Last night I was chatting by phone with a well-informed priest, brilliant and with a vast knowledge of history ancient and contemporary, about various developments political, social and ecclesial.
He told me alarming thing which I hadn’t heard before.
He mentioned that Presidential candidate Sen. Barak Obama (D-IL), in a speech in Colorado Springs last July, went off the prepared pre-released stump speech and announced his desire for a "civilian national security force".
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
Civilian… just as strong.. just as well funded as the military….
What would that cost? From what segment of the population would such a civilian security force be recruited? Who would opt to enlist in such a force? If there is recruitment of the military, who would then be the target for such a force?
Those comments, which he spoke, were not in the text of the speech as released by the campaign. Thus, he either spoke them off the cuff, which is plausible, or they were cleansed from the speech, which is unlikely, since these speechs wind up being recorded by many sources.
Aside from the incredible expense of such a thing, I wonder how that would be different from what local law enforcement and state national guards do.
But there is a rather disturbing dimension to this idea, which I think we can surmise reveals something of the candidate’s mind, since he went off script to talk about it.
The paramilitary nature of such a "security force", has the ring of the Sturmabteilung, the SA, of 1930’s Germany. Brownshirts. They were unleashed on those who opposed the goals of the poltical party the NSDAP… which is known usually by a different name these days.
I don’t care who the candidate is or what party he belongs to… I find even the whisper of the musings of an idea of a proposal about such a thing truly disturbing.
Compound this proposal with the oversight of someone rooted in the Marxism of Black Liberation Theology and formation in the radical thought of Saul Alinsky, who dedicated his Rules for Radicals to Lucifer, I start to get alarmed.
I frankly don’t know what at the time were the reactions to this proposal in the press. It seems to have gone off the screen. This suggests to me both that people at the time didn’t perhaps catch some of the darker implications of such a "security force", or the press at the time quieted the coverage.
As a result, I must suspend to a certain extent alarm in favor of disturbed curiosity.
Since this post is likely to bring out the wackos, who will inevitably leap to the stupid conclusion that I am being politically partisan, I will leave the comments off.
I need to understand more about this whole thing.
If people have helpful things to contribute, they can e-mail me and, if I consider them apt, I will post them.
Loading ...
This is from a reader:
Another reader:
From a reader: