Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

[vector7]

Military coup "to resolve the 'Obama problem' " is not "unrealistic"

September 29, 2009 5:57 pm ET by Terry Krepel
From John L. Perry's September 29 Newsmax column:

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn't the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it.
[...]
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don't shrug and say, "We can always worry about that later."
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.

UPDATE: Newsmax has removed the column. More here. And here's a copy of the column Newsmax removed.

[American Patriot]

I am afraid I can NOT see that happening. I live to close to, live in and am family with the military. It's been my life.

While there will INDEED be those higher up, Flag Officers who are just steps away from the Boss' desk, they would not ever, ever think of a coup. Intervention perhaps, but remember that if you don't agree with the President, that's fine, you can voice your opinion quietly behind closed doors, but not in public.

ALL Officers are political appointees. Anyone who has brass on their shoulders all the way to the top, five-star is appointed by an act of Congress or orders of the President of the United States. They remain in those offices by the President (or those presiding above them) alone.

Break a rule, you are out. Step on your dick in a politically motivated stance, you're out. I had to skirt some fine lines myself over the years - and to some extent, I still do.

But to openly buck the President? Don't foresee that EVER happening.

[Backstop]

Not gonna happen.

[Malsua]

Not gonna happen.

There are caveats to that. It's not going to happen over the SOP going in Washington.

If they start going fascist or something, that could change pretty quickly. "Ordering" a massive dislocation of people for political reasons could find the president, ANY president doing the perp walk pretty quickly.

I agree however that as things stand today, nothing is going to rise to level requiring a coup to restore sanity.

Libs know this anyway. This is why they practice incrementalism.

[American Patriot]

Well, yeah, I'll agree with those caveats.

[Backstop]

There are caveats to that. It's not going to happen over the SOP going in Washington.

If they start going fascist or something, that could change pretty quickly. "Ordering" a massive dislocation of people for political reasons could find the president, ANY president doing the perp walk pretty quickly.

I agree however that as things stand today, nothing is going to rise to level requiring a coup to restore sanity.

Libs know this anyway. This is why they practice incrementalism.

Agreed, but I don't think we'll go that far left.

The Libs want to change this nation in the most radical of ways.

But they're not stupid.

This goes back to my "one brick at a time" hypothesis.

They'll make incremental changes, until folks get pissed off. As evidenced recently in the elections in VA and NJ.

At which point this will swing back a bit to the right.

Again, don't get me wrong; it could happen - the possibliity and means exist.

But I don't think it ever will.

[zenbudda]

these past 2 elections have been "john titor"-ish if you ask me. i will say though. i work with people who will not acknowledge anything conservatives bring up at this point. no matter how blatant the white house or the dems are at being power hungry. it seems the divide has been happening for some time but its head is surfacing the more i ask around. i did have a very pleasant, fact driven african american lady come up to me at work today though and express to me that other black people in our company do not like her. she says she has received this treatment over the years because she finds nothing wrong with white people.

[Malsua]

these past 2 elections have been "john titor"-ish if you ask me.

You mean predicting that people will be divisive in the future past would come true, I'm shocked!! Shocked!!

i did have a very pleasant, fact driven african american lady come up to me at work today though and express to me that other black people in our company do not like her. she says she has received this treatment over the years because she finds nothing wrong with white people.

Black people in general are more racist than whites. Most white people I know don't see color in day to day workings. Blacks view it through a much more "colored" lens. They're even more racist depending on the darkness of the skin tone.

One of the interesting things was during all the time I spent in Honduras, I noted an EXTREMELY racist attitude towards "native" looking Hondurans by other Hondurans. Native meaning, the ones that looked more Mayan or Meso-American. Those people had the worst jobs, were treated unkindly and were unseen. They looked like any other Honduran to me.



This reminds me of a Star Trek episode:
Let That Be Your Last Battlefield

Shortly thereafter, sensors detect another spacecraft in fast pursuit of the Enterprise. Curiously, the craft remains invisible to all but sensors and sets itself on a direct collision course with the ship. Moments later, Spock reports the invisible craft has disintegrated and deposited an "alien presence" aboard the ship. Kirk turns to see the alien pilot who has beamed himself directly to the bridge. The second alien identifies himself as Bele (pronounced "Beale"), obviously of the same race as Lokai, however, the sides of Bele's black and white skin are reversed. The difference is pointed out by Bele to a perplexed Captain Kirk who asks what is the difference between them, to which he replies, "Isn't it obvious? Lokai is white on the right side. All his people are white on the right side."

[Beetle]

Agreed, but I don't think we'll go that far left.

The Libs want to change this nation in the most radical of ways.

But they're not stupid.

This goes back to my "one brick at a time" hypothesis.

They'll make incremental changes, until folks get pissed off. As evidenced recently in the elections in VA and NJ.

At which point this will swing back a bit to the right.

Again, don't get me wrong; it could happen - the possibliity and means exist.

But I don't think it ever will.

OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH yes they are!!


No, all kidding aside, they are not stupit. I say that most are ignant, but they are not stupit. I think they think we are stupit. And I think that does make them stupit.

Is this post stupit. Should I get some pics for this post? Would that make it better?

[vector7]

Full Text Of Newsmax Column Suggesting Military Coup Against Obama

Here is the full text of John L. Perry's column on Newsmax which suggests that a military coup to "resolve the Obama problem" is becoming more possible and is not "unrealistic." Perry also writes that a coup, while not "ideal," may be preferable to "Obama's radical ideal" -- and would "restore and defend the Constitution." Newsmax has since removed the column from its website.

Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention

By: John L. Perry

There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.

America isn't the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:

# Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States."

# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.

# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.

# They can see that the economy -- ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation -- is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.

# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.

# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America's troop strength is allowed to sag.

# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.

# They can see the nation's safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.

So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?

Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?

Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran's nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?

What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, "I'm not interested in victory") that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?

Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?

Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America's military leadership is lost in a fool's fog.

Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?

Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.

Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.

Unthinkable?

Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don't shrug and say, "We can always worry about that later."

In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.

[American Patriot]

I still don't see this happening, two years after the Congressional elections. Things have not changed for the better, only worse.

I just can't see the head guys doing anything but resigning "en masse" as he put it.

[Malsua]

Still not going to happen. This is a good thing. As much as I dislike captain zero, a military dictatorship would be even worse. Even if they planned to step aside once order is restored, it sets a fatal precedent. After the first event, more are sure to follow until one utterly scraps the constitution and installs a puppet to run roughshod over the citizenry.

[vector7]

500 Admirals and Generals Endorse Gov. Romney Today

by AWR Hawkins
5 Nov 2012, 5:05 AM PDT

As I wrote yesterday, military endorsements for Gov. Romney outnumber those for Obama by 100 to 1. And today, a shining example of the military's support for Romney comes in the form of a Washington Times ad in which 500 former admirals and generals endorse the GOP candidate for president.

The ad bears the headline: "We, the undersigned, proudly support Governor Mitt Romney as our nation's next President and Commander-in-Chief." It is then followed by the names of the 500 former military figures announcing their endorsement.

One of those 500, Rear Admiral (ret.) James J. Carey, released this important caveat concerning the ad:

It is important that you're aware that this is not an ad being paid for by the Romney Campaign. Rather, it is being paid for and placed by the 500 of us who have agreed to have our names in this public ad and to take a public stand on how very important it is that our fellow Americans choose a new Commander-in-Chief in the elections this coming Tuesday.

Please vote on Tuesday, NOT because of revenge for something, but because of "Love of Country."

God bless our military, and God bless these 500 brave souls who understand that the foreseeable future of our military will be decided by who emerges victorious on Tuesday.

TheBlaze was sent an advanced copy of how the ad is expected to appear:

OBAMA IS FORMALLY AND CRIMINALLY CHARGED WITH TREASON, BY THE U.S. MILITARY

Posted by: liberating elder Posted date: November 08, 2012 In: Featured, Solutions





The latest formal criminal complaint naming OBAMA in TREASON was filed this morning at 1131 hours local (11: 31 a.m. EST).
The TREASON complaint is copied below for your convenience.

• CLICK HERE: For the .pdf download of the 8 November 2012 formal criminal complaint OBAMA TREASON-

• CLICK HERE: For the .pdf download of the 8 November 2012 TREASON COMPLAINT ADMINISTRATION RECORDS-
• CLICK HERE: For a history of the TREASON complaints since 17 March 2009! Scroll down to “TREASON ON THE BOUNTY,” and clikc on the links directly below!

Now, as is assiduously, urgently importuned since 17 March 2009 it is going to take a very large number of people, acting in groups and in a coordinated way, to advance this formal criminal complaint naming OBAMA in TREASON so as to take effect.

Individuals must file individual complaints in the same way this complaint was administered. Then the individual complaints must be collected up and submitted in mass everywhere possible across the United States.

OBAMA can and must be removed from his residence in the White House as a common thug, punk street wise criminal.

I’m not talking impeachment, I’m talkin’ ’bout OBAMA being taken down as any other accused felon.

It can be accomplished if enough people get behind the effort in a way that soars over any gathering or group action before.

FIND A WAY OR MAKE ONE!

DO IT NOW!

HERE ENDTH THE LESSON!

[Phil Fiord]

I read the complaint. It will not get taken seriously.

[American Patriot]

Yep.. don't see this going anywhere. No more than the secession....

[Phil Fiord]

What gets me about the secession idea in motion is 150 years ago it was in motion as well. We had civil war. That war was not directly about slavery but states rights. See where I am going here?

[American Patriot]

I see exactly where you're going

I wouldn't be too happy about it, but then again, it COULD happen.

I look at friends and relatives who will take the other side and know without a doubt that it won't happen in a "local venue".

In other words, family and friends won't fight ME. They know better. Which is going to be the same all over. But YOUR friends might fight me, but not you etc

See where I am going?

[Phil Fiord]

Yes, and 150 years ago the same dynamic occurred. It is so true that we should know real history as it does repeat. Learn from it if we can. If it does happen again, it wont be North vs South, but rural vs urban and about states rights not race.

[American Patriot]

That's the thing... it HAS to be "rural vs urban" and some of us live in urban areas.... it's gonna suck.

[Phil Fiord]

I live in a rural section of a larger city. No question that I am rural where I live though. It will suck as you cite because to go anywhere I have to move away from the relative security of where home is at. I have no clear rural way out beyond my little island of woods and water. In short, I am surrounded.