Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship

Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship

By BEN EVANS – 6 days ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — A Republican congressman from Georgia said Monday he fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.

"It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's the one who proposed this national security force," Rep. Paul Broun said of Obama in an interview Monday with The Associated Press. "I'm just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may — may not, I hope not — but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism."

Broun cited a July speech by Obama that has circulated on the Internet in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.

"That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did," Broun said. "When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist."

Obama's comments about a national security force came during a speech in Colorado about building a new civil service corps. Among other things, he called for expanding the nation's foreign service and doubling the size of the Peace Corps "to renew our diplomacy."

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," Obama said in July. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Broun said he also believes Obama likely will move to ban gun ownership if he does build a national police force.

Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms and favors "common sense" gun laws. Gun rights advocates interpret that as meaning he'll at least enact curbs on ownership of assault weapons and concealed weapons. As an Illinois state lawmaker, Obama supported a ban on semiautomatic weapons and tighter restrictions on firearms generally.

"We can't be lulled into complacency," Broun said. "You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential."

Obama's transition office did not respond immediately to Broun's remarks.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Obama has said he respects the Second Amendment right to bear arms

The press needs to delve a little deeper on this quote. Obama believes in HIS interpretation of the 2nd Amendment, NOT what the Supreme Court has said.

He supported, and still supports, the DC gan ban. He thinks it well within the constitution to fobid a private citizen from owning a handgun of any kind, and only non-functioning rifles and shotguns.

If he was a republican I would say he's suggetsting lifting ALL restrictions on gun ownership in this country so what we could have a standing National Security Force (In 1775 lingo that would be a militia) but I'm guessing this is not what he means.

Being that he's Obama, I think this is reading as, he will institute anti-gun laws throughout the country, and his National Security Force (heretofor "Brown Shirts"), under his control, will be armed, and at his beck and call to keep fellow Americans from straying from the path of Obama Righteousness. The ony people that will be armed are his Security Force, and then he'll pass by Executive order some way to keep weapons from the military as long as they are inside the borders of the US. Maybe a HUGE arms arsenal where all the military's weapons will be kept until the military is called on to serve outside the US.

But it will ALL be in the name of "Gun Safety"..

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Remarks linking Barack Obama and Adolf Hitler
On November 10, 2008, one week after the 2008 presidential election, Broun drew national attention[8] when he criticized President-elect Barack Obama's call for a civilian national security force, suggesting that Obama might use it to establish a Marxist dictatorship.

In an interview with the Associated Press, Broun said, "That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did. When he's proposing to have a national security force that's answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he's showing me signs of being Marxist." Broun later clarified his statement by saying, "We can't be lulled into complacency. You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I'm not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I'm saying is there is the potential of going down that road."

Broun cited a July 2008 speech by Obama in which the then-Democratic presidential candidate had said, "We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." A spokesman for Obama indicated that he had been referring to a civilian reserve corps intended to handle postwar reconstruction efforts, such as rebuilding infrastructure. The Bush administration has endorsed this idea, and a Civilian Response Corps, described as similar to the one proposed by Obama, was formed in 2006 by the Bush Administration after a bipartisan Congressional vote.


Further statements
The following day, November 11, Broun seemingly backed away from his statements, saying on WGAC radio, "I regret putting it that way," and "I apologize to anyone who has taken offense at that." Broun nevertheless asserted that Obama "is extremely liberal" and "has promoted a lot of socialistic ideas, and it just makes me concerned."

His remarks in the radio interview were at first interpreted in the press as an apology. However, Broun's office later said he was "not taking back anything he said" and a spokeswoman said, "We have not issued any official apology” for the remarks. The spokeswoman said Broun stood by a written statement he had issued in which he criticized Obama for having "socialist views" and raised what the Atlanta Journal Constitution described as "ominous concerns" about the civilian force. The news release read in part, "I firmly believe that we must not fall victim to the 'it can't happen here' mentality. I adhere to the adage 'eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.'"

Broun claimed that his comments had been sensationalized by the media.

whackjobs quoting whackjobs

[ylexot (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

whackjobs quoting whackjobs

You have to admit that "a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" sure doesn't sound like a reconstruction group. Reconstruction doesn't require the group to be "powerful" or "strong", just like the military. It's also puzzling to call a reconstruction group (who I'd assume would be doing reconstruction in foreign lands) a "national security force". "Civilian international construction force" would be far more appropriate.

[2ndAmendment]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

whackjobs quoting whackjobs

Will you be laughing when they start rounding people up?

Troll ..........

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

whackjobs quoting whackjobs

Okay... I've asked this question several times on here and no one (not even you) have answered it. So this "whackjob is asking you... when BO said:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

... what did he mean by this? Since BO didn't go into detail about it perhaps you could. Because we don't know why BO believe our existing military isn't capable of protecting this country and thinks we need such a force. We have the National Guard, FBI, CIA, our police forces, and other protective agencies to perform this function. Why does BO feel he needs his own army?

[ImnoMensa]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Okay... I've asked this question several times on here and no one (not even you) have answered it. So this "whackjob is asking you... when BO said:



... what did he mean by this? Since BO didn't go into detail about it perhaps you could. Because we don't know why BO believe our existing military isn't capable of protecting this country and thinks we need such a force. We have the National Guard, FBI, CIA, our police forces, and other protective agencies to perform this function. Why does BO feel he needs his own army?

My question is who will make up this Army.?
Will they be drafted or recruited?
Who will direct this Army?
Will they be Federal or State?
Will they be armed?
What authority over Civilian authority will they have?

I dont consider myself a nutcase,but when the intended President of the United States starts talking about raising an Army of Brownshirts because the Civilian and Military we have now are not capable of handling their jobs, I have to wonder what his ultimate goal is.

If we dont have enough military or Civilian police to handle things most people would suggest we get more military or Civilian personnell. not start a new concept of SS troops.

If the House of Representatives or the Senate led by Democraps brings up this crap we better make a move on the Capitol and straighten their asses out. And do it fast.

[aps45819 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

whackjobs quoting whackjobs

That was Rep. Paul Broun qouting Barry Soetoro.

Why do you feel Paul Broun is a wackjob?

[twinoaks207 (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Beaver-Cleaver

whackjobs quoting whackjobs

One should always be cautious in using Wikipedia as a reference source. Wikipedia is an Internet encyclopedia that can be and is edited by Internet users. There is no guarantee that the person making the edits has the qualifications or knowledge required to make the edits. Any information found in Wikipedia should always be verified by researching the information using other reputable sources. People who are "media literate" (or have been taught Media Literacy skills in school or by the local Public Librarian) would already know this about Wikipedia. After all, we don't want "whackjobs quoting whackjobs", right? Verify your sources!