April 17, 2014 By Jennifer Burke
When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he made a statement that caused people to wonder about its exact meaning and Obamaâs intentions. The statement he said during a campaign speech on July 2, 2008 in Colorado Springs, CO, a city that is home to a large Air Force base, is as follows.
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that weâve set. Weâve got to have a civilian national security force thatâs just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
At that time, WNDâs Joseph Farrah posed the following question in his column.
What does it mean?
If weâre going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isnât this rather a big deal?
I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?
Now, maybe he was misquoted by the Congressional Quarterly and the Chicago Tribune. I guess itâs possible. If so, you would think he would want to set the record straight. Maybe he misspoke. That has certainly happened before. Again, why wouldnât the rest of my colleagues show some curiosity about such a major and, frankly, bone-chilling proposition?
Are we talking about creating a police state here?
With numerous agencies under Obama buying ammunition in record numbers, many have been wondering if Obama is secretly fulfilling his dream of a national security force just as strong, powerful, and well-funded as the military. In fact, these purchases of ammunition come at a time when Obama is scaling back the military; cutting their benefits, their pay, and reducing the size of the Army to pre-WWII levels.
The recent events at the ranch of Cliven Bundy in Bunkerville, NV has people asking if Obama is indeed creating a police state. What was essentially a bureaucratic matter between the BLM and Bundy was turned into a full on tactical designed assault with more than 200 federal agents descending upon the ranch with major ammunition, attack dogs, and tactical gear.
The Editorial Board at Investors.com addressed these concerns surrounding the militarization of government as was made evidently clear with the way the Bundy Ranch situation was handled.
As our military is slowly decimated by his policies and budget cuts â and with federal agencies armed to the teeth â we may be seeing what he had in mind at the ranch of a 67-year-old Nevadan.
Agents of a federal agency that many Americans were surprised to see so heavily armed even herded American citizens into âFirst Amendment zones,â another surprise to those who thought the Constitution made the entire U.S. such a zone.
âThe governmentâs option,â said Fox News contributor and former Judge Andrew Napolitano, âis to take the amount of money (Bundy) owes them and docket it â that is, file the lien on his property. The federal government could have done that.
âInstead, they wanted this show of force. They swooped in . . . with assault rifles aimed and ready and stole this guyâs property, they stole his cattle. They didnât have the right to do that. Thatâs theft, and they should have been arrested by state officials.â
The Investors Editorial Board continues by listing exactly how many federal agencies have a private army. These agencies include the EPA, the Library of Congress, the Federal Reserve Board, Fish and Wildlife Service, Coast Guard, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Park Service in addition to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). It has also been recently reported that the United States Postal Service has bought huge quantities of ammunition adding to the number of government agencies with well-armed âprivate armies.â
This militarization of the government is also coming at a time when Barack Obama is leading the attack against the Second Amendment rights guaranteed to Americans as a God-given right by the Constitution. His call for âreasonable reformsâ is in violation of the Second Amendment and will put the American people at a severe disadvantage as we witness an overly aggressive government going wild and a police state being implemented
Thomas Jefferson once said, âWhen government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.â
Obamaâs attack on the right to bear arms coupled with his building of a national security force or private army can only be a sign of one thing â his desire to make the people fear the government and witness the brute force that government will take when we donât comply. That, my friends, is tyranny.
When Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, he made a statement that caused people to wonder about its exact meaning and Obamaâs intentions. The statement he said during a campaign speech on July 2, 2008 in Colorado Springs, CO, a city that is home to a large Air Force base, is as follows.
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that weâve set. Weâve got to have a civilian national security force thatâs just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
At that time, WNDâs Joseph Farrah posed the following question in his column.
What does it mean?
If weâre going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isnât this rather a big deal?
I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?
Now, maybe he was misquoted by the Congressional Quarterly and the Chicago Tribune. I guess itâs possible. If so, you would think he would want to set the record straight. Maybe he misspoke. That has certainly happened before. Again, why wouldnât the rest of my colleagues show some curiosity about such a major and, frankly, bone-chilling proposition?
Are we talking about creating a police state here?
With numerous agencies under Obama buying ammunition in record numbers, many have been wondering if Obama is secretly fulfilling his dream of a national security force just as strong, powerful, and well-funded as the military. In fact, these purchases of ammunition come at a time when Obama is scaling back the military; cutting their benefits, their pay, and reducing the size of the Army to pre-WWII levels.
The recent events at the ranch of Cliven Bundy in Bunkerville, NV has people asking if Obama is indeed creating a police state. What was essentially a bureaucratic matter between the BLM and Bundy was turned into a full on tactical designed assault with more than 200 federal agents descending upon the ranch with major ammunition, attack dogs, and tactical gear.
The Editorial Board at Investors.com addressed these concerns surrounding the militarization of government as was made evidently clear with the way the Bundy Ranch situation was handled.
As our military is slowly decimated by his policies and budget cuts â and with federal agencies armed to the teeth â we may be seeing what he had in mind at the ranch of a 67-year-old Nevadan.
Agents of a federal agency that many Americans were surprised to see so heavily armed even herded American citizens into âFirst Amendment zones,â another surprise to those who thought the Constitution made the entire U.S. such a zone.
âThe governmentâs option,â said Fox News contributor and former Judge Andrew Napolitano, âis to take the amount of money (Bundy) owes them and docket it â that is, file the lien on his property. The federal government could have done that.
âInstead, they wanted this show of force. They swooped in . . . with assault rifles aimed and ready and stole this guyâs property, they stole his cattle. They didnât have the right to do that. Thatâs theft, and they should have been arrested by state officials.â
The Investors Editorial Board continues by listing exactly how many federal agencies have a private army. These agencies include the EPA, the Library of Congress, the Federal Reserve Board, Fish and Wildlife Service, Coast Guard, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the Park Service in addition to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). It has also been recently reported that the United States Postal Service has bought huge quantities of ammunition adding to the number of government agencies with well-armed âprivate armies.â
This militarization of the government is also coming at a time when Barack Obama is leading the attack against the Second Amendment rights guaranteed to Americans as a God-given right by the Constitution. His call for âreasonable reformsâ is in violation of the Second Amendment and will put the American people at a severe disadvantage as we witness an overly aggressive government going wild and a police state being implemented
Thomas Jefferson once said, âWhen government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.â
Obamaâs attack on the right to bear arms coupled with his building of a national security force or private army can only be a sign of one thing â his desire to make the people fear the government and witness the brute force that government will take when we donât comply. That, my friends, is tyranny.
