Defense bill opens door to martial law

[fastpat]

Yes folks, it's escalating as fast as the National Socialists, er, neocons can pass the legislation. Hopefully, this won't make it through the lame duck session. Hopefully the Democrat leadership in the Congress won't listen to Hillary Clinton and pass it next year.

Fine Print in Defense Bill Opens Door to Martial Law
By Jeff Stein, CQ National Security Editor

It’s amazing what you can find if you turn over a few rocks in the anti-terrorism legislation Congress approved during the election season.

Take, for example, the John W. Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2006, named for the longtime Armed Services Committee chairman from Virginia.

Signed by President Bush on Oct. 17, the law (PL 109-364) has a provocative provision called “Use of the Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies.”

The thrust of it seems to be about giving the federal government a far stronger hand in coordinating responses to Katrina-like disasters.

But on closer inspection, its language also alters the two-centuries-old Insurrection Act, which Congress passed in 1807 to limit the president’s power to deploy troops within the United States.

That law has long allowed the president to mobilize troops only “to suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.”

But the amended law takes the cuffs off.

Specifically, the new language adds “natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident” to the list of conditions permitting the President to take over local authority — particularly “if domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order.”

Since the administration broadened what constitutes “conspiracy” in its definition of enemy combatants — anyone who “has purposely and materially supported hostilities against the United States,” in the language of the Military Commissions Act (PL 109-366) — critics say it’s a formula for executive branch mischief.

Yet despite such a radical turn, the new law garnered little dissent, or even attention, on the Hill.

http://public.cq.com/public/20061201_homeland.html

[Danny_Ocean]

I'm all for it. Wish we had martial law in a few neighborhoods surrounding me right now!

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Danny_Ocean
I'm all for it. Wish we had martial law in a few neighborhoods surrounding me right now!

You're living in the wrong country, clearly. There are some countries with complete martial law already, rather than partial like we have, don't you think you'd like them?

[Grady Clay]

Pat,

While I disagree with much of what you promote, you do a great service.

I know nothing about this issue but will learn.

On the face of it, what is missing are the “checks and balances” and “division of power” envisioned by our founders and so necessary to prevent abuse.

Can you link to the actual law? How about links to scholarly references (particularly non-partisan)? What do you see should be the language to correct possible misuse or abuse? This can be the starting point for corrective legislation in the next Session.

I think almost everyone will agree that it is absolutely abhorrent that US troops be used against our own citizenry. Even the threat and ability is unacceptable in most circumstances.

I have long been a believer that a great use for our military in peacetime is aiding in disaster situations. This helps maintain our fondness for our “citizen army” volunteers. It also helps the military keep connection with real (civilian) life.

I agree that the Katrina connection is a “red hearing” in that the Iraq war had sufficiently committed our military that they were almost unavailable. The “disaster” was the Administration’s incompetence at the top.

Best,
Grady

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Grady Clay
Pat,

While I disagree with much of what you promote, you do a great service.

Thank you. It's my opinion that if you're not close to or where I am today, you're likely to be tomorrow.

I know nothing about this issue but will learn.

On the face of it, what is missing are the “checks and balances” and “division of power” envisioned by our founders and so necessary to prevent abuse.

Can you link to the actual law? How about links to scholarly references (particularly non-partisan)? What do you see should be the language to correct possible misuse or abuse? This can be the starting point for corrective legislation in the next Session.

It's PL 109-364, formerly H.R. 5122., the John Warner Defense Authorization Act of 2007. Grady, what's missing is a government that remains lawabiding all of the time.

I think almost everyone will agree that it is absolutely abhorrent that US troops be used against our own citizenry. Even the threat and ability is unacceptable in most circumstances.

I have long been a believer that a great use for our military in peacetime is aiding in disaster situations. This helps maintain our fondness for our “citizen army” volunteers. It also helps the military keep connection with real (civilian) life.

I agree that the Katrina connection is a “red hearing” in that the Iraq war had sufficiently committed our military that they were almost unavailable. The “disaster” was the Administration’s incompetence at the top.

Best,
Grady

What Bush, and the last 4 or 5 presidents before him, have done is strip away the protections of the Posse Comitatus Act layer by layer. this will be one of the final nails in the coffin for that old law.

[m21sniper]

Originally posted by Grady Clay
Pat,

While I disagree with much of what you promote, you do a great service.

I know nothing about this issue but will learn.

On the face of it, what is missing are the “checks and balances” and “division of power” envisioned by our founders and so necessary to prevent abuse.

Can you link to the actual law? How about links to scholarly references (particularly non-partisan)? What do you see should be the language to correct possible misuse or abuse? This can be the starting point for corrective legislation in the next Session.

I think almost everyone will agree that it is absolutely abhorrent that US troops be used against our own citizenry. Even the threat and ability is unacceptable in most circumstances.

I have long been a believer that a great use for our military in peacetime is aiding in disaster situations. This helps maintain our fondness for our “citizen army” volunteers. It also helps the military keep connection with real (civilian) life.

I agree that the Katrina connection is a “red hearing” in that the Iraq war had sufficiently committed our military that they were almost unavailable. The “disaster” was the Administration’s incompetence at the top.

Best,
Grady

The Katrina disaster was a local debacle. It was totally botched by the Gov and the Mayor from the get go, so it hardly seems fair to lay the blame at Bush's feet.

Lord knows he's guilty of plenty of things without having to mis-attribute things to him.

[Grady Clay]

Pat,

I was refering to the head of FEMA, a Bush apointee.

Best,
Grady

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Grady Clay
Pat,

I was refering to the head of FEMA, a Bush apointee.

Best,
Grady

In many ways, FEMA has been a diaster waiting to happen. It's purpose was as a place to put retired federal employees in an "advisory" capacity, as if the feds have more of something than locals do. Further, since the federal government is sucking so much money from the citizenry in the states now, little is left, relatively speaking, to the states and locals to handle these issues.

Do I really need to get into the fact that the federal government has encouraged at least three generations of people to become dependent on them for their life blood, which has become thoroughly integrated into their culture in some groups?

Yes, you can place blame on a few Bush appointees, but that will solve nothing for the future. Remember the axiom, if more government is the answer you come up with, the question was very stupid.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by m21sniper
The Katrina disaster was a local debacle. It was totally botched by the Gov and the Mayor from the get go, so it hardly seems fair to lay the blame at Bush's feet.

Lord knows he's guilty of plenty of things without having to mis-attribute things to him.

The problem was government, period. Nothing more needs be said, the answer is getting rid of government at every level.

[Danny_Ocean]

Originally posted by fastpat
... rather than partial like we have...

We have "partial" martial law here? Where? The closest I've ever seen in my 44 years was during the LA riots (Rodney King edition).

I'm all for it. I'll be the first in line supporting our Gov't. My .308 is getting rusty from non-use.

[Danny_Ocean]

Originally posted by fastpat
The problem was government, period. Nothing more needs be said, the answer is getting rid of government at every level.

Right...and let the people affected by a disaster take care of the problems:

[fastpat]

Originally posted by Danny_Ocean
Right...and let the people affected by a disaster take care of the problems.

That's how they've been handled successfully for a long time.

It's only when the fed had promised to handle the problem, and failed; and the state government had promised to handle the problem, and failed; and the local government had promised to handle the problem, and failed; all the while each level demanding more and more money to do these promised things, do you have this issue.

There was no solution to be had from government because government was the primary problem in New Orleans.

[Eric 951]

Originally posted by fastpat

There was no solution to be had from government because government was the primary problem in New Orleans.

and here I thought it was all of that floodwater.

[Danny_Ocean]

Originally posted by fastpat
That's how they've been handled successfully for a long time.

It's only when the fed had promised to handle the problem, and failed; and the state government had promised to handle the problem, and failed; and the local government had promised to handle the problem, and failed; all the while each level demanding more and more money to do these promised things, do you have this issue.

There was no solution to be had from government because government was the primary problem in New Orleans.

Hmm...We must have been observing two different Hurricane Katrina's...

Why didn't the umm, err..."where's my entitlement" people of New Orleans rise up and rebuild without waiting for the government? The English and Germans did during WWII.

[m21sniper]

Why didnt the mayor evacuate the poor with the city's school and public transit fleet?

If that one thing is done, Katrina is a disaster that occurs in a ghost town.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by m21sniper
Why didnt the mayor evacuate the poor with the city's school and public transit fleet?

If that one thing is done, Katrina is a disaster that occurs in a ghost town.

As I said, the failure was a massive one of government promising to handle these problems for decades, and failing to do so at every level.

[Danny_Ocean]