Travis, If it is still government property why shouldn't they know where their property is?
On Jun 12, 1:06 pm, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > From: *Travis* > Date: Thu, Jun 11, 2009 > Subject: Government Demands Inventory of ALL Weapons at Veterans of Foreign > Wars Posts > > Does no one else find this peculiar? > > B > > http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-demands-inventory-of-all-vfw-we<http://www.prisonplanet.com/government-demands-inventory-of-all-vfw-w...> > aponshtml > > Government Demands Inventory of All VFW Weapons Kurt Nimmo > > Prisonplanet.com June 9, 2009 > > An Infowars reader has passed along an email sent to VFW commanders by > > the Assistant Adjutant of the Department of Texas Veterans of Foreign > > Wars indicating the U.S. Army TACOM (Tactical Army Command) is > > demanding an inventory of all weapons held by VFW posts. > > Email sent to VFW commanders > > Inventory form > > “While you may have had possession of this equipment for 20, 40, 60 or > > 100 years,” the email states, “it still belongs to the U.S. Military.” > > The email arrived with an inventory attachment where all weapons are > > to be listed and the document sent to the Department of Texas Veterans > > of Foreign Wars. “This form will then be bounced off of the central > > database of all Texas VFW Posts at U.S. Army TACOM to verify serial > > numbers of each item that has been issued. This is a very extensive > > list and goes back to before the VFW was founded. So if you have a > > cannon from the Spanish-American War it’s on the list.” > > Many VFW halls around the country have decommissioned military weapons > > on their properties along with uniforms, statues and flags from every > > era. It is a common practice for VFW honor guard units to use M-1 > > rifles made into blank firing devices for salutes at parades and > > funerals. Weapons held by VFW posts are generally kept under lock and key > in storage rooms. > > TACOM is not simply interested in blank firing devices and antique > > rifles and pistols, however. “Weapons and Equipment consist of but is > > not limited to, Rifles, Pistols, Mortars, Artillery, Tanks, Vehicles, > > Aircraft, Missiles Aircraft Carriers (sic), etc, from any period.” > > According to the email, any attempt “hide” the items will be dealt > > with severely. “Please do not try and hide this as all weapons and > > equipment not accounted for will be reported to the FBI and BATF as > > stolen military equipment,” writes Dan West, retired Sgt. USMC. “I am > > hopeful that I need not remind anyone of the severity of punishment > > that can be administered or the legal bills resulting from individuals > > or elected officers of the Post having possession of stolen military > > weapons.” > > The inventory of weapons at VFW posts is further evidence the > > government does not trust veterans, even with antiquated and > > non-functioning military equipment used primarily for display and > historical purposes. > > Last month the government took the unprecedented step of requiring > > soldiers at Fort Campbell in Kentucky to disclose all of their > > privately owned weapons and gun licenses. > > “Military officials insist the policy is not connected to a recent > > controversial Department of Homeland Security report that warned > > disgruntled veterans could pose a national security threat. Rather, > > the inventory of private guns is aimed at stemming what the Army > > claims is an increasing number of accidental discharges by gun-toting > > soldiers,” NewsMax reported on May 5. WorldNetDaily reported that Fort > > Bliss in Texas had informed soldiers who live off the premises to > > provide descriptions, serial numbers, calibers, makes and models of > > any of the guns they own privately. > > *************************************************************************** > > (for which the officer who gave said instruction almost got his career > kicked in the ass, the order and or letter of instruction was recinded > immeidately At Ft. Campbell) the military has no legal authority over > private property or the right to seperate a citizen or a solider from their > constitutional rights when they are off post which is not under the > jurisdiction of the military. > > in addition if such instruction was given at Ft. Bliss it was illegal. It > does not conform to the standards and practices of the UCMJ and deprives > individual soldiers of rights without due process....... > > If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we > are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the > intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. > … We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to > tolerate the intolerant. –Sir Karl Popper > > __,_._,___ > > -- > *~@):~{> > > -- > *~@):~{> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
