Nationalized Police?
I have two posts today. The one that follows this one is a re-post from 2008. When I wrote it, I got a lot of conspiracy theory like snarky comments for my effort.
Recently, there has been turmoil in our city streets. Businesses destroyed, property destroyed and police officers and National Guard told to stand down. Each and every one of these events is manufactured. They are built upon a false narrative from the media using one of our most precious rights to further an ideology and doing it with full knowledge that they are telling outright lies to the American people. Events such as these manufactured riots are not without purpose.
When added to the false narrative put out across the media people who are equivalent to black turban wearing Imams whip mobs of functional illiterates into destructive frenzy. Then, they begin to demand social justice. The very people who would cry lynch mob themselves become a destructive lynch mob. These mobs have been so worked up and the police in the cities so demonized that now police officers are being shot. The latest one just yesterday.
Then, in rides a politicized justice system whose professed purpose is to solve the manufactured problem. In other words, to deliver justice in the name of the wronged citizen. Never mind the wronged citizen robbed a store, assaulted a policeman and was returning to finish the job when he was justifiably shot. But, is that their real purpose? Or have they whipped illiterate mobs into rage to further a greater aim. A purpose even those in the mob believing someone is looking out for them and expecting favor will regret if it is ever realized. Their lives most certainly transformed – fundamentally so.
The picture painted by the complicit media and the purveyors of social just is that local police forces simply cannot be trusted to protect the citizenry. So, the federal government must take steps to fix them. Elijah Cummings is leading the call from his perch atop of the Congressional Black Caucus to nationalize local police forces. Eric Holder has been using and abusing power of the Justice Department to control local police. Just this week, Whitehouse Advisor Al Tawana Brawley Sharpton made the call for nationalizing local police forces.
When you view local police departments and the amounts of surplus military equipment they have been receiving, everything from armored vehicles to assault weapons, have you ever wondered why? The standard response is that they need the additional equipment to better respond. To what? When federal agencies, even the US Postal Service started buying millions of rounds ammunition, the most in demand ammunition, did you ever wonder why?
People can only be pressed so far. They will only stand by for so long while their property and livelihoods are destroyed with police under orders to give the protestors room to do just that. Some day there will be a push back, which is probably just the tipping point dear leader seeks.
So, you propagandist in the media that delivered us to this point and you spineless Washington politicians who have sat back and watched things deteriorate at a more accelerated pace, please do the following:
[From 2008]Tell me again about that National Security Force….
What do you think about the Russian analyst who predicted the demise and breakup of the United States? I have news for him. The breakup of the United States was completed the day that being a Hyphenated-American became more important than being just an American. I needed to clear that thought from my mind before moving on.
I recently scanned an article in a paper produced by a professional military association. It talked about the President-elect and what the military and veterans should expect from him. What the article amounted to was a regurgitation of talking points provided to them by a political campaign. I was rather disappointed.
One political statement made by President-elect Obama, or campaign promise, whichever way you choose to characterize it, concerns me a great deal. It should concern everyone. It should concern professional military associations also, but like most other things here in the twilight zone of news and information suppression, it has not garnered much attention. The media, that bastion of investigative and objective journalism, is too busy basking in its political victory to be curious about what it may bring to their doorstep. Before all of our voices are suppressed by the Fairness Doctrine and the Googstapo, I suggest we forget all of the conspiracy theories and lawsuits bouncing around the net and concentrate on those concrete ideas expressed to us by Mr. Obama before we elected him.
“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
“Just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded..” According to the Department of Defense, the active duty military strength as of June 30, 2008 was 1,385,122. There are 1,105,297 active duty military in the United States and its territories and 279,825 in foreign countries. These numbers do not include the military reserves. The National Defense Budget for 2008 was 647.2 billion dollars. Why would we need a “civilian national security force just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded” as that?
What exactly does the President-elect envision as the mission of this force? Every state has a State Police Force. Every Governor has at his or her disposal the state’s National Guard. We have the Federal Bureau of Investigation, The Drug Enforcement Agency, the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, The U.S. Border Patrol, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the US Coastguard and probably some agencies I have never heard of. The question that comes to mind is what exactly will the President’s national security force do that is not already accomplished by these organizations? I am not going to write the answers that keep popping into my mind; just suffice it to say that none of them are good.
Since we appear to be shredding our Constitution, it does not surprise me that no one as yet has raised any legal questions about this force. The Posse Comitatus Act prevents the use of the military to enforce civil law in the United States. It also protects the liberties of citizens. What protections of our liberties would we have from this “civilian national security force”?
Mr. Obama made some other comments about national security that should concern all citizens and should especially concern professional military people.
“… I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending [and use it to fund my civilian national security force?]. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems [while the Iranians develop nuclear weapons and test long range missiles]. I will not weaponize space [but the Chinese have already started]. I will slow our development of future combat systems. [the systems that keep our Soldiers alive and provide them a battlefield advantage]
“I will institute an independent defense priorities board to ensure that the Quadrennial Review is not used to justify unnecessary defense spending.
“Third, I will set a goal for a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal.”
When these statements are considered along with the concept of a civilian national security force just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded, it should concern any thinking American. It has me thinking. Thinking that I should be making improvements to the home bunker.
Copyright 2008 JD Pendry All Rights Reserved
© 2015 J. D. Pendry American Journal All Rights Reserved.
Category: Politics
Dunno, J.D. It seems to me a person who gets their news strictly from network television tends to develop tunnel vision. For the most part, the networks have a posture that all wisdom shines from Manhattan’s butt crack, and anyone who lives west of the Hudson is a hopeless shitkicker. They don’t care about places like Ferguson or Baltimore other than as destinations for the pack to travel like a bunch of feral dogs.
Ultimately, it’s a refuge for the vapid and facile with a talent for sensationalism. It also helps to have a nice smile, and the ability to cry on cue. All of which is good for ratings, but is not particularly good for journalism.
The conflict over centralization is as old as the Republic. Thomas Jefferson, you might remember, saw the best form of government as that of yeoman farmers who would come together from time to time to make decisions for the common good. People like Alexander Hamilton, on the other hand, wanted a government more like jolly olde England, and would have appointed George Washington for life if he hadn’t had better sense.
The problem with democracies is that they tend to be messy. A potentially bigger problem with central governments is that they tend to become autocratic until, to quote T.H. White, “Everything which is not forbidden is compulsory.”
Geez, this was addressed in great depth over two years ago. Here: http://www.educationviews.org/why-has-dhs-bought-1-6-billion-rounds-of-ammo/ All those heavy armored vehicles, which became surplus as the US withdrew from Iraq/ME went to police departments because they were SURPLUS. DHS grabbed them because, as the article says, ‘they’re cool’. The ‘excessive ammo purchase’, which somehow depleted ammunition stocks, was part of DHS’s standard budget. The ammo shortage then was caused by people who were hoarding it when the news went around that DHS/USPS/USGS, etc., etc., were buying up ammo in large lots. People who went to Walmart or Bass Pro Shops or Gander Mountain or whatever and lined up to grab another 3 boxes, because those stores had to ration the supply — well, they were hoarding the stuff and the factories could not keep up with the demands. Here’s the link to that post 2+ years ago. http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=34697 Here’s rb325th’s comment on it: http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=34697&cpage=1#comment-806227 Here’s my calculation how much money the panic buyers were likely to spend, even if they only bought .22 calibre: http://valorguardians.com/blog/?p=34697&cpage=1#comment-806231 I calculated the purchasing dollars using ONLY .22 calibre as the grade. It came to over 16 quadrillion rounds of .22 calibre, and helluva a LOT more than the entire volume of USGOV purchases for non-military use. I emphasized then and again now that I based my calculations on ONLY one calibre for the sake of brevity. Just a little question: aside from the fact that Holder has blundered every idiotic thing he’s touched, including the dustup with the Bundy bunch, is there someone on the street corner demanding your identity papers? Or making you wear a weird patch on your clothing to ID you? If you think your every movement is being tracked, then get rid of the GPS thingy in your car and turn off the GPS node on your phone, or stop carrying one in your pocket. If the government has become such a bunch of overbearing slugs that you have to complain bitterly about it, then explain the complete and utter failure of the sequester in 2012, during which people threw traffic cones into… Read more »
What she said.
Literally, I was all set to write a nice long rebuttal and PH-2 did it for me.
I was thinking that a campaign to point out the tax benefits TO states with gun control advocates (people who are afraid of their own shadows) might actually be worth the effort.
I’m not actually promoting gun ownership in restricted states, just saying that if every citizen was issued a voucher to buy a gun and ammo when registering to vote, and purchased said weapon plus its ammo, the tax revenues in cash-strapped state budgets would increase exponentially.
In my younger days, as I witnessed National Police forces in Europe, in Arabia, and in Asia, I thought it might be a reasonable idea, perhaps even a needed concept.
But, there is a very good reason for localized police. Local police forces KNOW their communities. They know the streets. They know many of the people. They know the serial criminals. They know the civically minded who will assist when they can.
A National force does not. They are merely the enforcement of national politicians’ wills.
Already we see an environment where many LEO’s don’t know the Constitution, and at the federal level we see agents that don’t care.
There is a reason the Founders created powerful State governments, and a restricted Federal government. It is because of many things, including you have more power to change your Governor than your President, and that the laws needed in Tennessee will be different than the laws needed in NY or CA. We need to return to the Founders’ intent and the Law over the government they wrote in the US Constitution.
We do NOT need a national police force
I love to quote myself in these stories….
“You’ve got to be a one-man fighting force…. You’ve got to have enough guns, and ammunition and body armor to stay alive…. You should be walking around in schools every day in complete tactical equipment, with semi-automatic weapons…. You can no longer afford to think of yourselves as peace officers…. You must think of yourself [sic] as soldiers in a war because we’re going to ask you to act like soldiers.” – John Giduck
sincerely
John “Faker 6” Giduck
I’ve been watching all this crap go on and listening to all the recent conspiracy theories about Operation Jade Helm 15 where they are practicing taking over the Great State of Texas with 1200 Specops troops.
Think about that, the only way 1200 people can take over this place is if they have nuclear weapons.
Even then the results will be of dubious results.
When the Bundy Ranch fiasco happened I truly believe that Holdmydick himself was on the other end of the phones talking to the troops from BLM demanding that they actually go ahead and open fire on the civilians present.
Fortunately cooler heads prevailed as that just might have been the last match that lit the fires of Hell for this country.
To me, I would imagine that the real problem with DC is that they think they matter to the rest of us.
Oshitforbrains believes the crap that comes out of his mouth and his narcissism and being surrounded by sycophants means that he has absolutely no clue about what America thinks.
The last election was a warning shot across the bow of DC and it would appear the only a few are actually listening to the words being spoken.
The forthcoming events are hard to assess and the outcome of those events depends on a million different events that nobody can foresee.
And ExPH-2, they are continuing to try to lock us up as fast as they can, people all over the country are being harassed by various federal agencies, private property is being taken without even a chance of redress unless you own a law firm that isn’t too busy working on corporate mergers and other Wall Street functions. So I would say, yes, there is a danger from this developing more and more into a police state.
I have a long history of watching this crap taking place and have been commenting on it for some time now on a different venue.
So it bears watching and bears discussion from all sides now.We damn sure cannot hide our heads in the sand.
Thunderstixx, if you’re referring to foreclosures, which ARE increasing, then I agree with you but I also know that the people who are going belly up on that are idiots who used their homes as piggybanks 10 years ago, took out home equity loans (HELOCs) and have been paying ONLY interest on those 2nd mortgages. The payments are increasing NOW, to include payments on the principle. Add this extra expense to the 1st mortgage and it makes that sparkly home unaffordable, so yes, people are being kicked out because they were stupid about money.
There is definitely a financial crisis forming that may make the 2009 crash look like a whimper. Not a joke or a speculation.
I’m just glad I paid for my home when I bought it.
I’d appreciate it if you can provide backup for your saying that people are being locked and/or harrassed by federal agencies. That is a strong statement, so I’d appreciate your providing a source for it. I do not watch idiot news sources like CNN, and my news sources are far enough from liberalism to make them valid.
A National Police Force. Gee whiz, what could that do? Let’s see, Hitler had his Gestapo, Lenin, Stalin, and their successors had the KGB, East Germany had the Stasi,…
SEE? Now somebody tell me JUST WHAT could go wrong with B. Hussein 0bama & Company having a National “Civilian” Police Force. Hey, he already has the IRS, EPA, FBI, DHS, and the TSA just to name a few, ALL of which have heavily armed and equipped sections…
/SARC
You have every reason to be concerned, because the danger is real. I thought John McCain put it well “How could such a young man have so many old, bad ideas?” The current administration has done nothing but gone dumpster-diving in the Dustbin of History. Fortunately for us, power is so divided up in this country, and the turnover in office is so regular, that truly stupid policies have a limited shelf-life in this country. We run through bad solutions relatively quickly. Or, as Winston Churchill observed, “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing – after they’ve tried everything else.” Although I, too, recognize the danger of radical pot-stirring by the President and members of his administration, and blatantly destructive agenda by their fellow-travelers, I see reason for hope in the sequence of events in Baltimore. I do not believe we are going to continue to see an escalating wave of violence in our cities: I think we are going to see a new and interesting coalition of grownups emerge, along with better policies. There were two iconic moments in Baltimore, and Barack Obama missed them. One was the mother extracting her sixteen-year-old before he could participate in a riot, and another was the line of big, civilian men between the “demonstrators” and the police, guarding the police line. These were only the icons. There were a thousand subsidiary actions underlying those icons. There were the ministers and adults filtering through the crowd at curfew time, telling the members of the crowd to go home. This included the members of the city council, and yeah, Elijah Cummings did his part by telling people to go him, and leaving, himself. There was the change in tactics: once the curfew was imposed, the police were allowed to act with efficiency and despatch. We have now have several rounds of riots and threats of riots over alleged police misconduct. The claims of institutionalized white supremacy have been shredded by reality. Even during the rioting in Baltimore, there was a consensus among the participants that “this is not about Freddie… Read more »
Valerie, is “gone dumpster-diving in the Dustbin of History,” an original phrase with you or did you get it somewhere else? If it’s your original thought, I’d like your permission to use it.
I saw that, too, Valerie.
And 15 miles from where I live, where a gun deal between two stupid young men went wrong when one tried to steal the gun, and was shot by a police officer, the ADULTS came on camera saying ‘WE DO NOT WANT another Ferguson or Baltimore. WE WANT SOLUTIONS.’
There is hope. If the dialogue begins with this – WE WANT SOLUTIONS – then maybe some good will come of all of this.
But I have to ask, when the video of that woman berating her son went viral (I must have seen it 5 times now), how could anyone possibly have missed it? We need MORE parents like that woman, and we need them now.
random thoughts:
In terms of police efficiency, I wonder what a unified police force at some level could achieve? I have never lived anywhere with less than three or four overlapping jurisdictions (here in Harris County I believe I read there are 7 separate police agencies, all with arrest powers, who don’t seem to talk or coordinate with each other?) At a national level, what does all that inefficiency cost us?
Just a thought.
Jade Helm – I’m not sure which is scarier: that 1200 troops could target taking us over (more likely – that someone could think 1200 troops of ANY caliber could be successful at that!) – that any sane person would believe that? or worse, that either our governor is enough of an idiot to believe it or spineless enough to cave in to the tin-foil hat brigade that does believe it?
Ammo shortages – doesn’t affect me much except for .22s. Can’t reload ’em safely. But whenever I do hear of decent stocks, the sales clerks tell me “yeah, there’s folks that try to buy ALL of the shipment” – the ammo companies say they are churning out 4 MILLION rounds a day… but people are buying at a hugely higher rate than before. THAT is your problem – the folks who think they need 10,000 rounds for their once-a-year plinker. I do know a store with very good stocks now… but thy charge $15 for a box of CCI MiniMags which even at inflated prices should sell for $9 or so.
This is what concerns me about the next election. How hard would it be for the administration to use a manufactured violence to suspend elections and put troops into the streets? I keep telling myself I don’t believe in conspiracy theories…
In a rational world (yes, a hell of a caveat)you would probably need Baltimore-style rioting in most major cities to begin to even consider something like that. And I suspect there would be a hell of a coalition of lefties AND righties – not all of each – but a hell of a coalition against it.
You guys do realize that the FBI is already the nation’s law enforcement body responsible for enforcing federal laws, right? Also, there was a time in American history when law enforcement organizations were just as well equipped and trained as the military. Either way, the military still falls under civilian leadership (the President) as part of the Constitution. Changing it would undermine American principles. Making a “national police force” is not only redundant but demonstrates a lack of understanding about what organizations we already have and what they’re responsible for. It seems Mr. Obama falls under this category if he really said that.