My future fiction is looking more like present reality every day.
Posted on 04/29/2010 8:55:07 AM PDT by tutstar
He may end up like the Ceaucescues if he orders troops into the streets. I don’t think he could order any troops into the streets unless a fed military installation was threatened. It would first be the call of the Gov of the state where the unrest happens.
Of course he could get some of his org for america group to impersonate the tea party to carry out the deed..
I have faith that the vast majority would not follow the unlawful orders.
As always, pray for the best, PREPARE FOR THE WORST.
We won't see a replay of the overthrow of the Ceausescus here regardless of what happens. This isn't our grandfathers' America. Most people will just run away.
re: “Interesting that this has never been needed in the past “
Was it not needed for the wackos in WACO?
David Koresh would go out of the compound daily for his daily run. But Clinton/Reno thought it was NEEDED to surroud the compund with tanks and then massacre the innocent children inside.
And how much protest to it was there? The same with those wrongly accused by the IRS. They go to jail and we murmur under our breath.
First they came for a taxpayer; we did nothing.
Then they came for a wacko; we did nothing.
Then they came for the protestors in a far off state.
Then they came for me. But they did not do to me what they did to the wackos in Waco. They put me in a re-education training camp where I became sensitive to the dialectical injustice of the pre-change social order.
Sounds like today's government schools.
He’ll probably have his thug army ready by summer
the book I read said he went into town daily for donuts and coffee
My future fiction is looking more like present reality every day.
No they cannot. US Military personnel have a legal, as well as a moral, obligation to disobey illegal orders. They know this full well and take it very seriously. The vast bulk of the US Military is NOT going to fire on it’s own people. More likely they will join them.
http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/militarylaw1/a/obeyingorders.htm
When one enlists in the United States Military, active duty or reserve, they take the following oath:
I 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.
National Guard enlisted members take a similar oath, except they also swear to obey the orders of the Governor of their state.
Officers, upon commission, swear to the following:
I do solemnly swear 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; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
Military discipline and effectiveness is built on the foundation of obedience to orders. Recruits are taught to obey, immediately and without question, orders from their superiors, right from day-one of boot camp.
Military members who fail to obey the lawful orders of their superiors risk serious consequences. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for a military member to WILLFULLY disobey a superior commissioned officer. Article 91 makes it a crime to WILLFULLY disobey a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 makes it a crime to disobey any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be “willful” under this article).
In fact, under Article 90, during times of war, a military member who willfully disobeys a superior commissioned officer can be sentenced to death.
Seems like pretty good motivation to obey any order you’re given, right? Nope. These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders — if the order was illegal.
“I was only following orders,” has been unsuccessfully used as a legal defense in hundreds of cases (probably most notably by Nazi leaders at the Nuremberg tribunals following World War II). The defense didn’t work for them, nor has it worked in hundreds of cases since.
The first recorded case of a United States Military officer using the “I was only following orders” defense dates back to 1799. During the War with France, Congress passed a law making it permissible to seize ships bound to any French Port. However, when President John Adams wrote the order to authorize the U.S. Navy to do so, he wrote that Navy ships were authorized to seize any vessel bound for a French port, or traveling from a French port. Pursuant to the President’s instructions, a U.S. Navy captain seized a Danish Ship (the Flying Fish), which was en route from a French Port. The owners of the ship sued the Navy captain in U.S. maritime court for trespass. They won, and the United States Supreme Court upheld the decision. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Navy commanders “act at their own peril” when obeying presidential orders when such orders are illegal.
The Vietnam War presented the United States military courts with more cases of the “I was only following orders” defense than any previous conflict. The decisions during these cases reaffirmed that following manifestly illegal orders is not a viable defense from criminal prosecution. In United States v. Keenan, the accused (Keenan) was found guilty of murder after he obeyed in order to shoot and kill an elderly Vietnamese citizen. The Court of Military Appeals held that “the justification for acts done pursuant to orders does not exist if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be illegal.” (Interestingly, the soldier who gave Keenan the order, Corporal Luczko, was acquitted by reason of insanity)
I would seriously doubt that our professional military would carry out an order to fire on Tea Party goers.
Yeah, I was just going to ping you on this...I saw it on FauxNews and was finding a link...
But all y’all beat me to it...
All of this is just sad...Pathetic...
Never mind that the people causeing the real violence and problems are the union thugs ACORN and SEIU, and the illegals...
We pick up our trash for crying out loud...
They are just trash themselves...Not much ou can do about it...Right now...I expect it to get worse because of them, not us...
MMM! Chop chae is another of my favorites.
When is that next book out for me to buy buddy.........?
Girls in the office are gettin antsy !........:o)
That “oathkeeper” bit is really getting down to nut-cuttin’ time.
Enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC indeed.
I’d like to see some first hand evidence before blowing my stack. Evidence of any WO or OPORD connected with the allegied exercise needs to be forecoming immediately from his sources. But, if this proves to be true, I want the names of the BDE S3 and CO.
I wanna vote NOW.
1) Exactly how many such signs have you, personally, seen?
None.
2) Have you proof that such signs (if any) were not carried by leftist disruptors there to spread FUD?
Nope. Nor do I need any as the government has established (at least within relevant agencies) that the tea party is a threat.
3) Remind me again: How does that thing called the “Bill of Rights” start off?
The first amendment.
I’m not saying I’m happy with this I was just observing that everyone should have seen this coming. This is a redux of Clinton labeling anyone with an assault rifle and camo a racist domestic terrorist. They want to marginalize the tea party movement and this present a very effective way to do so. Right now the focus should be on elections all this cheap talk about revolution should be avoided. If it comes time to do anything you don’t want to be talking you want to be doing.
Did you hear anything about this? Is it real?
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.