Skip to comments.Why does Obama need 1.6 billion bullets? (challenges Old Media to cover multiple federal ammo dumps)
Posted on 03/14/2013 9:54:41 PM PDT by Perseverando
Dear Mainstream Media,
Back in 2008, candidate Barack Obama went off his teleprompter and added a couple of sentences to the text of a speech about expanding the Peace Corps and AmeriCorps. Over rolling applause, the soon-to-be president of the United States said: We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that weve set. Weve got to have a civilian national security force thats just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
At the time, Joseph Farah of WND.com wrote a column calling on you to help shine a light on what this shocking statement really meant. In a permanent state of vapors over Obamas candidacy, you were of no use when it came to extracting anything but press releases from Team Obama.
Nearly five years later, it hardly matters that candidate Obamas promise to double the Peace Corps and the rest has come to naught. But the presidents unscripted determination to empower a civilian national security force is a different story. As far as youre concerned, though, its also a nonstory.
This complacency or complicity has to stop. During the last 10 months, the Department of Homeland Security has purchased 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition, including millions of hollow-point bullets. The department also has purchased 7,000 fully automatic assault rifles, and it has overseen the retrofitting of more than 2,000 light tanks, which, of course, were originally designed to resist the mines and ambushes of the battlefield. Why does DHS need such offensive and defensive firepower?
Remember, DHS stands for Department of Homeland Security, and homeland, just to be extremely clear, means the USA. Obama must be asked against which domestic enemy he is arming nonmilitary forces. It sounds incredible, to be sure, but are we watching administration battle
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
old media is covering, if they cover they will be protected. simple as that.
What guns are they armed with?
Important is that a segment of the US population is alert to this fact, but a majority does not even understand its implication. IMHO the US gov is not preparing to subjugate the entire US population, but rather preparing for a siege or regional outbreak of civil disorder. Add to the 2700 MRAP vehicles, and 1.6 billion rounds of ammo is about 10 million #10 cans of dehydrated food FEMA brought in the spring and summer of 2011. Food, guns, fighting vehicles, existing military forts and underground shelters. Sounds like Uncle Sam is ready for a siege.
IMHO the US gov/banks are entering a very unstable and dangerous financial scenario. Pumping money to keep the stock market afloat, banks solvent, and unknown/unseen obligations banks got the US involve with SWAPS, CDO, CDS etc etc, as well as secret loans to overseas banks to prevent the international currency printing from imploding, the behavior of the US gov makes you wonder. I always thought the US would pull back its forces overseas if they anticipate domestic disorder. Rather the US gov and the power elites decided to build a domestic internal security force instead for possible domestic collapse. You know what that means, the US gov is prepare to abandon her military forces overseas if an emergency happens to our financial system and a collapse occurs.
Since we may have a glimpse of what the gov is preparing for, then what are we as freepers who are aware going to do to prepare our families and community for the potential calamity?
I think the author is referring to MRAPs.
Why is the author claiming that civilian law forces are arming with 2000 “light tanks”?
Because some conservative outlets are reporting that DHS recently purchased 2,000+ MRAPs. Nobody can explain why.
Because, those attack vehicles, are actually easter bunnies.
The author is deliberately lying to people, an MRAP is not a light tank armed for tank warfare.
Or the author doesn’t understand the difference.
Ok, they are not tanks but they are very scary, even though it says “Police/Rescue” on the side.
Before one picks up the pen to tell the public that “tanks” are coming after them, shouldn’t they at least look into it, or google it, or talk to a veteran or someone who reads a little bit?
She knew what she was doing, it is WND, it is what they do with everything.
An AR-15 is not a heavy machine gun, and an MRAP is not a tank.
Thats where you in the mainstream media come in. This story has been burning up the alternative press [it's time for you to join in!]
Not to worry.. "nonpartisan" CoastToCoastAM is featuring this problem in the last three hours of tonight's show.
Yes, "the government" is up to no good.. and it's Bush's fault, he started it is the likely conclusion if the usual C2C take on these matters prevails.
The guest tonight is frequent guest and author of books like "The Hydra of Carnage: Bush's War-Rule of Law." Craig B Hulet. "Bush's Imperial War-making and The Rule of Law".
In all this conundrum my thoughts center on how could USA citizen peace officers take armed conflict against other law abiding citizens. The spirit of a disunited citizenry apart from political is beyond my reasoning especially as a WWII vet. Where are all the Vet organizations on such a possibility? The 4th of July can’t have much real patriotic motivation if such a situation can happen. I do believe that putting Brennan, A Muslim, in as CIA chief and his taking an oath on a personal version of the Constitution is ominous for our freedoms apart from Sharia law. We have lackeys and/or traitors in Congress as well as an enabler of such as POTUSA. I’ll let you know if I get a special call.
I think you are quibbling Ansel. A ‘tank’ can be any armored vehicle. It doesn’t necessarily have to be armed as well. The German ‘panzer’ means ‘armor.’
The British were the first to develop tanks. They were code-named ‘cisterns’ or ‘reservoirs.’ Churchill was one of its backers, following grinding WWI trench warfare and the remarkable feat of the French in rushing troops to the front in taxis. Eventually the term ‘tank’ stuck. They actually had (what they called) ‘male’ and ‘female’ versions of their early tanks and I believe the ladies were unarmed.
The most extraordinary thing here, I think, is someone—myself—actually defending WND ...
Ultimately, that's exactly what happens. Even in traditional wars troops advance and retreat as it is appropriate. When they retreat they are often not able to take the supplies with them. The advancing side takes them and uses them.
In a civil war there is nowhere to retreat, and very little to advance toward. Supplies will be exactly where they are now - in warehouses, on military bases, in hidden caches. As fortunes of war change, they become property of the advancing forces. This happened in Libya, this is happening in Syria. Army depots of the state are often supplying the rebels - and they are an attractive target.
All this talk about an "alternative defense force" is worth nothing if there is nobody willing to fight and die for the bureaucrats in power. I cannot imagine why would anyone do that, especially considering that the bureaucrats have nothing to offer. I don't think that an extra MRE per day can buy a soldier who will fire at his countrymen. In Middle Ages a good soldier can be knighted and become eligible for a manor. In 20th century a good soldier would fight for survival of his country (as he understood it.) What would a modern US mercenary fight for on this land? Or I can put it differently: if a US mercenary is willing to fight, what side he will be fighting on?
Dictators are acutely aware of this; that's why they always try to bind their elite guard with money - and with blood too, if they can. The intent is to have troops that will fight and die for you because the alternative is worse. Saddam tried his best, and it wasn't enough. Gaddhafi tried his best, and it wasn't enough. Hitler tried and was successful in brainwashing of millions of Germans. But he had an advantage of being first, and he was a strong leader, and it took him ten years, not even counting the years that preceded his rise to power and left the German society with a desire for a strong leader.
You must live, in a nice place. Take good care.
Let us say Italy decides to pull out of EU and screws up the Euro. US banks have invested in hidden currency SWAPS and disclose to Fed gov that they took heavy losses and unable to payoff their margin calls. Wall Street bankers inform the Fed and US Treasury that if they do not get a bailout they will implode the US financial system. Within 72 hrs the US system collapses, Fed gov calls a bank holiday (banks close). ATM machines freeze, credit card freeze and worst food stamp cards freeze and unemployment checks bounce. Inner cities erupt into welfare riots, and your LEO will be more then willing to shoot the rioters. Homeland Security will go into action with their 2700 MRAPs, NG will be mobilized and LEO will fall in line as soon as Fed troops and DHS arrives to put down the riots. All this power and capacity being stockpiled not for just for Obama, it is for the next POTUS, so the gov is ready when the banks finally fall apart and the gov cannot issue entitlement checks anymore.
Is our government dissolving into tyranny? Yes. Should DHS be dismantled into it’s former legacy agencies? Yes. Do the people writing these articles about the billion rounds have a good understanding of what they are talking about? No.
It’s really kind of maddening to see such ignorance and misinformation, coming from conservatives no less. It is vitally important that we have accurate and well researched info and none of these articles have those characteristics.
Maybe people movers. “Soylent Green is people”..
Not quibbling, those are not light tanks, and no, we do not call any armored vehicle or all armored vehicles tanks.
Anything other than her outright lie, we conservatives are in desperate need of better sources for accurate information.
Here is the reason.
It’s relative to what you are going up against.
An AR-15 is a heavy machine gun if your opposition only has a shotgun.
An MRAP is a tank if your opposition only has a bicycle.
Drug dealers in Mexico make “tanks” to go up against other drug dealers. They don’t have the firepower to stop them so in their eyes it’s a tank.
It’s not a heavy machine gun or tank as defined by the military, but as defined by the people they are used against.
In a lot of cases it’s just a convenience of words.
Try taking on a MRAP with shotgun and tell me you wouldn’t call it a tank.
rather than attack an author, how about we address what in sam hill is going on with these purchases.
Frankenfeinstein is being disingenuous or a ‘rat robot.
Disingenuous, if somewhere in the back of her cranial empty chamber of a birdbrain there is the information of future financial collapse. Then, her shenanigans on “assault weapons bannings” is willfully in cahoots with stockpiling of bullets, armored personnel carriers and AR-15s.
Or, just a ‘rat robot. In this scenario, Franenfeinstein’s cranial emptiness is merely acting out what she always has done with no inkling of why - the why is: she is a ‘dem carrying the water. Somewhere above her, task-masters know the whole picture: gun confiscation, financial collapse, control (bullets/personnel-carriers/AR-15s) of the citizenry.
“This happened in Libya, this is happening in Syria. Army depots of the state are often supplying the rebels - and they are an attractive target.”
After Gaddhafi ordered his army to fire on Libyans, 75% of the army deserted and returned to their provinces to defend their families. On their way home, they emptied the armories. What remained were recruit cadets and Qaddhafi’s officers in his elite guard. They could never mount any kind of effective military action, so the elite officers deserted the recruits and headed for the Niger border, loaded with loot.
Theses gun control laws are unconstitutional, and there is nothing that can make them lawful. The same goes for Obamacare. Unless we realize that our system is corrupt and broken then we can't win. We have a government full of traitors who have a hatred of our Constitution. They are liars who make up frivolous arguments to support their treason. We can't survive when we continue to make fools of ourselves fighting a battle we can't win. We better do something drastically different than what we have been for decades that have resulted in the advancement of liberalism. These tyrants should be warned to keep their hands off our Bill of Rights, which they were not given authority to take away by any lawful means.
We have to remember that Obama is a tyrant unlike any we have dealt with in modern times. He will destroy this country one way or another. He's a principled radical. The Bill Ayers type of leftist are intelligent and principled extremist, and they seem hellbent on pushing us over the edge fast.
It's easy to underestimate the left because they can sound pretty damn stupid arguing against our Constitution, but they are intentionally doing that. They know the Constitution, but have to oppose it for their agenda. They have had a better strategy than the right, and even their stupidest sounding comments seem to work in the long run.
Before anyone gets too confident about Obama not having the forces to impose his tyranny on us, we have to look at the possibility of foreign troops entrenched on American soil under false pretenses. Our military can easily be put in a situation it can't respond, and there isn't any guarantee it would. There would be those who would go along will Obama in the feds, and those who would refuse or resist won't be in a position to act the way we may think. Obama seems to be stepping everything up at his pace. He's testing the waters, and any major escalation will be when he wants it.
We may see Russian and/or Muslim troops inside our military bases while our troops are sent overseas. Obama hates this country, and I don't think anything he does should surprise us. I would see that as a bigger possibility, and threat, than any western European troops. We don't know how much Obama’s willing to risk, and we shouldn't underestimate him. I honestly don't think he would be risking as much as it might seem. He would just flee overseas if things went south, and I could see him living openly in luxury without ever being punished. It's better if we expect the worse, but work for the best outcome.
Oath Keepers - Guardians of the Republic - www.OathKeepers.org
The author is using hyperbole to get attention. Without hyperbole, most “news” and opinion pieces could be written on a matchhead (oops...). I agree that misrepresentation of facts brings the entire presentation into doubt, and trivializes an important issue. Are her other facts accurate or similarly tweaked to spike attention?
The huge ammo purchase story looks less ominous when you find out that the contracts are a framework for buying quantities over years, not necessarily stockpiling all the ammo today.
But why we need all this ammo, or 2,700 MRAPS is a valid question. Why did Congress fund these? I’d like to see Diane West, et al., put the question to Congressmen, and investigate who is making money from these purchases, whose district got a few jobs out of it, etc. Is the purpose tyranny, or just to stimulate Obama cronies with public cash, while pretending to be serious about anti-terrorism? As a nation we are broke, the current government has no appetite for border control, is releasing illegal aliens instead of deporting them, and wants a broad amnesty. Doesn’t make sense to buy tools you don’t intend to use.
Did he ever list "the national security objectives" that they set? I don't recall seeing them anywhere.
Part of the preparation involves identifying the locations of the armories at which they keep the vehicles, weapons and ammo. They will be the only source of resupply for Patriots. Next we must identify those who will be GIVING THE ORDERS for the firearms confiscation; they are the primary targets when confiscation begins. Cut off the head and the snake will die.
There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. - Ayn Rand
You'll no longer BE a law-abiding citizen; they'll make you a criminal.
See my #39.
I have never actually heard or seen them listed, but I believe they're being put in place daily, i.e. gun control, drones, etc.
The left has nothing on conservatives evidently when it comes to the lack of interest in honesty and accuracy in reporting, the only thing that counts is that it sounds great to the low knowledge types and hits the emotional keys.
That's just it, so far we still don't really know the truth of these purchases, I haven't yet seen a good article on them that I have confidence in.
It is not an established tradition for US LEOs to bravely catch bullets just so a few homeless people in another street can be saved. When riots begin the law enforcement ends. The timeline of LA riots (1992) shows that the police fled the streets. The Koreans were holding the fort because 911 did not answer, not because they wanted to get a few murders under their belts. Wikipedia offers this quote:
"I want to make it clear that we didn't open fire first. At that time, four police cars were there. Somebody started to shoot at us. The LAPD ran away in half a second. I never saw such a fast escape. I was pretty disappointed."
The riots of 1992 were put down by the National Guard, without use of force. Wikipedia does not mention the police as a major peacemaker. Police is not an army, and a supervisor cannot send a police officer to death because it is strategically advantageous. If one shooter is holed up somewhere, the police needs 100 officers and air support because they are very safe operators. If mass riots are in progress, the police simply doesn't have enough officers to achieve such an overwhelming force. Individual officers will not survive in a riot. That's why they are not a player. They are not trained, not conditioned, and not expected to die for their country. They can maintain law and order only when the local majority supports them.
If the riots are calming down, the police will be cautiously making their appearance, "supporting" the troops. Riots will be calming down if they have a finite cause, like a beating of one guy, or a hurricane, or an earthquake. Riots will not be calming down if the trigger situation remains active. The crash of US financial system is not something you can repair overnight. This means the riots will not be that easy to stop, and the police will be exactly where I'd expect them to be - with their families, and hopefully with their neighbors, taking part in the mutual defense.
Those MRAPs will not be a wunderwaffe either. They are resistant to IED, but they are not resistant to anti-tank weapons; they cannot pass over trenches or barricades; they can be buried under demolished buildings. They don't seem to have effective weapons that can be operated from the inside; they only have gun ports for small arms. They appear to be very vulnerable to incendiary weapons - they have too many crevices, and the rubber of the tires is certainly going to burn. The vehicle has neither the efficient (carbon) filters nor the positive air pressure inside - this makes the passengers dependent on clean ambient air, which is in short supply if there are fires all around (especially if it's their own MRAP that is burning.)
In essence, this MRAP is only usable for delivery of troops. Once they are there, they have to disembark and become vulnerable on their own. It is not a fighting vehicle like a tank; it has no integrated weapons. It's just an armored carrier.
If you're too ignorant to know what was being referred to because it wasn't spelled out to your satisfaction it's not my problem that's your problem.
A profanity throwing idiot would be the person who doesn’t know anything about the military or armaments and just doesn’t care as long as the writing is made more fun in their mind because of it.
Adults require something better, that is why this publication gets so little respect among thinking people.
Apparently you are too dense to grasp the fact that when military equipment is used against civilians which have nothing even close to it, the civilians might not have the exact same designation for the equipment as is used by the military. That was the point they were trying to make, sorry if you missed it.
It’s civilian terms verses military terms numb nuts.
Compared to what the American people have at their disposal, it’s a tank, even if it’s just a generic term.