Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (68005)	11/1/2008 9:15:33 AM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

This combination: Forces permanently assigned to NorthCom for the first time ever. And being trained in what sounds like civilian control rather than combat against other military. The president being empowered to send the national guard or other troops into action in the US in conditions as he sees fit. And the ability to declare people resisting them - not excluding US citizens - as unlawful enemy combatants. armytimes.com [The 1st of the 3rd] may be called upon to help with civil unrest and crowd control ... The 1st BCT’s soldiers also will learn how to use “the first ever nonlethal package that the Army has fielded,” 1st BCT commander Col. Roger Cloutier said, referring to crowd and traffic control equipment and nonlethal weapons designed to subdue unruly or dangerous individuals without killing them. The package is for use only in war-zone operations, not for any domestic purpose.... The package includes equipment to stand up a hasty road block; spike strips for slowing, stopping or controlling traffic; shields and batons; and, beanbag bullets. The 2006 defence appropriations bill contained an "Insurrection Act Rider" which allowed the President to order the deployment of troops on US soil in response to any "condition" he might cite. This was repealed, but the President added a signing statement saying he is not bound by the appeal. There's precedent. commondreams.org On October 1, the Pentagon, for the first time ever, dedicated an Army force specifically to NorthCom, which is in charge of securing not some foreign region but the United States of America. ... This marks a change for NorthCom, which was established on October 1, 2002. Its website still says it "has few permanently assigned forces," and that "the command is assigned forces whenever necessary to execute missions, as ordered by the President and the Secretary of Defense." ... Leahy was instrumental in getting Congress to repeal the "Insurrection Act Rider" in the 2006 defense appropriations bill. That rider had given the President sweeping power to use military troops in ways contrary to the Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus Act. The rider authorized the President to have troops patrol our streets in response to disasters, epidemics, and any "condition" he might cite. ... The repeal of the rider was signed by Bush on January 28, though Amy Goodman reports that "Bush attached a signing statement that he did not feel bound by the repeal." And here's the post to which I responded where wonk details precisely his concerns about the insurrection act rider and the powers it grants the President. Message 22923067 I would be concerned by any president claiming these powers: they're pre-requisites and potentially precursors to autocracy. I looked at the posts from the time: people here didn't seem concerned while it was Bush claiming these powers. But maybe the prospect of Obama, often described here as "radical", "liberal", "socialist", "hard left" in "communist" tradition - well, IMO if this is your genuine belief, you should be scared that he's got the tools in law to effectively declare and enforce military law in response to any "condition" he specifies.