20,000 uniformed troops inside U.S. by 2011


festus

God Bless Our Troops!!!
Pentagon to detail plan to bolster security
Plan would dedicate 20,000 uniformed troops inside U.S. by 2011
By Spencer S. Hsu and Ann Scott Tyson
The Washington Post
updated 10:46 p.m. CT, Sun., Nov. 30, 2008
The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.

The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said.

There are critics of the change, in the military and among civil liberties groups and libertarians who express concern that the new homeland emphasis threatens to strain the military and possibly undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old federal law restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

But the Bush administration and some in Congress have pushed for a heightened homeland military role since the middle of this decade, saying the greatest domestic threat is terrorists exploiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five years -- "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. But the realization that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe prompted "a fundamental change in military culture," he said.

The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011. The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command.

If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide. All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it.

Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack have been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corps activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such efforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq was invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil support personnel across the United States.

In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized "preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents." National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to grind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include those who "want to inflict such brutality on our society that we give up the fight," such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.

In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005.

Last month, McHale said, authorities agreed to begin a $1.8 million pilot project funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency through which civilian authorities in five states could tap military planners to develop disaster response plans. Hawaii, Massachusetts, South Carolina, Washington and West Virginia will each focus on a particular threat -- pandemic flu, a terrorist attack, hurricane, earthquake and catastrophic chemical release, respectively -- speeding up federal and state emergency planning begun in 2003.

Last Monday, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered defense officials to review whether the military, Guard and reserves can respond adequately to domestic disasters.


Gates gave commanders 25 days to propose changes and cost estimates. He cited the work of a congressionally chartered commission, which concluded in January that the Guard and reserve forces are not ready and that they lack equipment and training.

Bert B. Tussing, director of homeland defense and security issues at the U.S. Army War College's Center for Strategic Leadership, said the new Pentagon approach "breaks the mold" by assigning an active-duty combat brigade to the Northern Command for the first time. Until now, the military required the command to rely on troops requested from other sources.

"This is a genuine recognition that this [job] isn't something that you want to have a pickup team responsible for," said Tussing, who has assessed the military's homeland security strategies.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the libertarian Cato Institute are troubled by what they consider an expansion of executive authority.

Domestic emergency deployment may be "just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority," or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU's National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of "a creeping militarization" of homeland security.

"There's a notion that whenever there's an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green," Healy said, "and that's at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace."

McHale stressed that the response units will be subject to the act, that only 8 percent of their personnel will be responsible for security and that their duties will be to protect the force, not other law enforcement. For decades, the military has assigned larger units to respond to civil disturbances, such as during the Los Angeles riot in 1992.

U.S. forces are already under heavy strain, however. The first reaction force is built around the Army's 3rd Infantry Division's 1st Brigade Combat Team, which returned in April after 15 months in Iraq. The team includes operations, aviation and medical task forces that are to be ready to deploy at home or overseas within 48 hours, with units specializing in chemical decontamination, bomb disposal, emergency care and logistics.

The one-year domestic mission, however, does not replace the brigade's next scheduled combat deployment in 2010. The brigade may get additional time in the United States to rest and regroup, compared with other combat units, but it may also face more training and operational requirements depending on its homeland security assignments.

Renuart said the Pentagon is accounting for the strain of fighting two wars, and the need for troops to spend time with their families. "We want to make sure the parameters are right for Iraq and Afghanistan," he said. The 1st Brigade's soldiers "will have some very aggressive training, but will also be home for much of that."

Although some Pentagon leaders initially expected to build the next two response units around combat teams, they are likely to be drawn mainly from reserves and the National Guard, such as the 218th Maneuver Enhancement Brigade from South Carolina, which returned in May after more than a year in Afghanistan.

Now that Pentagon strategy gives new priority to homeland security and calls for heavier reliance on the Guard and reserves, McHale said, Washington has to figure out how to pay for it.

"It's one thing to decide upon a course of action, and it's something else to make it happen," he said. "It's time to put our money where our mouth is."


© 2008 The Washington Post Company
URL: Pentagon to detail plan to bolster security - Washington Post- msnbc.com
 

boris

New member
Really bad idea.

what's next? confiscation of private arms for th good of the people? we have now taken the first step to globalization.... and oblivion. :help:
 

HK4U

New member
Seems like there was a quote about the danger from a standing army? I am all for the military defending us against foreign enemies. I am against it being used against citizens.
 

HK4U

New member
festus I found some more on this today.

Alex Jones' Prison Planet: The truth will set you free!

Washington Post: 20,000 More U.S. Troops To Be Deployed For “Domestic Security”

As part of long term agenda to establish “military form of government,” combat likely unrest following total economic collapse



Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Monday, December 1, 2008

The Washington Post today reports on plans to station 20,000 more U.S. troops inside America for purposes of “domestic security” from September 2011, an expansion of Northcom’s militarization of the country in preparation for potential civil unrest following a total economic collapse or a mass terror attack.

“The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials,” reports the Post.

“Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU’s National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.”

As Alex Jones exposed back in the late 1990’s, U.S. troops have been training for this eventuality for a considerable amount of time. During numerous urban warfare drills that Jones attended and reported on, troops were trained to raid, arrest and imprison U.S. citizens in detention camps as well as taking over public buildings and running checkpoints. During role playing exercises, actors playing prisoners would scream “I’m an American citizen, I have rights” as they were being dragged away by troops.

The contention that the troops will merely help “recovery efforts” after a major catastrophe is contradicted by the fact that Northcom itself, in a September 8 Army Times article, said the first wave of the deployment, which was put in place on October 1st at Fort Stewart and at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, would be aimed at tackling “civil unrest and crowd control”.

After a controversy arose surrounding the admissions made in the Army Times article, Northcom retracted the claim but conceded that both lethal and non-lethal weaponry traditionally used in crowd control and riot situations would still be used in the field.


The increasing militarization of America is part of a long term agenda to abolish Constitutional rule and establish a “military form of government,” following a large scale terror attack or similar disaster, as Tommy Franks, the former commander of the military’s Central Command, alluded to in a November 2003 Cigar Aficionado piece.

Franks outlined the scenario by which martial law would be put in place, saying, “It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”

In the short term, the domestic deployment of troops is likely aimed at combating likely civil unrest that will ensue after a complete economic collapse followed by a devastating period of hyperinflation.

This warning was again echoed a few days ago in a leaked internal memo from Citibank.

“The world is not going back to normal after the magnitude of what they have done. When the dust settles this will either work, and the money they have pushed into the system will feed through into an inflation shock,” wrote Tom Fitzpatrick, Citibank’s chief technical strategist.

The memo predicts “depression, civil disorder and possibly wars” as a fallout from an economic collapse that many say is on the horizon.

Naturally, the claim that such troop deployments are merely to aid in disaster relief efforts is a thin veil aimed at distracting from the real goal. Should a real tragedy occur, volunteers and already existing civil aid organizations are fully capable of dealing with such events, as we witnessed on 9/11.

The military are primarily trained to kill people and break things, and their role during the Hurricane Katrina relief efforts was mainly focused on detaining people in sports stadiums, shooting alleged looters and seizing guns from wealthy home owners in the high and dry areas, while real recovery measures were left to volunteers and local state authorities.

The open admission that U.S. troops will be involved in law enforcement operations as well as potentially using non-lethal weapons against American citizens is a complete violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act, which substantially limit the powers of the federal government to use the military for law enforcement unless under precise and extreme circumstances.

Section 1385 of the Posse Comitatus Act states, “Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.”

Under the John Warner Defense Authorization Act, signed by President Bush on October 17, 2006, the law was changed to state, “The President may employ the armed forces to restore public order in any State of the United States the President determines hinders the execution of laws or deprives people of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”

However, these changes were repealed in their entirety by HR 4986: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, reverting back to the original state of the Insurrection Act of 1807. Despite this repeal, President Bush attached a signing statement saying that he did not feel bound by the repeal. It remains to be seen whether President elect Obama will reverse Bush’s signing statement.

The original text of the Insurrection Act severely limits the power of the President to deploy troops within the United States.

For troops to be deployed, a condition has to exist that, “(1) So hinders the execution of the laws of that State, and of the United States within the State, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or (2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. In any situation covered by clause (1), the State shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.”

Is the incoming Obama administration and Northcom waiting for such a scenario to unfold, an event that completely overwhelms state authorities, before unleashing the might of the U.S. Army against the American people?

The deployment of National Guard troops to aid law enforcement or for disaster relief purposes is legal under the authority of the governor of a state, but using active duty U.S. Army in law enforcement operations inside America absent the conditions described in the Insurrection Act is completely illegal.

The political left and right need to join forces and denounce this plan for what it is - another unconstitutional step towards the incremental implementation of martial law and the militarization of America.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Seems like more hyperbole and paranoia to me. From where are the writers getting their information? I don't see a single reputable source cited in the article. And for the record,
The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said. doesn't count, because the supposed person or persons saying it are not directly named.
 
Last edited:

HK4U

New member
Seems like more hyperbole and paranoia to me. From where are the writers getting their information? I don't see a single reputable source cited in the article. And for the record,
The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said. doesn't count, because the supposed person or persons saying it are not directly named.

How did I know you would say that? Well anyway you are entitled to your opinion and the rest of us are entitled to ours.
 
G

gpbarth

Guest
Can you say "posse comitatus?" I knew you could. There is NO excuse to use the military inside our country other than disaster situations. None! There are state police, county sheriffs, and local police departments, all of whose sole function is to enact law enforcement below the federal level. Even the FBI has no jurisdiction at the state and/or local level, with the exception of federal crime, unless "invited" by those agencies.

When the federal government starts talking "national police force," it ought to raise the hairs on all of our necks.
 

toreskha

Titles are un-American.
How did I know you would say that? Well anyway you are entitled to your opinion and the rest of us are entitled to ours.
Anyone with a copy of Jane's and some Tom Clancy novels can be a "defense analyst". That doesn't mean a thing. How often does the media just blurt things out that aren't even in the neighborhood of right, but just happen to be something that sounded good at the time?

That would be like someone contacting a gunsmith or an NRA instructor and asking them a question that can be answered a dozen different ways, just taking whatever they say, and crediting them as a "Firearms Industry Analyst".

"A civilian version of the ACR will absolutely replace the AR-15 as the gold standard for accurate assault rifles, according to industry analysts."

Not difficult to write, but not necessarily based on anything, either.
 
Don't panic this will never happen... I know there are those who will think I am nuts but believe me this will not happen. Obama will not take away our rights and our guns... It will not happen.. Before you people attack me just take a wait and see -- then we can talk. Right now people are just out of control.. Relax lets see what happens.. If need be we have time to take action.. like succeed from the union...
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
So just because I'm making the observation that the conspiracy theorists come out of the woodworks in the after math of most presidential elections (whether the president-elect is a Democrat or Republican), I must be smoking something, huh? Was I smoking something to notice that nothing in the article was cited from any reputable sources?
 

boris

New member
well,

Don't panic this will never happen... I know there are those who will think I am nuts but believe me this will not happen. Obama will not take away our rights and our guns... It will not happen.. Before you people attack me just take a wait and see -- then we can talk. Right now people are just out of control.. Relax lets see what happens.. If need be we have time to take action.. like succeed from the union...

wait and see, huh? by the time we wait and see it will be too late. you won't have a chance to leave the union. as for me, i will be proactive . i better just leave it at that
t-boy, i suggest you read the article festus posted again and then go to the army times and read the article. i posted the link on the board so do a search you will find it. do you really trust the goverment that much ? do you really think obama is going to be the savior? the military's primary job, before anything else quite frankly is to kill people. they are not law enforcement personnel. better to die fighting as a free man than to live with a boot in my throat.
 

HK4U

New member
So just because I'm making the observation that the conspiracy theorists come out of the woodworks in the after math of most presidential elections (whether the president-elect is a Democrat or Republican), I must be smoking something, huh? Was I smoking something to notice that nothing in the article was cited from any reputable sources?

Well lets see...

“Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU’s National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.”

After a controversy arose surrounding the admissions made in the Army Times article, Northcom retracted the claim but conceded that both lethal and non-lethal weaponry traditionally used in crowd control and riot situations would still be used in the field.

The increasing militarization of America is part of a long term agenda to abolish Constitutional rule and establish a “military form of government,” following a large scale terror attack or similar disaster, as Tommy Franks, the former commander of the military’s Central Command, alluded to in a November 2003 Cigar Aficionado piece.

Franks outlined the scenario by which martial law would be put in place, saying, “It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”

In the short term, the domestic deployment of troops is likely aimed at combating likely civil unrest that will ensue after a complete economic collapse followed by a devastating period of hyperinflation.

Tatt it would appear that unless it is something you agree with then it would make no difference who the source is. They are not reputable. So like I said we all have oppinions. That is one of two things we all have. The following quotes are from some more non reputable sources.

It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.
George Washington

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic elite."
Senator William Jenner, 1954

"Since March 9, 1933, the United states has been in a state of national emergency. A majority of the people of the United States have their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (now 72 years) freedoms and governmental procedures, guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought forth by states of national emergency."
Senate Report 93-549 (1973).

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby, the New Generation

"The truth of the matter is that you do have those standby provisions, and the statutory emergency plans are there whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism, apprehend, invoke the military, and arrest Americans and hold them in detention camps."
U.S. Representative Henry Gonzalez, August 29, 1994

"There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international . . . network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies . . . but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."
Professor Carroll Quigley, in his book Tragedy and Hope, 1966.

"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties."
New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
- David Rockefeller

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Well lets see...

“Domestic emergency deployment may be “just the first example of a series of expansions in presidential and military authority,” or even an increase in domestic surveillance, said Anna Christensen of the ACLU’s National Security Project. And Cato Vice President Gene Healy warned of “a creeping militarization” of homeland security.”

After a controversy arose surrounding the admissions made in the Army Times article, Northcom retracted the claim but conceded that both lethal and non-lethal weaponry traditionally used in crowd control and riot situations would still be used in the field.

The increasing militarization of America is part of a long term agenda to abolish Constitutional rule and establish a “military form of government,” following a large scale terror attack or similar disaster, as Tommy Franks, the former commander of the military’s Central Command, alluded to in a November 2003 Cigar Aficionado piece.

Franks outlined the scenario by which martial law would be put in place, saying, “It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”

In the short term, the domestic deployment of troops is likely aimed at combating likely civil unrest that will ensue after a complete economic collapse followed by a devastating period of hyperinflation.

Tatt it would appear that unless it is something you agree with then it would make no difference who the source is. They are not reputable. So like I said we all have oppinions. That is one of two things we all have. The following quotes are from some more non reputable sources.

It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.
George Washington

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic elite."
Senator William Jenner, 1954

"Since March 9, 1933, the United states has been in a state of national emergency. A majority of the people of the United States have their lives under emergency rule. For 40 years (now 72 years) freedoms and governmental procedures, guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought forth by states of national emergency."
Senate Report 93-549 (1973).

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby, the New Generation

"The truth of the matter is that you do have those standby provisions, and the statutory emergency plans are there whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism, apprehend, invoke the military, and arrest Americans and hold them in detention camps."
U.S. Representative Henry Gonzalez, August 29, 1994

"There does exist and has existed for a generation, an international . . . network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies . . . but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."
Professor Carroll Quigley, in his book Tragedy and Hope, 1966.

"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties."
New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller, Baden-Baden, Germany 1991

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
- David Rockefeller

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

Your highlighting of Tommy Franks referred to something he said about the increasing militarization of America (back in 2003), and was not made in reference to what the subject of t he article was, which was that there would be 20,000 uniformed personnel here by 2011. Tommy Franks himself is a reputable source, as are all the others you cited in this post. With regard to the premise that 20,000 uniformed personnel would be on our soil soon, though, still no reputable citations. I'm waiting......
 

HK4U

New member
Your highlighting of Tommy Franks referred to something he said about the increasing militarization of America (back in 2003), and was not made in reference to what the subject of t he article was, which was that there would be 20,000 uniformed personnel here by 2011. Tommy Franks himself is a reputable source, as are all the others you cited in this post. With regard to the premise that 20,000 uniformed personnel would be on our soil soon, though, still no reputable citations. I'm waiting......

Well I guess you could ask the Washington Post because they are quoting the Pentagon. Or years ago my wife worked in the same department that Gordon England was in at General Dynamics. Perhaps I could get her to write him and see if he would elaborate a little more.


In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005.
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Well I guess you could ask the Washington Post because they are quoting the Pentagon. Or years ago my wife worked in the same department that Gordon England was in at General Dynamics. Perhaps I could get her to write him and see if he would elaborate a little more.


In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005.

Who at the Pentagon? The Pentagon isn't a person, last time I checked. Again, where's the reputable source?
 

festus

God Bless Our Troops!!!
When the US Army puts out a press release...

When the US Army puts out a press release...concerning adding a combat arm to NORCOM, It is the pentagon as a source. When it is reported in mainstream news media it no longer can be discounted as conspiracy theory.

CL sorry but I did not realize this was the same subject as the NWO combat team. Please ask Luke to merge the two into a super thread.
 
B

boyzoi

Guest
Maybe Im being simple here...........but does not the Governor of any state have the right to ask for and "get" federal troops?
After getting them, is that G. restricted in how they(troops)are used? Not that Im aware of.
 

SubHntr

New member
It's the real deal.

I'm finally able to log on out here. Here is what you need to know. (Part 1)
U.S. Northern Command gains dedicated response force

September 30, 2008

PETERSON AIR FORCE BASE, Colo. -- For the first time in its existence, U.S. Northern Command is gaining a dedicated force to respond to potential chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosive (CBRNE) incidents in the homeland.

"We are now building the first of three CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces," said USNORTHCOM Commander Gen. Gene Renuart. "On the first of October, we’ll have an organized force, a trained force, an equipped force, a force that has adequate command and control and is on quick response – 48 hours – to head off to a large-scale nuclear, chemical, biological event that might require Department of Defense support."

The CBRNE Consequence Management Response Force, or CCMRF, is a team of about 4,700 joint personnel that would deploy as the Department of Defense’s initial response force for a CBRNE incident. Its capabilities include search and rescue, decontamination, medical, aviation, communications and logistical support.

Each CCMRF will be composed of three functional task forces – Task Force Operations, Task Force Medical and Task Force Aviation – that have their own individual operational focus and set of mission skills. Depending on the different mission requirements and the incident commander’s priorities, Task Force Operations, Task Force Medical and Task Force Aviation units would have varying roles and responsibilities based upon the type of catastrophe and the size of the geographical area. In USNORTHCOM’s first CCMRF, the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team, assigned at Fort Stewart, Ga., will form the core unit of Task Force Operations.

Although CCMRFs are a joint force comprised of Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines, the first CCMRF will fall under the operational control of USNORTHCOM’s Joint Force Land Component Command, U.S. Army North, located in San Antonio, Texas. Joint Task Force Civil Support, USNORTHCOM’s subordinate command in Fort Monroe, Va., would serve as the operational headquarters and work closely with state and local officials and first responders.

“U.S. Army North has done an outstanding job anticipating the needs of our federal, state and local partners, and training the CCMRF to be prepared to respond when called upon,” said Army Col. Michael Boatner, USNORTHCOM future operations division chief.

“We’re excited about obtaining a ready and capable team that we can quickly activate and deploy as part of a federal response package when responding in the aftermath of catastrophic events,” Boatner said. “This response force will not be called upon to help with law enforcement, civil disturbance or crowd control, but will be used to support lead agencies involved in saving lives, relieving suffering and meeting the needs of communities affected by weapons of mass destruction attacks, accidents or even natural disasters.”

USNORTHCOM is the joint combatant command formed in the wake of the Sept.11, 2001, terrorist attacks to provide homeland defense and defense support of civil authorities.
 
Last edited:

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,141
Messages
621,700
Members
74,109
Latest member
jjtallis
Top