The Constitution, which sets forth the principle of rule of law, defines what is unconstitutional, and guarantees freedom of speech and other liberties of a Constitutional republic, and also describes the impeachment power. (How many know of the Jewish roots of this document?) Hypocrisy threatens Constitutional government. Could Israel use a constitution like this? More to the point: would a Convention of States save it, or destroy it? (Example: civil asset forfeiture violates the Constitution.) Quick fixes like Regulation Freedom Amendments weaken it. Furthermore: the Constitution provides for removing, and punishing, a judge who commits treason in his rulings. Furthermore, opponents who engage in lawfare against an elected President risk breaking the Constitution. The Constitution, which sets forth the principle of rule of law, defines what is unconstitutional, and guarantees freedom of speech and other liberties of a Constitutional republic, and also describes the impeachment power. (How many know of the Jewish roots of this document?) Hypocrisy threatens Constitutional government. Could Israel use a constitution like this? More to the point: would a Convention of States save it, or destroy it? (Example: civil asset forfeiture violates the Constitution.) Quick fixes like Regulation Freedom Amendments weaken it. Furthermore: the Constitution provides for removing, and punishing, a judge who commits treason in his rulings. Furthermore, opponents who engage in lawfare against an elected President risk breaking the Constitution.

Coup d’état in America – more evidence

More evidence came in last night (March 3, 2013) that the de facto President is either (a) living in fear of a coup d’état against his administration or (b) planning such a coup against the Constitution itself. The government is either over-reacting, running a psy-op, or planning to lay siege to the American people.

Coup d’état Exhibit F: More on the ammo buys

Here I laid out Exhibits A, B, C, D, and E of evidence for a coup d’état in America:

  1. The Newtown Incident
  2. The gun control push
  3. DHS buying billions of rounds of ammunition
  4. Loose talk about scrapping the Constitution
  5. Fomenting civil unrest

Pay attention to Exhibit C: those ammo rounds. Several readers have written in to suggest that the many Federal law-enforcement agencies would use up that much ammunition within a year in routine proficiency training. And this is how the government explains it. But in this case, the Social Security Inspector General offers no figures to back up his claims. (He said Social Security criminal investigators are shooting up all the hollow-point ammo they ordered in routine training.) And Drew Zahn at WND quotes Mark Levin as saying DHS has bought enough ammo to last twenty-four years:

[E]xperts estimate that at the peak of the Iraq war American troops were firing around 5.5 million rounds per month. At that rate, the [Department of Homeland Security] is armed now for a 24-year Iraq war. A 24-year Iraq war!

Does a soldier or an LEO shoot up ammo faster than that in routine training? According to Business Insider, all the LEO’s in the federal government need only 15 to 20 million rounds a year for their target practice.

Former Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) mentioned these ammo buys in passing last week, before “The Sequester” went into effect:

If we are going to wet our proverbial pants over 0.3% in annual spending cuts when we’re running up trillion dollar annual deficits, then we’re done. Put a fork in us. We’re finished. We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.

Governor Palin seems to think the government is afraid the people will storm their buildings, like the food rioters in the 1973 film Soylent Green. (Play Clip One below for the Riot Scene, with the infamous Riot Scoops that showed up in the movie poster.)

Exhibit G: Practice on Innocent Looking Targets

Less than two weeks ago, Paul Joseph Watson at Infowars.com made this chilling report. DHS bought practice targets that looked like pregnant women, high school girls, and other such inoffensive people. They say they did this because police departments asked them to. Infowars also reported that DHS paid the company that made those targets $2 million over the years, for various contracts.

Greg Ellifritz, at Active Response Training, tried to rationalize these targets.

On the threat evaluation side, these kind of targets actually work well. They teach the officer to look for the threat, not for the person.

Fine. But under what circumstances would a pregnant woman aim at an LEO? And why does DHS or anyone else feel they must prepare for that sort of threat?

Exhibit H: Armored Vehicles for American Streets

Presenting the latest and greatest police vehicle for the mean streets of America: Navistar Defense’s Mine Resistant Ambush-Protected Vehicle. Navistar describes it thus:

The International® MaxxPro is Navistar Defence’s Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicle and incorporates the latest design in armoring technology. Extensively tested by the military and used in theater today, the MaxxPro features a V-shaped hull and other design features that greatly improve survivability. With so much protection, it’s the vehicle that every crew wants when they’re out in the field.

Is this sort of thing in fear of a coup d'état, or planning for one?
MaxxPro MRAP Vehicle, pained in police colors. Source: Modern Survival Blog

This is the sort of truck that mechanized infantry would need in urban warfare. It is similar to this vehicle that the Israel Defense Forces use. But Modern Survival Blog ran with this picture (at right) of a Navistar MaxxPro painted with police legends. (See also Clip Two below.) Question: why did DHS retrofit 2700 of these vehicles for use in American cities? (See also here.) Do sober-minded LEOs really think someone will attack them by mining the roads and shooting at them?

Exhibit I: “I am not a dictator.”

That’s what de facto President Obama actually said last Friday. (Clip Three, Go!) True, he was answering a moronic question from a reporter. She had asked why he couldn’t summon leaders of Congress to a room and then not permit them to leave until they worked out a deal. But when a good-hearted President gets a question like that, he simply says,

That might work in North Korea, or perhaps Iran. Not here.

The answer Obama gave, would make one think he wishes he could do precisely that.

One must also put that answer in context. Why is Obama removing key senior flag officers? Is he afraid that one of them will plot a military coup against him, as Burt Lancaster tries to do to Fredric March in Seven Days in May? (Clip Four, Go!) Or does he want only those officers around him who will shoot American civilians on American soil if he so orders?

And why does Robert Reich suddenly say the goal of the Tea Party is “to undermine the government of the United States”?

To sum up

If Barack Obama really fears a coup d’état against his government, either military or popular, then he’s a maniac, or a paranoiac, anyway. Or maybe he’s thinking the way dictators in southern Africa think.

More likely, he is running a psy-op on the people. Twenty-four years’ worth of ammunition, and explicitly militarizing the police, are a way to send a message:

Don’t even think about it.

If he is planning an actual takeover, then he might have shown too much of his hand by now. So the psy-op theory is most likely of all.

ARVE Error: need id and provider
ARVE Error: need id and provider
ARVE Error: need id and provider
ARVE Error: need id and provider

[subscribe2]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Editor-in-chief at | + posts

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

constitutional law, evidence, liberty, military, president, second amendment


Terry A. Hurlbut

Terry A. Hurlbut has been a student of politics, philosophy, and science for more than 35 years. He is a graduate of Yale College and has served as a physician-level laboratory administrator in a 250-bed community hospital. He also is a serious student of the Bible, is conversant in its two primary original languages, and has followed the creation-science movement closely since 1993.

Comments (10)

  • Nathaniel Roubideaux

    “Fine. But under what circumstances would a pregnant woman aim at an LEO? And why does DHS or anyone else feel they must prepare for that sort of threat?”

    That’s not the correct assumption. There’s no point in arguing whether you’ll admit the wisdom of this, so I’ll just say it and the discussion proceed however you wish:

    The exercise is to train the trainee who *not* to shoot. Police officers have been training with paper cutouts of civilian children, moms, grandmas, etc. for decades. It’s highly effective training that is part of the distinction between the ignorant and irresponsible gun owner you wish everyone to be and what they’ll be up against when they pretend they’re aiding “constitutional sheriffs” (LOL – this whole idea is based on such staggering ignorance and misrepresentation that I’ve resisted even commenting) in resisting imagined federal tyranny. Those brandishing weapons against law enforcement officers will die. The children and pregnant women standing next to them will not. Get it?

    • Except for one thing: the practice targets I saw, showed the pregnant woman holding the gun. Now answer the question. Why would anyone assume that a pregnant woman would be desperate enough to aim a gun at an LEO?

      Unless she were engaging in her Constitutional right of self-defense against an LEO who was barging into her home without a warrant and without even the semblance of probable cause?

  • “Why would anyone assume that a pregnant woman would be desperate enough to aim a gun at an LEO?”

    Roisin McAliskey took part in PIRA atrocities while she had another little Provo swelling inside her foul carcass. Criminals get pregnant just like normal people, and being up the duff doesn’t necessarily make them any more law-abiding.

    I think you’ll find that the target you saw comes in two versions; with and without the gun. The trick is to shoot the pregnant women holding guns, but not the otherwise identical ones without. Which makes perfect sense.

    • Your argument assumes that the United States government has good reason to regard a good portion of the population it is sworn to guard, as no better than murderous insurrectionists like the type that I suppose you faced down once.

      I’ve heard the second part from other sources: that the target comes with an overlay, with or without a weapon pointed at the viewer. Now ask yourself: under what circumstances might a housewife pick up a gun in that setting? It seems to me that DHS is training the personnel in its various and sundry subsidiary LEAs to violate the rights of freedom and security of the person on a grand scale.

  • “He said Social Security criminal investigators are shooting up all the hollow-point ammo they ordered in routine training.”

    Yes, of course. If your weapon will be loaded with hollow points operationally then that’s what you use in training.

    “And Drew Zahn at WND quotes Mark Levin as saying DHS has bought enough ammo to last twenty-four years”

    So what?

    • So what? So you don’t stockpile such expensive ammunition unless you are planning either to dig in for a long siege, or to lay a long siege to someone else. And I don’t think this administration is stupid enough to think they can withstand siege. I’m sure you know as well as I do that no one can withstand siege forever.

      And are you sure that you’re going to train on the most expensive ammunition you’re likely ever to use?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.



© All Rights Reserved. Conservative News and Views.

Back to Top