A Federal WAR on Civilians?

I’ve seen a similar thread but there are actually 70 Federal Offices doing the same, and stocking up on sub-machine guns and ammo.

70 Federal Offices packing heat and 40 caliper hollow point Ammo

Under President Obama, the Department of Education now has armed officers, in case any of you got the bright idea of failing to repay those student loans. Forest Rangers now have guns, in case you suddenly get the urge to smoke a cigarette out in the woods when you believe no one to be looking. The census bureau I'm sure wishes the right to shoot anyone who might seek to have their conservative leaning suburban homestead adequately represented when drawing up congressional districts. The Department of Transportation will need to deal with those gas guzzlers who drive Hummers without being famous Hollywood types first somehow, and shooting them will help thwart global warming in its tracks. Lord knows that the fellows in the Department of Commerce will need guns to help them deal with the black marketeers who inevitably spring up from no where any time Socialism becomes the economic system of choice. And farming community, don't worry, there's something under the Christmas tree for you as well.

The United States Department of Agriculture has declared its intent to purchase .40 cal Smith & Wesson submachine guns.
In an announcement on the procurement branch of the General Services Administration’s website, the USDA has claimed it wishes to buy semi-automatic or burst fire machine guns with night sights and flashlight attachments.
Now, I know what you're thinking. What could possibly go wrong with giving automatic weapons to the same people who made it possible for you to pay over $50 Billion in reparations to any African American who claimed to have tried growing a tomato plant on their balcony and failed at it, aka, "failed to farm?" I say you're a racist for objecting to anything that the Bamster has it in his mind to do, ever. I mean after all, he's nothing short of a beneficent Messiah, who really really cares about all of us personally. Let's meet one of those new armed USDA agents now, shall we?
I know I feel safe, knowing that we have an armed civilian security force that answers only to President Zero. What did the WWII era Germans call their armed civilian security force again?.... I believe it was called the Gestapo.
Though most Americans know agents within the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Federal Bureau of Prisons carry guns, agencies such as the Library of Congress and Federal Reserve Board employing armed officers might come as a surprise.
The incident that sparked the renewed interest and concern occurred in late August when a team of armed federal and state officials descended on the tiny Alaska gold mining town of Chicken, Alaska.
The Environmental Protection Agency, whose armed agents in full body armor participated, acknowledged taking part in the Alaska Environmental Crimes Task Force investigation, which it said was conducted to look for possible violations of the Clean Water Act.
The FBI, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management and Park Service are among 24 federal agencies employing more than 250 full-time armed officers with arrest authority, according the federal report, which is based on the 2008 Census of Federal Law Enforcement Officers.
The other 16 agencies have less than 250 officers and include NOAA as well as the Library of Congress, the Federal Reserve Board and the National Institutes of Health.
The number of federal department with armed personnel climbs to 73 when adding in the 33 offices of inspector general, the government watchdogs for agencies as large as the Postal Service to the Government Printing Office, whose IG has only five full-time officers.
Why does the EPA need armed officers to look for violations of the Clean Water Act? Why does the Federal Reserve Board and Library of Congress need armed officers? Why do so many federal agencies need to have employees that are packing heat? It would be one thing if they simply had security guards on premises, but as you see with the EPA, when a government agency has guns, it looks for any excuse to use them.
It’s especially ironic that the federal government is looking for any excuse to take away the 2nd Amendment rights of the American people while government agencies appear to be looking for any excuse to arm themselves. Congress should look into this issue and if they don’t see a good reason for these agencies to have armed agents, they should cut off the funds they’re using for weaponry.

Department of Agriculture requisitions submachine guns
forums.randi.org...

US Government preparing to wage war against citizens

The US federal government has militarized more than 70 agencies, from the post office to park rangers. Even the Social Security office and the International Revenue Service are a part of the shocking trend which should raise red flags for all Americans or anyone living in the US.
Since 2009 The Dollar Vigilante Blog has brought you story after story covering federal purchases of hollow-point ammunition, firearms, even tanks for federal agencies like the US Postal Service and Social Security.

In 2008 Barack Obama promised to create a private civilian army as strong and well-funded as the military. This is now the reality.

www....[hate-site-nolink]/forum/t1041846-2/

USDA Buying Submachine Guns
feww.wordpress.com...

Wow wonder why the house of representatives aren't doing anything about this lord knows there not doing anything else....

Ops sorry but the republicans are for ndaa and patriot act at more than 95% where the democrats are for it at around 50%

The war on drugs is a war against the people just look at our prison population.

apologies but I can never understand these stories about "imminent government war on the public"

Without the civies the USA or any other country cannot exist. Or buy ammo.

So, other than fear mongering what's the point?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Wow wonder why the house of representatives aren't doing anything about this lord knows there not doing anything else....



Ops sorry but the republicans are for ndaa and patriot act at more than 95% where the democrats are for it at around 50%



The war on drugs is a war against the people just look at our prison population.

I believe they are all together on a larger plot, perhaps due to coming chaos they expect with global banking. Martial Law is another idea, why not arm them all. I still cant understand why social services are armed now. That is an odd one.

originally posted by: canucks555
apologies but I can never understand these stories about "imminent government war on the public"



Without the civies the USA or any other country cannot exist. Or buy ammo.



So, other than fear mongering what's the point?

Maybe a One World Government that most will oppose?

originally posted by: LDragonFire
Wow wonder why the house of representatives aren't doing anything about this lord knows there not doing anything else....

Ops sorry but the republicans are for ndaa and patriot act at more than 95% where the democrats are for it at around 50%

The war on drugs is a war against the people just look at our prison population.

And we have a DEMOCRAT for a President!

What has HE done about it???

Oh and please don't say he can't, because he has shown he doesn't have a problem overstepping his authority when he chooses to do so!

Just ask the murderers and rapists that he just set free from ICE detention.

EXACTLY! NOTHING!!!

Other than just ramp it up!

Odd how everything with you has to be focused on blaming one party when they are BOTH guilty of ruining this country....

stop asking or wondering what your local representative will do or your party or whoever. THEY do it cause the citizens is doing jack shhh. Do not write to them gang up go there tell them, we the people demand that you do x y z by then or we do it and that mean we then will have no use for you so by xyz time if you did nothing f off. then and only then will things change.

a reply to: seeker1963

Oh and please don't say he can't, because he has shown he doesn't have a problem overstepping his authority when he chooses to do so!

Just ask the murderers and rapists that he just set free from ICE detention.

EXACTLY! NOTHING!!!

Is that what happened? Why do you insist on spreading misinformation?

There have been more deportations since Obama came into office than under any other President in US history. Here's some recent numbers.

2012 409,849
2011 396,000
2010 400,000
2009 387,000
2008 358,000
2007 318,000
2006 280,000
2005 245,000
2004 240,000
2003 210,000
2002 165,000
2001 186,000
2000 185,000
1999 175,000

In fact, ICE expanded upon strategies instituted under the Bush administration to deport more criminals:

The numbers reveal a more nuanced picture than either side paints. The Obama Administration has deported immigrants in record numbers and, following on a high-consequence enforcement strategy instituted in the mid-2000s, has significantly increased the chances that an individual apprehended at the border will face consequences—namely, formal deportation. The administration has also shifted its enforcement emphasis to criminals and has escalated the use of administrative removal proceedings that authorize removals outside of traditional immigration courts. Faced with limited resources, the administration’s shift toward removing criminals and recent border crossers has been coupled with a decline in deportations of other individuals caught in the interior

source

Your entire opinion is built on a report by the CIS that was fed through Fox News and regurgitated throughout the Internet. CIS is the Center for Immigration Studies, a private "think tank" founded by a retired ophthalmologist from Michigan named John Tanton who also founded FAIR, NumbersUSA, Californians for Population Stabilization, U.S. English, Pro-English — something like 13 of these interconnected propaganda factories in total. The guy is a frothy mouthed lunatic, eugenicist and all around horrible person. From a 1996 letter to millionaire and fellow eugenicist, Robert Klark Graham:

Do we leave it to individuals to decide that they are the intelligent ones who should have more kids? And more troublesome, what about the less intelligent, who logically should have less? Who is going to break the bad news, and how will it be implemented?

Here's something else he had to say:

In a 2001 letter by Tanton being circulated as part of the current campaign, he laid out his idea to “move the battle lines on the immigration question in our favor” by convincing Republican lawmakers that “massive immigration imperils their political future.” The goal, he wrote, was to “change Republicans’ perception of immigration so that when they encounter the word ‘immigrant,’ their reaction is ‘Democrat.’ ” Organizers of the campaign against the groups found the letter at the University of Michigan’s Bentley Historical Library, which houses Tanton’s papers.

You can read about the love-hate relationship between Tanton's groups and conservatives in this Washington Post article from which the above expert was taken.

The guy supports forced abortion and sterilization FYI (I can dig up the sources). You seem like a guy who doesn't like to be played for a sucker and wouldn't support mass sterilization programs so I thought you might like to know whose misinformation your peddling.

Back to the topic. It was covered a couple of days ago here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
and here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

One of the posters pointed out an article from the conservative website, hotair.com which offers a pretty mundane explanation:

We’re getting a lot of e-mail this weekend about an executive order issued on Friday afternoon by President Obama titled “National Defense Resources Preparedness.” While the timing of the EO is curious — why send it out on a Friday afternoon when an administration is usually trying to sneak bad news past the media? — the general impact of it is negligible. This EO simply updates another EO (12919) that had been in place since June 1994, and amended several times since.

Again, this is almost identical to EO 12919 from 18 years earlier. Note what this EO specifically orders: identify, assess, be prepared, improve, foster cooperation. None of these items claim authority to seize private property and place them at the personal disposal of Obama. What follows after Section 103 are the directives for implementing these rather analytical tasks, mostly in the form of explicit delegations of presidential authority to Cabinet members and others in the executive branch.

Why the update? If one takes a look at EO 12919, the big change is in the Cabinet itself. In 1994, we didn’t have a Department of Homeland Security, for instance, and some of these functions would naturally fall to DHS. In EO 12919, the FEMA director had those responsibilities, and the biggest change between the two is the removal of several references to FEMA (ten in all). Otherwise, there aren’t a lot of changes between the two EOs, which looks mainly like boilerplate.

In fact, that’s almost entirely what it is. The original EO dealing with national defense resources preparedness was issued in 1939 (EO 8248) according to the National Archives. It has been superseded a number of times, starting in 1951 by nearly every President through Bill Clinton, and amended twice by George W. Bush.

Havent you heard... even the pentagon is prepping for a zombie apocalypse. Surely they are buying all of this artillery to keep us civvies safe and comfy.

..... or to have them stocked for a civil uprising where in that case WE are the zombies.. and that sorts offends me.

a reply to: seeker1963

Its easy to blame one party over another would you like me to show you the voting records on the laws that has lead to the militarization of our government and police forces?

Same old story about stockpiles of ammo by people who do not understand government contracts. Not to mention things like the Post Office have had armed agenst since before the revolution. And with a grand total of little over 100,000 armed federal agents of any kind they would have a hard time making war on small state.

What I find ridiculous is that so many government agencies need a "military" arm. They don't call themselves military, but obviously they are not just agents walking around with sidearms. They are equipped with military-grade tactical gear and automatic weapons. Why? I am relatively certain that the public did not consent to this, and in my opinion no department or group within the government should be allowed to do this except those tasked with law enforcement. And most of these groups should not be tasked with law enforcement. That is what the designated law enforcement groups are for, like the FBI.

A big part of the problem is that the more groups like this with military arms, the more people needed for oversight. And we know for a fact that there is already not enough oversight with the groups who we allowed to have such military personnel. So nothing good can come of this. I feel that it is people within these agencies wanting more and more power, if not for themselves then for their agency. It needs to stop.

a reply to: JiggyPotamus

I tend to wonder if these are just what both parties are sending over=seas for their secret WW3 chaos plots in other countries?

Or, are they still just arming the drug cartels in Mexico?

It would be nice if some nice post man, or USDA agent would pine in and tell us all that "Yes, we are all carrying "sub-machine" guns on us, where=ever we go".

Just a note on one point the OP raises. Hollow Point is what we *WANT* Federal Agents to have. We do not want them carrying hard ball ammunition.

The difference is one bullet which will expand greatly inside (and really suck for who is shot) but by doing that, STOP inside the target it hits in most cases. It won't go through and through to shoot someone totally unintended behind the target or in the next room in the case of dry wall type walls on a wood frame house.

I think to people who focus on gun shot wounds as horrible things above all else, they are bad bullets. To think about innocent people in public places to worry about in a justified shoot situation, they are a baseline of safety for that limited penetration.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I think the appropriate authorities should use Hollow point ammo but certainly not on law abiding civilians! The IRS and Social Security office are also using them; RATHER plan on using them. Crazy!!! They must be expecting civil unrest of the masses!

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

I think the appropriate authorities should use Hollow point ammo but certainly not on law abiding civilians! The IRS and Social Security office are also using them; RATHER plan on using them. Crazy!!! They must be expecting civil unrest of the masses!

a reply to: wonderworld

If they aren't safe with that ammunition, then they aren't safe with live firearms at all as I'd consider it. (Which I don't necessarily take issue with, given how many seem to be adding large enforcement elements).

I'm simply noting that anyone carrying a gun where hollow points are available and while carrying in public? Absolutely should be. CCW as well, if not especially. Personally, I carry a .45 and so it's rather pointless. That actually does make a larger problem for no good reason and it's due to ballistics (speed the bullet is going vs what it takes to open a hollow point round).

Smaller calibers go faster (in many cases) and definitely are safer, as odd as that sounds, using HP/JHP ammunition, IMO. Just what they are often ordering.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

It sounds like we have a few things in common, although I dont share what I use for protection or hunting. Either way I find it total lunacy that this is occurring. Do all the 70 or 73 Federal Agencies see us as a threat? To use lethal force on farmers or the rest of us?

a reply to: wonderworld

Again, I ask the question - Can a post-man, USDA agent, NOAA weatherman, social service administrator - actually say "yes, we are armed."

Where are these "purchases" really going?

originally posted by: Happy1
a reply to: wonderworld



Again, I ask the question - Can a post-man, USDA agent, NOAA weatherman, social service administrator - actually say "yes, we are armed."



Where are these "purchases" really going?

That's a good point. I hadnt looked at that point of view but nothing would surprise me. That is one huge stock-pile of weapons and ammo. Where do you think they are headed, if not in the hands of the Federal Agencies? I should be asking you that question.