Obama "considered but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters."
Directive outlines Obama’s policy to use the military against citizens.
Well, it seems that my sources who reported at the time that the Bundy standoff was the subject of a meeting of under-secretaries of various cabinet departments (which I did not report, but awaited confirmation) were correct. It also makes more understandable the business of Oath Keepers and the rumor of military intervention, even if they were fed disinformation about a drone strike.
A U.S. official said the Obama administration considered but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters.
Mr. Bundy is engaged in a legal battle with the federal Bureau of Land Management over unpaid grazing fees. Along with a group of protesters, Mr. Bundy in April confronted federal and local authorities in a standoff that ended when the authorities backed down.
The Pentagon directive authorizes the secretary of defense to approve the use of unarmed drones in domestic unrest. But it bans the use of missile-firing unmanned aircraft.
"Use of armed [unmanned aircraft systems] is not authorized," the directive says.
It is further interesting that the link provided to the original document no longer works.
Yes, and it's hard to understand, as I believe "Civil Unrest" is exactly what Bo-Zo wishes would happen.
Just keep in mind that Civil Unrest pales before the scenario of Holy Hell that will play out the moment military guns are turned on civilians.
Here is a link to a story on this, and other possible uses of military force on American civilians, from the Wasghington times.
I tried to share that story yesterday on Facebook only to have Facebook attempt to block my sharing it. It took 10 minutes before I could work around Facistbook's censoring of it.
Has Congress declared war on the American people or anyone else? NO? Then Congress is in control of the military, and obama isn't commander-in-chief so he can't order the military anywhere.
According to that little pesky Constitution, that is. This crap is starting to piss me off.
the link in the WT article for the pdf of the directive is working again....
The Police are entirely out of control . This young toddler got a flash bang in the face..http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/local/toddler-critically-burned-during-swat-raid/nf9SJ/
Is Posse Comitatus completely dead now?
They would have carried the day, but lost everything beginning the day after.
Was dismayed when the Oathkeepers became involved with this. Just can't see Bundy as the victim here and was concerned OK would get branded as nuts (they have). But if your story proves out - all may have been worthwhile. The government has shown its hand. Will only increase the number of angry citizens and harden attitudes.
Army vs the people will not stand.
Bundy was the victim. He was the last rancher standing between Harry Reid's son and a bunch of free land. Bundy's family grazed the land before the BLM existed.
Post a Comment