Does anyone know or have heard of this? [Archive]

View Full Version : Does anyone know or have heard of this?

Blitzzz (RIP)

01-05-2009, 00:33

Operation Garden Plot

[Acquired via a circuitous route from the Internet. Sources have been deleted to protect their identity. Thanks to the tireless work of you guys out there. If the guy(s) who gathered this great scoop wish to be identified, please email me. Forest<glen@bayarea.net> ]

The United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2

The following information was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. The original printing was of June 1, 1984. The information herein is UNCLASSIFIED and does not come within the scope of directions governing the protection of information affecting the national security.

It took a little more than three years to obtain a full copy of Operation Garden Plot from the U.S. Government, and was done so under the freedom of information act for unclassified documents. The implications within the full context of this document should make the hair on the back of your head stand on end!!!!!

In this document signed by the Secretary of the Army, is hereby assigned as DOD Executive Agent for civil disturbance control operations. Under Plan 55-2 he is to use airlift and logistical support, in assisting appropriate military commanders in the 50 states, District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and US possessions and territories, or any political subdivision thereof.

The official name of this project is called "Operation Garden Plot."

Under this plan for the deployment of Operation Garden Plot, the use of CIDCON-1 will be mandatory. This direct support of civil disturbance control operations is to be used by the Army, USAF, Navy, and Marine Corp. with an airlift force to be comprised of MAC Organic Airlift Resources, airlift capable aircraft of all other USAF major commands, and all other aerial reconnaissance and Airborne Psychological Operations. This is to include control communications systems, aeromedical evacuation, helicopter and Weather Support Systems.

If any civil disturbance by a resistance group, religious organization, or other persons considered to be non-conformist takes place, under Appendix 3 to Annex B of Plan 55-2 hereby gives all Federal forces total power over the situation if local and state authorities cannot put down said dissenters.

Annex A, section B of Operation Garden Plot defines tax protesters, militia groups, religious cults, and general anti-government dissenters as Disruptive Elements. This calls for the deadly force to be used against any extremist or dissident perpetrating any and all forms of civil disorder.

Under section D, a Presidential Executive Order will authorize and direct the Secretary of Defense to use the Armed Forces of the United States to restore order.

2 TAB A APPENDIX 1 TO ANNEX S USAF CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLAN 55-2 EXHIBIT POR:SGH, JCS Pub 6, Vol 5, AFR 160-5 hereby provides for America's military and the National Guard State Partnership Program to join with United Nations personal in said operations. This links selected U.S. National Guard units with the Defense Ministries of "Partnership For Peace." This was done in an effort to provide military support to civil authorities in response to civil emergencies.

Under Presidential Decision Directive No. 25, this program serves to cement people to relationships between the citizens of the United States, and the global military of the UN establishments of the emerging democracies of Central and Eastern European countries. This puts all of our National Guardsmen under the direct jurisdiction of the United Nations.

Section 3:
This plan could be implemented under any of the following situation:

(1) Spontaneous civil disturbances which involve large numbers of persons and/or which continue for a considerable period of time, may exceed the capacity of local civil law enforcement agencies to suppress. Although this type of activity can arise without warning as a result of sudden, unanticipated popular unrest (past riots), it may also result from more prolonged dissidence.

This would most likely be an outgrowth of serious social, political or economic issues which divide segments of the American population. Such factionalism could manifest itself through repeated demonstrations, protest marches and other forms of legitimate opposition but which would have the potential for erupting into spontaneous violence with little or no warning.

(2) Planned acts of violence or civil disobedience which, through arising from the same causes as (1) above, are seized upon by a dedicated group of dissidents who plan and incite purposeful acts designed to disrupt social order.

This may occur either because leaders of protest organizations intentionally induce their followers to perpetrate violent acts, or because a group of militants infiltrates an otherwise peaceful protest and seeks to divert it from its peaceful course.

Subsection C: (2) Environmental satellite products will be continue to be available. (d) Responsibilities. Meteorological support to civil disturbance operations will be arranged or provided by AWS wings.

The 7th. Weather Wing (7WW) is responsible for providing / arranging support for Military Airlift Command (MAC) airlift operations. The 5th Weather Wing (5WW) is responsible for supporting the United States Army Forces Command.

(3) SITUATION. Civil disturbance may threaten or erupt at any time in the CONUS and grow to such proportions as to require the use the Federal military forces to bring the situation under control.

A flexible weather support system is required under control. A flexible weather support system is required to support the many and varied options of this Plan.

ANNEX H: XXOW, AWSR 55-2, AWSR 23-6, AFR 23-31, AR 115-10, AFR 105-3.

Subsection B:

Concept of Environmental Support. Environmental support will be provided by elements of Air Weather Service (AWS) in accordance with refs a-f. The senior staff meteorologist deployed int the Task Force Headquarters (TFH) will be the staff weather officer (SWO) to the TFH.

Centralized environmental support products are requested in accordance with AWSR 105-18. (4) Weather support is provided by weather units located at existing CONUS bases or by deployed SWOs and / or weather teams to the objective areas.

(5) Support MAC source will be provide in accordance with the procedures in MARC 103-15. MAC forces will be provided in accordance with the procedures in AFR 105-3.

(a) Air Force Global Weather Central: Provides centralized products as requested.

REFERENCES : JCS Pub 18 - Doctrine for Operations Security AFR 55-30, Operations Security

1. GENERAL Opposition forces or groups may attempt to gain knowledge of this plan and 'use that knowledge to prevent or degrade the effectiveness of the actions outlined in this plan. In order to protect operations undertaken to accomplish the mission, it is necessary to control sources of information that can be exploited by those opposition forces or groups.

OPSEC is the effort to protect operations by identifying and controlling intelligence indicators susceptible to exploitation. The objective of OPSEC, in the execution of this plan, is to assure the security of operations, mission effectiveness, and increase the probability of mission success.

Blitzzz (RIP)

01-05-2009, 00:34

2. RESPONSIBILITY FOR OPERATIONS SECURITY (OPSEC):

The denial of information to an enemy is inherently a command responsibility. However, since the operations Officer at any level of command is responsible to his commander for the Overall planning and execution of operations, he has the principal staff interest in assuring maximum protection of the operation and must assume primary responsibility instibility for ensuring that the efforts of all other staff elements are coordinated toward this
end. However, every other individual associated with, or aware of, the operation must assist in safeguarding the security of the operation.

3. OBJECTIVES:

a. The basic objective of OPSEC is to preserve the security of friendly forces and thereby to enhance the probability of successful mission accomplishment. "Security" in this context relates to the protection of friendly forces. It also includes the protection of operational information to prevent degradation of mission effectiveness through the disclosure of prior knowledge of friendly operations to the opposition.

b. OPSEC pervades the entire planning process and must be a matter of continuing concern from the conception of an operation, throughout the preparatory and execution phases, and during critiques, reports, press releases, and the like conducted during the post operation phase.

4. Specific operations orders and standard operating procedures "MUST be developed with the awareness that the opposition may be able to identify and exploit vulnerable activities.

Reference Material:

Released under Freedom of Information Act on March 30th, 1990. All material presented here has been declassified and supersedes USAD Operations Plan 355-10 of July 16, 1973. Information released by USAF under supervision of Alexander K. Davidson, BRIG. GEN, USAF, Dep. Director of Operations.

APPENDEX 5 TO ANNEX E TO USAF CIVIL DISTURBANCE PLAN 55-2 Annex Z. Other References: 10 United States Codes 331,332,333,8500,1385, MARC 105-1, MARC 105-18, AR 115-10, AFR 105-3, PDD-25.

Additional backup documents will be found on another site at

http://www.cafes.net/mo/Gardenplot.htm

That is a good site to read this type of material. Lots of curious stuff.

If I can give anyone credit for this great file, I give to the guys in the "cafes". Thanks, guys.

Please notice that your "faithful" political servants did not tell you about this law. But they wrote and passed it. It took someone about there years to find it. And they had to force it out into the open. Congressman Gonzalez admits that it exists. Gee, thanks a lot, you guys.

This is from an E-mail sent to me from a friend. Blitzzz

incarcerated

01-05-2009, 01:09

Hadn't heard of it.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/jtf-la.htm

http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/rio.htm

http://www.uscg.mil/directives/cim/3000-3999/CIM_3010_14.pdf

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/garden_plot.htm

I am finding that the www.cafes.net link will not open.

6.8SPC_DUMP

01-05-2009, 01:58

Operation Garden Plot
The United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2

I'm glad you posted this Sir. I'm not someone "in the know" like some of the extremely accomplished members here, but the thesis for my Poli. Sci. degree was on FEMA and it's not at all what I thought it was. There are very clear ways for the Fed to bypass the Constitution in times of national emergency. FEMA was created for just such reasons during the Cold War in preparation of a nuclear attack. Complicated and interesting topic with far reaching implications. For example some law abiding citizens had their guns confiscated at gun point and not returned during the Katrina incident. That seemed similar to the house to house raids in unstable Iraq areas. I'd be really interested in hearing the thoughts about domestic deployment from some of our nations bravest here.

Guy

01-05-2009, 04:13

For example some law abiding citizens had their guns confiscated at gun point and not returned during the Katrina incident. That seemed similar to the house to house raids in unstable Iraq areas. I'd be really interested in hearing the thoughts about domestic deployment from some of our nations bravest here.Katrina -vs- Iraq operations are: two "totally" different operations/scenarios.....

Stay safe.

Penn

01-05-2009, 06:58

Guy, I think you are totally correct on the Apples and Orange’s scenario. To help clarify the point: it’s in the Operational environments; Iraq is a war zone, where as, in this instance, we are contemplating Marshall Law, warrantless search and seizure, with permissible use of deadly force across the spectrum spanning peaceful civil protest that hinders the function of government, to the extreme of armed uprising. It’s a very broad law… and combined with several other recent discussion on this board, concerning the all volunteer force, and threat to democracy posed by a standing Army, one has to question where they would position their loyalties if this situation were to transpire in the event of a full civil protest, where leadership activate: The United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2 in a non disaster emergency to quell civil unrest.
For those of us who have signed the contract to protect and defend, it would be a interesting point of departure; considering this law was passed without participation of you and me, the citizen’s of the United States of America.

Soft Target

01-05-2009, 07:50

Alright, you FOGs, fess up. Who spent wasted hours standing in ranks with plastic facehields on your steel pots?

I'll let the lawyers handle the legal ramifications.

Pete

01-05-2009, 08:06

Penn

01-05-2009, 08:10

Gotta have a plan, but what if...what postion would you take?

SF_BHT

01-05-2009, 08:23

The Military is tasked with coming up with plans.

How many times have you heard the press "The Military has plans to......"

Kinda' like a giant CYA thing. What if.......?

I'll bet in some dusty vault somewhere there are plans for the 82nd to be used to invade the moon. Probably done in the late 70's and covers a first move made by the USSR.

Someone was probably tasked to come up with something at the last minute and did it and they figured if needed they would clean it up. I can not telly you how many plans I have done only to shred them later as thing changed or got clarified.

The Reaper

01-05-2009, 09:34

It looks bogus to me.

While the Army is tasked to do a number of things to support domestic preparedness issues, this would be a violation of Posse Comitatus. The Guard, OTOH, could be called in to do many of these things, and that list has recently been expanded to include things like bird flu, etc.

If it was printed in 1984, and refers to the Central and Eastern European democracies, it was either updated since then or is complete BS. MAC became AMC many years ago, so it would appear to be mixing pre-'89 Soviet breakup terms with post-'89 political situations.

Not too many official documents have that many typos, or refer to the "Marine Corp." The term "resistance group, religious organization, or other persons considered to be non-conformist" does not sound right either.

I think the whole thing is a hoax, either using an existing plan for a template, or made up by someone who had read plans before, probably former military.

I am sure that the tinfoil hatters ate this stuff up.

Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

Sten

01-05-2009, 09:45

...

(tin foil away)

Razor

01-05-2009, 09:50

For example some law abiding citizens had their guns confiscated at gun point and not returned during the Katrina incident. That seemed similar to the house to house raids in unstable Iraq areas.

IIRC, the firearms seizures were conducted by the New Orleans police, not by federal entities.

Penn

01-05-2009, 09:59

On a second reading of the post; I agree with TR.

CSB

01-05-2009, 10:12

1 - There really is a Contingency Plan (CONPLAN) named Garden Plot.

2 - We conducted exercises under GARDEN PLOT back in the 1970's.

3 - For all practical purposes, it is little more than riot control.

4 - Key to any federal troop deployments is the complete inability of the individual state to maintain order, protect life and property. It fact, almost always the plan anticipates that the State will specifically ask for federal assistance.

Given that the really is such a plan, it would take very little to add bullshit phrases (such as "non-conformists") and pass off the result as if it was an actual part of the plan.

There were bombings in the United States, remember (university of Wisconson Math Building) and people were being killed by what we would today call domestic terrorists. Back then they were the "Weathermen" and the "Weather Underground" among others.

CPTAUSRET

01-05-2009, 10:17

Blitzzz (RIP)

01-05-2009, 12:21

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin472.htm

Soft Target

01-05-2009, 13:00

I do recall riot control being labeled Garden Plot, and it would have been the 70's.

My first exposure to the real thing was in the spring of '71. Even the Army Branch schools were included.

Richard

01-05-2009, 13:26

FWIW - we had file cabinets of contingency plans at every Bn+ unit to which I was ever assigned. We also never seemed to have 'exactly' the plan we needed whenever we were alerted, either. :rolleyes:

An interesting 'cast of characters' in the JTF-LA situation cited below. And so it goes. ;)

Richard's $.02 :munchin
**********

Operation Garden Plot
JTF-LA Joint Task Force Los Angeles

The euphoria over the August 6, 1965, signing of the Voting Rights Act subsided a week later when the Watts section of Los Angeles exploded in the Nation's worst race riot since 1943. It lasted 6 days and left 35 dead, 900 injured, over 3,500 arrested and $46 million of property damage. The Watts riot demonstrated the depth of the urban race problems in the North.

On the afternoon of 29 April 1992, the worst civil unrest since the riots of the 1960's erupted in the streets of Los Angeles (LA). The civil unrest in Los Angeles followed a California jury's acquittal of the Los Angeles policemen accused of using excessive force in the beating of Rodney King. The case had received heavy media coverage dating from before it even went to trial, when a video of the beating hit the national airwaves. It came as a surprise then, as the verdicts were read: One of the officers was found guilty of excessive force; the other officers were cleared of all charges. The verdicts were broadcast live, and word spread quickly throughout Los Angeles. At various points throughout the city that afternoon, people began rioting. Riots erupted on the streets of south central Los Angeles and soon expanded to disrupt and threaten lives and property in much of the city and county of Los Angeles.

The lawlessness involved physical violence, looting, and arson, which resulted in massive destruction of property. According to the City in Crisis, the rioting was cyclical in nature and occurred with equal intensity in daylight hours and during the night, unlike past civil disorders. Disturbances which began in the morning gathered momentum during the day and reached a high point in the evening, declining during the early morning hours. Destruction was most severe on the second day and tapered off only on the fourth and fifth days.

At least forty-four [possibly 58] people died and hundreds [possibly more than 2,000, or even 4,000] were injured before order was restored Property damage reached the billion dollar mark because of rampaging looters and the thousands of fires that they set. It began as a small disturbance in south central LA, but quickly escalated and spread rapidly throughout the city and country. Arsonists set over 4,600 fires that at least partially burned a reported 10,000 businesses. Reports on the number arrested ranged from 12,000 to 17,000. Emergency workers were soon stretched to the limit in their efforts to cope with the crisis. The violence initially overwhelmed law enforcement agencies, resulting in the burning of large areas of the city. The LA riots of 1992 were unquestionably the most costly civil disturbance in US history.

The initial response of many city officials was marked by uncertainty, confusion, and lack of coordination. Within the LAPD, there was no meaningful integration with any other arm of government. The LAPD was uncharacteristically hesitant in responding to initial incidents of disorder - which later would be considered a major factor in their inability to control the unrest.

As the fires spread across Los Angeles beginning in the late afternoon of Apri1 29, 1992, unprecedented demands were placed on the Los Angeles City Fire Department, in particular, because it was forced to respond to calls for assistance while confronted at times by hostile individuals and crowds armed with assorted weapons. The fire fighters were severely hampered by the response time and level of escort support which the Los Angeles Police Department was able to muster.

Both the state and federal governments responded quickly to the crisis. The governor of California committed the state police and two thousand National Guard soldiers to assist in restoring law and order on 30 April. At 2230 on 29 April 1992, as part of the response to this disorder, the 3d Battalion, 160th Infantry (Mechanized), 40th Infantry Division, California National Guard, was ordered to mobilize. CANG's initial response was slow and somewhat disorganized. Its troops did not arrive in the streets until 17 hours after Wilson's order or not until the evening of April 30. Between 2100 and 2400 the following day, all 3d Battalion companies deployed to their assigned areas. It was the first tactical battalion to be mobilized, the first to deploy to the streets of LA, and the last to redeploy. By the early morning of 30 April, the Governor of California had ordered state police and about 2,000 guardsmen into the area to restore order. The first of the National Guard units, the 670th Military Police Company, traveled almost 300 miles from its main armory and arrived the same afternoon to assist local police.

Lacking proper warning by LAPD, CANG loaned out to local agencies key items of riot control equipment such as face shields, riot batons and lock plates for their M-16 rifles. Logistics failures included ammunition shortages and transportation and communications snafus. Training was inadequate and predicated on the mistaken belief that the troops would face only a riot and not "low-intensity conflict (or urban warfare)" Training before and during the crisis was based on out of date "crowd control" techniques prescribed in the 1985 Army Field Manual 19-15, Civil Disturbances. Absolutely no one, civilian or military, expected a situation where the National Guard would be needed on the streets in a matter of hours.

The federal response was timely. SecDef Richard Cheney put 4,000 Army and Marine troops on alert on 30 April 1992. President Bush invoked the Insurrection Act via Executive Order 12804 [not Executive Order 6427] of 1 May 1992, federalizing elements of the California National Guard and authorizing active military forces from the Army and Marine Corps to help restore law and order. Following this Presidential Executive Order on 1 May, JTF-LA was formed. The Executive Order federalized unit of the California Army National Guard (CAARNG) and authorized active military forces to assist in the restoration of law and order. JTF-LA formed and deployed within 24 hours. It operated in a unique domestic disturbance environment while working with city, county, state, federal agencies, and the CAARNG. JTF-LA was completely successful in meeting the three objectives defined in its mission statement, which were-assume command and control of federalized National Guard and AC Marine and Army forces, establish liaison with local law enforcement agencies; and conduct civil disturbance operations to restore order in the greater LA area.

As DOD's executive agent for the crisis, the Secretary of the Army activated a civil disturbance plan, called GARDEN PLOT, to help orchestrate the callup and deployment of the military forces. Joint Task Force Los ANGELES consisted of about 10,000 guardsmen, nearly 1,500 marines from Camp Pendleton, and 2,000 soldiers from the 2d Brigade, 7th Infantry Division (Light), at Fort Ord. Virtually the entire 40th Infantry Division was mobilized. The military personnel were supposed to protect specific areas of the city, patrol neighborhoods after the police had restored order, and protect the fire fighters who were being attacked by mobs. Army troops showed restraint and discipline in handling a touchy situation. During the riots, they worked in areas of the city without electricity, where many buildings had been destroyed by fires, and resolved several potentially dangerous confrontations. The military would also provide some logistical support and supply riot gear, helicopters, tentage, and Meals, Ready-to-Eat (MRE). DOD estimated the final cost of the operation at about $15 million. A full complement of intelligence analysts was required to support the assault command post (ACP) during Operation Garden Plot. Law enforcement agencies generally have adequate data collection capabilities, but lack the ability to perform detailed intelligence analysis. Considerations for the G2 (S2) in an operation such as Garden Plot may include points similar to the following:

In Operation Garden Plot, military forces established intelligence exchange with suburban police departments, local city command post, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), the LAPD emergency operations center, the city command center, the sheriffs office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Close and effective liaison must be established with all potential sources and agencies. Local law enforcement agencies have access to HUMINT, often unavailable to the military. The intelligence staff of the law enforcement agencies have unparalleled expertise in civil disturbances and gang behavior, while military analysts are in the best position to apply this experience to civil-military operations. During Operation Garden Plot, units used a variety of government-owned, off-the-shelf purchased, and personally owned equipment to effectively conduct operations. Additional communications equipment included such things as cellular phones, faxsimile machines, and police scanners.

For many days after, it was impossible for people living in South Central and Koreatown to purchase the minimum necessities. The city's mayor lifted the curfew on 4 May, and troops departed Los Angeles by 6 May.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/jtf-la.htm

Guy

01-05-2009, 22:44

IIRC, the firearms seizures were conducted by the New Orleans police, not by federal entities.Which included your resident criminals; some of them just happened too be on the NOPD.:D

Stay safe.

Conrad Y

01-06-2009, 07:31

:rolleyes:
Regardless of the good intentions of oplan Garden Plot, any (future) administration can use this, as well as other oplans, against the American citizens when unpopular policies are instituted. If a (future) POTUS wants to play dictator, for example, anyone with a firearm can now be labled a "terrorist" or "criminal" and if you protest in any way they can institute these oplans.
Recent history has proven the points about absolute power...

My beret is lined with tinfoil, by the way. I lined it during the Clinton years. :eek:

Blitzzz (RIP)

01-06-2009, 19:50

That there are Millions of Gun owners with high powered rifles that out reach the basic infantry rifle. In the end it would be very bloody. Sorry, Blitzzz

6.8SPC_DUMP

01-06-2009, 21:01

Mr. Penn brings up an extremely important question:

The United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2 in a non disaster emergency to quell civil unrest.
For those of us who have signed the contract to protect and defend, it would be a interesting point of departure; considering this law was passed without participation of you and me, the citizen’s of the United States of America.
...what postion would you take?

It has everything to do with the great feedback of:
Guy
Katrina -vs- Iraq operations are: two "totally" different operations/scenarios.....

Razor
IIRC, the firearms seizures were conducted by the New Orleans police, not by federal entities.

TR
While the Army is tasked to do a number of things to support domestic preparedness issues, this would be a violation of Posse Comitatus. The Guard, OTOH, could be called in to do many of these things, and that list has recently been expanded to include things like bird flu, etc.

First off, during the looting after Katrina some residents formed militias to protect their property and loved ones. Louisiana's strategy for quelling the "civil unrest" was to have local LEO's and any available National Guard solders disarm all citizens (aside from the hundreds of contracted armed guards (some from Blackwater)) so that relief supply's could be brought in, people could be rescued ect. Although many of the National Guard solders were fresh from overseas deployment, they operate under their state Governor's authority and are not subject to Posse Comitatus. Somehow these measures were claimed not to be Martial Law by both Louisiana and the Army. The NRA sued in Sept. 2005. Initially, the Police falsely claimed only stolen or abandon guns were taken and the City attorneys said the right to keep and bear arms has never been recognized as a fundamental individual right. Finally in Oct. 2008 Louisiana agreed to give back the guns pending a background check.

What worries me is that Posse Comitatus is now meaningless - literally. Bush wanted to send Commandos in to Katrina as first responders. Governor Blanco of Louisiana refused to allow them, opting instead for service from the National Guard, who would be under Louisiana control as with it's LEO. The grounds for the Gov.'s refusal was the Insurrection Act of 1807. The Insurrection Act of 1807 is the set of laws that govern the President's ability to deploy troops within the United States to put down lawlessness, insurrection and rebellion. The general aim is to limit Presidential power as much as possible, relying on state and local governments for initial response in the event of insurrection. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 tightened these restrictions, imposing a two-year prison sentence on anyone who used the military within the U.S. without the express permission of Congress. Operation Garden Plot, i.e. United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2 was also in effect as "legislation" at this time and was Bush's grounds for leading the Commando's in first. As you can imagine having two laws contradicting each other, on a topic like military control of the country, posed a problem for the president. This also may shed some light on why it took a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to have Operation Garden Plot made public as of recently when it was aptly implemented in 1984... To remedy this discrepancy The Defense Authorization Act of 2006 was passed, replacing the Insurrection Act of 1807. It empowers the President to impose martial law in the event of a terrorist "incident," if he or other federal officials perceive a shortfall of "public order," or even in response to antiwar protests that get unruly as a result of government provocations. Parameters so broad the President now has complete military control of the US for the first time in our history and does not need to consult with the Governor of that state. Obama will have the power to redact this soon - unlikely seeing as 20,000 troops will be in the US by 2011 for suppressing "civil unrest".

Bottom line - I don't give a F*** who you are when it comes to my loved one's well being - as I doubt any of you do either. One thing I like about Republican ideology is we favor power of the state over power of the Fed. - or is that even a Republican any more? This topic needs more attention and discussion......

GratefulCitizen

01-06-2009, 22:50

The NRA sued in Sept. 2005. Initially, the Police falsely claimed only stolen or abandon guns were taken and the City attorneys said the right to keep and bear arms has never been recognized as a fundamental individual right. Finally in Oct. 2008 Louisiana agreed to give back the guns pending a background check.

Some of the legal stuff surrounding that issue: http://saf.org/default.asp?p=legalaction#nola-gun-grab

The Reaper

01-07-2009, 08:30

I was waiting for FEMA to be brought into this. There is info. out there about their power and control, (not just on the federal level), that would do more than make the hair on the back of your neck stand on end.

Howard:

You have already been asked to read the rules and stickies and make your introduction in the proper place before posting again.

You will not be asked again.

TR