No products in the cart.

News

National Guard Troops Patrol California City, Conduct New Jersey “Homeland Response Drill”

national-guard Ontario

This article was originally published at Zero Hedge

Late last week, when we covered the various signs that “something big” may be coming, we discussed the one “exercise that people have really been buzzing about” – operation “Jade Helm”, an “unconventional warfare exercise” during which the states Texas and Utah will be designated as hostile territory.

As previously profiled, “Jade Helm is a challenging eight-week joint military and Interagency (IA) Unconventional Warfare (UW) exercise conducted throughout Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah and Colorado,” according to an unclassified military document announcing the training drill, which runs from July 15 through September 15.

Multiple branches of the US military, including Green Berets, Navy Seals, and the 82nd Airborne Division, will participate in the 8-week long exercise, which may result in “increased aircraft in the area at night.”

Troops will be tasked with honing advanced skills in “large areas of undeveloped land with low population densities,” and will work alongside “civilians to gain their trust and an understanding of the issues.”

The exercise, in which some participants will be “wearing civilian clothes and driving civilian vehicles,” lists Texas and Utah as “hostile” territory.

The proposed theater of operations of Operation Jade Helm is shown on the map below:

National Guard Troops Patrol California City, Conduct New Jersey "Homeland Response Drill"

So while there are still three months until Jade Helm officially opens, various documented reports of substantial national guard drills and troop exercises are starting to trickle in early. As Paul Joseph Watson notes, the first documented proof of National Guard drills comes from Ontario, California where National Guard troops can be seen patrolling residential streets and practicing traffic control.

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=”https://youtu.be/Hj7efDgGRH0″]

In the video troops, followed by a humvee, are seen marching close to an elementary school and single family homes.

“I just watched it again and recognized the low block wall and the elementary school! It was right there where my sister and her husband live! OMG how frightening!” one YouTube commenter responded, while others insisted the patrols were a routine occurrence.

However, another respondent insisted that the patrol was not normal.

“During the last few seconds I got a quick glimpse of my sister and brother-in-laws house on Fuschia. Ave,” wrote the commenter.”That motorcycle was parked almost in front of their house. They told me they saw this procession going on from their front yard. They have lived in that house for 30 or so yrs and this is the first time they have seen this type of thing in their neighborhood. Might be a common thing to do their training someplace else but not in that area.”

This is not the first such clip: a disturbing video out of Fort Lauderdale, Florida last month also showed military and law enforcement practicing the internment of citizens during martial-law style training.

Meanwhile on the eastern US easboard, the PostStar reports that nearly 600 Army and Air National Guard forces from New Jersey and New York “are preparing for the worst.”

They are participating in a homeland response force drill at New Jersey’s Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst on Friday.

The troops specialize in rescue, security, decontamination and medical treatment.

The units will train to rapidly assess and identify a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear incident.

Of course, the bigger concern is that the real motive behind this major national guard exercise is not a focus on a “defensive” drill from an outside threat, but one dealing with a domestic threat.

How is that possible, some would say? Could the national guard really be preparing for a confrontation with the US population?

Unfortunately the answer is yes, as we reported last August in “Under What Conditions Can The US Army Engage Citizens: The Army’s “Civil Disturbances” Primer” which lays out not only when the US Army (and national guard) can engage the US population, but lays out clearly the protocol under which the US army is specifically permitted to engage in “PSYOPs” against the US population.

Here are the salient points, as reported previously, from the primer which begins with the umbrella statement:

Civil unrest may range from simple, nonviolent protests that address specific issues, to events that turn into full-scale riots. Gathering in protest may be a recognized right of any person or group, regardless of where U.S. forces may be operating. In the United States, this fundamental right is protected under the Constitution of the United States…

“Protected” it may be, but as usual, the interpretation of the Constitution is in the eye of the beholder, or more appropriately, gun holder. Because shortly thereafter we further read the following:

The Constitution of the United States, laws, regulations, policies, and other legal issues limit the use of federal military personnel in domestic support operations. Any Army involvement in civil disturbance operations involves many legal issues requiring comprehensive legal reviews. However, federal forces are authorized for use in civil disturbance operations under certain circumstances.

What circumstances? For the answer we turn to section, 2-8. To wit:

The Constitution of the United States provides two exceptions for which the Posse Comitatus Act does not apply. These exceptions are based upon the inherent right of the U.S. government to ensure the preservation of public order and to carrying out governmental operations within its territorial limits by force, if necessary. These two exceptions are—
  • Emergency authority. A sudden and unexpected civil disturbance, disaster, or calamity may seriously endanger life and property and disrupt normal governmental functions to such an extent that local authorities cannot control the situation. At such times, the federal government may use military force to prevent the loss of life or wanton destruction of property and to restore government functions and public order. In these circumstances, federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances (see DODD 3025.18).
  • Protection of federal property and functions. When the need for the protection of federal property or federal functions exists, and duly constituted local authorities are unable to, or decline to provide adequate protection, federal action, including the use of military forces, is authorized.

2-9. Laws passed by the U.S. congress include four exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act. With the first three laws discussed below (10 USC 331–333) there is a prerequisite that the President must take personal action, including the issuance of a proclamation calling upon insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably within a limited time. The four exceptions, based on law are—

  • 10 USC 331. When a state is unable to control domestic violence and they have requested federal assistance, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.
  • 10 USC 332. When ordinary enforcement means are unworkable due to unlawful obstructions or rebellion against the authority of the United States, use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.
  • 10 USC 333. When a state cannot or will not protect the constitutional rights of the citizens, due to domestic violence or conspiracy to hinder execution of State or Federal law, the use of the militia or Armed Forces is authorized.
  • House Joint Resolution 1292. This resolution directs all departments of the U.S. government, upon request of the Secret Service, to assist in carrying out its statutory duties to protect government officials and major political candidates from physical harm.

In other words, if and when the US Armed Forces decide that rioting infringes upon any of these exclusions, then the constitution no longer applies and the use of lethal force becomes a viable option against US citizens.

It gets worse, because whereas one would expect that a “Constitutional expert” such as the president, Barack Obama would be the one tasked with interpreting if and when the Constitution no longer applies, the primer is quite explicit in handing over responsibility to “federal military commanders”:

… federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbance.

So should Obama resume his vacation even as things in Missouri escalate dramatically, and be “unreachable”, it may well come to pass that Obama’s opinion will be irrelevant not only whether the National Guard should be unleashed in Ferguson, but whether Posse Comitatus is suddenly null and void.

The good news: the use of lethal force is not the only option the US Army would have if and when it engages with the population. US citizens may simply  be herded into “temporary internment camps” for reindoctrination purposes under the supervision of PSYOP Officer (no really, they used that word), as follows from the Army’s FM3-39.40 Internment and Resettlment Operationsmanual:

Internment and Resettlement (I/R) operations facilitate the ability to conduct rapid and decisive combat operations; deter, mitigate, and defeat threats to populations that may result in conflict; reverse conditions of human suffering; and build the capacity  of a foreign government to effectively care for and govern its population. This includes capabilities to conduct  shaping operations across the spectrum of military operations to mitigate and defeat the underlying conditions  for conflict and counter the core motivations that result in support to criminal, terrorist, insurgent, and other destabilizing groups. I/R operations also include the daily incarceration of U.S. military prisoners at facilities  throughout the world.

An adaptive enemy will manipulate populations that are hostile to U.S. intent by instigating mass civil disobedience, directing criminal activity, masking their operations in urban and other complex terrain, maintaining an indistinguishable presence through cultural anonymity, and actively seeking the traditional sanctuary of protected areas as defined by the rules of land warfare. Such actions will facilitate the dispersal of threat forces, negate technological overmatches, and degrade targeting opportunities. Commanders will use technology and conduct police intelligence operations to influence and control populations, evacuate detainees and, conclusively, transition rehabilitative and reconciliation operations to other functional agencies. The combat identification of friend, foe, or neutral is used to differentiate combatants from noncombatants and friendly forces from threat forces.

Presenting army camps, hopefully not in a city near you:

Detainee facilities, an important planning consideration, are treated in the same basic fashion as any base camps. The same basic planning considerations are taken into  account. Some detainee facilities will be subordinate to a larger base camp but they may also be at a separate location.

Of course, none of this will be needed if the Army’s Psyops work as required:

The PSYOP officer in charge of supporting I/R operations serves as the special staff officer responsible for PSYOP. The PSYOP officer advises the military police commander on the psychological impact of military police or MI actions to prevent misunderstandings and disturbances by detainees and DCs. The supporting I/R PSYOP team has two missions that reduce the need to divert military police assets to maintain security in the I/R facility.  The team—
  • Assists the military police force in controlling detainees and DCs.
  • Introduces detainees or DCs to U.S. and multinational policy.
  • Develops PSYOP products that are designed to pacify and acclimate detainees or DCs to accept U.S. I/R facility authority and regulations.
  • Gains the cooperation of detainees or DCs to reduce the number of guards needed.
  • Identifies malcontents, trained agitators, and political leaders within the facility who may try to organize resistance or create disturbances.
  • Develops and executes indoctrination programs to reduce or remove antagonistic attitudes.
  • Identifies political activists.
  • Provides loudspeaker support (such as administrative announcements and facility instructions when necessary).
  • Helps the military police commander control detainee and DC populations during emergencies.
  • Plans and executes a PSYOP

In other words, if and when the time comes to “override” Posse Comitatus, random US citizens may have two options: i) end up in the US version of a Gulag or, worse, ii) be shot. For now, however, just keep an eye on the various drill videos to get a sense of the US army’s preparedness in dealing with “civil disobedience.”

0

Brandon Smith

Oath Keepers Merchandise

8 comments

  1. A ruck march in formation with road guards and a guidon is hardly the same thing as “patrolling residential streets and practicing traffic control”. This story has been out long enough that OK should recognize it as FUD and not be posting it on the front page with such a misleading headline.

    1. Troops are fully capable of “ruck marching” on base. That is what military bases are for. They even have fake residential areas set up for real world training. They do not need to march through residential areas and practice diverting traffic. Also, you completely neglected all other evidence presented in the article. This is what sheeple do. Don’t act like a sheeple.

    2. doesn’t matter, they don’t need to be on the streets, this isn’t a frigging warzone…this is out of control.

  2. I may be old(56) BUT I AM NOT STUPID. I WILL STAND WITH YOU. I SUGGEST, YOU START IN DC. CUT OFF THE HEAD THE SNAKE.

  3. @ gentlemanJack, “A ruck march in formation with road guards and a guidon is hardly the same thing as “patrolling residential streets and practicing traffic control”.”

    I am sorry, I must have misread the article… the military was MARCHING on civilian streets is what I thought it said. I do not care what type of marching, unless it is in a PARADE, it is NOT lawful or normal here in America. ‘

    In China, Russia, Germany, Thailand, etc the “show of military force” to intimidate the peoples and remind them who is in charge happens all the time.

    All of those that marched following UNLAWFUL orders on American Soil are questionable as Americans under the US Constitution, and the Oath they are PERSONALLY responsible for. As long as they will follow the orders to march on American streets, where will they draw the line, if they will even draw the line? This is America, we are a Constitutional Republic that is NOT supposed to even have a STANDING MILITARY, as they are to be called up WHEN THE CONGRESS DECLARES WAR. They will come from the TRAINED (organized) Militia who will hold the ground by defending America until the “regulars are called” – mostly from the organized Militias.

    Think it is not so? Read the US Constitution. Read our forefathers and the framers.

    James Madison said that war “has the tendency to render the head too large for the body.” Madison concluded, “A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty.” Madison was not alone in this belief.

    US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 11: “To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water”.

    Clause 12 specifies that there shall be no military beyond that of two years. The Militia of each state is charged with our nations defense here within the USA until and unless the congress has declared war and a “standing” military is raised:

    Clause 12: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.

    Clause 12 was put in as a lawfully assigned duty of congress because, as James Madison, the Father of the US Constitution warned: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare”.

    Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, floor debate over the 2nd Amendment, I Annals of Congress : “What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to PREVENT THE ESTABLISMENT OF A STANDING ARMY, the bane of liberty….”

    Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions.”

    Clause 16: “To provide for organizing, ARMING, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.

    Thomas Jefferson, 1st inaugural, explained that: “a well-disciplined militia” is “our best reliance in peace and for the first moments of war, till regulars may relieve them” and also a guarantee of “the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; [and] economy in the public expense.”

    Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers 28: “The militia is a voluntary force not associated or under the control of the States except when called out; [when called into actual service] a permanent or long standing force would be entirely different in make-up and call.”

    Thomas Cooley: “The right is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the law, ARE LIABLE TO THE PERFORMANCE OF MILITARY DUTY, AND ARE OFFICERED AND ENROLLED FOR SERVICE WHEN CALLED UPON. . . If the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for that purpose”.

    Samuel Adams: “Under every government the last resort of the people, is an appeal to the sword; whether to defend themselves against the open attacks of a foreign enemy, or to check the insidious encroachments of domestic foes. Whenever a people … entrust the defence of their country to a regular, standing army, composed of mercenaries, the power of that country will remain under the direction of the most wealthy citizens.
    And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; or to raise standing armies, unless necessary for the defense of the United States, or of some one or more of them; or to prevent the people from petitioning, in a peaceable and orderly manner, the federal legislature, for a redress of grievances; or to subject the people to unreasonable searches and seizures of their persons, papers or possessions”.

    Samuel Adams: “It is always dangerous to the liberties of the people to have an army stationed among them, over which they have no control … The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of their making use of their Power to the destruction of their own Rights, or suffering others to invade them..”

    Notice that here Patrick Henry warns us to never let the Militia die out as a standing military (and that does include militirized lea’s) can never be trusted to NOT “JUST FOLLOW ORDERS” AND TO NOT “JUST DO THEIR JOB” to the detriment of the American people.

    Patrick Henry: “If you have given up your militia, and Congress shall refuse to arm them, you have lost every thing. Your existence will be precarious, because you depend on others, whose interests are not affected by your infelicity.”

    Justice Story, Associate Justice, Supreme Court wrote: “The next amendment is: “A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
    The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them”.

    Tench Coxe: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American…The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”

    Tench Coxe, ‘Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’, in the Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, on the Second Amendment where he asserts that it’s the people with arms, who serve as the ultimate check on government: “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”.

    Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers 65: “A president should be impeached for “offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated political, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to society itself.”

    That would be the Patriot Act, all US Presidents INCLUDING Bush 1. The NDAA, the NSA, the TSA, etc all are acts or actions AGAINST the American people and against the authority authorized to those that serve TEMPORARILY in those positions, making it TREASON.

    Thomas Jefferson: “It would be a dangerous delusion were a confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the safety of our rights; that confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism; free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy, and not confidence, which prescribes limited constitutions to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power; that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no farther, our confidence may go…. In questions of power, let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

    Just in case you think that those who serve within the executive branch, or even backed by those who serve within the judicial branch can take the US people to war… They LAWFULLY cannot.

    James Madison: “The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature … the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.”

    George Washington: “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”

    James Madison: “In time of actual war, great discretionary powers are constantly given to the Executive Magistrate. Constant apprehension of War, has the same tendency to render the head too large for the body. A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defence against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.”

    –> this one should sound a lot like what has been happening in the USA in the last few (quite a few) decades here in America.

    –> James Madison: “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied: and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

    James Madison: “The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.”

    James Madison warned: “No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.”

    So NO, it is not okay as they are NOT supposed to exist anyway – and to be used in/on American soil, worse, in American streets is the epitome of corruptness and NOT KEEPING AND HONORING the Oath.

    Quit letting those who SERVE within our governments do your thinking for you. Do not even allow me to. VERIFY everything I just said.

    BTW

    It has already been established by those who serve within our governments that the original intent of the Second Amendment to enable the people themselves to defend against tyranny which comes from a corrupt and oppressive government. This right to defense is not special to Americans, as it is THE natural right of all peoples on this planet.

    Remember that in the 70s and 80’s the mujahideen (basically a Militia) was engaged against fighting tyranny against the Soviets. To aid them in their fight, those who serve within our federal government (USA) sent Stinger rocket launchers so that the Afghan Militia could wage an more equal battle against the much better equipped Soviet forces.

    Our own federal government did establish precedent that, in today’s age of a modern military, modern military weapons fall within the scope of the weapons necessary for citizen militias fighting against tyranny – inadvertently making the case that they should be covered under the 2nd amendment.

  4. Stuart Rhodes was to pen his opinion on Jade Helm this week. Still waiting. I smell a big RAT on this exercise. My friend in San Angelo, TX said the military equipment already massing (jeeps) have the FEMA logo – not army, etc. There is just no reason to train in our cities, large or small.

  5. The documented evidence that this display of force on the American continent is without a constitutional doubt, illegal. It would be comforting to know whether or not the commanders of this operation are in line with the designs of the current power structure of the American politic, but the average citizen is not privy to this information.

    I believe that instead of reaching out to these and other units in this exercise with Push Cards and Tri-Folds and accompanying videos along with this warranted 1st Amendment activity towards our service members in the ranks. We have missed a prime and important counter exercise in RTI and education to these young soldiers that to some if not many would be the fire of ideas lit in their minds to hopefully perhaps in the future cause a total if not partial breakdown of an actually attempted martial law scenario.

    Would have been great to see the video maker or a chapter of Oath Keepers handing out the orders that we will not obey Push Cards and Tri-Folds that many of us use on a daily basis. Just saying HEARTS AND MINDS people, we must engage these soldiers with brotherhood, friendship and education while we still can.

    This will give our numbers the moral high ground if and when it is too late to be peaceful.

Comments are closed.