The Army’s Plan for Martial Law Carried Out Under UN Authority

The Common Sense Show
by Dave Hodges

Since February of 2014, I have written about a series of planned actions, on the part of the US Army which would give them martial law power over the people of the United States. In the same time frame, I have written extensively about the futuristic plans of the United Nations Agenda 21 to create densely populated megacities.

This article examines the “perfect storm” that is presently occurring which is witnessing the manifestation of Agenda 21 living conditions in America and a vicious martial law occupation force which will be presiding over these megacities.

No speculation is required; the government admits complicity in this plot by their own actions and in their own documents. The title page of this PDF is displayed below.

US ARMY DOCUMENT GUARANTEES MARTIAL LAW WITHIN AN AGENDA 21 NIGHTMARISH SCENARIO

The smoking gun document that virtually guarantees an Army enforced martial law way of life, within an Agenda 21 megacities framework:

MEGACITIES AND THE UNITED STATES ARMY
PREPARING FOR A COMPLEX AND UNCERTAIN FUTURE
June 2014

nyc martial law

Chief of Staff of the Army, Strategic Studies Group
Megacities Concept Team:
Colonel Marc Harris, Lieutenant Colonel Robert Dixon, Major Nicholas Melin, Command Sergeant Major Daniel Hendrex, Sergeant Major Richard Russo
and Mr. Michael Bailey

An Army report boldly proclaims that American troops need to be ready and willing to enter New York City and other global “megacities” in the “near future”.  The purpose of this instruction by the Army in the nation’s domestic affairs, in violation of Posse Comitatus would be to prevent civil unrest (i.e. “precrime”), political uprisings and protect key infrastructure and natural resources in the national interest. In other words, the American Army will be deployed because what the American people “MIGHT DO”. The official Army report is entitled “Megacities and the United States Army” (PDF), and it was released by the Chief of Staff of the Army, Strategic Studies Group.

The report disturbingly states that, “It is inevitable that at some point the United States Army will be asked to operate in a megacity and currently the Army is ill-prepared to do so.”

Megacities and the U.S. Army

Previously, on August 27, 2014, I reported on the rapid progress of the “megacities” concept. It is an United Nations created Agenda 21 plan initiated by the global elite to establish 11 megacity regions, each containing approximately six million people. Please note that somebody apparently forgot to tell the United Nations that the United States has 310 million people, not 66 million as their future plans call for housing. Nobody, in an official capacity, dealt with the numerical discrepancy between the present population of the United States and the planned population of the United States. And now, and very disturbingly, the Army has announced that it is inserting itself into this process. Before proceeding, you may wish to read “The Psychological Reasons Why American Soldiers Would Fire On American Citizens“, as it details the well-researched psychological reasons that the U.S. military would fire upon American citizens if ordered to do so. I would also recommend that you read my previous report “The Nightmarish Megacities of the Near Future“. These two reports will psychologically prepare the reader to fully understand the clear intentions of the Army as detailed in the following paragraphs.

The Army and Their Planned Megacity Intervention

megacities map2

The aforementioned Army report details the reasons given for why the U.S. Army would insert itself into major cities to deal with “civil unrest”. With regard to the power of the people vs. the power of the state, this Army document leaves no doubt as to which group is the sovereign and the Constitutional principle of the sovereign people controlling its government is officially dead and buried.

Some of the other reasons that the Army will “occupy” the megacities will include “income disparity,” “natural disasters,” and “illicit networks” that would dare to challenge the “authority of state power”. The document goes on to state that the military will be training its forces to oppose those who could engage in the “precrime” activity of influencing the lives of the American population while undermining the authority of the state.You must feel like you have stumbled upon Part Two of Orwell’s  classic book, 1984.

At this point, a summary statement needs to be made. The Agenda 21 megacities plan, often referred to America 2050, will be enforced under the dictates of martial law in which absolutely no political dissent will be allowed. 

U.S. Army Techniques Publication 3-39.33: Civil Disturbances

 I have also previously reported on the Army’s, August 15, 2014, of how they plan to deal with dissidents and protesters. The new Army manual, known as ATP 3-39.33, provides discussion and techniques about civil disturbances and crowd control operations that occur in the continental United States (CONUS) and outside the continental United States (OCONUS).

The following are diagrams lifted from  ATP 3-39.33 which instructs soldiers how to kill and disable American citizens.

How to best kill and maim an American.

How to best kill and maim an American.

 

army use of lethal force

 

ATP 3-39.33 speaks to the Army strategy of deploying snipers at public events and protests and “eliminating” the leadership of any such activity. This document not only marks the death of the leaders of any civil disobedience, but it marks the death of the First Amendment to the Constitution as it eliminate any right of the people to “peaceably assemble” and to allow the people the full expression of the right “to express grievances” against the government.

On February 22, 2014, I revealed the existence of a classified Army document which has been leaked online, is entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF). The document was originally to be kept secret, but everyone in the military command structure, as we know, is not on board with the encroaching tyranny sweeping across this country.

The Army Did Not Wait To Begin Training for the Martial Law Takeover

The Army has been diligently training to lock the country down in an Agenda 21 megacites imposed martial law. They did not wait for the release of the aforementioned martial law documents. Specifically, I am referring to the Army’s building of a ‘fake” $96 million dollar Northern Virginia town which is being used to train the military to enforce martial Law. Of course, the government says that this is a foreign town being used to train our troops to occupy. If this is true, then someone needs to explain why the town has a Christian church, handicap parking spots, Washington DC subway logos, loading zone signs and road signs in English. A picture is worth a thousand words as you will see in the following video.

 

No Martial Law Takeover Would Be Complete Without Detention Camps

Since the Army documents make it clear that no public dissent against the policies of the prevailing state authority will be permitted, the Army would be compelled to establish detention centers to house “dissidents”. As an aside, please note that the Army does NOT refer to the prevailing civil authority as “duly elected officials”, or, “Constitutionally mandated authority”. Further, there is strong evidence, based upon more government documents that the coming and planned detention camps will be manned by foreign troops.

 In the Words of the Army

Straight from the Internment/Resettlement article (12 February 2010 FM 3-39.40 1-5) it states the following:

“…I/R operations may place Soldiers in continuous contact with or near insurgents, terrorists, or criminals who will exploit every opportunity to escape and kill or injure U.S. personnel or multinational partners“.

 

An occupation force is being mobilized.

An occupation force is being mobilized.

Please allow me to remind the reader that back in late may and early June, that The Common Sense Show devoted a lot of attention to the sightings of UN vehicles on American soil, particularly in and around the southern border area of the United States.

Whether you believe there are Russian troops training on our soil, along with other UN “Peacekeeping” troops is an irrelevant argument at this point. The above excerpt and the following paragraphs will make it clear regarding the INTENT to use “multinational partners” to round up and detain American citizens.

un vehicles 2

The following is a list of involved agencies involved in the soon-to-be roundups of American citizens who are not drinking from globalist Kool-Aid.

AGENCIES CONCERNED WITH INTERNMENT AND RESETTLEMENT 

The following are excerpts from this martial law doctrine which reveals the true intent as to what is happening behind the scenes in America.

1-40. External involvement in I/R missions is a fact of life for military police organizations. Some government and government-sponsored entities that may be involved in I/R missions include—

International agencies.

The UN

International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

International Organization of Migration.

U.S. agencies.

Local U.S. embassy.

Department of Homeland Security.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Federal Emergency Management Agency.

 

There can be no doubt as to the meaning of the above quote from the manual. This government plans to enlist the aid of foreign troops in conjunction with the UN, DHS and FEMA for the purpose of rounding up and detaining American civilians.

Segregation of Civilian Detainees

I have previously been told my military sources that when families are transported to the I/R camps, husbands will be segregated from wives and children from parents. Some scoffed at the details of the report. To those people, I would suggest reading from the I/R Resettlement documents:

Detainees may also be segregated by ethnic and family groups and further segregated to protect vulnerable individuals. Additionally, detainees may be categorized by behavior (cooperative, neutral, or combative) to accurately resource guards and facilities”. Juveniles within the I/R population are typically segregated from the general population. (See DODD 3115.09.)

You Are An Enemy Combatant

Most of us who are detained in these I/R camps will be classified as enemy combatants. The following reads like the MIAC Report on steroids.

“Enemy Combatants

1-15. An enemy combatant is, in general, a person engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners during an armed conflict. (JP 3-63) Enemy combatant includes EPWs and members of armed groups.

1-16. Enemy combatants are divided as follows:

An enemy prisoner of war is a detained person who, while engaged in combat under orders of his or her government, was captured by the armed forces of the enemy.

Member of an armed group is a person who engages in or supports acts against the United States or its multinational partners in violation of the laws and customs of war during a named conflict that do not meet the criteria of a prisoner of war as defined within the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War”

 

The last sentence is frightening. It says that anyone who supports acts against the United States or its foreign mercenaries, is not entitled to humane treatment under the Geneva Convention. An offense against the US government could include the failure to turn in your gun or to not pay your taxes. This also opens the door to torture and summary extermination as you will not likely have any rights. For those who think this is an exaggeration, ask yourself what does “do not meet the criteria defined within the Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of prisoners of war”, actually mean?

We already know that the present administration holds the US Constitution in complete disdain and utter contempt. Do you remember the domestic terrorist designations which are contained in the MIAC Report?  An authority not recognized by this criminal government would include Libertarians, Constitutionalists, a former Ron Paul supporter, a Bible believing Christian, a Second Amendment supporter and a veteran. If you belong to any of these groups, you are a domestic terrorist, an enemy combatant, a sovereign citizen and a stateless person.

The Legal Justification to Snatch You From Your Home

The following definition of an “evacuee” should concern all Americans. The definition of the term indicates the right of the military to remove a citizen from their home.

“Evacuee. An evacuee is a civilian removed from a place of residence by military direction for reasons of personal security or the requirements of the military situation.” (JP 3-57)

Do you remember when the globalists began to use the term “sovereign citizen”? This term was applied by DHS to Americans who claimed that they followed the Constitution, but not the “legitimate” governmental authority. The first time that I saw the term utilized by the government was in the Stacy Lynne case in which this anti-Agenda 21 activist had her son stolen by a NWO Judge, Julie Kunce Field, without so much as an allegation of parental wrong doing. This former World Bank and IMF consultant, turned judge, referred to Stacy as a “sovereign citizen”. As a result, Stacy was not allowed to call witnesses or object to the illegal practices she was subjected to while in Fields’ courtroom on the basis of any of the “constitutional violations” of law.  This designation by this globalist judge was used as the impetus to steal Stacy’s son from her custody for her part in anti-Agenda 21 political activities. Fields was signaling what was coming for all of us by her application of the law in the Lynne case. The following defines a sovereign citizen as a stateless person.

Stateless Person. A stateless person is a civilian who has been denationalized or whose country of origin cannot be determined or who cannot establish a right to the nationality claimed.

If one is a stateless person, they are, by default, an enemy combatant. I have been assisting the Larimer County resident, Stacy Lynne, for 26 months. Stacy has not been able to see her son in almost a year and a half. I always wondered what kind of chicken outfit could steal someone’s child without cause. When I read this I/R manual, my eyes were opened and chills went up and down my spine. What was done to Stacy was accomplished because she was an anti-Agenda 21 advocate. And through the complicity of this globalist judge, Stacy was declared to not be a citizen and, as such, was not entitled to any Constitutional protections because a “sovereign citizen” is in effect a stateless person. Go back to original document in this article in which the Army declares that it will impose martial law in the megacities.

When martial law comes to our land, we will be snatched from our homes because of our collective verbal and behavioral resistance to the tyranny that is sweeping our land. We will be met by the likes of  the self-appointed authority that globalist judges like Julie Kunce Field represent. These despots will use their unconstitutional powers to declare a wide swath of Americans to be stateless, or sovereign citizens. This will be the excuse designed to steal our children from us and to imprison us in the new I/R Resettlment camps.

This mentality already exists in places like Ft. Collins, CO., and in Austin, TX. Soon, the entire nation will be declaring any perceived dissident to be a sovereign citizen.

Conclusion

Do I have to spell it out for you? All of us are Stacy Lynne. The NDAA is for you and for me. Sixty six million of us will be “stacked and packed” into an Agenda 21 nightmarish existence enforced by the U.S. Army.

By virtue of the fact that you have visited this website, or a website that linked into this website, your every keystroke has been cataloged by the NSA and you and your family have been declared to be non-citizens and are targeted for forced Internment/Resettlement at some future date. This will most likely occur following a false flag event.

In the eyes of this criminal administration, we are all enemy combatants. We are all “sovereign citizens”. We are all stateless people not protected by either the Constitution, in the pre-arrest period, or, by the Geneva Convention, in the post-arrest period.In the next part of this series, I will spell out what losing your Geneva Convention rights will mean to you and your family.

You will never stand before a judge and jury and have your freedom stripped from you. You will likely be taken from your home at 3AM, loaded into a transport vehicle with other designated sovereign citizens with only the clothes on your back, and shipped to your final designated I/R camp.

Also in the next part of this series, I will expose more details on the upcoming mass incarcerations and what the dead banksters and fired generals have to do with all of this.

The Common Sense Show

Washington Menaces America With Its ISIS Creation

New Eastern Outlook
by Tony Cartalucci

4535121The Washington Times in an article titled, “Intel believes 300 Americans fighting with Islamic State, posing threat to U.S.,” makes the incredible claim that:

The U.S. government is tracking and gathering intelligence on as many as 300 Americans who are fighting side by side with the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria and are poised to become a major threat to the homeland, according to senior U.S. officials.

Officials say concern is widespread in Washington that radicalized foreign fighters could return to the homeland and commit terrorist attacks with skills acquired overseas, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the information. Those concerns were heightened by the disclosure Tuesday that a California man was killed fighting alongside militants with the group, also known as ISIS.

It is incredible because the United States’ National Security Agency (NSA) has not only been tapping and recording phone conversations of Americans for years, but also tracking phone locations as well. How is it that this massive, invasive, illegal, abhorrent surveillance control grid can be put in place, sold to the public as a necessity to “protect Americans” and “national security,” yet miss entire battalions of Americans signing up for and joining overseas, a terrorist organization like the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS)?

If the very scenarios the NSA uses to justify its abhorrent means have unfolded unimpeded, revealed only by “chance” with the passport of an American turning up in the pockets of dead terrorists upon an alleged battlefield in Syria, either the NSA’s existence serves another purpose, or the narrative we are being fed regarding the true nature of ISIS is a lie, or the most likely scenario – both.

Not the First Fit of Feigned Ignorance 

The very appearance of ISIS on the battlefields of Iraq and Syria allegedly took the US intelligence community by surprise. The unlikely narrative was designed entirely to maintain plausible deniability between ISIS mercenaries and their paymasters in Washington, London, Brussels, Riyadh, Doha, and Ankara respectively. In reality, headlines over the past 3-4 years such as, “C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition,” “First Syria rebels armed and trained by CIA ‘on way to battlefield’,” “Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A.,” and “Official says CIA-funded weapons have begun to reach Syrian rebels; rebels deny receipt,” indicate precisely how and from where the immense, multinational ISIS mercenary force originated.

The US has yet to account how its CIA could be operating within territory held by ISIS – including all along the Turkish-Syrian border and within Turkish territory itself – and neither know the existence, movements, or intentions of ISIS forces.

Between NSA surveillance at home, and the CIA operating side-by-side with ISIS and other Al Qaeda-linked terrorist organizations, the sudden revelations that Americans are fighting within ISIS’ ranks seem to be more a matter of politically-motivated propaganda, timed perfectly to justify US military intervention in Syria, than a case of yet another convenient lapse in American intelligence.

Washington Menacing America With Its Own Mercenaries 

Indeed, in order for the US to begin military operations in Syria under the guise of fighting ISIS forces, it must first demonstrate the threat ISIS poses to America. Already, likely false flags serving ISIS no benefit, but giving the US the green light to begin military operations in Syria have begun making their rounds across Western media. A CBS/Associated Press story titled, “Former Deputy CIA Director: ‘I Would Not Be Surprised’ If ISIS Member Shows Up To US Mall Tomorrow With AK-47,” claims:

“The short-term concern is the Americans that have gone to fight with ISIS and the west Europeans that have gone to fight with ISIS could be trained and directed by ISIS to come to the United States to conduct small-scale attacks,” Morell stated. “If an ISIS member showed up at a mall in the United States tomorrow with an AK-47 and killed a number of Americans, I would not be surprised.”

Morell warned that over the long-term the extremist group could be planning for a 9/11-style attack that killed thousands of Americans.

The same report would also claim:

The United States launched a new barrage of airstrikes Wednesday against the Islamic State extremist group that beheaded American journalist James Foley and that has seized a swath of territory across Iraq and Syria. President Barack Obama vowed relentless pursuit of the terrorists and the White House revealed that the U.S. had launched a secret rescue mission inside Syria earlier this summer that failed to rescue Foley and other Americans still being held hostage.

The current justification for ongoing preparations against Syria has been the Foley execution video, which experts have agreed upon was staged. The London Telegraph in its article, “Foley murder video ‘may have been staged’,” would state:

Analysts believe the British jihadi in the video may not have been James Foley’s killer, although it is accepted that the journalist was murdered.

Of course, if the video was staged, and every claim about it made by ISIS thus far proven a fabrication, no evidence at all suggests when and where, or even if Foley was murdered. If he was, no evidence suggests by whom. And despite this revelation, the US continues building momentum to intervene in Syria.

Imperialism Hiding Behind Righteousness 

Several years and hundreds of millions of dollars later, ISIS is clearly the product of long-laid Western designs to overthrow the Syrian government and reorder the Middle East as warned by the prophetic 2007 9-page report titled, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?,” written by Seymour Hersh and published in the New Yorker. In it Hersh warned about a cataclysmic sectarian war that would ravage the entire region, targeting not only Syria and neighboring Lebanon, but also Iran. He also warned that it was an intentionally engineered conspiracy between the United States, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, with many smaller regional players serving in supporting roles.

With the emergence of ISIS creating the very cataclysmic sectarian conflagration warned about in Hersh’s 2007 report, with no other credible explanation to account for ISIS’ incredible size, strength, and success beyond multinational state-sponsorship, Hersh’s reportage has once again been vindicated.

It is clear that the US has created ISIS, and is to this day using it as both a means to target and attack its enemies across the Middle East, as well as serve as a pretext for direct US military intervention when proxy wars flounder. It is also being used in a third context – on the domestic front – as a manufactured and perpetual threat with which to further justify the militarization and centralization of America’s police forces and the continued expansion of the NSA’s invasive domestic spying.

It is also clear that all of this adds up not to promoting freedom and democracy abroad while ensuring national security at home, but rather achieving full-spectrum domination in regions abroad and over the population at home. It is naked hegemony and imperialism playing dress-up in the wardrobe of righteousness.

New Eastern Outlook

See Something Snitch Something Is Back: DHS to Release New Guidelines for Stores to Watch Shoppers

The Daily Sheeple
by Melissa Melton

dhs homeland security theater

So far, Jeh Johnson has managed to largely stay out of the spotlight and avoid much of the hate showered on his predecessor Big Sis Janet Napolitano. One example is right there, in the fact that no one really refers to Jeh as Big Bro Johnson, which is good, because it sounds like a really bad porno name.

But I digress…

Yesterday, the Washington Times reported that Homeland Security is going to release a brand new, shiny guidance list to retailers this week (just in time for another 9/11!) which will “train” them on how to watch for suspected terrorists in their stores, i.e. — anyone who buys a bunch of stuff from what Mr. Johnson says is a “long list of materials that could be used as explosive precursors.”

Continuing via WT:

“We can’t and we shouldn’t prohibit the sale of a pressure cooker. We can sensitize retail businesses to be on guard for suspicious behavior by those who buy this kind of stuff,” Mr. Johnson said during a question-and-answer session after a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations.

So Johnson did specifically mention those suspicious people who buy things like a pressure cooker, an item that caused a family to get a knock on the door by the FBI just for Googling in what was considered a “suspicious internet search” shortly after the Boston Marathon bombing just for example.

No other suspicious terroristy items were specifically mentioned during Johnson’s post-CFR Q & A.

Oh, but don’t worry guys, because as WT was sure to point out, “Mr. Johnson said he is aware of the tenuous balance between security and freedom, and does not want to upset it with his moves.”

Uh-huh…

Because nothing says “freedom” quite like being eye-raped by nervous store owners who are just waiting for you to buy something off some unseen terrorist shopping list that will give them an excuse to call DHS to swoop in and secure the homeland…

If you’ll recall, back in 2012 a different list was published of 25 flyers — produced jointly by the FBI and Department of Justice as part of the “Communities Against Terrorism” suspicious activity reporting program — detailing what our government considers to be the suspicious activities terrorists might engage in at those specific types of businesses.

The list included everything from tattoo parlors to beauty supply stores to Internet cafes and car rental agencies, and it gave out bulleted points of suspicious people and shopping behaviors that shopkeepers and employees should be on the look out for, including things like:

  • people with burn marks on their hands, arms or face, or someone who is missing fingers
  • people who significantly alter their appearance from visit to visit (as in, they shave their beards, change hair colors or styles of dress)
  • people who are vague about the intended use of products they purchase
  • people who always pay cash
  • people who are “overly concerned about privacy”

You know, the kind of purposefully ambiguous guidelines that could be incorrectly applied to millions of people who are absolutely not terrorists on a daily basis across this country.

Then again, I guess it’s pretty suspicious that I’m even questioning the whole big brother police state society they’ve been constructing since September 11, 2001 via this article on what falls under an “alternative media” website, especially considering that “alternative media” was listed on Homeland Security’s 2009 “Domestic Extremism Lexicon” and defined as “A term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets.”

Interpretations that differ radically from the establishment media’s propaganda? Exercising your First Amendment to raise your hand and say you disagree with a corrupt, tyrannical government?

Oh no… Not that.

The Daily Sheeple

Resistance is Futile: The Violent Cost of Challenging the American Police State

InfoWars
by JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

us police state

“Police are specialists in violence. They are armed, trained, and authorized to use force. With varying degrees of subtlety, this colors their every action. Like the possibility of arrest, the threat of violence is implicit in every police encounter. Violence, as well as the law, is what they represent.”
—Kristian Williams, activist and author

If you don’t want to get probed, poked, pinched, tasered, tackled, searched, seized, stripped, manhandled, arrested, shot, or killed, don’t say, do or even suggest anything that even hints of noncompliance. This is the new “thin blue line” over which you must not cross in interactions with police if you want to walk away with your life and freedoms intact.

The following incidents and many more like them serve as chilling reminders that in the American police state, “we the people” are at the mercy of law enforcement officers who have almost absolute discretion to decide who is a threat, what constitutes resistance, and how harshly they can deal with the citizens they were appointed to “serve and protect.”

For example, police arrested Chaumtoli Huq because she failed to promptly comply when ordered to “move along” while waiting outside a Ruby Tuesday’s restaurant for her children, who were inside with their father, using the bathroom. NYPD officers grabbed Huq, a lawyer with the New York City Public Advocate’s office, flipped her around, pressed her against a wall, handcuffed her, searched her purse, arrested her, and told her to “shut up” when she cried out for help, before detaining her for nine hours. Huq was charged with obstructing governmental administration, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

Oregon resident Fred Marlow was jailed and charged with interfering and resisting arrest after he filmed a SWAT team raid that took place across the street from his apartment and uploaded the footage to the internet. The footage shows police officers threatening Marlow, who was awoken by the sounds of “multiple bombs blasting and glass breaking” and ran outside to investigate only to be threatened with arrest if he didn’t follow orders and return inside.

Eric Garner, 43 years old, asthmatic and unarmed, died after being put in a chokehold by NYPD police, allegedly for resisting arrest over his selling untaxed, loose cigarettes, although video footage of the incident shows little resistance on Garner’s part. Indeed, the man was screaming, begging and insisting he couldn’t breathe. And what was New York Mayor Bill De Blasio’s advice to citizens in order to avoid a similar fate? Don’t resist arrest. (Mind you, the NYPD arrests more than 13,000 people every year on charges of resisting arrest, although only a small fraction of those charged ever get prosecuted.)

Then there was Marine Brandon Raub, who was questioned at his home by a swarm of DHS, FBI, Secret Service agents and local police, tackled to the ground, handcuffed, and forcibly transported to a police station. Raub was then detained against his will in a psychiatric ward, without being provided any explanation, having any charges levied against him or being read his rights—all allegedly because of controversial song lyrics and political views posted on his Facebook page.

Incredibly, police insisted that Raub was not in fact under arrest. Of course, Raub was under arrest. When your hands are handcuffed behind you, when armed policemen are tackling you to the ground and transporting you across town in the back of a police car, and then forcibly detaining you against your will, you’re not free to walk away.

If you do attempt to walk away, be warned that the consequences will likely be even worse, as Tremaine McMillian learned the hard way. Miami-Dade police slammed the 14-year-old boy to the ground, putting him in a chokehold and handcuffing him after he allegedly gave them “dehumanizing stares” and walked away from them, which the officers found unacceptable. According to Miami-Dade Police Detective Alvaro Zabaleta, “His body language was that he was stiffening up and pulling away… When you have somebody resistant to them and pulling away and somebody clenching their fists and flailing their arms, that’s a threat. Of course we have to neutralize the threat.”

As I point out in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, this mindset that any challenge to police authority is a threat that needs to be “neutralized” is a dangerous one that is part of a greater nationwide trend that sets the police beyond the reach of the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, when police officers are allowed to operate under the assumption that their word is law and that there is no room for any form of disagreement or even question, that serves to chill the First Amendment’s assurances of free speech, free assembly and the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Frankly, it doesn’t matter whether it’s a casual “show your ID” request on a boardwalk, a stop-and-frisk search on a city street, or a traffic stop for speeding or just to check your insurance: if you feel like you can’t walk away from a police encounter of your own volition—and more often than not you can’t, especially when you’re being confronted by someone armed to the hilt with all manner of militarized weaponry and gear—then for all intents and purposes, you’re under arrest from the moment a cop stops you.

That raises the question, what exactly constitutes resisting an arrest? What about those other trumped up “contempt of cop” charges such as interference, disorderly conduct, obstruction, and failure to obey a police order that get trotted out anytime a citizen engages in behavior the police perceive as disrespectful or “insufficiently deferential to their authority”? Do Americans really have any recourse at all when it comes to obeying an order from a police officer, even if it’s just to ask a question or assert one’s rights, or should we just “surrender quietly”?

The short answer is that anything short of compliance will get you arrested and jailed. The long answer is a little more complicated, convoluted and full of legal jargon and dissonance among the courts, but the conclusion is still the same: anything short of compliance is being perceived as “threatening” behavior or resistance to be met by police with extreme force resulting in injury, arrest or death for the resistor.

The key word, of course, is comply meaning to obey, submit or conform. This is what author Kristian Williams describes as the dual myths of heroism and danger: “The overblown image of police heroism, and the ‘obsession’ with officer safety, do not only serve to justify police violence after the fact; by providing such justification, they legitimize violence, and thus make it more likely.”

How else can we explain why police shot a schizophrenic 30-year-old man holding a pellet gun over 80 times before his corpse was handcuffed? Mind you, witnesses reportedly informed the police that it was not a real gun, but the officers nonetheless opened fire about five minutes after arriving on the scene.

John Crawford was shot by police in an Ohio Wal-Mart for holding an air rifle sold in the store that he may have intended to buy. Oscar Grant, age 23, unarmed and lying face-down on the ground, was shot in the back by a transit officer in Oakland, Calif., who mistakenly used a gun instead of a taser to further restrain him. Ordered to show his hands after “anti-crime” police officers noticed him adjusting “his waistband in a manner the officers deemed suspicious,” 16-year old Kimani Grey was fired at 11 times, and shot seven times, including three times in the back. Reportedly, the teenager was unarmed and unthreatening.

Even dogs aren’t spared if they are perceived as “threatening.” Family dogs are routinely shot and killed during SWAT team raids, even if the SWAT team is at the wrong address or the dog is in the next yard over. One six-year-old girl witnessed her dog Apollo shot dead by an Illinois police officer.

Clearly, when police officers cease to look and act like civil servants or peace officers but instead look and act like soldiers occupying a hostile territory, it alters their perception of “we the people.” Those who founded this country believed that we were the masters and that those whose salaries we pay with our hard-earned tax dollars are our servants.

If daring to question, challenge or even hesitate when a cop issues an order can get you charged with resisting arrest or disorderly conduct, you’re not the master in a master-servant relationship. In fact, you’re not even the servant—you’re the slave.

This is not freedom. This is not even a life.

This is a battlefield, a war zone—if you will—governed by martial law and disguised as a democracy. No matter how many ways you fancy it up with shopping malls, populist elections, and Monday night football, the fact remains that “we the people” are little more than prisoners in the American police state, and the police are our jailers and wardens.

Via Rutherford Institute

UN Martial Law On US Soil?

The Prepper Project
by Rick Cox

united nations

This is one of those topics; some might call it a “conspiracy theory”, which comes up with surprising frequency throughout the Prepper community.  Personally this is a “threat” that I really have zero concern with.

I’m sure that many reading this will have an immediate desire to stop reading, or to write me a nastygram, or both.  I hope you will at least do me the courtesy of reading the entire article before deciding on any course of action.

I’ll begin by pointing out that my opinion has nothing to do with the possibility of a “New World Order” or similar group wanting to impose martial law or other reductions in American freedoms on us.  My opinion is that of a retired soldier with a wide range of specialties and experiences with military personnel from several other nations.  My opinion is also influenced by more than 4 decades of formal as well as informal historical and military history studies.  I don’t find much credence in a “New World Order” either, but that’s a separate discussion.

I looked at several issues that would influence any decision to send UN forces into the USA and that would likely impact the potential for success of such a mission when forming my opinion.  These included things like the current forces available for such a mission, their training/leadership, the abilities of the military/nation to project power, the abilities of the military/nation to supply/support their forces in such a distant setting, the track record of the militaries in question versus the USA, the track record of the militaries in question in peacekeeping or counter-insurgency settings, and finally the economic situation of the nations in question and how that might affect their ability to fund any such forces.  I won’t address these in significant detail in this article as it would be a huge document and nobody would take the time to read it.  Instead this will be the Prepper Project condensed version.

At the time that this is being written there are only 2 nations that truly have the numbers of troops it would take to impose any meaningful force on the USA.  Those nations are Russia and China.  While there are other nations with very large armies, North Korea is an example; they are also nations that require very large armies to maintain their current governments in power.  Thus, they wouldn’t have troops to spare for a UN mission of this scale.  Some will say that there are nations that could supply a battalion or brigade perhaps, but the USA is a large nation in terms of size and in population as well.  Which means it would take a lot of troops, a couple dozen divisions at the least, to have any serious impact on the USA.  And while some nations might be willing to send small contingents, most wouldn’t do so under the command of Chinese or Russian generals.  And since command normally is awarded to the nation with the largest number of troops, that would mean Chinese or Russians in command of the effort and most other nations boycotting the mission.

Of the two nations that have enough troops to spare to consider supporting a UN mission in the USA both have serious issues with training and leadership.  The Soviet Union maintained serious limitations on initiative and freedom of action with their junior officers and NCOs.  This has largely continued in the Russian Army.  What this means is that commanders get their orders and don’t share them with subordinates.  So if anything happens to the commander, the subordinates don’t know what they are supposed to do.  This is an important consideration for the type of actions that make up a UN peacekeeping or similar mission as these are typically focused on small unit, squads or fire teams in most cases, tasks such as patrolling or manning checkpoints.  In most modern armies such missions could be run by junior NCOs, the Sergeants and Staff Sergeants.  In the Russian army such missions would take at least a Lieutenant.  The Chinese military hasn’t fought a significant war since the Korean War of the early 50’s, so their doctrine is roughly 60 years behind the times.  Their equipment is comprised of Soviet era knock-offs and their unit structure is as well, which is not a good thing as the Iraqi Army and Republican Guard will attest to.  Morale in both militaries is questionable at best and would almost certainly collapse in the face of determined American resistance.

Power projection sounds like such a simple concept, and in many ways it is, however actually doing it well is a daunting proposition for most nations.  You have to be able to transport troops, vehicles, equipment, and supplies.  You have to have air superiority or your ships will be sunk.  You have to have sea superiority or your ships will be sunk.  You have to be able to resupply and provide replacements for your forces.  You have to be able to care for sick and wounded troops, to include getting them home.  To have any impact on a nation the size of the USA you’re talking about doing this for a minimum of 20 divisions, which means more than 200,000 troops.  Neither Russia nor China could support even 10% of those numbers for any length of time.  Note: Those 200,000 troops would only be sufficient if they were not actively opposed by insurgents in the USA, but my guess is that they would be very actively opposed.

Russia doesn’t have much of a track record against the USA in military terms.  However, there are numerous considerations that will certainly affect how their military is likely to interact with Americans.

  • Each time US forces have faced an opponent using Soviet/Russian equipment, structure, and tactics they have smashed them at very little cost.  Meaning the Soviet/Russian approach to war gets hammered every time it meets the US approach to war.  Any American insurgency would make use of US tactics and such, and the Soviet/Russian military model would not do well.
  • A UN mission in the USA would almost certainly end up with an American insurgency against the UN troops.  Soviets/Russians don’t have much experience with such actions, and they didn’t do well when they’ve tried.  Part of the problem is the issues they have with trusting their junior officers and their NCO corps, coupled with an inability to “think outside the box”.
  • The USA has a track record of foreign troops deserting from the invading forces and joining the Americans.  Once the Russian troops get to see how much better life is in the USA I suspect many will desert to join with the Americans, probably bringing their weapons and vehicles with them.

China has not faced Americans in a shooting war since the early 1950s, back in the Korean War.  It wasn’t a pleasant experience for them, not that it was great for the Americans either.  But with the numeric advantage that the Chinese had, and the near total surprise of their entry into the war, they should have wiped out the UN (largely US) forces.  Instead the Chinese took huge numbers of casualties and accomplished nothing beyond getting the border set back to where it had been originally.  Some issues the Chinese would face in a UN mission focused on the USA:

  • The Chinese military is largely patterned on the Soviet model, as described above.  They have modified it some, but they have no practical experience to guide such modifications so it’s unlikely that much has really changed.
  • The Chinese have not won a war in a very long time.  Nor do they have a military or warrior culture.  So the average Chinese soldier is unlikely to be a fierce fighter or dedicated to the mission.  Such soldiers don’t do well in insurgencies.
  • China also does not foster independent thought among its officers or NCOs.  They are more focused on blind obedience and adherence to doctrine, which is a major disability in any military action, but especially in the midst of an insurgency.

When considering the economics of any UN military mission to the USA one must understand that the majority of the UNs budget, especially for military actions, traditionally comes from the USA.  Obviously that would not be available for such a mission.  The Russians have no money to support such a mission, and won’t anytime soon.  The Chinese should have cash available, but most of theirs is tied up in trying to bring their military into the 21st century as a regional (or if they can manage it a super) power while also trying to modernize their industrial complex and improve their peoples standard of living.  So any UN mission to the USA carries significant economic risk for them, especially when one considers that if the USA is to be subjected to a UN military mission the country won’t be servicing its debts etc.

The last consideration for any UN mission in the USA is the reality of the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.  What this means to any nation contemplating such an action is that there are more weapons (and in many cases better weapons) in the hands of American citizens than most nations have in their militaries hands.  Couple that with the fact that there are more combat veterans in America than most of the rest of the world combined and the likelihood of any nation taking on a UN sponsored mission to the USA slips to nothing.  Between our military, combat veterans, gangsters/mafia, gang bangers, and cowboys most other nations are more than a little afraid of us as it is.

With all of this in mind I see zero likelihood that there will be a UN mission to impose martial law or any other military action in the USA.  Any nations foolish enough to consider such an effort either don’t have the troops or can’t afford it.  The rest know better.

I welcome questions, opposing views, and discussion on this and any other topic I’ve written about.

The Prepper Project

Serve and Protect is Now “Search and Destroy”

The Daily Sheeple
by Lily Dane

militarization of police.jpg-large

Anyone who has been paying attention is aware that we have a growing domestic terrorism problem here in America.

And by domestic terrorism, I mean our militarized police departments.

Here’s how the FBI defines domestic terrorism, from their website:

“Domestic terrorism” means activities with the following three characteristics:

  • Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
  • Appear intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
  • Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

Indeed, uniformed thugs police officers kill more Americans every year than terrorists do. In fact, we are eight times more likely to be killed by a cop than by a “terrorist.”

Radley Balko, author of “Rise of the Warrior Cop,” wrote in the Wall Street Journal in August:

“Since the 1960s, in response to a range of perceived threats, law-enforcement agencies across the U.S., at every level of government, have been blurring the line between police officer and soldier.

“Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment—from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers—American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the U.S. scene: the warrior cop—armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties.” (source)

Brave New Films has produced a new short film that explores HOW police have become soldiers.

Here are some quick facts the producers compiled:

  • Pentagon’s Excess Property Program (1033 Program) has supplied police departments across the country with more than $4.3 billion in gear since 1997. This includes $449 million in 2013.
  • St. Louis County, where Ferguson is located, received two military vehicles, a trailer, a generator, 12 5.56-millimeter rifles and six .45 caliber pistols from the Pentagon.
  • Military style police raids have increased in recent years, with one count putting the number at 80,000 such raids last year.
  • In SWAT style raids, people of color are most affected – 37% were Black, 12% Latino, and 19% White. Race was not known for the remainder.

Police militarization grew out of our failed drug war. Does a town of 2,200 need a massive military tank? Why does the police department in Dundee Michigan need a MRAP (Mine-Resistant, Ambush-Protected vehicle)? They don’t. Military grade gear does not improve the safety and security in small towns. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel must end the flow of military grade gear from the Pentagon to our local communities. It’s time for the militarizing of police to end.

If you’d like to see what kinds of military equipment your local police department has acquired, see Mac Slavo of SHTF Plan’s article Database Shows What Military Equipment Your Local Police Department Has Been Stockpiling.

As if it isn’t bad enough that militarized police forces are becoming common in the US, the epidemic is spreading to our children’s schools.

As reported by Infowars, schools in Texas have acquired military equipment:

Citing the shootings at Columbine and Sandy Hook as pretexts for the need to militarize school police, an investigation launched by CBS affiliate KHOU recently found that cops in at least 10 different Texas school districts are seemingly gearing up for war.

“In all, the departments received 64 M16 rifles, 18 M14 rifles, 25 automatic pistols, and magazines capable of holding 4,500 rounds of ammunition as well armored plating, tactical vests, and 15 surplus military vehicles,” reports KHOU.

Unfortunately, Texas isn’t the only state that has decided to arm some of their school police officers to the hilt – schools in Kansas, California, Florida, and Utah have as well.

This is cause for concern, as  so passionately expressed in his article Now It’s the School Police That Are Becoming Militarized:

School officials insist that their officers will be well-trained in the use of their military-style weapons. But this misses the point. Military-style weapons are designed for combat, and they are designed to spray a field of battle wreaking mass carnage against the ranks of enemy soldiers.

Opening up on a mythical shooter in a grade school could cause the same mass carnage. The difference is the victims would not be enemy soldiers on a battleground, but 2nd, 3rd, and 4th graders. School officials haven’t said how they would avoid that carnage. In ordering his review of the military weapons programs, Obama said “there is a big difference between our military and our local law enforcement and we don’t want to blur those lines.” School officials that have armed their police with assault-style weapons have done more than blur that line. They have sent the horrific message that weapons of mass destruction have a place at their schools.

Colleges are no exception – the Pentagon’s 1033 program has reached them as well, reports Vice.com:

According to documents obtained by the website Muckrock, more than 100 campus police forces have received military materials from the Pentagon. Schools that participate in the program range from liberal arts to community colleges to the entire University of Texas system. Emory, Rice, Purdue, and the University of California, Berkeley, are all on the list.

In 2012, UC Berkeley tried to use the program to purchase an eight-ton armored truck. After a backlash, university officials ultimately decided the truck was “not the best choice for a university setting.” The following year, Ohio State University acquired a mine-resistant ambush protected (MRAP) vehicle. So far, it has yet to be targeted.

How ironic that the American populace is being terrorized by those who were supposed to protect us from terrorism.

You can sign a petition to end arming police with war weapons here: stoppolicemilitary.org

The Daily Sheeple

Redrawing the Map of the Russia Federation: Partition Russia After World War III?

Strategic Culture
by Mahdi Darius NAZEMROAYA

The end goal of the US and NATO is to divide (balkanize) and pacify (finlandize) the world’s biggest country, the Russian Federation, and to even establish a blanket of perpetual disorder (somalization) over its vast territory or, at a minimum, over a portion of Russia and the post-Soviet space, similarly to what is being done to the Middle East and North Africa. The future Russia or the many future Russias, a plurality of weakened and divided states, that Washington and its NATO allies see is/are demographically in decline, de-industrialized, poor, without any defensive capabilities, and hinterlands that will exploited for their resources. 

The Plans of the Empire of Chaos for Russia

Breaking the Soviet Union has not been enough for Washington and NATO. The ultimate goal of the US is to prevent any alternatives from emerging in Europe and Eurasia to Euro-Atlantic integration. This is why the destruction of Russia is one of its strategic objectives.

Washington’s goals were alive and at work during the fighting in Chechnya. They were also seen in the crisis that erupted with EuroMaidan in Ukraine. In fact, the first step of the divorce between Ukraine and Russia was a catalyst for the dissolution of the entire Soviet Union and any attempts at reorganizing it.

The Polish-American intellectual Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was US President Jimmy Carter’s national security advisor and an architect behind the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, has actually advocated for the destruction of Russia through gradual disintegration and devolution. He has stipulated that «a more decentralized Russia would be less susceptible to imperial mobilization». [1] In other words, if the US divides Russia up, Moscow would not be able to challenge Washington. In this context, he states the following: «A loosely confederated Russia—composed of a European Russia, a Siberian Republic, and a Far Eastern Republic—would find it easier to cultivate closer economic regulations with Europe, with the new states of Central Asia, and with [East Asia], which would thereby accelerate Russia’s own development». [2]

These views are not merely constrained to some academic’s ivory tower or to detached think-tanks. They have the backing of governments and have even cultivated adherents. One reflection of them is below. 

US State-Owned Media Forecasts the Balkanization of Russia

Dmytro Sinchenko published an article on September 8, 2014 about dividing Russia. His article titled «Waiting for World War III: How the World Will Change». [3] Sinchenko was involved in EuroMaidan and his organization, the Ukrainian Initiative «Statesmen Movement» (Всеукраїнської ініціативи «Рух державотворців»), advocates for an ethnic nationalism, the territorial expansion of Ukraine at the expense of most the bordering countries, reinvigorating the pro-US Georgia-Ukraine-Azerbaijan-Moldova (GUAM) Organization for Democracy and Economic Development, joining NATO, and launching an offensive to defeat Russia as part of its foreign policy goals. [4] As a note, the inclusion of the word democracy in GUAM should not fool anyone; GUAM, as the inclusion of the Republic of Azerbaijan proves, has nothing to do with democracy, but with counter-balancing Russia in the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). 

Sinchenko’s article starts by talking about the history of the «Axis of Evil» phrase that the US has used to vilify its enemies. It talks about how George W. Bush Jr. coined the phrase in 2002 by grouping Iraq, Iran, and North Korea together, how John Bolton expanded the Axis of Evil to include Cuba, Libya, and Syria, how Condoleezza Rice include Belarus, Zimbabwe, and Myanmar (Burma), and then finally he proposes that Russia be added to the list as the world’s main pariah state. He even argues that the Kremlin is involved in all the conflicts in the Balkans, Caucasus, Middle East, North Africa, Ukraine, and Southeast Asia. He goes on to accuse Russia of planning to invade the Baltic States, the Caucasus, Moldova, Finland, Poland, and, even more ridiculously, two of its own close military and political allies, Belarus and Kazakhstan. As the article’s title implies, he even claims that Moscow is intentionally pushing for a third world war.

This fiction is not something that has been reported in the US-aligned corporate networks, but is something that has been published directly by US government-owned media. The forecast was published by the Ukrainian service of Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, which has been a US propaganda tool in Europe and the Middle East that has helped topple governments.

Chillingly, the article tries to sanitize the possibilities of a new world war. Disgustingly ignoring the use of nuclear weapons and the massive destruction that would erupt for Ukraine and the world, the article misleadingly paints a cozy image of a world that will be corrected by a major global war. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and the author are essentially saying that «war is good for you» to the Ukrainian people and that some type of utopian paradise will emerge after a war with Russia. 

The article also fits very nicely into the contours of Brzezinski’s forecast for Russia, Ukraine, and the Eurasian landmass. It forecasts the division of Russia whereas Ukraine is a part of an expanded European Union, which includes Georgia, Armenia, the Republic of Azerbaijan, Belarus, Israel, Lebanon, and Denmark’s North American dependency of Greenland, and also controls a confederation of states in the Caucasus and the Mediterranean Sea—the latter could be the Union of the Mediterranean, which would encompass Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, and the Moroccan-occupied Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic or Western Sahara. Ukraine is presented as an integral component of the European Union. In this regard, Ukraine appears to be situated in a US-aligned Franco-German-Polish-Ukrainian corridor and Paris-Berlin-Warsaw-Kiev axis that Brzezinski advocated for creating in 1997, which Washington would use to challenge the Russian Federation and its allies in the CIS. [5]

Redrawing Eurasia: Washington’s Maps of a Divided Russia

With the division of the Russian Federation, Radio Free Europe’s/Radio Liberty’s article claims that any bipolar rivalry between Moscow and Washington would end after World War III. In a stark contradiction, it claims that only when Russia is destroyed will there be a genuine multipolar world, but also implies that the US will be the most dominant global power even though Washington and the European Union will be weakened from the anticipated major war with the Russians.

Accompanying the article are also two maps that outline the redrawn Eurasian space and the shape of the world after the destruction of Russia. Moreover, neither the author nor his two maps recognize the boundary change in the Crimean Peninsula and depict it as a part of Ukraine and not the Russian Federation. From west to east, the following changes are made to Russia’s geography:

The Russian oblast of Kaliningrad will be annexed by Lithuania, Poland, or Germany. One way or another it will become a part of an enlarged European Union.

East Karelia (Russian Karelia) and what is currently the federal subject of the Republic of Karelia inside Russia’s Northwestern Federal District, along with the Federal City of St. Petersburg, Leningrad Oblast, Novgorod Oblast, the northern two-thirds of Pskov Oblast, and Murmansk Oblast are split from Russia to form a Finnish-aligned country. This area could even be absorbed by Finland to create a Greater Finland. Although the oblast of Archangel (Arkhangelsk) is listed as a part of this partitioned area in the article, it is not included in the map (probably due to a mistake in the map).

The southern administrative districts of Sebezhsky, Pustoshkinsky, Nevelsky, and Usvyatsky in Pskov Oblast from the Northwestern Federal District and the westernmost administrative districts of Demidovsky, Desnogorsk, Dukhovshchinsky, Kardymovsky, Khislavichsky, Krasninsky, Monastyrshchinsky, Pochinkovsky, Roslavlsky, Rudnyansky, Shumyachsky, Smolensky, Velizhsky, Yartsevsky, and Yershichsky, as well as the cities of Smolensk and Roslavl, in Smolensk Oblast from the Central Federal District are joined to Belarus. The Smolensk Oblast’s Dorogobuzhsky, Kholm-Zhirkovsky, Safonovsky, Ugransky, and Yelninsky districts appear to be portioned further in the map as the new border between Belarus and the proposed amputated Russia. 

The North Caucasian Federal District of Russia, which is comprised of the Republic of Ingushetia, the Kabardino-Balkar Republic, the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, the Republic of North Ossetia–Alania, Stavropol Krai, and Chechnya, is separated from Russia as a European Union-influenced Caucasian confederation

The South Federal District of Russia, which is constituted by the Republic of Adygea, Astrakhan Oblast, Volgograd Oblast, Republic of Kalmykia, Krasnodar Krai, and Rostov Oblast, is completely annexed by Ukraine; this leads to a shared border between Ukraine and Kazakhstan and cuts Russia off from the energy-rich Caspian Sea and a direct southern frontier with Iran.

Ukraine also annexes the oblasts of Belgorod, Bryansk, Kursk, and Voronezh from Russia’s most heavily populated federal district and area, the Central Federal District.

Siberia and the Russian Far East, specifically the Siberian Federal District and the Far Eastern Federal District, are torn off from Russia.

The text states that all of the territory in Siberia and most of the territory in the Russian Far East, which are comprised of the Altai Republic, Altai Krai, Amur Oblast, the Republic of Buryatia, Chukotka, the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, Irkutsk Oblast, Kamchatka Krai, Kemerovo Oblast, Khabarovsk Krai, the Republic of Khakassia, Krasnoyarsk Krai, Magadan Oblast, Novosibirsk Oblast, Omsk Oblast, Primorsky Krai, Sakha Republic, Tomsk Oblast, the Tuva Republic, and Zabaykalsky Krai either turn into several Chinese-dominated independent states or, alongside Mongolia, become new territories of the People’s Republic of China. The map categorically draws Siberia, most the Russian Far East, and Mongolia as Chinese territory. The exception to this is Sakhalin Oblast.

Russia loses Sakhalin Island (called Saharin and Karafuto in Japanese) and the Kurile Islands, which constitute Sakhalin Oblast. These islands are annexed by Japan.

On his own webpage, Sinchenko posted his Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty article days earlier, on September 2, 2014. The same maps, which are accredited to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, are also present. [6] There, however, is an additional picture on Sinchenko’s personal webpage that is worth noting; this is a picture of Russia being cheerfully carved out for consumption as a large meal by all the bordering countries. [7]

Mapping a New World Order: The World After World War III?

The second map is of a post-World War III globe that is divided into several supranational states. Japan is the only exception. The second map and its supranational states can be described as follows:

As mentioned earlier, the European Union is expanded and has control over its peripheries in the Caucasus, Southwest Asia, and North Africa. This is the realization of NATO’s Mediterranean Dialogue and Partnership for Peace at the political and military levels and the European Union’s Eastern Partnership and Euro-Mediterranean Partnership (the Union of the Mediterranean) at the political and economic levels. 

The United States forms a North American-based supranational entity that includes Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Columbia, Venezuela, Ecuador, the Guianas (Guyana, Suriname, and French Guiana), and the entire Caribbean.

All the countries that are not swallowed by the US in South America will form their own supranational entity in a lesser South America, which will be dominated by Brazil.

Some type of Southwest Asian bloc or supranational entity will be formed out of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, and Yemen.

Some type of a supranational entity will be formed in the Indian sub-continent or South Asia out of India, Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Myanmar (Burma), and Thailand.

There will be a supranational entity in Australasia and Oceania that will include the Philippines, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Indonesia, East Timor, Papa New Guinea, New Zealand, and the islands of the Pacific. This entity will include Australia and be dominated by Canberra.

Aside from North Africa, which will be controlled by the European Union, the rest of Africa will unify under the leadership of South Africa.

An East Asian supranational entity will include most of the Russian Federation, Indo-China, China, the Korean Peninsula, Mongolia, and post-Soviet Central Asia. This entity will be dominated by the Chinese and dominated from Beijing. 

Although Radio Free Europe’s article and two post-World War III maps can be dismissed as fanciful notions, some important questions have to be asked. Firstly, where did the author pick up these ideas? Were they transmitted through any workshops supported by the US and the European Union indirectly? Secondly, what informs the author’s visions of a post-World War III political landscape?

The author has essentially catered to Brzezinski’s outline of a divided Russia. The text and the maps have even included the areas of North Africa, the Middle East, and the Caucasus that the European Union views as a secondary periphery or layer to itself. These areas are even shaded with a lighter blue than the darker blue used to identify the European Union.

Even if Radio Free Europe is dismissed; no one should lose sight of the fact that Japan still lays claim to Sakhalin Oblast and the US, European Union, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia have been supporting separatist movements in both the Federal Southern District and the North Caucasian District of the Russian Federation.

Ukrainianism 

The Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty article radiates with traces of Ukrainianism, which is worth briefly mentioning. 

Nations are constructed, because they are all dynamic communities that, in one way or another, are constructed and kept together by the collective of individuals that make societies. In this regard they can be called imagined communities. 

There are machinations at play to deconstruct and reconstruct nations and groups in the post-Soviet space and Middle East. This can be called the manipulation of tribalism in sociological and anthropological jargon or, in political jargon, the playing out of the Great Game. In this context, Ukrainianism has particularly been supportive of anti-government elements and anti-Russian nationalist feelings in Ukraine for more than one hundred years, firstly under the Austrians and Germans, later through the Poles and British, and now under the US and NATO. 

Ukrainianism is an ideology that seeks to reify and enforce a new collective imagining or false historic memory among the Ukrainian people about them always being a separate nation and people, in both ethnic and civic terms, from the Russian people. Ukrainianism is a political projection that seeks to deny the historic unity of the Eastern Slavs and the geographic roots and historic context behind the distinction between Ukrainians and Russians. In other words, Ukrainianism seeks to de-contextual and to forget the process that has led to the distinction of Ukrainians from Russians.

***

Russia has always arisen from the ashes. History can testify to this. Come what may, Russia will be standing. Whenever all the diverse people of Russia are united under one banner for their homeland, they have shattered empires. They have survived catastrophic wars and invasions and have outlived their enemies. Maps and borders may change, but Russia will remain.

NOTES

[1] Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geo-strategic Imperatives (NYC: Basic Books, 1997), p.202.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Дмитро Сінченко [Dmytro Sinchenko], «В очікуванні Третьої світової війни. Як зміниться світ,» [«Waiting for World War III: How the World Will Change»], Радіо Вільна Європа/Радіо Свобода [Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty], September 8, 2014.

[4] Всеукраїнської ініціативи «Рух державотворців,» [Ukrainian Initiative «Statesmen Movement»] «Стратегія зовнішньої політики,» [Foreign Policy Strategy] Рух Державотворців: втілимо мрії в життя [Statesman Movement: Chasing Dreams/Visions]. Accessed September 9, 2014: .

[5] Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard, op. cit., pp.85-86 

[6] Дмитро Сінченко [Dmytro Sinchenko], «В очікуванні Третьої світової війни. Як зміниться світ,» [«Waiting for World War III: How the World Will Change»], Дмитро Сінченко (Блоґ) [Dmytro Sinchenko {blog}], September 2, 2014, Accessed September 3, 2014: .

[7] Ibid.

Strategic Culture

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,015 other followers

%d bloggers like this: