Posted on 04/29/2010 8:55:07 AM PDT by tutstar
"The duty imposed upon [the president] to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed, follows out the strong injunctions of his oath of office, that he will 'preserve, protect, and defend the constitution.' The great object of the executive department is to accomplish this purpose; and without it, be the form of government whatever it may, it will be utterly worthless for offence, or defence; for the redress of grievances, or the protection of rights; for the happiness, or good order, or safety of the people." --Justice Joseph Story
A few months back, the commander in chief or our Armed Forces, that erstwhile community organizer Barack Hussein Obama, denigrated a large cross section of Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement -- those who advocate for Essential Liberty and Rule of Law.
Obama identified them as malcontents, "waving their little tea bags."
Since then, the Obama administration and their Leftmedia sycophants have endeavored to characterize Tea Party attendees as rude, radical, racist, redneck, enemies of the state.
In fact, Americans who attend Tea Party rallies are from all walks of life, as noted in the Patriot Declaration, Patriots who are peacefully and constitutionally petitioning their government for redress.
As I noted in my tax-day essay, Tea Parties are "not a call for revolution but for restoration -- a call to undertake whatever measures are dictated by prudence and necessity to restore constitutional Rule of Law."
However, Obama's words do have consequences.
This week, I was contacted by a number of military personnel, enlisted and officer ranks, who expressed concern about a military exercise underway at Ft. Knox, the U.S. Bullion Depository. As with most such exercises, the Ft. Knox alert occurred in stages, as if real time intelligence was being provided at various intervals.
The first intel advisory was issued on Friday, 23 April 2010, and identifies the terrorist threat adversaries as "Local Militia Groups / Anti-Government Protesters / TEA Party."
You read that right: "TEA Party"!
The alert states that plans for the demonstration may have been interrupted by "Federal and local law enforcement" raids on a "White Supremacists Organization," but "TEA Party organizers have stated that they will protest at the Gold Vault at a future date."
Further, the intel advisory states, "Anti-Government - Health Care Protesters have stated that they would join the TEA Party as a sign of solidarity."
In accordance with the exercise, Ft. Knox post security is placed on high alert because, "these groups are armed, have combative training and some are former Military Snipers. Some may have explosives training / experience," and "a rally at their compound / training area is scheduled."
Another intel update was issued on Monday, 26 April 2010, noting that the "rally at the Militia compound occurred," and "Viable threats ... have been made." The intel on the rally notes, "Many members were extremely agitated at what they referred to as Government intervention and over taxation in their lives. Alcohol use 'fanned the flames.' Many military grade firearms were openly carried. An ad hoc 'shoot the government agent' event was held with prizes (alcohol) given for the best shot placement."
The report states further, "Components of bomb making are reported to have been on the site. Some members have criminal records relating to explosive and weapons violations."
In response to the "immediate threat," the exercise stipulates, "local detention centers are being made ready for mass arrests." Both the "QRF I and QRF II" are placed on two hour recall, and the "5-15 CAV" was ordered to "draw weapons from holder and store in most available arms room," and "coordinate with MASA for immediate ammunition draw; have equipment readied for immediate use, i.e. vehicles staged and loaded IAW 5-15 CAV SOP; LMR's charged."
QRF refers to Quick Reaction Force. QRF I is the 16th Cavalry Regiment. QRF II is the 194th Armored Brigade.
The 26 April order gives specific instructions for the 5-15 CAV (a 16th Cavalry battalion) to have weapons, ammo, vehicles and communications at ready, and it places the other 2,200 members of the units on two-hour recall. In other words, these orders are to gear up for defending Ft. Knox against Tea Party folks and their co-conspirators who oppose nationalization of our health care sector.
Now, for almost 30 years I have participated in the development and implementation of small and large scale military exercises within the U.S. and around the world.
Such exercises are critical to the readiness of our forces, and the standard for the real time intel reports in these drills requires thinly veiled references to assets of existing or collateral threat vectors such as communist regimes such as China and real terrorist networks such as al-Qa'ida, etc.
Perhaps the writers of such exercises today should focus on response plans for, say, an Islamic terrorist who attacks a post. (See Ft. Hood / Major Nidal Malik Hasan.)
The Ft. Knox exercise is not only amateurish in its construct, but also sets an ominous political precedent.
The military officers and enlisted personnel with whom I spoke are all dedicated uniformed Patriots who are loyal, first and foremost, to their oath to "support and defend" our Constitution "against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
Their concerns about this exercise mirrored my own. As one put it, the exercise "misrepresents freedom loving Americans as drunken, violent racists -- the opponents of Obama's policies have been made the enemy of the U.S. Army."
They were equally concerned that command staff at Ft. Knox had signed off on this exercise, noting, "it has been issued and owned by field grade officers who lead our battalions and brigades," which is to say many Lieutenant Colonels saw this order before it was implemented.
It's not likely that Ft. Knox Commanding General James Milano or Deputy Commander Col. David Teeples, or even the regimental and brigade commanders for the 16th Cav and 194th AB, actually read the exercise scenario, but that doesn't absolve responsibility for such an egregious example of political exploitation of U.S. forces.
One officer insisted, "The American people should require greater accountability of their commissioned officers, that they abide by their oath and never allow politically motivated propaganda like this exercise on any post or base again."
Another observed, "Whether this is complacency by officers who do not see such orders as a problem, or worse, officers who recognize the problem but do not insist the orders are changed, this is a serious problem. We are discussing the training of American citizen soldiers in the use of potentially deadly force against a specific group of political dissenters. There is never a time in an officer's career in which he does not have a duty to apply critical thought to the orders he is given and asked to give. It is my opinion that any officer that has allowed these orders to persist, to reach the level of junior officers and soldiers, has demonstrated a lack of judgment or apathy towards what his duty requires of him. Either way, we should demand more of the commissioned officers, who we as a nation empower to lead our sons and daughters into battle."
Indeed, and at best, the blatant malfeasance on the part of the individuals who composed this exercise reflects poorly on the uniformed services.
The antidote to this patent misrepresentation of peaceable Patriots is to expose it with the Light of Truth. As our motto Veritas vos Liberabit affirms, the Truth shall set you Free!
(Note: To report examples of politically motivated "exercises" in either the civilian or military sectors of our federal government, please contact us -- NewsTip@PatriotPost.US)
Subscribers may reprint, forward or post original content from The Patriot Post, in whole or part, in accordance with our Terms of Use, with the following citation: "The Patriot Post (www.patriotpost.us/subscribe/ )"
Will the senior command staff also inform everyone who participated which parts of the scenario was altered and which would be inappropriate to use of deadly force?
Thanks, I didn’t see it. Lots to do today and haven’t even gone all the way through the first page of replies.
something about advocating violent radicalization against the government comes to mind...
Here is a follow up notice by the publisher of the original article:
Army Preps for Tea Party 'Terrorists'
By Mark Alexander · Thursday, April 29, 2010
Publisher's Note: Regarding my essay, Army Preps for Tea Party 'Terrorists,' I was contacted by senior command staff at Ft. Knox on the afternoon of the date of publication. There was a security exercise at Ft. Knox this week, but an officer in the security loop altered the scenario "in order to make it more realistic." Those alterations were described in my essay, exactly as they appeared. The command staff informed me that the alterations were not approved at the command level and that the individual who circulated the scenario through official channels will "receive appropriate counsel." I was assured that the Command staff would not have authorized such a scenario.
Semper Fi,
TS
Washington D.C. may well be a foreign country. I'm only half kidding.
I knew this was going to happen sooner rather than later.
I’m just advocating following the Constitution....
Yeah....sure.
“Bailiff, whack his peepee.”
I have the utmost respect for a primitive man with an AK 47 and RPG.
Obama identified them as malcontents, "waving their little tea bags." Since then, the Obama administration and their Leftmedia sycophants have endeavored to characterize Tea Party attendees as rude, radical, racist, redneck, enemies of the state.
roger that.
Well, don’t expect the military to be on the side of the people. Historically, that isn’t what happens.
I hope that you are right.
>Not sure how many people may have seen this but it gives the President authority to order detentions at his ‘discretion’.
Indeed, that can be VERY disturbing.
>Also detainees do not need to be read their Miranda rights.
Then, I think it would be best if we memorized them beforehand.
>”The conflict over a sweeping crackdown on illegal immigration in Arizona intensified Monday as vandals [left-wing opponents of the crackdown] smeared refried beans in the shape of swastikas on the state Capitol’s windows.”
So... Mexicans are Nazis?
The commie organizers who likely encouraged them to do it meant to imply that the people who wrote the AZ law were “nazis”. Meanwhile, they have far more in common with each other (nazis and commies) than with any other groups or movements, except of course for the radical islamists. All three hate Israel, America, freedom and Capitalism.
>>False, the president and congress can do anything they want.
>
>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.
I think the point he was making is that the Congress and the President are acting as if they are not bound by the Constitution... and the simple matter is he’s right.
Where in the Constitution does it:
- Authorize the SELECTIVE taxation of individuals (AIG, etc)?
- Authorize the RETROACTIVE taxation of said individuals?
* Both are prohibited as Bills of Attainder and Ex Post Facto Law, respectively.
- National, Federally mandated healthcare?
* The ninth and tenth amendments reserve the rights not SPECIFICALLY given to the Federal government to the States or People themselves.
- The existence and funding of the BATF, a federal agency.
* We repealed the Amendment allowing for the federal prosecution of Alcohol related crime; Tobacco has never been so restricted; and the Second Amendment prohibits infringement on the keeping and bearing of arms... which is what the BATF does.
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.