PDA

View Full Version : Sabotage: The "Peace Movement"'s Plans for War



nickg
03-20-2003, 11:15 AM
<a href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/Content/read.asp?ID=35" target="_blank">http://www.frontpagemag.com/Content/read.asp?ID=35</a>

Sabotage: The "Peace Movement"'s Plans for War

by David Horowitz
Volume 1 Issue 6- Tuesday, March 18, 2003

THE THREAT: On the day after the U.S. military action in Iraq begins, the so-called peace movement will begin their own war at home. The plan is to cause major disruptions - illegal in nature - in cities across the country to disrupt the flow of normal civic life. These actions will tie up Homeland Security forces and create a golden opportunity for domestic terrorists. The Fifth Column left is also planning to invade military bases. Here is a report from Salon.com's Michelle Goldberg:

"[Camp] Vandenberg is about 50 miles north Santa Barbara, Calif. In a few days, activists will start converging on a nearby four-acre plot of land…. They're going to camp there and train to breach the base's security and possibly vandalize some of its equipment.

"The [leader of the activists] describes the base as 'the electronic nerve center of the global-surveillance-targeting, weapons-guidance, and military-command satellites that will largely direct the war.' The base is 99,000 square acres, with a perimeter running through rugged, wooded terrain. 'If people are committed and determined and in halfway decent physical shape, it is possible to get in, because it's enormous and much of the land is still fairly wild,' he says.

"Within the base, [the action leader] says, are 'major off-limits security zones,' that, when breached, 'set off a series of responses in their own security procedures which require disruption and partial shut down of regular activities,' which means the base can't operate at full capacity."
------------------------------------------------------------------------

if you get caught you get shot. simple as that.

SGT Dave
03-20-2003, 11:24 AM
By tying up our forces at home, I'd vote they are "giving comfort to our enemies" so they could be handled as traitors or seditionists.

Again, I applaud them for making it this easy for us. :D

nickg
03-20-2003, 11:54 AM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by SGT Dave:
<strong>By tying up our forces at home, I'd vote they are "giving comfort to our enemies" so they could be handled as traitors or seditionists.

</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">can you arrest some for "sedition" according to US laws since there has been no "formal" declaration of war? that might be a thorny issue. but other than sedition, they can be arrested for numerous offenses no prob!!

i'm all for it one way or the other. i just hope that some heads are cracked in the process. seeing idiot moronic protesters getting cracked, dragged, cuffed, and arrested beats ANY sitcom for laughs by far!! :D

BrickCop
03-20-2003, 12:05 PM
I won't care if those clueless protesters want to do so peacefully OUTSIDE of the base and without interference.

However, if they intentionally breach the perimeter/security in an attempt to disrupt operations then I say shoot them on sight. They would go from being protesters to domestic terrorists.

Many protesters view arrests as like getting a badge of honor. Blocking a city street is one thing, trying to disrupt military operations is way over the line and a clear message should be sent- shoot them.

johnguy
03-20-2003, 01:30 PM
Ah, i thought i head something about protesters wanting to breach military bases. lol wold that not give base security etc, a go ahead to shoot those stupid morons? if so i can't see this being much of a problem lol.

Oink
03-20-2003, 10:30 PM
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by BRICKCOP:
<strong>However, if they intentionally breach the perimeter/security in an attempt to disrupt operations then I say shoot them on sight.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I agree! :D
Having a stupid opinion is one thing, and their right, But disrupting the war effort in this manner is domestic terrorism.
Better idea than shoot them wouold be to draft 'em the second they enter a military base. Just grab 'em and ship 'em off to Iraq and give 'em a rifle. To save money make it a rifle that's a little cheaper than an M16 since they won't last long without training anyway(which also saves money) Problem solved.

jarhead6073
03-20-2003, 11:11 PM
Especially in a high-security area like that. Getting into a local reserve center or something probably won't get you killed; but you start messing with sensative areas and the use of force continuum leaps to deadly real quick.