Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Army Colonel Ignites Firestorm - Claims Tea Party Will Be The Enemy


"it is now clear that the U.S. Army considers it a valid proposition to assume that a future civil war will be sparked not by extremist Islamists with dirty bombs or left wing insurrectionists inspired by Alinsky or Ayers but by the tea party and the conservatives who participate in it."

Whoa.

Our military is being infected by Progressive politics. The scenarios presented by this so-called military "teacher" is just chilling. Not only is he teaching biased garbage, but he is cultivating an anti-civilian mentality.  Please read the entire article...but here are some highlights:
A retired U.S. Army colonel who now teaches modern warfare to soldiers at the University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. has co-written an article with a Civil War expert that has ignited a firestorm today among those increasingly concerned about what some say is a distinct anti-civilian tone that has infected much of the military and Homeland Security since 2009.

Retired Col. Kevin Benson and Jennifer Weber, Associate Professor of History at the University of Kansas, co-wrote an article for Small Wars Journal on a 2010 Army report titled, "U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, The Army Operating Concept 2016 - 2028."

The report describes how the Army will respond to threats "at home and abroad" in the coming two decades and in doing so has made clear that a monumental cultural shift has occurred in the thinking of those at the top levels of military command. This shift has some government watchdogs worried, particularly given that Benson is using the platform provided at Fort Leavenworth to educate military personnel in his vision of the nature of modern warfare in America. According to the vision articulated by Benson, future warfare will be conducted on our own soil. The military will use its full force against our own citizens. The enemy will be average citizens whose values resonate with those articulated by the tea party.

The fictitious scenario used in the Army report as a teaching tool is a future insurrection of "tea party activists" in South Carolina.... While mainstream politicians and citizens react with alarm, the “tea party” insurrectionists in South Carolina enjoy a groundswell of support from other tea party groups, militias, racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, anti-immigrant associations such as the Minutemen, and other right-wing groups.

Several items of interest are to be noted in the scenario the Army uses to describe the tea party activists -- "right wing," "extremists," "insurrectionists," all of whom are lumped together with militias and organizations that are considered "racist" and "anti-immigration."

By contrast, those who oppose the tea party are referred to as "mainstream."

The obvious question that arises is why would this sort of scenario, with its obviously biased and skewed portrayals, be presented as a teaching tool to military personnel? Why would the U.S. military consider the tea party to be "extremist" or "insurrectionist?" And why would the tea party be classified together with groups that are "racist, "anti-immigration," and "extremist right wing?" ....

Yet repeatedly since the election of Barack Obama in 2009, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has referred to the tea party as "potential homegrown terrorists."

Why? Not a shred of evidence remotely suggests that the tea party has any connection whatsoever with terrorists. Yet some of President Obama's closet longtime friends have not only been associated with terrorism but actively participated in it, such as Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who as members of the Weathermen from the 1960s and 70s bombed federal buildings that resulted in the deaths of police officers.

But if one listens to the rhetoric emanating from the White House, DHS, and now the U.S. military, one gets the impression that none of the president's friends ever posed a threat to the country but hundreds of thousands of tea party activists are ticking time bombs lying in wait to unleash a nuke on an American city at the drop of a hat.
And this, my dear readers, is precisely why we need groups like Oathkeepers.
I would also recommend that this Retired Col. Kevin Benson, who is teaching this tea party domestic terrorist garbage to our military, review the oath that he took when he joined up, and then re-read and review the document he swore to protect and defend! This Retired Colonel should also be reminded that he swore no oath of loyalty to the government, or to the Commander in Chief, but only to the Constitution! That very document represents the American People, the only source of authority in this ocuntry; not the government.

It is very disturbing that soldiers are being instructed that American civilians are the enemy. 
This is why we need Posse Comitatus.
This is why there should be a stark difference between law enforcement and military.
This is why militarism and the growth of the police state needs to be stopped.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Well, in all fairness who would you prefer to go into battle against? A bunch of old folk who have no history of violence or a bunch of anarchist young able bodied people who's only history is violence?