A very disturbing bit of news -- from the Gun Rights Examiner:
Disabled Marine rifles at inauguration signal shift in administration policyA bit more:
�Didn't know the Marines had to take the bolts out of their rifles for the Inaugural,� an email forwarded to Gun Rights Examiner from a United States Marine Corps source observed. �Wonder if someone can explain why [they] would be marching in the inaugural parade with no bolts in their rifles!�
The email linked to a YouTube video of the 57th Presidential Inaugural Parade, embedded in this column, featuring Bravo Company Marines from the Marine Barracks Washington. Sure enough, the observation in the email is confirmed by watching the video, with screen shots provided in the photo and slide show accompanying this article.
This prompted an internet search to see if others had also noticed, and the Blur-Brain blog had.
�The bolts have been removed from the rifles rendering them unable to fire a round,� the post stated. �Apparently Obama�s Secret Service doesn�t trust the USMC. Simply searching each guy to make sure he didn�t have a live round hidden on him wasn�t enough, they had to make sure the guns were inoperable.
Gun Rights Examiner made a cursory search and found something even more curious. In the 2009 Inaugural Parade, the United States Navy marched with rifles that had not been so disabled (see 1:24 into that video plus the final slide).Hat tip to Peter over at Bayou Renaissance Man for the link. Peter offers these words:
This raises the question of why the administration felt it necessary to make this change now, particularly with concerns being raised about military involvement in domestic affairs, litmus tests on top brass willingness to fire on American citizens alleged by a heretofore prominent and credible Nobel Prize nominee, a "terrorism" policy that allows for assassinating Americans without due process, rising concerns over deployment of domestic drones, and publicized opposition among many in the USMC to presidential policies such as women in combat, as well as having been the most resistant military branch to ending �don�t ask, don�t tell.�
Add to this concerns over administration agencies buying up ammunition in massive quantities, the renewed destruction of expended military ammunition brass in contravention of the Defense Appropriations Act, and Obama�s post-election confidence in dropping the mask on his previously �under the radar� citizen disarmament plans, and the change becomes another piece that fits in a puzzle that�s forming an increasingly disturbing picture.
Unsurprisingly, a Google news feed search finds no reports on inaugural Marine disarmament in the �Authorized Journalist� media. Chances are, most of them aren�t qualified to notice such things, and that it doesn�t serve the agenda of those who are to point such things out.
Would someone please tell me why every General- and Field-Grade officer in the US Marines did not instantly resign his commission upon learning of this grossly contemptuous and distrustful gesture towards their Corps? Do they have any esprit de corps left? Or have they become nothing more than lickspittle lapdogs for politicians?Indeed. The zero-information voters think that everything is just peachy but this nation is rotting away at the core.
If I were a Marine today, I'd take this mortal insult - for it can be construed as nothing less - as grounds to request my immediate discharge from a Corps that no longer appears to understand - for it certainly no longer appears to apply! - the meaning of honor. How the USMC could have asked or expected its personnel to acquiesce in such a demeaning, degrading exercise is utterly beyond me.
I wouldn't like to have been anywhere near Chesty Puller's grave on the day this happened. The tremors of his high-speed spinning would probably have made it impossible to stand! He probably wouldn't say aloud, but would almost certainly think, that any President displaying such distrust in and contempt for his nation's finest fighting force is probably not worth serving.
