Inside the Ring: Memo outlines Obama’s plan to use the military against citizens

I call reading about the 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.” But forgot about it till I read this.

www.washingtontimes.com...

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 dow

www.washingtontimes.com...

edit on 29-5-2014 by nighthawk1954 because: (no reason given)

a reply to: nighthawk1954

Sorry, but a "directive" doesn't supersede the Posse Comitatus Act, which has not been repealed as far as I know.

Any use of the military against US citizens is illegal.

a reply to: nighthawk1954
The Bundy family lawsuit is targeting restoring States Rights in property dealings AND restoration of US Constitution in-full.

"For the people" - Cliven Bundy

A legal dream team especially has this "law" in their crosshairs...they are "pro bono" because of history about to be made.

Also Constitutional Sheriff's training is accelerating in US, Canada especially in Midwest.
"Stand-down" orders are being issued in Canada and listened/taken seriously by RMP.

All part of the Obama master plan.

Many "Government" agencies that are "armed" are also exempt from Posse Comitatus

The Coast Guard, DHS, etc. etc. are exempt.

And Obama himself says we need a "Civilian" Security Force.

Obama Civilian Security

Is Obama planning to have a Civilian Security Force in addition to the military?

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit
a reply to: nighthawk1954

Sorry, but a "directive" doesn't supersede the Posse Comitatus Act, which has not been repealed as far as I know.

Any use of the military against US citizens is illegal.

Unfortunately it didn't slow them down one bit when it came to the Branch Davidians. Not only did I know someone that was there, he tells me the SAS was there as well. And for Bundy it looked to me like Blackwater was there as well, but that doesn't violate the Posse Comitatus Act.

Didn't I hear something to the effect in Obama's speech to the West Point Grads they could be used civilly? I did a double take but don;t know if I heard it right I was working during the speech.

a reply to: xuenchen

He left off, "and is willing to fire upon anyone deemed a target regardless of the circumstances..."

The emperor is lining things up for his clone army...

People should know by now that their "Leader: cares nothing about laws nor the constitution and even less about the people. He has shown this many times.

If he ordered the military into the streets it will be done and that's it. He knows this as well.

America must get rid of this maniac asap but unfortunately the next will be even worse.

Peace

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

I agree! But with this nut job in White house... to me...anything is possible. He has gotten away with so much already!

This is going to be a little class in how military directives and plans are written. If it is the original document it will end with .1 the first time it is updated it will become .12 then .13 etc. So what does this tell you about DoD Directive 3025.18 from 2010? Well it tells you that is an update, the 7th such update to document called DoD Directive 3025.1 that was created in 1993 DOD DIRECTIVE 3025.1 1993. Of course this was a new Directive the replaced several old ones that in essence are all the same.

The second part of this lesson is that DoD Directive 3025.12, DoD Directive 3025.13, DoD Directive 3025.14, DoD Directive 3025.15, DoD Directive 3025.16, DoD Directive 3025.17 and lastly DoD Directive 3025.18 are all updates to the original directive from 1993. They are rountinely updated by every new Presidents administration for verbage and organizational changes. They are also all available for public viewing online so you see any changes made and exactly what they say.

Lesson number three is these are Department of Defense Directives. They are created by the DoD and signed by the Secretary of Defense not the President.

So now what do we know about DoD Directive 3025.18? That it is the 7th update to a directive written during the Clinton Administration. It has been updated 7 times since then. And that no President including Obama signs it.

Now you know, and knowing is half the battle.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: xuenchen

He left off, "and is willing to fire upon anyone deemed a target regardless of the circumstances..."

The emperor is lining things up for his clone army...

Maybe you should read the directive it says right in it that civilians will not be subject to military force.

Department of Defense DIRECTIVE

A Federal military c ommander’s , DoD Component Head’s, and/or responsible DoD civilian official’s authority temporarily to employ resources under their control, subject to any supplemental direction provided by higher headquarters, and provide those resources to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate great property damage in response to a request for assistance from a civil authority, under imminently serious conditions when time does not permit approval from a higher authority within the United States. Immediate response authority does not permit actions that would subject civilians to the use of military power that is regulatory, prescriptive, proscriptive, or compulsory.

a reply to: buster2010

Maybe you should read the directive it says right in it that civilians will not be subject to military force.

Does that mean these are no longer in effect? ....

ref Posse Comitatus;

There are a number of situations in which the Act does not apply. These include:

National Guard units and state defense forces while under the authority of the governor of a state;

Troops used under the order of the President of the United States pursuant to the Insurrection Act, as was the case during the 1992 Los Angeles Riots.

Under 18 U.S.C. § 831, the Attorney General may request that the Secretary of Defense provide emergency assistance if civilian law enforcement is inadequate to address certain types of threats involving the release of nuclear materials, such as potential use of a nuclear or radiological weapon. Such assistance may be by any personnel under the authority of the Department of Defense, provided such assistance does not adversely affect U.S. military preparedness. The only exemption is nuclear materials.

Support roles under the Joint Special Operations Command


Exclusion applicable to U.S. Coast Guard

See the Law Enforcement Detachments and Missions of the United States Coast Guard for more information on U.S. Coast Guard law enforcement activities.

Although it is a military force, the U.S. Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security, is not restricted by the Posse Comitatus Act. The Coast Guard enforces federal laws within its jurisdiction, even when operating as a service for the U.S. Navy. ...............

Posse Comitatus Exclusions and limitations

Ah ha! But what happens when a citizen is deemed a terrorist and denationalized under the Patriot Act?

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit
a reply to: nighthawk1954

Sorry, but a "directive" doesn't supersede the Posse Comitatus Act, which has not been repealed as far as I know.

Any use of the military against US citizens is illegal.

US CODE TITLE 50 > CHAPTER 32 > § 1520a.
Restrictions on use of human subjects for testing of chemical or biological agents.

(a) Prohibited activities
(1) any test or experiment involving the use of a chemical agent or biological agent on a civilian population; or
(2) any other testing of a chemical agent or biological agent on human subjects.

(b)Exceptions: The prohibition in subsection (a) of this section does not apply to a test or experiment carried out for any of the following purposes:

(1) Any peaceful purpose that is related to a medical, therapeutic, pharmaceutical, agricultural, industrial, or research activity.
(2) Any purpose that is directly related to protection against toxic chemicals or biological weapons and agents.
(3) Any law enforcement purpose, including any purpose related to riot control.

(e) “Biological agent” defined
In this section, the term “biological agent” means any micro-organism (including bacteria, viruses, fungi, rickettsiac, or protozoa), pathogen, or infectious substance, and any naturally occurring, bioengineered, or synthesized component of any such micro-organism, pathogen, or infectious substance, whatever its origin or method of production, that is capable of causing—
(1) death, disease, or other biological malfunction in a human, an animal, a plant, or another living organism;
(2) deterioration of food, water, equipment, supplies, or materials of any kind; or
(3) deleterious alteration of the environment.

www.law.cornell.edu...

originally posted by: ScientiaFortisDefendit
a reply to: nighthawk1954

Sorry, but a "directive" doesn't supersede the Posse Comitatus Act, which has not been repealed as far as I know.

Any use of the military against US citizens is illegal.

kent state.

originally posted by: LeddHead
Ah ha! But what happens when a citizen is deemed a terrorist and denationalized under the Patriot Act?

Thats when you fall under the NDAA act and can be held as long as they want without due process. That little 9 letter word owned, described, and applied, by the US federal government.

originally posted by: MarlinGrace

originally posted by: LeddHead
Ah ha! But what happens when a citizen is deemed a terrorist and denationalized under the Patriot Act?

Thats when you fall under the NDAA act and can be held as long as they want without due process. That little 9 letter word owned, described, and applied, by the US federal government.

Tyranny, at its purest.

And we let them do it.

Since when does Obama follows any laws. U can't stop them because Democrats will defend them to the death.

THe only way is for Republicans to take the senate and they would have the ability to impeach him if he steps over the line.