Monday, October 05, 2009

Here is the full text of John L. Perry's treasonous call for a military coup against our President.

Obama Risks a Domestic Military Intervention

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."
(And yet they would not have been inspired to oust President Bush who famously referred to the Constitution as "just a goddamned piece of paper"?)

# Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized. (You mean like spying on Americans, and using the Patriot Act to illegally search the homes of citizens NOT suspected of terrorism?

# 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.
(Obama inherited this problem, he did not cause it.)

# 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. (Absolutely NO recognition that this "illegal war" was started by George W. Bush.)

# 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.
(Also the fault of George W. Bush was almost single-handedly destroyed out military by failing to adequately fund it while engaging in two unnecessary wars and damaging our reputation around the world.)

# 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.


I am not usually one to toss around words like traitor or treason, but I am stumped for another term which adequately describes this article.

And how completely dishonest of this tool to blame the problems we are facing now on a President hat has only been in office for less then one year.

President Obama did not START these wars. He did not destroy the economy. He did not break the military. All of that was done BEFORE he took the reins of power.

And this little prick know it too. He just hopes that his readers, who have been constantly fed big heaping piles of bullshit, will be too ignorant, and too filled with hate for Obama, to doubt him.

This John Perry should be arrested immediately and Newsmax, which is nothing more than a Neo-con rag, should be thoroughly investigated by Homeland Security for domestic terrorism.

(H/T to TPM. You can visit their site by clicking the title.)

36 comments:

  1. How sickening this whole idea is. That ANY american is outright threatening the sitting POTUS (no matter who's administration it is). Gryphen, I think they forget that the MAJORITY of americans elected our POTUS and many in the military are also democrats. As a middleaged grandma I am willing to take to the streets(in any form necessary) to protect my president. These rightwing ideals being spouted, in the end will cause the death of thier own party. While the threats sicken me, I do know in my heart that in the end they are all writing the ads against the GOP for the next election cycle. May the secret service keep our elected officials safe!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is insane! I can't believe what I'm hearing. Why are they hell bent on undermining America?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Well, the 1st Amendment protects Perry in this instance. An incitement to violence is illegal -- and I hope the Secret Service hassles him on that basis -- but he was not truly calling for a military coup, just envisioning one. Exposing scumbags like Perry, as you are doing, is the best thing to do. Our country is great precisely because Perry is free to write that drivel, just as I could call Bush a moron while he was in office.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous6:14 AM

    Technically, this is sedition, not treason. It's still not a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is why I said on a previous post. GOOD knocks but once but EVIL leans on the doorbell until you answer.

    Gryphen, thank you for calling out this EVIL. We cannot underestimate this HATE. We must organize an answer. I am with CR46, it's time to take this to the streets. While we are asleep at the wheel, they are organizing HATE with teabagging marches and the envisioning of driving our President out of office. Let's not be complacent.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous6:50 AM

    Guess Who?


    http://w3.newsmax.com/a/sarahbook/?PROMO_CODE=8B06-1

    ReplyDelete
  7. Perry ends his diatribe thus:

    "In the 2008 election, that [attitude, i.e., that we can always worry about problems later] was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass."

    Wow! He seemingly has no sense of the irony of his words -- what a perfect description of Bush's two terms in office! Perry may have a future in comedy -- if only he develops a sense of self-awareness.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The fact that Newsmax pulled the article not long after it was posted speaks volumes. Newsmax then took the coward's way out by distancing itself from Perry. Think Progress and the Washington Monthly provided evidence that Perry has a long and intimate relationship with Newmax. Do these guys think before they publish these types of articles, or is that their hatred for Obama overshadows all else?

    Newsweek has an article online about Osama bin Laden, but the title reads Obama bin Laden. I found out about this on DKos and sent them an email about it. This type of lazy proofreading is unexcusable.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous7:28 AM

    These idiots got bolder because Sarah Palin, Limbaugh and the rest have given them permission to do so and have planted it in their minds that it is ok. May God have mercy on America because we are surely sinking fast into self destruction. Don't these itdiots realize that a nation divided against itself can not stand and that other countries are watching for an opportunity to take the USA out because we are not UNITED? How stupid can these "God" loving folks be to be so blinded by hate?

    ReplyDelete
  10. yukonark8:00 AM

    "Prick" indeed aptly describes this guy.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous8:22 AM

    O/T - Gryphen, did you see Tank and Levi's new pistachio ad? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/05/levi-johnstons-tv-commerc_n_309738.html

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous8:24 AM

    Un-frickin'-believable. And I agree with anon at 7:28. Palin and Co. have emboldened the crazies among us.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous8:29 AM

    I found this regarding sedition:

    This is from the U.S. Code, which is the codification of the general and permanent laws of the United States.

    TITLE 18--CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
    PART I--CRIMES
    CHAPTER 115--TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

    Sec. 2385. Advocating overthrow of Government

    "Whoever, with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so...Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both, and shall be ineligible for employment by the United States or any department or agency thereof, for the five years next following his conviction."

    http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/usc.cgi?ACTION=RETRIEVE&FILE=$$xa$$busc18.wais&start=3862440&SIZE=5057&TYPE=TEXT

    ReplyDelete
  14. SoCalWolfGal8:36 AM

    I do think their hatred for President Obama overshadows everything, and that includes not only losing the Olympics in 2016 but I guess they will be happy when the country does self destruct. It would be nice if Newsmax admitted it's mistakes, but then I guess they are not as big a person as is, say David Letterman. This is beyond sick.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anon 6:50:
    Yep, you can get a free copy of the Quitter's book if you buy a subscription to Newsmax. But why? It'll be cheaper to buy that silly ole Rogue book from Amazon.com since it is 45% off (unless you want hate filled, lying crap from 2 sources).
    I guess all the talk about bulk ordering Palin's book to give it away free (to jack sales) are being proven now. This book may just go from #1 straight to the bargain bin before it is even released.
    Hey juju, better order more books! You can use it for toilet paper just so all that paper won't go to waste. Or, you can build a likeness of Palin with them books as your own personal shrine to her.

    ReplyDelete
  16. This kind of article scares me in light of the fact that there has been an intense evangelizing effort in the military for years. This provides a base for this man's crazy talk. Kind of like an invisible coup in the military. Also, I will venture out on a branch and point out how it has become so unthinkable to criticize the military. Being old enough to remember the Vietnam war, I also remember the atrocities which are an inevitable part of a war, especially a war of aggression. When people talk about "supporting the troops" I get a queasy feeling. Do they mean to support even the troops who joined out of a spirit of revenge or because they wanted to avoid jail. Would this blind support of the troops be strong enough to allow an overthrow of our Democracy?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous9:48 AM

    Actually, it's not unbelievable because people such as Perry rely on the fact that the vast majority of people are unwilling to give Mr Obama a chance to even see his first term through without criticising him early on.

    The very samne thing happened to Gordon Brown, PM of the UK, a very competent and honourable man, who was criticised from the get go and is now facing up to the fact that it looks like he will lose the next general election in the UK as The Sun newspaper, owned by Murdoch, has gone back to supporting the Conservatives for the first time in twelve years. Where the Sun leads the people of the UK generally follow.

    If you want the President to make progress get behind him and give him time to do what he needs to do. Try not to be persuaded by media and celebrities that Obama is failing you because after 9 months you can't visualise the promises that he gave you. It is too soon to see results and Obama is being hindered by the soft left and the right in politics.

    Please do not allow what is happening in the UK happen to us in the USA or we will most likely find that our discontent has been played with allowing Palin and her friends to slip through.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous10:03 AM

    Become part of the action to get these racist, hate mongerers in line...StopDomesticTerrorism.com
    or VelvetRevolution.us

    We need to take action to stop these acts of treason, subversive activites

    ReplyDelete
  19. Anonymous10:09 AM

    Thanks, Gryphen, for posting that information.

    Respect for the office of the President of the United States and for the democracy of this land has been eroding because of those who want to overthrow and unseat President Obama. The Bush/Cheney regime did not complete their mission, to destroy the Constitution and overthrow America for the New World Order. The race issue is but a tool along with the other tools to promote hatred towards President Obama, a democrat.

    Thermite was found in the dust collected from all buildings that collapsed on 9/11. There has been numerous videos and documentation collected by Americans that dispute the validity of the Bush/Cheney regime's 9/11 Commission Report.

    Blueprint for Truth videos on youtube by professionals using forensic science prove that the buildings were taken down by demolition. And the site patriotsquestion9/11 lists over 700+ engineers who have come together to dispute the official report. There are others who have joined in, military officers, etc., as well. And the site whatreallyhappened provides additional information, too. Not only were lives destroyed in those buildings and from the planes, but it caused the genocide of a people. Not because of race, but because of political gain. And the owner of the Blawkwater military force believes in the genocide of people who do not believe in speaking in tongues. Even megachurchs have been built on air force bases. SP's comment to the media to quit lying out of respect for the military is another example of pitting the military against groups of people. And The Patriot Act and torture could also be used against the American people.

    There are many forces coming together to divide this nation for political gain, even from the pulpit.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Anonymous11:18 AM

    Found this today at HuffPost. A guy is suing a religious organization.

    Weinstein, who is Jewish, said the harassment started several years ago when he began protesting Christian proselytizing at his alma mater, the Air Force Academy. Weinstein started his foundation shortly after that to battle the influence of extremist evangelical Christians in the armed forces.

    http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/100509dnmetprayersuit.3fb3560.html

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous12:33 PM

    I have been saying that the Repocons were Nazis since around 2004, Dubhya may not have made the grade as the next Hitler but you know they will keep looking till they find somebody soulless enough to fit their needs.

    I again repeat what I heard on a radio interview of a Republican operative shortly before Nixon's reelection. The Republican party planned to amend the Constitution of The United States of America to remove Presidential term limitations
    and
    ELECT NIXON PRESIDENT FOR LIFE.

    I didn't make that story up. The Republicans don't like democracy they like ruling, they like cheap labor, they want a population of peons who are so desperate for food and shelter that they will tolerate being enslaved.

    ReplyDelete
  22. While I certainly agree that this article borders on treason, and It seems to me like there are laws against threatening the President and fomenting insurrections and the like, we can't forget that the same despicable thing happened regarding President Bush. I believe that both men are doing/did what they think/thought was right for the country, and this kind of clearly over-the-top rhetoric from both sides weakens and harms the country in the eyes of the world and its own citizens.

    Protesting war is fine, but you don't call for the murder of the President. Protesting expanding government involvement in health care and other areas is great, but don't make signs such as: "next time I'll exercise my 2nd amendment rights".

    "A protester with a sign saying “Kill Bush” and advocating that the White House be bombed, at the March 18, 2007 anti-war rally in San Francisco."

    ReplyDelete
  23. Anonymous2:17 PM

    Gary, so what? Why try to divert the point of Gryphen's post? Bush had one little sign against him in San Francisco? Do you realize what President Obama is living with at the moment ON THE AIRWAVES? It's the most outrageous hate speech since the 1800's.

    Oh, did you google Sarah Palin and Brad Hanson yet?

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous2:36 PM

    Newsmax gets NO CREDIT whatsoever for pulling this.

    They knew darn well all it had to do was be up on their site for a day, then it would go viral. Which it has.

    Phony move. Like they didn't read it and approve it ahead of time.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous3:54 PM

    Gary,

    Thanks for the reminder for all of us not to use the "It's okay if it's us" defense without taking a second to think about what that means.

    And now that I have given it a second thought, I think there is still a differential here in the nature of the new protests, their organization and backers, relationship to the media, to churches, to funding that is troubling. This oppositional research on speed approach may just be the present preferred mode--cheap, fast, ultimately meaningless (but effective?)--in our political discourse. It will probably be picked up and continued in the next cycle by whomever covets the brass ring and isn't too squeamish about how they achieve it.

    It is always amazingly strange to me how few qualified/unqualified contenders are actually on deck when the games begins, how varied and flawed they are, and how we pick through them like stinky socks to see which we'll wear in our holey shoes.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous5:25 PM

    Newsmax? Aren't they the organisation that is giving away Palin's book for free with a six month subscription and for $8.95 if you sign up for 4 months?

    http://w3.newsmax.com/a/sarahbook/?promo_code=81BB-1

    Proves a point about the bulk buy efforts of right wing organisations that you made Gryphen.

    ReplyDelete
  27. This is no joking matter and nothing will ever come of it. No charges no investigation nothing. That speaks more to me than the original story.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem."

    It's called "2012." If you don't think that's fast enough, then GET THE FUCK OUT OF THIS COUNTRY!

    ReplyDelete
  29. anon @2:17 and wherever else --

    "One little sign"? Apparently you didn't click on my link and examine the plethora of signs calling for the then President to be killed, bombed, beheaded, shot, impeached, etc, etc. And this was world-wide.

    Of course, this ugly aspect of the protests was not highlighted in the media like it is today, simply because around 8-9 out of 10 reporters and editors vote Democrat. It was left for citizen journalists with websites to document, so I'm actually not surprised you're under the impression that there was only "one little sign".

    I responded to your misguided attempt at constructing a moral equivalence between Letterman's self-admitted to activities and Sarah Palin's activities as alleged by an unreliable source in the last comment here.

    Could we bother you for a name?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous3:48 AM

    I suggest everyone go to stopdomesticterrorism.com or velvetrevolution .us and take action against these traitors threatening violence and promoting subversive activities

    stopdomoesticterrorism.com

    velvetrevolution.us

    We have to take action now !

    ReplyDelete
  31. Anonymous10:50 AM

    I was struck by the paragraph that asked (basically) "what if Obama doesn't give us enough troops in Afghanistan"? Has he actually done this? If he was actually going off starting wars with no regard to the troops needed or the equipment and resources they'd need to stay safe and complete their mission, I'd say they might have a legitimate gripe. But as I recall, that's exactly what George W. Bush did and no one was talking about a military overthrow then.
    Obama hasn't really even had time to show how he would run a war. If he'd been screwing things up for a couple years, maybe they'd have something to write about. But this writer is assuming a lot, and you sure as hell don't start talking this treasonous crap on an assumption.
    I was married to a guy in the Air Force during the Carter administration. You never would have heard this kind of talk in the military, not even during the Iran hostage crisis.
    And that line about Obama wanting to start a "Marxist state"! As if! He's not even very leftist for a Democrat! Every time I hear some idiot calling Obama a Marxist I know there's not much point in talking to them. Pearls before swine...

    ReplyDelete
  32. Anonymous3:47 PM

    @Gary, you gave a non-response. DID YOU GOOGLE SARAH PALIN AND BRAD HANSON?

    It's a simple question. Yes or no?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Yes, "anonymous", I did "google it". Everything seems to based on reports by that paragon of journalism accuracy, the National Enquirer. And even in that story, an actual "affair" is not really determined, only that some "feelings" were starting to develop and it was nipped in the bud. (if we can even believe that) How earth-shattering.

    Your amateur attempts at "gotcha" really don't hit any meaningful or relevant mark. My only point regarding Dave's dalliances (which he finally realized he should apologize for on air to his wife and co-workers, destroying the notion that nobody was hurt by his actions) was that I did not approve of this kind of behavior and that it sours me on him. I also went on to say that IF an actual affair was ever admitted to by Sarah Palin, or if there was some kind of credible proof provided, that information would sour me on her as well. It's called consistency.

    But even IF there WAS an acutal sexual affair above and beyond a friendship starting to cross a line, and if we're doing direct comparisons here, it would pale next to what Letterman did. No, he may not have been married, but he may as well have been, given the nature of his relationship with his now wife and mother of his child. (It would be interesting to know if the affair(s) took place before or after her pregnancy was known to be ..... pesky details) Not only did he hurt his now wife, and open his son to later embarrassment, but he abused his position with his employees, both the ones he actually screwed and the others who were left out of the fun.

    This goes above and beyond what Palin may or may not have done with Brad Hanson, somewhat similar to a mountain vs. a mole-hill.

    Or so it seems to me.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous5:09 PM

    @Gary, what you write is called "fan fiction."

    How do you know what Letterman's relationship was like with his girlfriend for all these years? They didn't marry until March 2009. Perhaps it was an "open" relationship, like Sarah and Todd's. The point is: you just don't know. But yet you make up things.

    Please don't lecture others on ideological consistency until you display some in your own comments here.

    ReplyDelete
  35. If nothing else "anonymous", you're a master of obfuscation.

    I made nothing up. Dave admitted to sexual affairs with staffers and later apologized to his wife and his staff. That he apologized would strongly imply that there was something to apologize for. Only by HIS OWN admissions and apologies do I "lecture" Dave and you. Otherwise, it's none of our business, but he MADE it our business by announcing it on TV. (albeit his hand was obviously forced)

    But of course I didn't actually "lecture" anyone, I merely expressed disapproval -- of anyone who would cheat on their significant other. I think that's a pretty universal reaction, is it not?

    As for consistency, why are you going on about Sarah's merely alleged affair when you obviously don't know what the circumstances were? In that case, we really DON'T know the circumstances. In Daves case, by his own frank testimony, we DO know what he did, and what he did merited apology to numerous parties.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.