Government Readies Youth Corps To Take On Vets

[Mr. T]

Government Readies Youth Corps To Take On Vets

 

“Ten minutes into arrant mayhem in this town near the Mexican border, and the gunman, a disgruntled Iraq war veteran, has already taken out two people, one slumped in his desk, the other covered in blood on the floor,” begins a shocking New York Times article reporting on how the Boy Scouts are being trained to take on domestic terrorists, which apparently would include war veterans and American citizens if the Homeland Security definition of a terrorist is to be applied.

 

Homeland Security and the FBI are behind the effort to indoctrinate and train the Boy Scouts to become tomorrow’s Gestapo. “Our end goal is to create more agents,” April McKee, a senior Border Patrol agent, told the Times. “Before it was more about the basics,” said Johnny Longoria, a Border Patrol agent. “But now our emphasis is on terrorism, illegal entry, drugs and human smuggling.”

 

Is this the literal creation of Hitler-Jugend style youth brigades designed to act as the front line for eventual programs of mass internment and gun confiscation in the advent of a national emergency?

 

In Nazi Germany, the Hitler Youth succeeded the Boy Scout movement. Hitler Youth training was militarized in comparison to the Boy Scout network, which was largely based around education. Boys aged fourteen and upwards, as well as a separate branch aged 10-14, were trained at preparatory schools to become future Nazi leaders. At its height in 1940, and after it had become mandatory to join, the Hitler Youth boasted no less than 8 million members.

 

Apparently in a shift away from the traditional Boy Scouts activities of sports, camping, survival skills and team leadership, the government is now training children “to confront terrorism, illegal immigration and escalating border violence” under the banner of the Explorers program, with the aid of military-style exercises aimed at subduing insurgents.

 

In one scenario, boys are trained how to conduct drug raids and take out an “obstreperous lookout”.

 

“Put him on his face and put a knee in his back,” a Border Patrol agent explained. “I guarantee that he’ll shut up.”

 

In other situations, Boy Scouts are trained to disarm “suspected terrorists” and subdue them, including Iraq war veterans.

 

Scouts are trained to identify the enemy. In a competition in Arizona, one role-player wore traditional Arab dress. “If we’re looking at 9/11 and what a Middle Eastern terrorist would be like,” said A. J. Lowenthal, a sheriff’s deputy in Imperial County, California, “then maybe your role-player would look like that. I don’t know, would you call that politically incorrect?”

 

Politically correct or not, Homeland Security and the FBI realize Arabs are not the enemy — “rightwing extremists” are.

 

Last month, a document produced by the Department of Homeland Security’s National Infrastructure Coordinating Center identifying advocates of the Second Amendment, veterans, pro-life activists, and militia members as dangerous terrorists. A subsequent DHS document, entitled “Domestic Extremism Lexicon,” pinpointed “antigovernment” types “rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority” as possible terrorists. “Islamic groups are specifically excluded from this document,” writes Benjamin Sarlin for the Daily Beast.

 

The new Gestapo Boy Scouts program will train the new Hitler Youth — or Obama youth — for the challenges of a totalitarian globalist future.

 

Gestapo Scouts will be required to combat “rightwing extremists” who will refuse to turn in their firearms. Police state Scouts will be the vanguard for Obama’s million-man Civilian National Security Corps. “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the military.

 

It’s up to the New York Times, as the premier “liberal” propaganda outfit, to sell the militarization of the Boy Scouts to the American people, using the standard bugaboos of Arab terrorists, drug cartel thugs, and marijuana cultivators as the example of why all of this is necessary.

 

In the real world, however, government is not primarily concerned with drug dealers — after all, the government and Wall Street run most of the drugs — they are worried about growing opposition to the destruction of the Constitution and the imposition of world government by a cabal of international bankers and their corporate fascist partners in crime

 

 

http://i.cdn.turner.com/ireport/sm/prod/20...th208249_md.jpg

[ballpeen]

I could see it turning that way...

[ballpeen]

It's a shame more Jews weren't paranoid back in late 20's, early 30's Germany.

 

Maybe a few more would have made it to see the 50's

[Guest Aloysius]

Yep, it's a pretty bad analogy. Especially since plenty of Jews in Germany & the rest of Europe were "paranoid" - the problem being that xenophobes here and abroad imposed immigration quotas that made finding safe haven close to impossible.

 

The story of the St. Louis is an unfortunate example of that. You can read more about it in While Six Million Died: A Chronicle of American Apathy.

[ballpeen]

Your going to equate an American president to hitler?

 

Peen you better just stick to your white sheet and love for all that is black ,I mean really your messed up.

 

LOL...that's what you read in to it.

 

 

 

[Mr. T]

Yep, it's a pretty bad analogy. Especially since plenty of Jews in Germany & the rest of Europe were "paranoid" - the problem being that xenophobes here and abroad imposed immigration quotas that made finding safe haven close to impossible.

 

The story of the St. Louis is an unfortunate example of that. You can read more about it in While Six Million Died: A Chronicle of American Apathy.

 

 

Apathy, its a killer.

 

Edmund Burke said all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. Do not allow evil to triumph. Do not do sit by and do nothing.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Yes, and a group of young volunteers helping vets deal with issues like getting health care when they get home from a tour of duty is about as evil as you can get.

 

T, you've got serious issues. I don't think there's anyone on this board who's as completely lost as you, and that's saying something.

 

And ballpeen, you should be ashamed of yourself. You can see the small expansion of current post-grad volunteer programs turning into an army of young drones following Obama's every totalitarian command? You haven't yet caught on that T is about as paranoid and senseless as a man can get? You're there thinking, "Hmm, maybe this guy has a point!" Are you shitting me?

 

Perhaps you need to go outside as well.

[ballpeen]

And ballpeen, you should be ashamed of yourself.

 

 

Are you kidding me??

 

I see the painting mentioned in the article has begun.

 

You guys are like the Boys from Brazil.

 

 

 

[Mr. T]

 

being lost is being blind such as you are heck

[ballpeen]

I really hope a few listen to that.

[heckofajobbrownie]

I guess I thought too much of you.

 

You guys are unbelievable.

[ballpeen]

I think Michael Savage has a great program and don't think him loony at all.

[Mr. T]

If you were born in a communist nation where you were not allowed to speak or write any wrong doings by your government or teachers in fear of being imprisoned. And then came to America and were allowed to be creative and be able to learn, live, and work of your choosing and have the ability to earn for your family as much as you can. Then you would understand why our freedom is worth protecting. Freedom of speech and freedom of the press is worth fighting for.

 

Under the Clintons came political correctness, now under Obama we have an attempt at political silencing.

 

Basically what it comes down to is freedom, most are familiar with the song “Freedom is never Free”.

And some old enough will remember Ronald Reagan stating this:

 

“Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free”.

Ronald Reagan 40th president of US (1911 - 2004)

 

 

We must always protect our rights and keep a watchful eye over our leaders, for those who would mislead society from all that is good here in America and would try to usher in a new change away from what this country is about.

[calfoxwc]

The article does -seem- to be over the top...

 

BUT

 

Obama DID SAY that he wanted a CIVILIAN DEFENSE CORPS

 

and Dan, Heck and Al here will not comment on it,

 

except to put lipstick on a pig....

 

Do you three believe that Obama SAID he wanted one?

 

He called it a CIVILIAN *****DEFENSE***** CORPS.

 

Not a new national veterans human resources org.

 

Can you explain WHY he wants one?

 

T brought up a legit topic, only because

 

Obama actually SAID IT.

 

And Savage irratates me with repeating the same phrases over and over

 

and over and over again, right in a row.

 

But he does say some truth, he just gets carried away most of the time.

 

Al, the libs' mod, should at least try to answer the

 

question. Why do you guys ignore Obama's CIVILIAN DEFENSE CORPS,

 

When all we heard about the Patriot Act was a devasting losss of

 

your freedoms and privacy, and the paranoid fear that your doors were going

 

to be kicked in and your phone conversations recorded ?

 

Now that Obama is pres, that doesn't matter anymore, eh?

 

Oh, but T is partisan?

 

I suggest you really talk to the issue, or ignore the thread.

 

But ignoring the serious "civilian defense corps" and personally attacking

 

anyone who posts what you don't like, makes you the personal attackers.

[Guest mz.]

I think Michael Savage has a great program and don't think him loony at all.

 

 

Thank you to saying that, ballpeen. It does put your Jews-in-the-20's reference into perspective. You people are too much with you Nazi references. You give less thought to the families of the 6 mil Jews who died at Nazi hands than you do to a fertilized egg. And our morality and priorities are out there...

 

How about if we just said, instead, it was like the Union army stomping your Confederate asses.

 

 

 

[Guest Aloysius]

Al, the libs' mod, should at least try to answer the

 

question. Why do you guys ignore Obama's CIVILIAN DEFENSE CORPS,

 

When all we heard about the Patriot Act was a devasting losss of

 

your freedoms and privacy, and the paranoid fear that your doors were going

 

to be kicked in and your phone conversations recorded ?

Why do you keep mentioning me in your posts? It's like when Rich started stalking RifferX at the other board; it's silly, somewhat annoying, and a little bit creepy.

 

FYI, Legacy does the bulk of the mod work here. Both he & Chic John are free to take whatever action they deem necessary. When I want to do something, I make sure to ask Leg first.

 

The idea to limit posters to a thread a day came from me, but it was something both of us agreed would be a good idea. People were already complaining about being inundated with threads, and we thought it'd be a good idea to try something during the almost football-free period between the draft and training camp, when more people tend to visit this board.

 

And I think it's working well. Yesterday, I looked at an older page of this board and saw eight threads with no responses, but the first page only had two goose egg threads. There were several threads with more than fifty responses and one with well over a hundred.

 

You seem to be the only one complaining. You're also involved in most of the personal flame wars and just today criticized another poster for starting a thread you didn't like. It seems like you're more interested in discussing the politics of this board than actual politics. Legacy and Inspecta have already pointed this out to you, but you're free to keep believing that a liberal cabal is oppressing you. Just try to not let it take over every one of your posts.

 

As to the civilian security thingy, Heck answered your question two months ago. I recommend you check that out.

[calfoxwc]

His answer was incomplete - it said nothing about "civilian NATIONAL SECURITY corps".

 

National Security, I was erroneously saying defense corps.

 

Heck grabbed at one part of the weed, but ignored the rest.

 

I mentioned you, because you Thanked Dan on his angry, bitterly critical post

 

objecting to T to dare express his opinion since it didn't conform to you and Dan's

 

protecting the Teflon God of Liberals.

 

Here is what I expect the answer should have been:

 

Obama SAID National Security, not Peace Corps, not Americorps, not a veterans helping corps.

 

Obama, imo, is setting up our society to be 100% dependent upon him for societies survival.

 

Hence, he is "buying votes and power" with tax dollars.

 

The real answer is not Heck's flippant and narrow perspective retort in defense of Obama,

 

and the real answer is not the Brown shirts front and center.

 

But, Acorn has intimidated people who speak out, Leftist Prosecutors in Minn. did the same.

Obama has done the same.

 

Acorn is now under investigation in more than 10 states.

 

Obama's org.

 

So, the jump to brown shirts may be overstated, but the idea has significant historical perspective

 

when a radical speaks of a civilian national defense corps, as powerful as our own military and as well funded.

 

Well, HERE is the correct and objective answer to my question that I never received from Heck, or Dan, or Al:

**********************************************************************

 

July 20, 2008

Obama's Civilian National Security Force

By Lee Cary

window.google_render_ad();Barack Obama's recent words to promote his image as Community Organizer in Chief were not about forming a paramilitary force of volunteer brown shirts. They were about turning America into one, giant, community organizer's sandbox at enormous cost to taxpayers.

 

Senator Obama was nearly 17 minutes into his July 2 speech (yet another one where naming Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was required) in Colorado Springs, Colorado when he deviated from his pre-released script and performed without the teleprompter net saying,

"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

." (

emphasis added

)

The immediate context for that amazing statement was a preview of parts of his plan to vastly expand community service opportunities for Americans of nearly all ages. He said,

"People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve."

The range of his community service initiatives was outlined in an earlier American Thinker article. In his campaign document entitled "The Blueprint for Change: Barack Obama's Plan For America," Obama's "Service" section runs a close second to "Education" in complexity. But, with his Colorado Springs' statement, it grabbed first place in its projected costs to taxpayers. Obama did the cost projection himself.

He plans to double the Peace Corps' budget by 2011, and expand AmeriCorps, USA Freedom Corps, VISTA, YouthBuild Program, and the Senior Corps. Plus, he proposes to form a Classroom Corps, Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, Veterans Corps, Homeland Security Corps, Global Energy Corps, and a Green Jobs Corps. Here a corps - there a corps - everywhere a corps corps.

So it made sense in Colorado Springs when he said his call to community service "will be a central cause of my presidency." He couldn't be clearer in signaling his intentions, including a Social Investment Fund Network to link local non-profits with the federal government.

The entire plan is breathtaking in its scope. But it does not, as at least one internet writer has suggested, portend a "giant police force." It would be easier to rebut if it did. As it is, it's silly stuff born of naively fanciful dreams.

Senator Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda. It's Orwellian-like, with a novice social activist's mentality at the helm. In his speech he said,

"Now I know what the cynics will say. I've heard from them all my life."

Has he? Well, given his absence of noteworthy community organizational achievements, perhaps he might have done more listening to the "cynics" for constructive criticism.

It seems clear that he meant to say, in effect, that the security of the nation is as dependent on its unarmed community service providers as it is on its armed military personnel. Even the nomenclature "corps," as in Peace Corps, carries a martial connotation as does the name, Salvation Army. His point: national security begins with civilians. It's a message like the one America's home front heard throughout World War II. Except in his case, he means to marshal volunteers for social service and economic equality while saving the environment.

"Because the future of our nation depends on the soldier at Fort Carson, but is also depends on the teacher in East LA, the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans..."

That is, of course, true. But ultimate national security requires someone to carry, and, if necessary, discharge a deadly weapon with intent to kill. This is something teachers, nurses and after-school workers are typically unaccustomed to doing as part of their service obligations.

Voters haven't paid much attention to his "Service" plan because the old news media has ignored it. That will likely continue, even though Obama attached an approximate price tag to it in Colorado Springs. When Obama said that the "civilian national security force" would be just as "well-funded" as the Armed Forces, he stepped squarely into the giant sandbox and played with the big numbers. As the late Carl Sagan said, "billions and billions" of dollars. Here's how.

The FY 2008 Department of Defense (DoD) budget is about $482 billion. Obama has announced his intentions to cut "tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending," including $9 billion per month spent in Iraq and expenditures for the missile defense system, while increasing the force size of the Army and Marine Corps.

Let's imagine "tens of billions" in cuts eventually adds up to a whopping $150 billion. That would be a near one-third cut in defense spending, taking the DoD budget down to $332 billion. Even in such an extreme case of DoD budget reduction, for his "civilian national security force" to be "just as well-funded" would mean funding his community service initiatives at an equivalent $332 billion.

Consequently, another $332 billion in addition to the Pentagon's reduced budget of $332 billion equals a net increase of $182 billion in the annual federal budget, assuming we sponge-up the already existing expenditures for the relatively meager, by comparison, existing service programs he plans to expand. That's $182,000,000,000 in new federal monies, and that means higher taxes.

In his entire life, Senator Obama has never managed an organization larger than a Senate staff, or that of a law school publication. And, he's never operated a for-profit business or been responsible for any profit center within one. So, while words matter to Senator Obama, it's not clear if math means anything to him at all.

Note: the author has experience in community organizing. For example, he organized one of the earliest Meals-on-Wheels programs in Illinois, in continuous service for over 30 years. He trained over a hundred Illinois non-profit organizations to resettle Vietnamese Refugees. He assembled three dozen congregations and a synagogue in a mid-sized Texas town to provide emergency assistance to low-income citizens, in continuous operation for 25 years. He was an expert witness at a Texas Senate hearing when legislation forming the state's Commission on Human Rights was being drafted.

[calfoxwc]

FYI, Legacy does the bulk of the mod work here. Both he & Chic John are free to take whatever action they deem necessary. When I want to do something, I make sure to ask Leg first.

**********************************************

Good idea. Leg is fine, and so is John. Never had any complaint about them.

**********************************************

The idea to limit posters to a thread a day came from me, but it was something both of us agreed would be a good idea. People were already complaining about being inundated with threads, and we thought it'd be a good idea to try something during the almost football-free period between the draft and training camp, when more people tend to visit this board.

***********************************************

I don't care about where the idea came from. I'm not complaining about the restriction

to one thread a day. It is fine, unless you let libs violate the rule, but not anybody else.

***********************************************

 

And I think it's working well. Yesterday, I looked at an older page of this board and saw eight threads with no responses, but the first page only had two goose egg threads. There were several threads with more than fifty responses and one with well over a hundred.

***********************************************

It's childish to count responses. Libs won't discuss what they don't like, and that's criticism of the

Obama admin.

In fact, it seems to be a collective decision. And, if a new thread they don't like IS discussed,

like with BallPeen, all of a sudden libs go berserk, and get hateful and resent T and Peen just

for expressing their opinion.

 

Gosh, Al. See the problem? Ask Leg or John.

************************************************

You seem to be the only one complaining. You're also involved in most of the personal flame wars and just today criticized another poster for starting a thread you didn't like.

************************************************

Yes, because I am also the one catching hell, along with T or Steve or anybody else.

 

Even JOHN caught a little hell for a conservative opinion a long while ago.

 

That's not true. I criticized him for smarting off to me and then posting reading material to your thread

for reading material.

 

Should I say it again? or what? Get it now? It isn't that I didn't like it, but I didn't see why

you didn't man up and tell him to post reading material in your reading material thread.

 

OH, let me guess, the liberal's mod - that was okay because it was him. But, if it was

me or T or Steve or now, 'Peen, you'd have a hissy fit.

 

Do...you...see...what....the....problem....is....here? You play favorites. No wonder a few libs wanted

you to be a mod.

*********************************

It seems like you're more interested in discussing the politics of this board than actual politics.

**********************************

Wait. T started a thead about politics. And T and Peen were attacked because they posted it.

 

Seems to me you're the libs mod and you take that to heart. As in, biased.

***********************************

Just try to not let it take over every one of your posts.

***********************************

Yes, your highness.

************************************

 

As to the civilian security thingy, Heck answered your question two months ago. I recommend you check that out.

 

*************************************

 

I recommend you read what the real answer I was wanting. I posted it.

 

Then try to learn to be fair in your criticism. You are throwing your weight around

 

only vs conservatives or anyone who won't agree with you.

 

 

I recommend you be a little quiet and think about that.

[calfoxwc]

You misinpret, Dan, and it isn't all your fault.

 

I meant only that I know the answer is not a simple liberal defense of Obama,

 

that Obama spoke of more things about the civilian national security corps than

just Americorps.

 

But it is very, very troubling that Obama also said, he wanted the civilian national defense corps

to be as powerful and well funded as our military. Doesn't that send up at least a tiny, eesy weensie

little itsy bitsy red flag? AT ALL ?

 

THAT is sure the heyl not "helping returning veterans get proper health care".

 

So, Dan, what IS YOUR take on the national security force?

[ballpeen]

How about if we just said, instead, it was like the Union army stomping your Confederate asses.

 

Is that the best name calling you have??? Geesh....you will never make it as a liberal.....oh....I was born in Ohio so I guess I am as northern as you my friend. Maybe more since you are a Californian.

 

 

You guys are fun to talk with even if not very engaging.

 

 

 

"We stomped you man"

 

 

LOL

[Guest mz.]

Is that the best name calling you have??? Geesh....you will never make it as a liberal.....

 

Ba dum CHING! Should I not forget to tip my waitress, 'peen?

 

Show me where I "called you a name"...

 

Thank you to saying that, ballpeen. It does put your Jews-in-the-20's reference into perspective. You people are too much with you Nazi references. You give less thought to the families of the 6 mil Jews who died at Nazi hands than you do to a fertilized egg. And our morality and priorities are out there...

 

How about if we just said, instead, it was like the Union army stomping your Confederate asses.

 

oh....I was born in Ohio so I guess I am as northern as you my friend.

 

So was I. Doesn't mean you're not a hick at heart (oops, a name was called).

 

Maybe more since you are a Californian.

 

I love how living in California is some sort of pejorative...

 

 

 

[ballpeen]

I love how living in California is some sort of pejorative...

 

No more than living in Tennessee or Alabama.

 

 

My advice to you is get over it.

 

 

 

 

[Guest mz.]

My advice to you is get over it.

 

Living in California, or the Holocaust?

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

Ballpeen, I want to give you one last try on this. Legacy was similarly concerned about this quote, so I posted the whole speech and showed how its meaning was completely taken out of context (by loons) and that what he's talking about is really nothing new, and certainly nothing resembling the Hitler youth or Nazi brownshirts, and just how deranged you'd have to be to think such a thing. And Leg, much to his credit, said, "Oh, okay. That's not what he meant. I feel better." He actually changed his mind when presented with new information. If only some people in here could learn that same lesson. Maybe Leg could teach a class.

 

Take a look at the speech again, and tell me what you think is scary about ...volunteering:

 

"Today, AmeriCorps -- our nation's network of local, state, and national service programs -- has 75,000 slots. And I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife, Michelle, once left her job at a law firm and at City Hall to be a founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. And these programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America's greatest resource -- our citizens.

 

And that's why as president, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem -- they are the answer.

 

So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods all across the country. We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 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. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where Americans can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment, and skill sets; you'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities. This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda, and make their own change from the bottom up."

 

[Mr. T]

Expand AmeriCorps from 75000 to 250000 annual slots;; Establish a Summer of ... turns to tattle-tale squads, forced service abroad

 

http://www.blog.rockthevote.com/2009/03/ta...e-give-act.html

 

Take it for what its worth, dont spit while facing the wind either.

 

can anyone answer what Forced Volunteerism is? left is right? right is left? up is down? down is up?

[calfoxwc]

So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people.

************************************************

 

Yeah, get at those young people. Get em on board the Dem free ticket to utopia train.

 

But seriously, who is going to PAY for all this eloquent universal domination of the gov.?

 

 

[Guest mz.]

So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people.

************************************************

 

Yeah, get at those young people. Get em on board the Dem free ticket to utopia train.

 

So college grads mentoring, presumably, at-riskish kids is now a bad thing.

 

How dare we!

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

ballpeen, does this speech scare you? Does the idea of expanding AmericaCorps scare you? Could anyone with half a brain read that speech and come away thinking he's proposing something that could morph into Obama's version of the Hitler youth? Would anyone worth their salt take the effort to move their hands and type something so stupid?

 

Doesn't it make you feel better knowing that you were frightened by lunatics about nothing? What a load this must be off your shoulders - he's only talking about getting young people to help with the elderly, and with disaster relief, or homeless people, in health care, etc.

 

Amazing what not getting your information from cranks can do.

 

 

[calfoxwc]

So, a civilain national security corps is going to

 

help young people with mentoring, and help old people?

 

But the corps is going to be as powerful and well equipped,

 

as funded and /// armed? as our MILITARY?

 

I'd like to hear this one explained more time. I don't get it.

[heckofajobbrownie]

You're right. You don't.

 

He never said they'd be armed, or as well-equipped as the military. You're just making that part up. You should stop doing that.

 

He's talking about the foreign service, and the Peace Corps, and the dozens of other organizations that assist the government/military in achieving our national security goals. He's talking about a renewed emphasis on soft power.

 

It's really not that hard to understand if you can read.