U.S. Troops Asked If They Would Shoot American Citizens, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 03:14 PM by AmoebaSized
On the Art Bell C2C show they had a pilot who tried and fly over Area 51. In the conversation, he was forced down by the military. I suppose if he was in anything except a civilian plane, if you think that trying to get on a base that is off-limits to anyone except the military that they will not end up shooting you, and if you pose enough of a threat even in a civilian plane, then perhaps you should have listened to that C2C show because in the first place, they do not know what that pilot was intending to do. And that could end up with the person being dead, just as dead as the military not knowing what the mob is going to do in the end, and being probably out-numbered but there to keep the order even if old News reels show that it was a fault even when Ohio State happened back in the '60's. Accordingly as far as I know, it is from a person involved back at the time with all that was happening across this Country with protesting the Vietnam War and anything else going on at the time.
That's all I can say, is that is probably why they attempt to make non-legal weapons and rubber bullets since that time. I think they just shot some over in England just recently with rubber bullets, but again I would have to look again at the News over there at the BBC.

The military is here to defend the Country even if the citizenzy goes bezerk or crazy, according to what they think, in the end. I would have to assume that if things got bad enough they will do what is Ordered if it festers up to a point of being that bad.


[edit on 2/4/2008 by AmoebaSized]


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 03:17 PM by zerotime
As someone who graduated from Kent State University I can tell you that the Kent State shooting was much more complicated then someone ordering a military officer to fire his gun and kill American students. They teach entire classes on the events (what led up to the shooting and what happened after the shooting).

What many do not like to talk about is that the Kent State protesters numbering in the thousands were not a peaceful bunch. They were breaking store and car windows all over town days before the shooting. They were lighting stuff on fire, including buildings and causing the entire town to be submitted to a state of dangerous chaos. The national guard was called in because the Kent Police had completely lost control. Students then set the ROTC building and fire and attacked fire fighters with rocks and bottles as they tried to put out the fire. There were students who came into the town to help business owners and town officials clean up the city but they were attacked by other groups of student protesters. The groups of malicious militant protesters were completely out of control even after the city was ordered into a state of emergency martial law.

So then comes May 4th. The protesters are about to march again and the guard is there to get rid of them. We all knew the outcome. Guardsman fire and kill four and wound nine - some of them not even protesters.

I am definitely not on the side of the guardsman seeing how they shot innocent people, but what cannot be skipped over is the conditions that led to the shootings. No matter what you think of the Kent State Shooting they not not a black and white clear cut case of US troops killing Americans because they wanted to kill Americans.



[edit on 4-2-2008 by zerotime]

[edit on 4-2-2008 by zerotime]


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 03:49 PM by biggie smalls
reply to post by SolPower


Actually to join the Marines, you are brainwashed from the start.

I speak from personal experience on this one so do not tell me otherwise. This is a fact.

They break you down so they can build you back up however they see fit (the military leaders).

The average soldier is a good person, but that does not mean they aren't changed during their years of "training."

We were told in ROTC that we had to follow our officers orders, NO MATTER WHAT.

The whole killing civilian topic never came up, but I imagine the answer would be the same.

"You must follow a superior's officer's orders." Plain and simple, cut and dry.

You listen to what you are told and if you don't, you'll have to go through court martial proceedings.

Brainwashing is what the military does, like it or not.

[edit on 2/4/2008 by biggie smalls]


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 04:22 PM by ItsHumanNature
reply to post by manbearpig


I agree that some action by true american patriots withiin the military to restore our Constitution is the only real scenario in which that could happen. Short of that our current situation will remain the same.


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 04:33 PM by Equinox99
Do military personelle have the authority to fire upon innocent civilians?

"919. ART. 119. MANSLAUGHTER
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who, with an intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm, unlawfully kills a human being in the heat of sudden passion caused by adequate provocation is guilty of voluntary manslaughter and shall be punished as a court- martial may direct.
(b) Any person subject to this chapter who, without an intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm, unlawfully kills a human being--
(1) by culpable negligence; or
(2) while perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate an offense, other than those named in clause (4) of section 918 of this title (article 118), directly affecting the person;
is guilty of involuntary manslaughter and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct. "

SOURCE

Unless it is stated otherwise by the president or a higher autority. Military personell must follow orders, but the Posse Comitatus Act states it otherwise.



The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385) passed on June 16, 1878 after the end of Reconstruction. The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (Army, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement police or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non-federal property (States, their counties and municipal divisions) in the former Confederate states.

The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the United States National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Posse Comitatus Act.
SOURCE


HOWEVER :



Recent congressionally passed law may have explicitly given this authority to the President. HR5122 also known as the John Warner Defense Authorization Act was signed by the president on Oct 17, 2006 John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007. Section 1076 Text of Hr5122 is titled "Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies". Removing the legalese from the text, and combining multiple sentences, it provides that: The President may employ the armed forces to restore public order in any State of the United States the President determines hinders the execution of laws or deprives people of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws. The actual text is on page 322-323 of the legislation.


Now that the John Warner Defense Authorization Act was signed, it gives the president the option of deploying armed forces into the states. If he says shoot at will, then the army has no choice but to shoot.


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 04:59 PM by Leyla
Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by manbearpig


That story is BS. There is no training going on to shoot Americans, family members and friends, etc.. getting ready for martial law. Far too many here take prison planet as gospel truth, without doing any research, or independant thinking.


BlueRaja is this your opinion or a stated fact?

I do hope this story is bogus but why would Scott say something like that?


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 05:36 PM by ADVISOR
I for one would not blatently engage US civilians, they would have to pose a very serious threat to those around them. If such an activity was under taken or ordered by the CINC, I would revolt and more than likely side with the counter forces and enforce civil law, as I've mentioned in timeless threads and posts, for which I am reknown for among the older members.

Equinox99, brings up a very valid bit of information. Only thing is, there is still a choice, it has some thing to do with "lawful orders", and what the soldier and officer, issued an order determines to be lawful. An order seen as unlawful can be disreguarded and it is encouraged to do so if said order is actually unlawful.

Now going back to the Armed Forces shooting civilians, that has been rumored about for some time now, decades actually. From certain publications know as "The RESISTER", which can also be found under Special Forces Underground, or as both, has been harder to find as the years go by. Even archived search engines have fewwer results, and some extra time must be spent to locate these pubs.
I mention that because in one of the copies of The RESISTER I have actually read, there is a poll by an officer to the enlisted. One of the questions is if they would engage US citizens. One of my earlier threads actually covers that material, but that is buried under years of content.

There is another source of the rumint (rumors intelligence), how ever after typing the above, it has slipped my mind and I will need to come back to post that later.

But as always, sources of said rumint should always be checked against others.


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 05:56 PM by kattraxx
reply to post by zerotime


Kent State University:

WHAT EVENTS LED DIRECTLY TO THE SHOOTINGS?

Shortly before noon, General Canterbury made the decision to order the demonstrators to disperse. A Kent State police officer standing by the Guard made an announcement using a bullhorn. When this had no effect, the officer was placed in a jeep along with several Guardsmen and driven across the Commons to tell the protestors that the rally was banned and that they must disperse. This was met with angry shouting and rocks, and the jeep retreated. Canterbury then ordered his men to load and lock their weapons, tear gas canisters were fired into the crowd around the Victory Bell, and the Guard began to march across the Commons to disperse the rally. The protestors moved up a steep hill, known as Blanket Hill, and then down the other side of the hill onto the Prentice Hall parking lot as well as an adjoining practice football field. Most of the Guardsmen followed the students directly and soon found themselves somewhat trapped on the practice football field because it was surrounded by a fence. Yelling and rock throwing reached a peak as the Guard remained on the field for about ten minutes. Several Guardsmen could be seen huddling together, and some Guardsmen knelt and pointed their guns, but no weapons were shot at this time. The Guard then began retracing their steps from the practice football field back up Blanket Hill. As they arrived at the top of the hill, twenty-eight of the more than seventy Guardsmen turned suddenly and fired their rifles and pistols. Many guardsmen fired into the air or the ground. However, a small portion fired directly into the crowd. Altogether between 61 and 67 shots were fired in a 13 second period.


dept.kent.edu...

Point is, it has happened. With enough polarizing rhetoric, any government action against its people can be "justified"-- even by other Americans.


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 06:02 PM by DogHead
reply to post by BlueRaja


Also Raja, this survey may well be seeking to identify those who would answer "yes" to would you fire on your own...

So they can be thrown out of the service.


reply posted on 4-2-2008 @ 06:10 PM by SolPower
Originally posted by BlueRaja
reply to post by watchZEITGEISTnow


trained=brainwashed=BS.

The military doesn't teach people what to think. They do teach them that teamwork and unit cohesion are essential to mission success, and that requires discipline, not an automaton. You don't lose self identity, or the ability to think independantly. It's more like a sports team- you can't win a game with a bunch of individuals running around. You have to learn to work as a team. That doesn't mean that you stop thinking. Just that you aren't only thinking about yourself.


EXACTLY!
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^