Skip to comments.A military assesment of the problem in the US
Posted on 02/23/2009 2:31:09 PM PST by Neil E. Wright
With the permission of JimRob, I am reposting this thread from 1997 for discussion. Substitute "Clinton" with "obama". We all remember the angst during the Clinton administration, well, now it is worse and will continue to worsen until something is done.
A military assesment of the problem in the US
Estimate of the overall problem. . . using lessons learned from not too distant past history:
One: Inasmuch as democracy and self-government are basic in the United States, it appears that this country has been infiltrated and occupied by agents of a foreign - that is, totalitarian - organization. Morally and politically, the criminal group controlling the United States must be considered wholly un-American. These foreign aggressors have succeeded in taking over every branch of government, in part because of the indifference of the indigenous population and in part because the aggressors are skillful and ruthless in their use of both force and bribery.
Two: Therefore, if we are to be realistic we must consider the United States to be an enemy-occupied country that is totally dominated by a paramilitary fascist organization of criminals and corrupt police. For our purposes, the local police must be considered similar to the Milice, the Vichy police who collaborated so brutally with the Germans from 1941 through 1944 during the Nazi occupation of France.
Three: as for the Clinton criminal syndicate itself, its power and methods and superior position force a comparison with the Gestapo. As the Gestapo dominated and used the Milice, so the Clinton group dominates and uses the local police forces. From this evaluation, we see that Clinton himself is functioning as Hitler, assigning his cronies to positions of "Gauleiter" - the heads of the fascist apparatus in the regions with the same life-and-death powers that Hitler's Gauleiters exercised in conquered territories.
Four: The fascist occupation forces now dominate both political parties, and today these parties are largely sham organizations within the United States. Within the United States, all senior officials must be viewed as collaborators - either bought or intimidated. The mass media are in hostile hands and are being used by the enemy for propaganda designed to discourage any resistance. Because the media are in enemy hands, the United States, like any other country garrisoned by a foreign force, has no recourse to public opinion. No help can be expected from state governments or local police since the Clinton group has reached an accommodation with key state and local politicians based on regular delivery of federal largess in the form of "pork-barrel spending".
Five: The enemy armed forces garrisoning the United States, uniformed and civilian, currently number in excess of 60,000, and their support organizations number in the hundreds of thousands. The garrison is well equipped with modern weapons, operates a vast fleet of vehicles, has a vast communications network and a propaganda network second to none. In the absence of any Resistance organization, the occupation forces have the skills, equipment and organization for effective counterespionage and counterinsurgency operations.
Six: The problem: to infiltrate covertly the enemy-occupied area that is the United States, now totally dominated by a foreign fascist organization; to ascertain and exploit the weak points in this paramilitary organization; to build, train and equip an effective resistance movement that will cooperate in a vigorous campaign of espionage, sabotage and psychological warfare; to splinter and destroy the fascist organization; and to identify and punish the persons responsible for the deaths of unknown numbers of American citizens during the course of this occupation.
This repost is for the purpose of DISCUSSION and I do NOT endorse any action that could be construed as acts of violence. At this time, anyway.
A reposted thread for the purpose of discussion.
No such file (give_legacy_article)
refresh a couple of times it’ll pop up.
Thanks. I was about to give up on refresh 20 :)
Reply to me too:
" you,sir,are either a patriot or an FBI provocateur. malcolm x said that whenever someone started talking about killing the man he always knew it was the FBI. see world trade center bombing. anyone here heard of gandhi?"
While I think this assessment of the problem is valid, it is incomplete. However, nowhere in this article do I see where "anon." is advocating "killing the man." What I do see is, in fact, a statement of why armed insurrection will FAIL, were anyone so foolish as to attempt it. Given the current climate in this country, to "infiltrate covertly . . . the United States" and to "to build, train and equip an effective resistance movement that will cooperate in a vigorous campaign of espionage, sabotage and psychological warfare" is pre-doomed to failure, as has been pointed out in other posts in FREE REPUBLIC. Most notably in Michael Gallutia's reply in Our Unconstitutional Congress posted elsewhere at this site, where he states " I do not think a revolution is a viable solution because too few would take up arms, and those arms would prove ineffective against the awesome power of our military (which would undoubtedly be called into action; if tanks are used against women and children, then no limits would be recognized for the degree of force required to suppress a rebellious mob)." (emphasis added).
I say that this assessment is incomplete in that it fails to take into account the degree of brainwashing of the general populace which has occurred over the last 80 years, and which has been greatly accelerated in the past few decades, since the late '60s. When 60 percent of the population of this country are, to a greater or lesser degree, accepting government handouts (and demanding more), most of the other 40 percent are too busy trying to survive while supporting the parasites that are feasting on them.
Obviously, the 60 percent (the parasites) who are feeding at the public trough will actively oppose any attempt to change the status quo. Of the other 40 percent (the productive host population), many, if not most, work for corporations which, again as is pointed out in other posts, actively support the current administration, and in fact are working to accelerate the corporate state, as was pointed out in the post Corporatism: Training to Serve the State. These factors, together with the factors posted in this assessment, will doom any attempt to restore Constitutional government in the United States.
Various solutions, short of armed insurrection, have been postulated in various posts. These suggested solutions can be summed up as follows:
1) Those of us who believe in INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM and the Constitution, can leave the country and start our own nation, based on Jeffersonian ideals, somewhere else.
2) We can move en mass to certain selected states, and by force of numbers, take over the local political establishments and secede from the Union.
3) We can work for, and elect, individuals who believe in INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM and the Constitution, and effect change by working within the current political framework.
4) A petition (lawsuit) brought before the Supreme Court.
5) A mass march by patriots on Washington D.C., demanding that Congress and the Administration uphold their oath of office and restore Constitutional government.
Let us now examine these proposed solutions.
1) Those of us who believe in INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM and the Constitution, can leave the country and start our own nation, based on Jeffersonian ideals, somewhere else. On the surface, this solution would seem to be the most workable, but close examination reveals numerous flaws. It is based on an assumption that some other country would allow a large portion of "its" territory to be taken over by expatriate Americans and allow these expatriate Americans to establish a sovereign nation. I would suggest that there is NO country on this planet that would allow this to happen, and indeed, if a sovereign nation based on the Jeffersonian ideal of INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM were somehow, somewhere established today, EVERY surrounding nation, regardless of political ideology, would join in concert under the aegis of the UN to CRUSH it, because they would perceive it (and correctly) as a threat to their own stability. This would also apply to solution number 2 (below).
2) We can move en mass to certain selected states, and by force of numbers, take over the local political establishments and secede from the Union. The idea of succession from the Union sounds grand. However, this was tried in the last century, and we all know how that turned out. Assuming that something along these lines were feasible however, several other problems would arise, in addition to the big problem which is discussed in the preceding section (under solution number 1). What to do with the current population of parasites living in the selected state or states. How to establish an economic base, when the borders of the new nation would undoubtedly be guarded by the statists from the surrounding states, and an embargo established. How to defend against the force which would be deployed to crush the "insurrection."
3) We can work for, and elect, individuals who believe in INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM and the Constitution, and effect change by working within the current political framework. As is pointed out in paragraph (4) of the assessment above, "The fascist occupation forces now dominate both political parties, and today these parties are largely sham organizations within the United States. Within the United States, all senior officials must be viewed as collaborators - either bought or intimidated. The mass media are in hostile hands and are being used by the enemy for propaganda designed to discourage any resistance. Because the media are in enemy hands, the United States, like any other country garrisoned by a foreign force, has no recourse to public opinion. No help can be expected from state governments or local police since the Clinton group has reached an accommodation with key state and local politicians based on regular delivery of federal largess in the form of "pork-barrel spending"." So assuming that a viable third party can be established, the Republic and Democratic parties have already established hurdles and roadblocks to prevent any disruption to the status quo. The LIBERTARIAN party has been battling the DEMOPUBLICAN party for 30 years, with very limited success. To assume that either party will willingly give up power or control, for any reason, would be a fatal mistake. Anyone who runs for office, from either party, and who openly advocates limiting government power and authority, would NOT be elected. The majority of the population that are the parasites would see to that.
Even assuming that such individuals could be elected, the unelected bureaucrats and the civil service employees in government would actively work against any change that would limit their power and authority over the people. Obviously the mass media would be hostile to limiting government, and without the mass media objectively reporting news, there will be no public hue and cry over government abuses which occur every day.
4) A petition (lawsuit) brought before the Supreme Court. Once again, let me quote Michael Gallutia: "a petition (lawsuit) to the Supreme Court would be met with derision, hostility and dismissiveness. The Supreme Court does nothing to dramatically upset the status quo. It slowly allows the expansion of governmental powers, restricts a few when the mood of the country swings in that direction, but seldom (if ever) has undertaken any bold moves of the magnitude needed to set this nation upon a course of renewal and revival." (emphasis added) Indeed, as was pointed out in the article Our Unconstitutional Congress, the Supreme Court not only allowed government to expand beyond its Constitutional bounds, but actively added and abetted the expansion, even going so far at times to FORCE the government to exert power and authority way outside its mandated limits.
5) A mass march by patriots on Washington D.C., demanding that Congress and the Administration uphold their oath of office and restore Constitutional government. "I no longer think a march on Washington or a general petition for redress of our grievances will be of any benefit; the government has grown too large, and its constituencies too enthralled with and dependent on its extant nature and scope." - Michael Gallutia. In addition to Michael's statement, let me add that, regardless of how many joined in the march, the media would ignore it, unless they decided to deride and dismiss it as the work of the "lunatic right-wing fringe."
So, is there any hope for FREEDOM?
As long as the parasitic majority of the population can continue to vote to steal from the productive class to support themselves, nothing will change. In the short term (i.e., our lifetimes), the only thing which will change government is armed rebellion, and rivers of blood in the streets. But, as I pointed out above, such rebellion is doomed to failure, given the current political, cultural and moral climate.
Long term? The only way to reverse the past 80 plus years of growing statism is to emulate the plan the statists used to create the ugly monster that has destroyed the country. We must first take over the schools, and start to create a climate for FREEDOM in the minds of the young. Then we must take back the mass media from the control of the statists, to allow the truth to be aired. Then we must create an economic base that will allow FREEDOM to thrive. We must use the political framework to elect supporters of FREEDOM and Constitutional government. In short, we must recreate the plan the statists used to create the ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT that currently exists, and use the same plan against it. It took the statists 80 plus years to bring us to this point, it will take those who cherish FREEDOM at least as long to undo the damage.
We must work to reverse the current situation where the majority is dependent on government. Will we be able to? Will this country, conceived in FREEDOM, ever again be free? That is a question that future generations must decide. But, if we do NOT start working toward that goal NOW, those unborn future generations will never get the chance to decide the question. The very concept of INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM will be lost.
The statists won by default. So perhaps they deserve to rule. Someone once said that people get the government they deserve. Perhaps we deserve what has happened to us. The statists were smarter and more dedicated than we were. They had a plan to subvert the country, and their plan worked. AND WE LET IT HAPPEN. And in some cases, we actively helped bring about the statist society, by demanding that SOME people be denied a measure of freedom because WE decided that they were making the WRONG moral decisions, and they should be protected from their own folly. Instead of DEMANDING that people be allowed to make their own moral choices, and accept the consequences, WE decided that we would insist on laws that impose our morality on everyone. We elected people who would pass the laws that we wanted passed, and ignored what was being done elsewhere. And the statists were glad to comply with our demands. So we are all to blame for what is happening. But now that it is our freedom that is being taken at an excelerated rate, NOW we complain and cast about for some way to change things back, to recover a measure of our lost liberty.
I do not know if I will live to see FREEDOM reign again in this country. But I know that I am as much to blame for what has happened as the statists. And I know that I must do whatever I can to undo the mistake.
From: Neil E. Wright (webmaster@FreedomUSA.org)
10/22/97 19:42:59 PDT
“When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security . . . . July 4, 1776”
Shucks, too long for a tagline.
I do not think a revolution is a viable solution because too few would take up arms,
***True today as well... Note that it’s a simple calculation of force available.
and those arms would prove ineffective against the awesome power of our military
***I think I remember this thread, and I think I posted the biblical line:
Men worshiped the dragon because he had given authority to the beast, and they also worshiped the beast and asked, “Who is like the beast? Who can make war against him?”
Millstone is making the Clinton era look like a Sunday school picnic.
Maybe we do have some small hope. Ayn Rand’s characters did not participate. This lead to a meltdown.
However unpleasant it is to think about this, some very smart folks are saying that a meltdown is coming even without our help. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nJ7LM3iyNg)
Perhaps from the ashes, and new nation can be built in the original image of our nation and it’s constitution, with safeguards in place to make damn sure we don’t go through this watering down again.
Perhaps there is hope in tribulation...
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.