The Obama Civilian Military “Litmus Test” For Military Leadership Compliance…

Many people will dismiss this claim as ridiculous or outlandish.  However, the originator holds considerable merit, and if you have read the actual research you know this is not an extreme position.  We have previously shared the fact based reality of numerous studies, funded by the military, identifying the primary psychology behind a willingness to fire upon citizens.

(Via GWP) Dr. Jim Garrow, the author of The Pink Pagoda: One Man’s Quest to End Gendercide in China, made the following claim on Facebook this week that is getting a whole lot of attention. The Examiner reported:

On Monday, renowned author and humanitarian Dr. Jim Garrow made a shocking claim about what we can expect to see in Obama’s second term.

Garrow made the following Facebook post:

I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new “litmus test” in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks. “The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not.” Those who will not are being removed.

So, who is the source?

Garrow replied: “The man who told me this is one of America’s foremost military heroes.”  (link)

[...]  Meanwhile, with the leadership unsure of which direction to take, the Chinese people hovered in a no-man’s land between fear of the authoritarian state, and the desire to speak out for reform. The government-instigated tragedies of the previous two decades left them hungry for change, but aware that the iron fist of Beijing’s leadership was always ready to smash down opposition. China’s people waited to see which way the wind would blow……

The regular Chinese Military refused to fire on the peaceful crowd when they were ordered to clear the square, many even linked arms and encircled the students to protect them and show their solidarity.   The Chinese government then enscribed the Mongolian branch of the military to engage the citizens and shoot if needed.   They Did.

Honest estimates appear to be around 2,500 people killed in the square and countless more, perhaps tens of thousands, in the surrounding area as they tried to block the military from entering the protest area.

The 1989 uprising for freedom culminating in what we call Tiananmen Square  is one of the most dismissed historical events in the global rise for freedom.   Hidden and overlooked because of the relatively simultaneous collapse of the Iron curtain and the fall of the Berlin wall.    The success of freedom for people in Eastern Europe is a great historical story.  But never, and I mean never, do you hear any discussion on the timeline about the failure of freedom cries in China.

[...]  Tiananmen Square captured the world’s attention for a month and a half.    Many articles written about the Tiananmen Square protests and subsequent massacre refer to Chinese military shooting and killing the demonstrators.

While generally overlooked I recall the reason the demonstrations continued for over a month was because regular Chinese troops would not shoot at Chinese citizens who were peacefully demonstrating.   The Chinese government finally made a decision on June 4th to remove the protestors and called in “Mongolian” troops (they did not speak Mandarin Chinese) and they had no qualms about obeying orders to shoot the demonstrators if needed.

Following that horrific violence, the U.S. military surveyed our own troops to determine if they would obey orders to shoot American citizens.  Almost all said they would most likely
refuse – with the statistically quantifiable exception of those from Hispanic or Latino backgrounds and ethnicities.    Subsequently, many people began to claim they saw a shift in recruiting ads for the Marines and Army away from english language programing – and an increase in the same ads on Spanish Language networks and print media.

I hold no opinion on the matter.

One of those activists from Tiananmen square is now an American citizen.   He recently gave a speech about the current Gun Control efforts:

To me, a rifle is not for sporting or hunting. It is an instrument of freedom.

It guarantees that I cannot be coerced, that I have free will, that I am a free man.

Now suppose, the 20 milllion Beijing citizens had a couple million rifles on hand in 1989? How many rounds should they have been allowed to load into their magazines? Ten rounds? Seven rounds? How about three rounds?

Do not give up the fight, my friends. It may be a small step that you give up your rifle, or a 30 round magazine.

But it will be a giant leap toward the destruction of this republic.

In closing, I will quote the words of Captain John Parker. “Stand your ground. Do not fire until fired upon. But, if they want a war, let it start here.”

About these ads
This entry was posted in 2nd Amendment, A New America, China, Communist, Dem Hypocrisy, media bias, Obama re-election, Obama Research/Discovery, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Potus Gun Ban, Socialist, Statism, Tea Party, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized, United Nations, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

76 Responses to The Obama Civilian Military “Litmus Test” For Military Leadership Compliance…

  1. elvischupacabra says:

    American troops are obliged to ignore illegal orders, no matter their origin. Also, of all the military branches, the Corps looks more like “the opposition” than the other branches of the service. Look for Obama to down-size the Marines.

    Also, look for him to create that “civilian security force” to which he alluded in July 2008.

    This was originally offered as biting satire. Now I wonder if it’s eerily prophetic:

    Like

    • retire2005 says:

      Do you remember last June when Army tanks were rolling through residential neighborhoods of St. Louis? The lamestream media in St, Louis downplayed it, telling their low-information voters “Hey, it’s just the 354th Military Police doing practices. Nothing to see here. Move on.”

      Only problem, the 354th is out of Fort Dix, New Jersey. Why would they choose a midwest city to practice driving urban assault vehicles through city streets when Trenton, New Jersey was a hellofa lot closer?

      Think we don’ t have those in government that won’t fire on American citizens? Anyone remember Ruby Ridge or Waco? It was later learned about Waco that every gun the Branch Davidians had were purchased legally, and they even allowed other gun owners from the Waco area to use their firing ranges.

      And our military going after us? Research the Bonus Marchers. Former American soldiers, veterans from WWI, who were demanding what the government promised them, were rounded up by ARMED active military and not only beaten but fired on.

      We expect our military to be congnizant of the rules of the UCMJ, and that they would never follow an illegal order. But the military is also representative of our nation, as a whole, politically. If the Black Messiah gave orders to oppress Americans, whould those very same black soldiers, who voted for him for no other reason than Obama is 1/2 black, fire on other Americans?

      We assume that tryanny, such as seen in European/African nations could never happen here. It is closer than you think.

      Like

    • allhail2 says:

      Well, I guess this answers my question about if they thought about massive non-compliance. However, 150,000,000 – 200,000,000+ people unwilling to give up their rights is going to be very formidable. Even if a traitorous general issues the order, I would expect “that issue” to be handeled from within the military itself. The military will not turn on their families, neighbors, friends and country. A personal civilian force will, and that is where the fight will be.

      Like

      • Sharon says:

        “The military will not turn on their families, neighbors, friends and country.”

        To the extent that anything in this post is correct, to any degree, you cannot be sure of that. Can you?

        Like

      • ytz4mee says:

        Really? I’m not sure about that. In fact, I’m very unsure about that.

        Like

      • wizzum says:

        The Indonesians will not post any soldier in their own province or on their own Island. that way they are not forced to shoot their own people. The same would happen here. Post Californians to Mississippi and vice verca and then as soon as reports of Southern people being people being fired upon by West Coast Military then the Southern Military posted on the West Coast are more likely to pull the trigger when they’re told.

        Like

    • ytz4mee says:

      No need to “downsize”. He has already successfully slotted woefully incompetent, but Pavlovian loyal, black officers in key billets in the Marine Corps. And, the leadership of the Marine Corps has decided it wants to be the vanguard of the newer, kinder, gay-lesbian-transgendered military.

      Like

      • yankeeintx says:

        The leadership of the USMC was dead set against the repeal of DADT. Of course now they are saying that everything is just fine. In the rank/file of the Marines (at least the infantry), it is still not acceptable. They don’t care if the guy typing reports stateside is gay, but they don’t want to share a foxhole with him. I’m sure there are a few that have proved themselves worthy, but they are rare.

        Like

  2. Pingback: If True This Is Very Disturbing - Litmus Test For Military Leaders - Page 2 - INGunOwners

  3. maggiemoowho says:

    I just read this morning that Miami police are assisting in Military training exercises. Did they do these ever before.

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/22/3194357/miami-police-announce-military.html

    Like

  4. michellc says:

    I had never heard of Garrow before but after my quick research he seems to be a good guy who is not your typical conspiracy theorist.
    I do know this, all of the military I talked to after Obama was elected were almost in a panic. At the time I thought it had more to do with him throwing them under the bus, but playing back through my mind how it was said and not what was said, it makes me wonder were they hearing some of this?
    Almost to a man they all told me the majority of the military would not take up weapons against citizens, they were very adamant about that. Now I’m wondering if that was a warning?

    LEO all over the country are sending Obama the message they will not obey his orders. Military are saying they won’t obey his orders in a round-about way. So it makes sense to force out those who won’t. So I guess he will need those who are obedient to him. He needs someone to shoot all that ammo he bought up. My guess is he’ll have a small military armed to the teeth and all of those who are joined at the hip with the DOJ.

    Whether you believe this or not, it would be very smart to at least consider the possibility, better forewarned and prepared for the worst than be a duck in a barrel.

    Like

    • gretchenone says:

      He may end up with officers who order troops to fire. It remains to be seen upon whom the guns are turned.

      Like

      • howie says:

        Kent State II.

        Like

      • michellc says:

        I think there are those in the military who will follow orders, I also think there are those who will follow orders while being mislead. However, I know many military members who are probably more aware than any of us, just how dangerous this man and his cronies are, so he will force out the majority of the military. Personally I think that is part of the plan and is why he wants to cut funding to the military, make it smaller and more yes men along with making us less safe from the rest of the world. The ATF are as corrupt as they come and the majority of them will do whatever they’re told and some of them will take great pleasure in doing it. There are some in the FBI that are corrupt, although I don’t think it’s as wide spread as the ATF is. We also do not know how many of Holder’s men have been put in place.
        There are though many in the military who fear being taken out before they start taking out citizens. I also greatly fear for these LEO who are sending out the message they won’t follow orders.
        It is seriously scary times we’re living in and I’m terrified all of my worst predictions will happen and I honestly don’t know how many of us will be left standing in 4 years. All I know is I won’t roll over and play dead, I won’t willingly live in this world they have planned. I’ve got enough cowgirl in me to die with my boots on standing in them and not down on my knees begging. They can only kill me once.

        Like

      • CV says:

        I work with a lot of officers in the military and they are not the ones who will carry out orders to shoot Americans. It’s those idiots in Homeland Security who will be shooting at us.

        Like

  5. aliashubbatch says:

    I am scared, that is all I can say about this. :(

    Like

    • Josh says:

      It’s okay to be scared. Just don’t let them see it :-)

      Like

    • sundance says:

      Train yourself to practice “extreme lawfulness”. It will perhaps be one of the most useful skillsets in the future.

      Like

      • aliashubbatch says:

        Could you explain to me what “extreme lawfulness” is?

        Like

        • elvischupacabra says:

          Do everything the right way. Be polite. Obey all the laws. Don’t be provoked, goaded or lead into breaking the law of creating an incident.

          Like

          • sundance says:

            Exactly. well put. Succinct.

            Like

          • LandauMurphyFan says:

            “Do everything the right way. Be polite. Obey all the laws. Don’t be provoked, goaded or led into breaking the law or creating an incident.”

            Yeah, and look how well that worked for George Zimmerman.

            Not to mention the Jews in Germany in the 30s.

            And what if obeying all the laws means turning in all your weapons?

            Extreme lawfulness may work for a while, but if your gov’t has already determined that you’re the enemy because your name is on a list somewhere (for such heinous actions as, say, donating to the wrong political party, taking a course in how to handle a weapon properly, or advocating for a non-approved cause such as justice for GZ), seems to me you may have to cut all ties with society to survive.

            Which, of course, is why you’re wolverines!

            Like

        • sundance says:

          Have you ever watched a show where the police investigator, or any questioner for that matter, tells the person being questioned they appear angry and unstable.?

          The person questioned gets upset (perhaps frustrated/angry) about being labeled…. this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy…. as their apparent anger affirms the inquistors label…. and the inquisitor escalates the approach until the person questioned loses control of their attitude.

          This is what the professional left will do to you to gain control of you. You will be deemed a danger to yourself or others. You must practice how to avoid this, any misstep will begin the process of your labeling….. you must be “extremely lawful”……

          Think of it like being the non-infected person in the movie “invasion of the body snatchers” and you are forced to walk amid the pod people…..

          Read books about the “resistance” operatives throughout history and how they communicated invisibly with eachother and other people of the “resistance”.

          Like

          • Sharon says:

            I’m putting a comment further down the thread with a quote from the Bonhoeffer biography about this….it’ll be too narrow and distracting here maybe….

            Like

    • Josh says:

      I recently watched a documentary about WWII. It tells the story of the men that fought and the women that served. More than one soldier said that he considered himself dead already and that made him a better figher. This concept actually helps me.

      WWII in HD – narrated by Gary Sinise

      Like

    • Josh says:

      Also get real practiced with your loading technique. The more comfortable you are with your gear the more at peace you will be.

      Like

    • yankeeintx says:

      Courage is not the absense of fear, but rather the judgement that something else is more important than fear – Ambrose Redmoon.

      In order to be important to a resistance, you need to keep your eyes and ears open and your mouth shut.

      Like

  6. 22tula says:

    Dr. Jim Garrow

    “This Nobel Nominee Actually Saves Babies”
    by Valerie Richardson – January 26, 2010

    “When President Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, that meant there were 205 nominees for the award who didn’t. One of them was Jim Garrow of the Bethune Institute.”
    – Valerie Richardson

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35324

    “The Pink Pagoda: One Man’s Quest to End Gendercide in China”
    CrosstalkAmerica – March 19, 2012

    Dr. Jim Garrow Interview Begins @ 13:00
    Trunews – April 30, 2012

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/trunews/2012/04/30/trunews-april-30-2012

    “How 1 Man Saved 40,000 Chinese Girls From Death”
    World Net Daily – April 23, 2012

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/how-1-man-saved-40000-little-girls-from-death/

    “The Pink Pagoda”

    http://pinkpagoda.org/

    Human Rights in China

    http://www.hrichina.org/

    Like

  7. Arkindole says:

    Forth.Generation.Warfare – who will their psychos be firing at? Rule #1: Never inflict damage to the civilian populace at large.

    Like

  8. Coast says:

    First, I hope that any military leader that is asked that question and is wise enough to understand the motive of the question simply lies about his answer. That way the honorable leaders are not removed.
    And second, I’ve always felt that the police force (i.e. SWAT teams, Emergency response, etc) are grossly over done, too powerful and simply inappropriate, and lately there is more and more news concerning the use of drones to perform surveillance, which is also inappropriate to a free society. In my opinion, our federal government, specifically the office of president and Congress, has way too much security and protection, which results in them not fearing the public whatsoever. Thus, it gives them motivation to do unconstitutional acts with no accountability. As I said before, we need to communicate with local government, especially with law enforcement and start making a stand for lawful constitutional action; similar to the statements by a few good sheriffs that will not obey unlawful orders.

    Like

    • WeeWeed says:

      I agree with some of what you said – I think ALL military leaders that have achieved any rank at all will understand EXACTLY what he’s asking of them. I, too, hope they lie, to give us any chance at all.

      Like

    • yankeeintx says:

      I don’t think they are going to directly ask the question to any military leader. They will ask those who have served with him/under him, friends, and neighbors. They will see who he donates to, who were his role models, and even what he reads. If they have ever given an opinion on policies such as “don’t ask, don’t tell”, then that will be considered too.
      They have been screening aplicants for years. They want someone who is easily broken, so they can be molded. The ones that cannot easily be broken are more suited to become Marines, Special Forces, and Seal Team members.

      Like

      • raskog says:

        One word. NSA. This is how they fired those military commanders last week. Digging into their private files. They are doing the same to Ted Cruz and any new Tea Party candidates. Anything that can be fabricated based on minor facts on innuendo will be attempted.

        Like

  9. Tony O. says:

    Do not put anything past the wannabe dictator in the WH.

    Like

  10. triage says:

    Very interesting and disturbing commentary. I seem to remember that a story came out during the Bengazi incident that a General who was told to stand down and not to help decided to disobey the order and help the people in Bengazi. The article stated that the Executive officer (second in command) had the General placed under arrest and the Executive officers orders were carried out. Does anybody have any information on who the Executive officer was and how he got his appointment.

    Like

  11. Sharon says:

    (This comment is in response to a good discussion that is upthread….and would have dropped in after this thought from landaumurphyfan:

    …“Do everything the right way. Be polite. Obey all the laws. Don’t be provoked, goaded or led into breaking the law or creating an incident.”

    Yeah, and look how well that worked for George Zimmerman.

    Not to mention the Jews in Germany in the 30s.)

    Eric Metaxas documents the following events that took place after France fell to the Nazis in May of 1940, three years before Bonhoeffer was arrested (eventually to be executed in 1945):

    Meanwhile, on the far side of the continent, Bonhoeffer and Bethge were visiting the pastorate of one of the Finkenwalde brothers in eastern Prussia. After a pastors’ meeting that morning, they took a ferry across to the peninsula and found an outdoor cafe in the sun. It was in Memel, which is today in Lithuania. Suddenly a trumpet fanfare on the radio loudspeakers announced a special news flash: France had surrendered! Twenty-two years after Germany’s humiliation, Hitler had turned the tables.

    People went wild. Some of them leaped up and stood on chairs; others stood on tables. Everyone threw out his arm in the Nazi salute and burst into “Deutschland uber Alles” and then the “Horst Wessel Song.” It was a pandemonium of patriotism, and Bonhoeffer and Bethge were pinned like beetles. At least Bethge was. Bonhoeffer, on the other hand, seemed to be a part of it. Bethge was flabbergasted: along with everyone else, his friend stood up and threw out his arm in the “Heil, Hitler!” salute. As Bethge stood there gawking, Bonhoeffered whispered to him, “Are you crazy? Raise your arm! We’ll have to run risks for many different things, but this silly salute is not one of them...”

    As pointed out by others in the conversation above, this is one of those times when two seemingly opposing truths are both true–one does not negate the other:

    Truth 1: Do not do anything to unnecessarily draw the attention of law enforcement or political regulators.

    Truth 2: Disobey the law flagrantly and enthusiastically when necessary to protect our Republic.

    Both statements are true, both recommendations are valid. We do not have to choose one or the other in a “one time” decision.

    It’s not either/or: it’s both/and.

    Like

    • sundance says:

      Yes, thank you.

      “Extreme lawfulness” is the resistance concept where you affirm your capacity to continue resisting by understanding what is confronting you directly, and prudently make determinations of when to express the resistance.

      Everyone must understand how important the “labeling” is to those who seek control.

      In order to convince the majority that their inherent beliefs are unnatural the minority oppressors will find examples to affirm their arguments; think “Columbine” for gun control, or “Oklahoma City” for extremist labels, or the infamous Capitol Spitting incident to label racist/Tea Party for opposition to Obamacare. More recently you might have seen Piers Morgan *provoke* Alex Jones about gun ideology.

      The goal is division. To create such a framing that people cannot align with those of similar association, divide and conquer.

      The oppressor(s) will always frame the argument to make the counter opinion seem extreme, intolerant or crazied….. this in turn incites the frustrations of people who lose control of their sensibilities, and subsequently lose the narrative.

      Like

      • ytz4mee says:

        I prefer to advise Kool-Aid drinkers that I have elected to “opt out”.
        The choice of verbiage confuses them. They can’t find it in their Organizing for America handouts.

        Like

    • Fascinating and appropriate connection, Sharon.

      History is repeating itself…repeating itself…repeating itself…

      Like

      • Sharon says:

        We’re being forced by reality to consider questions that we (at least — me) sometimes have trouble articulating….. sometimes I think we can even feel a bit foolish as though we are over-reacting–half afraid that we look silly:…but I’m thinking we need to pay attention to the creepy-crawlies that we feel in our hearts these days.

        There’s something afoot…and it’s not good. We need us a bunch of Gandalfs.

        Like

  12. 22tula says:

    Kai Chen – June 4, 1995

    http://www.freewebs.com/oneinabillion/foreword.html

    My Way – Kai Chen

    “On April 5, 1976, a photo of Premier Zhou Enlai’s corpse appeared on TV. He had the most painful and tortured expression on his face. That made me think a little deeper. He was the second most powerful person in China. But he was also the most miserable victim in China. What kind of society was this? Watching that tormented face of Zhou, I suddenly wept uncontrollably. I finally understand that all the conclusions I had made were all correct. I was virtuous, they were malevolent. It didn’t matter how many people they had, or how many weapons they had, or how powerful their propaganda machine was. I finally realized. I was immensely powerful. I was the one who was right. All of my conclusions were correct. I was indeed a very good person. When you entered the realm of true spirituality and morality and understood yourself as a moral being with power from above, you were finally free.”
    – Kai Chen, “My Way” Part 2 -1 @ 7:37

    Like

  13. triage says:

    I am all for being rationale and in control but that requires an opponent with some integrity and fair play and morals. Ghandi’s non violence worked because the Brits had some sense of right and wrong. When Ghandi marched his people up to the soldiers two by two and they we bludgeoned he knew that it would sicken the soldiers over time and they could not continue to beat them. I am not so sure about this bunch we are up against. I keep a low profile in discussion at work but we have to be perfect and they have no rules. I’m not sure how this will work. We have to find a way to not accept this double standard that ensures we will lose.

    Like

  14. czarowniczy says:

    Yet another anonymous source claiming the the POtuS is about to unleash the military on an unsuspecting public.
    American soldiers are drawn from the public, though mostly middle-class and lower and generally represent the values of where they came from. Those who stay for successive enlistments generally show a greater love of country and Constitution and meld into the ‘military’,mindset. Yes, you’ll find soldiers who’ll fire on civilians if ordered – most likely even find some who’ll fire without being ordered, but it is the sergeants who lead who’ll be the largest factors in any such decisions, not the officers. Orders come down a chain, rarely will an officer jump the chain and order an enlisted man to do something as it creates tension in the chain. If we go back to Waco there were military there carrying ATFs and the FBIs water, and there were foreign military right there in the trenches next to US military and the FBI. Not once did the FBI issue any orders to any military without observing the chain of command that had been established between the two and while the military were under fire they did not return fire. The recovery vehicle pounding a hole in the compound wall and pouring CS into the house was a military vehicle that had been placed under the command of the FBI and that turned into a disaster. Will the military fire on US citizens without provocation? Can’t say for sure but I doubt they will without problems, and as soon as they do there will be major problems all around, starting with state governors and THEIR National Guards. I believe that orders to the US military to fire on US citizens without a damned good and easily understandable basis will fracture the US military, maybe even causing large scale mutiny. The Wehrmacht command and rank-and-file were heavily against the internal purges that Hitler and his minions were pursuing, that’s why he had the SS. Obama’s administration would have to have their own SS-like protective group capable of facing down military loyal to the Constitution they swore an oath to defend – start sweating when you see Him assembling his own SA or SS cadres.
    Do not compare my soldiers to the Chinese – that’s apples to tofu. The Chinese soldier comes out of a totally different culture and that drives his being. Mao and his progeny have woven their system around and through a culture that predates and will outlast them, but it ain’t ours. They act differently, are trained differently and fight differently. It’s not unusual for someone pushing an ad hominem argument to suggest all soldier act or will act alike. Having spent much of my adult life in the working company of US soldiers and having spent a lot of time with foreign military, friendly and otherwise, I’ll say that there’s a vast difference between the US soldier and his foreign counterpart. The Chinese military who were ordered to fire on civilians at Tiananmen Square were protecting the state while US soldiers deployed at major police actions in the US over the last 40 years or so have been there to protect the public. It will be a hard sell to get the military to violate the oath on the DD Form 4.

    Like

    • Sharon says:

      “….starting with state governors and THEIR National Guards.”

      Do I remember correctly that the National Guard(s) were given (or ordered to take?) a seat at the table with the Joint Chiefs about a year ago? If I remember that correctly, would that compromise the traditional relationship between governors and their national guards?

      Has a different order of command been established regarding the National Guard in terms of their relationship to federal armed forces?

      Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        Yes, the Guard was granted foster-child status at the DoD table but that does not mean they are all equal any more than sitting at the ship’s captain’s dinner table gives you permission to drive the boat. The Guard still reports through the DC-based Guard Bureau and members still swear an oath to their state’s governor on the DD Form 4 enlistment contract. Congress did change the Insurrection Act of 1807 to give the President the power to call up the Guard for the purpose of putting down rebellions or enforcing constitutional rights if state authorities fail to do so to include “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident”. That’s a very, very touchy area though and were that to happen I can see some serious consequences occurring as the Feds move to strip the states’ governors of their Guard.

        Like

      • Sharon says:

        And this is five years before Germany invaded Poland…..Hitler was barely on the world’s radar scope.

        Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        I’m very aware of the Knight of the Long Knives, my uncle was in the SA and after the Night was moved to the SD. This did not involve the military except as part of the grand pile of excuses Himmler used to justify the action and increase his personal power. The SS was not military, and I’m not including the Waffen SS which was not part of the Wehrmacht, nor was the SA. The Wehrmacht despised the SA and the SS and part of the SA and SS’s duties were to ride herd on the military. When the Wehrmacht balked at mass extermination of Eastern Jews the SS formed the Einsatzgruppen, again a non-military unit.

        Like

    • sundance says:

      The Chinese soldier comes out of a totally different culture and that drives his being. Mao and his progeny have woven their system around and through a culture that predates and will outlast them, but it ain’t ours. They act differently, are trained differently and fight differently. It’s not unusual for someone pushing an ad hominem argument to suggest all soldier act or will act alike.

      It is not an ad hominem argument. Actually the Chinese Military refused to fire that is why the call to the mongols. Several military soldiers were hung/burned during the massacre as a message to those who were non-compliant.

      The issue is “the state” and the demand of The State. Obviously the author who stimulates the conversation has insight, accurate or not, into the mind of the leader(s) within the current State as to their “litmus test”. Hence the discussion thread.

      You might hold the U.S. soldier to a higher sense of moral right regarding citizenry, but the vast majority of the discussed Chinese soldiers held the same “higher sense”. The reason for the Chinese comparison is because this was only 24 years ago (1989) and most can relate to it.

      Like

      • czarowniczy says:

        There is a HUGE lack of reliable reporting on the Tiananmen incident as the Chinese locked down the square and any reporting early on. The use of troops from a different culture who speak a different language is an old Communist trick, Russians used it for internal control as they felt it limited the empathy between soldier and civilian and the soldiers would be less likely to refuse an order to use force against them. Except for the Puerto Rican National Guard we don’t have tat arrangement here. The Mongols might well fire upon native Chinese even without an order, they ain’t the best of friends and the Chinese consider them inferior. Enough Chinese soldiers did fire or drive over them with armor BUT from what I believe from what I’ve seen the Chinese government worried about long term perceptual/political problems that might be caused by having ethnic Chinese killing ethnic Chinese to support a government that was influx and not in total control of the population. I think they thought it easier to displace a part of the negativity their actions would cause by using ‘foreign’ troops. Think how the Texans would feel were the Feds to use an almost totally ‘Mexican’ military unit to put down protests in, let’s just say for the sake of argument, Dallas/Ft Worth? I’ve been fielding cases of people saying my military would fire on innocent US citizens since the Kent State incident, it’s as if the old Vietnam hostility for the military as a physical representation of authority is still here in another form. Some may well but I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. As for the ‘insider’, as an ex-cop and MI I’d like to vet his bona fides before I wholesale accept his premises.

        Like

  15. Tuduri says:

    “Following that horrific violence, the U.S. military surveyed our own troops to determine if they would obey orders to shoot American citizens. Almost all said they would most likely
    refuse – with the statistically quantifiable exception of those from Hispanic or Latino backgrounds and ethnicities. Subsequently, many people began to claim they saw a shift in recruiting ads for the Marines and Army away from english language programing – and an increase in the same ads on Spanish Language networks and print media.”

    ‘Almost all said they would not fire, yet a ‘statistically quantifiable exception” of Latinos would’. Citation, please? Or is this just anecdotal bias? I’ve known both Hispanic officers and grunts in the military who would never fire on civilians. Most Hispanics in the military are Catholic and Christian and patriotic Americans.
    It would seem logical for the military to be advertising more towards the fastest growing ethnic group in the country. It is not because Hispanics would be more likely to fire on civilians.

    Like

    • czarowniczy says:

      Agreed – and what the hell is ‘Latino’ to do with troops firing on anyone? One of the worst fights I ever had to deal with as a platoon sergeant was when the Mexican and Puerto Rican soldiers in my company got into a very personal origin-based name calling contest that quickly devolved into beating the hell out of each other. Then there was the ‘argument’ between the Nicaraguan and Cuban soldiers. Only universal, according to Tom Lehrer, is that ‘everybody hates the Jews'”

      Like

  16. 22tula says:

    Rick Wiles True News – Yesterday – Wednesday – January 22, 2013
    Taped Phone call interview with Dr. James Garrow.
    Because of scheduled guest Rick Wile will interview Dr. James Garrow
    on Wednesday – January 23, 2013
    TruNews

    http://www.trunews.com/listen_now.htm

    Dr. James Garrow – Taped Phone Call Interview – First Segment – Tuesday
    January 22, 2013 – direct mp3 link

    [audio src="http://www.trunews.com/Audio/1_22_13_tuesday_trunews2.mp3" /]

    Dr. James Garrow was not on the show today.
    Rick Wiles replays yesterday’s interview which begins @ 15:43
    January 23, 2013 – direct mp3 link

    [audio src="http://www.trunews.com/Audio/1_23_13_wednesday_trunews2.mp3" /]

    Dr. James Garrow – on The Alex Jones Show
    January 23, 2013 – interview begins @ 1:09:48

    Alex Jones – Seal of Approval

    Like

  17. Tuduri says:

    None of the soldiers at Kent State were Hispanic were they? Hmmm, oh, and how about Mai Lai, no Latinos there either. Hmmm, don’t see too many Hispanic soldiers firing at civilians. Waco, none there either. You say there is a statistically quantifiable exception with Hispanics. My ass there is. Hispanics are 12 percent of the armed forces but it’s acknowledged that almost all soldiers said no to firing on civilians. Who are you kidding? Did you know that Texans of Mexican descent fought with Davy Crocket in the Alamo. Did you know that dozens of Hispanics have received medals of honor. No, I am not Mexican but I do not like casting aspersions at honorable Americans who have dedicated their lives to protecting America.

    Like

  18. LIbordeath says:

    The narrative is not going to be as black and white as the military vs. civilians.
    It will be more like a group of govt. employees, with the mindset that it is okay to grope both your grandmother and your five year old son, sent to disarm the right wing nutjobs.
    A firefight ensues. It escalates. The military is call in to support the Americans being fired on by other Americans.

    Like

  19. Pingback: POWERFUL VIDEO: A heartfelt plea from a Tiananmen Square protestor on disarming the people – The Brenner Brief

  20. Patriot1 says:

    If and when the SHTF, we will know who’s on our side and who isn’t. Just how many police and military will side with the people and just how many will side with the tyrant Obama we do not yet know, but soon the battle lines will be drawn and everything will become clearer. I’ve been telling people for years that it would come down to this, and they acted like I was crazy or they were like” Well, I’m neutral, I don’t want to get involved.” But I’ll say now as I said then, there will come a day when you will have to choose sides, there will be no being neutral. You will have to choose between good and evil, between right and wrong, between liberty and tyranny. That day is drawing nearer by the moment, it may arrive much sooner than we think. May God help us all.

    Like

  21. l perks says:

    This, and then live-fire helo drills in downtown miami. Be weary my friends… Very very weary

    Like

  22. Lurkin says:

    “We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” O 2008

    Recent purging of top military leaders.

    Arming DHS to the gills.

    Gutting the military.

    The stuff of conspiracies.

    Like

  23. Pingback: DHS Target Supplier Includes Pregnant Women & Old Men For Target Practic Read m - Page 3 - INGunOwners

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s