are subject to the Constitution as well. This portion pertains to those that issue orders.

tahDeetz

[mad_as_he$$]

Since post 202 - mine - says it was in response to 159 -yours - it would be 159.

First you said what the oath was which you were wrong about now you are quoting the UCMJ.

[ebiskit]

Initially, I was referencing to the fact that it is the codified law of the US Declaration of Independence where our inalienable rights are duly guaranteed by God and are eternal.

It clearly restrains those that are granted temporary stewardship over the the Republic.

It is within our unchallenged purview if they perform that task in an illicit manner, that we have the not just the right, but in fact a duty, to disband and abolish the unconstitutional entity into something that falls into the realm of Constitutional principle.

My initial response was referring to where the UCMJ derives it’s authority to allow for dissension in the ranks.

I was just kicking the argument upstairs, so to speak.

tahDeetz

[Tublecane]

“At first glance this seems a little off-the-wall, but the fact remains that the atrocities against freedom in Obama’s first two months exceed anything done by King george in the decade before 1776.”

You could probably technically say the same thing about the Washington administration. In instituting a federal government, we brought into being a body capable of much more than the King, thousands of miles away, couldn’t practically accomplish.

[Tublecane]

“they are just useful idiots in the plans of Obama and whoever is controlling him.”

Why does there have to be a conspiracy? Can’t they just be idiots? If you listen closely enough, undistracted by there glowing intentions, they tell us exactly what they’re going to do. If there is a hidden plan, I can’t imagine it being more sinister than the up-front plan. Or if it is, I can’t imagine it working very well. They have a difficult enough job of completing even the simplest of the tasks they set themselves in newspaper headlines.

[Tublecane]

“is it ever possible for members of the federal government to be the ‘enemies’ against whom the USAF is to protect the People?”

Yeah, that’s a mutiny. Happened in Russia during WWI. Didn’t end well. Bu8t let’s not write it off altogether.