🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 29 Apr 1997 20:13:30 GMT, mfn8j@watt.seas.Virginia.EDU
(Maximillian Natzet) wrote:

>
>klaatu  writes:
>> 
>> You seem to have very conveniently overlooked one possibility, or need I
>> say eventuality.
>> 
>> That would be a long-term infiltration by renegade elements of foreign
>> powers, operating with or without support from their former countrymen.
>> [snip] 
>> A series of surgical strikes (after sufficient
>> softening-up of course) could completely disable local Organized Militia
>> suficiently so as to allow the infiltrators to effectively decapitate
>> local government through the simple means of assassinating local leaders
>> in the absence of any protection by local Organized Militia, who would
>
>You can not be seriously suggesting that such a farce is a
>legitimate threat?
>
>In regards to the National Guard, I agree with John.  What we
>now call the National Guard is the modern incarnation of a well
>regulated militia.  The fact that the DOD spends money on the
>National Guard in no way waives its primary responsibility to
>the state government.  That federal funding is a contract between
>states and the feds, freely entered into by each party.  If the
>President deems it necessary to send Guardsmen overseas, he has
>to clear it with the Governor first.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

You'd better ask former gov.s Perpich and Celeste about THAT.

They both sued the federal government because they didn't want their
guardsment going to Central America.

They LOST.

The National Guard is just another part of the U.S. Army.

That's why Ohio has a SEPARATE State Militia under EXCLUSIVE control
of the governor, the Ohio Volunteer Militia.

--
Ask suuty@hotmail.com (Hugh Donald Green) why he says things like:

>  "Did you hear the one about the dirty jew, the welfare queen, and
>the single mother?" - suuty@hotmail.com (Hugh Donald Green)