Attention

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Saturday, May 01, 2010

More On The Ft. Knox Security Scenario

Regarding Mark Alexander's essay, "Army Preps for Tea Party Terrorists," the update on this story issued [Thursday] was not a correction or retraction, but additional information about the security scenario circulated at Ft. Knox.

In response to our initial inquiries regarding this scenario, security staff at Ft. Knox responded, predictably, "We are not authorized to discuss this exercise."

Before publishing this story, we established that there was, indeed, a security exercise at Ft. Knox this week, and that the security scenario Mr. Alexander described was, in fact, circulated among officers, security personnel and civilians involved in that exercise.
Mr. Alexander's description of this scenario was accurate.

After publishing the story, Mr. Alexander was contacted by Command Staff at Ft. Knox who confirmed that there was a security exercise, but that the scenario circulated among officers, security personnel and civilians, had been altered to include "Tea Party" and "anti health care" protesters "in order to make it more realistic."

In his essay, Mr. Alexander wrote, "It's not likely that Ft. Knox Commanding General James Milano or Deputy Commander Col. David Teeples, or even the regimental and brigade commanders for the 16th Cav and 194th AB, actually read the exercise scenario..."

Indeed, Command personnel informed Mr. Alexander that they had neither read the scenario nor authorized it.

Further, Mr. Alexander was informed that the officer who authored the scenario had been identified and would be brought in for "appropriate counsel" to ensure no such highly politicized scenario finds its way into official channels again.

Mr. Alexander says he accepts the explanation provided by Command staff with the caveat that it is not clear why objections to this scenario were not raised within the command by those who received it, thus requiring objections to be raised by The Patriot Post.

The fact that any officer would associate Tea Party folks with "white supremacists" armed with "military grade weapons" and "bomb making components," and believe that association would make this scenario "more realistic," is troubling, at best.

In regard to the verbatim scenario documentation we posted, even though those documents were not classified, Command staff asked that we remove them for specified security reasons.
As our mission is not only to uphold our Constitution by holding those in positions of authority accountable to their oaths, but also to support our uniformed Patriots, Mr. Alexander agreed to remove the documents from our Web site.

In conclusion, Mr. Alexander says, "It is important to note that the vast majority of uniformed officers and enlisted personnel serving our country are right-thinking Patriots who are serving their country with honor and integrity, who are true to their oaths. For sure, one Army officer will think twice about politicizing a security exercise scenario in the future, if he or she still has a future."

(The Patriot Post)

2 comments:

Unknown said...

People forget (or were never taught) that, following Dr. King's assassination, there were far more than exercises related to civil disobedience. I and many others were called to duty by the President to quell the riots that took place in Washington, Baltimore, Cambridge, and Salisbury.

Anonymous said...

We have to be ready for Tea Party acts of terror and the military recognizes this. Tea Party members are currently far more likely to be the source of domestic terrorism than any other group.

Many Tea Party members make no secret of their belief that the government is illegitimate, oppressive, responsible for 9-11 etc. etc. Many Tea Partiers also take pride in how "ready" they are in both temperment and personal armament to take on the corrupt US government when it does something crazy like endangering their Medicare entitlement.

Tea Party members are the # 1 domestic terror threat in the US at this point for most government agencies.