Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
(View past Libertarian pings here)
Posted on 06/16/2009 9:25:43 PM PDT by Libloather
Oath Keepers...Guardians of the Republic (video)
D.C., you'll get problems if you get any funny ideas.
I agree. If we can control protesters at political conventions - and they are kept blocks away - it's the least we can do for the men and women who protect us.
This isn't saying people can't "protest" but they can't "protest" without some restrictions if they're near a DOD facility or American soldiers protecting us. This is starting to come across as OK. What do you think xzines?
The US military should not be used in internal to the US operations that are on the civil side.
They are a force that gets projected, therefore, any protests they are a part of are going to be in the nature of civil affairs operations in occupied countries or countries being traversed.
Soldiers overseas should always be wary of the potential for terrorism inherent in large crowds, especially in protests.
Don't bother. Kent State was Ohio National Guard sent in by the Ohio governor. I was a 19 year-old Marine when that happened and among active duty there was the general feeling that the guard was too ill-trained at that time to be doing riot control. Regular troops at that time would not have fired on that crowd under those conditions nor would their officers have given any orders to that effect. The guard of that day was far different from the force-integrated guard of today.
I wonder if anybody here read the actual pdf?
Hence the importance (to them) of linking the “terrorist watch list”, aka “no-fly list”, to NICS rejections. Call a standard political protest “low level terrorism”, drop the irrelevant “low level” modifier, put the participants on a terrorist watch list, add that to the no-fly list, and every “tea party” participant automatically loses their RKBA.
Even ABC News probably still agrees with this... ( and I do too!) Thanks for the claifications, xzins.
Remember, Obama also probably sees the military as a potential threat to his power.
Thanks for the research into the document and help in clarifying the purpose. It is unconstitutional for Obama to try and use the military inside the United States for ‘protests’ but it makes perfect sense for operations in ME countries that our troops are stationed in. You just never know with the Obama crowd though and we are right to question how they intend to use this ‘training’. After all..they are marxist fascists.
Because Obama KNOWS the military are for the most part CONSERVATIVE.
I guess that means you’ll get an all-expense-paid trip to Bermuda... complete with mansion to live in!
:-P
We could make it freeper headquarters!!!! :-D
It’s the citizens against the gov.
Been that way since time began.
The Iranian protests are romper room compared to what I think is coming to the USA.
I was discharged fromn the Marines a month b4 Kent state.
The last days of my inlistment were spent on riot control,going thru tear gas once a week, and quick response deployments.
We were all Viet Nam vets and were trianing for the poor peoples march in Washington DC.
I’m glad we were never called because there would have been blood in the streets.
Kent state was terrible but would have been dwarfed by our actions. just sayin’.
Semper Fi
Just imagine the outcry if this headline has appeared: “Rumsfeld: Peace Protesters=Terrorists.” We’d never have heard the end of it.
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.