U.S. Department of Defense orders off-duty American troops to hide their military identity in public because of terrorism threats from Muslims

Our military has to hide that they’re in the military on our own soil? Totally unbelievable. The Democrats have turned America into a safari park where the dangerous wild animals run free and the defenders of freedom are in cages. How about we put these Muslim threats in internment camps instead? 


Clash Daily  Through our confidential contacts in U.S. Military Special Operations, ClashDaily.com has been provided a copy of an unclassified Department of Defense directive, USNORTHCOM Force Directive 1-295, which essentially orders our troops into hiding here in their own sovereign territory and in Canada, whenever they leave their duty stations.

The directive, issued a week ago in close coordination with our Canadian allies, describes in detail the recent deadly sequence of Islamic jihad attacks on Canadian military members in Ottawa and near Montreal.  It also describes the ongoing threats announced by ISIS, commanding their jihadi sleepers and “lone wolves” to murder any and all Americans possible (especially military members and their dependents) here at home.  

Rakkasans return home

The directive orders that all U.S. military personnel in North America who are in “public venues” or using commercial transportation are to refrain from wearing uniforms, insignias, or any other kind of identifying clothing or items which indicate their military affiliation, “unless complying with official travel instructions or other orders.”

While it is understood that the specific targeting of U.S. and Canadian military personnel by ISIS is very serious, very real, and has already proven disastrously deadly, one cannot help but consider the fact that we are basically, timidly, allowing the enemy to dictate the terms and rules of engagement here, on our turf.


It’s extremely unfortunate, and even more so because it doesn’t have to be this way.

How is it avoidable?  As with other maddeningly timid rules of engagement during this long war — in areas of operation overseas and in anti-terrorism policies and operations everywhere — the present situation is the result of the craven politically-correct ideology that says when dealing with those who resemble the enemy and share the enemy’s nationalities, culture, and stated religion, we must err on the side of non-aggression and exert ourselves to avoid giving offense.


In the aftermath of the 1941 attack by the Imperial Japanese on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, our country’s leadership ordered the rounding up all of those here on our soil who had at least some surface liability to sympathize or otherwise be aligned with our mortal enemies.  We didn’t screw around and unnecessarily put more American lives at risk.  The threat was real.

While World War II escalated, we didn’t excessively wring our hands and worry more about whether we were violating the rights of people whose loyalties were legitimately in question than we did about preventing further attacks — we were at war, and our leaders made the clear decision to protect the homeland, and to win.

At that time, rounding up the second generation Japanese, and certain others related to the Axis powers, was the right thing to do given the circumstances.  In her phenomenal and exhaustively researched book titled In Defense of Internment: The Case for Racial Profiling in World War II and the War on Terror, author Michelle Malkin details the specifics of our government’s systematic evacuation of the Japanese and others away from critical areas and into comfortable, secured communities (“internment camps” replete with recreation facilities and movie theaters, etc.) until the threat was eliminated and the war was over.


Those who go around apologizing for all of that today are in the same league of dhimmis, derelicts, doofuses, and outright traitors who squashed the Phoenix Memo prior to Sept. 11th, 2001, and who prevented FBI counter-terrorism agents from ever communicating with each other at all out of excessive concern for “sensitivities” and “appearances” (recall Clinton deputy Jamie Gorelick’s increased “wall of separation” between law enforcement and intelligence units). 

They are the same “progressives” who still refuse to secure our borders against illegal and dangerous foreign invasions and crime networks, and who continually release the worst of the worst of our enemy’s warriors and top commanders from Guantanamo Bay.  They are the same worthless enablers of terror attacks who ignored numerous red flags to let the underwear bomber get on the plane in Africa, bound for Detroit, and who poo-pooed the Russians’ warnings about the Tsarnaev brothers prior to the Boston Marathon bombings.


They are the same people among the liberal vanguard of multiculturalist Canadian political bureaus who made sure that the murderous jihadis of last week, already known to security personnel as posing some degree of threat, were left free to plot and carry out their attacks. 

They are the psychotically stubborn people in the media and in office who do everything they can to not call last week’s jihad hatchet murder rampage against New York City cops exactly what it was, lest that assessment “contribute to negative stereotypes” of Muslims/minorities — until they have completely exhausted the fetid reservoir of diversity-correctness and are forced to acknowledge the facts.


They do everything they can to marginalize and vilify voices like mine and ours, when we call for more aggressive measures to contain and eliminate the broader threat posed by followers of Mohammed in this modern era.

They are the alleged “authorities” who say that instead of aggressively rounding up and/or otherwise profiling young Muslim men who pose at least some degree of threat of being aligned with jihad extremism, we must order our military personnel to go incognito in the very land our security forces and citizens could, instead, readily secure, if those so-called authorities would simply let us do it.


Unfortunately, all of that makes perfect sense, given the circumstances — circumstances which have resulted from the ongoing failure of leadership and deliberate policy decisions guided by the groveling, apologetic, anti-American ideology which says it’s more important to protect the feelings and the military academies (mosques) of the enemy than it is to protect innocent lives like little 8-year-old Martin Richard, murdered by a Tsarnaev brothers’ bomb at the Boston Marathon.

If we ever have sound leadership in this country again while the threat of Islamic jihad exists, any Muslims on our soil will cautiously hide their religious garb/affiliation while our troops proudly wear their uniform of our nation on their way home off-base or on their lunch break at the McDonald’s outside the post gate.

157th Brigade returns from Kosovo deployment

The alert is titled “Recent Threats and Individual Protective Measures.”

The alert lists 11 protective steps that require employees to alter their ways of life, including:

⦁ Remove decals and other identifiers from clothing and vehicles.

⦁ Vary travel routes.

⦁ Avoid large gatherings and places where people congregate.

⦁ Guard what you post on Facebook and Twitter.

⦁ Do not post anything that links you to the Defense Department.

⦁ Do not post any opposition to terrorist groups.