Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Is Barack firing military leaders


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#1    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:10 PM

I came across this subject in the comment section of an unrelated article on another website. Not sure how to really comment on this myself without going off the deep end but I figure it's worth putting out there for speculation and debate. I'm sure there are lots of dots to connect which would make this seem true such as enacting legislation that keeps our fire power sub par and relatively weak, ie low round magazines and Dian Feinsteins hopeful elimination of anything of use in dire situations and gun control in general. As I said, off the deep end but I'm torn on what to believe vs what I don't want to believe. Stuff's so crazy anymore but while this sounds crazy I'm not naive enough to just accept that sinister sht isn't happening on the hill.
Apparently this Garrow guy is a renowned humanitarian who isn't known to be a kook and was a Nobel nominee. Then again, Obama the person of concern won a nobel prize for nothing so that credential may not be exactly a good one. He doesn't confirm his source which is something to keep in mind.
I can pretty much predict how this thread will go but I wanted to share. Ya know, just in case :)

Quote

http://www.examiner....on-u-s-citizens

On Monday, Dr. Jim Garrow, a renowned author and humanitarian who was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize in 2009, sparked a firestorm of controversy when he wrote on Facebook that President Obama wants military leaders who will fire on U.S. citizens. In an exclusive interview with Examiner.com, Dr. Garrow said the man who told him this is a military hero who is known by everybody in the country.

"I have just been informed by a former senior military leader that Obama is using a new 'litmus test' in determining who will stay and who must go in his military leaders. Get ready to explode folks," he wrote.

"The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not," the unnamed military officer reportedly said. Dr. Garrow also wrote that those who do not meet this litmus test are being removed.

On Tuesday, Dr. Garrow said that officers who know about this cannot come forward without endangering themselves and facing possible retaliation from the administration.

...Click link for the rest...

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 27 January 2013 - 07:11 PM.

Posted Image

#2    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 7,518 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:21 PM

"The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not," the unnamed military officer reportedly said. Dr. Garrow also wrote that those who do not meet this litmus test are being removed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is this real? is Obama for real? if true, then it does not surprise that every one in America wants to be armed, not only to protect yourselves from the normal joe criminals, but also from your very own government. Can not believe this will ever happen! Could it?

if this is true, I would have imagined that this would have been kept top secret, so how did it get out?
"the man who told him this is a military hero who is known by everybody in the country.".................this is a bit unbelievable, but maybe he was paid well?

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#3    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:21 PM

Dont care what the leaders do. Its the soldiers that are the concern. Will they follow those orders or shoot said leaders on the spot.


#4    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:31 PM

View Postfreetoroam, on 27 January 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

"The new litmus test of leadership in the military is if they will fire on US citizens or not," the unnamed military officer reportedly said. Dr. Garrow also wrote that those who do not meet this litmus test are being removed.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is this real? is Obama for real? if true, then it does not surprise that every one in America wants to be armed, not only to protect yourselves from the normal joe criminals, but also from your very own government. Can not believe this will ever happen! Could it?

if this is true, I would have imagined that this would have been kept top secret, so how did it get out?
"the man who told him this is a military hero who is known by everybody in the country.".................this is a bit unbelievable, but maybe he was paid well?
That's the thing freetoroam. We don't know and probably won't concerning this and many other things. It certainly could happen. It's happened many times in history. Now I'm nt saying it is happening, just that it could. And that's why we have the constitution and especially the second amendment. It's a really big and important just in case factor.

Posted Image

#5    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:37 PM

It is in the military doctrine to ask that question. It does also fall under the protecting the country from enemies foreign and domestic. They also take an Oath to uphold the Constitution. So its a dirty question that can be twisted but if you talk to the average soldier today they are disenfranchised and distant from the meaning behind the OP. Now those in control of the drones and other special equipment may perhaps be handpicked for the willingness to do such acts. But like you say noone knows for sure.


#6    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 7,518 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:52 PM

View PostAsteroidX, on 27 January 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

Dont care what the leaders do. Its the soldiers that are the concern. Will they follow those orders or shoot said leaders on the spot.
Whether he actually said this or not, I would imagine the cost for his "security" has just trebled.........and it is the US civilian who is the core of this "test" who will be funding it!!!

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#7    Gromdor

Gromdor

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,361 posts
  • Joined:16 Jul 2011

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:54 PM

The need to possibly shoot fellow citizens is in the constitution.  The whole second ammendment thing we have been dicussing for the last month is one example.  Also the whole "Swearing to protect the constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic", oath that all military members take that Asteroid X pointed out.


#8    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 7,518 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:55 PM

View Post-Mr_Fess-, on 27 January 2013 - 07:31 PM, said:

That's the thing freetoroam. We don't know and probably won't concerning this and many other things. It certainly could happen. It's happened many times in history. Now I'm nt saying it is happening, just that it could. And that's why we have the constitution and especially the second amendment. It's a really big and important just in case factor.
Surely this kind of comment, if true, would not secure him votes next time round? If not true, then surely you will be seeing him to telling the nation that it is a lie ASAP?

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#9    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:55 PM

Very true asteroid. Like so many other things going on the lines are so fine as to the use of powers. Like NDAA. It is covered in a veil of good intention yet can be so easily abused due the how it's worded. But you're other point is also right. It all depends on the willingness of those in the military to obey such orders. I am under the assumption that most wouldn't attack. These scenarios aren't so much of a military pursuit against a radical group run a mock so much as a straight up fight against the citizens. At least that's how I see it.
Remember though we have the FBI and DEA and SWAT and such that can handle most if not all dangerous crazy cult-like, if you will, domestic situations. The striking thing about the op is that the military is involved.

Posted Image

#10    Thanato

Thanato

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 4,153 posts
  • Joined:27 Jun 2004

Posted 27 January 2013 - 07:55 PM

Ok so they are going to give Generals guns? Its not the leaders who will carry out anything its the troops, if the order is given to fire on there own people odds are most will refuse it.

~Thanato

"Your toast has been burnt, and no amount of scrapping will remove the black parts!" ~Caboose

"I will eat your unhappyness!" ~Caboose

****
"Freedom isn't bought in stores, it is bought on battlefields." ~Thanato
****

#11    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,625 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:02 PM

What I find funny that to give credence to this gentlemen they say that he was "nominated" for a Nobel. Well guys, so is Stalin, Idi Amin and about every other year Hitler. Is there nothing else that makes the guy notable?

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#12    freetoroam

freetoroam

    Honourary member of the UM asylum

  • Member
  • 7,518 posts
  • Joined:11 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:rivers and canals of England and Wales.

  • If you didn't see it with your own eyes, or hear it with your own ears, don't invent it with your small mind and share it with your big mouth!

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:13 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 27 January 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

What I find funny that to give credence to this gentlemen they say that he was "nominated" for a Nobel. Well guys, so is Stalin, Idi Amin and about every other year Hitler. Is there nothing else that makes the guy notable?
yep, and if Obama had a say, he would not be nominated again!

In an ideal World a law would be passed were NO guns were allowed and all those out there destroyed, trouble is the law makers are not going to take a risk of trying to pass that without making sure they are armed first.

#13    AsteroidX

AsteroidX

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,570 posts
  • Joined:16 Dec 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Free America

  • it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:20 PM

Dont underestimate the Governments ability to use fear mongering to try and keep the population under control. Its using the same principle we are suppose to have. The govrnment should be doing its job correctly because it fears the people.

Some old guy made that quote a few hundred years ago. Im just stealing it and swapping a word or two because Im lazy.

Edited by AsteroidX, 27 January 2013 - 08:20 PM.


#14    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:22 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 27 January 2013 - 08:02 PM, said:

What I find funny that to give credence to this gentlemen they say that he was "nominated" for a Nobel. Well guys, so is Stalin, Idi Amin and about every other year Hitler. Is there nothing else that makes the guy notable?
Hey I made special note that it wasnt the best credential right in the op so don't twist it. Other than that supposedly this guys MO is humanitarian causes China. I read he's built 250 schools in China and his big thing is finding ways to stop infanticide due to Chinas one child policy. Here is a website about a group he spearheads. http://pinkpagoda.org/ I won't speak for him or do anymore research but it seems he's a good guy. Doesn't mean he ain't loony, though it doesn't appear so.

Posted Image

#15    F3SS

F3SS

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,584 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 27 January 2013 - 08:25 PM

Sorry Q. The article does use that as credence but I did point it out the same as you. My bad.

Edited by -Mr_Fess-, 27 January 2013 - 08:26 PM.

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users