Pentagon plans to station 20,000 troops for 'domestic security'
Agence France-Presse
Published: Monday December 1, 2008

The US Department of Defense plans to deploy 20,000 troops nationwide by 2011 to help state and local officials respond to terror or nuclear attacks and emergencies, The Washington Post said Monday.

Citing Pentagon officials, the newspaper said the plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces.

The first 4,700-strong unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade, is based at Fort Stewart, Georgia, and is already available for deployment, according to General Victor Renuart, commander of the US Northern Command, it said.

Two additional groups will later join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops to support local and state authorities nationwide, The Post said.

They will all would be trained to respond to domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attacks.

The newspaper said that civil liberties groups and libertarians had expressed concern that the plan could undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a 130-year-old law restricting the military's role in domestic law enforcement.

Before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, dedicating 20,000 troops to domestic response -- a nearly sevenfold increase in five years -- "would have been extraordinary to the point of unbelievable," Paul McHale, assistant defense secretary for homeland defense, said in remarks last month noted by the Post. But the recognition that civilian authorities may be overwhelmed in a catastrophe [Hurricane Katrina might be used as an example] prompted "a fundamental change in military culture."

"The Pentagon's plan calls for three rapid-reaction forces to be ready for emergency response by September 2011," the Post added. "The first 4,700-person unit, built around an active-duty combat brigade based at Fort Stewart, Ga., was available as of Oct. 1, said Gen. Victor E. Renuart Jr., commander of the U.S. Northern Command."

"If funding continues, two additional teams will join nearly 80 smaller National Guard and reserve units made up of about 6,000 troops in supporting local and state officials nationwide," they continued. "All would be trained to respond to a domestic chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or high-yield explosive attack, or CBRNE event, as the military calls it."


Immediately Following The Mumbai Attacks - Interesting

Hard to ignore the timing.

Note also how a regional "terror" event in India seemed to "coincidentally" occur during a major U.S. family holiday, when much of the traveling public will be passing through additionally heightened TSA airport security and the rest would be home watching it all unfold on cable TV networks.

The latest "problem, reaction, solution" type psy-op?


A hint was mentioned on 11/25...

Do these people deserve to know how and why their loved ones were murdered? Do we deserve to know how and why 9/11 happened?

Alex Jones

AJ has been right all along.

I must agree. It appears that martial law is coming.

Alex Jones is right on this one.

It may not take another false flag event to get the country into chaos. It may just be that the inevitable financial crash and resulting unemployment will bring about the kind of chaos that they need to "justify" martial law.

Alex Jones on Coast to Coast AM - 12/1/08

To be a little optimistic,

it is simply not possible to control 300 million angry Americans with 20,000 troops. (That's 15,000 Americans per troop.) But they will try.

Also, we do not have 300 million angry citizens. Yet.

And I too find Alex Jones to be spot on these days.

You don't have to control all 300 million

Americans are an especially fearful bunch. Just go after 1 million in a very public way and you've attained the 50:1 ratio needed for effective counter-insurgency. Most will do their all best to not be in that group.


One cannot leave out the large number of mercenaries hired by the State Department, some of whom seem to want to build training facilities from coast to coast.

Private armies created with taxpayer dollars.

We'll need 160 million for a general strike to counter them non-violently (or as non-violently as possible).

There will be attempts to identify, isolate and neutralize "leaders", this is why we all have to be our own leaders, and the best leaders are also good listeners.

Love is a verb, brothers and sisters, let's get busier!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.


mercenaries are a very bad (and for that matter, dangerous) thing. No wonder they call them 'contractors'. These can include foreigners, who may be far more willing to open fire on hapless Americans.

A general strike would be great. There's no way they could deal with mass actions. 'Diffuse' action, like a small group on every streetcorner, would be far harder to put down than one massive protest.

The only good thing about the economic situation is that it may finally motivate enough people to make this possible.

just finished "Black Bush"...


and join the organization putting on the Boston event as well as

Alex Jones has been all over this

You're right. More and more Alex has warned of this. I've become a big fan and listen daily. He's had some great quest on latley. I feel I'm ahead of the news before I read it in my local rag. Keep up the great work Alex.

it this what Colin Powel and others were trying to warn Obama ?

Herblay FRANCE

bonjour ,

it this what Colin Powel and others were trying to warn is going to happen on the 21st or 22nd of January ?

Yours John

Note that

the military will receive training to deal with chemical, biological or nuclear attacks, but the public will not. I guess they figure the public will be dead, or they want them dead. The military are just clean up crews. Why is the public not being trained to deal with these attacks?

see also


Greenwald's comment section is being heavily censored on this one.

And on ABC? Our old friend Jerome Hauer

preps us for a "small nuclear event".

"Jerry Hauer, one of the nation's leading experts on biological and chemical terrorism and an ABC News consultant, supports the Pentagon's plan and says that those who criticize it need to face reality that any future attack on the United States will be unlike any other the country has faced.

"I'd rather enhance state and local personnel's training, but having said that I also believe that in the event of a catastrophic event like a nuclear attack it becomes very clear that the National Guard in most states would not be enough and that troops would clearly be needed," said Hauer.

He added that the 15,000 number might be conservative.

Hauer said that through exercises in various cities, including one three years ago with the Joint Chiefs of Staffs in which they reacted to a mock terrorist attack, he is certain that at least 100,000 additional troops would be necessary in the event of a biological or nuclear attack.

In the event of an attack, Hauer said that military troops would be vital in helping move injured patients, providing medical treatment and securing the city where the incident occurred.

"And you've not only got to keep roads open to get aid in but you've got to keep roads open so that people can get out, and that's very labor intensive," he said. "That's where the military plays a very important role."

"Certainly there are valid concerns [about this plan], but at some point we need to look at the reality here and see that a lot of people are going to die because we don't have the resources in place in any state or local government to cope with one of these disasters," said Hauer.

"There is not one city in the country that is even close to prepared for dealing with even a small nuclear event."

“On the altar of God, I swear eternal hostility against all forms of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson