Yes, but it's all in the name of freedom.

Fuck, and people think that it will all be ok.

The market will collapse... what the hell do they think is going to happen?

Can we hope that our men and women of the uniform will not slaughter us all when we come to exercise our free speech?

With modern training I bet they could get a soldier to do what ever they want.

They tricked em into signing a contract, with out negotiation or representation.

You know what my Grandfather told me when I told him I wanted to be military?

"If you walk out that door, don't come back. There are far better ways of obtaining glory." - He was a Staff SGT Korean War

Maybe he knew something I didn't?

With news like this every day, I get the feeling that we've lost the ability to fight back should our citizens ever turn en masse to (violent) upheaval and overthrow.

What else is there to do when a representative democracy no longer represents the will of its people? What recourse do you have when all other options and rights are being stripped away? No, seriously, I want to know because I don't want to see it come to this seeming last resort.

We can only hope that they will ultimately honor their oath to the Constitution instead of a corrupt administration that could easily abuse their power of the military.

It would be a horrible irony to see our trusted military (which took an oath to defend the law of the land) execute unconstitutional anti-citizen/citizen suppression in such a manner as to harm their fellow countrymen.
Hopefully there will be enough commanders that follow the UCMJ which clearly dictates that it is not only a member of the military's right but however is their duty to not follow illegal orders.

"I,____________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809.ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the "lawful command of his superior officer," 891.ART.91 (2), the "lawful order of a warrant officer", 892.ART.92 (1) the "lawful general order", 892.ART.92 (2) "lawful order". In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ. The moral and legal obligation is to the U.S. Constitution and not to those who would issue unlawful orders, especially if those orders are in direct violation of the Constitution and the UCMJ.

During the Iran-Contra hearings of 1987, Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, a decorated World War II veteran and hero, told Lt. Col. Oliver North that North was breaking his oath when he blindly followed the commands of Ronald Reagan. As Inouye stated, "The uniform code makes it abundantly clear that it must be the Lawful orders of a superior officer. In fact it says, 'Members of the military have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders.' This principle was considered so important that we-we, the government of the United States, proposed that it be internationally applied in the Nuremberg trials." (Bill Moyers, "The Secret Government", Seven Locks Press; also in the PBS 1987 documentary, "The Secret Government: The Constitution in Crisis")

I remember having to study this when I was in boot camp in the USAF so I thought to look this up.

We have to trust our men and women in Uniform - there is little other choice really.

When I swore in, I actually affirmed. Swearing felt like signing a contract in the blood of Christ or something, and back then I was quite religious. [/pointless tangent]

Um.. CP, nice thought, but they've already thought of that. For one thing massive amounts of PTSD and city fighting being told someone could IED them has desensitized soldiers. All they have to be given is some threat of domestic insurgents.

In fact, all enemies foreign and domestic now applies to most citizens. For instance the comment by Kevlar above could put this site and any participants on the list of "domestic terrsts" by a simple decree from a secret court (?) or FBI carnavoer program. It may sound tinfoily, but it is possible under this perversion of the executive branch, DoJ, and DHS.

In case you thought you remembered that old fashioned Constitutional law or even "common law". Bush has amended and renamed the Insurrection Act to say

When the President invokes section 333 of chapter 15, he may involuntarily call to active duty members of the reserve components (not more than 200,000 Select Reserve and Individual Ready Reserve, of whom not more than 30,000 may be Individual Ready Reserve) for up to 365 days to conduct law enforcement activities in a disaster, accident, or catastrophe area and, if such incident involves a terrorist or WMD threat or attack, other response activities.

Here is the actual article being referenced since DemocracyNow did not provide links:

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

This is the first time an active duty unit was given a dedicated assignment, but *not* the first time active duty units have been used on US soil. Also, this is in response to manpower shortages experienced following past disasters, not to go around subduing citizens. It was proposed in the wake of studies showing deficiencies in our response to Katrina. The units being trained are medical, engineering, commo, and the like. This is support stuff, not combat training.

"“If we go in, we’re going in to help American citizens on American soil, to save lives, provide critical life support, help clear debris, restore normalcy and support whatever local agencies need us to do, so it’s kind of a different role,” said Cloutier, who, as the division operations officer on the last rotation, learned of the homeland mission a few months ago while they were still in Iraq."

....

"Should personnel be needed at an earthquake in California, for example, all or part of the brigade could be scrambled there, depending on the extent of the need and the specialties involved."

My unit is being called in on this. I was talking to some old friends about it last week and they are receiving training in areas like treating wounds, cleaning drinking water, clearing road obstructions, and other such things. Nothing has come up at all about arresting people or using force. I agree with Constitutional_Patriot that you have to trust our men and women in uniform, but so far they have not been asked to do anything illegal. The only thing that has changed is that now there is a plan in effect to ensure that there is a trained reserve force ready to send in for disaster assistance. They will be called up to assist local agencies and work with them, not take over. Active duty units have been deployed in the past for disaster relief with no major problems, so unless they actually demonstrate a reason to believe otherwise, I don't see why this is any different.

Hey Canada, you got room for one more?

does this "the Army unit may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control" translate to disaster assistance?

Also, why is it acceptable to you that active duty are being used for domestic duty? Isn't that what the reserves are for? Isn't 1st BCT active duty? Why are all of the reserves overseas and have no equipment to respond to disasters?

You tell me if there is training with rescue vehicles and bulldozers and bridge repair, or if you training is with UAVs, urban theater, and with usage of tasers. WTF are they doing all the taser stuff for if it is to deliver supplies to disaster areas??

Let me guess, you skipped over the part about "new modular package of nonlethal capabilities" and tasers and all the fun toys that came from Iraq.

Tell me where in the chain of command "locals" fit in for active policing or assistance. You do know about National Guard and their role? How about their command structure. Tell me again how an active duty brigade isn't receiving orders under the revised Insurrection Act and how the Governor and/ot ANY LOCALS fit into this?!

You might want to read up on the Constitution about how active duty soldiers are not allow to "help out locals". There was once explicit barring of active duty soldiers running around this country with tasers. Even in a disaster. That's what the National Guard is for.

Someone like MG please tell me how you are taking orders from Mayor Bubblebutt. Tell me how you are allowed to march around downtown Detroit with tasers. To answer the question about soldiers going along willingly with this, here is your proof.

So is there any reputable news source for this? I couldn't find anything in a search and the newspaper and TV media have nothing to say on it. It honestly sounds like a solo anti-government alarmist blip. But if anyone can confirm this story other then the short paragraph on one anti-establishment web site I'd be interested in reading it.

Well, I suppose we need people like joedirt to be paranoid about these kinds of things. You are making most of your statements off of the assumption that everyone involved has ill intent and basically are picturing worst case fictional scenarios. Like soldiers running the streets subduing the general populace. That wasn't the point of the article at all. This is a result of inquiries into Katrina response problems and complaints that the National Guard was not enough for such extreme cases. I'll definitely find out more as time goes on since I still talk to everyone in my old unit, but the possibility of being used for anything other than emergency disaster relief has not even come up with them. In fact, they were told specifically that this was in response to recent failings in hurricane response and that they were getting ready at the time in case any serious problems arose when Ike hit. As far as the Constitution is concerned, if you can point to the article or amendment which covers active duty soldiers helping with disaster relief that would help some. All that I have ever seen regarding that is the 3rd Amendment which prohibits the quartering of soldiers without consent. The Army can be deployed for disaster relief without violating any constitutional rights, and they have done so already in the past.

Good to hear.. I trust the active and reserve military units far more than I would trust a civil paramilitary mercenary group such as Blackwater to handle disaster relief efforts...

However, It was troubling to see the disarming of American citizens by the National Guard and Blackwater in Louisiana after Katrina. The 2nd Amendment should not ever be violated for those that are in their own homes wanting to protect themselves.

I wonder exactly what FEMA is up to these days.. I haven't heard anything positive yet.. just lots of negative - especially from the truck drivers delivering relief. I hear that they (FEMA) still have a major portion of the relief funds for Katrina.

Every one has ill intent until they prove that they do not.

Just like every one is a threat until they prove that they are not.

this comes from the site Army Times.com

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

There is the proof that they are dedicating a whole brigade to Northcom.

To much of a coincidence. This is what the National Guard is for.

I smell bad intentions because that's what I have come to expect from a country that bails out the rich and shits on the lower class.

It is really close to the elections to be pulling this shit, I smell shit and its rolling this way.

Personally I don't want some ass hats chilling at the ballot box with an M-16, and a M1A1 out side.

All hail the North American Union.

Now hear this: This is an unconstitutional act that violates Posse Comitatus.

No Uniformed Troops may serve in a federal law enforcement capacity on state property. Even if they are there for relief. This proposal gives the Federal Army the ability to exercise federal law in, and on state property.

This constitutes a violation of the Constitution of the United States, it is your duty to stand for the law of the land, and uphold your oath.

EDIT: I had to read up on the Constitution, no federal military uniform may act on state property, or its counties. Now because they could be used for crowd control constitutes a violation of the Constitution, therefore violating the Supreme Law of the Land. Not even the executive branch has the right to do that.

>> ^joedirt:
In fact, all enemies foreign and domestic now applies to most citizens. For instance the comment by Kevlar above could put this site and any participants on the list of "domestic terrsts" by a simple decree from a secret court (?) or FBI carnavoer program. It may sound tinfoily, but it is possible under this perversion of the executive branch, DoJ, and DHS.


But, but, I was just speaking in the hypothetical! Have some apple pie!

Ummm... close, but no. The Posse Comitatus Act is a law signed in the late 1800's and is not included in the Constitution. There are also no specific guidlines governing the use of the military in disaster scenarios in the Constitution. Here is the current wording:

"Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1385.html

Posse Comitatus means the power (or force) of the country. This refers to raising a militia. It was originally written to stop the government from grabbing able bodied citizens and forcing them into service, or a posse, for the purpose riot control, keeping the peace, arresting criminals, etc. This was part of English common law at the time. Prior to 1878 when the law was originally signed, it was a regular occurance to see the US Army enforcing law. The law was later amended to prohibit the US Army and Air Force from being used to execute law, but it's original purpose was to prevent local governments from forming a posse, or taking control of the military for purposes of law enforcement. Although it can be overridden in situations expressly authorized by the Constitution, or when authorized by Congress. This has happened many times before in the past in the case of disaster relief. For example, in the 1930's the Army Corp of Engineers performed disaster relief operations and aided communities in preventing and repairing flood damage.
http://www.lrp.usace.army.mil/pm/johnlfpp.htm

I'm still trying to find out more information on exactly how this whole dwell-time mission thing began and who is authorizing what. As of now, the article only references training in case they are called up for support. If it is approved by Congress, then they are legally allowed to deploy. Since this has happened in the past without incident, it is reasonable to assume it could happen again. Going on what I know from talking to the unit, they were ready to deploy for Ike, but were never called. I can only assume this means that since Congress didn't say they should go, they didn't go. It would be illegal if they just started deploying without approval since the changes were repealed from the Insurrection Act in January of 2008. I'm not exactly too happy with the idea myself, but I'm not seeing this as the doomsday scenario other people seem to be visualizing. It looks more like a response to continued reports and complaints about Federal shortcomings in aid during recent natural disasters.

http://www.history.navy.mil/library/online/posse%20comit.htm
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/cc/baker1.html

Well...

The human part of me is worried that our rights are being further trampled by George W. Bush's totalitarian neo-conservative philosophy that crosses the line into 1984-fascism, and that martial law is just around the corner, especially if Obama wins the election.

But...

The inhuman side of me begs for this to happen, just around the time the LHC destroys us all. And if those catastrophes fail, I hope an unseen asteroid or comet hurtles into the Midwest, obliterating civilization.

And I hope God doesn't do bailouts.

Ill echo it again, Non Lethal Modular Package.

The secretary quoted in the article says they they would help with crowd control?

Is that not law enforcement?

"They may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack."

Id Highlight civil unrest but I think we can all ready. That is a violation of the act that you corrected me on.

Do you remember Katrina? Take the guns away from the little old lady in the house, get those "assault rifles" away from those guys guarding that mansion. That was black water and National Guard... now they wanna sneak in some regular soldiers.

Its fine to help with relief, but as soon as one single soldier arrests, confiscates, or any thing like that. Its time to prosecute and sentence.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/09/army_homeland_090708w/

Yes lurch I do like to spin little. But I try to keep it to a minimum.

What I do think is if we bring the brigade home.. let them go home, don't make em flop around on shore duty.

fjbakdbavkf blaaiaisduaaiis sdnervuadf


^because it really doesn't matter what the constitution says if u got an army.

>> ^MINK:
fjbakdbavkf blaaiaisduaaiis sdnervuadf

^because it really doesn't matter what the constitution says if u got an army.


Its a brigade, not an army. And its good odds.

Ill hand out constitutions to every soldier I see.

Oh, its "just a bridgade"... lol. Google what that entails.

Also, I was wrong about the Bush cancelling Posse Comitatus. Apparently, Leahy revoked the crappy Congressional Act with almost no mention in the news, so apparently Governors would still have final say about military assistance in their state.

To any asshats who claim this is about Katrina. It seems odd to me to wait how many years before trying to implement this!! It seems they would have done this in a month, maybe a year if the intent was disaster assistance. And clearly this is not in response to Ike. There is no way the Army would announce this as plans of this magnitude have been under way for months, well before Ike.

It is however nicely timed around the election, and who hasn't known for months about the economy going broke and a run on the banks. Freddie and Fannie have been known to be insolvent since way before last year. That's why all the fat cats have been dumping money into it gambling on gov't bailouts.

And for reference LHC is offline for two months at least.

>> ^joedirt:
To any asshats who claim this is about Katrina. It seems odd to me to wait how many years before trying to implement this!!


Just because it seems odd to you doesn't make everyone else that followed the news an asshat. Here is an article from 2005 when this first came up. It doesn't seem odd to me at all that it would take the government a long time to actually do something they talked about.

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-09/2005-09-21-voa5.cfm?CFID=43835047&CFTOKEN=69876548

Please explain to me the role of Army Corp of Eng and Natl Guard? How is the National Guard not tasked with exactly this? Is it because we sent all of our reservists to a desert to go do the Saudi royals' dirty work?

>> ^NordlichReiter:
Ill echo it again, Non Lethal Modular Package.


Thats the first thing that popped into my mind. I mean SOMEONE has to operate the new "pain ray"s they've developed and tested. The thing was created for domestic use for gods sake and with the millions spent making it.. They just gotta have them ready ya know? I mean "just in case" right? God knows they'd never have to use it unless.... MASS CIVILIAN UNREST occurs. Wonder what they're getting ready for...

It is the public's responsibility to put the fear of GOD in those that hold office and are the same that burn crosses.

Because god does not strike fear into those. If there is a god, she would want the public to stand up for themselves.

*quality

Awarding joedirt with one star point for this contribution to Sift Talk - declared quality by schmawy.