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.

 

Defense Department Seeks Legal Authority to Deploy Reservists onto American Streets

page: 1
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Defense Department Seeks Legal Authority to Deploy Reservists onto American Streets


occupycorporatism.com

...if the Defense Department has their way, a new authorization act will give them the power to order the armed forces to be used against the American public.

Air Force reservists are slated to be the new response team for domestic disturbances. Disseminated from Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) and other reserve agencies, these men and women could be called to be first response to natural disasters within the US. The legislation would extend mobilizations for indeterminate periods of time.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:22 PM
link   
The US needs to make it clear if it is going to tolerate armed forces openly patrolling its streets.

Up until now, the answer given in history has always been a resounding "no." The so-called Posse Comitatus Act is a longstanding piece of legislation that expressly forbids the deployment of troops on US soil (although vague wording does make the act a bit ambiguious in terms of "circumstances" where exceptions are permitted). If Americans pass the new measure, it will represent a profound change in the way we see both the military and what it means for citizens to be "free" in a society policed by the military.

Quite simply, in passing or defeating this bill, America is deciding what kind of a long-term society it wants to be. Will this join the long list of "firsts" in curtailing rights that we've seen as a steady march in the post 9-11 years?

Personally, I'd have no problem with, say, the National Guard patrolling the border areas and escorting illegals back in the direction they came from. There are emergency situations in which military deployment may be beneficial, too. What I do have a problem with, specifically, is the very real possibility of cities everywhere becoming home to mini-TSA-style nodes...unreasonable search and seizure, troops everywhere, travel flow snarled because of "checkpoints." Then there is the problem of jurisdictional overlap; is a given problem to be dealt with by the local police, or the deployed airforce, creating bureaucratic nightmares..any law with the words "indefinite deployment" ought to be an eyebrow-archer at the very least.

And beyond the petty hassles and humiations, the end to truly free movement looms as Lockdown America emerges, deciding it values "security" over liberty. Just one more notch upwards on the stove dial for the slow frog boil of vanishing rights.

occupycorporatism.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 5/27/2012 by silent thunder because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
National Guard have been used within the US during natural disasters for a long time. Haven't Reservists been called up to, like durring Katrina? Or am I mistaken?







For these forces to be used, the law specifies that the president must declare an emergency or disaster, and a state governor must request the assistance.

Under the new law, some aspects of disaster relief will not change. Civil authorities will remain the first responders. Moreover, if military support is needed, National Guard forces will be the first to step in when called by their state governor. However, if a situation also demands a federal response, reserve forces can step in to assist for up to 120 days.


www.afrc.af.mil...
edit on 27-5-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:28 PM
link   
That would really be a neat trick considering the sheer numbers of civilians and the majority of troops over seas. Actually that makes the best case to keep defense spending where it is. If they are over seas they can't be used here.

Sorry and the op gives a new perspective of Biden's comments to prepare for new threats.


edit on 27-5-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


The article states "Defense Department has their way, a new authorization act will give them the power to order the armed forces to be used against the American public." This implies quelling rebellion and such, not passing out bandaids after a hurricane. No doubt the latter rationale would always be given, though. The new law makes deployement at the local level possible, rather than requiring an act of congress. "Indefinite" deployment is also a new thing in terms of US troops on US soil. It also seems to stress the central role of Air Force reservists in the new measures.


edit on 5/27/2012 by silent thunder because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


The article states "Defense Department has their way, a new authorization act will give them the power to order the armed forces to be used against the American public."



Right. But that's just the author's own speculation. I see nothing in the source article he cites that makes any mention of that sort of thing at all. It says it will still be run at the State level.




The new law makes deployement at the local level possible, rather than requiring an act of congress.


Pardon my ignorance. Is an act of congress required to call in reservists during a natural disaster?
edit on 27-5-2012 by stanguilles7 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
The national guard can be activated by a call from any governor the op is clearly different.

Second.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder

Personally, I'd have no problem with, say, the National Guard patrolling the border areas and escorting illegals back in the direction they came from. There are emergency situations in which military deployment may be beneficial, too.


I would encourage you to read this.

You don't let it start, for any reason at all. Fascists always operate by asking for special exemptions. They always make out that it will only be for "emergencies." The only reason why they do that is because they know that that is something which non-psychopaths will be more willing to accept. Their real desire is to have such things become entirely normal, standard operating procedure.

Fascism cannot be given a millimetre. It cannot be permitted to have its' way, no matter what the special case or unique circumstances it cites as justification. Once it gets what it wants, the public has no means of forcing relinquishment.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder

Defense Department Seeks Legal Authority to Deploy Reservists onto American Streets


occupycorporatism.com

...if the Defense Department has their way, a new authorization act will give them the power to order the armed forces to be used against the American public.

Air Force reservists are slated to be the new response team for domestic disturbances. Disseminated from Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) and other reserve agencies, these men and women could be called to be first response to natural disasters within the US. The legislation would extend mobilizations for indeterminate periods of time.
(visit the link for the full news article)



I saw the publication and have many questions starting with that rags "agenda" The Poise Comitatus forbids the use of troops for any reason other to aid in the services of such actions as appropriate and the same as the National Guard. Funny, I don't see to many people having a s*** fit over the Guard showing up after their house has turned there house into match sticks...



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by stanguilles7
Pardon my ignorance. Is an act of congress required to call in reservists during a natural disaster?


Here's another piece that may be of some help clearing things up:


The new defense authorization act all but erases decades of U.S. government compliance with the letter and the spirit of the Posse Comitatus Act 1878, a law that prohibits the use of the U.S. military to perform law enforcement functions within the United States, according to police officials and others opposed to the militarizing of American law enforcement.

Provisions in the new authorization act allow military reservists – Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines – to be called to duty and deployed in the event of a natural disaster or other emergency within the homeland, as well as mobilization of reserve units to support counterterrorism and security missions overseas, according to the American Forces Press Service’s Donna Miles.

“Except for a crisis involving a weapon of mass destruction, the reserves historically have been prohibited from providing a homeland disaster response,” Army Lt. General Jack C. Stultz, the Army Reserve chief, told reporters on Friday.

Originally, such deployments were the duty of National Guard, which are under the control of state governors who would call in guardsman as needed to support civil police forces, fire departments and other emergency personnel.

However, when Hurricane Katrina fiercely struck the Gulf Coast in 2005, especially the city of New Orleans, active-duty service members became “the federal default force,” according to Miles.

But the reason for that deployment was the inability of Louisiana’s governor and New Orleans’ mayor to command and control the police and emergency responders. Now the U.S. Congress and the Obama Administration have acquired the authority to use military resources in such emergencies, including deploying soldiers during an insurrection.

More at source:
johnmalcolm.me...



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Federal military have always been able to be deployed in the USA to support civilian disaster relief, and this act does nothing except allow reservists to join those efforts, which has not been allowed until now:


Air Force reservists are slated to be the new response team for domestic disturbances. Disseminated from Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) and other reserve agencies, these men and women could be called to be first response to natural disasters within the US.


and


Armed Forces chiefs claim that there were reserve-component Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines who were close at hand with the capabilities needed, but they didn’t have the authority to act,” said Army Lt. Gen. Jack C. Stultz, chief of Army Reserve. “Finally, we got the law changed. This new legislation says that now we can use Title 10 reserves.”

Without a declaration of emergency or disaster from the President, these armed forces could not act. With this new ability, they can . . . whenever and for whatever purpose they are ordered to.

The law specifies that local law enforcement is still mandated to provide initial response; yet if needed, the National Guard will become the first step requested by a state governor.


It's right there in the article from the OP!
edit on 27-5-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Thats your source? Read any of the stuff that guy writes and I'd be pissed off to. But if true, I will never the less do some research and respond. Somehow I don't exactly take this guy as credible, never hurts to check facts though... Believe me, I will.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


But, again, they are still under the authority of the State, not the Fed. Your source even says so.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by stanguilles7
 


Federal troops can only be released to any State with permission, and that leaves tracks, noise.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Federal military have always been able to be deployed in the USA to support civilian disaster relief


There has been no law enforcement function by US military on US soil under the Posse Comitatus act. Disaster relief support by the National Guard is one thing; troops of Army, Navy, Marine, and Air Force Reservists deployed indefinitely on domestic soil on a law-enforcing mission (i.e., "maintaining order" and quelling insurrection, not passing out lunch-box meals to kindergarten kids) is something altogether new to the American experience, disaster or no disaster.
edit on 5/27/2012 by silent thunder because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Wasn't posse com 'out written' by new law rushed through congress only recently?

As disaster relief..I don't see why they wouldn't be useful..we use our military all the time for floods and fires etc...but their mandate is very specific and doesn't involve policing at all...so any new law would have to be 100% guaranteed to only be that - disaster - more specifically, natural disaster relief.


Ro



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rosha
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Wasn't posse com 'out written' by new law rushed through congress only recently?

As disaster relief..I don't see why they wouldn't be useful..we use our military all the time for floods and fires etc...but their mandate is very specific and doesn't involve policing at all...so any new law would have to be 100% guaranteed to only be that - disaster - more specifically, natural disaster relief.


Ro


The indefinite renewal of deployment clause is worrisome. There is a sense that reservists are only going to be deployed in emergencies under watchful eyes and steady hands. But its unnerving becuase history shows that laws like this tend to get abused. Measures like this tend to serve as just another brick in the wall of building a police state.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
The National Guard has already been used by DHS to help on the Mexican Border I've known a few of them that have gone down there... they were not activated by a State Governor either, but by a request of the Dept of Homeland Security, so I'm not quite sure where this is going, they seem to already have that power, maybe this is just an air of making it seem legitimate?



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by vkey08
 


I see the new law as extending the mandate of the non-National-Guard branches on US soil. Traditionally, while the National Guard had some role in emergencies, the other branches and their reservists would NOT be deployed in an emergency unless it was seen to involve something like weapons of mass districtuction. Now this seeks closer domestic involvement of the other branches of the military, through use of reservists. It's an attempt to legitimize wider on-soil law enforcement action by non-National Guard troops - Something the US has ALWAYS balked at in the past. Balk no more, I guess.



posted on May, 27 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by silent thunder

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Federal military have always been able to be deployed in the USA to support civilian disaster relief


There has been no law enforcement function by US military on US soil under the Posse Comitatus act. Disaster relief support by the National Guard is one thing; troops of Army, Navy, Marine, and Air Force Reservists deployed indefinitely on domestic soil on a law-enforcing mission .


This says nothing about 'indefinite deployment'. The article specifically states 120 day deployments.

Also, Posse Comitatus doesnt cover the Marines, or the Navy.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join