New Military Unit for Domestic Deployment......Now we can all sleep better, NOT!

ernest2

New member
New military unit
for domestic deployment
Cohen says Americans should
'welcome' troops on home soil


By Jon E. Dougherty
© 1999 WorldNetDaily.com

Critics are denouncing recent
congressional changes to the Posse Comitatus Act that will allow a broader use of U.S. military forces in a domestic law enforcement role including a new unit for deployment in assisting civilian officers during a terrorist attack.

The new command, established Oct. 7 in Norfolk, Va., will be called the U.S. Joint Forces Command, and replaces the
former U.S. Atlantic Command.

At a ceremony commemorating the new unit,
Defense Secretary William Cohen told
participants the American people shouldn't fear the potential of seeing
U.S. military forces on the streets of
U.S. cities.

The military must "deal with the threats we are most likely to face," Cohen told reporters, downplaying concerns about
troops operating on home soil.

"The American people should not be concerned about it. They should welcome it."

The new command is designed to
prepare U.S. troops to fight abroad or to respond if terrorists strike with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

In opposing the measure, critics cite the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which
prohibits federal troops from participating in domestic law enforcement activities under most circumstances.

With the concern over domestic terrorism rising since the World Trade Center bombing and numerous incidences of cyber-attacks on
U.S. defense and financial institutions,
the Clinton administration has begun to
relax some of those restrictions.

In July, WorldNetDaily reported the new measures would end the requirement for local law agencies to reimburse the federal government for any local use of military equipment, as well as enable the Department of Defense to deploy
military troops in cases of anticipated or actual terrorist attacks.

Then, David Kopel of the Independence Institute warned that the measures would, if passed, "set (bad) precedents for years to come."

Since the Waco debacle in 1993, when federal law officers and military personnel assaulted a church community resulting in the deaths of over 80 men, women and children, Kopel said the federal government has been "eroding the protections contained in the Posse Comitatus Act." In the past, he told WorldNetDaily, most of the
amendments to the original law had been based on bogus drug issues.

Now, he said, that issue seems to have shifted to so-called terrorist attacks, or at least the threat of them.

The Defense Department has said only the military has enough equipment to operate in a poisoned environment, or to manage amassive decontamination effort.
Secretary Cohen told reporters
last week that federal law will not be violated because the military would only respond if requested.

"It is subordinate to civilian control," he said.

But Gregory Nojeim, legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union in Washington, D.C., told
WorldNetDaily he is concerned about "nightmare scenarios" like those in the recent films, "Enemy of the State" and "The Siege."

"Soldiers are not equipped, by training or temperament, to enforce the laws with proper regard for civil and constitutional rights," he said.
"They're trained to kill the enemy."

Nojeim said the ACLU is concerned about "letting loose the most effective fighting force in the history of the world" on American civilians.

Cohen said that the creation of the Join Forces Command would better coordinate the training of the four armed services. However, history is replete with reasons why some Americans
continue to be hesitant about using military troops in a law enforcement capacity.

Besides questions about the Army's Delta Force role during the Waco siege, most recently, in 1997, U.S. Marine assigned to assist the U.S. Border Patro in combating illegal immigratio accidentally shot and killed an
18-year-old goat herder.

That force has since been withdrawn and reassigned, but lawmakers have remained committed to expanding the military's civil law enforcement role in other ways.

For example, the military also has been given an expanded role in defending against cyber-terrorism, or assaults on U.S. computer systems.
The U.S. Space Command in Colorado will be leading that effort.

Nojeim questioned the need for such an expansion of federal military forces into the domestic law enforcement arena, even though U.S. officials have said the nation is now at greater risk of terrorist attack.
He also believes the White House
should do a better job of educating the American people about why the changes to the Posse Comitatus law are needed.

"For years the federal government has showered the FBI with hundreds of millions of new dollars to help it combat crimes involving chemical and
biological weapons," he told
WorldNetDaily.
"Taxpayers need to know where that money has gone and why the president now wants to call in the troops."

Addressing the long-term ramifications of the change in military law
enforcement policy, Nojeim said, "When the crisis hits, those with the biggest guns will be subordinate to no one."

Related stories:
More military police powers?
Panel sees danger ahead for America


Jon E. Dougherty is a staff writer for
WorldNetDaily.
 
Using military to assist police in fight against terrorism is a common practice in many European countries, and often with good results. In those situations military's job is to assist, not lead those operations, and the highest ranking LEO is always in charge and the military assistance is subordinated to him/her. I think for example the British SAS (part of the British Army) has done a good job in anti-terrorist operations.

Of course there is always a risk that something goes wrong, but that is the case also when police acts alone. For example the Waco raid was mocked up by federal agents, not by military. A military unit could not have succeeded worse than the LEOs did there.

Ossi
 
Ossi,

“Using military to assist police in fight against terrorism is a common practice in
many European countries, and often with good results.”

Oh, yes. Quite! Especially when there is any perception of opposition to governmental authority.
-----

All,

Our military (either as the above or as a “militarized” police force) is
supposedly no threat because it is under “civilian control”.

Civilian control brought us Waco and Ruby Ridge.

When Americans are no longer willing and able to provide for their own local
defense (personal, family, and community), that will be the permanent death of
liberty and freedom in the United States.

------------------
Either you believe in the Second Amendment or you don't.
Stick it to 'em! RKBA!


[This message has been edited by Dennis (edited December 19, 1999).]
 
This is the Joint Task Force-Civil Support (JTF-CS). It is part of the U.S. Joint Forces Command. It is located in Norfolk VA and reports to the Secretary of Defense. In theory it is to operate only in incidents involving Weapons Of Mass Destruction.

I dont know who gets to define Weapons of Mass Destruction.

I have been assured by the Director, USJFCOM Washington Liaison that JTF-CS will act in compliance with the Constitution, the Posse Comitatus Act and other U.S. laws.

------------------
Better days to be,

Ed
 
Do you REALLY believe any of that bogus lie? Why is it so easy for many sheeple to believe these blatant lies? It happened in Germany and Poland in the late thirties when the Third Reich tried to convince the public that a euthanasia program was needed to cleanse the country of humans who were a burden to Society.
Our Government and the news media are nothing but out and out liars. And thats being very kind with words!!!!

------------------
From my cold dead hands.
 
I agree four,

And they say they will obey the posse act, well aint that convenient since they had to ammend it to even say that without violating it. Maybe some one should explain why it was written in the first place?

Europe does it, yeah and take a look at belfast for the last 30 years, maybe in the not so distant future the ememy here will be rogue gun owners not willing to turn them in, as the flip side to the IRA. I think we should be more concerned with our commie buddies talking about nukes because of slik willie running his mouth than some alleged terrorist conspiracy theories, or is it just a few gun owners?

What's that noise?....I think I hear cattle cars in the distance, or maybe...its just a few abrams patroling my hood, damn don't I feel safer that my car won't get stolen or blown up by some middle eastern terrorist working under Osama "i always have my AK with bananna mag" bin Laden.
 
Down playing of the importance of Freedom+The dissarming of the population+firming police and military links+NSA FBI reconciliation=

Anyone? Anyone? Yes, you in the back.
 
I would just like to ask one thing, what is considered a "terrorist act"? Sure seems to me that almost anything can be labeled a terrorist act.
Im not sure if its because I have been reading whats on this board alot more or not,and i dont consider myself a conspiratist (is that a word even?), but there sure are alot of weird things happening here in the US. Things like German military base here,lots more involvement with the u.n., our rights and freedom dwindling (and not just gun rights either), less and less say so over what laws are passed and whats happening to the Constitution, police forces becoming more military like,I could go on and on. Anyone else see this happening, or should I spend a little less time reading and dwelling on these posts? :)-----Cuz
 
It is a sales tactic. You and helpless children are the potential victims of awful terrorist activity because you enjoy "too many selfish freedoms". You all need to adjust your thinking a bit and accept an overt military presence for the good of the "village". Geez, I think I saw this in an old Errol Flynn flick and the audience still got the irony! Cuz, remember, thinking too critically about terrorism in itself borders on conspiracy. Watch it bub :).
 
Hmmmmm......I smell a rat.

What ever happen to police doing there job and the military defending the country.

The biggest problem I see is it takes Local authority and moves it up to a federal level.

Plus we don't have enough troops now to defend the nation, why take more away.

Then there's that other thought that's in the back of everybodies mind. What if they are here to take our guns?

------------------
The new guy.

"I'm totin, this pistol because my dang SKS won't fit in my holster"
 
Yep, Secretary Cohen's reassurances don't mean a darned thing to me. As far as I'm concerned, he's nuts even to mouth them. For once, I agree with the ACLU.
 
"The American people should not be concerned about it. They should welcome it."

Hiel Hitler!

People better wake up. We had a balance of power in this country. Enough citizens armed to counter balance the arms of our armed forces and law enforcement. Look what's happening to that balance. Here in CA they have banned SKS's and mags over 10 rounds while at the same time requiring all tax collectors to be armed. Yes the Franchise Tax agents are now armed.

At the federal level full autos are so hard to get that they might not as well exist. The number of citizens who even know how to handle these weapons are dwindling. While at the other front the military is being used more for civilian duty. Oh the scales of liberty are being tipped.

Where is the outrage? Through the propaganda machine the vast majority of citizens are now willing to give up liberties for a little temporary safety.

"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania.



------------------
Richard

The debate is not about guns,
but rather who has the ultimate power to rule,
the People or Government.
RKBA!
 
Back
Top