"The duty imposed upon [the president] to take care, that the laws be faithfully executed, follows out the strong injunctions of his oath of office, that he will 'preserve, protect, and defend the constitution.' The great object of the executive department is to accomplish this purpose; and without it, be the form of government whatever it may, it will be utterly worthless for offence, or defence; for the redress of grievances, or the protection of rights; for the happiness, or good order, or safety of the people." --Justice Joseph Story
A few months back, the commander in chief or our Armed Forces,
that erstwhile community organizer Barack Hussein Obama,
denigrated a large cross section of Americans who identify with the Tea Party movement
-- those who advocate for Essential Liberty and Rule of Law.
Obama identified them as malcontents, "waving their little tea bags."
Since then, the Obama administration and their Leftmedia sycophants have endeavored to characterize Tea Party attendees as rude, radical, racist, redneck, enemies of the state.
In fact, Americans who attend Tea Party rallies are from all walks of life, as noted in the Patriot Declaration, Patriots who are peacefully and constitutionally petitioning their government for redress.
As I noted in my tax-day essay, Tea Parties are "not a call for revolution but for restoration -- a call to undertake whatever measures are dictated by prudence and necessity to restore constitutional Rule of Law."
However, Obama's words do have consequences.
This week, I was contacted by a number of military personnel, enlisted and officer ranks, who expressed concern about a military exercise underway at Ft. Knox, the U.S. Bullion Depository.
As with most such exercises, the Ft. Knox alert occurred in stages, as if real time intelligence was being provided at various intervals.
The first intel advisory was issued on Friday, 23 April 2010, and identifies the terrorist threat adversaries as "Local Militia Groups / Anti-Government Protesters / TEA Party."
You read that right: "TEA Party"!
The alert states that plans for the demonstration may have been interrupted by "Federal and local law enforcement" raids on a "White Supremacists Organization," but "TEA Party organizers have stated that they will protest at the Gold Vault at a future date."
Further, the intel advisory states, "Anti-Government - Health Care Protesters have stated that they would join the TEA Party as a sign of solidarity."
In accordance with the exercise, Ft. Knox post security is placed on high alert because, "these groups are armed, have combative training and some are former Military Snipers. Some may have explosives training / experience," and "a rally at their compound / training area is scheduled."
Another intel update was issued on Monday, 26 April 2010, noting that the "rally at the Militia compound occurred," and "Viable threats ... have been made." The intel on the rally notes,
"Many members were extremely agitated at what they referred to as Government intervention and over taxation in their lives. Alcohol use 'fanned the flames.' Many military grade firearms were openly carried. An ad hoc 'shoot the government agent' event was held with prizes (alcohol) given for the best shot placement."
The report states further, "Components of bomb making are reported to have been on the site. Some members have criminal records relating to explosive and weapons violations."
In response to the "immediate threat," the exercise stipulates, "local detention centers are being made ready for mass arrests." Both the "QRF I and QRF II" are placed on two hour recall, and the "5-15 CAV" was ordered to "draw weapons from holder and store in most available arms room," and "coordinate with MASA for immediate ammunition draw; have equipment readied for immediate use, i.e. vehicles staged and loaded IAW 5-15 CAV SOP; LMR's charged."
QRF refers to Quick Reaction Force. QRF I is the 16th Cavalry Regiment. QRF II is the 194th Armored Brigade.
The 26 April order gives specific instructions for the 5-15 CAV (a 16th Cavalry battalion) to have weapons, ammo, vehicles and communications at ready, and it places the other 2,200 members of the units on two-hour recall. In other words, these orders are to gear up for defending Ft. Knox against Tea Party folks and their co-conspirators who oppose nationalization of our health care sector.
Now, for almost 30 years I have participated in the development and implementation of small and large scale military exercises within the U.S. and around the world.
Such exercises are critical to the readiness of our forces, and the standard for the real time intel reports in these drills requires thinly veiled references to assets of existing or collateral threat vectors such as communist regimes such as China and real terrorist networks such as al-Qa'ida, etc.
Perhaps the writers of such exercises today should focus on response plans for, say, an Islamic terrorist who attacks a post. (See Ft. Hood / Major Nidal Malik Hasan.)
The Ft. Knox exercise is not only amateurish in its construct, but also sets an ominous political precedent.
The military officers and enlisted personnel with whom I spoke are all dedicated uniformed Patriots who are loyal, first and foremost, to their oath to "support and defend" our Constitution "against all enemies, foreign and domestic."
Their concerns about this exercise mirrored my own. As one put it, the exercise "misrepresents freedom loving Americans as drunken, violent racists -- the opponents of Obama's policies have been made the enemy of the U.S. Army."
They were equally concerned that command staff at Ft. Knox had signed off on this exercise, noting, "it has been issued and owned by field grade officers who lead our battalions and brigades," which is to say many Lieutenant Colonels saw this order before it was implemented.
It's not likely that Ft. Knox Commanding General James Milano or Deputy Commander Col. David Teeples, or even the regimental and brigade commanders for the 16th Cav and 194th AB, actually read the exercise scenario, but that doesn't absolve responsibility for such an egregious example of political exploitation of U.S. forces.
One officer insisted, "The American people should require greater accountability of their commissioned officers, that they abide by their oath and never allow politically motivated propaganda like this exercise on any post or base again."
Another observed, "Whether this is complacency by officers who do not see such orders as a problem, or worse, officers who recognize the problem but do not insist the orders are changed, this is a serious problem. We are discussing the training of American citizen soldiers in the use of potentially deadly force against a specific group of political dissenters. There is never a time in an officer's career in which he does not have a duty to apply critical thought to the orders he is given and asked to give. It is my opinion that any officer that has allowed these orders to persist, to reach the level of junior officers and soldiers, has demonstrated a lack of judgment or apathy towards what his duty requires of him. Either way, we should demand more of the commissioned officers, who we as a nation empower to lead our sons and daughters into battle."
Indeed, and at best, the blatant malfeasance on the part of the individuals who composed this exercise reflects poorly on the uniformed services.
The antidote to this patent misrepresentation of peaceable Patriots is to expose it with the Light of Truth. As our motto Veritas vos Liberabit affirms, the Truth shall set you Free!
Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!
Army Preps for Tea Party ‘Terrorists’
by Mark Alexander Publisher, PatriotPost.US
Update from Mark Alexander – April 29, 2010
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Regarding my essay, Army Preps for Tea Party 'Terrorists', I was contacted by senior command staff at Ft. Knox this afternoon. There was a security exercise at Ft. Knox this week, but an officer in the security loop altered the scenario "in order to make it more realistic." Those alterations were described in my essay, exactly as they appeared. The command staff informed me that the alterations were not approved at the command level and that the individual who circulated the scenario through official channels will "receive appropriate counsel." I was assured that the Command staff would not have authorized such a scenario.
BARRY SOETORO aka BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
He is not eligible to be
President of the United States
because he is not a Natural Born Citizen
as required by Article Two, Section One, Clause Five of the United States Constitution.
This is a fact REGARDLESS of
where he was born (Mombassa, Hawaii, Chicago, Mecca or Mars).
He is not eligible
because he was not born of
BOTH OF WHOM WERE UNITED STATES CITIZENS
AT THE TIME OF HIS BIRTH
as required by the Constitution.
Barack Hussein Obama Jr. is not eligible to be President of the United States because – according to public admissions made by him – his “birth status was governed” by the United Kingdom. Obama further admits he was a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at birth.
Since Barack Hussein Obama Jr. was, if born in the state of Hawaii, a dual citizen, who – according to his own State Department – owed allegiance to the Queen of England and United Kingdom at the time of his birth – he cannot therefore be a “natural born” citizen of the US according to Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the US Constitution.
His father, who did not live in the United States for more than a couple of years, was a subject/ciitizen
of Kenya/Great Britain at the time of Barack’s birth and afterwards, AND further, as Barack himself admitted on his website during the 2008 campaign, Barack was therefore born SUBJECT TO THE GOVERNANCE OF GREAT BRITAIN.
Here is a direct quote from Obama's "Fight the Smears/Fact Check" 2008 website:
‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “
The FACT that he was not born of TWO US CITIZEN PARENTS is all that matters. The question of his birth certificate is a distraction (a distraction fostered by Obama’s supporters?) that ought not to occupy our time and resources. BUT if you are really convinced of the value of the COLB (certificate of live birth) that Obama posted on his website, see this:
Also, it is possible that he is not a United States
citizen at all through his mother if he was born in Kenya, as three witnesses have testified. The reason is because his mother could not pass her US citizenship on to her son because she did not live continuously in the United States for five full years after her fourteenth birthday as required by the US immigration law in effect during that period of time.
Check it out:
Also, an excellent introductory primer on Obama Presiidential Eligibility is to be found at:
His usurpation can only be corrected (1) by Congress through his Impeachment and Removal [something which will never happen in a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid], or (2) it can be
corrected by his resignation, which could happen if the public presssure on him to resign becomes great enough, or (3) by his removal by the United States Supreme Court affirming a Quo Warranto decision of the United States Federal District Court for the District of Columbia [which process Attorney General Eric Holder would never allow to even begin] or (4) by an amendment to the Constitution,
which will never happen because that again would require the agreement of a Congress controlled by Pelosi/Reid.
HERE IS THE QUESTION WHICH EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN SHOULD BE ASKING HIS OR HER CONGRESSMAN AND SENATORS
“During the 2008 election, then Senator Obama published a statement at his website which said that his birth status was ‘governed’ by the British Nationality Act of 1948. Can you please tell me, and the American people, how a person governed - at birth - by British law, can be a natural born citizen of the United States and thus constitutionally eligible to be President of the United States?”
If you really want to understand the difference between the technical terms natural born citizen, native born citizen, naturalized citizen and just plain citizen, go to:
And if you really want to understand why it is necessary for a man to be a natural born citizen of the United States in order to be President of the United States, read the essay by Leo Donofrio at:
- Leo Rugiens