On July 2 in Colorado Springs – Obama made a statement that, of course, no one in the Media is asking about. SHhhhhhh!
The statement below is NOT included in the transcripts of Obama's Colorado Springs speech. But we are all getting used to statements being amended, denied, censored or shrugged off.
"We cannot continue to rely only 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."
Why was this statment removed or never included in the speech transcripts if it is something that is as innocuous as blogs like Daily Kos would have you believe?
It isn't in the transcripts for a reason. But it's in the video above.
Obama can keep having his troops remove things, but not fast enough that we won't find them and expose him. The scary thing is that he has become so powerful that it doesn't seem to matter what we find or say while exposing him.
Our military is 500,000 strong [which Obama wants to cut back on] and nearly 450 billion a year in cost.
And Obama [who wants to cut back on military- did I say that already?] see's a need for some kind of "civilian" national security force...just as powerful- just as strong- just as well funded.
Why?
Why replace one force with the "other"?
We already have the military branches for our National Security - and we have The National Guard in each state.
We have HomeLand security and it's branches.
We have FBI, US Marshals, Deputies, Sherrifs, Hiway Patrol, Border Patrol and more.
Did he say we needed 450 billion a year for greater police and law enforcement protection? Borders security? (which he is against)
Did he say we need More military to "achieve" whatever this "objective" is?
Noooo, what he said was we need a bunch of collective civilians marching around who are just as mighty as our military. Powerful. Funded.
Perhaps even a day that comes, as our military is whittled to the bone, when they are even more powerful, eh?
He doesn't state why our military can't meet the 'objectives we've set'. Nor does he tell us what those national objectives are that our law enforcement officers, and, or our military, can't meet, and why he deems they can't be 'relied on' to meet them.
Where does he expect to get his well funded "volunteers"? What will motivate them into the Obama ranks?
Why does the Obama plan have such a fixation on 'youth groups'?
Will he cut Federal funding to school districts, as he proposes and now threatens for any students not "VOLUNTERING" in his forced community service programs?
Yes, his little "college for all" speech went from 'volunteer' community service to 'forced' service.
Forced servitude is slavery. Why would one need to remind Obama of that?
What other plans has Obama not fully brought to the table that he could change faster than a COLB?
Will his Health care plan evolve into me being forced into "volunteering" my time to some underprevlidged sweat shop in order to get my medications? Donate or be fined. Serve or die.
A civilian army? Obamalitia? Enforcers?
Why in the world would we need a civilian national security force?
Have you turned your thermostat down today?
What third world fifth column fascist planet does this guy come from?
I have studied Obam and his 'buddies' and their views. I've read his spupporters "ABOUT" pages. A good deal of these want separation, and Police out of their nieghborhoods like the Arabs demand in France. Their own little nieghborhood Kingdoms -funded of course by the Government while you are told to get out. In most cases they want entire States turned over to them. Revolution, baby. Obama's da man.
Just who's going to 'vet' these civies? The Farrakans?
And who's already got nieghborhood armies in place?
How will you keep civilians from becoming their own law, and above the law?
In order to be as powerful as all of our military combined they must be armed, yes?
Who will they report too, and what exactly is this national 'objective'?
We see this gang mentality idiocy in the chaotic nieghborhoods in Baghdad, and Gaza and Lebanon. We see it in their army that turn on each other because their beliefs aren't the same. We see it in their corrupt police officers, and the slain Officers who are stand ups and in the way. We see it in Palestinian children carrying AK-47's.
We saw it in Germany and in the Soviet Union.
We don't need a civilian national security force.
We sure could use some more Law Enforcement Officers though.
This Barack slip-up is one of the dumbest more dangerous things I have heard Obama propose.
And the thing is - I think it is perfectly in Line with the Obama philosophy of "change" for America.
Tiny goose steps.
Progress!
Here’s what led John Kelly to call Liz Warren an ‘impolite arrogant woman’
-
An email obtained through the Freedom of Information Act reveals a previous
interaction between White House chief of staff John Kelly and Senator
Elizabeth...
6 years ago
Posts
9 comments:
I think you're confused about the meaning of the word "civilian" in this case.
Civilian basically means any agency that doesn't fall into the military chain of command.
Local Police and Sherriff's departments are civilian law enforcement forces. So are the FBI, ATF, etc...
This wasn't reported on because he's said that civilian law enforcement is an important part of fighting terror many times before. It's not news.
Police men and the FBI etc are not civilians... they enforce the law to civilians. If you work for the government as a law enforcer or something I dont think u count as a civilian.
I tend to agree with the author. If this civilian police force really is as harmless as Obama claims then he should detail what exactly its duties and aims will be. Why do we need it anyway? Obama's problem is that he makes outlandish promises without discussing how they will work in concrete reality.
The US Armed Forces are prohibited from interfereing in civilian matters. Maybe he's looking for an armed force that's not.
the Gestapo is back
Obama is simply stating here the obvious. We've (our ancestors included) heard this all before. The Germans, The Soviets, The Chinese and now here in our own Country. We do not need "civilian law enforcement. He's requiring it because our own military will be hesitant to fire on our own. The civilian "military" which he refers to, will no doubt be one which answers to the "United Nation" rule as they strive to "New World Order". This, eventually, will happen or an attempt will be made to entice it. Think about it? Enlist those who are without and destitute to merely "serve" as directed in return for some form of financial reimbursement, or perhaps even health care. Who would be in command? Has that ever been addressed? No. It will be the U.N. Remember this as well, this government of OURS is OURS and we do possess the power to take it back. Don't sit idle and simply worry about which of your neighbors has the nicest car, or the biggest T.V., be prepared to one day worry about whom you can trust, really trust, and do not take it laying down. We don't need anything except less government interference. Finally, study the constitution, it's great reading material!!!!!!!
If you had bothered to view the entire speech instead of cherry picking the sentence or two that you cite you would have come to the conclusion that he wasn't talking about a military force but about a national security force of volunteer groups like the Peace Corps, veterans groups, Americorp who would band together to volunteer in American communities and mentor to the less fortunate
Here's the speech
Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.
People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.
We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 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.
We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.
This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.
Her
A civilian national security force, does not sound like a group of people trying to help the less fortunate. When I hear the words security force I think of people who have been trained and armed for a purpose.
Google Gene Sharp and start doing some research.
Post a Comment