Military Use of Lethal Force in America

Podcast: Download

Subscribe: RSS | More

Darrell Castle talks about a new Department of Defense directive 5240.01 which allows the US military to use lethal force against American citizens when assisting police authorities in domestic disturbances.

Transcription/Notes

MILITARY USE OF LETHAL FORCE IN AMERICA

Hello, this is Darrell Castle with today’s Castle report. This is Friday the 18^th day of October in the year of our Lord 2024. I will be talking about a new Department of Defense directive 5240.01 which allows the US military to use lethal force against American citizens when assisting police authorities in domestic disturbances. This Directive changes the relationship between the American people and their military and coming this close to the election might indicate civil disturbances, otherwise known as a coup, are expected in case of a Trump win.

Yes, it seems that politicians on the Democrat side of the political spectrum, apparently unable to articulate any position on any issue that might be of vital importance to the electorate or the American people in general, are unleashing their inner demons to fuel the fantasies of a few prominent people on the left. The DOD directive allowing the use of lethal force by the US military inside the US is particularly frightening to me for many reasons.

It seems to be a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and the intent of that act which prohibits use of US military in a law enforcement capacity. Posse Comitatus originally passed in 1878, limited the power of the federal government in a law enforcement capacity. It was originally intended to get the military out of law enforcement in the south post-civil war. It has been expanded and reinforced many times, the last being the Defense Authorization Act in 2022. The act has some grey areas for politicians to wriggle through such as the fact that it doesn’t apply to the various state guards or even to the Coast Guard which has law enforcement responsibility offshore.

Generally speaking, I am on alert when the federal government starts to push into the grey areas like this latest directive does. In my opening paragraph I mentioned that it changes the historic relationship between the American people and their military and it weakens to the point of non-existence the concept of Posse Comitatus. Why now just before a very hotly contested election and why the specific permission for lethal force. I have a copy of the directive on my desk and it is about 22 pages of the usual bureaucratic gobbledygook but it does lay out some of the circumstances under which the military could be called on to use its lethal force against the American people. This specific authorization pushes the boundaries between domestic law enforcement and the military and should set off alarms that soon we may see armed soldiers on our streets as a form of intimidation and suppression of civil rights.

 Am I overreacting to this directive, perhaps, but we will see, and I hope that seeing comes before it is too late. Opposition to Covid measures set up by the CDC but enforced locally could come under this directive potentially. People exercising their First Amendment rights would seem to me to be most at risk of this “lethal force.” Could a federal mandate to get vaccinated, wear a mask, or stay in your home be enforced by the US military or is that just too farfetched to believe. I think it could happen and I am not the only one. Why have this directive if there is absolutely no reason to use it.

Free speech could be chilled under the guise of protecting national security. Covid protesters have already been defined as domestic terrorists by some agencies so expanding that would be the natural thing to do. I am just fearful that this directive along with several of the things I have talked about recently points toward us being herded into a box canyon with no escape and only one point of view can ever be expressed. Farfetched, maybe, but I don’t think so. That is why every breach of civil rights and every Constitution violation by the government cannot be allowed to stand and become normal practice.

Fourth Amendment concerns are also raised by this directive. Why do we need such close cooperation between local law enforcement and the US military to the point that it is hard to tell the difference. The intelligence sharing between the two under emergency conditions raises privacy and unlawful surveillance and search questions. Again, I ask why this directive and why now. Americans have a right to due process of law under protection by the US Constitution and this directive causes concerns about how due process could be guaranteed before some lethal force or other life-altering act is taken.

This causes me to wonder once again why so close to this particular election. Could something ominous be in the works. No media seem interested in this story certainly not on a national scale so everything about it causes me to wonder and doubt whether something ominous is headed our way. I remind myself of all the various violations of US law and even international law by the people in power such as the lawfare attacks and other perversions of the Department of Justice and the call for the overthrow of the United States by calling for an end to the First Amendment. Could they also be planning to resist a peaceful exchange of power because of its terrifying exposure of their works of darkness.

That’s a pretty strong statement I know but listen to this before you conclude that I am over the top. Listen to presidential candidate Kamala Harris from May 2019. She was speaking to the annual NAACP Fight for Freedom Fund dinner in Detroit.

“We will put the Department of Justice of the United States back in the business of justice. We will double the civil rights division, and direct Law Enforcement to counter this extremism.” She went on to say she would “hold social media platforms accountable for the hate infiltrating their platforms because they have a responsibility to help fight against this threat to our Democracy. If you don’t police your platforms, we are going to hold you accountable.”

She or someone in her administration will decide what speech is acceptable to her and what is not. Enforcement means most likely both civil and criminal sanctions for what used to be called free speech. All we hear from her on the campaign trail now is joy and uncontrolled cackling but this 2019 speech I submit is the real Kamala. In other countries such as Great Britain and France people are already being arrested and prosecuted for their speech and I believe it is the global wave of the future. Many politicians I talked about last week have said publicly that the First Amendment is a hindrance to their desire to enforce only one point of view while punishing what they call hate speech and disinformation.

In recent years particularly after 9/11 the department of justice has shifted its focus from going after foreign terrorists to a concentration on what they call domestic terrorism. I quote now from page 13 of the Directive regarding lethal force. Thanks to Leo Hohmann of Gateway Pundit for his information and research on this topic. It appears that he is very concerned as I am about the direction the federal government is taking.

“Assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury. It also includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Such use of force must be in accordance with DOD5210.56, potentially as further restricted based on the specifics of the requested support.”

I keep saying to you that this is very ominous and going in a very bad direction. I trust that everyone listening to me or reading the transcript can see and visualize where they will most likely be in a short time unless something is done to reverse this one party, one view, one voice only is permitted. For many years the federal government has been colluding with and intimidating social media platforms to censure speech that differed from its propaganda. Mark Zuckerberg CEO of Facebook, admitted in a letter to Congress that he agreed to accommodate the federal censors and censor information about the vaccines and about Hunter Biden’s laptop.

Essentially, to avoid the appearance of violating the First Amendment, the federal government has outsourced its censorship to social media platforms and then said, what can we do, that is a private company. Most of their domestic terrorists turn out to be patriotic, usually Christian, Americans. The exceptions usually fit into some group of unwitting, unarmed, until the FBI arms them, suckers for the FBI’s false flag operation.

Word of warning to all Americans, the federal government has not started rounding up truthtellers and putting them in jail yet as other countries in the West have, but that is because England and France do not have a First Amendment so if the Democrats can just get rid of that pesky thing they will be clear to instigate one party rule. So, what is really the goal of all this that we can expect to see coming our way. Let me quote Leo Hohmann for his answer to that question.

“The goal is to require a biometric digital ID for all internet users at the ISP level. That means you won’t be able to log onto the internet without submitting your digital ID credentials, which will include your record as an obedient serf who only says what’s approved by the government, or a “troublemaker” who thinks independently and critically, always questioning official narratives and sometimes exposing them as lies. Everything you’ve ever posted online will be judged and scored for its level of obedience. No more anonymous commenting on articles. No more posting of articles that challenge the government narratives. All this will be monitored and ferreted out by AI.”

The attitude among members of the press and others on the left is very scary right now regarding the intrusion of the federal government into our lives. Several prominent Democrats including Michael Moore are advising President Biden to take drastic dictatorial powers in the last 3 months of his administration because they say he can get away with it. That seems to be the limit on federal politicians right now, can I get away with it, or will somebody stop me. The authority he is being advised to exercise doesn’t exist so, in effect, they are advising him to gut the Constitution and become a monarch. That is how close we are right now to disaster and that is why I am concerned.

These people such as Keith Olbermann and Michael Moore say they are advising Biden to take action to save Democracy. It is easy to see how ludicrous that is. The president, to accept their advice, would have to violate the Constitution, refuse the directives of the courts, and pursue his own list of desires without acknowledging any restraints all in the name of democracy. The line between tyranny and democracy is a fine one and can be quickly blurred and lost it seems. They want the president to assume the powers of an elected dictator.

The Democrats, of course returning to the advice of Saul Alinsky, accuse Donald Trump of what they are trying to do. Harris tells crowds in Pennsylvania that Trump will put them in camps. Rachel Maddow said he would use the Insurrection Act to deploy the U.S. military against civilians or exactly what Biden has authorized to be done.

Finally, folks, once our First Amendment rights to free speech are gone the rest of the bill of rights will follow quickly. Once lost they will never be recovered, and I submit that is what we are facing in this upcoming election.

At least that’s the way I see it,

Until next time folks,

This is Darrell Castle,

Thanks for listening.