It's About Liberty: A Conservative Forum
Topics => Military News/Veterans => Topic started by: Pandora on July 01, 2013, 04:50:08 PM
-
As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide “security at mass events” in the United States, a scenario that won’t sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil.
According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations.
In addition to agreeing with FEMA to “exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters,” the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing “security at mass events” in the United States.
This suggests that events designated as “National Special Security Events” by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security.
The meeting last week also agreed on the conclusion that US and Russian emergency authorities will increase their co-operation, “in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters.”
The use of foreign troops or other officials in a law enforcement capacity providing “security” inside the United States is illegal under Posse Comitatus. Capt. William Geddes of the U.S. Army Reserve acknowledged last year that it is against federal law to use US troops to conduct police patrols, despite the fact that such occurrences are becoming increasingly common. The use of foreign troops is an even more clear cut violation of Posse Comitatus.
http://www.infowars.com/russian-forces-to-provide-security-at-us-events/ (http://www.infowars.com/russian-forces-to-provide-security-at-us-events/)
H/T Drudge
-
WTF.
-
As in WTF!?!
-
As in WTF!?!
Yes. As in I feel like I'm living in an alternate universe. Nothing is as I thought it was.
And I'm quite sure that that, in and of itself, is a large chunk of their goal. Disorientation.
-
We've been going back and forth on whether or not our military will fire on us; I'm damn well sure the Russians will. I'd like to know what Congress has to say about this .... if they even know.
This will not end well.
-
We've been going back and forth on whether or not our military will fire on us; I'm damn well sure the Russians will. I'd like to know what Congress has to say about this .... if they even know.
This will not end well.
Respectfully...you're looking at this the wrong way. Some folks expressed ambivalence at the thought of firing upon soldiers if SHTF - I don't have a nanosecond's hesitation at dropping a ruskkie should he pull onto my block.
-
We've been going back and forth on whether or not our military will fire on us; I'm damn well sure the Russians will. I'd like to know what Congress has to say about this .... if they even know.
This will not end well.
Respectfully...you're looking at this the wrong way. Some folks expressed ambivalence at the thought of firing upon soldiers if SHTF - I don't have a nanosecond's hesitation at dropping a ruskkie should he pull onto my block.
Sure, sure, just like you to present the bright side. ;)
-
As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide “security at mass events” in the United States, a scenario that won’t sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil.
According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations.
In addition to agreeing with FEMA to “exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters,” the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing “security at mass events” in the United States.
This suggests that events designated as “National Special Security Events” by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security.
The meeting last week also agreed on the conclusion that US and Russian emergency authorities will increase their co-operation, “in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters.”
The use of foreign troops or other officials in a law enforcement capacity providing “security” inside the United States is illegal under Posse Comitatus. Capt. William Geddes of the U.S. Army Reserve acknowledged last year that it is against federal law to use US troops to conduct police patrols, despite the fact that such occurrences are becoming increasingly common. The use of foreign troops is an even more clear cut violation of Posse Comitatus.
http://www.infowars.com/russian-forces-to-provide-security-at-us-events/ (http://www.infowars.com/russian-forces-to-provide-security-at-us-events/)
H/T Drudge
So violating the law...again. And, just what the hell is this gonna cost. I'm sure this isn't free.
-
And that's entirely what it's all about. They know there is going to be direct resistance against them, probably sooner rather than later, and both their ability to contain it and the disposition of their own forces are in doubt. In essence, they're forging the relationships with their foreign mercenaries that they plan to use against the American people. Seems a few years ago there was some hubbub about Russian "security forces" operating in Colorado or somewhere in the mountain west.
-
We've been going back and forth on whether or not our military will fire on us; I'm damn well sure the Russians will. I'd like to know what Congress has to say about this .... if they even know.
This will not end well.
Respectfully...you're looking at this the wrong way. Some folks expressed ambivalence at the thought of firing upon soldiers if SHTF - I don't have a nanosecond's hesitation at dropping a ruskkie should he pull onto my block.
Sure, sure, just like you to present the bright side. ;)
Well since we're all such sunny optimists these days, here's another: at least they'll bring plenty of 5.45 and 7.62x39 with them :)
-
how trustworthy is infowars?
-
More trustworthy than any of the alphabet networks.
-
More trustworthy than any of the alphabet networks.
True dat. They'd have to lie continuously to be that bad. Infowars just draws questionable conclusions frequently.
-
I think Alex Jones and the Infowars people engage in a bit of deliberate hyperbole. You might say that discredits, but I have come to see a certain wisdom in it and have even started using it myself in online discussions or conversations with people. We have such a high degree of normalcy bias, mass collective Stockholm Syndrome, that occasionally people need to hear news presented in an outlandish way.
I've listened to his podcast somewhat regularly since December. At the time the latest Feinstein gun grab was in full frontal assault mode, and I wanted to hear bombastic defiance. It wasn't enough to listen to my "regulars" (Limbaugh, Levin, etc) argue against her in their more measured way. But anyhow as a consequence of starting to listen to him more, I came to enjoy his show even as frequently out-there as it was. I'll also say that I find him to be very genuine. The guy is tireless. He does his show 6 days a week, and will often just tack on another hour at the end. He lets phone callers say pretty much whatever they want, and will hold them over a commercial break to let them finish their point. Though he and the Infowars team will often end up at bizarre conclusions, he has an instinctive distrust of authority and I have no doubts that he will reliably come down on the side of individual liberty whatever the issue.
-
As in WTF!?!
this could be the issue
::dueling:: ::rockets::
-
We've been going back and forth on whether or not our military will fire on us; I'm damn well sure the Russians will. I'd like to know what Congress has to say about this .... if they even know.
This will not end well.
Respectfully...you're looking at this the wrong way. Some folks expressed ambivalence at the thought of firing upon soldiers if SHTF - I don't have a nanosecond's hesitation at dropping a ruskkie should he pull onto my block.
Being a Cold War vet I have no problem dropping a few Rooskies that dare cross my path. Invited or not, they do not belong, they violate our Law...as a foreign invader I'll be glad to drop them as well as their treasonous handlers.
-
And that's entirely what it's all about. They know there is going to be direct resistance against them, probably sooner rather than later, and both their ability to contain it and the disposition of their own forces are in doubt. In essence, they're forging the relationships with their foreign mercenaries that they plan to use against the American people. Seems a few years ago there was some hubbub about Russian "security forces" operating in Colorado or somewhere in the mountain west.
I remember something about that. While it is not unusual for foreign military personnel to train at our bases (even nominally friendly sorts)...letting them operate in the nation at large is a line that has never been crossed. They cross this line, we could have a hot civil war in no time...and involving a foreign power makes this even nastier.
-
Most people aren't going to get out of their La Z Boys for gay marriage or abortion etc. Ruskies patrolling the Super Bowl or whatever will tick them off. Many Americans still remember the Russians were the bad guys (even if you didn't keep up with the news--they were popular villains for tv, movies and literature).
-
Most people aren't going to get out of their La Z Boys for gay marriage or abortion etc. Ruskies patrolling the Super Bowl or whatever will tick them off. Many Americans still remember the Russians were the bad guys (even if you didn't keep up with the news--they were popular villains for tv, movies and literature).
They're still the villains because today's real horrible bad guys, 'slims, are *never* the enemy; if they're involved at all (think NCIS Los Angeles), they're always innocent dupes. We've stopped watching because it just got disgusting. And because LL Cool J as a peaceful, patriotic, muslim NCIS agent ain't credible.
So, the aforementioned Russkies; will we know they're not American? Are they going to be wearing blue helmets, or what?
BTW, I heard Beck pooh-poohing this this morning. Of all people.
-
Most people aren't going to get out of their La Z Boys for gay marriage or abortion etc. Ruskies patrolling the Super Bowl or whatever will tick them off. Many Americans still remember the Russians were the bad guys (even if you didn't keep up with the news--they were popular villains for tv, movies and literature).
They're still the villains because today's real horrible bad guys, 'slims, are *never* the enemy; if they're involved at all (think NCIS Los Angeles), they're always innocent dupes. We've stopped watching because it just got disgusting. And because LL Cool J as a peaceful, patriotic, muslim NCIS agent ain't credible.
So, the aforementioned Russkies; will we know they're not American? Are they going to be wearing blue helmets, or what?
BTW, I heard Beck pooh-poohing this this morning. Of all people.
He also likes to do CYA for his pals and the weepy/preachy "peace-is-the-answer" naïveté just infuriates me.
That's probably why I am listening to more Metal Mix and Classic Metal channels on my phone in the morning...
::outrage::
-
Beck's pooh-poohing of it probably has more to do with the source of the story than anything else. He has an animus against Infowars and Alex Jones.
-
well, I guess I was thinking the Russians would be identified but that probably wouldn't be the case...would the media even report their presence at some tv event?
(Yes, Russians as bad guys is back as a story theme (often as gun runners, bomb purchasers or mob)! As for NCIS:LA--I bailed on that along time ago. Whenever I watch any show now I can bet on the Muslim being the "good" guy or innocent party. A popular theme I've seen in the last couple of years is an American* trying to set up innocent Muslims or becoming a "terrorist" to wake America up to the dangers in the world.)
*white,male usually a vet
-
Beck's pooh-poohing of it probably has more to do with the source of the story than anything else. He has an animus against Infowars and Alex Jones.
Beck's the last one to be throwing stones.
I love him dearly but he is often so ill-informed it makes me cringe.
-
Re: OMFG Obama To Deploy 15,000 Russian Troops in US Under DHS Orders!!!!!
Are these even vaguely the same thing? Hell no. And this exaggeration and deliberate misinterpretation is no mistake or accident. You see it in article after article. And sadly quite a few well-known conservative blogs also engage in the same bullsh*t-bait-and-switch as well.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/341506.php (http://ace.mu.nu/archives/341506.php)
-
Re: OMFG Obama To Deploy 15,000 Russian Troops in US Under DHS Orders!!!!!
Are these even vaguely the same thing? Hell no. And this exaggeration and deliberate misinterpretation is no mistake or accident. You see it in article after article. And sadly quite a few well-known conservative blogs also engage in the same bullsh*t-bait-and-switch as well.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/341506.php (http://ace.mu.nu/archives/341506.php)
1) Given this Administrations hatred of the American people, we ignore this tin-foil hat noise at our peril. Yes, the BS is there and you have to weed through it.
2) The press release doesn't deny the accusation, and in fact supports it ("In addition, the parties approved of U.S.-Russian cooperation in this field in 2013-2014, which envisages exchange of experience including in monitoring and forecasting emergency situations, training of rescuers, development of mine-rescuing and provision of security at mass events.")
Is that "nicey-nice-let's-agree-to-share-experiences-and-training-tips bureaucratic argle-bargle." Maybe. But where is the equivalent press release from the US side? If they were planning to share troops as part of this "provision of security at mass events" would they not try to obfuscate that fact using "nicey-nice-let's-agree-to-share-experiences-and-training-tips bureaucratic argle-bargle." - Would any US dept release a press release on it?
Like all good conspiracy stories you can neither confirm or deny, its unverifiable.. And sadly, if and when a true bit of intelligence shows up it is likely to be buried in this noise. In fact I suspect that most of this noise and BS is created by the tyrants to ensure the real information is lost and ignored under a pile of tin foil hats. "Its the EU TIMES, here is nothing you can believe in that rag!" is ad-hominem - a broad sweep attack to discredit anything posted there. He uses the same broad brush to paint Alex Jones, and we all know that Jones has broken a couple of bigger and true stories this year, all firmly in Tin Foil Hat territory - including the DHS Ammo purchases. Is AJ free of tin foil hat BS? Of course not. I like Ace of Spades, but like everyplace you go, there is a bias and a certain desire to post stuff that confirms that Bias. Yep, they are all humans alright. And a lot of folks have a bias against the tin-foil hat types, largely because of the fact that if what they believe is true, there will be little or nothing we can do to fight it. Ace of Spades did a service pointing our what could and could not be verified, but then degenerating into broad smears does the same disservice as those who post BS.
When I hear stuff like this, I can't just discount it. It may not be true. It might be. Look for further confirmation. If I hear of Russian being spoken by the "bouncers" at events, its another data point confirming this story. Also keep in mind that "not making sense" is often a question of motive. If you believe the current POSOTUS is a petty punk, its quite easy to see him doing things like this for no other purpose than to make us mad. His little nose scratch with the finger trick exemplifies this guy. I hope its the picture that finds its way into the History books. So the fact that "it won't work" or "won't help him" may not be relevant.
Here is another tin foil hat take (http://www.starvingthemonkeys.com/articles/Foolproof.html) on the same info.
If you want to sell a bad thing, stick a worse thing on it and try really, really hard, but not really, to sell that combination. Let people get all worked up about the worse thing, and then say, “OK, you convinced me, that worst thing is OUT!” The crowds will rejoice and smugly line right up to buy the bad thing, even though they would have never considered it at all in the first place.
So, want to seal the deal and remove any remaining uncertainty? Float the idea that the Russians might be used to collect guns from Americans, and then let them Billy Bobs get all churned up into a lather. Later, change it to their buddies, the Israelis, and watch how they all flip over. Miracle of miracles, thankyoo Jesus!
Is he right? ( I disagree with most of that screed, but this last point,... yeah, that is plausible-- Russians no, someone else yes. (Israelis? yeah maybe, but any traditional ally would work as well) )
We are in a psy-ops war this administration is waging upon us - maybe for a real purpose. Maybe because Borat is a moronic choom punk with a drug addled adolescent's sense of pranksterism.
-
Three steps toward tyranny and then backing up one step is still momentum toward tyranny, yes?
Too bad we all cannot see the need to knock them back several dozen steps!
::cussing:: ::gaah::
-
I'm not biased at all against the tin-foil-hat crowd. I just like to find some credible sources before I jump on the bandwagon. That's a job in itself.
-
I'm not biased at all against the tin-foil-hat crowd. I just like to find some credible sources before I jump on the bandwagon. That's a job in itself.
There are no credible sources. Everyone has an agenda. Everyone has blinders. Look at what they say, the evidence they provide and then decide. If they have been found credible in the past, pay more attention to what they say, but seriously, almost nothing can be discounted out of hand at this point.
-
I'm not biased at all against the tin-foil-hat crowd. I just like to find some credible sources before I jump on the bandwagon. That's a job in itself.
There are no credible sources. Everyone has an agenda. Everyone has blinders. Look at what they say, the evidence they provide and then decide. If they have been found credible in the past, pay more attention to what they say, but seriously, almost nothing can be discounted out of hand at this point.
True dat. Who coulda woulda predicted the National Enquirer, a rag, to have broken the "blue dress" story and John Edwards' Rielle romp.
-
Plus we have to remember one of the reasons the GOP is bleeding from the anus is because they always take that "we're not stooping to their level" tact, which in reality is nothing so noble. It's more like cowardice masquerading as "above all that" so that they don't have to look in the mirror and recognize a coward. Meanwhile, the Left has treated this as a no holds barred war for decades. One side comes hopping out in their boxing trunks, the other side breaks a liquor bottle and slashes with it.
To get back to more literal meaning, the Left always paints their opposition as irredeemably terrible, assigning to them every possible negative superlative. Everything is always due to the nefarious intent of their opponent. Even when it's demonstrably BS, just the mere consistency of that angle begins to have an effect on the opinions of people. So why should our side be so giddy about calling out its own as charlatans? We should just run with the meme that every thing liberals and government do is a nefarious back room conspiracy.
Truth? Truth is an impossibility right now. Clouded, by the Dark Side things are.
-
I am pretty sure that this Russian troops thing has been completely discredited.
Besides...if chimpy was going to bring foreign troops here you can damn well bet they would be jihadis instead of rooskies.
-
Besides...if chimpy was going to bring foreign troops here you can damn well bet they would be jihadis instead of rooskies.
He's already got those in place.
-
Besides...if chimpy was going to bring foreign troops here you can damn well bet they would be jihadis instead of rooskies.
He's already got those in place.
Yup, turn the manifesto to the next page...