U.S. troops’ new mission: America’s ‘special events’
Proposal would allow civilians to activate Army to prevent ‘environmental damage’
wnd
By Bob Unruh
New rules published in the Federal Register would allow certain civilians to call American soldiers into action inside the U.S. to prevent environmental damage or respond to “special events” and “other domestic activities.”
The alarming warning is contained in proposed rules published last week for the Department of Defense’s “Defense Support of Civil Authorities” plan.
Under the U.S. Constitution, soldiers inside the country essentially are tasked with the responsibility of quelling “insurrections” and repelling invasions as well as making sure each state has access to the republican form of government.
But the new rules go far beyond that, essentially establishing a plan to activate the U.S. military inside the country to deal with social issues under provisions that appear to be devoid of any connection to the Constitution, according to an expert.
“I think the thing that’s of concern with respect to this set of rules is it appears to have no constitutional foundation, no reference whatsoever of any constitutional structure. It’s totally missing,” said Herb Titus, a onetime candidate for vice president for the Constitution Party and a longtime constitutional professor.
“I think the thing that’s of concern with respect to this set of rules is it appears to have no constitutional foundation, no reference whatsoever of any constitutional structure. It’s totally missing,” said Herb Titus, a onetime candidate for vice president for the Constitution Party and a longtime constitutional professor.
Titus, whose biography includes teaching at five different American Bar Association-approved law schools and service as founding dean of the College of Law and Government at Regent University, reviewed the federal proposal at WND’s request.
The multi-page plan is to establish policies and assign responsibilities “regarding military support for civilian law enforcement.”
“Who Killed the Constitution?” Here’s a dirty little secret: The bedrock of our country is … dead.
The plan states, “This proposed rule will allow civil authorities access to the correct procedures when they are seeking assistance from the Department by establishing updated policy guidance and assigning the correct responsibilities within the Department for the Defense for support of civil authorities in response to requests for assistance for domestic emergencies, designated law enforcement support, special events, and other domestic activities.
Titus, who has testified before Congress on constitutional issues and is authorized to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court and a long list of federal court districts, said, “All of this is based on the assumption that government was created for the purpose of preventing things from happening in our lives.”
A plain reading of the law, he said, would allow drastically different actions than what Americans probably expect.
“Instead of prosecuting somebody charged with murder, we should profile people who are likely to commit murder, round them up and prevent them from endangering lives,” he said, citing the plan’s apparent permission for the government to restrain liberties when there is concern about potential damages or injury.
A contact at the Department of Defense did not return a WND call requesting comment on the proposal.
But the plan itself says the person calling for soldiers’ actions could be either a military official or civilian leader. And it renews questions about Barack Obama’s stated plans for a National Civilian Security Force that is at least as powerful and well-funded as the U.S. military.
Even Obama’s new chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, says there will be a mandatory “force” for Americans.
“If you’re worried about, are you going to have to do 50 jumping jacks, the answer is yes,” Emanuel told a reporter who was podcasting for the New York Daily News.
WND also reported when the official website for Obama, Change.gov, announced he would “require” all middle school through college students to participate in community service programs.
That proposal, however, was changed suddenly after a flurry of blogs protested children being drafted into Obama’s proposal. The new wording reads, “President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in under served schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps.
Video of a marching squad of Obama youth.
Obama, meanwhile, also has yet to clarify what he meant during his July “Call to Service” speech in Colorado Springs in which he insisted the U.S. “cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set” and needs a “civilian national security force.”
A video of his comments is here:
“If we’re going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn’t this rather a big deal?” Farah wrote. “I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?
“Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that? If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?” Farah wrote.
The Obama campaign has declined to respond to WND questions on the issue.
The newly proposed Department of Defense rules leave a virtually wide open door for what could be cited as a reason for military intervention.
It defines “Imminently Serious Conditions” as “Emergency conditions in which, in the judgment of a military commander or responsible DoD civilian official, immediate and possibly serious danger threatens the public and prompt action is needed to save lives, to safeguard public health or safety, or to prevent or mitigate great property or environmental damage.”
Repeatedly the rules cite “special events.”
The plan has been lauded by some in the Bush administration and Congress as a reasonable response to the threat of terrorism, despite concerns over how it would undermine the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal law that restricts the military’s role in domestic law enforcement.
At word of the plan, the ACLU warned of expansions in “presidential and military authority,” while the Cato Institute called it a case of “creeping militarization,” according to the Post.
Gene Healy, Cato vice president, told the newspaper, “There’s a notion that whenever there’s an important problem, that the thing to do is to call in the boys in green … and that’s at odds with our long-standing tradition of being wary of the use of standing armies to keep the peace.”
Wild Thing’s comment………
I am really glad to have this added information. I think we need to keep up on this to see what else they will add to it. Especially with the illegal President that will be sworn in next year.
“the U.S. military inside the country to deal with social issues “
Tied in with 20,000 troops being deployed in the U.S., this is scary.
See it here in a post I did on December 2, 2008
Pentagon to Detail Troops to Bolster Domestic Security
“The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials.”
And this was in the ARMY Times last September …for complete article
3rd Infantry’s 1st BCT trains for a new dwell-time mission. Helping ‘people at home’ may become a permanent part of the active Army
The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team has spent 35 of the last 60 months in Iraq patrolling in full battle rattle, helping restore essential services and escorting supply convoys.
Now they’re training for the same mission — with a twist — at home.
Beginning Oct. 1 for 12 months, the 1st BCT will be under the day-to-day control of U.S. Army North, the Army service component of Northern Command, as an on-call federal response force for natural or manmade emergencies and disasters, including terrorist attacks.
Other branches included
The active Army’s new dwell-time mission is part of a NorthCom and DOD response package.
Active-duty soldiers will be part of a force that includes elements from other military branches and dedicated National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction-Civil Support Teams.
A final mission rehearsal exercise is scheduled for mid-September at Fort Stewart and will be run by Joint Task Force Civil Support, a unit based out of Fort Monroe, Va., that will coordinate and evaluate the interservice event.
In addition to 1st BCT, other Army units will take part in the two-week training exercise, including elements of the 1st Medical Brigade out of Fort Hood, Texas, and the 82nd Combat Aviation Brigade from Fort Bragg, N.C.
There also will be Air Force engineer and medical units, the Marine Corps Chemical, Biological Initial Reaction Force, a Navy weather team and members of the Defense Logistics Agency and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
The post referenced article states: Under the U.S. Constitution, soldiers inside the country essentially are tasked with the responsibility of quelling “insurrections” and repelling invasions as well as making sure each state has access to the republican form of government.
But the new rules go far beyond that, essentially establishing a plan to activate the U.S. military inside the country to deal with social issues under provisions that appear to be devoid of any connection to the Constitution.
Obama although he claims to be a “Constitutional Lawyer” who taught Constitutional law, is attempting to undermine and destroy the basic freedoms our forefathers fought so hard to insure to their progeny, and those who would later adopt the USA as their homeland (legal immigrants). We have the Bill of Rights because the founding fathers knew that those rights would guarantee that USA would be and remain a free country where the Rule of Law would prevail over any form of force. It appears that Mr. Obama plans to use force to destroy our freedoms and our rights assigned to the States and citizens under the Constitution.
….Thank you so much Mark for sending this to me.
It’s the making of a police state at minimum, or to put it another way a step back to 1860. We are facing wholesale take over by Communism to achieve the caveats of the UN.
Who proposed this activation of the military inside the US? Was it Congress or the Administration? How likely is it to become policy? Things are getting scarier and scarier.
A National Civilian Security Force AND the military to be used by politicians. To protect the American public or to control the American public? This is not the idea of America. This is the idea that was on the east side of the Berlin Wall.
The last time this happened was in the 1920 when WW 1 veterans were protesting the lack of benefits.
But a permanent force to be used by the government is unheard of. The formation of or the proposal of a civilian Brown Shirt Civilian Army ? This is scary.
The New York Draft riots of 1863 Lincoln called in the Military to quell the riots, Units from the just finished battle of Gettysburg were sent to New York, they had about 20,000 troops when it was all over.
The media keeps comparing obama to Lincoln and of all the Presidents Lincoln violated the constitution in more grievious ways than any other President until now. Lincoln was allowed to waive Habeas Corpus and literally threw people in jail without any due process and a lot were democrats or the ‘Copper-heads’.
Jack, I agree…..”We are facing wholesale take over by Communism to achieve the caveats of the UN.”….
They have mentioned this on the news but once again only in passing then right on to the next story. No one even questioned it on the news I have seen about it on TV.
Tom, from all I can tell this one comes right from Bush. Not sure though if it is his own idea or something that has been in the works from one of those times Bush had to say OK to stuff to get something else passed or what.
Mark, wow, that is really interesting. I didn’t know that about Lincoln. Thank you so much and also for the post article too.
George Orwell’s 1984 was fiction. Barack Obama’s 2009 will be fact and horror.