Chuck Baldwin
The age of despotism
By Chuck Baldwin
On August 7, 2012, The Washington Times ran an editorial entitled, "The Civil War of 2016." It begins, "Imagine Tea Party extremists seizing control of a South Carolina town and the Army being sent in to crush the rebellion. This farcical vision is now part of the discussion in professional military circles.
"At issue is an article in the respected Small Wars Journal titled 'Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A "Vision" of the Future.' It was written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army's University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert at the University of Kansas. It posits an 'extremist militia motivated by the goals of the "tea party" movement' seizing control of Darlington, S.C., in 2016, 'occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council and placing the mayor under house arrest.' The rebels set up checkpoints on Interstate 95 and Interstate 20 looking for illegal aliens. It's a cartoonish and needlessly provocative scenario.
"The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army's Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that 'once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.' They claim that 'the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,' not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy."
The Times editorial goes on to say, "The scenario presented in Small Wars Journal isn't a literary device but an operational lay-down intended to present the rationale and mechanisms for Americans to fight Americans. Col. Benson and Ms. Weber contend, 'Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil.' This is a dark, pessimistic and wrongheaded view of what military leaders should spend their time studying."
See The Washington Times editorial at:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/7/the-civil-war-of-2016/
I well remember when my friend LT CDR Ernest "Guy" Cunningham conducted his "Combat Arms Survey" to 300 active-duty Marines at the USMC's Air-Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California, back on May 10, 1994. A couple of questions in this survey were especially revealing (and startling). John McManus picks up the story at this point: "One of the questions asked the Marines if they would be willing to be assigned to a 'national emergency police force' within the U.S. under U.S. command. The survey showed that 6.0 percent strongly disagreed, 6.3 percent disagreed, 42.3 percent agreed, 43.0 percent strongly agreed, and 2.3 percent had no opinion."
Commenting on these results, Cunningham said, "Do you realize that 85.3 percent agreed with assigning troops to a mission that violates the Posse Comitatus Act?" Remember, these were active duty Marines back in 1994.
Responses to another question were even more startling. Cunningham's question: "Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." The result: "42.3 percent strongly disagreed with this statement; 19.3 percent disagreed; 18.6 percent agreed; 7.6 percent strongly agreed; and 12.0 percent had no opinion." This equates to approximately 61% of Marines saying they would defy orders to turn their weapons on US citizens in order to disarm them; 26% saying they would not disobey such orders; and 12% refusing to say one way or the other, which means you could probably add them to the 26% who would not disobey orders to turn their weapons on American citizens.
See McManus' report at:
http://jpfo.org/articles-assd/29palms-mcmanus.htm
Speaking of Commander Cunningham, back in 2009, he told me that America was entering "The Age of Despotism." Cunningham is no slouch. He was a Green Beret (who served in the same Special Forces Company alongside his father and two brothers), an infantryman with the 101st Airborne Division, Navy pilot, mission commander and analyst. He is also the author of the previously mentioned Twentynine Palms Survey. His military credentials are unassailable. When Commander Cunningham speaks, people should listen.
Commander Cunningham shared his insight with me into the stranglehold that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) holds over the U.S. military by estimating that "75% of military admirals and generals with two stars or more have been trained by the CFR."
In supporting his ominous conclusion that America was entering "The Age of Despotism," Cunningham noted former President Bill Clinton's introduction of PDD 25 (a Presidential Directive that is still in place), which reportedly authorizes the President to use and declare martial law at any time, for any reason. He reminded me of how the US military has been used several times for action on US soil.
The US military was used directly in the government attack against the Branch Davidians at the private residence of Mount Carmel outside Waco, Texas. The military was stationed outside Los Angeles, California, during the LA riots. The military was used in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The military even patrolled the streets of the tiny town of Geneva, Alabama, after a man went on a short, albeit bloody, shooting spree.
Commander Cunningham also reminded me of how President George W. Bush virtually expunged Posse Comitatus and set the table for despotism and martial law by signing the USA Patriot Act into existence. As a result, we now have an entire Army division (NorthCom) assigned to the American homeland, a first in US history. He noted that even FEMA has the authority to declare martial law.
Add the advent of NDAA 2012 and 2013, which authorizes the federal government to seize and incarcerate American citizens on American soil without court order, legal representation, or any other constitutionally-protected right — and now Col. Benson's treatise that military officers should be prepared to turn their weapons on American citizens — and Cunningham's prognostication seems even more accurate.
All over America, NorthCom is currently engaging in urban military training exercises, including right here in my backyard in Northwest Montana. Given Col. Benson's treatise, people are justifiably concerned as to what the actual purpose of these exercises might be. Plus, if you are paying attention to what both President Obama and President Wannabe Mitt Romney are saying, both of these gentlemen seem all-too-content to continue to swell the scope of military interventionism into domestic law enforcement duties.
Of course, the problem is the military do not operate under the same rules of engagement as do domestic law enforcement agencies. There are no constitutional rights and protections at play when military personnel target an enemy, which is why America's founders were absolutely adamant that military personnel never be used against the American citizenry. And with the way the above-mentioned recently enacted laws read, an "enemy" is anyone the President (or any subordinate he authorizes) says is the enemy. And remember, this is the same federal government that has recently categorized people who voted for Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or yours truly, people who are pro-life, people who believe in the Second Coming of Christ, veterans of the Iraq and Afghan wars, people who oppose the New World Order, etc., as "extremists," "dangerous," etc. Does all this mean when the President (any President) adds the word "enemy" to the lexicon that NorthCom plans to order military troops to turn their weapons against us? It would appear that Col. Benson believes this is true.
Think of it: in the name of the 9-11 attacks, the United States is being transformed into the kind of despotic countries that we are told we are being protected from!
I would be very interested to know what the answers would be among our nation's military personnel if CDR Cunningham were to give his Twentynine Palms survey today!
© Chuck Baldwin
September 14, 2012
On August 7, 2012, The Washington Times ran an editorial entitled, "The Civil War of 2016." It begins, "Imagine Tea Party extremists seizing control of a South Carolina town and the Army being sent in to crush the rebellion. This farcical vision is now part of the discussion in professional military circles.
"At issue is an article in the respected Small Wars Journal titled 'Full Spectrum Operations in the Homeland: A "Vision" of the Future.' It was written by retired Army Col. Kevin Benson of the Army's University of Foreign Military and Cultural Studies at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and Jennifer Weber, a Civil War expert at the University of Kansas. It posits an 'extremist militia motivated by the goals of the "tea party" movement' seizing control of Darlington, S.C., in 2016, 'occupying City Hall, disbanding the city council and placing the mayor under house arrest.' The rebels set up checkpoints on Interstate 95 and Interstate 20 looking for illegal aliens. It's a cartoonish and needlessly provocative scenario.
"The article is a choppy patchwork of doctrinal jargon and liberal nightmare. The authors make a quasi-legal case for military action and then apply the Army's Operating Concept 2016-2028 to the situation. They write bloodlessly that 'once it is put into play, Americans will expect the military to execute without pause and as professionally as if it were acting overseas.' They claim that 'the Army cannot disappoint the American people, especially in such a moment,' not pausing to consider that using such efficient, deadly force against U.S. citizens would create a monumental political backlash and severely erode government legitimacy."
The Times editorial goes on to say, "The scenario presented in Small Wars Journal isn't a literary device but an operational lay-down intended to present the rationale and mechanisms for Americans to fight Americans. Col. Benson and Ms. Weber contend, 'Army officers are professionally obligated to consider the conduct of operations on U.S. soil.' This is a dark, pessimistic and wrongheaded view of what military leaders should spend their time studying."
See The Washington Times editorial at:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/7/the-civil-war-of-2016/
I well remember when my friend LT CDR Ernest "Guy" Cunningham conducted his "Combat Arms Survey" to 300 active-duty Marines at the USMC's Air-Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, California, back on May 10, 1994. A couple of questions in this survey were especially revealing (and startling). John McManus picks up the story at this point: "One of the questions asked the Marines if they would be willing to be assigned to a 'national emergency police force' within the U.S. under U.S. command. The survey showed that 6.0 percent strongly disagreed, 6.3 percent disagreed, 42.3 percent agreed, 43.0 percent strongly agreed, and 2.3 percent had no opinion."
Commenting on these results, Cunningham said, "Do you realize that 85.3 percent agreed with assigning troops to a mission that violates the Posse Comitatus Act?" Remember, these were active duty Marines back in 1994.
Responses to another question were even more startling. Cunningham's question: "Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." The result: "42.3 percent strongly disagreed with this statement; 19.3 percent disagreed; 18.6 percent agreed; 7.6 percent strongly agreed; and 12.0 percent had no opinion." This equates to approximately 61% of Marines saying they would defy orders to turn their weapons on US citizens in order to disarm them; 26% saying they would not disobey such orders; and 12% refusing to say one way or the other, which means you could probably add them to the 26% who would not disobey orders to turn their weapons on American citizens.
See McManus' report at:
http://jpfo.org/articles-assd/29palms-mcmanus.htm
Speaking of Commander Cunningham, back in 2009, he told me that America was entering "The Age of Despotism." Cunningham is no slouch. He was a Green Beret (who served in the same Special Forces Company alongside his father and two brothers), an infantryman with the 101st Airborne Division, Navy pilot, mission commander and analyst. He is also the author of the previously mentioned Twentynine Palms Survey. His military credentials are unassailable. When Commander Cunningham speaks, people should listen.
Commander Cunningham shared his insight with me into the stranglehold that the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) holds over the U.S. military by estimating that "75% of military admirals and generals with two stars or more have been trained by the CFR."
In supporting his ominous conclusion that America was entering "The Age of Despotism," Cunningham noted former President Bill Clinton's introduction of PDD 25 (a Presidential Directive that is still in place), which reportedly authorizes the President to use and declare martial law at any time, for any reason. He reminded me of how the US military has been used several times for action on US soil.
The US military was used directly in the government attack against the Branch Davidians at the private residence of Mount Carmel outside Waco, Texas. The military was stationed outside Los Angeles, California, during the LA riots. The military was used in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. The military even patrolled the streets of the tiny town of Geneva, Alabama, after a man went on a short, albeit bloody, shooting spree.
Commander Cunningham also reminded me of how President George W. Bush virtually expunged Posse Comitatus and set the table for despotism and martial law by signing the USA Patriot Act into existence. As a result, we now have an entire Army division (NorthCom) assigned to the American homeland, a first in US history. He noted that even FEMA has the authority to declare martial law.
Add the advent of NDAA 2012 and 2013, which authorizes the federal government to seize and incarcerate American citizens on American soil without court order, legal representation, or any other constitutionally-protected right — and now Col. Benson's treatise that military officers should be prepared to turn their weapons on American citizens — and Cunningham's prognostication seems even more accurate.
All over America, NorthCom is currently engaging in urban military training exercises, including right here in my backyard in Northwest Montana. Given Col. Benson's treatise, people are justifiably concerned as to what the actual purpose of these exercises might be. Plus, if you are paying attention to what both President Obama and President Wannabe Mitt Romney are saying, both of these gentlemen seem all-too-content to continue to swell the scope of military interventionism into domestic law enforcement duties.
Of course, the problem is the military do not operate under the same rules of engagement as do domestic law enforcement agencies. There are no constitutional rights and protections at play when military personnel target an enemy, which is why America's founders were absolutely adamant that military personnel never be used against the American citizenry. And with the way the above-mentioned recently enacted laws read, an "enemy" is anyone the President (or any subordinate he authorizes) says is the enemy. And remember, this is the same federal government that has recently categorized people who voted for Ron Paul, Bob Barr, or yours truly, people who are pro-life, people who believe in the Second Coming of Christ, veterans of the Iraq and Afghan wars, people who oppose the New World Order, etc., as "extremists," "dangerous," etc. Does all this mean when the President (any President) adds the word "enemy" to the lexicon that NorthCom plans to order military troops to turn their weapons against us? It would appear that Col. Benson believes this is true.
Think of it: in the name of the 9-11 attacks, the United States is being transformed into the kind of despotic countries that we are told we are being protected from!
I would be very interested to know what the answers would be among our nation's military personnel if CDR Cunningham were to give his Twentynine Palms survey today!
© Chuck Baldwin
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
