BLUF: This is an Operation Jade Helm related story. Follows is the final para.
[ZeroHedge] Know Thy Enemy
I have outlined the above tactics not because I necessarily think they will prevail, but because it is important that we know exactly what we are dealing with in order to better defend ourselves. Such methods can be countered with community preparedness, the avoidance of central leadership, the application of random actions rather than predictable actions, etc. Most of all, liberty champions will have to provide a certain level of safety and security for the people around them if they want to disrupt establishment efforts to lure or force the population into controlled regions. Crisis is the best weapon the elites have at their disposal, and exercises like Jade Helm show that they may use that weapon in the near term. The defense that defeats crisis is preparation -- preparation not just for yourself, but for others around you. War is coming, and while we can't know the exact timing, we can assume the worst and do our best to be ready for it as quickly as possible.
#4
OK, here's the deal. The Jade Helm exercise is told off as training easier conducted here rather than overseas. However, the single largest problem in running an operation overseas is the language barrier, i.e. they don't speak English there. They're not even pretending to deal with this in the present case.
Which by extension means the project is useless except as a dress rehearsal or walkthrough.
Draw your own conclusions.
Posted by: ed in texas ||
05/08/2015 7:32 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I have no problem with it, as long as we have one programmed (see the POM) to be carried out in major blue areas as well. As I posted before, there are great opportunities to practice MOUT in Detroit et al with virtually abandoned neighborhoods.
#8
Proc,
You must then be in opposition to Jade Helm then because it is not happening in the big cities as you suggest and there are no plans to do so. It is not happening in liberal/progressive areas of the US and probably never will.
#9
Should the elites decide to foolishly wage war on the citizen, they should do so with great caution. There are unintended consequences that could go on for a long time. These elites might do well to read the account of Jack Hinson, Confederate sniper. Jack Hinson.
#10
Biggest problem will be them starting brush fires, leaving gates open or unlocked, and generally disturbing the peace. Long term Im not that concerned about the military as I am BATF and other federal forces that tend to behave like the Jackbooted thugs of your average banana republic or communist "people's paradise".
#11
#8 - not necessarily as much as hearing the whining and crying (the lamentation of the women) of the Left when such an event happens. And they will bitch. They never are able to put themselves in other peoples (re: non-Left) 'boots' to get the perspective to understand the concerns or outrage
#13
Thanks newc. I stopped reading when I got to para 10 however:
Author: Personally, I don’t buy into the conspiracy theories, but, to each his own. Just like I can provide my reasoning for believing that this is a legitimate exercise, someone on the other side can just as easily counter with their reasons why it isn’t. I have been privy to planning for similar exercises while I was with the CIA,
#14
Given the circumstances on our southern border, and recent revelations as to who is camping out there, this exercise would seem to be the perfect MOUT practice regimen. It's not about blending in over there - it's about blending in here so as to not tip off enemy and to be ready to react with fast, efficient and lethal force should events require. A good component of defense in depth is also to have the right mix of troop skills
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/08/2015 12:25 Comments ||
Top||
#15
It's not about blending in over there - it's about blending in here so as to not tip off enemy and to be ready to react with fast, efficient and lethal force should events require.
Agreed! Now all we need do is determine who the "enemy" is.
#16
Good point - and that's up to our civilian leadership which is why so many folks are antsy. We know who the enemy is, the administration knows who the enemy is - they're just not the same enemy.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
05/08/2015 14:49 Comments ||
Top||
#17
SOFREP also addressed the exercise in a podcast.
It sounds like the most realistic training possible.
#18
Starting in July, the story goes, the Pentagon will start taking over Texas and opening up tunnels hidden under abandoned Walmarts, precipitating a Chinese invasion. Yes, that’s actually the claim.
That's where I stopped reading.
That may be A claim, but it is by far not the only one nor the most plausible. That's a typical straw-man tactic or taking the farthest out whack-a-doodle and stating that as the "real" opposition thinking.
Rex Mundi asks that proper question, Who is the enemy?
Given the stated concerns of our current regime and the militarization of everyone from the IRS to the EPA serious questions are perfectly reasonable.
I actually doubt that this is a real threat because I can't see the Special Forces performing a coup for this crowd in the admin. I'd find the other way around more likely.
#20
OK, some of the stuff is a tad goofy, but the larger picture makes me more than a little uneasy.
Posse Comitatus, First Amendment, Second Amendment etc., could hit the $hitcan under the "right" circumstances as announced by POTUS under an emergency executive order.
That we even have to think about this kind of crap is a real testament to what we have "leading" this country and who put them there.
#21
It's a training exercise. No more, no less.
The other times this you did not hear about it because there is really nothing to report. That tells you how good it is.
You rarely get to train for a sweep in a supermarket for instance, not many mock ups for those.
It's a pro event, and we will pass on making sure the closing of the gates and doors when it's over.
#22
US Military is about the only government I totally trust. I agree with Old Spook regarding the other paramilitary-ish branches but the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are filled with the best of America. Disliking and distrusting the administration is one thing but to just assume the folks in uniform would go along with a coup or other stuff against the American people just doesn't compute. Not in today's day and age.
Today's New York Times editorial on the Garland, Texas affair protests a bit too much. One might expect liberal journalists to express solidarity with their murdered colleagues at Charlie Hebdo. Instead, the Times offers outright condemnation:
Some of those who draw cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad may earnestly believe that they are striking a blow for freedom of expression, though it is hard to see how that goal is advanced by inflicting deliberate anguish on millions of devout Muslims who have nothing to do with terrorism. As for the Garland event, to pretend that it was motivated by anything other than hate is simply hogwash.
Not to quibble, but a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, like the 2005 Mohammed caricatures in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten and the 2014 Charlie Hebdo depictions, only reached a large Muslim audience because Muslim organizations chose to make an issue of images that appeared in obscure publications with a small circulation. The cartoonists did not cause the anguish of millions of Muslims: Muslim authorities of various sorts elicited the anguish of their constituents by denouncing them. If Muslim leaders had ignored the cartoons, the millions of devout Muslims cited by the New York Times would have gone about their daily lives suffering anguish from another source: the cruel and inevitable encroachment of modernity on traditional life.
Islam is fragile, far more fragile than the traditional Catholicism which flourished in Italy, Spain, Ireland and Quebec only two generations ago and now is in shambles. We know this because the number of live births to Muslim women is falling faster than in any documented case in the history of the world.
Fertility and faith are inextricably linked; academic literature on the theme is deep and persuasive (I reviewed it in my book How Civilizations Die (and Why Islam is Dying, Too). As Mary Eberstadt argued in her 2013 book How the West Really Lost God (which I reviewed here), sterile societies lose their desire to bring children into the world before they admit that they have lost their faith.
Europe had two centuries in which to adapt to the great wave of secularization, and the old adage about how to boil a frog comes to mind: drop a frog into hot water and it will leap out of the pot, but a frog left in cold water that is slowly heated will not notice that it is being boiled. The Europeans suffered the latter fate, although traditional society in some cases raged against its end, for example Spain's Civil War. Europe had the advantage of two centuries of wealth creation, an explosion of scientific knowledge, social mobility and modern governance; Islam has the disadvantages of two centuries of economic stagnation, isolation from the scientific revolutions, the prevalence of tribal society and governance that is as cruel as it is corrupt. Modernity crept up on the Europeans, but has hit most of the Muslim world with the suddenness of a boiling bath.
...Muslim anguish will deepen, whether or not anyone publishes nasty cartoons about Mohammed (which I do not do, because I do not like vulgar insults against anyone's religion--although I will defend to the death the right to do so). Liberals will agonize along with them. The millions of devout Muslims mentioned by the Times deserve a modicum of sympathy, for life has dealt them a losing hand. The liberals on the other hand provide a fine opportunity for Schadenfreude. Unless, of course---between them, Muzzies & Tranzies manage to bring the Caliphate on our heads.
#1
I'm going to meet Spengler later this month. There a couple of things I would like to ask him. This column is now number one.
Why does he think that European's adapted easily over 2 centuries? Those weren't real smooth and easy from what I was taught. Why were the Muslims so slow to catch on? After they were removed from Spain and the Gates of Vienna they were pretty much on a downward spiral. They saw their own demise and that of Europe's many major conflagrations why didn't they learn?
#2
But it is equally clear that the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Garland, Tex., was not really about free speech. It was an exercise in bigotry and hatred posing as a blow for freedom.
Has the NYTs forgotten the images of falling burning towers in NY, people jumping from the buildings, the attack on the Pentagon, and a field in Pennsylvania. This is to say nothing of all the other terrorism and murder committed in the name of the Prophet and Islam over the past half century. I don't have a problem with Geller stirring the pot occasionally. The politicos in D.C. seem to work hard at denying that a problem exists.
#3
Does anyone think these two 'noble savages' of Islam would not have eventually struck elsewhere, and possibly with greater success and higher casualties ?
Geller and the Garland PD did society a favour. The investigative, social network spin-off may be very beneficial as well. Be thankful for it, be very thankful.
#3
Now for fok's sake, please tell me why the TTP is being publicized.
(a) "To protect our jobs."
(b) "Wouldn't it be just & proper if some of these loud 'Islamophobes' got what's coming to them (because Jihadis are aware of our SOP)?"
#4
If the FBI's Counterterrorism Task Force can monitor people and events, and warn the Garland PD, why couldn't the regional Task Force responsible for Boston warn the Boston PD about the Tsarnaev's ?
#5
The left is arguing that if a woman wears a short skirt and gets raped, it is the woman's fault she got raped? The left has turned this whole thing around.
#6
I think what really bothers the Left about Pam and Garland is how starkly they contrast with every contact the Left has with violence.
mean seriously, just about anyone given a choice would choose to be on the Right. So the Left must eliminate the choice - even the knowledge that a choice exists.
#7
Even when the venue was in lockdown and hundreds of attendees were ushered down into the auditorium, the crowd was singing the Star Spangled Banner and G-d Bless America.
Agree with everything Ms. Geller says but who censored the word God? Was it her or Time magazine?
[DAWN] IT has been barely six weeks since two churches in the Youhanabad locality of Lahore were bombed, resulting in the death of almost two dozen people. For most of us who consume 'breaking news' like a bad habit, stories like the Youhanabad 'incident' are quickly relegated to the dustbin of history. For the almost 100,000 Christians living in the area, life is not so fickle. In case you've forgotten, which is entirely possible given Pakistain's awe-inspiring murder rate, Moslems committed another mass murder of Christians, resulting in the Christians' lynching of two people suspected of involvement. Cops have arrested something like a hundred suspected of involvement in the lynching, so far zero of those Moslems even suspected of involvement in the mass murder.
It is bad enough that working-class Christians are regularly targeted by armed bigots while state authorities sit idly by; what is even more galling is that such episodes of organised violence are rendered invisible by the media and intelligentsia through their selective moulding of so-called public opinion.
To the extent to which Youhanabad was talked and written about in the days after the bombings, it was not the death of innocent Christian men, women and kiddies that made the news, but the response of the enraged mob that lynched two men in the aftermath of the church attacks. Deploring the reaction of the mob is one thing, but using the lynching as a pretext to completely erase the bombings from public memory is the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
05/08/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11126 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] A ROUTINE army corps commanders' conference has resulted in a rather extraordinary allegation: "The Conference also took serious notice of RAW's involvement in whipping up terrorism in Pakistain," according to an ISPR blurb after Tuesday's conference.
Given the forum from which the allegation has emanated, it cannot -- nor should it -- be easily dismissed. For years, Pakistain and India have traded accusations about RAW and ISI fomenting trouble in each other's vulnerable and unstable regions.
Inside Pakistain, there has been a consistent set of allegations that Fata, Balochistan ...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it... and Bloody Karachi ...formerly the capital of Pakistain, now merely its most important port and financial center. It is among the largest cities in the world, with a population of 18 million, most of whom hate each other and many of whom are armed and dangerous... have been the area of particular focus of the Indian intelligence apparatus.
With a political and security transition in Afghanistan well under way, Iran edging towards the lifting of suffocating US-led sanctions and the army heavily engaged in Fata, the regional dimensions of Pakistain's security situation are surely informing the army's concerns.
The principal question is where to go from here. A statement of condemnation by the army leadership is insufficient. Both from the point of form and substance, the next logical step is for the federal government to take the lead here.
Press releases by the ISPR are not a good way to conduct bilateral relations, especially with a neighbour accused of instigating terrorism inside Pakistain. Where the evidence exists, it should be gathered by the civilian government, assembled in clear and convincing manner and taken up at the highest diplomatic levels.
It is surely not enough for a minister or two to chip in with verbal condemnations of RAW and the Indian security establishment.
Sound bites and posturing for domestic audiences are not going to help keep Pakistain safe. There is an additional element here: the principal goal of the government should be to restart the dialogue process with India.
Where intelligence agencies may be creating mischief and stoking trouble, the only long-term answer is to try and restart a process that can lead to normalisation of ties. The seriousness of the army leadership's allegations notwithstanding, shadowy struggles between the intelligence apparatuses in the two countries should not overwhelm the broader need for finding common ground.
Finally, there is an internal dimension to the problem too: wherever it has been alleged that Indian involvement has been detected, it has come in areas long mismanaged by the Pak state itself.
Fata, Balochistan and Karachi have all suffered from the abdication by the state of its basic duties towards the people of those areas.
As the corps commanders' conference stressed, the key is to press ahead with the fight against militancy internally. But a militarised strategy will never work -- not in Fata, Balochistan or Karachi.
At best, it will cause violence to temporarily subside, as seen after previous significant operations, only for it to re-emerge elsewhere or in a different form in the same places. Ultimately, internal security is about the right internal and external policies.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/08/2015 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11126 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
The United States remains committed to a two-state solution... that can bring lasting peace and stability to both peoples. A two-state solution is the only way for Israel to ensure its future as a Jewish and democratic state. And it is the best path forward for Israel's security, for Palestinian aspirations, and for regional stability. -- Samantha Powers, US ambassador to the UN, April 21
If the new Israeli government is seen as stepping back from its commitment to a two-state solution -- that makes our jobs in the international arena a lot tougher because our ability to push back on efforts to internationalize the conflict...
has depended on our insistence that the best course is in achieving a two-state solution. -- Wendy Sherman, US under-secretary of state, April 27
President Obama has made clear that we need to take a hard look at our approach to the conflict. We look to the next Israeli government... to demonstrate -- through policies and actions -- a genuine commitment to a two-state solution. -- Susan Rice, US national security adviser, April 29
#1
I dunno, girls. Hard to imagine a long-lasting two-state solution, when one state is determined to eradicate the other. Unless the two states in question are the quick and the dead.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
[DAWN] IT has been barely six weeks since two churches in the Youhanabad locality of Lahore were bombed, resulting in the death of almost two dozen people. For most of us who consume 'breaking news' like a bad habit, stories like the Youhanabad 'incident' are quickly relegated to the dustbin of history. For the almost 100,000 Christians living in the area, life is not so fickle.
