OC for ME
Regular Member
Even the Missouri MIAC did not go this far. Apologized to the environmental wackos but not to law abiding citizens.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Ohio National Guard Training Envisions Right-Wing Terrorism
- Thread starter OC for ME
- Start date
davidmcbeth
Banned
This does not surprise me at all ... the military have been training for trouncing citizens since 2006 at least.
I do not view the military as protecting our rights any more and have not for a long time.
I do not view the military as protecting our rights any more and have not for a long time.
Last edited:
I would think that the Facists in various parts of the Government would use State National Guard in other parts of the country - like use Ohio guard to suppress citizens of KY or MD, and say WV against Ohioans or Indianans. Don't know whether guardsman Ohio would be hung-ho for another Kent State, but this time doing the bidding of the anarchists against everyday folks protecting their homes and families.
I still say we know where the soldiers/police/TSA people live, their families and as such there will be consequences if they violate our rights and lives. Look up MA Lt Gov Tom Hutchison when he supported King George over the Sons of Liberty and the Stamp Act.
I still say we know where the soldiers/police/TSA people live, their families and as such there will be consequences if they violate our rights and lives. Look up MA Lt Gov Tom Hutchison when he supported King George over the Sons of Liberty and the Stamp Act.
Fuller Malarkey
Regular Member
I wonder if much of the "zeal" of participating in sanctioned invasions by government thugs would be dampened if the thugs involved had to worry that the compadres of those they were hunting down like animals were in fact closing in on the thug's digs. Tit for tat.
I suspect the voiced discontent from the Mundanes is what is behind a lot of the dispensing of vehicles of war and the arming of police with weapons of war to replace their tools of keeping the peace is to discourage a gathering of the Mundanes the next time the Occupiers throw another Ruby Ridge or Waco.
I suspect the voiced discontent from the Mundanes is what is behind a lot of the dispensing of vehicles of war and the arming of police with weapons of war to replace their tools of keeping the peace is to discourage a gathering of the Mundanes the next time the Occupiers throw another Ruby Ridge or Waco.
davidmcbeth
Banned
None of this is unexpected, right?
Running Wolf
Campaign Veteran
The scenario was that these "Second Amendment supporters with 'anti-government' opinions" had used biological weapons. At that point they have become domestic terrorists, regardless of whether their belief system is similar to mine or not.
The ONG is practicing responding to actions, not beliefs.
The ONG is practicing responding to actions, not beliefs.
Primus
Regular Member
Running Wolf
Campaign Veteran
Another thought:
If the ONG had used PETA/Green peace members as the offending party would that have been any less offensive?
If the ONG had used PETA/Green peace members as the offending party would that have been any less offensive?
Rusty Young Man
Regular Member
Did they say, in their scenario, who attacked first?
Eeyore
Regular Member
Overblown
+1. It's normal practice for disaster prep drills: create a scenario that plays out, including a back story to provide associated "intelligence inputs" to keep the scenario moving and developing. Sometimes it's a natural disaster, sometimes a plane crash, and sometimes a terrorist attack. They're not demonizing anybody, they're trying to develop as reasonable a scenario as possible that drives them to respond with whatever functions the exercise is intended to evaluate.
It'd be hard for everybody to take the exercise seriously if the scenario was a troop of Girl Scouts infiltrating the base pushing rancid cookies, alien invasion, or the ever-popular zombie apocolypse. The Soviets are long gone, and despite all the hype about al Qaeda, it's not necessarily believable to have them behind every attack in the CONUS. When I was on the exercise team, scenarios we cooked up involved disgruntled former employees shooting up the place (this was years before the Navy Yard shooting), neo-Nazi militia cells firing on our aircraft (thinking our low-flying planes were spying on them), a contractor hijacking an airplane, etc. I've heard of scenarios where peace activists chain themselves to perimeter fences, and where Earth First-type eco-hooligans were the bad guys.
Everybody with a potential axe to grind gets their turn to be the Bad Guy eventually. Chill.
+1. It's normal practice for disaster prep drills: create a scenario that plays out, including a back story to provide associated "intelligence inputs" to keep the scenario moving and developing. Sometimes it's a natural disaster, sometimes a plane crash, and sometimes a terrorist attack. They're not demonizing anybody, they're trying to develop as reasonable a scenario as possible that drives them to respond with whatever functions the exercise is intended to evaluate.
It'd be hard for everybody to take the exercise seriously if the scenario was a troop of Girl Scouts infiltrating the base pushing rancid cookies, alien invasion, or the ever-popular zombie apocolypse. The Soviets are long gone, and despite all the hype about al Qaeda, it's not necessarily believable to have them behind every attack in the CONUS. When I was on the exercise team, scenarios we cooked up involved disgruntled former employees shooting up the place (this was years before the Navy Yard shooting), neo-Nazi militia cells firing on our aircraft (thinking our low-flying planes were spying on them), a contractor hijacking an airplane, etc. I've heard of scenarios where peace activists chain themselves to perimeter fences, and where Earth First-type eco-hooligans were the bad guys.
Everybody with a potential axe to grind gets their turn to be the Bad Guy eventually. Chill.
Last edited:
JoeSparky
Centurion
I do seem to vaguely remember some OHIO NATIONAL GUARDSMEN that fired on and killed some college kids during a protest at a University. This use does concern me.
JoeSparky
Centurion
NOT one bit!
Running Wolf
Campaign Veteran
I agree completely. Any exercises that result in desensitizing the NG, or LEA, to firing upon US citizens, even if unintentional, should be removed. The intentional desensitization should be removed with "extreme prejudice."
Citizen
Founder's Club Member
The proof is in the alternative. They could have assigned any ideologic motivation to the mock terrorists.
This is too easy. How about just anti-government terrorists? How about former federal official trying to break away a part of the state (actual case--look up Aaron Burr, the guy who killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel)? How about anti-social cultists like that bunch in Japan a few years ago that spread poison gas on a subway?
See? In under a minute I thunk up three alternatives they could have used. How many could they think up in ten minutes?
DrakeZ07
Regular Member
1. It's spelled 'fascists'.
2. So, if a member of the government, be they a Solder, LEO, or other fedgov/stategov agent was to follow orders, to suppress a rebellion, or quell a terrorist action, involving U.S. citizens as the OPFOR, then you'd advocate we the people find where the Gov't members live, and hurt them, or their families? Oh, yea, that's really freedom and liberty-inspired! Did you take a page from North Korea's policy of harming/imprisoning/killing 'traitors' and their families, up to three generations, and chalk it up to the 'consequences'? You're starting to sound less like a typical Military worshiping American, and more like a "let's kill people at-will because they're related to traitors!" type of person.
Not helping the stereotype that Gun owners are just a news column away from going off the deep end, and bringing a few people along with them.
What if, and this is a hypothetical, you're cousin who lived down the street was a Nat'l Guardsman/woman, who was in a platoon, sent to quell a group of 2A supporters that got too rowdy for local police to handle. How would you felt if the whole thing escalated into a riot, and the Guardsmen/women, and police lost temporary control of the area/city/county/whatever, and the loons started going to the homes of the family members of the people in the police/military, and beating the crap out of them, or tar and feathering them, or making them pay the consequences of being related to someone else who may or may not be acting in a traitorous way. What then? You may fire on the people trying to break in, or if you had no gun, you might flee or stay and fight, but lets say they did capture you, and poised to execute or seriously harm you. Would your harm/death be justified? According to what you said, yes, it would be justified, because the family could very well be punished for the actions of a family member, lawfully or unlawfully acting under orders of the Government/Superior officers.
Whatever happened to free association, and the protections we have in our laws, and constitution, that got rid of 'cruel and unusual punishment'? I suppose the constitution/laws that restrict cruelty and rights violations only apply to the government, and not to ordinary people.
I don't mean to take the side of the Government, or the side of anyone in general, but, HPMatt, do you even think before you speak? Have you never read the forum rules? There is no, no, NO advocating or promoting of illegal stuff on the forum. Suggesting, even in the slightest, that we should mete out consequences to the families, or the people themselves acting under orders by U.S. government, is advocating, and suggestion something illegal. And you forget, a traitor by definition, is someone who rebels, aids, or otherwise supports actions taking against a nation, or government; With modern usage, and phrasing, a traitor would be you, or me, or anyone who defies the Government with open hostility. So, with the twisting of the law done by Government on a daily basis, legally the orders given to quell an insurrection or a U.S. Citizen group, would be a legal order, and harming someone for following a lawful order [remember, we're going under the guise that government twists things for themselves, and has the money to outlast you in court, and owns the means of propaganda], would make you a traitor.
I need a hot shower to scrub myself, I feel so dirty and violated for taking on any semblance of playing devil's advocate for the Gov't, or it's agents.
Running Wolf
Campaign Veteran
I couldn't agree more. Gives me the willies . . .
The proof of what? And what alternative are you referring to?
I agree that any of the options you suggested would have been just as useful. Are you saying the ONG used 2A supporters due to some nefarious design? I'm interested in your thoughts on this, if you've got a few minutes.
Primus
Regular Member
You may feel dirty but it was well said and needed to be said. I actually appreciate that. I reported it because it makes all gun owners and members of forum look bad but I don't think they had a chance to fix it yet.
I wonder if the S2 would use some of the posts here and print them up and give it out during OPORD.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
SFCRetired
Regular Member
Just for the record: As far back as 1961, when I first went through Basic Combat Training, National Guardsmen were trained in handling "civil disturbances". The scenarios may have changed because the national demographic has changed. However, I will stress that, back then, there were very strict rules about when deadly force could be used in those circumstances. If I remember right, it took a general officer to authorize it.
As concerns the incident JoeSparky mentioned; Kent State was something that never should have happened. I remember it quite well. Whoever the officer in charge and the senior NCO were, they should have been given a general court martial and sent to Leavenworth. As it happened, the Guardsmen were indicted by a grand jury, but all charges were eventually dropped. Civil actions resulted in findings for the defendants.
The one very good thing that came out of it was that many of us who had previously trusted the government learned that it was not to be trusted.
Someone who has connections with, or is in, the Guard might want to look into, and pass on, what the actual ROE are for a present-day civil disturbance.
As concerns the incident JoeSparky mentioned; Kent State was something that never should have happened. I remember it quite well. Whoever the officer in charge and the senior NCO were, they should have been given a general court martial and sent to Leavenworth. As it happened, the Guardsmen were indicted by a grand jury, but all charges were eventually dropped. Civil actions resulted in findings for the defendants.
The one very good thing that came out of it was that many of us who had previously trusted the government learned that it was not to be trusted.
Someone who has connections with, or is in, the Guard might want to look into, and pass on, what the actual ROE are for a present-day civil disturbance.
Personal attacks aside, read up on American history and report back on a) what Lt Gov Thos Hutchinson advocated London do to the American citizens in Mass, b) whether he and/or his family were killed by mobs, c) if they were not killed, where they lived their final years, and c) what type of apology should suffice for casting malicious asspersions.
Primus
Regular Member
I'd look it up but we don't have any standing roe in regards to civilians that we know of in my company. This is probably because we are infantry. I do know some mud puppies so I'll make a call and see what I can get.
I do know my company was activated for the Boston bombing. Our roe/mission was basically just help the police if possible with searches/perimeter stuff, etc.. so we were told dont enage anyone unless it was to help the pds. We weren't even allowed firearms. The MPs were armed but we weren't allowed.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk