Whose enemy?

The Dutch army is increasingly involved in police raids, observation of criminals and the search for missing persons. This according to Nieuws.nl (NL), noting with unseemly enthusiasm that the various peacekeeping missions in Iraq and Afghanistan have bred a skill set in the Dutch forces that is eminently applicable on the streets in the Netherlands (emphasis mine – KV).

This regards capacities the police and fire brigade do not have. For instance, specialists of the army and navy analyse the patterns of movement of suspects. Additionally unmanned surveillance planes are deployed quite regularly over the Netherlands at the request of mayors or the justice department. (…)

The cooperation with the police has lifted off tremendously in recent years. In all 25 security regions members of the military are stationed, whose job it is to translate requests for assistance by the police, the justice department or mayors into offers from the armed forces.

On the face of it this is an innocent development. If it means criminals are plucked from our streets, so much the better, right? And the police is right, and prudently so, to hire capacities and skills they need, but don’t have.

And yet.

And yet there is something distinctly worrying and downright icky about mayors ordering surveillance flights by UAV’s over Dutch cities. This is the Netherlands we’re talking about, not Iraq or Afghanistan. Our damp corner of the world is not a war zone. So, I really fail to see why such heavy-handed measures as deploying UAVs should be necessary.

There is nothing wrong with members of the military being seconded to police forces around Holland to apply their trade in fighting crime. But there is something very wrong when the armed forces as a whole are getting into the crime-fighting business. That is not what they are for, it is not a trade they naturally ply. In peacekeeping operations armed forces are used to pacify. But pacification is something a world apart from policing.

Accepting this misuse of the armed forces sets a dangerous precedent. Putting all manner of nuances aside, the armed forces of the Netherlands are evidently being deployed against the Dutch people. Let that sink in for a second or two: The Dutch army is being used against the Dutch people.

Such would possibly be acceptable in the case of a violent insurrection. But there is none. Hence, there is no reason, it is not acceptable. Not in a free and democratic state, ruled by law. Think about it: When hearing of a nations army set upon the nations people, what regimes do you associate with that. China comes to mind, more recently Syria. Is that the example we want to emulate? By accepting these first tentative steps to deploy the Dutch army in this manner, this nation has set itself on a very slippery slope, away from freedom, democracy and the rule of law.

Crime fighting is the core business of the police. The core business of the armed forces is to defend the Netherlands against enemies. The fact that UAVs and other resources of the armed forces are used against the Dutch people should give us pause. It should alarm us. UAVs and special operatives are assets that are normally used in war-zones against enemies and hostile civilians. If Dutch mayors think it reasonable to deploy such assets within the borders of their own municipality, against their own citizens, what does that say about how they view us? What does that make us? The enemy? Whose enemy?

This entry was posted in corruption, democracy, freedom, totalitarianism. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Whose enemy?

  1. I think you should be very worried. I know I am how I as a swede has noticed how our government has betrayed us. They have changed our constituition as to allow the army to open fire on us native swedes. Something that hasn’t happened since 1931 when the army opened fire on a peaceful socialist demo. That in itself may not mean so much, weren’t it for the fact that our now miniscule defence as late as last summer trained together with NATO troops in Lapland. First off, Sweden is not even a member of NATO and second, the training they performed was not against invading troops nor muslim terrorists but against native swedes. So now we know, that when all hell eventually will break loose, all sides will be shooting at us, muslims, our own traitors and the americans as well. So keep your eyes open if they also practice on the field shooting at the native dutch. Looks like that is the plan in the final end game of these globalists. To get rid of the white native europeans all together in one final holocaust. the mother of them all.

  2. Edward says:

    Britain used to be very wary of standing armies as a danger to liberty. It’s been abandoned now like much else but Parliament used only to grant the power to government to keep an army for a year. A new Act of Parliament was required each year to permit the army to continue in existence. Until about 100 years ago it was also the reason why the salaries of army officers were so low. That was designed to avoid the creation of a professional military class. Officers’ pay was “an honorarium and not a merces”. Officers would be drawn from the wealthier end of society and so were not likely to become discontented revolutionaries. Amazing really that it worked not unsuccessfully for so long. I suppose the disastrous South African War spelled the end of it and the British Expeditionary Force of 1914 was probably the most “state of the art” force Britain ever put into the field – and it was nearly all dead by the end of 1915.

    The Royal Navy, on which the country chiefly depended, was always a more meritocratic, technocratic service. The public never felt so uneasy about the navy. You can’t patrol city streets with ships!

    At present , the armed forces are just about the only part of the state which still commands respect and affection from the public. So, who knows what we may expect?

    • Klein Verzet says:

      At present , the armed forces are just about the only part of the state which still commands respect and affection from the public. So, who knows what we may expect?

      In the case of Holland: Not much, I’m afraid. The upper cadres (from colonel, or equivalent, upwards) are completely politicized. As a general rule (all from my own anecdotal observation, of course), they are careerist civil servants, more then they are field officers.

      Besides, the draconian cuts in capability has left the backbone of the armed forces quite demoralized. People are leaving the forces in droves. Moreover, the ones leaving are the ones you’d want they stayed on, leaving the dross to manage the liquidation.

  3. whirlwinder says:

    Gentlemen, if you in Europe have not noticed it, you are fighting a war for the survival of your civilization against Islam. If you do not stop immigration and do not bring in the army, you are committing suicide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s