Yes, I am sure there is no bias on your part..WestPoint. I would strongly be against any such liberal move that would attempt to erode more state rights.

I agree with this statement though:

``I'm not talking about superseding state authority or local authority,'' Vitter said on CNN's ``Late Edition'' program. ``When a disaster is as big as at least Katrina, and you have this full-scale mobilization,'' the military rather than FEMA may be the proper federal entity to lead the effort.

It seems this issue should be more an internal federal question rather than federal-state. But, if FEMA wasn't in charge of emergencies, than what is the point of having that agency?

The Laws they are trying to do away with goes back to the Civil War. Its Easy to forget, that if FEMA was run buy some one with more competence, the military would not have to come to the resue as much, as it did. The Coast Guard was the only Group that was with it through Katrina they all need a raise and more funding.

The problem IMHO is that like FEMA the Department of Homeland Security was not run by Emergency Manegment Experts...Chertov is a lawyer, and doesn't have the back ground{or Brown} to make desicissions he was faced with.

FEMA has allways done a Good job, With proper leadership. The Leadership in both DHS and FEMA is why Katrina was a fiasco.

So, I don't agree that the answer is the Military, they have there hands full allready.

peace

[edit on 26-9-2005 by LDragonFire]

Obviously it would be utterly ridicules to call in the Military for a tropical storm or a weak hurricane, hence that is why you have FEMA. Let FEMA be in charge of tasks they can handle. When a city of 1.4 million people is destroyed over night then I think that any reasonable person would understand that's just way to much for FEMA, and the Military needs to be in charge when these types of events occur.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Obviously it would be utterly ridicules to call in the Military for a tropical storm or a weak hurricane, hence that is why you have FEMA. Let FEMA be in charge of tasks they can handle. When a city of 1.4 million people is destroyed over night then I think that any reasonable person would understand that's just way to much for FEMA, and the Military needs to be in charge when these types of events occur.

Exactly. Which is why President Bush, at a televised meeting discussing the reaction to recent natural disasters, stated that there needs to be a discussion regarding the involvement of the military in response to certain natural disasters. He went on to question if there should be a certain level, or threshold, that should determine when in fact the military should be deployed to a disaster area.

So let's not overreact and act as though Bush is saying "let's send in the troops everytime there's a hurricane." Because that's not what the man is saying. I completely agree with him when he says there needs to be a discussion about this, both in Congress and amongst the American public. I feel that those who have genuine concerns about the military being involved in these kinds of domestic operations should voice their opinions, and I am confident that such concerns can and will be adressed. I think we can all agree that we need to be more prepared and do what is best for the future victims of such disasters. We cannot, however, allow some people's fear of the military to prevent disaster victims from receiving the best and most rapid response to their crisis in the future.

This is something that needs to be handled before another tragedy like Katrina comes along. That could be next week, or 10 years from now. Regardless, we all need to come together in a national and bi-partisan effort to draft legislation that both adresses the concerns of military involvement as well as adressing the concerns of the American people for their families.

Come on people don't fall for the propaganda that is our government. Have we not learned anything from the past? This is the same type of stuff they used in Nazi Germany. Martial law is nothing good and is unescessary. The line in the sand is getting crossed and unless you want your God given rights taken blindly away from you I suggest you do not accept this and do something about it when you feel the need be.

Welcome to the police state of America.

This quote sums it up

"Those who are willing to sacrifice essential liberty for the promise of a little temporary security, deserve neither."
--Benjamin Franklin




[edit on 26-9-2005 by UFObeliever]

here we are in the last few years of coundown of 13.0.0.0.0. the last of this procession and our wonderful president has called for military action on our country. it was only leading up to this point. the last few years your freedom has been stripped away and your rights canceled. when do people finally stand up and take notice. or stand up for themselves at all. when the boots come knocking at your door soon enough what are you going to do?

what freedoms or rights have we lost? I have lost nothing, so why don't you actually provide some examples instead of spouting senseless lies?

Originally posted by ferretman
what freedoms or rights have we lost? I have lost nothing, so why don't you actually provide some examples instead of spouting senseless lies?

You haven't really lost any freedoms yet, they are just being restricted, limited, violated, eroded, whatever you want to call it, at some point there will be next to nothing left ... But if that's okay with you, then I guess you deserve it, just like good ol' Ben said
Tip: Read Patriot Act I & II, gun restriction laws etc.

[edit on 27/9/2005 by SwearBear]

I see that you are located in Finland........care to mention what rights of Americans have been limited, eroded?

Once again I'll listen to opposing views but provide some examples before spouting lies.

Already screwed up all we need is for more idiots to make it worse. Coming from a military family, my father retired in 1970 as a full bird after WWII, Korea and Vietnam, I can honestly say that the leadership in our military today are a bunch of low life losers who can't make it outside the military because they don't have the strength nor the brains. My maternal Grand Father thinks the same, he retired in 1972 after being the VCofStaff of the USAF. If you look at what is going on in Iraq, that's our military leadership, and you can find smarter, better leadership in your local preschool!

Originally posted by ferretman
I see that you are located in Finland........care to mention what rights of Americans have been limited, eroded?

Once again I'll listen to opposing views but provide some examples before spouting lies.

Lies, hmm ...
Patriot Act I & II limit/violate the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth and thirteenth amendments of the US consitution.
Gun restriction laws which are becoming more restrictive (depends on which state, of course) limit the second amendment.
Your rights are enshrined in the constitution, no?

At the moment, in New Orleans the second and fourth amendments don't even exist.

[edit on 27/9/2005 by SwearBear]

First of all Patriot Acts 1 & 2 have not affected me at all, nor has my right to bear arms been affected, nor has it in any state in America.

You should do your own research instead of relying on other individuals and/or websites. Almost all U.S. Government documentation is availible on-line.

New Orleans and the surrounding area is a disaster area...people are being kept out for their own safety.

You obviously know little about America.

Obviously some members did not heed my request to stop the ridicules paranoia concerning this matter.
First we are talking about who is in control of assets and operations in a disaster zone after a major natural disaster which the local authorities and FEMA cannot handle. We are not talking about Martial law, or abolishing the Posse Comitatus laws. I could care less if you “feel” something is up, I would rather see less people die in another major storm, then do nothing because some people have wild theories not based on facts. Also, did anyone miss the ban on assault rifles expiring last year? A law put in place by Bill Clinton, and a law not re-instated by George W. Bush, my… how my right to bear arms is being eroded.

Please use common sense next time you decide to post something; we don’t have time for fear mongering and lies.

[edit on 27-9-2005 by WestPoint23]

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Obviously some members did not heed my request to stop the ridicules paranoia concerning this matter.
First we are talking about who in control of assets and operations in a disaster zone after a major natural disaster which the local authorities and FEMA cannot handle. We are not talking about Martial law, or abolishing the Posse Comitatus laws. I could care less if you “feel” something is up, I would rather see less people die in another major storm, then do nothing because some people have wild theories not based on facts. Also, did anyone miss the ban on assault rifles expiring last year? A law put in place by Bill Clinton, and a law not re-instated by George W. Bush, my… how my right to bear arms is being eroded.

Please use common sense next time you decide to post something; we don’t have time for fear mongering and lies.

Are you a government agent or just a government apologist? Wow Westpoint knock knock they aren't wild theories when the government including your beloved George Dubya Bush has openly talked about taking away the Posse Comitatus laws and instilling Martial law in future disasters. How about you use common sense instead of being a sheeple asking for more security and bigger government so they can "protect" you. Did you not see the gun confiscations in New Orleans? What did the republicrats do? Absolutly nothing, they could have at least said its unconstitutional but no they laid back and snickered.

Thing frog in the water on the pot. The heat gets turned up a little bit at a time.

Tell you what, by the time the Bushbots figure out they've been had, that water will be BOILING!

Obviously despite the claims of some members when Katrina hit, no Martial Law was imposed. And the confiscation of some guns after Katrina hit in NO was legal and the sanest thing to do. With reports of shootings and looting, it only makes sense to confiscate some weapons so workers can rescue people without getting shot at by morons who don't know how to act.

I’m not physicist and I doubt you’re one either, so don't claim I'm wrong be cue you can predict the future and somehow know that this is the start of some govt. take over.

Just because there was an illegal unconstitutional law in place doesn't make it right. How is someone suppose to protect themselves against looters then? By throwing kitchen knives at the looters?

Can you give me one supporting link where it says that the police confiscated weapons from law abiding residents after Katrina? Because I do recall watching the news, and people who refused to evacuate in order to protect their homes still had their guns. The only ones who go arrested or got them take away were the ones who were not using them for self defense.