Obama Poised to Carry Out Hostile Military Takeover of US
Nathan: I have come to respect the opinions of the writers and publisher/editors of Godfather Politics, who are generally liberty-loving and less and less statist as time goes by.  This article obviously is timely, but I fear a bit too alarmist at the present time.  Still, it is a good thing to ponder and recall.  And we need to prepare: we do not know how long we really have.  My comments are in italics; I’m reprinting most of the article.

(Godfather Politics)  I’ve been told by a number of people that it would be impossible for any person to stage a military or hostile takeover of the United States.  Ten years ago, I would have agreed with them, but not now.

Nathan: It has never been IMPOSSIBLE, just highly improbable, but that has been changing since the 1990s.  One thing he does not address is the idea that the current administration might drive the military forces to take action against THEM: as enemies of the Constitution.

In the past year, President Obama has taken a number of actions that when added together clearly indicates his plans for a military or hostile takeover of the United States.  And for the first time in my life, I not only believe it could happen, but I am firmly convinced it’s going to happen before the 2016.

Nathan: There were quite a few people who thought it might have happened last year, but suspect that the reason it did not is that the Dems were assured that they could steal or buy enough votes – and they did.  I know some who are expecting such an attempt within months.  Not necessarily because everything is ready for such a push but by sheer accident: that someone, somewhere, will push too hard and cause a bloody backlash that will spread.

To begin with, Obama has been tailoring the US military to his personal agenda.  He is filling the ranks with gays and lesbians who will now follow him to any extreme because he is their champion.

Nathan: “Filling the ranks” is a bad exaggeration.  But there is a combination of factors that may present a similar problem.  Homosexuals likely will never make up more than 10% of the force, and many of them will NOT follow the “messiah” because despite their sexual orientation, they are still honest and loyal to the Constitution.  But we also have an ever-increasing number of gangbangers and rabid (but low-key) Jihadists who are not just enlisting to get training but to create networks of their kind inside the military.  And then we have the sadist, Simon Legree types (the same that become Jack-Booted Thugs in police forces) that are guns-for-hire and will do anything for greed and the opportunity to abuse and beat or kill others.  And we also have those corrupted by power:  too many senior officers seem to be willing to betray their honor with corruption, adulterous affairs, and other immoral actions that it is hard to believe that they would NOT accept a deal with the devil – or the “messiah.”  But a majority?  Even now and in the next four years, I do not think all or even a large minority of officers and troops would go rogue.  This is despite the other points the writer makes in the rest of this paragraph.  Even if it were the opposite: only 25-30% loyalty (to the Constitution), that percentage would be enough to render the military ineffective in a “military takeover.”

He has all but shackled chaplains from preaching Christianity to the troops, who by the way, aren’t even allowed to have Bibles in some areas in the Middle East or any other semblance of Christianity. For the military coup de gras, he has been tailoring his top military leaders by asking if they are willing to shoot Americans.  Those that answer yes, are put in key positions while those that answer no are basically seeing the end of their military careers.

Next, the Department of Homeland Security has been stockpiling millions of weapons and billions of rounds ammunition.  The federal government even has NOAA stockpiling weapons and ammunition and they aren’t going to be using it to predict the weather.

Nathan: Now, we get to a place where I can agree more with the writer.  Just as so many local and state law enforcement agencies have a very bad reputation that is getting worse, it is easier to corrupt civilians, for some reason, than military.  And a lot of the bad apples get OUT of the military and go into civilian service as LEOs.  But the writer overstates things:  there is no evidence of even DHS stockpiling “millions of weapons.”  I’ll go along with a billion or more rounds of ammo, but weapons are only in the thousands, maybe tens of thousands.  This kind of exaggeration does the cause of liberty no good at all.  As for NOAA, two points need to be made: first, that parts of NOAA DO have law enforcement authority (such as the fisheries service) and second that NOAA is one of the nation’s seven uniformed services (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Public Health Service, and Coast Guard being the others).  I have a tiny, tiny bit more trust in the military uniformed services than in the other armed agencies.  But the important point about arming NOAA and other agencies is that it is more simply explained by fear than by plans to stage a takeover.

This is unprecedented in American history and has no purpose or basis other than the use against the American people.

Nathan: The excuse can as easily be fear as a “military takeover.”  But a civilian takeover is no better – indeed, worse – than a military takeover.  The Third Reich was the result of a CIVILIAN takeover – the military was not part of the power base but submitted to the civilian election and subsequent coup.  The same thing was the case in England with the Parliamentary overthrow of the Monarch in the 1630s.  DHS, the various federal “law enforcement agencies” (FBI, DEA, BATFE, ICE, and a hundred more) are the real threat to what little liberty we have left, far more than the military.  Yes, a military rump might improve their chances of succeeding in bringing in the dark ages, but it is the civilian elite that will be the tyrants.

The massive push for gun control has only one purpose and that is to disarm the American people.  There are more guns in private ownership than there are people in the US.  That would make a hostile takeover more difficult, costly and time consuming.  However, the stockpiles of weapons and ammunition are just for that purpose, because Obama knows that there are a lot of Americans who will not give up their guns so easily.  Attorney General Eric Holder has already warned gun owners to cower like smokers.

Nathan: I agree; disarmament would (to any rational person) be a prerequisite for introducing the much higher level of tyranny that they want.  However, an armed populace by itself does NOT prevent tyranny, as history shows us time and time again.  Examples?  Many Arab states (such as the former and new Iraq, Syria, and even Egypt) had very high levels of civilian gun ownership and still continued to be tyrannies.  Mexico, between its independence in 1821 and post-WW2, had high levels of civilian gun ownership but still went through dictatorship after dictatorship, despite several very nasty “revolutions” and pocket civil wars.  Gun ownership is important, but the attitude of the people is even MORE important – as could be seen in Revolutionary France and in the Resistance in many countries in WW2.  But this is typical for the Tranzis, and not really a strong indication that a coup is coming.

One of the problems with the guns in the hands of people is that the government doesn’t know where they all are.  That’s why they are pushing for complete gun registration and background checks for everyone who owns a firearm, regardless of any grandfather clauses.  Under Obamacare, they are pushing doctors and medical staffers to gather information on their patients as to whether or not they own a gun.

Nathan: Again, I agree, but the question to be asked is (a) how many medical people will agree to be stoolies, and (b) what can be done to REDUCE that number?  Once more, this is part of a long-standing liberal and Tranzi agenda, and there is nothing to tie this to an eminent takeover by the “messiah” or his backers.

Under the National Defense Authorization Act, the federal government has the legal right to indefinitely detain anyone they deem to be dangerous to the country.  They do not have to produce any evidence, they do not have to obtain a warrant, and they do not have to give you the right to an attorney.  All Obama or Eric Holder have to do is say you are a threat and that could be the last anyone sees of you for who knows how long.

Nathan: Here, the correct wording is the “legal power;” this is nothing to do with “rights,”- government HAS no rights.  But having the power and exercising it is two different things:  if the fed gov and its employees are as fearful as recent events indicate, this detention power will have more a deterrent effect than actually resulting in massive gulag archipelagoes.  Not that the detentions won’t happen, but they will be relatively few and carefully chosen to try and strike as much fear into us as the fedgov goons have.

Obama has also issued an executive order that gives him absolute power and control over all means of communication for any reason including an emergency.  The executive order includes all television, radio, cable, internet and cell phone communications.

Nathan: This is in essence the same power that we have allowed every president since FDR to have “in reserve,” so this is no indicator that a coup is imminent.  Again, having the power is NOT the same as being able to exercise it – especially absolute power.  Does anyone remember ham radio, or exactly how FRS and CBs work?  And how many hackers are constantly honing their skills?

Lastly, Obama is already placing drones in the skies over America.  His chief puppet, Attorney General Eric Holder has ruled that not only are the drones legal, but that Obama also has the legal right to use them to shoot Americans on American soil.

Nathan: No, I’m not going to cite Holder’s last letter to Sen. Paul.  I don’t need to, as we know that the drones are already up there, with more showing up each day.  The question is just who controls those, and how easily they are knocked out of the air or taken over.  But when you get right down to it, just how much has this current regime actually worried about whether something was legal or not?

When you put this all together into one package, it’s obvious that the stage is set for Barack Hussein Obama to use force in a hostile takeover of the United States.  All he has to do is declare a state of emergency (mostly likely prompted by a forced economic collapse).  This will allow him to control all forms of communication.  Both military and DHS trained personnel will then start rounding up everyone that has or still opposes Obama and detain them under the National Defense Authorization Act.

Nathan: Again, let me emphasize that the real threat is in the DHS and the other federal “civilian” agencies, not the military.  (For one thing, the military is needed to keep the rest of the world off his back while the Tranzis swallow the nation – or get swallowed. Indeed, without that worry, part of any coup would include rounding up a whole lot of military personnel who cannot be trusted to take orders from DC in this kind of situation.)

Those that resist will be face lethal force from the drones and/or the heavily armed military and DHS troops.  Anyone resisting will be shot, since he has been given the legal authority to do so.

Nathan: Again, I suspect that one of the reasons for the 2700 MRAP vehicles being purchased by DHS is because Army armored forces cannot be considered reliable in case of the balloon going up here in the States (as well as the fear of DHS of anyone and everyone).  And to be shot, you have to be seen.  With all the high-tech and gun-nut types who are lovers of liberty here in the formerly United States, that could be a problem – for the Tranzis and the “messiah.”  Still, it is important that we remember this IS possible.

If Obama fears a threat from another nation, he would not be slashing military spending, cutting our nuclear arsenal down to a third of what it was and he wouldn’t have NOAA stockpiling millions of weapons and ammunition.  Everything Obama has being doing and putting in place is pointed inside the US, not outside.  We are his target, not Iran, Syria, China, North Korea or al-Qaeda.

Nathan: I disagree: I think that the “messiah” and his handlers and minions DO fear foreign intervention when the takeover enters the active phase, but they understand that what we have for a military today is NOT what is needed for defense, but for the current world semi-domination that we “enjoy” today. He not only can afford to draw down the military but he MUST draw it down to ensure that it cannot both protect the nation from outside threats AND interior threats (from DC itself). But they realize that the single biggest threat to world domination by DC today is… the American people.  As for cutting down the nuclear arsenal, again we see his distrust of the military – and the great potential for US military personnel, in a coup situation, to have their weapons disappear into “private” hands as happened in the collapse of the Soviet Union.  But even with a third, he can still wipe out North Korea or Iran – and frankly, a full conversion to transnational socialism will make China and Russia very friendly and cooperative.  (And frankly, I don’t understand the reference to NOAA in this paragraph at all.)

If you don’t believe this will happen prior to the 2016 election, then please explain to me the purpose of all these things that have been strategically placed at this time.  Also, I suggest you do a little studying of history in nations like Germany, Russia, China and other socialist nations.  They all thought it could never happen to them and it did and it all started with a tyrant just like Obama gaining power and outlawing guns!

Nathan: This is certainly an issue that we must be prepared for, but it is not the only scenario that matches this sort of preparation.  However, there ARE other possibilities, that many other people have explored.  The most likely is that the Tranzis figure that the American people will continue to be passive and slide into ever more servitude – it has happened in the UK and France and elsewhere.  These are just “insurance” in case some places don’t slide as peacefully as others.  And to ensure the regime, once its control is complete, has the ability to secure it against a new revolution.  (Remember, this regime is essentially a COUNTER-revolutionary one, opposed to the entire concept of the original revolution in 1775-1783.)  A second possibility is that all of this serves as nothing more than a great maskirovka: deception and distraction while other plans and actions are taking place.  And incidentally as a way to draw out more people to be added to the lists to be neutralized.

What the author(s) here do NOT address is WHAT TO DO ABOUT THESE THINGS.  We need to think about these threats and determine more precisely what their courses of action are likely to be so that we can take action NOW to be prepared to deal with them.  That is obviously a topic for another article.