Claim: US military are preparing a major PSYOP/martial law - Op Jade Helm

THAT is very nearly a reasonable conclusion. Because, in a way, that's exactly what it is, in the same sense that Abel Archer 83 was preparation for an invasion of East Germany. Strictly speaking it was, but that preparation didn't actually indicate such an invasion was imminent or even likely.
 
(Oops...posted this in the wrong thread earlier. That's what I get for believing in my ability to multitask)

Latest "news" on Jade Helm from Infowars is now:

Content from external source

Jade Helm: Preparation For Huge War in the Middle East?
Drill simulates invasion of Iran, Syria


by Paul Joseph Watson | March 30, 2015

The Jade Helm military exercise, set to take place in nine U.S. states this summer, has prompted concerns about preparations for martial law in America, but could the real purpose behind the drill be centered around a mock invasion of Iran and Syria, and a huge Middle Eastern war?
Content from External Source
Warmer....Warmer.....

Soon, they'll probably come to the conclusion that this is all just a big training exercise to hone the operator's skills.

Either way, all CT is speculation, and this is an easy one:

Training in the US? Martial Law!
Training in the desert? The Illuminati want more oil (as the previous century of robber barons and exploitation was not enough)
Training for Public Order Ops? The guv'ment are cummin for our guns boys!
Training with Jets? They will hijack/steal/shoot down/disappear a passenger plane!
Training with transports? They are chemtrailing!!!!!
The exercise will cost $****? They are trying to hide the missing $Trillions!
Hold a PR event? What are they trying to distract us from....?
 
Germany didn't effectively occupy Hungary, though. Even with cooperation of the Hungarian army, they didn't get the population back under control and could only control the government by intimidation and were eventually forced to depose it (the German occupation was in response to Hungary attempting to leave the Axis by negotiating a separate peace with the USSR, and even under occupation the government signed that armistice).
Between Hevach and BombDr two of my three examples have gone up in smoke.... Darn.

I'll take a shot at the third before someone else comes along and destroys it:

(From the Wikipedia article on Canadian identity)
In their search for an early identity, English Canadians relied heavily on loyalty and attachment to the British Empire, a triumphalist attitude towards British role in the building of Canada, as evidenced in the lyrics of the informal anthem The Maple Leaf Forever.... In the 1920s, the Dominion of Canada achieved greater independence from Britain, notably in the Statute of Westminster in 1931....

In the 1950s overt ties to British nationalism faded.
Content from External Source
So it seems that until the 1950s English Canadians saw themselves as British and therefore wouldn't have been interested in resisting the British occupation (the Revolutions of the late 1830s were minor events that never seemed to have much popular support).

(Even today, many people in the Maritime provinces and especially in Nova Scotia identify strongly with Scotland, many Canadian Forces regiments retain Scottish and English traditions and uniforms, the monarch is Elizabeth II, and the ruling Conservative Party is often attacked for being Anglophilic and un-Canadian.)

Presumably, however, the French and aboriginal populations would have been much less content with British rule, so perhaps I am left with a shred of an instance where a small military force held a relatively large population at bay with the co-operation of competent local authorities.
 
Well, there, Canada wasn't occupied. It didn't have to be, since it was functionally part of the same country (That word gets really fuzzy when dealing with empires, so to be clear, what I mean is they were not independent and did not openly seek independence from the British Empire).

French Canadians are perhaps more apt to resist now than in the past because of the relatively recent change in how nationality works* in a world no longer dominated by empires, but have not sought independence in a way which was resisted by force - the violence of the 70's was local rioting, less widespread than the rebellions you mention, and didn't call for anything approaching occupation or martial law.

It's also unlikely a success in political means would be met with force either, but instead by a gradual but mutual disentangling of government, much like what was discussed regarding Scotland.

*-For most of western history the regional cultural ties and language tended to carry on regardless of which empire set its flag over the land, a person might live in southern France but still be Italian in language and custom

And the native populations are in little better shape than those in the US - ravaged by plagues, crushed in wars, there is no "large population" to hold at bay. That very sad ship sailed almost two hundred years ago. Today, they account for under 5% of the Canadian population, and that's after many years of recovery, as well as self government and the right to define their own membership rules.
 
Last edited:
Large scale exercises were an annual occurrence in West Germany for almost 25 years.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercise_Reforger


NATO forces became very adept at working around civilians. This was especially true in the countryside. God help the tank commander who managed to back over a chicken coop by mistake!
Well if they held a huge exercise in a NATO country, say.... Poland? Estonia? would that not cause a whole new level of CT?
 
Between Hevach and BombDr two of my three examples have gone up in smoke.... Darn.
Sorry about that!

But there are variation on 'occupation'.

In Israel/Palestine, Israel took over all of the state functions prior to Oslo, with the exception of the Fire Department, Ambulances, minor municipal stuff, but the Police, Judiciary, Hospitals, Infrastructure et al was done by Israel, hence the strain on manpower.

Now that most of the West Bank is autonomous Israel has relieved itself of ALL of Gaza and police, housing, hospitals, ambulances etc. Obviously I am being dispassionate about it and not making any comments about human rights abuses and settlements, but you get the point about the reduction in 'occupation' manpower required.

The Nazis by comparison would invade a country and then replace the existing bureaucracy with one of its own of Nazi sympathisers.

I am assuming the CT crowd will be expecting all the law enforcement to 'honor their oath' and be put into gas-chambers and whatnot, as well as the entire NRA membership list, and Obama Liberals will be roaming the streets with nightsticks made from recycled coconuts, on bicycles to keep the non-FEMA-camped Sheeple under control, with the US Military....?
 
NATO forces became very adept at working around civilians. This was especially true in the countryside. God help the tank commander who managed to back over a chicken coop by mistake!


I know and there was Ex Lionheart in the 80s. I was in Germany from 03-05 and we still had large-ish exercises, and the odd farmer was actually delighted by our presence and looked for opportunities to get compensation. One even askd if we would mind knocking a wall over for him.... Not to claim, but as it was in his way.....
 
If local authorities are co-operative, it can be quite easy for a minimal number of troops to occupy a large population.

(I recall reading that only one German division was left in Hungary after the initial invasion of that country in March 1944, but cannot now find any info online.

The Government was changed so that Hungary remained a nominally soveriegn state - it did not need to be occupied.

Think also of British Canada from the late 1840s to 1867 - where only four thousand British troops were stationed

I think you mistake "occupy" for "stationed in" in this case!


- and the six Israeli brigades currently occupying Palestine.)

The West Bank areas that are under full Israeli control are out of bounds to Palestinians - see West Bank areas from the Oslo accords
 
When you get off the bench Lib, could you tell me where you would expect the United States Military to train for Public Order operations, if not within the United States?

Or are you suggesting the US military should never train for Public Order operations...?
There are already good facilities for training for public order operations (Martial Law).
One such facility was "debunked" here:
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/debunked-fake-city-us-army-trains-for-martial-law-in-us.3110/

The military also trains for public order operations (in this case against only black people) at facilities like this one:

In the above video advertisement for "Guardian Centers", the military forcibly interns black Americans into razor wire pens before turning them over to the local police. In the Guardian Centers ad, some black rowdies overturn a car and set it on fire at 0:56. At 2:05 a black woman wearing sneakers, sweat pants and a hoodie is forcibly interned at some type of makeshift detainment area, before being handcuffed and turned over to the Perry Georgia Police Dept.
 
Last edited:
Here are some screenshots of the Public Order Internment Operations that are undertaken at the Guardian Centers. The last screenshot is from Google Streetview, showing that the local police and police vehicles being used for this training operation are from a real precinct in Perry Georgia.

Screen Shot 2015-04-01 at 6.23.11 PM.png Screen Shot 2015-04-01 at 6.23.47 PM.png Screen Shot 2015-04-01 at 6.24.16 PM.png Screen Shot 2015-04-01 at 6.24.38 PM.png Screen Shot 2015-04-01 at 6.24.55 PM.png Screen Shot 2015-04-01 at 6.17.09 PM.png
 
The military also trains for public order operations (in this case against only black people) at facilities like this one:

So, apart from this video, in which I clearly see white people playing the agitators, and clearly see black people in uniform and being evacuated as casualties, what evidence do you have of a racially segregated training programme?

Are the people training here Army or National Guard...? Presumably you would like the National Guard and local authorities to be ready, so there is no repeat of the anarchy of Katrina...? Or is that big government....?

So is your objection the training, or that it is not on a designated training area...?
 
None of this adds up to martial law, if the military are only acting in a support role then the civil authorities remain very much in control.

In times of disaster, this should be an advantage rather being seen as martial law or something sinister even though the fire service and Coast guards would usually fill in this positions. It is not unusual to have the military assisting in times of disasters or emergencies in many countries of the world.
 
Ironically enough, a lot of the same people freaking out over this have frequently expressed support for a hypothetical military coup to remove President Obama.

And shouldn't Arizona also be designated as hostile?
 
Ironically enough, a lot of the same people freaking out over this have frequently expressed support for a hypothetical military coup to remove President Obama.

And shouldn't Arizona also be designated as hostile?

The thing is though (and I do wholeheartedly agree with you regardless of how this may come across) its your typical policeman syndrome... "There's never a cop around when you need one" but as soon as there IS one and you're caught doing something illegal its "Those fucking cops are everywhere, and those jackbooted thugs are always out to put us down!" People have a tendency to want rules and laws applied to everyone BUT themselves.. just so as long as THEY arent (or dont feel that they are) "the target."

So while it may sound or seem weird from an outside view to have people rally behind a military coups to overthrow a President they dont like, that fear that the military could turn on THEM is gnawing at the back of their minds. Long story short, as long as whatever the entity may be is being used for THEIR benefit, they're happy.. if the roles are reversed (or more accurately they FEEL the roles are reversed) they freak the hell out and scream police state.
 
Long story short, as long as whatever the entity may be is being used for THEIR benefit, they're happy.. if the roles are reversed (or more accurately they FEEL the roles are reversed) they freak the hell out and scream police state.
I agree wholeheartedly, but the people that are in constant fear of Martial Law are hardly thinking in rational terms.
 
I agree wholeheartedly, but the people that are in constant fear of Martial Law are hardly thinking in rational terms.

True, but a lot of that fear (at least for our generation) comes from images of the cold war, 1984, and just about any movie where there's SOME form of police state present.. Pink Floyd's "The Wall" (the movie), The Postman with Kevin Costner, Equilibrium with Christian Bale, 1984.. in Real life there's Tienanmen Square, images of Goose Stepping Russians through Red Square and soldiers up on the Berlin Wall just to name a few. So if you take those images and combine them with an already paranoid mind, you get a terrified mind... for the average joe its not a massive thing, which is why MOST ppl dont freak at the sight of cops in riot gear, or training how to deal with riots and rioters... the LA Riots and the Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood in 1997 taught law enforcement a LOT about how to deal with those kinds of situations... the average joe understands that, MOST of the time.

*EDIT - edited for clarity and to fix some bad edits I made before posting.
 
Last edited:
which is why MOST ppl dont freak at the sight of cops in riot gear, or training how to deal with riots and rioters... the LA Riots and the Bank of America Shootout in North Hollywood in 1997 taught law enforcement a LOT about how to deal with those kinds of situations... the average joe understands that, MOST of the time.

It's a weird paradox that people would expect their law enforcement and military to be well trained and equipped to handle difficult situations, yet dont want to see them training or accept the ugly reality of restablishing public order when riots do occur - there is no polite way to quell a riot.

I can't understand how these paranoid types expect military to maintain their edge, refresh and develop skills if not by realistic training....osmosis? In fact I would have thought the fact they were maintaining some sort of transparency and training "in the open" as it were would have the opposite effect on that crowd (in contrast to shadowy, top secret training where they use their reptilian mind control powers to interrogate innocent members of public).

You're dead right, it is just an extension of the cop syndrome.
 
It's a weird paradox that people would expect their law enforcement and military to be well trained and equipped to handle difficult situations, yet dont want to see them training or accept the ugly reality of restablishing public order when riots do occur - there is no polite way to quell a riot.

I can't understand how these paranoid types expect military to maintain their edge, refresh and develop skills if not by realistic training....osmosis? In fact I would have thought the fact they were maintaining some sort of transparency and training "in the open" as it were would have the opposite effect on that crowd (in contrast to shadowy, top secret training where they use their reptilian mind control powers to interrogate innocent members of public).

You're dead right, it is just an extension of the cop syndrome.

I think this sums it up:

 
I think this sums it up:


I totally understand the sentiment

I think it was expressed more consisly by the great George Orwell (my favourite author) when he said

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

I have to say this is a very interesting thread, coming from someone who was born and lives in the UK - we (Europeans in general) have such a different relationship with the state (and by extension state power)

I am always intrigued by Americans relationship with their state/government

I look at it with both admiration and revulsion (it does tend to lead to these anti government conspiracist memes - Sandy Hook, I mean wtf) and actual terrorist acts - Oklahoma

But as a republican, in the literal sense (and yes we do exist in the UK)

I love the simplicity and elegance of the first line of the American constitution "we the people"
 
Last edited:
I'm always reminded of the 09 (or was it 08 or 10') NDAA and how the military was going to throw us all in jail with no trial.... Still waiting on that one.
 
I love the simplicity and elegance of the first line of the American constitution "we the people"
Magna Carta can be quite nostalgic too:

FIRST, THAT WE HAVE GRANTED TO GOD, and by this present charter have confirmed for us and our heirs in perpetuity, that the English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired.
Content from External Source
 
I'm always reminded of the 09 (or was it 08 or 10') NDAA and how the military was going to throw us all in jail with no trial.... Still waiting on that one.

Which begs the question: How long can Youtube CTs sustain an audience? By any rational means, if a prediction never occurs, the forecaster should lose some credibility, right?

Do they just recruit new ones along the way, or do the diehards see the event not occurring because these pesky kids on the internet 'found them out'?

AMTV, Dahboo, LaRouche, Infowars.... they alll have videos going back since the beginning of Youtube all predicting calamity next week and it never happens, but they leave the video up anyway.
 
Last edited:
firstly mention of the Magna Carta reminds me how the Freeman movement in the UK always go on about it as if it can never be repealed, although the myth of what it was about seems to have influenced the US constitution. Coming form Salisbury, I have seen the best example of the original 1215 document. When I was last in salisbury Cathedarl a couple of weeks back there were massive queues as it's 800 years old.

Secondly, I think they do get new believers as and when older ones "Wake up" or "fall back asleep" (depending on your worldview) but i also think as we have seen that even though something is comprehensibly debunked and they won;t repeat that argument to the one who debunked it, they will still repeat it anyway as if they somehow still believe it.
 
firstly mention of the Magna Carta reminds me how the Freeman movement in the UK always go on about it as if it can never be repealed, although the myth of what it was about seems to have influenced the US constitution.


Although the US constitution has taken on consecrated-text status, I heard Thomas Jefferson was also partial to the works of John Locke, and 'borrowed' some of the ideas from him.
 
It's rather a dramatic "depends on who you ask"
Not really. Ask a settler and he will say Israel, ask a Palestinian and he will say Palestine. I'm not seeing the drama...?

Would you consider it legal to defend this illegal occupation? [..to fire rockets at the settlers, say]
Do you mean 'resist' and not 'defend'?

There are no rockets being fired from the West Bank.
 
It's rather a dramatic "depends on who you ask"
The international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.
Content from External Source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank

Would you consider it legal to defend this illegal occupation? [..to fire rockets at the settlers, say]
This is getting very far OT and IMO should be split into a different thread.

@qed: To clarify your last line: Are you suggesting that Hamas is justified in firing unguided rockets into settlements, putting men, women and children at equal risk? How about murdering Israeli teenagers who live in settlements, which sparked last summer's war?
And what about the rockets fired into cities in Israel proper? (Since the settlements in Gaza were dismantled in 2006, most Hamas rockets have been fired at cities in southern Israel and not at settlements.)

Furthermore, should the settlers not be protected because they are lawbreakers? Would you be ok with Israel indiscriminately murdering men, women and children who break the law?

I'm not suggesting that you agree with any of these statements, I'm just confused by your last line (as well as a comment about Hezbollah on a different thread), which seemed to indicate that you think terror against civilians is justified.
 
Although the US constitution has taken on consecrated-text status, I heard Thomas Jefferson was also partial to the works of John Locke, and 'borrowed' some of the ideas from him.
Oh, Jefferson was profoundly influenced by Locke, and even Locke's
phrasing can be found in the Declaration of Independence.
Today it would be called "plagiarism," but it was considered more of a tribute
or homage back in TJ's day.

Further, Jefferson had no patience for this "consecrated-text" nonsense:
He wrote famously to Madison that "the earth belongs to the living,"
and that the opinions of dead generations should not straightjacket the living.
He thought a new constitution should be written every 19 years (!!)
to reflect new realities. I'm still waiting to see that on a Tea Party sign!

In short, Jefferson absolutely would've thought that people who treat the 1787 Constitution as some kind of sacred, forever document, were idiots.



(p.s. TJ used the word 'usufruct' in his famous quote, but I skipped it, as it has fallen into disuse)

(p.p.s: TJ also advanced winemaking in the U.S. and even was known to produce a fetching mocha)
 
Last edited:
Not really. Ask a settler and he will say Israel, ask a Palestinian and he will say Palestine. I'm not seeing the drama...?
Ask the world and they will say Palestine.
The international community considers Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.
Content from External Source
 
Which begs the question: How long can Youtube CTs sustain an audience? By any rational means, if a prediction never occurs, the forecaster should lose some credibility, right?

Depends on how crafty they are in "explaining" away failed predictions. Nancy Lieder is still going after almost 20 years, and even after her very specific predictions for 2003 failed utterly.
 
In short, Jefferson absolutely would've thought that people who treat the 1787 Constitution as some kind of sacred, forever document, were idiots.
I agree! I'm less bothered about the plagiarism issue, as most people that write use themes discovered elsewhere, and as level-headed as I am, the US Constitution does have some literary eloquence to it. My problem is that its near-religious reverence and assertions of perfection are slightly worrying, as is the lack of recognition that its authors were far from perfect and hardly lived up to some of its proclamations (slavery being the most obvious).
 
My problem is that its near-religious reverence and assertions of perfection are slightly worrying, as is the lack of recognition that its authors were far from perfect
There are definitely a number of people that equate the constitution (and only those few amendments that they find agreeable with their cause) as biblical, and love to throw quotes by Jefferson and such as if they were irrefutable truths.
Part of the jade helm CT mob are stating it is unlawful that there is even a standing army, which only suggests that certain parts of the constitution might not be as relevant as they once were.
 
Which begs the question: How long can Youtube CTs sustain an audience? By any rational means, if a prediction never occurs, the forecaster should lose some credibility, right?

Do they just recruit new ones along the way, or do the diehards see the event not occurring because these pesky kids on the internet 'found them out'?

AMTV, Dahboo, LaRouche, Infowars.... they alll have videos going back since the beginning of Youtube all predicting calamity next week and it never happens, but they leave the video up anyway.
Look at Pat Robertson. He's been predicting the Tribulation/Rapture/Final War either within the next 5 years or already beginning and we haven't realized it yet for fifty-five years. And he wasn't starting work but continuing somebody else's.

There's a certain leak from any belief system based on predictions in the immediate future instead of ones in some nebulously defined "some day" that might not actually refer to the mortal world anyway, but Christian Armageddon predictions have been holding strong since they really came into vogue again in the 1800's - for most people that realize the futility of it somebody else in a crisis of self finds something to latch onto in it.

Historically, it's more likely for congregations to replace a failed prophet with a new one rather than leave his flock, and we see that sometimes among CTs as well.
 
Back
Top