US Warns It Cannot Guard Arizona Section of Border

page: 2
88
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 





Arizona nor New Mexico has a State Defense Force.

....Nor do they need one.
From the militia act of 1903:


In return for the increased Federal funding which the act made available, militia units were subject to inspection by Regular Army officers, and had to meet certain standards.


You see, if you have arms (weapons) and both the means and will to use them, coupled with good leadership, then Congratulations! You ARE the militia!




posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
This sounds like a good area to go "deer hunting" in, although I would be worried about hitting drug dealers


It is shame that this is happening I expect we will see quite a few reports of vigilantism in this area.

Secure



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   
A well maintained and regulated militia.

Basically you can't have one based on volunteers.
in order to have a militia that's maintained and well regulated would mean that it was your primary job.

Now blackwater could well be defined as a well maintained and regulated militia.

i'm surprised that we don't have some rich guys maintaining well regulated militia's. maybe even some senators like they did back in rome.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 


I respectfully disagree. A militia does not need to be a large force, in fact I think smaller, more cohesive units would be more efficient. All that would be needed is an agreed upon structure, that could even be based around existing authority figures in the community. I think mercenary groups such as black water, are Exactly what our government WANTS us to call upon, thereby becoming reliant on "private security firms" when the one thing they fear the most is an intelligent, armed, cohesive, FREE people.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   
well to hell with fed . this goes out to arizona governor call up a state wide militia contact heckler and koch in va ask for 1000 hk416 or 417 for law enforcement . set up rifle squads to the border with orders to detain any peaceful crossers to deport but if fired upon to retaliate in kind and if they can't call in air national guard for fire support. then send bill to fed for not doing its job. really they decided not to patrol that border was because arizona's law made them look stupid and this is just how they getting back at them. next thing you hear will be fedralies declaring war with state of az



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:37 AM
link   
What ever happened to Jim Gilchrist's Minute Men? They were doing a great job on the border. Arizona also has many Posse Organizations around the state. I'm surprised that non of these guys have come forward if not only just to have huge protest.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:47 AM
link   
jam321 offers some more info as to the why in this thread:

Arizona- Federal Land/Cartel Research



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:51 AM
link   
As a proud Arizonan, I can tell you that it is a little disconcerting to read this. A person came into the store I work at yesterday and I asked her about this situation. She looked at me and said "what situation, I live in Tucson and I haven't heard anything about it." I'm up in the High Country and know she had to drive through this zone to get here. We are all watching this.

saxony



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by blood0fheroes
reply to post by grey580
 


I respectfully disagree. A militia does not need to be a large force, in fact I think smaller, more cohesive units would be more efficient. All that would be needed is an agreed upon structure, that could even be based around existing authority figures in the community. I think mercenary groups such as black water, are Exactly what our government WANTS us to call upon, thereby becoming reliant on "private security firms" when the one thing they fear the most is an intelligent, armed, cohesive, FREE people.


I didn't necessarily mean that a militia had to be a large army.
militia's could be any size. and the nice thing would be that you could specialize. you could have a militia that was just special ops. another could be just a police force. another could be a specialized noc militia.
anything.

the main point i was trying to make. That in order to have a well regulated and maintained militia means that the people in that militia basically can't do anything else other than what they are trained to do. ie no weekend warriors.

i'm thinking that there's plenty of ex soldiers in this country that could be hired by milita's and put to use defending states.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
My letter to Senator McCain. Copy to Governor Brewer.

Dear Sir, I am appalled at the news that this sovereign state of Arizona has allowed the federal government to close Arizona land to the public due to Mexican caused violence!
They expect us citizens to stay away while they allow another country to breach our borders? I say we are in full right to seize the property by use of eminent domain. Recruit some of our 600,000 jobless men and women and train them to be militia to guard our border. Charge the federal government for all costs. You sir should be Commander and Chief of this militia. Please react.
What Texas won at the Alamo the inept President of the US is giving away in Arizona!

I hope he views this as an opportunity to help his re-election and takes action.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:05 PM
link   

This is incredible! We seem to have the ability to "police" the world, yet we don't have the ability to protect our own border. I doubt that we don't have the ability so much as we don't want to stop the illegals from entering our country to benefit corporate interests. This is a sham.


Maybe you should ask yourself why that area is off limit and gotten out of control.

The reason is that for the most part, border patrol is not allowed on federal land for fear of harming the environment.

I understand that the illegals and smugglers are damaging the same environment, but it is just another example of government policy that has failed us.

Many people are still intent on blaming illegals and Mexico for the problem.

But I ask, if our government did its job and allowed border patrol and other law agencies to work in this area, do you really believe the problem would be as big as it is now?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 

By and large it seems we see eye to eye. Personally though im of the opinion that the local population would be better suited to the task. They would be more readily available, and more intense in the defense of their home. The logistics really wouldnt be that hard either. From field workers to desk jockeys, anyone could be away from their normal work for 48 hours, once or twice a month. Especially if there can be a mutual fund set up, possibly by the state, to fund them. Plus, a volunteer force means they want to be there.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by awakentired
 


Nice letter.


More people should write similar letters!

As for some of the other responses, a SDF is voluntary. They are not full-time military personnel. They are small units, Missouri's is organized in 4 man units, then 2 unit commands, and then on up the chain.

Yes, this would be a terrific place to go "deer" hunting. It would be a shame if you were in a National park doing lawful activities, and you had to "defend yourself" against known criminals. Just a shame. Be careful though, because they are likely better armed, with more people, and daily combat experience. These cartels are not weekend warriors, they are full-time criminals and they have seen a lot more shooting than you have.

Posts staggered near the border and away from the border at 1 mile intervals with constant communication and air support would surely secure this entire area. 4 man teams at 1 mile intervals and at the very least you could have cameras on balloons overlooking the area, although police choppers with infrared vision would be much better. In the event of someone coming into view, several outposts could convene on the area to give you a force of 12 to 24 within a couple of minutes! Local law enforcement would respond to any distress calls, and you should be able to overcome even a large cartel incursion! We are talking 300 men, not 3000, and we are talking 2 helicopters at most.

If the incursions continued more than a time or two, or the fighting escalated, then the force should be bolstered and the invading parties should be pursued back to where it came from and destroyed at all costs!

That is border protection! That is how the entire Southern and Northern border should be protected!!



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Starting to sound like what I expected,sounds like the borders will be a thing of the past,welcome in Nafta good bye America



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


Exactly; and an excellent thread you started there.

To which I reiterate my previous point: If the feds Wont, and the state Cant, then the People are left with few options....none of them pretty.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Another element in the story worth considering:

The military industrial complex is lobbying hard to get permission to use unmanned drones (as surveillance and attack platforms) within US borders.

What more convenient excuse than "We cant do it otherwise."?

In effect, the imprudent authors of the statement have essentially declared that part of Arizona has been effectively 'lost' to foreign criminals. And there's some doubt about 'how to proceed'? Really?

Most of the community at ATS are aware that there is a non sequitor aspect of this story. There are those whose mandate demands they take immediate and conclusive action... can we really be so naive as to think they can somehow 'excuse' themselves from doing so - and that's OK?

I fear that any action taken by citizens will only fuel the fires of the well publicized and imaginary domestic terror threat from American citizens who have had enough of their nonsense,



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:21 PM
link   

This happened in 2006!





The closed off area stretches 80 miles along the border and includes part of the Buenos Aires National Wildlife Refuge. It was closed in October 2006 "due to human safety concerns," the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said Wednesday in response to news reports on the closure.


FOX News

Apparently NewsMax didn't think that was an important piece of information.

It's interesting how this is JUST NOW becoming "news" seeing as how illegal immigration is such a hot-button issue. They're reporting it like it's "News" four years after the fact!



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


Yes, 2006 and I pointed that out in other threads. They also didn't point out the interagency dispute between Department of Interior and DHS.

Border patrol is limited when it comes to patrolling Federal lands due to envronmental reasons.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Now isn't this special?

We get all worked up over AZs laws governing illegal immigration, the Feds go on a propaganda spree, and now this.

If the federal government weren't so busy wasting our money in foreign entanglements and clandestine action we'd have the man power and money to get this and more done.



posted on Jun, 17 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 



I fear that any action taken by citizens will only fuel the fires of the well publicized and imaginary domestic terror threat from American citizens who have had enough of their nonsense,


I believe your fear could soon be a reality.

Maybe this is just part of the plan.






top topics



 
88
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join