A Civilian Homeland Security Force - A proposal, by Barack Obama

[CAPSmith]

In a speech on July 2, 2008 Barack Obama had this to say.

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that 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."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXvLWB_NLKE

If I remember correctly, Germany had a similar organization - called the Gestapo.

So far, at least one congressman has spoken out against it.


Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship
By BEN EVANS – 13 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.

"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."

Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.

"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."

Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado about building a new civil service corps. Among other things, he called for expanding the nation's foreign service and doubling the size of the Peace Corps "to renew our diplomacy."

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force.

Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he'll at least enact curbs on ownership of assault weapons and concealed weapons. As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.

"We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential."

Obama's transition office did not respond immediately to Broun's remarks.

So the Junior Senator from Illinois, supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons, but wants to have a police force just as powerful as the military under his control...sounds like disarming the resistance, robbing the citizenry of its RIGHT to overthrow a corrupt governement that fails to act in the best interest of the people.

Looks like I'm on my way to the gun store...

[HairyEyeball]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but we already have a 'national security force' - it's called the unorganized militia, and consists of every able-bodied individual capable of bearing arms - and it exists specifically for the purpose of denying some half-@$$ed demagogue the ability to subjugate the citizenry and abrogate the Constitution. This is precisely the reason for the huge jump in firearms and ammunition sales we've seen (at least the 'we' who still live in semi-'free' States) over the past few weeks.

As a side note, at the last Tucson gun show, AR-15 clones were practically flying out the door, and for possibly the first time in history, the local major bulk ammunition supplier ran out of 5.56 ammo - people were buying it by the pallet.

Make no mistake: Those of us who have taken the oath to support Country and Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic take that oath seriously. Should it reach the point where military force is employed against the citizens of this nation - and it may yet come to pass - we have the duty to resist, and every member of the military, no matter how indoctrinated by the 'education establishment', has no obligation to obey a blatantly illegal order.

Admiral Yamamoto was alleged to have stated that an invasion of this country would be impossible: "There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." This still holds in 'flyover' America, between the two left coasts.

[Lee Ragan]

I'm hearing the same sort of thing here in West Texas about gun shops doing a land office business since the election. I was told by a friend that recently attended a local gun show (I wasn't able to attend myself), that business was booming in gun and ammo sales. Looks like plenty of freedom loving Americans are getting prepared for what looks to be some very dark times ahead.

[03_SHOOTER]

The biggest challenge that we face today, that the FF's did not face in 1776 is the fact that today our government has ensured that We The People do not possess the equal, or even superior weaponry than the active military, and in fact have gone to great lengths to ensure that we do not, in the belief that when, not if, they finally openly and blatantly violated Posse Comitatus, and put the military on the streets of America, that We The People, when faced with the combined might of the military hardware that WE bought and paid for, won't dare to try to oppose them.

[PaulR]

Now that is the scariest Obama clip I have heard!

It is second only to their ever lowering figure of what defines a rich person for tax purposes... What is the figure now... $125,000? I remember when it was $1,000,000, over a year ago!

[HairyEyeball]

The biggest challenge that we face today, that the FF's did not face in 1776 is the fact that today our government has ensured that We The People do not possess the equal, or even superior weaponry than the active military, and in fact have gone to great lengths to ensure that we do not, in the belief that when, not if, they finally openly and blatantly violated Posse Comitatus, and put the military on the streets of America, that We The People, when faced with the combined might of the military hardware that WE bought and paid for, won't dare to try to oppose them.

They can 'believe' whatever they damned well please, but when they illegally send the few who will obey such a blatantly illegal order out to enforce it, they and their .22s-on-steroids will be facing Veterans and patriots quite comfortable with their military (.30)caliber rifles, their magnums, their .50BMGs, their automatic weapons - who practice and 'qualify' more than once a year - or a career. They'll be facing Veterans of Baghdad, Hue, Khe Sanh, Inchon and Normandy and Iwo Jima - and their families - on terrain we know as well as we do our Garands and Springfield '03s. This will be a civil war where the 'lowly' .22 can be the ultimate urban sniper rifle, it's subsonic report lost in the apartment fired from and its 'bite' little more than a disregarded sting - until the agressor keels over from exanguination.

The left coasts and illegal contributions and illegal (and multiple) votes may have stolen the election, but here in 'flyover America' - the heartland of the nation - they haven't taken the country, or the citizenry. If this 'American Gestapo' ever comes to fruition, their brown trousers had better match their brown shirts, because they will never be safe from an aroused America.

We may not storm 'Sodom on the Potomac' - we won't have to - but those sitting and plotting in its War Rooms will not conquer America. More: How much food do they grow in DC? How much fuel do they produce, how much electricity to they generate, what do they manufacture? If they do initiate a war against our country, who can sustain longer?