First there's this graphic:
Come on, really?
Next there's the actual article itself:
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.”
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:
And at this point, the original article goes on to make it's case on why the military ought to revolt against their own country and assassinate the president, which you can read all about in Gordon Duff's full article.
Outrageous. Obama is more conservative than many of the governments or our west-European allies.ReplyDelete
The military should indeed have intervened, but not with Obama, rather, with G.W. Bush, and not with violence against Bush, but by refusing to carry out the orders to start illegal, immoral wars.