Pastor Exposes FEMA Plan To Use Them To Pacify Cowboy Farmers When Martial Law Is Dec

let's just ignore that at every point we're told to accept the inevitable martial law.

Pastor Exposes FEMA Plan To Use Them To Pacify Cowboy Farmers When Martial Law Is Declared
Pastor Butch Paugh | May 23, 2006


About three months ago, I was invited to become a part of a group implementing federal FEMA/Homeland Security directives in our county. I couldn't pass that up!

Lots of interesting and bothersome info being discussed at these meetings...

• <LI class=subheadline_body>Local FEMA's ('across the US' according to a spokesman at our local meeting) are gathering Ministers (Pastors) to help in the event of a "declaration of Martial Law or like police action following a declared emergency or quarantine due to an act of bioterrorism". The discussion centered around the need of 'locals' to "quell the cowboy mentality" of farmers who may have their stock or crops confiscated and subsequently destroyed.
• FEMA and other Disaster Agencies (NVOAD in particular: www.nvoad.org) are training volunteers in a "Peer to Peer" program. That program trains people to assist FEMA in a neighborhood setting--teams reach out to neighbors in a declared emergency and "get their neighbors to obey authorities". According to our spokesman, Ministers will be especially helpful because "you guys and gals can use Romans 13".

These are but two highlights and I would like to share more with you should you find this helpful.

Plum Island is a CDC/USDA effort to stop "Foreign Born Diseases" from coming into the US. They also test domestic diseases. Since the island sits in International waters, our spokesman said "anything sent to them can be declared 'foreign born' and could initiate a quarantine by the fed's". He added, "that would help us all".

By the way, I am a Pastor. You all know one of our congregation******** a blessing to our church and my family.

The next meeting (FEMA) is set for May. I will attend as they will be giving out printed material on this plan. Want a copy?

Name deleted to protect the Pastor by Webmaster

LOL, Your always good for a giggle Pissy

awww, tommy franks is so sad about it, but it's bye-bye constitution after the next 'terrorist' attack...how unfortunate for us, it sure will keep us safe though, so that's reassuring.

Gen. Franks Doubts Constitution Will Survive WMD Attack
John O. Edwards, NewsMax.com
Friday, Nov. 21, 2003
Gen. Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government.
Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the menâ??s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado.

In the magazineâ??s December edition, the former commander of the militaryâ??s Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government.

Discussing the hypothetical dangers posed to the U.S. in the wake of Sept. 11, Franks said that â??the worst thing that could happenâ?� is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties.

If that happens, Franks said, â??... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty weâ??ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.â?�

Franks then offered â??in a practical senseâ?� what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack.

â??It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world â?? it may be in the United States of America â?? that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.â?�

Franks didnâ??t speculate about how soon such an event might take place.

Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent.

But Franksâ?? scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government.

The usually camera-shy Franks retired from U.S. Central Command, known in Pentagon lingo as CentCom, in August 2003, after serving nearly four decades in the Army.

Franks earned three Purple Hearts for combat wounds and three Bronze Stars for valor. Known as a â??soldierâ??s general,â?� Franks made his mark as a top commander during the U.S.â??s successful Operation Desert Storm, which liberated Kuwait in 1991. He was in charge of CentCom when Osama bin Ladenâ??s al-Qaeda attacked the United States on Sept. 11.

Franks said that within hours of the attacks, he was given orders to prepare to root out the Taliban in Afghanistan and to capture bin Laden.

Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including:

President Bush: â??As I look at President Bush, I think he will ultimately be judged as a man of extremely high character. A very thoughtful man, not having been appraised properly by those who would say heâ??s not very smart. I find the contrary. I think heâ??s very, very bright. And I suspect that heâ??ll be judged as a man who led this country through a crease in history effectively. Probably weâ??ll think of him in years to come as an American hero.â?�

On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the presidentâ??s decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein.

â??I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent.

â??If we know for sure ... that a regime has intent to do harm to this country, and if we have something beyond a reasonable doubt that this particular regime may have the wherewithal with which to execute the intent, what are our actions and orders as leaders in this country?â?�

The Pentagonâ??s deck of cards: Asked how the Pentagon decided to put its most-wanted Iraqis on a set of playing cards, Franks explained its genesis. He recalled that when his staff identified the most notorious Iraqis the U.S. wanted to capture, â??it just turned out that the number happened to be about the same as a deck of cards. And so somebody said, â??Aha, this will be the ace of spades.â??â?�

Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner than Osama bin laden.

â??The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I wonâ??t say thatâ??ll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable.â?�

Franks ended his interview with a less-than-optimistic note. â??Itâ??s not in the history of civilization for peace ever to reign. Never has in the history of man. ... I doubt that weâ??ll ever have a time when the world will actually be at peace.â?�

American armed forces are assuming major new domestic policing and surveillance roles

Is Military Creeping into Domestic Law Enforcement

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128010,00.html

Military Industrial Complex Coup in '04

The US military: A creeping civilian mission

Asia Times

It seems that the United States military coup of 2012 has arrived about 10 years early. Well, okay, not the full-fledged classic coup, led by a general on horseback. But, as they say, close enough for government work.

First, more about that coup. In 1992, a then little-known deputy staff judge advocate lieutenant-colonel by the name of Charles J Dunlap Jr published an article titled "The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012" (1) in the US Army War College's military journal Parameters. In a plot that was a cross between Arthur Koestler's Darkness at Noon and the movie The Siege , he depicted an America in which a military coup had taken place in the year 2012, and General Thomas E T Brutus, commander-in-chief of the Unified Armed Forces of the United States, occupies the White House as permanent military plenipotentiary. A senior retired officer of the military is one of those arrested, having been convicted by court-martial for opposing the coup. Prior to his execution, he discusses the origins of the coup, arguing that it was the outgrowth of trends visible as far back as 1992. These trends were the massive diversion of military forces to civilian use, the monolithic unification of the armed forces, and the insularity of the military community.

While Dunlap, now a brigadier-general at the Air Combat Command, has not weighed in on this recently, the last two trends have been evident for many years. The Goldwater-Nichols reforms passed by Congress in the 1980s greatly strengthened jointness among the traditionally separate armed forces and the increasingly conservative and republican nature of the armed forces, which is well documented by journalists and academics.

But a report in the November 23 Los Angeles Times by respected military affairs analyst William Arkin provides the latest evidence that the supposedly inviolate wall keeping the military out of traditional civilian activities is eroding, due the diversion of the military to civilian missions.

That wall is embodied in the US by the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, enacted to preclude federal troops from doing the bidding of local politicians in the occupied South following the Civil War. It prohibits the military from conducting domestic law enforcement operations. Congress wanted to make it crystal clear, as Richard Nixon might have said, that there is a great difference in a democracy between protecting our nation from foreign attack and policing our neighborhoods. But the law also allows Congress and the president to make exceptions, and over the years they have done so.

They did so notably in the 1980s in the Ronald Reagan era when the US military was dragged kicking and screaming into counter-drug operations. Ironically, then defense secretary Caspar Weinberger wrote in 1985, "Reliance on military forces to accomplish civilian tasks is detrimental to both military readiness and the democratic process."

On May 20, 1997, a Marine anti-drug squad stalked, shot and allowed to bleed to death Ezequiel Hernandez, an 18-year-old high school sophomore, while he was herding goats near his home in Redford Texas, near the Rio Grande River, the site of heavy military drug interdiction activity. Hernandez's death was the first fatal shooting of a US civilian since the military began anti-drug missions in the 1980s and is the first American killed by soldiers on US soil since the 1970 National Guard killings of four students at Kent State during anti-Vietnam War demonstrations.

In fact, Congress already has passed several laws relaxing the strictures of the act in order to deal with potential attacks on American soil. In 1997, Congress gave the Pentagon authority to cooperate with the Justice Department in responding to biological or chemical attacks. Another law gives the president authority in an emergency to use the armed forces to perform work "essential for the preservation of life and property". Another allows military personnel to assist the Justice Department in collecting intelligence or conducting searches and seizures if "necessary for the immediate protection of human life". Section 104 of the USA Patriot Act passed last year further authorizes the emergency use of the military in "case of attack with a weapon of mass destruction".

Taken together, all these measures give the president authority to use the military in most conceivable emergency situations. But after the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Pentagon picked up extra responsibilities focused on preventing future terrorist attacks on US soil. US Air Force pilots were and are now authorized to shoot down commercial airliners, if necessary. The Air National Guard flew thousands of combat air patrols (Operation Noble Eagle) over major American cities

Some US military officials want to put unmanned aerial vehicles in the skies above the continental US to conduct surveillance and intelligence operations. The North American Aerospace Defense Command wants to use a high-altitude airship to detect cruise missiles and monitor vessels and other potential threats approaching the continent.

Initially, the Pentagon expanded the role of the US Joint Forces Command (JFCOM), giving it additional authority to coordinate and deploy military forces to fight terrorism in the continental US. The commander was placed in charge of the land and maritime defense of the continental US, as well as providing military assistance to civil authorities. JFCOM already was responsible for providing support to civilian authorities responding to attacks or disasters, and for planning the land and maritime defense of the continental US. Now, it would also have the power to deploy military forces domestically to fight terrorism and defend the homeland, an authority previously left to the defense secretary.

But this was deemed unwieldy, and thus led to the creation of the Northern Command, an organization that consolidates all existing military homeland defense and security operations. Concerns about possible violations of the Posse Comitatus Act caused Congress, in the 2002 Defense Authorization Act, to "conduct a study on the appropriate role of the Department of Defense with respect to homeland security".

Last year, however, the Bush administration's Homeland Security strategy document said: "The threat of catastrophic terrorism requires a thorough review of the laws permitting the military to act within the United States in order to determine whether domestic preparedness and response efforts would benefit from greater involvement of military personnel and, if so, how."

Since then the Defense Department also has been inserted into two very visible new agencies. It transferred about 50 new employees in the new Department of Homeland Security to the White House's newly formed Terrorist Threat Integration Center, which is designed to make sure the Central Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation share information.

At Homeland Security's United States Northern Command (Northcom) headquarters at the Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, more than 200 people will be engaged in gathering domestic intelligence, receiving information from local and state police as well as US intelligence agencies.

But as Arkin's article makes clear, Northcom is doing more than mere coordinating. "Under the banner of 'homeland security', the military and intelligence communities are implementing far-reaching changes that blur the lines between terrorism and other kinds of crises and will break down long-established barriers to military action and surveillance within the US."

According to Arkin, Northcom has defined three levels of operations, each of which triggers a larger set of authorized activities. The levels are "extraordinary", "emergency" and "temporary". During emergencies, the military can provide similar support, mostly in response to specific events such as the attacks on the World Trade Center. It is only in the case of extraordinary domestic operations that the unique capabilities of the Defense Department are deployed. These include not just such things as air patrols to shoot down hijacked planes or the defusing of bombs and other explosives, but also bringing in intelligence collectors, special operators and even full combat troops.

Some say this is nothing new. In a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in January, former US senator Gary Hart said American founders "created such an army and called it the militia: citizen-soldiers under the immediate command of the various states that can be deployed in times of emergency. Since the late 19th century these militias have been known as the National Guard, and they were created and given constitutional status as the first responders and the first line of defense in the case of an attack on our homeland".

Indeed, on December 2 Paul McHale, former Democratic congressman and now the Defense Department's assistant secretary for homeland defense, said at the Defense Manufacturing Conference in Washington that military studies of potential domestic terrorist attacks have determined that the National Guard should not only protect the defense industrial base but also critical infrastructure that has previously been defended by civilian law enforcement agencies.

In the future, the National Guard will be the lead organization that coordinates military and civilian responses to terrorist threats and attacks against some critical infrastructure, such as nuclear power plants, McHale said.

He also said the Pentagon reviewed the Posse Comitatus Act and determined that it would not be a violation to deploy the National Guard to protect critical infrastructure in some circumstances. He said he expects more presidential directives in the future to expand the military's homeland defense role.

But the same basic concerns about military involvement still remain relevant. From a civil liberties viewpoint, while members of the armed forces take an oath to uphold and defend the constitution, they are not trained, like the police, to uphold Americans' rights to privacy and due process. Civil libertarians' fears about due process have been heightened since September 11 by the indefinite detention of citizens and immigrants, and by proposals to try them before secret military tribunals.

Yeah.. it's very disturbing when they're recruiting pastors to brainwash good americans. Yes, military is good, putting RFID chips in our livestock is good, taking away our guns is good, its what Jesus wants!