Author Topic: Obama Using Directive 3025.18 To Authorize Use Of Military Force Against American Citizens!!  (Read 383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,271
  • “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them
Obama Using Directive 3025.18 To Authorize Use Of Military Force Against American Citizens!!
 

IS THIS HOW OBAMA WILL GET HIS THIRD TERM?

As NTEB has stated for the past 5 years, Barack Hussein Obama is following the path of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power, and today’s revelation is proof of the coming police state that his administration has been working so hard to build. Hitler used the Reichstag Fire false flag event to wrest complete power over Germany out of the hands of the German people. Directive 3025.18 gives Obama even more power than that.

Since 2009, the Obama REGIME ( administration ) has placed hundreds of laws, directives and executive orders on the books just waiting for his command to activate them. This Pentagon directive from 2010 is a perfect example of Obama’s tactic of waiting to move until people have forgotten the laws he has passed.

Washington DC – A 2010 Pentagon directive on military support to civilian authorities details what critics say is a troubling policy that envisions the Obama administration’s potential use of military force against Americans.

obama-pentagon-directive-3205-18-defense-support-civil-authorities-now-the-end-begins
( “This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens,” said a defense official opposed to the directive. )

The directive contains noncontroversial provisions on support to civilian fire and emergency services, special events and the domestic use of the Army Corps of Engineers. The troubling aspect of the directive outlines presidential authority for the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in operations against domestic unrest.


Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” was issued Dec. 29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency authority under this directive.”

“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under emergency authority,” the directive states.

“In these circumstances, those federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances” under two conditions.

13-Similarities-Between-Obama-And-Hitler-630
( The similarities are terrifying, the conclusion inevitable. Click to read why. )

The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”


“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the directive states. Military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest.

A U.S. official said the Obama administration considered but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters.

Mr. Bundy is engaged in a legal battle with the federal Bureau of Land Management over unpaid grazing fees. Along with a group of protesters, Mr. Bundy in April confronted federal and local authorities in a standoff that ended when the authorities backed down.

The Pentagon directive authorizes the secretary of defense to approve the use of unarmed drones in domestic unrest. But it bans the use of missile-firing unmanned aircraft. “Use of armed [unmanned aircraft systems] is not authorized,” the directive says.

The directive was signed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn. A copy can be found on the Pentagon website: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/302518p.pdf

If (when) the government removes this PDF, we have downloaded a copy and is available by clicking here.

Defense analysts say there has been a buildup of military units within non-security-related federal agencies, notably the creation of Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams. The buildup has raised questions about whether the Obama administration is undermining civil liberties under the guise of counterterrorism and counternarcotics efforts.


Other agencies with SWAT teams reportedly include the Department of Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education Department.

The militarization of federal agencies, under little-known statues that permit deputization of security officials, comes as the White House has launched verbal attacks on private citizens’ ownership of firearms despite the fact that most gun owners are law-abiding citizens.

A White House National Security Council spokeswoman declined to comment.

Via: source – Washington Times!!

h/t: Via: Now The End Begins

http://kristiann1.com/2014/05/29/obama-using-directive-3025-18-to-authorize-use-of-military-force-against-american-citizens/
« Last Edit: May 30, 2014, 06:31:29 AM by rangerrebew »
There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.
Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics. There must be a positive passion for the public good, the public interest, honour, power and glory, established in the minds of the people, or there can be no republican government, nor any real liberty: and this public passion must be superior to all private passions. John Adams

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,271
  • “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them

SHOCK: Directive No. 3025.18 Authorizes Military Force Against U.S. Citizens On American Soil During Times of ‘Unrest’

By Eric Odom
14   
7:34 pm May 29, 2014   

   
People are always skeptical when the talk of martial law or military action against citizens pops up in the blogosphere. The discussion is elevated to a whole new level, though, when a major media outlet like the Washington Times publishes a terrifying report on a new directive that essentially empowers the President to use military force against citizens in times of unrest.

Which is exactly what the Washington Times did yesterday. The story surrounds Directive No. 3025.18 and should shake anyone who bothers paying attention right down to his/her core.

This is truly scary.


The troubling aspect of the directive outlines presidential authority for the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in operations against domestic unrest.

“This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens,” said a defense official opposed to the directive.

Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” was issued Dec. 29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency authority under this directive.”

“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under emergency authority,” the directive states.

“In these circumstances, those federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances” under two conditions.

The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”

“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the directive states.

Military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest.

We’ve covered countless stories of the U.S. military arming local law enforcement with heavy armor vehicles. We’ve covered countless stories of training events that included the firing of live ammunition in heavily populated cities like Miami. But this new directive is a much different animal. It essentially moves the conversation away from terrorism and into the idea of civil unrest.

And by what definition of unrest does the government intend to use in initiating such military force?

Land of the free and home of the brave? Not so much anymore. Not so much at all.
- See more at: http://www.libertynews.com/2014/05/shock-directive-no-3025-18-authorizes-military-force-against-u-s-citizens-on-american-soil-during-times-of-unrest/#sthash.PU9Pdr7o.dpuf
There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.
Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private, and public virtue is the only foundation of republics. There must be a positive passion for the public good, the public interest, honour, power and glory, established in the minds of the people, or there can be no republican government, nor any real liberty: and this public passion must be superior to all private passions. John Adams

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 43,478
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Quote
Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” was issued Dec. 29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency authority under this directive.”

Yup, it surely does.  So do many of the directives that came before it and that are subsumed within the new directive.  For example, Directive no. 3025.15, issued February 18, 1997, provides in section 4.4 that
Quote
The Secretary of Defense retains approval authority for support to civil authorities involving:  use of Commander in Chief (CINC)-assigned forces (personnel, units, and equipment) when required under subsection 4.5., below; DoD support to civil disturbances; DoD responses to acts of terrorism; and DoD support that will result in a planned event with the potential for confrontation with specifically identified individuals and/or groups or will result in the use of lethal force.  Nothing in this Directive prevents a commander from exercising his or her immediate emergency response authority as outlined in DoD Directive 3025.1 (reference (g)).

DoD Directive No. 3025.12, "Military Assistance for Civil Disturbances (MACDIS)", issued February 4, 1994, in section 4.2.2 and following grants emergency authority to deploy military assets within the US in the event of civil disturbances.

Beyond that, these directives go back to the 1950s - Directive 3025.1 was initially released sometime in the 50s, was revised several different times over the years, and has just now been subsumed into this new directive.

As an aside, I would note that under all of these directives, going back into the 50s, the President always had the authority to deploy military forces within the US to quell civil disturbances, so I fail to see why granting military commanders a degree of emergency authority viz. same is more scary than the fact that this president has been thoroughly authorized by his predecessors to order the use of military force within the US.

In other words, this article is much ado about nothing.

Offline olde north church

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,136
Why?  Well, because I'm a bastard, that's why.

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 43,478
  • #NeverTrumpForever
And the timing?

utterly irrelevant.  everything alleged by the conspiracy theorist who wrote the original article was already granted under the old directives, so this one added nothing new to the little bit the writer is hyperventilating about.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf