It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Police State is coming

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 08:32 PM
link   
www.govexec.com...=32414&sid=21


Pentagon begins review of law on military's domestic role

By Megan Scully, CongressDaily

The Pentagon has begun what might become a historic review of a post-Reconstruction-era law that bars the military from participating in domestic law enforcement activities, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., said Monday.

During a brief telephone conversation Monday afternoon, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld informed Warner that department officials are examining the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act to determine whether revisions are needed to give the military police powers during major domestic disasters. Under that law, the active-duty military can participate in humanitarian relief missions, but are prohibited from making arrests or conducting searches or seizures.
.........

Rumsfeld and several lawmakers opposed efforts to revise Posse Comitatus after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, arguing that it is not the military's job to conduct arrests, searches or seizures on U.S. soil.

But a sweeping statement made earlier this month by President Bush has renewed the national debate over whether the military is better equipped than local law enforcement to maintain order under extreme circumstances.

During a Sept. 15 speech in New Orleans that laid out initiatives in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, Bush said he wanted a

Those remarks came a day after Warner urged a Pentagon review of Posse Comitatus, prompting questions from lawmakers about whether the "broader role" for the military during domestic disasters. He revealed few specifics, other than to say the Defense Department is "the institution of our government most capable of massive logistical operations on a moment's notice."president wants to give the military police powers during a major natural disaster.

Over the weekend, Bush said he had talked with U.S. Northern Command officials about whether the military should take the lead role in any initial response to a major disaster.

And the president attempted again Monday to clarify his Sept. 15 statement, saying he wants to begin a "robust discussion" about how the federal government can best respond to disasters and other major events on U.S. soil, including how to make better use of military personnel and equipment.

...........

Bush did not discuss Posse Comitatus in particular, but hinted that revisions to laws might be necessary to change how the military can respond to natural disasters.

"I don't want to prejudge the Congress's discussion on this issue, because it may require a change of law," Bush said.

Congress is still awaiting details from the Defense Department on any proposal to expand the military's domestic role, Warner said.




Hitler's Enabling Act

On March 23, 1933, the newly elected members of the German Parliament (the Reichstag) met in the Kroll Opera House in Berlin to consider passing Hitler's Enabling Act. It was officially called the 'Law for Removing the Distress of the People and the Reich.' If passed, it would effectively mean the end of democracy in Germany and establish the legal dictatorship of Adolf Hitler.

The 'distress' had been secretly caused by the Nazis themselves in order to create a crisis atmosphere that would make the law seem necessary to restore order. On February 27, 1933, they had burned the Reichstag building, seat of the German government, causing panic and outrage. The Nazis successfully blamed the fire on the Communists and claimed it marked the beginning of a widespread uprising.

On the day of the vote, Nazi storm troopers gathered in a show of force around the opera house chanting, "Full powers - or else! We want the bill - or fire and murder!!" They also stood inside in the hallways, and even lined the aisles where the vote would take place, glaring menacingly at anyone who might oppose Hitler's will.

Just before the vote, Hitler made a speech to the Reichstag in which he pledged to use restraint.

"The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one." - Hitler told the Reichstag.

He also promised an end to unemployment and pledged to promote peace with France, Great Britain and the Soviet Union. But in order to do all this, Hitler said, he first needed the Enabling Act.

A two thirds majority was needed, since the law would actually alter the German constitution. Hitler needed 31 non-Nazi votes to pass it. He got those votes from the Center Party after making a false promise to restore some basic rights already taken away by decree.

However, one man arose amid the overwhelming might. Otto Wells, leader of the Social Democrats stood up and spoke quietly to Hitler.

"We German Social Democrats pledge ourselves solemnly in this historic hour to the principles of humanity and justice, of freedom and socialism. No enabling act can give you power to destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible."

This enraged Hitler and he jumped up to respond.

"You are no longer needed! - The star of Germany will rise and yours will sink! Your death knell has sounded!"

The vote was taken - 441 for, only 84, the Social Democrats, against. The Nazis leapt to their feet clapping, stamping and shouting, then broke into the Nazi anthem, the Hörst Wessel song.

They achieved what Hitler had wanted for years - to tear down the German Democratic Republic legally and end democracy, thus paving the way for a complete Nazi takeover of Germany.

From this day on, the Reichstag would be just a sounding board, a cheering section for Hitler's pronouncements.




"The government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures...The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is in itself a limited one." - Hitler told the Reichstag.

Bush has had numerous quotes similiar to the one above.

Let's see both Hitler and Bush said they would only use the military in the worst disasters. Hitler lied. Will Bush lie to? Most probly yes.

Welcome to the Police State of America.



df1

posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Does everybody support this latter day fascist except UFObeliever and me?

I'm completely baffled. This thread gets no replies while the ATS conspiracy whackos run around whining about Freemasons and owls at Bohemian Grove. Wake up folks the conspiracy is right under your freaking noses.
.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 01:45 AM
link   
I've been ranting and raving on this topic for some time now. It seems so obvious, the possibility for disaster, the probability even. In fact, I've made several posts warning of this, including offering a scenario in which this could happen. Nobody comments though, for some reason.

Actually, I recall recently being at a nearby park where I heard some kid (must've been 14 or 15) utter the words "America is the greatest nation on the planet because it's a democracy. For the people, by the people." I corrected him, informing him officially the nation is a representative-democracy, or more accurately, a republic. I then explained to him how unofficially and truthfully, it's more likely it's a (two party) dictatorship. I even went as far as to explain to him all the terrible things the United States has done and is doing, that isn't generally reported.

Surprisingly he stood there in silence as I lectured to him about the Patriot Act, US nuclear weapons use in Iraq and Afghanistan, NORTHCOM and FEMA, detainment camps, various civil rights abuse, corruption and secrets, the failure of US Congress to properly execute its role, etc etc. What must've been thirty minutes later, I had given him a good idea as to what was truly going on, what America really was. Can you guess as to what his response was? "...but we get to vote," he said. In shock I paused for a moment, then stated "Yes, we get to vote" followed by turning around and walking away. At that moment I realized you can't stop this when it requires a genuine interest in truth and a mental capacity to understand what you're reading or hearing, and of course, people are programmed from early childhood to believe the United States is the greatest (and fairest) nation on the Earth, and will always remain as such.

I figure we stuck our head through the door which brings us to the Information Age, but never walked through that door. We're in the age of paranoia and misplaced trust. What age comes next, you think? The age of tyranny and oppression, perhaps?

[edit on 9/30/2005 by SkyFox2]



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 02:03 AM
link   
This is very chilling. It is as if the era of Natizism is trying to be created again, except more overtly than when Hitler took over. When the day comes for a police state, most people will be dumb struck and only ask questions after the fact.

Sky you are so right. Many can't think for themselves. The Bible written over 2000 years ago perdicted that in the latter days knowledge will increase greatly, but wisdom will be lacking. To think that adults take the attitude such as the kid you talked with really makes me wonder. Will they even think to ask what laws have passed to make a police state possible? Will they ask when and how those laws were passed? Or will they just say ok, if you say so, where do you want me to go and what do you want me to do? As their school training starts to kick in with obeying, not thinking, and never asking.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Having the military activated quickly and coordinated on a federal level, rather than having various state governments and agencies have to communicate with one another to implement the military policing, is a far cry from nazism. Its these calls of nazism that are precisely why no one is really paying attention to these things.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Folks, my suggestion is: don't look at the way the information is being presented here, look instead at the information being presented and give some serious thought to the possible consequences.

I have lived my entire life by a philosophy of plan for the worst, hope for the best, that has made me ready to handle most of the trials and tribulations that have come my way. I suggest that some of you should adopt this philosophy toward the Posse Comitatus Act. Human nature will become involved and sooner or later someone is going to see a way to use (abuse?) any given situation for their gain.

Do I see this as a huge conspiracy with the worst case scenario as the planned result? No.
Do I see this as opening the door for the worst case scenario to happen? YES!
Could I be wrong in my views? Absolutely and I hope I am.


My final thought: Why should we open up the possibility for terrible wrong-doings when we don't need to?



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Heh, I think somebody --forget his name-- once said something like "Learn to shoot and clean a gun." =)



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 12:15 PM
link   
While I agree that amending the Posse Comitatus act is cause for concern, I don't think it will become the next Enabling Act. For one, the German economy was in dire shape with unemployment at an unbelievable high and a crippling debt that was the result of the ending of WWI.

Also, Hitler's party took steps to ensure that they controlled 2/3rds parliament, which is what was required to pass the enabling Act.

While their are issues with the current U.S. economy and government, the shape of these two are no where near the state that the German economy and government were when the enabling Act was passed.

Additionally, communication at the local level is not very reliable, and local officials will have little, if any, knowledge of how to deal with crippling disasters. In times of National emergencies, there must be a uniform response. The best place for this is the Armed Services.

Perhaps a new division of the Armed Services could be created for responding to National emergencies, with careful consideration taken to ensure that the personnel are trained in dealing with civilians.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by DCFusion
Additionally, communication at the local level is not very reliable, and local officials will have little, if any, knowledge of how to deal with crippling disasters. In times of National emergencies, there must be a uniform response. The best place for this is the Armed Services.

Perhaps a new division of the Armed Services could be created for responding to National emergencies, with careful consideration taken to ensure that the personnel are trained in dealing with civilians.


The Posse Comitatus Act is not about the military responding to disasters and providing relief, rescues, etc., it is about using the military in law enforcement. This is why there are many of us who don't like the idea of repealing it. Right now, the U.S. military is prohibited from conducting law enforcement (searches, seizures, arrests, etc).

I found this article that can better explain the ideas behind this than I ever could.

If you read the article, you will see that the government can use the military for domestic situations under a lot of situations. After seeing all the exceptions, the question you should be asking is why do elements of our government feel we need to get rid of the Posse Comitatus Act? It certainly can't be for relief efforts as that is not prohibited.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DCFusion
Additionally, communication at the local level is not very reliable, and local officials will have little, if any, knowledge of how to deal with crippling disasters. In times of National emergencies, there must be a uniform response. The best place for this is the Armed Services.


The armed services are trained to kill. What about the armed services makes them qualified for emergency response in aid of the people? It turns out that the media braying about murder, rape and mayhem in New Orleans was totally overblown. I wonder who planted that message? The result of that message was the govt. was able to justify sending in Blackwater mercenaries and US army troops to "quell the rioters" who did not in fact exist.

Rather than exhibiting any sincere interest in aiding the people the White House sought control over the people. The hurricane and its destruction simply provided the mechanism to bring in the troops. Open your eyes. Remember Bush stated on camera as he took office in his first term that he was opposed to a dictatorship in the U.S. unless he was the dictator. Then he chuckled. It's gonna get worse people. And you're decision to be an apologist makes you an accomplice. Sprechense Deutch? Heil Bush?

[edited to correct quote codes -nygdan]

[edit on 1-10-2005 by Nygdan]



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 02:52 PM
link   
If you haven't already seen it, watch this video taken w/troops in New Orleans after Katrina. What you'll see has nothing to do with providing relief or rescues... and shouldn't have happened, even under the circumstances.

In reality, since Katrina 'Posse Comitatus' has been on life support - just like Terry Schiavo...



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by blackholebrain
If you haven't already seen it, watch this video taken w/troops in New Orleans after Katrina. What you'll see has nothing to do with providing relief or rescues... and shouldn't have happened, even under the circumstances.

In reality, since Katrina 'Posse Comitatus' has been on life support - just like Terry Schiavo...

Great video blackholebrain, thanks for posting that!

While I agree that this has nothing to do with providing relief or rescues and that it shouldn't have happened, this isn't directly involved in the Posse Comitatus Act (how about we all just refer to it as the PCA from here on?
) as it was national guard troops that were working with the police.

Jaryn

By the way, I like your analogy



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 04:29 PM
link   
I wont be concerned of a Police State coming until major steps are taken to disarm the US public. Its happen over and over in history Nazi germany,USSR etc.. and disarming the public is the first step.

There is 630 million some odd guns in the world and 200 million of them are in the US alone. People think the insurgency in Iraq is bad
you would see a whole new meaning of the word.

Since not to long ago we had Clinton's AWB expire and not get renewed I dont see a trend of them trying to take away arms from the people. Infact now we are making steps in the other direction thanks to the death of the AWB.

[edit on 30-9-2005 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I've not seen this posted here before-
Operation Vampire Killer 2000




PURPOSE The Police Officers, National Guardsmen and military officers who have contributed to this special publication are aware of a plan to overthrow the Constitutional Republic of these United States of America. This publication, many months in preparation, was found difficult to compile for many reasons. One important reason was that none of the officers involved were pleased with the duty of bringing to the attention of our colleagues the names and activities of some in our nation who have been in the past (or presently) engaged in what can only be described by law as treason and/or sedition against their own government.


A cop buddy of mine showed me a spiral bound version of this about 7-8 years ago, although I haven't heard much about it since. One of the reasons I can't get too worked up about a Police State is most of the cops I know (and I know quite a few) would be the first ones to fight against something like that. They're just regular ol' good guys who aren't going to be swayed to turn on the populace. And I'm pretty confident the military guys are the same, although I don't personally know as many.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I have known and still know a lot of military (I retired on the first) and the majority wouldn't go along with a police state idea....unless it was very slowly and subtly worked into place and they never realized that's what they were doing.

My fear isn't that the govt will suddenly declare martial law, suspend the constitution and destroy all the citizen's rights. My fear is that they will do all of that by inches and only those of us who are observant/cynical/suspicious/whatever enough to recognize the threat to our freedom will ever notice.

Remember the adage about drop a frog in boiling water, it jumps out - drop a frog in cool water and slowly turn up the heat, you get a cooked frog?
Let's try to keep from becoming a nation of cooked frogs.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Why do you suppose we have Blackwater and other private mercenaries operating with impunity, shooting civilians, in New Orleans? They were brought in by our govt. No one said martial law would succeed in the long term, but there will be many, many deaths in the meantime. However it's no solace to me that so many wacko's out there have semi-automatic weapons in their hovels. Shotguns will work as well and are less dangerous to school children.

It's the creep of the loss of civil (i.e., personal) liberties. It began when the already prepared misnamed Patriot Act was crammed down our throats following 911 or even earlier through various Executive Orders.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 05:42 PM
link   
When did Blackwater shoot civilians in New Orleans?



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
The big picture, we are more than half way, and the next 10 to 15 years will been the turning point. The war on the public started anew in the US after WWII. It has taken 3 major conflicts and a few downturns in the economy for the few to rake in power. The pace isnt speeding up and we will never see a "police state." Its not needed to control people. Car loans, drugs, worring about terrerist, do the trick. The TV and internet only help to misinform and give people unimportant goals and wishes. I dont think the public is blind to the facts but more focused on Walmart and paying gas bills to risk doing anything, feeding the family or protesting? Think how hard it would be for any of us to give up on our lifestyle. Until people care more about the person next to them than some material gain, we wont take back our rights. The things we own just own us in the end. Fear, pride, and being right are the weapons used to control the public's mind. If history repeats, we have much to suffer yet.
Im in Iraq now and its sad to see so many young man ready to die for this war. I repect their will but fear for their future. The fact that over a hundred thousand US soldiers are more than willing to fight this war is only a testament to the power and control gained by the few now. Its not hard to see an army that is more than willing to draw down on the public. Thousands of Iraqis have been killed here for no other reason than to lower the threat to US forces. Im not old enough to talk about the 60s but many who lived than have written about the real threat the army and others saw in the peace and civil rights movements. Not in the goals they seeked but the threat of millions of people gathering and acting as one. In this new world phase, terror attacks have helped the police find more reason to control mass movements. Total control wont feel like the man pionting a gun in your face but the man taking all your free time and money and leave you unable to do much but work to support your families.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 07:14 PM
link   
Excellent post dirk d and take good care of yourself over there.



posted on Sep, 30 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by cargo
When did Blackwater shoot civilians in New Orleans?




A journalist interviewed a Blackwater group and a guy was happy to tell him about a firefight they had with some people above them on a bridge. The guy implicated that they took good care of the people on the bridge. I watched the journalist being interviewed on Democracy Now a couple days back. He was quite upset about it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join