It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Army patrols downton Samson AL after shooting spree

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by jefwane
 


This is actually in relpy to all of those who are speculating that they are national gaurdsmen.

In the like I posted earlier, there is a quote from Yahoo News photo attributed to Reuters. It specifically states that these men are Army from Fort Ruker.



This is a picture of the Solders gaurding the house with the bodies. It appears to be a different group and a different location than the picture embeded on this threat on page 2.

Neither I, nor anyone else is claiming that the actual solders have any malicious intent. We were just saying that who ever autherized this deployment on US streets is committing a federal crime, and we want to know the reason this is going on. Are they starting to condition us to military responses to law enforcement issues on US soil. If so, that is a BIG problem.

[edit on 11-3-2009 by finemanm]




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:31 PM
link   
I live in the northern half of bama. I understand that the gaurd or soldiers are there because they were called.

What I don't understand is where the sheriffs department is and the state police. Why did they step aside and not help in this police matter.

Why are the bodies still in the house is another question I have. This happened yesterday. I would think the bodies could of been removed before this.

I don't know how it is in the southern part of the state but here where I live you see a lot of strange activity with the military. Not only on land but even in the air.

I've only lived here for 3 years so maybe thats why I notice and everyone else thats been here forever seem to not think the things odd. They just shrug if you mention it and say well they employee lots of people around here.



[edit on 11-3-2009 by napayshni57]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


How can you tell they are not National Guard. I can not find anything to say one way or the other. Please post a link?

I have no problem agreeing that if they are regular Army they should not be there as it is the National Guards job. What I did find is that the National Guard wears identical uniforms, train and station at the same bases and unless you can see one patch on their arm, you do not know they are regular Army.

It seems that many are so quick to label everything they assume facts that are not known and then they are off to the races with it. How dishonest is that?

Simply posting proof they are not the National Guard would solve the dilemma. So post it? If you can not, you do not know yourself. If they turn out to be National Guard, which is likely the case, this whole thread is a waste of bandwidth.

All you can say right now is some men who may or may not be Army National Guard are helping a small community in need.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by pluckynoonez
 


For the life of me I can't remember in my civil war history a group of 10 or more slaves being killed in a wild killing spree by one person.

Maybe thats what the title meant.

I do remember a group of slaves following grant as he marched thinking he was going to save them and then he leaves them trapped between a river on one side of them and confederates on the other. So they tried to swim the river even though they didn't know how to swim. That didn't happen in Alabama though. It was also not brought on by Alabama either.

No one has forgotten slavery. Some of us are sick of people that don't want to let the wound heal and the people united as one. People that only know slavery from watching roots and government issued school books. The south was not the only ones that had slaves.

Also remember because one parent is a child abuser it doesn't make all parents child abusers...the same goes with slave owners. Do not judge the actions of some as the actions of all.

Looking at it this way then if the number of people dying over a period of time by a certain type source such as white people then I would say maybe monsantos chemical toxic dump would beat even the slavery deaths here in Alabama.

So I shall assume it meant by one individual or more in one event.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Blaine91555
 


Here, I have copied and pasted the link to the Reuters photo and the caption below it stating:




U.S. Army soldiers from Ft. Ruker guard a home with five bodies inside as investigators search for clues in Samson, Alabama, March 11, 2009. A gunman on the rampage killed at least eleven people in several different locations. Geneva County Sheriff Greg Ward said the eleven people, including the suspected gunman, were killed in the shooting spree and car chase in southern Alabama March 10, 2009. REUTERS/Mark Wallheiser (UNITED STATES)


This is the link, the only way I can get it to work is to paste it here. You are going to have to copy and paste into your browser's address bar to open the link. For some reason, if I try to hyperlink it using the commands for this forum, it redirects to a 404 page not found document.

"http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/Ala-Shooting-car-chase/ss/events/us/031109alabamashootin/im:/090311/ids_photos_ts/r1211985247.jpg/print"

So, I can only know what I am told as I do not live in Alabama; however, if Reuters says that they are Army from Fort Ruker, I have no reason not to accept that.

What I don't accept is the fact that as the time passes, it has become harder and harder to find any mention of the Army's involvement in securing a crime scene and patroling the streets (both law enforcement functions).



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by finemanm
reply to post by jefwane
 


This is actually in relpy to all of those who are speculating that they are national gaurdsmen.

In the like I posted earlier, there is a quote from Yahoo News photo attributed to Reuters. It specifically states that these men are Army from Fort Ruker.



This is a picture of the Solders gaurding the house with the bodies. It appears to be a different group and a different location than the picture embeded on this threat on page 2.

Neither I, nor anyone else is claiming that the actual solders have any malicious intent. We were just saying that who ever autherized this deployment on US streets is committing a federal crime, and we want to know the reason this is going on. Are they starting to condition us to military responses to law enforcement issues on US soil. If so, that is a BIG problem.

[edit on 11-3-2009 by finemanm]


Just because they're at Fort Rucker doesn't mean they're not National Guard. I drill at Ft. MacPherson, which houses US FORSCOM. Ft. Gillem, which houses the 221st MI BN under me, holds the Army's only crime lab. They are both heavily Active Duty bases, but they also hold both "Normal" Army Guard drills and have "Active Guard" positions (Active Guard is just like Regular Army, except they're not under federal control, they're under the control of the state.) Ft. Stewart in Savannah is the same way. They're home to the 3rd Infantry Division, no doubt an Active Duty unit. However, there are Guard MP units on the base.

There is nothing that defines one base as "regular army" and one as "Guard." We're not the Air Force.

As I said, they are most likely Guard troops. There is nothing to point to the fact they aren't. Show me a unit patch, and then I'll believe you.

edit: There seems to be some confusion about the difference between Regular Army and National Guard. The "Army" is all-encompassing. It includes Guard, Reserves, and Regulars. There is Active Reserve, there is Active Guard, and there are Active Regulars. Reserve and Guard also have the traditional "one weekend a month, two weeks a year" deal going. The only difference is that one is a full-time job, and one is just that - one weekend a month.

The Army and Army Reserves are both federally controlled. They are "property" of the US Government at all times. They cannot act on US soil unless martial law is declared, under the Posse Comitatus act.

The National Guard is state-controlled. The NG units answer to the governor. They CAN be federally activated, which then lumps them in with RA and AR, but that still only applies to that specific unit. There is such thing as a "state callup" which is when the guard unit is activated for the state, in such an event as a natural disaster or public upheaval.

This being said, they are still all under the Department of the Army, NG, AR, and RA are all considered "Army Soldiers."

[edit on 11-3-2009 by Highground]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Highground
 


I'm not asking you to believe me. The only personal stake I have in this is that I am concerned that there is even the possibility that the US Army could slowly but surely begin to be deployed on US streets in an event that the government deems appropriate.

Its these little infringments upon the constitution that begin to add up until there is no more constitution and we live in a police state. We went a long way towards lossing our civil liberties during the last administration. Although I didn't vote for Obama, and I don't particularly like his socialist agenda, I had hoped that he would at least swing the pendulum back in the direction of more civil liberties compared to Bush.

Here, read this:




The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.

Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.


source

You got to admit, the Government is looking for all sorts of ways to deploy active duty military on US soil lately!


[edit on 11-3-2009 by finemanm]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by finemanm
reply to post by Highground
 


I'm not asking you to believe me. The only personal stake I have in this is that I am concerned that there is even the possibility that the US Army could slowly but surely begin to be deployed on US streets in an event that the government deems appropriate.

Its these little infringments upon the constitution that begin to add up until there is no more constitution and we live in a police state. We went a long way towards lossing our civil liberties during the last administration. Although I didn't vote for Obama, and I don't particularly like his socialist agenda, I had hoped that he would at least swing the pendulum back in the direction of more civil liberties compared to Bush.

Here, read this:




The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.

Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.

Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.


source

You got to admit, the Government is looking for all sorts of ways to deploy active duty military on US soil lately!


[edit on 11-3-2009 by finemanm]


Yep, that's under Op Garden Plot. I'm not saying it's right for our rights to be taken away, I agree, there's a reason the Posse Comitatus Act was put into place - I just don't feel it was abused here. If it was in the middle of a metropolis where there is a clearly booming police force and a sheriff's department to boot, then yeah, it'd be overkill, but I think this was something new to the locality, and they simply weren't prepared.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Highground
 


I gave you a star because you are willing to stick to your position without getting nasty. I noticed that this could be an issue on this board.


But, I still believe that if the local Police Department needed assistance (which I don't think is the case since the incident had ended), they could have, and should have requested assistance from State Police.

Its not like this was a national emergancy. It was a horrible crime carried out by a truely disturbed person, but that person turned his gun on himself; thus ending the threat.

Maybe there is more to the story that they are not telling us in relation to the necessity for military involvement. Maybe there is more to this beneath the surface.


[edit on 11-3-2009 by finemanm]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   
They are not supposed to deploy military on the street, especially after this crime, in where the gunman killed himself. The threat is terminated. The community is grieving.

The police are supposed to have predesignated citizens ready to take up any emergency responsibilities in the event of any loss in police numbers, I think.

I think its just a byproduct of the post 9/11 world, Where the military gained greater powers, and replaced any old school models where the police could outsource from the citizenry and replaced it with a more militaristic model.

I wonder how many military were deployed, 5, 10, 100?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by finemanm
reply to post by Highground
 


I gave you a star because you are willing to stick to your position without getting nasty. I noticed that this could be an issue on this board.


But, I still believe that if the local Police Department needed assistance (which I don't think is the case since the incident had ended), they could have, and should have requested assistance from State Police.

Its not like this was a national emergancy. It was a horrible crime carried out by a truely disturbed person, but that person turned his gun on himself; thus ending the threat.

Maybe there is more to the story that they are not telling us in relation to the necessity for military involvement. Maybe there is more to this beneath the surface.


[edit on 11-3-2009 by finemanm]


That is true. My first thoughts would be that there may not have been an abundance of state police available, but as I said, they're on top of a military post, so they use that instead. You could be right they're hiding something more, as seems to be the case when military is called out for hokey reasons; that would not surprise me at all. I think it all depends really on if they're Guard or not and I don't think anyone here can rightly make that call.

I was just getting irritated with the misinformation about what the Army "can" and "cannot" do. I generally lurk, but when I see something that needs correcting, I try to step in. Cheers, I'll return the star since you seem to display the same "not taking it so personal" debate stance that is not so common today.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The picture in the link is just fine and loads just fine. Turn off your pop-up blocker and the link takes you to that exact picture.

As I stated...When ... I ... pull up this link and go to picture 5...It is half gray...EVERY other picture is fine...Out of the...eleven...pictures...(MSNBC link)

www.msnbc.msn.com...

In case it doesn't take you directly to the picture scroll down and on the right it will say ...slide show...Go to picture 5...It may just be ...My...computer...But...It is ...Only...picture 5 doing that..That was my point...

I just checked and the Alabama Army National Guard wears normal Army Uniforms with the same insignia's and train at the same facilities. There is no way to tell from that picture if those are regulars or National Guard.

If they are National Guard, helping out in that manner is normal. People should find out before you start screaming.

They are not patroling the streets or enforcing the law. They were just guarding a house with five bodies inside to free up the Police to do their job. Ooooh, evil men lending a hand in time of need.


Refer back to the same photo...One more time...In the upper right hand corner...It says "ARMY SOLDIERS from Ft. Rucker PATROL THE DOWNTOWN AREA of Samson Ala. OVERNIGHT after the shooting spree"...
Word for word...

Now in this link the picture shows up clear...From...Reuters...

www.daylife.com...

But...As I said like the last picture...In the upper right hand corner...It states the same thing...ARMY SOLDIERS...PATROL the downtown area...

Maybe you were looking at a different picture than the one I was talking about...But...It does say Army Soldiers Patrol...downtown streets...In 2 pictures...

This link is from yahoo news...

news.yahoo.com...=/090311/ids_photos_ts/r1211985247.jpg

They have 70 pictures...some are 2 or 3 of the same picture repeated...But picture 52 says that...U.S. Army Soldiers guard home with bodies on March 11th...

So I guess they guarded and patrolled downtown on March 10th 2009...Then guarded the house with bodies on March 11th 2009...

I see from the posts, some of you appear to have never lived in a small town?

I live in a small town...Half my family is from Really small town...One red light...or you blink and your in another town...lol...

I understand country ways...With all that is going on...Just seems the military is being used more and more though...That is my main point...

We are being conditioned...In my Opinion...


[edit on 3/11/2009 by Blaine91555]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:01 AM
link   
It ...Was...AMY SOLDIERS...

Look at the post I made just above this one...It says Army Soldiers in 2 of the photos...Follow the links and read the captions on the photos...

I am not being crabby...Just trying to Prove our point...

They were patrolling the streets March 10th 2009...Downtown...
Then on March 11th 2009 they were guarding the house...
They were there for quite a while...

I also do not like when people get so mean on these posts...Which I see very often...

They will even make ugly personal attacks...


Which is not nice at all...



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by sapphirearaidia
It ...Was...AMY SOLDIERS...

Look at the post I made just above this one...It says Army Soldiers in 2 of the photos...Follow the links and read the captions on the photos...

I am not being crabby...Just trying to Prove our point...

They were patrolling the streets March 10th 2009...Downtown...
Then on March 11th 2009 they were guarding the house...
They were there for quite a while...

I also do not like when people get so mean on these posts...Which I see very often...

They will even make ugly personal attacks...


Which is not nice at all...


Just because they're ARMY doesn't mean they're not NATIONAL GUARD. NATIONAL GUARD = ARMY. If you read any of my posts, I've made this point inherently clear.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Highground
 


I have read... EVERY... post on this thread...
No need to be hateful...
I just in my last post stated... no need to get hateful...
Why do people get so bent out of shape over something so small...???

Just in the photos it says...U.S. Army Soldiers...
NOT...National Guard...
It just seems that they should have specified...If that was the case...



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by sapphirearaidia
 


First of all the media likes to sensationalize every thing. So they report that the Army not the Army National Guard are patrolling the streets. Army doing it is illegal, cause more of a buzz. That's just my opinion of course.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
This is my last post on here tonight...(then I am off to bed)

Then I will check in...In the morning...
I would just like to know for sure myself if they were guard or regular army...

But...Back on page 4 of this thread a lady posted and said her husband was one of the MP's on the job all night last ...Her User name is ...jj8607...
She is a little past half way on the page...

Being a MP...I don't know if that would be guard or army...???

Still my biggest point is ...I feel that our military is being used more and more often...For police jobs...

I have children and a grand baby...I just hate for them to grow up with Soldiers marching around town as a every day thing...
That is my greatest fear...



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 12:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by sapphirearaidia
This is my last post on here tonight...(then I am off to bed)

Then I will check in...In the morning...
I would just like to know for sure myself if they were guard or regular army...

But...Back on page 4 of this thread a lady posted and said her husband was one of the MP's on the job all night last ...Her User name is ...jj8607...
She is a little past half way on the page...

Being a MP...I don't know if that would be guard or army...???

Still my biggest point is ...I feel that our military is being used more and more often...For police jobs...

I have children and a grand baby...I just hate for them to grow up with Soldiers marching around town as a every day thing...
That is my greatest fear...


There are National Guard MPs and Regular Army MPs, as I have stated before.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 01:30 AM
link   
I notice several posters suggested a variety of possibilities for the blank, mindless expression on the killer's face. I'll add one more - SSRI. Prescription medications for depression that turn people into psychotic killers. This is severly under-reported because many stations have a "policy" to not report suicides ... and some include murder/suicides in that policy.

The reason I suspect SSRI is the blank face. A 12 year old boy on SSRI killed his family and burned down the house. He remembered doing it; but, said it was like he was "watching himself do it" and that he was unable to stop THAT person he was watching.

Now, back on topic ... there was a poster a few nights ago who described that SAME uniform! I can't remember the thread title; but, it was about military in his town and since he had no pictures ... people lambasted him (or her).

In fact, there's been a handful of threads about military presence in cities or towns this past week alone.

Do they ALL have that same uniform?

If I lived there, I think I would feel more at ease having the military patroling after such a shocking local event. For a few days that is, after that, I'd start writing my congressman.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Z.S.P.V.G.
 
MOST DEFINITELY ARE PREPARED FOR THE DEFENSE OF FAMILY AND LOVED ONES AGAINST INDIVIDUALS PROGRAMMED TO BE NUMB FROM MEDICATIONS ADMINISTERED LIKE CANDY TO INDIVIDUALS, AND THE MILITARY HAS NO JURISDICTION ON ANY STREET IN ANY TOWN IN UNITED STATES THERE IS NO OPERATIONAL CHARTER FOR IT, GO ON YOU WAY, BE PREPARED TO STAND YOUR GROUND, BECAUSE IT WILL START SHOWING UP ON OUR STREETS BECAUSE THE ADMINISTRATION FEELS THEY ARE JUST GOING TO DO IT TILL AND IN THE HOPES OF PEOPLE ACTING OUT AGAINST IT, SEEMS LIKE SOMEONE NEEDS TO CONTACT THEIR LOCAL REPRESENTATIVES




new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join