"Pentagon Unilaterally Grants Itself Authority Over ‘Civil Disturbances’"
Sheriff Buelton: General, I am the local civilian authority and I am hereby making a formal request of the military to do everything in its power to assist and aid me in apprehending known...
Maj. Gen. V.E. Hubik: Posse Comitatus, sir.
Sheriff Buelton: Did you call me a pussy communist?
Maj. Gen. V.E. Hubik: The U.S. Army is, by an act of congress; Posse Comitatus act, specifically precluded from enforcing civilian law outside the military reservation.
Sheriff Buelton: Pussy communist?
Maj. Gen. V.E. Hubik: That means I do not have the authority to provide you with a single piece of military equipment or personnel without a direct order from my superior or the President of the United States. I can give you his address, if you'd like. -- Tank, 1984.
"Did you call me a pussy communist?"
How quaint the dialogue from Tank sounds thirty years later. Posse Comitatus, R.I.P.
The manhunt for the Boston Marathon bombing suspects offered the nation a window into the stunning military-style capabilities of our local law enforcement agencies. For the past 30 years, police departments throughout the United States have benefitted from the government’s largesse in the form of military weaponry and training, incentives offered in the ongoing “War on Drugs.” For the average citizen watching events such as the intense pursuit of the Tsarnaev brothers on television, it would be difficult to discern between fully outfitted police SWAT teams and the military.
The lines blurred even further Monday as a new dynamic was introduced to the militarization of domestic law enforcement. By making a few subtle changes to a regulation in the U.S. Code titled “Defense Support of Civilian Law Enforcement Agencies” the military has quietly granted itself the ability to police the streets without obtaining prior local or state consent, upending a precedent that has been in place for more than two centuries.
The most objectionable aspect of the regulatory change is the inclusion of vague language that permits military intervention in the event of “civil disturbances.” According to the rule:
Federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the President is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.
Bruce Afran, a civil liberties attorney and constitutional law professor at Rutgers University, calls the rule, “a wanton power grab by the military,” and says, “It’s quite shocking actually because it violates the long-standing presumption that the military is under civilian control.”
10 comments:
Sounds a lot like that time when Parliament declared that it had the unilateral right of taxation over the American Colonies. Despite myths to the contrary, this is what pushed our founding fathers over the edge.
For the second time since Lincoln, may he burn in hell, the US has come under military dictatorship. This time, however, there are 100 million armed Americans.
The next headline will read, "Americans Unilaterally Grant Themselves Authority over the Pentagon, Reestablishing Constitutional Law"
Any such deployment demands a reaction.
Primary focus should be on decapitating the beast.
The 500 meter solution.
III/0317
Getting to that time when we shoot on sight?
What's next, death squads?
This Canuck wants to See Airplanes. As a Former Pilot, I Love Airplanes. However, One Foot outside those Gates, You Impatient Antsy Commies, Shall Want to See Your Toy Planes... ON FIRE
http://youtu.be/cyK_ubfTwwE
might as well see the actual "pussy communist" video from the movie
anon 8:50am
"shoot on sight" should only be for if they are actively hostile. you never know when you have a bunch of oathkeepers who are defecting with their stuff, and it would be a damn shame to shoot up the people who would be helping us.
set up an ambush, and approach. remind them who has the upper hand (or bluff them really hard. one guy with a good rifle can look like more if you do it right) and tell them they can return to base, surrender, or come under your command. you don't WANT to kill them but you are capable and willing to do so. and see what happens.
Unintended consequences?
Is this what happens when you carefully weed out the professional soldiers and promote the ambitious ones?
Seven Days in May?
What happens when the dogs get off the leash? When they no longer need a master?
Guys, I need a favor ... an indulgence, if you will. I can recall seeing a movie that began with commandos (Soviet?) asassinating Congress ... I think the attack might have been timed for the State of the Union speech. At any rate, it was a decapitation that eliminated COG as a practical matter. Within hours the coup was an accomplished matter except for the efforts of private citizen militias and military stragglers (OathKeepers ?).
What is its name?
Post a Comment