FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I use such material in an effort to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is used without profit. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Follow-up: Iowa National Guard Weapons Confiscation Drills
FINAL UPDATE 2355 est 21 Feb 09: Watch this YouTube video of Alex Jones' interview with LTC Hapgood. Pay especially close attention to how LTC Hapgood answers Jones' direct question as to whether he would obey an order to confiscate Americans' firearms:
UPDATE 1015 est 21 Feb 09: A message dropped over on Sipsey Street reads as follows:
Since Iowa HAS a dedicated MOUT / city warfare training compound already built on camp Dodge, why are still they insisting on this "door to door" public training event?
This dog doesn't hunt.
Link to the base compound order sheet is here.
http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:ogUn2nBuCBEJ:www.iowanationalguard.com/CampDodge/Documents/MOUT_SOP.pdf+%22MOUT%22+facilities+iowa&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&client=firefox-a Those wishing to push the issue further with LTC Hapgood, the Governor of Iowa, and that state's Senators and Congressmen should save a copy of the Camp Dodge MOUT materials at:
For the record, Google Maps shows that it is 80.2 miles from Carroll, Iowa (the planned exercise site) to Johnston, Iowa (where the Camp Dodge MOUT facility is located).
Draw your own conclusions re LTC Hapgood's veracity.
UPDATE 0955 est 21 Feb 09: See this story from WND re the "scale back" of the ING's plans.
Note the time of the WND story. Note next the timestamp (in est) of the email below from LTC Hapgood.
Funny how he didn't mention the "scale back" in either my conversation with him, the subsequent conversation with Stewart, or the email itself...
My fave part of the WND story? This quote:
And while Hapgood confirmed the Guard had been inundated with objections from citizens concerned about soldiers patrolling the streets of an American town, he said most came from people out of state and unfamiliar with the operation. Iowans, he explained, typically cooperate with the Guard. The change in plans was based on troop evaluation, he said, not public outcry.
Shades of the old "outside agitators" cry raised by the old segregationists.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
*** See the attached email received this evening from LTC Gregory Hapgood of the Iowa National Guard:
RE: Guardsmen to conduct weapons confiscation drills in Iowa From: Hapgood, Gregory (IA) (gregory.hapgood@us.army.mil) Sent: Fri 2/20/09 6:08 PM To: bloviate@hotmail.com
Peter: It was a pleasure talking with you this afternoon.
Per our conversation, theCarroll, Iowa-based Company A, 1st Battalion, 168th Infantry, Iowa ArmyNational Guard, working in cooperation with city leadership and residents of Arcadia, Iowa, has tentatively planned to hold a training event in Arcadia April 2-5.
After a review of the training plan by battalion and companyleadership, the unit will focus on squad and platoon tasks, which will shiftthe actual training to the unit's armory in Carroll and away from Arcadia.The proposed training event simulates several combat tasks our Soldiers perform in Iraq and Afghanistan, including cordon and search, which is used to locate weapons caches and also persons of interests. By conducting the training in an urban environment close to where the Soldiers live, this enables our Soldiers to gain proficiency in the exact tasks they will be conducting in combat but without having to travel several hours to Camp Dodge, which is the only military training facility in Iowa. All private citizens who will participate have volunteered to be part of the training event-our unit has a great relationship with the unit's hometown of Carroll and also with surrounding towns, including Arcadia, and we have conducted other training events in the area with outstanding cooperation by the localcitizens, law enforcement personnel, and first responders. The bottom line is that this training event is designed to build combat proficiency while maximizing training time and resources.
Peter, you will not find greater patriots or more committed defenders of theU.S. Constitution than the men and women of the Iowa National Guard. Don't hesitate to contact me if you have additional questions.
Best regards.
Lt. Col. Greg Hapgood Public Affairs Officer Iowa National Guard
-----Original Message-----
From: bloviate@hotmail.com Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 6:43 PM To: PAOIA Subject: Guardsmen to conduct weapons confiscation drills in Iowa Importance: High
To: IA National Guard, Public Affairs Officer From: A Deeply Concerned American Citizen Re: Confirmation/Denial of the Referenced Media Story/Iowa Guard to Practice Weapons Confiscation
1) Will you confirm or deny the substance of the below media story as linkedathttp://www.carrollspaper.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=7451&SectionID=1&SubSectionID=&S=1 ?
2) Who is your commanding officer, and what is his/her contact information?
3) Who is the commanding officer of the Iowa Guard, and what is his/hercontact information?
Your prompt attention to this inquiry is appreciated.
In my brief call with LTC Hapgood earlier today, he confirmed that this story was accurate in its substance, and he promised to send me the email above.
Stewart Rhodes also spoke today with LTC Hapgood; his blog entry follows:
I just had an interesting and rather emotional phone call with Col Hapgood, Public Affairs Officer, of the IA National Guard (Pete of WRSA sent me his phone number).
I introduced myself as a veteran and a writer for S.W.A.T. Magazine, and said I needed confirmation and clarification on the planned house to house search exercise scheduled for Arcadia Iowa for April 2-5, 2009 because people were very, very concerned.
The Colonel told me it is only to prepare them for Afghanistan and Iraq.He said that there are no full time military in Iowa, and therefore no place to train in the state to get them ready for MOUT and that is why they used local towns.He said they were baffled by all this [uproar] because it is just routine training to prepare them for deployment to combat in urban environments overseas.I asked him why that particular scenario was picked - of having NG troops searching for a "weapons dealer."He said that in Afghanistan and Iraq, they have to do searches for weapons caches and need to train for it, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with domestic deployment or any plans for domestic.
I asked him that question twice - "so, it is not for domestic use or training for future domestic use?" And he said no, not at all. I told him, in no uncertain terms, that Americans, especially gun owners, were extremely concerned because of the current political climate and because of the potential for civil unrest in the future because of the economy - we hear all manner of rumors about preparations for such disturbances - and the use of a scenario of searching for a gun dealer seems aimed at gun owners - and in particular we are concerned because of who is now in power.
As an example of why we are concerned, I told him how Rahm Emanuel, who is called "the second most powerful man in America" gave a speech before the Brady Bunch in 2007 advocating that anyone on the no-fly list be stripped of their right to keep and bear arms, and anyone can be put on that list at any time.I told him that we know they want to disarm us.And that is why folks are so very alarmed by this exercise.I also told him that there were people planning on going there to protest.
He responded by saying that while he did not want to get into politics, he could assure me that all of the people in the Iowa National Guard are the most dedicated supporters and defenders of the Constitution and also of the right to bear arms.And I responded by saying yes, I took that oath too - most of us did - and we just want to be sure that oath is kept, and the very last thing we ever want to see in this country is it being veteran against veteran (and this is where my voice cracked and I got rather emotional), but, I told him. we are very concerned and our radar is up because the people in power in DC have no respect for the Constitution or our rights and that is why folks wanted confirmation and clarification of this story.
I was going to remind him of what happened during Katrina, to let him know how disturbing that was to many patriots, but because he was so frank, and sounded so sincere when he said that the people in the Iowa NG are dedicated defenders of the Constitution and of the right to bear arms, I did not do that to him.
MY THOUGHTS AFTER THE PHONE CALL:
That was a tough goddamn phone call for me. I truly hope that all men and women in uniform remember, and keep, their oath. I never, ever want to see in my lifetime veterans having to fight against our own troops in defense of our rights. God forbid it.I still have some serious concerns about this kind of training going on - especially when it is not made clear to the public that it is for training in preparation for overseas, and the "civilians" are supposed to be Afghan villagers and Iraqis.
But even with those qualifications, I still don't like it, since the troops are still going door to door, in America, searching for weapons, and that is still conditioning them for that very act, regardless of the intent.And I don't think the Colonel or the National Guard troops understand fully just how on edge people in this country are, and how suspicious we are (for very good reason) of anything the government does that even hints at martial law or going house to house in America looking for weapons.
And however sincere the Colonel or the rest of the troops in the NG, we still DO NOT trust the politicians in DC, who have already demonstrated that their oath to support and defend the Constitution was some damn joke, since they violate it all the time.The forked tongued bastards in DC cynically roll their eyes and mouth the oath with a bored expression on their faces because it is a mere formality before they get power and perks. They don't mean it. They have nothing but contempt for the restraints in the Constitution.
But when us veterans took that oath to defend the Constitution and this Republic against all enemies, foreign and domestic, we MEANT IT with all our heart and soul, ready to give our lives to keep it. And we still mean it, because that oath was for life. I sure hope to hell that what the Colonel said about the NG troops' commitment to defend the Constitution is true, and I hope that if/when The Day comes, they will side with the people, and not the politicians.
But I still feel like something else is needed to express to these troops our concerns, and our resolve, and to remind them of their oaths, and of our oath. It is just too important and vital an issue to leave to chance. We need to be sure they will be oath keepers when the chips are down.
Stewart Rhodes
***
I agree with Stewart that LTC Hapgood seemed to be an earnest and sincere professional.
Nonetheless, the ultimate question remains: what will LTC Hapgood, the Iowa National Guard, and the rest of America's vaunted military machine do when (not if) they are ordered by the National Command Authority to collect, whether directly or in support of .gov forces such as the BATFE and their superiors in the FBI, firearms from American citizens?
I, like LTC Hapgood, "don't want to get into politics."
I and every other freedom-loving American simply wants to be left the hell alone by a grasping Leviathan that recognizes no bounds on its authority or power.
On that awful day, when the President as Commander-in-Chief orders LTC Hapgood and the rest of the good men and women of the US military into action against "gun terrorists" and "weapons dealers", we will all be plunged hip-deep into the cataclysm that inevitably results when politics are divorced from morals and ethics.
The hard truth is that many military men and women will obey those orders, and many others will not.
Welcome to the jungle, now known as the "polygonal battlespace".
Pete and Stewart, You are to be commended for your swift and forthright action calling the Iowa NG....but there is something that just still doesn't sit right with me. Call it gut instinct or what ever you will but I smell a rat! Question: How many of these young folks that join the military today and have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution have actually read the document?...and if they have not read it how can they be expected to defend the fundamental principals it sets forth?
Furthermore, is it not high time we got the U.S. military out of all these little shithole countries we are busy building up and defending? The purpose of a strong national defense is to do just that; DEFEND THE NATION. Our nation. Not "nation building" in some far away place populated by tribes that haven't the foggiest notion about Republican form of government! Not to insure that women can vote!....and not to do the dirty work for the Zionists in Israel!
We are a bankrupt nation and we better admit it or we will never again be viewed as a world power. There are plenty of things here at home to fix....roads, and infrastructure.
I am not a veteran and I am sure I will hear the howls of anti-semite, isolationist, protectionist, etc. but we are on the wrong path and headed for immanent doom if we don't start to look after our own interests first.
I think that this was a test to see if we are sleeping or or if there will be resistance from the heartland. For now you were able to avert a very bad scene. What is next in their scheming?
Thank you for your efforts but I am still very concerned.
our unit has a great relationship with the unit's hometown of Carroll and also with surrounding towns, including Arcadia, and we have conducted other training events in the area with outstanding cooperation by the local citizens, law enforcement personnel, and first responders.
What training exercises have been conducted and when?
As anonymous stated, thank you both for your swift and forthright approach to what is rightfully seen as a troubling story.
My question, in reference to the question of intended targets of these actions being iraqi and afghanistani militia's is, Whats the difference?
I guess that answers at least part of the question of "where do you draw the line in the sand?" doesnt it? If not at your neighbor's definately not in strange countries.
Ill shy away from politics as well, but i wouldnt mind refering anyone interested to the following link:
an excerpt: The US military has been fighting a war against the people of Iraq. The Iraqi “militias” are directly equivalent to the well regulated militia that the Founding Fathers discussed as the last line of defense against government oppression - US government oppression. The fact that this oppression is occurring in Iraq rather than on US soil does not change the role of guns as tools of self-determination. The Second Amendment is guarantee of a right, but that right is based in observable reality. It is operating in Iraq today, and the streets run with blood as people exercise their right to die and kill for what they believe, however misguided it may be.
The Iraqi people are demonstrating the Second Amendment.
The US must not develop the ability to win in future wars against populations like we see in Iraq if it wishes to remain a good nation.
The focus of the article is very different, focusing on technology rather than tactics, but the end conclusion is the same:
As anonymous stated, thank you both for your swift and forthright approach to what is rightfully seen as a troubling story.
My question, in reference to the question of intended targets of these actions being iraqi and afghanistani militia's is, Whats the difference?
I guess that answers at least part of the question of "where do you draw the line in the sand?" doesnt it? If not at your neighbor's definately not in strange countries.
Ill shy away from politics as well, but i wouldnt mind refering anyone interested to the following link:
an excerpt: The US military has been fighting a war against the people of Iraq. The Iraqi “militias” are directly equivalent to the well regulated militia that the Founding Fathers discussed as the last line of defense against government oppression - US government oppression. The fact that this oppression is occurring in Iraq rather than on US soil does not change the role of guns as tools of self-determination. The Second Amendment is guarantee of a right, but that right is based in observable reality. It is operating in Iraq today, and the streets run with blood as people exercise their right to die and kill for what they believe, however misguided it may be.
The Iraqi people are demonstrating the Second Amendment.
The US must not develop the ability to win in future wars against populations like we see in Iraq if it wishes to remain a good nation.
The focus of the article is very different, focusing on technology rather than tactics, but the end conclusion is the same:
He may have been perfectly frank and sincere. That's the purpose of doublethink, it lets you lie without feeling that you are lying.
training in preparation for overseas, and the "civilians" are supposed to be Afghan villagers and Iraqis.
The principles behind the bill of rights are universal. They are for all human beings, not just American citizens. There is no valid excuse to be infringing the right to keep and bear arms, or to search without a warrant, no matter whether the peaceful civilians being infringed upon live in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Iowa.
From my understanding of history and military theory, I see it going down this way:
The element to note is that the Iowa National Guard will not be used in Iowa. The Guard will be mobilized for "national defense" (i.e at the Federal level) and moved to some kind of "staging area" (out of State) for "re-equipment before deployment." Likely they will be given training in "riot control" to ginger them up a bit and get them used to aggression against American civilians in a context they will see as plausibly justifiable. Then National Guard units, augmented by some kind of Federal Government element who will operate political oversight, will be deployed to "areas of concern" which will be as far away from their home States - areas of allegiance - as practical.
If I'm right, the inevitable first clue will be National Guard units mobilized in large numbers and training outside their home States in "riot control." So, although the current situation is obviously of great concern we can be charitable and take Lt. Col. Hapgood at his word... at least for now.
(FWIW, I served for 5 years in the UK Territorial Army, kind of analogous to your National Guard, in Military Intelligence as an OP INT & SY - so I do have some kind of qualifications that justify me pontificating about this.)
The novel Neither Predator Nor Prey www.neitherpredatornorprey.com goes into quite a bit of detail on this very subject. The governor of Wyoming is blackmailed by the feds into imposing martial law in one of the counties to help enforce new federal gun laws. The author retired as a Master Sergeant with 30 years service in the Wyoming Army National guard and is quite familiar with the Guard's capabilities and shortcomings.
The novel Neither Predator Nor Prey goes into quite a bit of detail on this exact topic. www.neitherpredatornorprey.com The governor of Wyoming is blackmailed by the feds into imposing martial law in one of the counties in order to help the feds enforce their new gun control measures. The author retired as a Master Sergeant with thirty years service in the Wyoming army National Guard and is knowledgeable about both the capabilities and the shortcomings of the National Guard.
Is suppose that I'm saying what Johnny said: and that the presence of armed/uniformed soldiers going house-to-house is training for onlooking Iowans. Regular civilians need a long period of getting used to these kind of sights in the street without a need to call the telephone tree for mobilization.
I don't doubt the ONG Lt. Col. He gets his short-term marching orders from an even higher pay grade. When it's time, he will be replaced with a more compliant man who will follow orders to "pacify" urban FUSA. The troops will rise to the level of their training, and do what they are told.
Oh, the gentleman who spoke on behalf of the Guard may believe it, but when push comes to shove, the people on the ground will do what they are told to do and those telling them to do it will be Washington shills, not men like the gentleman who answered the questions. Remember Waco; remember Ruby Ridge. Both of those murderous situations involved troops and most of us would have said that American soldiers or law enforcement would never raise a weapon against American civilians, especially women and children. I think that we can discount that particular fantasy, don't you?
Nothing that they do in the US is going to train them for field work in countries like Afghanistan and they have to think that we're pretty stupid to buy that excuse. How many Afghanis live in homes like Americans? How many live in small, neat middle income enclaves like the folks that will be involved in this "exercise"? How many will open their doors willingly to these soldiers as our folks will? No, this is to prepare our own soldiers to police our own people and nobody should deceive themselves otherwise.
I did 3 years on active duty in the Army, and am currently in the National Guard, serving for the second time, in Iraq. Once on Active, once so far in the Guard.
The Day I am ordered to do somthing like this, is the day I will desert, and take as many fellow soldiers with me as I can.
If I am home, and Uniformed Soldiers come to my home, demanding to search my house, they will be shot, the second they step foot across my door.
Apparently, the Constitution of the United States is mattering to less and less people, every fucking day now.
Rest in Peace, America, July 4th, 1776 - November 4, 2008
I have a couple of points, that I am going to throw out here:
1.Line in the sand This “line in the sand” concept has been used for a very long time, and I don't disagree with it, not completely anyway. It is also possible to use the trip wire concept, of which a certain point is crossed and a predetermined reaction is initiated. But taking this a little further, what is the initial meeting of forces. Looking to nature as a source for a point of reference, the likely reaction after a line is crossed is a wheeling about, kicking up dust and sizing up the opponent. This will go on for a period of time, however eventually force will be brought directly to bear against opposing force. Then it is either a fight to the death, or to a point where the weaker party withdraws, and either gives up previously held territory or if the weaker party is the aggressor is unable to take that which was targeted for conquest.
To put it another way, the weaker part will either fail to defend, or will fail to take over. More than a lot of people think about the line being crossed part, but fail to think things through to the logical conclusion of such events. I for example, know that if a Criminal Government decides to take private property, and engage me in my residence to do so, a line will be crossed. I also realize that basically means that you either give up, or fight. In this scenario it is highly unlikely that I would fight and win (or even survive), but I also know that I will engage the enemy in battle nonetheless.
How many people that speak of the line in the sand have considered this?
2.Just being left alone There has to come a point, where it is no longer enough to simply be left alone. I see being left alone as something that you hope for, so that there is no need to fight. This is desirable, but only acceptable if it is obtained at no further cost. If the Government decides not to take our arms for example, but strips away free market trade, and requires everyone to be branded or receive a microchip to buy and sell, then being left alone in one facet of existence does not make acceptable the loss of further freedoms. Read the rally cry by Patrick Henry, “The War Inevitable” which ends in the famous quote; “I know not what course others may take but as for me: give me liberty or give me death.” It can be read here http://www.infowars.com/the-war-inevitable/.
This brings to my mind another thought; it is time to seek out those who share our common enemy. Allies can be found in places that we may not have thought to look, just make sure that you do not make a deal with the Devil, so to speak. The above website is one such ally in our struggle.
I have no doubt that there will be a fight, and that it is highly likely that things will never be the same again. You may also wish to read The "Tree of Liberty" letter, From Thomas Jefferson to William Smith (http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96oct/obrien/blood.htm). It is this letter that gave us the famous quote:
“What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure.”
TexasShooter - the NG was on the ground in downtown Des Moines during an exercise a few years ago. The primary purpose was traffic and crowd control. (Basically: "your papers please")
If the 'training exercise' did take place (Anywhere, USA), what if: I can't help but wonder what would happen if an ad hoc group of citizens were walking around the same neighborhoods as the NG troops 'in training' with their favorite battle rifle, ammo'd up (but out of courtesy, no rounds in the chamber) and all their gear necessary for a day Op?
Maybe that's the realism that these troopers should be seeing? Not just some sheople willing to heed every beck and call of the NG. Maybe that would send a powerful message to one and all that the citizenry is not to be trifled with. We will not go quietly in the night.
In fact, in my time in the British Army we did all sorts of training in public places, in civilian clothes, and civilian (hired) vehicles, to do with covert surveillance and tracking "terrorists." Said, "terrorists" were other soldiers pretending to be terrorists/fifth columnists, wandering around amongst the public. We were specifically told to avoid getting arrested by the police because it would cause difficulties.
We broke into military bases to see if the security was effective. Perhaps you will be comforted to know that nine times of ten it was totally useless despite the fact we were very far from the calibre of special forces troops that would be expected to attempt to break into military installations in the event of lead-in to war with the Soviet Union. (And they were specifically told a bunch of part-time soldiers were going to attempt a break-in and when.)
I also personally spent time tracking Soviet personnel doing reconnaissance of UK Military Installations in private vehicles - following empty Eastern European container trucks that were driving around back roads around air bases, which would have two very fit looking young men (Special Forces soldiers on a recce of potential targets) in the truck cab. We were following them so's they'd know they were actually being monitored. It's something I wouldn't have believed was actually going on if I hadn't participated in it for myself.
This was all during the Cold War, and a time of great activity in the"Troubles" in Northern Ireland.
I'm quite prepared to believe these National Guard troops would train in the local community, with the community's support, if they thought it would further their war mission in Iraq or Afghanistan. Equally, it's easy to see how this sort of training is a double-edged sword and could be designed for something else. Hence my earlier comment.
From my military experience I can assure you soldiers are concerned about what constitutes a lawful order and in what circumstances deadly force could be used and do argue the about it. Of course, the context of the Cold War armies and the threat of massive nuclear attack were a different situation to what we see today. Nonetheless, I would expect modern, well-educated, soldiers to be doing what they thought to be the right thing, I would imagine that the situation in the United States of America will have to deteriorate considerably before significant numbers of its soldiers could be persuaded to accept Martial Law was necessary, excepting in circumstances that appeared to be localised and extreme, e.g. Katrina.
The problem is, of course, that things look worryingly like they are heading for that perfect storm.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/ And a combat brigade is coming home to "help people at home". Wonder if they aren't helping at home anymore? This little "exercise was AFTER being over there.
They sure as hell showed us by example at Ruby Ridge and Wako and those poor Morman women and children in Texas last year. Uncle Sam passed the test. They got away with it and us RUBES sat back on our asses and Fucking did nothing. More importantly the Police and military also passed the test and did what the hell they were told to do. What in the fucking hell makes you think the future will be any different. Just realize that you are on your own. No one is gonna come to your aid. I personally intend to die on my feet but you have to make your own choices. Just get it into your thick skulls that if you're waiting for someone else then prepare for a life on your knees. III
AFTER HEARING LTC HAPGOOD RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS POSED BY ALEX JONES, IT IS MY FIRM BELIEF HE IS A FUCKING LIAR. HE KNOW WHERE HIS BREAD IS BUTTERED AND HE IS A CAREER MILITARY MAN. HE IS GOING TO FOLLOW WHATEVER ORDER IS GIVEN BECAUSE HE IS COUNTING ON HIS PENSION TO BE THERE WHEN HE RETIRES.
HE DID NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS DIRECTLY. HE IS A TRAINED COMMUNICATIONS MAN. THAT MEANS HE HAS BEEN TAUGHT HOW TO OBFUSCATE AND USE SUBTERFUGE TO ADDRESS HARD HITTING QUESTIONS.
AGAIN I SAY, I AM NOT A VETERAN OR A COP. BUT MY B.S. METER IS RUNNING ON HIGH ALERT.
THIS WAS A TEST TO SEE IF THE PEOPLE WHERE SLEEPING. AND THEY WILL BE BACK TO TRY AGAIN AT A MORE OPPORTUNE TIME.
THINK ABOUT IT. USE YOUR CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS AND THEN PREPARE TO ACT.
I'd be a lot more willing to stand down and give the NG people the benefit of the doubt if
a) POTUS and Congress were not hard-over gun-grabbers, and
b) I wasn't pretty damned sure that most .mil folks will obey what will be portrayed to them as lawful orders to confiscate guns from American citizens.
I can't help but wonder what would happen if an ad hoc group of citizens were walking around the same neighborhoods as the NG troops 'in training' with their favorite battle rifle, ammo'd up (but out of courtesy, no rounds in the chamber) and all their gear necessary for a day Op?
I suspect they would be arrested and charged as terrorists, under that recent national law that defines terrorism as the attempt to influence the behavior of government with force. Look how much legal hassle the civilians patrolling the Mexican border receive; yet they are unarmed and not interfering with a military exercise.
what will be portrayed to them as lawful orders to confiscate guns from American citizens.
Of course they will be lawful orders; at that time they will be able to show a brand new gun registration law from congress with the commander-in-chief's signature on it. Everything Hitler did was lawful too, even if it had to be approved after the fact, just like the US congress did for the telco companies spying on us.
FINAL UPDATE 2355 est 21 Feb 09: Watch this YouTube video of Alex Jones' interview with LTC Hapgood. Pay especially close attention to how LTC Hapgood answers Jones' direct question as to whether he would obey an order to confiscate Americans' firearms:
24 Comments:
Pete and Stewart,
You are to be commended for your swift and forthright action calling the Iowa NG....but there is something that just still doesn't sit right with me. Call it gut instinct or what ever you will but I smell a rat!
Question: How many of these young folks that join the military today and have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution have actually read the document?...and if they have not read it how can they be expected to defend the fundamental principals it sets forth?
Furthermore, is it not high time we got the U.S. military out of all these little shithole countries we are busy building up and defending? The purpose of a strong national defense is to do just that; DEFEND THE NATION. Our nation. Not "nation building" in some far away place populated by tribes that haven't the foggiest notion about Republican form of government! Not to insure that women can vote!....and not to do the dirty work for the Zionists in Israel!
We are a bankrupt nation and we better admit it or we will never again be viewed as a world power. There are plenty of things here at home to fix....roads, and infrastructure.
I am not a veteran and I am sure I will hear the howls of anti-semite, isolationist, protectionist, etc. but we are on the wrong path and headed for immanent doom if we don't start to look after our own interests first.
I think that this was a test to see if we are sleeping or or if there will be resistance from the heartland. For now you were able to avert a very bad scene. What is next in their scheming?
Thank you for your efforts but I am still very concerned.
our unit has a great relationship with the unit's hometown of Carroll and also with surrounding towns, including Arcadia, and we have conducted other training events in the area with outstanding cooperation by the local citizens, law enforcement personnel, and first responders.
What training exercises have been conducted and when?
As anonymous stated, thank you both for your swift and forthright approach to what is rightfully seen as a troubling story.
My question, in reference to the question of intended targets of these actions being iraqi and afghanistani militia's is, Whats the difference?
I guess that answers at least part of the question of "where do you draw the line in the sand?" doesnt it? If not at your neighbor's definately not in strange countries.
Ill shy away from politics as well, but i wouldnt mind refering anyone interested to the following link:
http://vinay.howtolivewiki.com/blog/global/the-second-amendment-in-iraq-combat-robotics-and-the-future-of-human-liberty-820
an excerpt:
The US military has been fighting a war against the people of Iraq. The Iraqi “militias” are directly equivalent to the well regulated militia that the Founding Fathers discussed as the last line of defense against government oppression - US government oppression. The fact that this oppression is occurring in Iraq rather than on US soil does not change the role of guns as tools of self-determination. The Second Amendment is guarantee of a right, but that right is based in observable reality. It is operating in Iraq today, and the streets run with blood as people exercise their right to die and kill for what they believe, however misguided it may be.
The Iraqi people are demonstrating the Second Amendment.
The US must not develop the ability to win in future wars against populations like we see in Iraq if it wishes to remain a good nation.
The focus of the article is very different, focusing on technology rather than tactics, but the end conclusion is the same:
If it can happen over there, it can happen here
As anonymous stated, thank you both for your swift and forthright approach to what is rightfully seen as a troubling story.
My question, in reference to the question of intended targets of these actions being iraqi and afghanistani militia's is, Whats the difference?
I guess that answers at least part of the question of "where do you draw the line in the sand?" doesnt it? If not at your neighbor's definately not in strange countries.
Ill shy away from politics as well, but i wouldnt mind refering anyone interested to the following link:
http://vinay.howtolivewiki.com/blog/global/the-second-amendment-in-iraq-combat-robotics-and-the-future-of-human-liberty-820
an excerpt:
The US military has been fighting a war against the people of Iraq. The Iraqi “militias” are directly equivalent to the well regulated militia that the Founding Fathers discussed as the last line of defense against government oppression - US government oppression. The fact that this oppression is occurring in Iraq rather than on US soil does not change the role of guns as tools of self-determination. The Second Amendment is guarantee of a right, but that right is based in observable reality. It is operating in Iraq today, and the streets run with blood as people exercise their right to die and kill for what they believe, however misguided it may be.
The Iraqi people are demonstrating the Second Amendment.
The US must not develop the ability to win in future wars against populations like we see in Iraq if it wishes to remain a good nation.
The focus of the article is very different, focusing on technology rather than tactics, but the end conclusion is the same:
If it can happen over there, it can happen here
It'd send the right message if the CO agreed to post this flyer on the unit bulletin board - above his signature.
he was so frank, and sounded so sincere
He may have been perfectly frank and sincere. That's the purpose of doublethink, it lets you lie without feeling that you are lying.
training in preparation for overseas, and the "civilians" are supposed to be Afghan villagers and Iraqis.
The principles behind the bill of rights are universal. They are for all human beings, not just American citizens. There is no valid excuse to be infringing the right to keep and bear arms, or to search without a warrant, no matter whether the peaceful civilians being infringed upon live in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Iowa.
From my understanding of history and military theory, I see it going down this way:
The element to note is that the Iowa National Guard will not be used in Iowa. The Guard will be mobilized for "national defense" (i.e at the Federal level) and moved to some kind of "staging area" (out of State) for "re-equipment before deployment." Likely they will be given training in "riot control" to ginger them up a bit and get them used to aggression against American civilians in a context they will see as plausibly justifiable. Then National Guard units, augmented by some kind of Federal Government element who will operate political oversight, will be deployed to "areas of concern" which will be as far away from their home States - areas of allegiance - as practical.
If I'm right, the inevitable first clue will be National Guard units mobilized in large numbers and training outside their home States in "riot control." So, although the current situation is obviously of great concern we can be charitable and take Lt. Col. Hapgood at his word... at least for now.
(FWIW, I served for 5 years in the UK Territorial Army, kind of analogous to your National Guard, in Military Intelligence as an OP INT & SY - so I do have some kind of qualifications that justify me pontificating about this.)
World Net Daily reports this morning that the exercise has been called off.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89527
The novel Neither Predator Nor Prey www.neitherpredatornorprey.com goes into quite a bit of detail on this very subject. The governor of Wyoming is blackmailed by the feds into imposing martial law in one of the counties to help enforce new federal gun laws. The author retired as a Master Sergeant with 30 years service in the Wyoming Army National guard and is quite familiar with the Guard's capabilities and shortcomings.
The novel Neither Predator Nor Prey goes into quite a bit of detail on this exact topic. www.neitherpredatornorprey.com
The governor of Wyoming is blackmailed by the feds into imposing martial law in one of the counties in order to help the feds enforce their new gun control measures. The author retired as a Master Sergeant with thirty years service in the Wyoming army National Guard and is knowledgeable about both the capabilities and the shortcomings of the National Guard.
Is suppose that I'm saying what Johnny said: and that the presence of armed/uniformed soldiers going house-to-house is training for onlooking Iowans. Regular civilians need a long period of getting used to these kind of sights in the street without a need to call the telephone tree for mobilization.
I don't doubt the ONG Lt. Col. He gets his short-term marching orders from an even higher pay grade. When it's time, he will be replaced with a more compliant man who will follow orders to "pacify" urban FUSA. The troops will rise to the level of their training, and do what they are told.
Cheers.
I'm sorry, but I don't believe a word of it.
Oh, the gentleman who spoke on behalf of the Guard may believe it, but when push comes to shove, the people on the ground will do what they are told to do and those telling them to do it will be Washington shills, not men like the gentleman who answered the questions. Remember Waco; remember Ruby Ridge. Both of those murderous situations involved troops and most of us would have said that American soldiers or law enforcement would never raise a weapon against American civilians, especially women and children. I think that we can discount that particular fantasy, don't you?
Nothing that they do in the US is going to train them for field work in countries like Afghanistan and they have to think that we're pretty stupid to buy that excuse. How many Afghanis live in homes like Americans? How many live in small, neat middle income enclaves like the folks that will be involved in this "exercise"? How many will open their doors willingly to these soldiers as our folks will? No, this is to prepare our own soldiers to police our own people and nobody should deceive themselves otherwise.
I did 3 years on active duty in the Army, and am currently in the National Guard, serving for the second time, in Iraq. Once on Active, once so far in the Guard.
The Day I am ordered to do somthing like this, is the day I will desert, and take as many fellow soldiers with me as I can.
If I am home, and Uniformed Soldiers come to my home, demanding to search my house, they will be shot, the second they step foot across my door.
Apparently, the Constitution of the United States is mattering to less and less people, every fucking day now.
Rest in Peace, America, July 4th, 1776 - November 4, 2008
I have a couple of points, that I am going to throw out here:
1.Line in the sand
This “line in the sand” concept has been used for a very long time, and I don't disagree with it, not completely anyway. It is also possible to use the trip wire concept, of which a certain point is crossed and a predetermined reaction is initiated. But taking this a little further, what is the initial meeting of forces. Looking to nature as a source for a point of reference, the likely reaction after a line is crossed is a wheeling about, kicking up dust and sizing up the opponent. This will go on for a period of time, however eventually force will be brought directly to bear against opposing force. Then it is either a fight to the death, or to a point where the weaker party withdraws, and either gives up previously held territory or if the weaker party is the aggressor is unable to take that which was targeted for conquest.
To put it another way, the weaker part will either fail to defend, or will fail to take over. More than a lot of people think about the line being crossed part, but fail to think things through to the logical conclusion of such events. I for example, know that if a Criminal Government decides to take private property, and engage me in my residence to do so, a line will be crossed. I also realize that basically means that you either give up, or fight. In this scenario it is highly unlikely that I would fight and win (or even survive), but I also know that I will engage the enemy in battle nonetheless.
How many people that speak of the line in the sand have considered this?
2.Just being left alone
There has to come a point, where it is no longer enough to simply be left alone. I see being left alone as something that you hope for, so that there is no need to fight. This is desirable, but only acceptable if it is obtained at no further cost. If the Government decides not to take our arms for example, but strips away free market trade, and requires everyone to be branded or receive a microchip to buy and sell, then being left alone in one facet of existence does not make acceptable the loss of further freedoms. Read the rally cry by Patrick Henry, “The War Inevitable” which ends in the famous quote; “I know not what course others may take but as for me: give me liberty or give me death.” It can be read here http://www.infowars.com/the-war-inevitable/.
This brings to my mind another thought; it is time to seek out those who share our common enemy. Allies can be found in places that we may not have thought to look, just make sure that you do not make a deal with the Devil, so to speak. The above website is one such ally in our struggle.
I have no doubt that there will be a fight, and that it is highly likely that things will never be the same again. You may also wish to read The "Tree of Liberty" letter, From Thomas Jefferson to William Smith (http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96oct/obrien/blood.htm). It is this letter that gave us the famous quote:
“What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it's natural manure.”
TexasShooter - the NG was on the ground in downtown Des Moines during an exercise a few years ago. The primary purpose was traffic and crowd control. (Basically: "your papers please")
Nary a peep of complaint, I'm ashamed to say.
If the 'training exercise' did take place (Anywhere, USA), what if:
I can't help but wonder what would happen if an ad hoc group of citizens were walking around the same neighborhoods as the NG troops 'in training' with their favorite battle rifle, ammo'd up (but out of courtesy, no rounds in the chamber) and all their gear necessary for a day Op?
Maybe that's the realism that these troopers should be seeing? Not just some sheople willing to heed every beck and call of the NG.
Maybe that would send a powerful message to one and all that the citizenry is not to be trifled with. We will not go quietly in the night.
Bobcat
In fact, in my time in the British Army we did all sorts of training in public places, in civilian clothes, and civilian (hired) vehicles, to do with covert surveillance and tracking "terrorists." Said, "terrorists" were other soldiers pretending to be terrorists/fifth columnists, wandering around amongst the public. We were specifically told to avoid getting arrested by the police because it would cause difficulties.
We broke into military bases to see if the security was effective. Perhaps you will be comforted to know that nine times of ten it was totally useless despite the fact we were very far from the calibre of special forces troops that would be expected to attempt to break into military installations in the event of lead-in to war with the Soviet Union. (And they were specifically told a bunch of part-time soldiers were going to attempt a break-in and when.)
I also personally spent time tracking Soviet personnel doing reconnaissance of UK Military Installations in private vehicles - following empty Eastern European container trucks that were driving around back roads around air bases, which would have two very fit looking young men (Special Forces soldiers on a recce of potential targets) in the truck cab. We were following them so's they'd know they were actually being monitored. It's something I wouldn't have believed was actually going on if I hadn't participated in it for myself.
This was all during the Cold War, and a time of great activity in the"Troubles" in Northern Ireland.
I'm quite prepared to believe these National Guard troops would train in the local community, with the community's support, if they thought it would further their war mission in Iraq or Afghanistan. Equally, it's easy to see how this sort of training is a double-edged sword and could be designed for something else. Hence my earlier comment.
From my military experience I can assure you soldiers are concerned about what constitutes a lawful order and in what circumstances deadly force could be used and do argue the about it. Of course, the context of the Cold War armies and the threat of massive nuclear attack were a different situation to what we see today. Nonetheless, I would expect modern, well-educated, soldiers to be doing what they thought to be the right thing, I would imagine that the situation in the United States of America will have to deteriorate considerably before significant numbers of its soldiers could be persuaded to accept Martial Law was necessary, excepting in circumstances that appeared to be localised and extreme, e.g. Katrina.
The problem is, of course, that things look worryingly like they are heading for that perfect storm.
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/
And a combat brigade is coming home to "help people at home".
Wonder if they aren't helping at home anymore? This little "exercise was AFTER being over there.
They sure as hell showed us by example at Ruby Ridge and Wako and those poor Morman women and children in Texas last year. Uncle Sam passed the test. They got away with it and us RUBES sat back on our asses and Fucking did nothing. More importantly the Police and military also passed the test and did what the hell they were told to do. What in the fucking hell makes you think the future will be any different. Just realize that you are on your own. No one is gonna come to your aid. I personally intend to die on my feet but you have to make your own choices. Just get it into your thick skulls that if you're waiting for someone else then prepare for a life on your knees. III
AFTER HEARING LTC HAPGOOD RESPOND TO THE QUESTIONS POSED BY ALEX JONES, IT IS MY FIRM BELIEF HE IS A FUCKING LIAR. HE KNOW WHERE HIS BREAD IS BUTTERED AND HE IS A CAREER MILITARY MAN. HE IS GOING TO FOLLOW WHATEVER ORDER IS GIVEN BECAUSE HE IS COUNTING ON HIS PENSION TO BE THERE WHEN HE RETIRES.
HE DID NOT ANSWER QUESTIONS DIRECTLY. HE IS A TRAINED COMMUNICATIONS MAN. THAT MEANS HE HAS BEEN TAUGHT HOW TO OBFUSCATE AND USE SUBTERFUGE TO ADDRESS HARD HITTING QUESTIONS.
AGAIN I SAY, I AM NOT A VETERAN OR A COP. BUT MY B.S. METER IS RUNNING ON HIGH ALERT.
THIS WAS A TEST TO SEE IF THE PEOPLE WHERE SLEEPING. AND THEY WILL BE BACK TO TRY AGAIN AT A MORE OPPORTUNE TIME.
THINK ABOUT IT. USE YOUR CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS AND THEN PREPARE TO ACT.
THIS SHIT IS GETTING DEEP.
I AM STILL VERY CONCERNED....NAY ALARMED.
.....RUBY RIDGE, WACO, KATRINA!
WE SHALL KNOW THEM BY THEIR DEEDS.
WAKE UP AMERICA!!!
Daniel:
I'd be a lot more willing to stand down and give the NG people the benefit of the doubt if
a) POTUS and Congress were not hard-over gun-grabbers, and
b) I wasn't pretty damned sure that most .mil folks will obey what will be portrayed to them as lawful orders to confiscate guns from American citizens.
Be careful out there.
Daniel: Your friends at the Cracker Barrel and McDonald's are asking for a contact.
Drop a line to bloviate@hotmail.com when you can.
I can't help but wonder what would happen if an ad hoc group of citizens were walking around the same neighborhoods as the NG troops 'in training' with their favorite battle rifle, ammo'd up (but out of courtesy, no rounds in the chamber) and all their gear necessary for a day Op?
I suspect they would be arrested and charged as terrorists, under that recent national law that defines terrorism as the attempt to influence the behavior of government with force. Look how much legal hassle the civilians patrolling the Mexican border receive; yet they are unarmed and not interfering with a military exercise.
what will be portrayed to them as lawful orders to confiscate guns from American citizens.
Of course they will be lawful orders; at that time they will be able to show a brand new gun registration law from congress with the commander-in-chief's signature on it. Everything Hitler did was lawful too, even if it had to be approved after the fact, just like the US congress did for the telco companies spying on us.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home