Sgt. Prepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band

Posted on March 27, 2013

1


Wouldn’t you like to be a Prepper, too? The Department of Homeland Security says, YES!!!!!

I wrote a piece last year called “Tea Party Terrorists”, in which I detailed that the Department of Homeland Security – the Frankenstein monster spawned from the ashes of 9/11 – commissioned a survey from the University of Maryland National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism.  The study concluded that conservatives and military veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan pose a domestic terrorist threat.

Adding insult to injury, they spent $12 million on a report culled from open sources that I could have assembled for them for probably less than $5,000.00 and at that, I would have plenty of time leftover for  riding roller coasters and thrill rides at America’s best amusement parks and getting morbidly obese on the theme park food.  I wouldn’t have dubbed you a security threat though, because I know better and because in doing so, I would have been libeling myself as well.

How did that report inform DHS policy in the wake of its dissemination?  It’s clear that the Department and its assorted collateral tentacles have opted to assume the very mannerisms and deployment readiness maneuverings that they have been demonizing with regard to the patriot groups, survivalists and so-called ‘doomsday preppers’.  The usual suspects in the left slanted media are certain there’s “nothing here to see, folks – move on (dot.org) now everyone”.

The  narrative here is that when private individuals implement a plan of self-preservation against future uncertainties and contingencies, it is a manifestation of paranoia and militancy – whereas, when government goes on a hoarding binge, stockpiling weapons and ammunition, it is entirely reasonable and logical.  More than that, you are hysterical and illogical to even raise the question of why such draconian measures are being adopted.

The DHS  is the new ‘doomsday prepper’.  This relatively new role they’ve adopted is not something that the legacy political media is interested in.  In fact, they are taking a quite assertive posture that the extreme weaponing up of agencies of whom vigorous tactical dominance is wildly out of character, is a non story, devoid of significance.  The usual Obama assets in the media landscape, are going out of their way to discredit facts that don’t fit the standard portrait of benevolent government.

The problem, as we’ve seen elsewhere, is that a mere blanket denial from a government spokeshole does not an infallible debunk make. Media apologists for big government and the Obama regime range from Atlantic Wire to Media Matters to Snopes.com.  All you really get from any of them in the way of a ‘debunk’, is a quote from a single source,  a DHS official who claimed the bullets were bought in bulk to save money and were for training purposes only:

“Federal solicitations to buy the bullets are known as ‘strategic sourcing contracts,’ which help the government get a low price for a big purchase”, says Peggy Dixon, spokeswoman for the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga. “The training center and others like it run by the Homeland Security Department use as many as 15 million rounds every year, mostly on shooting ranges and in training exercises.”

That’s it – the Obama Administration, with its well earned reputation for frugality, is just loading up on a bargain!  I hate to be the one to bring up the ‘devil’ in the details, but if as  Ms. Dixon claims, the feds require 15 million slugs a year, why are they buying enough to last them (darn, where’s that calculator?), oh heck, I’m going to say for mmmm, a century?  Something for additional consideration here, it is well known that it is more common for law enforcement personnel to use ‘range bullets’ for target shooting, because they are considerably less expensive.

As we’ve seen for the last 4 years, normally tenacious investigative reporting is so ‘last century’ don’t you know?, when it comes to any question of malfeasance or negligence on the part of this administration.  Instead, the new paradigm became, “O.K., well, there you have it folks, an official denial / clarification from an administration official – guess this story is over (except for those pesky conspiracy theorists among the Tea Party).”  More often, the establishment media will not deign to even acknowledge government behavior that is paradoxical.  The old ‘spike’ treatment.  “If we don’t talk about it, it ain’t news”.

A number of reliable experts in military and law enforcement circles have rejected the simplistic explanation of the DHS  on the matter of the ramping up of ordnance and firearms purchases.  One of them, retired Army Major General Jerry F. Curry, noted that during the Iraq War the U.S. military used 70 million rounds of ammunition per year.  Compare that with the 750 million rounds of hollow point bullets that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ordered in March.  And then it further ordered another 750 million rounds of various types of ammunition, some of which can penetrate walls.   (Late breaking news, another order of 450 million rounds).

Major General Curry declared,

 “This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen. Is this something we and the Congress should be concerned about? What’s the plan that requires so many dead Americans, even during times of civil unrest? Has Congress and the Administration vetted the plan in public. I fear that Congress won’t take these ammunition purchases seriously until they are all led from Capitol Hill in handcuffs. Why buy all this ammunition unless you plan to use it. Unknown to Congress, Does DHS plan to declare war on some country? Shouldn’t Congress hold hearings on why the Administration is stockpiling this ammunition all across the nation? How will it be used; what are the Administration’s plans?”

Left leaning media reports nitpick that conservatives have misreported the agencies that ordered some of the estimated 1.6 – 2 Billion hollow point rounds.  Snopes, for its part, wags its finger at the reports that the SSA (Social Security Administration) and the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, put out to bid a request for 46,000 and 174,000 rounds respectively, of .357 Sig 125 grain bonded hollow point pistol ammunition.   In the case of the SSA, the ammo was being procured for Field Division offices of the Office of Investigations (OI), of the SSA’s Office of Inspector General.  Well, that makes a difference.  At least we know that the people behind the information desk aren’t packing heat!

On the NOAA purchase, the fact check clarifies that the bullets are for the National Marine Fisheries’ Service (NMFS) “which is tasked with protecting fish stocks from depletion, marine mammals from extinction, the livelihoods of commercial fisheries, the hobbies of recreational fishers and the health of seafood consumers.”  I’ve got to bet that David Crosby (a noted gun and whale aficionado – not to mention long time connoisseur of Acapulco Gold and ‘B.C. Bud’), would jump at the chance of joining the boys at the NMFS as a volunteer agent.

Listen, or as Obama would say ‘Look’, plausible reasons for all these bullets could genuinely exist – I’ll admit that.  Sure, you bet – and I’ll also admit that it’s possible that Nicky Minaj, Britney Spears, Madonna and Miley Cyrus could conceivably abandon their careers as deviant divas and join a convent.   What is not helpful and probably not lawful, is for ‘Big Sis’ Janet Napolitano and other administration officials, to adopt a posture of non-responsiveness to members of Congress, when asked to detail the necessity and intended uses for such copious numbers of ordnance and weapons.

As reported by Paul Joseph Watson on PrisonPlanet.com, Californian Congressman Doug LaMalfa and 14 of his House peers have written a letter to the Department of Homeland Security demanding to know why the federal agency is buying so many rounds of ammunition and whether the purchases are part of a deliberate attempt to restrict supply to the American people. “The extraordinary level of ammunition purchases made by Homeland Security seems to have, in states such as my own, created an extreme shortage of ammunition to the point where many gun owners are unable to purchase any,” LaMalfa wrote in the letter. “Are these purchases being conducted in a manner that strategically denies the American people access to ammunition,” the Congressman added.

That is also an insightful question, because the selected bidder on these contracts happens to be the military  industrial conglomerate known as ATK. Because the group’s products include some of the most widely known  brands in the industry, including Federal Premium, CCI, Speer, RCBS, Alliant Powder, Champion, Weaver, Eagle Industries, and Blackhawk, it’s easy to see why you’d be hard pressed to compete with the government’s ginormous order when you head down to WalMart or your local gun shop for ammo.  The response so far to these constitutionally proper inquiries from Congress?  Crickets.

Let’s just set aside the malevolent specter of the magnitude of these expenditures and assume that perhaps the Federal government is not gearing up to deal with massive social unrest due to circumstances that they have reason to suspect will soon appear on the horizon.  Where are the hysterical voices on the Left that fear the possession of legal firearms in the hands of law abiding fellow citizens on this domestic agency arms buildup?  Is arms proliferation by federal agencies somewhat more stabilizing to society than citizens exercising their 2nd amendment rights?  Depends who you ask, I guess.

Can I get some love from you Civil Libertarians on the Left, who normally and joyfully practice the habit of questioning authority?  Isn’t there also a discussion to be had, that the charter of most of these agencies are constitutionally dubious if not outright unlawful to begin with?

Can’t we at least have a discussion on the matter of whether the functions of Federal agencies have gradually been transformed into a massive, national SWAT apparatus network?  Forget that the founding fathers never had an inkling of  such an agency as the Department of Education – what would they have thought of it ordering tactical shotguns?   May I ask where the line is drawn between proper law enforcement functioning and what appears to be the emergence of a heavily militarized Police State, without someone hurling the assumed debate ender ‘conspiracy nut’ at me?  So many questions, so few answers.

As Forbes editorial contributor, Ralph Benko  also asks in a recent column, “Why, indeed, should the federal government not be deploying armored personnel carriers and stockpiling enough ammo for a 20-year war in the homeland?  Because it’s wrong in every way.  President Obama has an opportunity, now, to live up to some of his rhetoric by helping the federal government set a noble example in a matter very close to his heart (and that of his Progressive base), one not inimical to the Bill of Rights: gun control.  The federal government can (for a nice change) begin practicing what it preaches by controlling itself.”  

Even though some in Congress are just now rightly exercising their duty of oversight, it cannot be denied that it is this very same Congress that has not only permitted this state of affairs to emerge, but has rubber stamped it all the way from the origination of the Department of Homeland Security to the Patriot Act to the NDAA.   And any of you that entertain the notion that Republicans are inherently less dangerous legislatively to our constitutional rights as citizens than Democrats; may I say think again?

The Democrats may be the dog with the bared fangs at this particular junction of history, but the Republicans are the ones who are willing to appease the rabid Canis Lupus with little chunks of your ground up freedom and liberty, one bite at a time, until guess what? –  your freedoms are gone and the wolf is on your doorstep.

I recently read an article which discussed the political motivations of ‘millennials’ and the authors wisely concluded that voting age youth in this country would be best served not to put all their eggs in either party’s partisan basket such as the Black and youth vote have in each election for decades.  I agree with that.  Make them prove up on their bonafides and hold them to their words.  Don’t trust and do verify.

Freedom deserves nothing less.

Advertisements