All about Cathy O’Brien: Ex-Illuminati NWO Mind Control Victim

Warning: Adults only, if you’re easily offended don’t watch
Read the book here: http://static.everdot.org/ebooks/engl…

For Reasons of National Security
(Intro – Mark Phillips. Cathy O’Brien – 0:36:50)
The Granada Forum, October 31, 1996 

Cathy O’Brien
Born 4 December 1957
Muskegon, Michigan
Nationality American
Occupation Writer, speaker
Known for Conspiracy theorist, statements of victimization by Project Monarch
Spouse(s) Mark Phillips
Children Kelly O’Brien
Parents Earl M. O’Brien

Carol O’Brien (née Tanis)

Website
http://trance-formation.com/

Contents

  

On May 7, 1966 a 9 year old child named Cathy O’Brien was subjected to an occult ritual named “The Rite to Remain Silent”. This is her own very shocking and eye-opening life story about her experience as a CIA MK-Ultra Whitehouse Pentagon level trauma-based Mind Control slave. She speaks out to expose those who abused, who go right up to presidents and congressmen and women and to give voice to the many mind control victims out there who can’t think to speak out.

O’Brien claims to have been abused since she was a toddler by her own family. Forced to partake in satanic sadomasochistic child pornography movies produced for Gerald Ford, she was eventually sold to the CIA, which was looking for traumatized children for their mind-control program … U.S. Presidents Ford, Reagan, Bush and Bill Clinton; Canadian Prime Ministers Pierre Trudeau and Brian Mulroney; Mexican President Miguel de la Madrid; Haitian dictator Baby Doc Duvalier; Panamanian President Manuel Noriega; and King Fahd of Saudi Arabia all sexually brutalized her. She recounts in graphic detail how the elder George Bush raped her thirteen year old daughter and how she was forced to have oral sex with Illuminati witch Hillary Clinton … While being sodomized, whipped, bound and raped, O’Brien overheard the globalist elite planning a military coup in the United States and conspiring to usher in the satanic New World Order

The Q&A (question and answers) starts at 1:35:00

This section Copied from:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy_O’Brien

Cathleen Ann O’Brien (born December 4, 1957, Muskegon, Michigan[1]) is an American who says she is a victim of a mind control government project named Project Monarch, which she said was part of the CIA’s Project MKULTRA forbehavioral engineering of humans (mind control).[2][3][4][5][6] O’Brien made these assertions in Trance Formation of America (1995) and Access Denied: For Reasons of National Security (2004) which she co-authored with her husband Mark Phillips.[6]

Assertions[edit]

The memories that O’Brien has asserted she possesses were retrieved through the use of hypnosis. The specific program which she claimed was responsible for herdissociative identity disorder, Project Monarch, is not mentioned in reviews of MKULTRA, its alleged parent program. Because most MKULTRA records were deliberately destroyed in 1973 by order of then CIA Director Richard Helms, it has been difficult, if not impossible, for investigators to gain a complete understanding of the more than 150 individually funded research sub-projects sponsored by MKULTRA and related CIA programs.[7][8] In 1977, Richard Helms was suspended by the US Congress for lying about the US government’s anti-government activities abroad and illegal surveillance domestically.[9]

O’Brien also states that she has a recollection of child abuse — of her and her daughter — by international pedophile rings, drug barons and satanists, as part of asex slave aspect to her “trauma based mind control programming.” Individuals from United StatesCanadianMexican and Saudi Arabian government officials to stars of the Country and Western music scene are among those she accuses of these crimes. According to scholar Michael Barkun, investigations into the story produced no credible evidence and numerous inconsistencies.[5]

Project Monarch[edit]

O’Brien says she was recruited against her will by the CIA and her abusive father as a child, through a network of child pornographers he was involved with, and forced to participate in a mind control program named Project Monarch, which is said to be a subsection of Project MKULTRA and Project ARTICHOKE.[2][3][4][5]

Multiple personality[edit]

O’Brien says that she has developed dissociative identity disorder (previously misnomered as multiple personality disorder) and that she has no memory of some of her activities. She also says that she has a photographic recall of the events that she suffered whilst her alternate personalities were in control.[6]

Criticisms of O’Brien[edit]

Swedish scholar Mattias Gardell states that O’Brien’s assertions are almost entirely unsupported by any evidence outside her testimony or the similarly unverified testimony of others.[10] Michael Barkun states that “scholarly and journalistic treatments of MK-ULTRA make no mention of a Project Monarch”.[5]

Her stories have entered the conspiracy culture, linking assertions of satanic ritual abuse with MKUltra.[11] Mark Dice was skeptical of her assertions, but also commented, “there are very real victims of such programs” and “it is possible that a victim would write a book about them and have nobody believe her.”[12]

Other videos on Mind Control:

Illuminati & Pre-9/11 Subliminals and Symbolism in Movies (Re-edit)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4mRTc…

Britney Spears Illuminati Mind Control Victim
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80c_b…

Bill Clinton under mind control
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DUmb…

9/11 Subliminals: GCSE Exam Papers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhnGNS…

RFID Mind Control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPsFXh…

Cathy O’Brien (with full index)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S3fla…

Footnotes[edit]

  1. Jump up^ O’Brien, Cathy. “Trance Formation Of America”. Retrieved 17 May 2012.
  2. Jump up to:a b Versluis, A (2006). The new inquisitions: heretic-hunting and the intellectual origins of modern totalitarianism. Oxford [Oxfordshire]: Oxford University Press. p. 173.ISBN 0-19-530637-6. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
  3. Jump up to:a b de Young, M (2004). The day care ritual abuse moral panic. Jefferson, N.C: McFarland. p. 235. ISBN 0-7864-1830-3. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
  4. Jump up to:a b Toropov B (2001). The complete idiot’s guide to urban legends. Indianapolis, Ind: Alpha Books. p. 221. ISBN 0-02-864007-1. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
  5. Jump up to:a b c d Barkun, Michael (2003). A culture of conspiracy: apocalyptic visions in contemporary America. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 76. ISBN 0-520-23805-2. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
  6. Jump up to:a b c Phillips, Mark (1995). TranceFormation of America (pdf). Reality Marketing, Incorporated. ISBN 0-9660165-4-8. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
  7. Jump up^ Walter H. Bowart (January 1971), Operation Mind Control, Dell Publishing
  8. Jump up^ John D. Marks (1979), The Search for the ‘Manchurian Candidate’: The CIA and Mind Control: The Secret History of the Behavioral Sciences, Penguin Books Ltd., retrieved 2013-10-27
  9. Jump up^ Christopher Marquis. “Richard Helms, Ex-C.I.A. Chief, Dies at 89”. New York Times. Retrieved 2013-10-27.
  10. Jump up^ Gardell M (2003). Gods of the blood: the pagan revival and white separatism. Durham, N.C: Duke University Press. ISBN 0-8223-3071-7. Retrieved 2008-10-20.
  11. Jump up^ Knight P (2003). Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO. pp. 487ISBN 1-57607-812-4.
  12. Jump up^ Mark Dice“Cathy O’Brien’s Claims of Being an MK-ULTRA victim”. Retrieved 2013-07-31.

External links[edit]

Ron Paul Scares the GOP and 4 Reasons He Might Still Get the 2012 Republican Nomination

Why the GOP Is Scared of Ron Paul and 4 Reasons He Might Still Get the 2012 Republican Nomination

Posted: 08/21/2012 3:55 pm
Wait, isn’t Dr. Ron Paul out of the presidential race? Isn’t it all tied up nicely in a bow with the Romney/Ryan ticket?

No.

Why would the GOP be scared of Ron Paul but end up nominating him?

I’ll explain.

Romney and the GOP have demonstrated both poor judgment and poor sportsmanship that might cost them by damaging Romney’s electability among the Ron Paul supporters thus leading to a splitting of votes, which in turn, could cost the GOP the entire election.

Dr. Ron Paul is still in the race for president and is a strong contender for the 2012 GOP nomination.

To be on the GOP ballot Aug. 27, 2012 in Tampa and get a 15-minute speaking slot, a candidate must have won the plurality (majority) of delegates in at least 5 states.

Well, Ron Paul did win the plurality of delegates in 5 states, enough to be eligible for the nomination and a 15-minute speaking slot at the GOP convention. The states he won are Louisiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Maine and Nevada. Then Ron Paul went on to win the plurality in Massachusetts, Romney’s home state and half the delegates in Oregon. Dr. Ron Paul also has around 500 delegateswho support him. The exact number of delegates that Romney and Paul have is still a mystery but should be clarified at the convention.

So… Ron Paul won his 5-plus states, he’s on the ballot and writing his speech, right? Not exactly.

What happened next is what may cost the Republicans and Romney the entire election. Instead of accepting that Ron Paul, the GOP underdog, had won enough delegates in enough states to be allowed his rightful place on the ballot and his 15-minute speaking slot, the GOP and Romney’s people decided to try and take these legitimate wins away from Ron Paul and his supporters. Ron Paul supporters fought hard, played fair and won. Romney supporters didn’t play fair and still lost those 5-plus states. These Ron Paul pluralities were won in spite of shenanigans and tricks tried by Romney supporters and the GOP to prevent or undermine Ron Paul wins. The Ron Paul supporters were well prepared and won the needed amount of states anyway.

So, how did Romney and his supporters handle their losses of five measly states to Ron Paul? Honorably? Graciously? With dignity? Maturely?

No. Quite the opposite.

Romney’s people ran to Big Daddy GOP to rescue them from their defeats by trying to disqualify the valid Ron Paul delegates and to take away Ron Paul’s right to speak and be on the ballot by reducing his states won to fewer than the five needed.

So far, Romney and the GOP have contested the Ron Paul wins in LouisianaMaineMassachusettsand Oregon. They threw out the Massachusetts Ron Paul delegates after the GOP tried to force the delegates to sign a long legal document that required them to vote for Romney. This was not something that had ever been done before. The GOP allowed Romney, big lawyers and big bullying to invalidate Ron Paul’s solid win in Massachusetts.

As in the other states, the Ron Paul delegates in Maine played by the rules and won. Even Governor LePage of Maine, a Republican, is appalled with GOP efforts to throw out the duly-elected Ron Paul delegates.

The entire plot to reduce Ron Paul wins to under five states to take his name off the ballot and take away his 15-minute speaking slot is well under way. If Romney/Ryan are so great, why can’t they handle a little competition without whining and crying like sore losers?

Are they afraid of losing the 2012 nomination to Ron Paul if he speaks and is on the ballot?

Why not play fair and let the best man win?

Who cheats? The lazy, bratty, insecure and less-qualified people who can’t win honestly and fairly. Is that really presidential material?

I wonder if Romney and the GOP are worried that if Ron Paul speaks and gets the nomination, that Ron Paul will fire all of them. Is the GOP that terrified of change, even if it is for the betterment of the country?

Here is why I think that Ron Paul might still walk away with the nomination.

4. Lots of regular “little people”, like me, want Ron Paul to be the 2012 GOP presidential candidate. We, the little people, do not like being trod upon and when we join together, we are stronger than big money. Remember, “We the People”? Ron Paul’s donors areregular working people, many military men and women, not banks.

3. Ron Paul is the David to Romney’s Goliath Machine but the spirit, character and faith of we “little people” count more in America than just money. Romney has raised$152 million to Paul’s $39 million. Ron Paul has more passionate support from his supporters due to Ron Paul’s character and dedication to serving America and Americans based on our founding principles embodied in our Constitution. Money, media manipulation and bullying can’t buy this type of support. But, Romney and his lawyers couldn’t let Ron Paul keep 5-plus wins?

2. Ron Paul wants to serve his country, and has served in the military, and would end the wars. Ron Paul’s supporters and Americans want someone they can trust and believe in. Dr. Paul is that man.

1. Mitt Romney is much less qualified to be president than Ron Paul, who understands the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Watch this link where Romney is asked a basic Constitutional question and replies, “I’ll have to ask my lawyers”. Ron Paul tells Mitt Romney, “Read the Constitution.” Ron Paul is the only Republican Presidential candidate who is qualified, experienced and credible.

We, little people, similar to Ron Paul and his supporters, work hard, play fair and expect the same from others.

If Romney and his supporters had been gracious losers about Ron Paul’s 5-plus state wins and Ron Paul’s 15-minute speech, Romney had a chance to garner both the GOP 2012 nomination plus the support and votes of Ron Paul and his supporters. (I say “a chance” because many Ron Paul supporters do not see Romney as a fiscal conservative.)

Not anymore. It is hard to vote for someone who has acted so dishonorably, even for the sake of party loyalty.

The misguided Machiavellian advice Romney got and took to “win at all costs,” may cost him dearly in November due to the bad will generated with Ron Paul supporters. Too many people have lost too much respect for Romney to vote for him. To the contrary, even though Ron Paul’s campaign was repeatedly slighted and undermined by Romney and his supporters, Ron Paul stayed gracious and denounced mistreatment of Romney. He has told his delegates to “Make yourself heard but be respectful.”

By playing dirty and being greedy, Romney supporters may have lost Romney both the nomination and the election.

Romney and the national GOP are showing their ugly colors by attempting to take away Ron Paul state delegate wins that were earned fair and square.

In speaking with some Ron Paul supporters, here is their current plan. If Ron Paul doesn’t win the 2012 GOP nomination, many Ron Paul supporters will elect to vote for Gary Johnson, the Libertarian presidential candidate. Why wouldn’t Ron Paul supporters write in Ron Paul on ballots around the country? For those write-in votes to count, a write-in candidate must be listed in every state and some Ron Paul supporters do not know if their Ron Paul votes would count.

And, due to the shabby treatment Ron Paul and his supporters have received from the GOP and Romney’s people, many Ron Paul supporters may refuse to vote for Romney in 2012, even if it means Obama being re-elected for four more years. One supporter told me, “I want the GOP to see how many votes they lost by playing dirty. They will only be able to count all the lost votes if I vote for Gary Johnson.”

If you want to learn more about Gary Johnson click here. He stands for small government, government staying out of your business, liberty and fiscal responsibility. He is like Ron Paul without the Roe v Wade concern. Gary Johnson has had virtually no media coverage so you may not have heard of him.

As I heard in grammar school and it remains true: “Cheat, Cheat Never Beat”.

Ron Paul is the only qualified person for the 2012 Republican Nomination who can unify conservative Republicans, Independents, Libertarians and stabilize the economy. If the GOP is smart and humble enough to do a mea culpa and nominate Ron Paul, Republicans stand a better chance of winning in November. If Ron Paul doesn’t get the nomination, many Ron Paul supporters will likely be voting for Gary Johnson. All Romney and the GOP had to do was play fair and win honorably, but I guess that was too much to ask.

But here is the GOP’s conflict: If the GOP nominates Ron Paul and he wins, many of the GOP cronies will be shown the door. There will be a big house cleaning of corrupt politicians, like turning on the lights and the cockroaches scatter. On the other hand, if they don’t nominate Ron Paul, they risk losing all the Ron Paul supporters, which would likely split the vote and lose the 2012 election entirely.

It is hard to make those type of decisions when choosing what is best for the country doesn’t figure in at all, but choosing what is best for their own selfish principles of self-preservation, greed and thirst for power rule the day.

Romney and the GOP need to leave Ron Paul’s five-plus states alone, place him on the ballot and allow Ron Paul to speak.

Follow Laura Trice on Twitter: www.twitter.com/LaurasWJF

Does U.S. put DU (Depleted Uranium) rounds in machine-guns on Great Lakes coast guard vessels?

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”
– George Orwell –

Dr. Doug Rokke

Depleted Uranium
The Pentagon Betrayal Of GIs And Americans

John Hanchette editor of USA Today from 1991 to 2001and Pentagon DU expert Dr. Doug Rokke, a serving officer for 30 years. [The Gulf War soldiers were in Iraq a tiny fraction of the time the soldiers are being kept in Iraq.] Rokke says he was ordered to lie about DU, because the military was determined to continue using it, despite the danger to US troops.
Watch the Full Movie CLICK HERE.

Army DU Specialist turned whistleblower
Dr. Doug Rokke- Depleted Uranium
Audio:
 
http://www.apfn.org/audio/rokke-depleted_uranium.mp3

TEDD WEYMAN: THE NUCLEAR WAR ON THE GREAT LAKES
It is known world wide, he says, that DU weapons have long-term implications that, right now corporations and governments are hiding
Video: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/DU_nuclear.htm

Has Our Military Refused to Show This Training Video To Our Troops Now Serving
US ARMY TRAINING VIDEO: 

Depleted Uranium Hazard Awareness
Video: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/DU_training_video.htm

Depleted Uranium Audios:

Doug Rokke

AUDIO: Wed., June 7, 2006: Playlists: M3U | RAM (Individual MP3: Click Here)
Christopher Bollyn speaks with Doug Rokke, and Leuren Moret about the military’s use of Depleted Uranium in munitions. Mr.Rokke is the former Director of the US Army Depleted Uranium Project. Ms. Moret is a geophysicist specializing in atmospheric sciences, a nuclear activist, and a former scientist and whistle blower at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories. http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Piper06.html

S. Firing Plans for
Great Lakes Raise Concerns

MONICA DAVEY / New York Times 16oct2006

U.S. Firing Plans for Great Lakes Raise Concerns MONICA DAVEY / New York Times 16oct2006Target Practice
The Coast Guard wants to mount machine guns on their cutters and small boats around the Great Lakes. Shooting zones for training are shown in red.


Mindfully.org noteThe M240 machine gun is capable of firing Sabot Launched Armour Piercing (SLAP) ammo. We’re checking this out, but it may mean this gun is capable of firing depleted uranium (DU) rounds, which is what the US has been using in the Gulf Region for many years and is both chemically and radiologically toxic. More in DU. . .

M240 information from the US Army…

Entered Army Service 1997

Description and Specifications
A ground-mounted, gas-operated, crew-served machine gun. This reliable 7.62mm machine gun delivers more energy to the target than the smaller caliber M-249 SAW. It is being issued to infantry, armor, combat engineer, special force/rangers, and selected field artillery units that require medium support fires and will replace the ground-mounted M-60 series machine guns currently in use.

Caliber: 7.62 mm
Weight: 27.6 lbs
Max effective range: 1800 m (area target) 800 m (point target)
Rate of fire: 200-600 rounds per minute

Manufacturer
FN Manufacturing (Columbia, SC)

source: 16oct2006
_____________________________________
From the manufacturer…

Information
The M240 was adopted by the U.S. Military following a world-wide competition for a reliable 7.62 mm machine gun for use as a coaxial weapon for armored vehicleapplications. The Coaxial version of the famous Belgian MAG 58, produced by FN Herstal, won this competition. The demonstrated reliability of this weapon, 26,000 Mean Rounds Between Failure (MRBF), makes it the world’s most reliable machine gun. As a result of the outstanding performance of this weapon, vehicle, aviation, and infantry variants are now in use by the U. S. Military. The US variants are produced by FN Manufacturing, a US subsidiary of FN Herstal S.A.

Interoperability
The U. S. produced M240 variants are produced to the exacting specifications of the original MAG 58. consequently, all M240 variants have interchangeable components and are interoperable with foreign-produced NATO equivalent weapons. This has significant advantages in training, logistics support, and tactical versatility. For example, an M240B buttstock and bipod may be carried in an armored vehicle to enable the tank crew to convert the coaxial weapon to an infantry model in the event that they are forced to dismount from a vehicle.

Common Characteristics

  • Gas operated 
  • Fixed head-space and timing 
  • 26,000 mean round between failure (MRBF) 
  • Maximum range 3725 meters 
  • Tracer burnout 900 meters 
  • Cyclic rate of fire:
    Single port: 550 – 650 RMP
  • 3 Port – operator adjustable 750 – 950 RPM 
  • Muzzle velocity 2800 ft/sec 
  • Slap ammunition capableAccessories 
    Egress kit – Consists or a buttstock trigger mechanism and bipod. Allows coaxial or pintle-mounted M240 to be converted for use in the dismounted role.
  • Flexible gun mount 
  • Ring and post sight 
  • Bandoleer hanger 
  • Adaptation hardware for U.S. M122 tripod 
  • Flexible ammunition chuting 
  • Buttstock and bipod for dismount use 
  • 600 and 1200 round capacity ammunition boxes 
  • Armorer’s tool kitsource: FN Manufacturing 16oct2006

GRAND HAVEN, Mich., Oct. 10 — Even in autumn, the cold, silent expanse of Lake Michigan defines this town, where pleasure boats glide into harbor, fishermen wait patiently for salmon and tourists peer up at the lighthouse.

But the United States Coast Guard has a new mission for the waters off of these quiet shores. For the first time, Coast Guard officials want to mount machine guns routinely on their cutters and small boats here and around all five of the Great Lakes as part of a program addressing the threats of terrorism after Sept. 11.

And, for the first time in memory, Coast Guard members plan to use a stretch of water at least five miles off this Michigan shore — and 33 other offshore spots near cities like Cleveland; Rochester; Milwaukee; Duluth, Minn.; and Gary, Ind. — as permanent, live fire shooting zones for training on their new 7.62 mm weapons, which can blast as many as 650 rounds a minute and send fire more than 4,000 yards.

The notion is so unusual that it prompted United States diplomats to negotiate with Canadian authorities in order to agree that it would not violate a 189-year-old treaty, signed after the War of 1812, limiting arms on the Great Lakes.

Many here in Grand Haven, a town whose history is so lovingly intertwined with the Coast Guard that it holds an annual festival celebrating the service branch, say they think of Coast Guard members mainly as the rugged sailors who race off to search for and save troubled boaters. But even here, in a town that calls itself “Coast Guard City U.S.A.,” some say the thought of members firing machine guns anywhere near these waters strikes them as dangerous to ordinary boaters, potentially damaging to the Great Lakes’ ecosystem and, frankly, a somewhat surprising place to be bracing for terrorists.

“You know exactly what’s going to happen with this,” said Bob Foster, 58, who said he spends every chance he gets on the waters here. “Some boater is going to inadvertently drive through the live fire zone and get blown out of the water.”

Carole Loftis, the owner of Snug Harbor, a popular restaurant with windows on the water, said that although she certainly carried concerns, like most Americans, about terrorism, drunken boating seemed a more frequent threat around here. “This seems a little like overkill,” Ms. Loftis said of the shooting plans.

Despite complaints from some charter boat captains, environmental groups and city leaders around the Great Lakes, the Coast Guard defended the need to mount M-240B machine guns on its boats and to test fire them two or three times a year in “safety zones,” about 70 square miles each.

“The Coast Guard has looked at an increased terrorist threat since 2001,” Rear Adm. John E. Crowley Jr., commander of the Coast Guard district that oversees the Great Lakes, said in a telephone interview. “I don’t know when or if something might happen on the Great Lakes, but I don’t want to learn the hard way.”

Some members of the Coast Guard assigned to law enforcement duties always carried weapons, but most of those were personal semiautomatic pistols. Since the arrival of the boat-mounted machine guns, the Coast Guard has conducted 24 training sessions on the lakes this year, although it has halted the exercises temporarily after news of the program seeped out last month and, with it, a barrage of objection.

“When I heard, I thought it was something from The Onion newspaper or an Internet hoax,” said Mike Bradley, the mayor of Sarnia, Ontario, which sits beside Lake Huron, where 6 of the 34 live fire zones are planned. “This whole thing was done way below the radar.”

The Coast Guard’s plans for permanent training zones were published in the Federal Register on Aug. 1, along with the promise of a month for public comment, but city leaders and ordinary boaters said that most of them never came across the document and that the authorities failed to provide them with any other notice of live fire plans — a fact that left some saying they felt as though the Coast Guard, now part of the Department of Homeland Security, was trying quietly to slip the whole weapons program past them.

Herb Bergson, the mayor of Duluth, got a telephone call in September from a resident who said she was listening to her marine scanner, heard talk of shooting on Lake Superior and wanted the mayor to explain what was going on.

“I didn’t know what to tell her,” Mr. Bergson said. “I was caught just flat-footed. No one told me, and they should have.”

Coast Guard leaders — who have since announced nine public meetings in Great Lakes cities, starting Monday, and have extended until Nov. 13 the period for people to weigh in on the idea — acknowledge that they initially failed to publicize the weapons training program. “I’ve got no good answer for that,” said Lt. j.g. Ryan Barone, a spokesman.

But the plans themselves, which ultimately would mean machine guns mounted on the vessels of more than 50 Coast Guard units throughout the Great Lakes, were carefully conceived, Lieutenant Barone said. Information about the proposal and scheduled public meetings is at uscgd9safetyzones.com.

All of the proposed firing zones sit at least five nautical miles from shores and from Canadian waters, as well as far from commercial shipping lanes and sensitive marine areas, Lieutenant Barone said. During the training days, when Coast Guard gunners will shoot at floating foam buoys, other boaters will be notified on marine radio frequencies, he said, and every test will include a designated safety observer.

Admiral Crowley said, “I don’t feel there’s a risk to anyone out there.”

Around the Great Lakes, some people said they were supportive of the presence of machine guns and the planned tests. The risks of terrorism, they said, cannot be underestimated — even in small towns, even in the Upper Midwest. And as with extra airport safety measures, they said, the live fire tests may be inconvenient but they are needed.

Several ferry operators in Michigan, who carry cars and passengers across Lake Michigan, said they were satisfied that their customers would be safe. Ken Alvey, president of the Lake Erie Marine Trades Association, which represents some 80 marine businesses, said he was comfortable knowing that the Coast Guard members would practice on their new weapons.

“To say we don’t have to worry about our open border with Canada would be foolish,” Mr. Alvey said. “You never know what avenue terrorists will take.”

But others, especially recreational boaters and professional fishing guides, said they were worried. Though most emphasized their support and gratitude to the Coast Guard, they said they did not even listen to their radios much anymore (unless a storm is rolling in) and could miss warnings altogether.

Ron Mihevc, who takes customers fishing out of the harbor at Waukegan, Ill., said he feared that the planned firing zone near Waukegan sits “right in the middle” of a prime fishing spot that draws scores of fishermen. Kelly J. Campise, another Waukegan boat captain, said fishermen already were carrying their clients many miles into Lake Michigan in search of salmon and trout at great fuel expense; going still further away to avoid the firing zones would cost still more, he said.

An 89-page environmental study, commissioned by federal authorities, concluded that rounds left in the lakes from the Coast Guard exercises would cause no harm, but Hugh McDiarmid Jr., a spokesman for the Michigan Environmental Council, said a “fuller environmental risk assessment,” given the lead content of the rounds in particular, was needed.

For years, Coast Guard boats have been armed, and training has been conducted off of the coasts of this country, said Brad J. Kieserman, chief of the operations law group at Coast Guard headquarters.

On the Great Lakes, weapons training by military branches like the Navy has also occurred in years gone by, dating back to World War I and World War II. But in keeping with a treaty known as Rush-Bagot from 1817, Coast Guard vessels on the Great Lakes have historically not included naval armaments.

But in 2003, federal authorities sought an understanding with their Canadian counterparts about Rush-Bagot in preparation for mounting machine guns on cutters so that the Coast Guard could “prevent terrorists or others engaged in criminal activities from crossing the United States-Canadian boundary by water,” according to documents from the exchange between the two countries.

In recent days, though, some Canadian mayors, who said they had not heard of the plans until this fall, have objected vehemently. David Miller, the mayor of Toronto, said he worried about practical, safety aspects of the weapons plan and about the environment, but also about the precedent set for the lakes’ more than 94,000 square miles of water.

“Our treaty had always said that the Great Lakes will not be militarized,” Mr. Miller said. “And in effect, this remilitarizes them in the name of a threat from 9/11.”

source: 16oct2006

U.S. puts machine-guns on Great Lakes coast guard vessels
 
I wonder – is this meant to keep the Canadians out or to keep us in?For the first time since 1817, U.S. Coast Guard vessels on the Great Lakes are being outfitted with weapons – machine-guns capable of firing 600 bullets a minute.Until now, coast guard officers have been armed with handguns and rifles, but the vessels themselves haven’t been equipped with weapons.The War of 1812 saw violent battles on Lake Erie and Lake Huron between U.S. troops and British forces, which were largely composed of militias from Britain’s colonies in what is now Canada. After the war, the United States and Britain – and later Canada – agreed to demilitarize the Great Lakes waters.The Rush-Bagot Treaty of 1817 allowed each country to station four vessels, each equipped with an 18-pound cannon, to safeguard the Great Lakes.

more:

http://www.cbc.ca/ottawa/story/ot-vessels20060315.html

To be fair I posted this comment from a so-called ex Marine.  I do not know if his side of the story is true or not but am always willing to listen to our comments and give credit to them if they help us correct our mistakes.  We want to look at all the facts.

Feb 27, 8:20 pm

MarineMachinegunner0331 commented: Not true, I was a machine gunner, and as of 2010 there was no such ammo for the M240G or M240B. The M2 .50 cal machine gun fires a Sabot Light Armor Piercing round that utilizes a 35. caliber tungsten penetrated wrapped in an injection molded (very very hard) plastic. The A10 (warthog) does use DU (depleted uranium) as an armor-piercing penetrator. This is called DEPLETED uranium because the typical amounts of uranium that you would find IN NATURE (that naturally occur as in not made by man!!) is much less. Uranium is a very dense and hard substance much like tungsten (except better) uranium 238 itself is not fissile (which means no spontaneous atom bomb) and it gives of very low amounts of radiation. In fact before it was used in commercial nuclear reactors it was used in paints and pottery that are still around today….. not giving people cancer.

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑