Posted on 05/23/2017 1:52:18 PM PDT by onemiddleamerican
The UK's terror threat level has been raised from severe to critical, meaning an attack is considered imminent.
Prime Minister Theresa May announced the decision from Downing Street.
The move means that military personnel could be deployed to support armed police officers.
"It is a possibility that we cannot ignore that there a wider group of individuals linked to this attack," Mrs May said.
She said that the threat level was under constant review.
"The change in the threat level means there will be additional support available to the police as they work to keep us safe," she said.
CNN just reported an explosion at a “transit center” in Jakarta Indonesia.
What you fail to take into account is how the media will frame these people as being. What you need to take into account how the government will frame them.
You think these folks will be seen by everyone as freedom fighters. No. They will be seen as a radical group armed to the teeth, challenging local law enforcement and other government agencies.
Look at the lack of accounting for Waco. That should make it clear just how much support we could expect from the public.
If you think folks would march on Washington, in time of nation emergency, what would meet them? Our armed forces would meet them.
This isn’t paranoid. The FBI sent snipers to Waco. They sent people there that pumped in a known flammable substance in the facility. It was a substance that was contraindicated for use with small children. It was known to be a lung irritant and would cause small children to have lung failure. It caused their lungs to excrete fluids and they would essentially drown.
Military helicopters were not supposed to be used. Tanks were not supposed to be used. Who drove those thanks, flew those helicopters?
Military personnel.
Any questions?
Clinton and Janet Reno managed to cobble together one small squad of our military to execute the horror at Waco, and you want to extrapolate that to reason that a traitor president could mobilize the entire U.S. military against the citizens of this country?
That’s not just ludicrous, it’s insulting in the extreme. Do you realize the gravity of the accusation you’re making? I expect such hateful, anti-American bullsh!t from liberals, but not from so-called conservatives.
Memorial Day is this coming Monday. Maybe you should attend a service at the nearest military cemetery and take a moment to reflect upon the ultimate sacrifice those dead patriots paid to preserve your freedom.
You really haven’t a clue do you.
I know of one person involved at Waco. It wasn’t some whacked out Clinton controlled individual.
It was a person who thought they were doing their job as a law enforcement officer.
Go ahead. You just tell yourself whatever you want.
The people that would stand up against us, would be average Americans who thought they were defending the nation from a bunch of wacked out militia members.
The military members would be thinking the same thing.
This would not require folks who thought they were killing innocents. It would require folks thinking they were protecting local law enforcement and the United States at large.
Doughty, it appears you’ve fallen into a level of despair that results in a man losing all faith in his fellows and his country. You’ve chosen to live on your knees, and accept the damnable lie that our nation is already lost, and that hope for a better future is pointless.
How sad for you.
With that sort of mindset, it seems rather pointless to show up every day at a forum full of people who still have fight in their bellies, and still believe in America. Just what is the point of Free Republic if all is lost?
Geez...
And you just keep right on slandering our military and our law enforcement agencies with your unpatriotic bullsh!t.
You're on your own, pal. I'm out.
I apologize for not wording my post differently, out of respect, but the points were valid.
Waco was a government quasi military action against a limited portion of the populace. So was the action against the Weavers at Ruby ridge. So was the action against the Bundy’s in Oregon.
Care to remind me who stood up for ANY of these people.
The FBI Agents in the first two situations were given awards and promotions.
At the Weavers they killed mother and kids. Nobody was taken to task over it. Not one government operative was charged with a crime.
The same thing at Waco. Not one government operative was charged with a crime.
You keep telling me you’re sorry for me. How about some sorrow for your fellow citizens, who gave their lives, and thus revealed to you what the reality in our nation is?
No, I’m not going to advocate or people picking up arms and trying to effect change.
Even folks on your own side will buckle when it comes to picking up arms against the government. You’re kidding yourself if you think folks will forsake family, home, jobs, and march on Washington. And you’re kidding yourself further if you think most Americans would see that as honorable and support them.
It would be seen as an insurrection. It would be seen as militia insanity.
Look at the amount of support Trump gets in this nation. He gets roughly half of the registered voters. He gets none of Congress or the media. The deep state is against him.
In this climate, you think the majority of Americans will see an armed militia against the government as a good righteous cause.
I do not. I also think that the government would not hesitate to use any weapons in it’s arsenal to put down a rebellion. I also think the populace would be at least moderately supportive, and in some cases wildly so.
We had people thrilled the government was taking action on Waco.
You are continuing to live in a delusional state.
Please think about what took place at Waco.
Koresh ran daily past a government observation point. He could have been arrested easily any day the government wanted. He was unarmed and had been running for half a mile, hardly a threat.
The government swooped in with an attempted military takedown.
This was met with resistance.
The government trumped up all sorts of charges, they could never substantiate.
The BATF folks were replaced by the FBI. The FBI called in military assets.
The BATF, the FBI, the miliary assets combined to kill almost all of the Branch Dividian people, men, women, and children.
Name one government player who was charged with a crime. JUST ONE!
Even the surviving Branch Dividians received very light sentences.
This was a trumped up nothing burger from start to finish, and yet about 80 people were killed on purpose.
One FBI agent in his gear told Koresh’s mom, I hope you’ve already said your good-byes.
I’m not slandering anyone. I’m not mis-characterizing anyone.
That is what took place.
It will take place on a larger scale if Conservatives band together to try to effect change by use of arms.
You can’t see that?
Which of the people at Waco do you think I’m mischaracterizing, and why do you think I’m slandering everyone, by explaining to you exactly what methods are used to get otherwise decent people to participate in an operation like this?
I’m explaining to you with a very good object lesson, exactly what tactics are used to make good people think they are doing something that is honorable.
Ruby Ridge
Waco
the Bundy ranch
Please think about the dynamics of what took place at these places.
I have to disagree, Doughty. I think you're selling the American People short, as well as the US Military.
If a cause is seen as just by enough of the People, they will not support the slaughter of their fellow citizens by the US Armed forces.
The incidents you cite—Waco, Ruby Ridge, etc.—actually undermine your thesis. Yes, there was not much outcry from the citizenry in general. But that was precisely because the "cause"—at least in the more publicized Waco incident—wasn't seen as sufficiently just.
I fully agree that some kind of armed march would be inadvisable except in the most dire circumstances, but if those circumstances do arise, then the critical mass could very well support the "rebels", and certainly could be enough to prevent US armed forces from killing their fellow Americans.
Fortunately, we know that's not a risk as long as President Trump is in office.
I understand your awe regarding our military capability, but using that against a general uprising of the citizenry is magnitudes beyond the way it was used against an isolated, marginalized group (Waco).
As we know from the Revolution, once you get to about 35% percent or so of the population being energetically engaged in a righteous cause, it's impossible for such a motivated group to be effectively marginalized.
Despite the fact that it has been suppressed over the decades, there is still a healthy level of rebelliousness in the average American's heart. There will always be that 1/3 who are pro-Tyranny, but there's simply no way that Americans can—for instance—look at the Media nowadays and place any trust in it whatsoever. It has become such a blatant arm of the Swamp that it just cannot be denied any longer.
Once the People come to realizations like that, all bets are off as to how "suicidal" armed resistance might be...
Sargon, do you think the media and the government will play fair? Do you think the media will describe in accurate terms what you are actually doing and why?
Folks, the media will be describing you as radical whacked out militia members who are out to take down the nation.
IMO < you folks are dreaming if you think the government is going to stand idly by and watch as you mobilize.
City, county, state, and federal agencies will be tasked with putting down the lawless. And in effect, lawless will be what you are.
I’m not stating that it isn’t for a good cause, or that we wouldn’t have been pushed into it by draconian measures, but we would be lawless none the less, and this would be all the excuse they needed. If we were successful in a few early skirmishes, it would represent a growing threat, and then it would be all force necessary to put the rebellion down.
What stops the government from using armed drones?
What stops the government from using munitions from altitude?
The public will be hearing and seeing what the evil militia was doing when it was attacked.
The righteous reasons for the militia would never see the light of day for 90% of the populace. If it did, they’d see it as flawed thinking, especially in light of the military styled action.
Name me a city hall today you would like to see 250 armed militants take over, even if they voiced your beliefs.
What do you think the reaction would be?
Think a majority of the populace would agree with them?
Think a majority of the populace would be angry if the government went in to clear out the protesters?
I hate the government of Sacramento. What it has done to the state is criminal in nature. Think we would be heralded as heroes for taking over the capital?
At times we get involved in discussions that are one sided, because we are on an internet site where our participants are mostly Conservative. We get very little push-back.
These ideas of us joining together and taking down the government are misguided IMO. If acted upon they would become a death warrant on all participants.
These people easily concoct multiple identities and would easily slip by any scrutiny.
Part of what needs to take place, is a very strict set of rules for people from those nations coming into Britain.
It would need to be on some form of business.
If family members wanted to visit, let those in Britain do the traveling.
This can be handled properly, if the government wants to do it.
Political correctness and the Courts would put a stop to anything rational.
Reducing the presence of the Islamic adherents in Western nations must take place.
Legal means can achieve the results desired.
While we’re thinking up reasons it couldn’t work, lets remember that moving terrorists in was something that shouldn’t have worked either.
I am only reflecting the reality of matters.
Given the Leftist control of media and education and Hussein’s reign moving the Terrorists in was a slam dunk not surprising at all.
Theresa May just comes across as a light weight PM. I have no doubt Lady Thatcher would have handled this whole mess very differently and would have called it like was, a Terrorist Attack.
Well sure, but there were as many hurdles to moving in terrorists as moving them out.
The Republicans helped to make it a lot easier.
Globally, those that should have objected, simply didn’t.
Think of all the social programs that had to fall into place to get those folks here.
Nonsense. Those sentiments would be absolutely true—as long as the moment wasn't right.
If one day the moment was right, things would go completely in the other direction.
You seem to have adopted the thesis that the moment could never be right, and I agree with Windflier that there is always the possibility that the People could be pushed too far, and—at that point—you'd see the armed forces joining the rebellion—and all the fake news in the world wouldn't be able to hide that.
So I categorically reject the notion that "it could never happen again", although I freely acknowledge the modern-day issues, and the fact that it would have to be as an absolute last resort.
But you're absolutely giving the Enemy too much power by ruling it out altogether. That attitude gives them an extra advantage. They should never imagine that the Second Amendment is just an outdated concept. That seems to be what you're arguing, which is a very dangerous and slippery slope. There are already those on the Left using that argument for why we don't need the Second Amendment anymore. So that's another reason I reject your thesis. You need to rethink what you're saying...
I like how you ignore almost all of my post, to pull one statement and attack it, then slander me as if I’m against the Second Amendment.
Lets see if you can deal with this.
Let’s say the American people didn’t like what was going on at Waco and mobilized to remove law enforcement out there.
What do you think would have happened?
Think we would have prevailed?
I'm simply saying that you're coming dangerously close to "the Second Amendment is obsolete" argument, because you seem to be saying that if the People ever exercised that option, they'd either 1) Be demonized by the Media, or 2) Fail in any event.
So if you're saying that the option has become totally obsolete—at least in practice—I don't accept that.
If you're not arguing that "the Militia" leading a restoration of the Constitution is obsolete, you seem to at least be saying that it's impractical—in ALL scenarios.
What's the difference?
Jeez, though. Get out of here with that "slander" crap. I though we were friends...
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.