Our blogs about
America's Wars
War on Iraq
War on Drugs
War on Afghanistan
War on Columbia
War on Philippines
War on Venezuela

MORE
Matrix Masters
Blogs
World Events
Katrina's Aftermath
US News
Bush Crime Family News
Science & Health
Earth News
Free Speech
News from Africa
News from Palestine
Bill of Rights Under Attack

Support Bloggers' Rights!

Lorenzo's
Random Musings
. . . about Chaos,
Reason, and Hope

 

Bush Junta is Establishing Secret Police in U.S.
(Bradley Graham, Washington Post, July 6, 2005)
A new Pentagon strategy for securing the U.S. homeland calls for expanded U.S. military activity not only in the air and sea -- where the armed forces have historically guarded approaches to the country -- but also on the ground and in other less traditional, potentially more problematic areas such as intelligence sharing with civilian law enforcement. . . . The strategy is outlined in a 40-page document, approved last month, that marks the Pentagon's first attempt since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to present a comprehensive plan for defending the U.S. homeland. . . . A new Pentagon strategy for securing the U.S. homeland calls for expanded U.S. military activity not only in the air and sea -- where the armed forces have historically guarded approaches to the country -- but also on the ground and in other less traditional, potentially more problematic areas such as intelligence sharing with civilian law enforcement. . . . The strategy is outlined in a 40-page document, approved last month, that marks the Pentagon's first attempt since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to present a comprehensive plan for defending the U.S. homeland. . . . it raises the likelihood that U.S. combat troops will take action in the event that civilian and National Guard forces are overwhelmed. . . . some of the provisions appear likely to draw concern from civil liberties groups that have warned against a growing military involvement in homeland missions and an erosion of long-established barriers to military surveillance and combat operations in the United States. . . . The document acknowledges, for instance, plans to team military intelligence analysts with civilian law enforcement to identify and track suspected terrorists. . . . [COMMENT by Lorenzo: Here is what the ultra-right-wing Cato Institute has to say about our Beloved Dictator's plans for a military take-over of the U.S.: Deployed in the U.S.A.: The Creeping Militarization of the Home Front . . . by Gene Healy [Gene Healy is senior editor at the Cato Institute. His previous studies include "There Goes the Neighborhood: The Bush-Ashcroft Plan to 'Help' Localities Fight Gun Crime" and "Arrogance of Power Reborn: The Imperial Presidency and Foreign Policy in the Clinton Years."] . . . Executive Summary As its overwhelming victories in Afghanistan and Iraq have demonstrated, the U.S. military is the most effective fighting force in human history. It is so effective, in fact, that many government officials are now anxious for the military to assume a more active policing role here at home. . . . Deploying troops on the home front is very different from waging war abroad. Soldiers are trained to kill, whereas civilian peace officers are trained to respect constitutional rights and to use force only as a last resort. That fundamental distinction explains why Americans have long resisted the use of standing armies to keep the domestic peace. . . . Unfortunately, plans are afoot to change that time-honored policy. There have already been temporary troop deployments in the airports and on the Canadian and Mexican borders and calls to make border militarization permanent. The Pentagon has also shown a disturbing interest in high-tech surveillance of American citizens. And key figures in the Bush administration and Congress have considered weakening the Posse Comitatus Act, the federal statute that limits the government's ability to use the military for domestic police work. . . . The historical record of military involvement in domestic affairs cautions against a more active military presence in the American homeland. If Congress weakens the legal barriers to using soldiers as cops, substantial collateral damage to civilian life and liberty will likely ensue. . . . And that is the opinion of conservatives! At least it is refreshing to know that there is a big difference between a real conservative and these Fascists who so proudly call themselves "neocons". . . . They are "cons" alright . . . Fascist Con-men&women.] . . . "It's a mixed message," said Timothy H. Edgar, a national security specialist with the American Civil Liberties Union. "I do see language in the document acknowledging limits on military involvement, but that seems at odds with other parts of the document. They seem to be trying to have it both ways." . . . The document, titled "Strategy for Homeland Defense and Civil Support" (PDF version)," was signed June 24 by acting Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England and is now a basis for organizing troops, developing weapons and assigning missions. It was released late last week without the sort of formal news conference or background briefing that often accompanies major defense policy statements. . . . Legal barriers to sending the armed forces into U.S. streets have existed for more than a century under the Posse Comitatus Act. Enacted in 1878, the law was prompted by the perceived misuse of federal troops after the Civil War to supervise elections in the former Confederate states. Over the years, the law has come to reflect a more general reluctance to involve the military in domestic law enforcement, although its provisions have been amended from time to time to allow some exceptions, including a military role in putting down insurrections, in assisting in drug interdiction work, and in providing equipment, training and advice. [COMMENT by Lorenzo: And we know what a great job the military are doing in fighting the war on drugs. See Good News! - Illegal drugs use 'rose in 2004'.] . . . Along with civil liberties groups, many senior Pentagon officials have tended to be wary of seeing troops operate on U.S. soil. Military commanders argue that their personnel are not specifically trained in domestic security, and they worry that homeland tasks could lead to serious political problems. . . . Still, the Pentagon has established new administrative structures in recent years in recognition of a growing military contribution to homeland defense. It set up the Northern Command in 2002 to oversee military operations in the United States. It created a new assistant secretary for homeland defense. And it designated a one-star general on the Joint Chiefs of Staff to work on the issue. . . . Additionally, the National Guard has been building small "civil support teams" to provide emergency assistance in the wake of a chemical, biological, nuclear or high-explosive attack. By the end of 2007, 55 of the 22-person teams are due -- at least one for each state and U.S. territory. . . . The new strategy notes that the Guard "is particularly well suited for civil support missions" because it is "forward deployed in 3,200 communities," exercises routinely with local law enforcement and is accustomed to dealing with communities in times of crisis. Indeed, Guard leaders have welcomed an expanded homeland security role. . . . "The move toward a domestic intelligence capability by the military is troubling," said Gene Healy, a senior editor at the Cato Institute, [see Comment by Lorenzo above for more about Healy] a nonprofit libertarian policy research group in Washington. . . . "The last time the military got heavily involved in domestic surveillance, during the Vietnam War era, military intelligence kept thousands of files on Americans guilty of nothing more than opposing the war," Healy said. "I don't think we want to go down that road again."

posted by LoZo 1:39 PM