Fmr WH Speechwriter: Military Coup Could Oust Obama
In an article originally posted on the Newsmax website, Perry wrote, “There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.”
Here is the full text of John L. Perry's column on Newsmax which suggests that a military coup to "resolve the Obama problem" is becoming more possible and is not "unrealistic." Perry also writes that a coup, while not "ideal," may be preferable to "Obama's radical ideal" -- and would "restore and defend the Constitution." Newsmax has since removed the column from its website. ...
By: John L. Perry
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn't the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn't mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
# Officers swear to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to "obey the orders of the president of the United States."
# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
# They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
# They can see that the economy -- ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation -- is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
# They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
# They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America's troop strength is allowed to sag.
# They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
# They can see the nation's safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran's nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, "I'm not interested in victory") that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America's military leadership is lost in a fool's fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don't shrug and say, "We can always worry about that later."
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
Former White House speechwriter John L. Perry has courted controversy by suggesting that the U.S. Military, upholding their oath to defend the Constitution against domestic enemies, could stage a bloodless coup to oust President Obama.
In an article originally posted on the Newsmax website, Perry wrote, “There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.”
Despite the fact that Perry was not explicitly advocating such a coup, Newsmax later removed the article to ensure it “was not misinterpreted”.
The article outlines how military officers, outraged at Obama’s “trampling” on the Constitution, nationalization of American institutions, rising deficits, unemployment and taxes, could peaceably seize power from the “radical-left commissars” of the Obama administration.
“Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible,” writes Perry.
It is important to stress that Perry is not a Neo-Con, he worked under the Democratic administrations of Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter.
A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Perry warns that America could be unrecognizable by 2012, prompting a coup to “restore and defend the Constitution,” a prospect that is “weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership,” he writes.
Perry says that such a move could be accelerated if Israel were to bomb Iran, causing the Middle East to explode and a massive destabilization of the free world.
Of course, the unlikely staging of a military coup could be just another ruse to implement martial law in the aftermath of what would undoubtedly ensue – mass civil unrest and a potential breakdown of society.
More and more credible analysts are predicting that the United States could collapse in a Soviet-style breakdown within the next few years. In such a scenario, the vacuum of power created would leave the door open for the imposition of an even greater tyranny than we are witnessing today with Obama’s big government Socialist agenda.
It is far more likely that a military coup, even if it began as a genuine effort to “restore the Constitution,” or “solve the Obama problem,” would be hijacked and transformed into an effort to subjugate the entire country under a militarized police state to an even greater extent than it is now.
The more probable scenario is the one that was outlined by Tommy Franks in a 2003 interview with the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado, where a military form of government would be implemented in the aftermath of a huge terror attack that kills millions.
Franks predicted that another mass casualty terror attack would occur that would cause the “population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution.”
...
Statement from Newsmax Regarding Blogger
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
...
In a blog posting to Newsmax, John Perry wrote about a coup scenario involving the U.S. military. He clearly stated that he was not advocating such a scenario but simply describing one.
After several reader complaints, Newsmax wanted to ensure that this article was not misinterpreted. It was removed a short time after being posted.
Newsmax strongly believes in the principles of Constitutional government and would never advocate or insinuate any suggestion of an activity that would undermine our democracy or democratic institutions.
Mr. Perry served as a political appointee in the Carter administration in HUD and FEMA. He has no official relationship with Newsmax other than as an unpaid blogger.
Labels: revolution #2
posted by jillosophy at 10/08/2009 03:28:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home