cannabisnews.com: Use of Military for Civilian Policing is Dangerous





Use of Military for Civilian Policing is Dangerous
Posted by CN Staff on July 23, 2002 at 12:58:34 PT
By Gene Healy
Source: Chicago Tribune 
Soldiers are trained to kill; policemen, to use force as a last resort. Accordingly, there's a deep-rooted American hostility to the idea of using the military for domestic law enforcement. But all that may be about to change. After repeatedly denying that they plan to undermine or alter the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which makes it a criminal offense to use U.S. military forces "to execute the laws," Bush administration officials are starting to change their tune. 
The national strategy for homeland security, which the administration released on July 16, suggests that the time may have come to weaken the protections provided by the Act. As it's phrased in the national strategy proposal, "the threat of catastrophic terrorism requires a thorough review of the laws permitting the military to act within the United States."But does it? Current law hardly hamstrings the military with regard to helping fight terrorism on the home front. The Posse Comitatus Act is riddled with exceptions. Federal law already provides that in the event of an emergency situation involving a possible terrorist attack with a weapon of mass destruction, the Department of Defense can assist civilian authorities with material, expertise, and personnel. Unsatisfied with the broad authority federal statutes already provide it, the Bush administration seems to be looking at something closer to the normalization of military law enforcement.That is a dangerous idea and one that's unlikely to make us any safer from terrorist attacks. The Army is a blunt instrument: effective for destroying enemy troops en masse, but ill-suited to the fight on the home front, which requires subtler investigative and preventative skills. Many of the uses of troops for domestic security after Sept. 11 appear ill-adapted to the threats we actually face. For instance, authorities in Florida stationed a tank outside of Miami International Airport last Thanksgiving, as if the next terror attack would come in the form of an Al Qaeda mechanized column, rather than a shoe-bomb or a smuggled box cutter.And the bluntness of the military instrument makes its use all the more dangerous within our borders. More widespread use of military personnel to do police work would do little to protect us from Al Qaeda; but it would increase the chances of collateral damage: innocent American citizens harmed by those who are supposed to protect them. From suppression of strikers in the 19th Century, to the deaths at Kent State, to the 1997 Marine Corps killing of an American high school student at the Mexican border, deviation from our tradition of civilian law enforcement has had grave consequences throughout American history.The problem is not, despite what the administration seems to think, that the legal barriers to the militarization of law enforcement are too high, but that they're far too low. In 1981 Congress weakened the Posse Comitatus Act substantially to allow military involvement in the war on drugs. Misuse of the "drug exceptions" to the act helped lead to the worst disaster in U.S. law enforcement history--the 1993 tragedy in Waco, Texas. Federal law-enforcement authorities used false allegations of methamphetamine trafficking by the Branch Davidians to obtain military hardware and personnel. Indeed, it was U.S. Army Delta Force commanders who advised federal agents to launch a tank assault against the Branch Davidians' dwellings. The result was more than 80 dead, including 27 children. If anything needs review and revision, it's the ill-considered exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act.Instead, in its new National Strategy for Homeland Security, the administration threatens to weaken the act. It's a threat that Congress ought to resist. Normalization of military law enforcement would have grave consequences for our political culture. We do not want to become a society where armed soldiers patrolling the streets are part of everyday life. The America we're fighting to preserve is a free, democratic republic--not a banana republic.Gene Healy is a senior editor at Cato Institute.Source: Chicago Tribune (IL)Author: Gene HealyPublished: July 22, 2002Copyright: 2002 Chicago Tribune CompanyContact: ctc-TribLetter Tribune.comWebsite: http://www.chicagotribune.com/Related Articles & Web Site:Cato Institutehttp://www.cato.org/Soldiers at US Border Posts To Be Armed http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread12371.shtmlToo Many Federal Cops http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread11501.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #13 posted by Industrial Strength on July 24, 2002 at 09:21:20 PT
the polls
The invasion of Iraq will most likely insure another four years of this administration. If they time it right, it will undoubtedly get them another four. Uh oh.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by Zero_G on July 24, 2002 at 09:00:10 PT
Paranoia strikes deep. 
Paranoia strikes deep. Into your life it will creep.
It starts when you're always afraid. Step outta line, the man come and take you away.The war against Iraq hasen't ended since the reign of George I, to wit, the enforcement of the so-called No-Fly zones which have not been approved by the U.N. security council.[...] French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine has called on Washington to redefine its policy on Iraq and criticised the recent US-British airstrikes on Baghdad as having no legal basis in international law. "We have believed for a long time that there is no basis in international law for this type of bombing," Mr Vedrine has said. Other countries, notably China and Russia, have condemned the no-fly zones as a violation of Iraqi sovereignty, and they insist there is no backing for the policy under international law or UN resolutions. [...]andSince UN weapons inspectors withdrew from Iraq shortly before a three-day US-UK bombardment in late 1998 known as Operation Desert Fox, the two Western powers have kept up their attacks whenever Iraqi air defences have locked onto aircraft patrolling the no-fly zones. Baghdad says more than 300 civilians have died in these attacks, with the some of the most serious incidents being: 2001 20 January: Six killed in raid in southern Iraq2000 6 April: 14 civilians killed and 19 wounded199928 July: Eight killed and 26 injured in northern Iraq18 July: 14 civilians killed in raid on southern Iraq13 May: 12 killed when planes hit residential area in the north of the country28 February: Oil exports cut after attack damages pipeline in Mosul 25 January: About 20 dead in attacks on Basorah region
The US and British air forces have disputed some of these figures, and insist they never target civilian areas. However, the raids have provided ammunition for Iraqi efforts to garner support for an end to its international isolation. excerpt from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1175950.stmAlso, on the posse comitatus issue, we must consider the continuing militarization of the civilian police forces in the U.S. Not only the actual use of military forces on the Continental U.S., (not the Homeland, with all the Third Reich connotations associated with that term...) but, the use of military weapons, training and tactics by police forces. SWAT teams used to effect arrests of grow ops, rubber bullets used against protesters at both major parties political conventions in 2000 and in Seattle (and internationally).What if you knew her - found her dead on the floor.How can you run when you know? I remember hearing the news of Kent State, that day is burned in my brain, as I was a member of the Student Mobilization Committee to End the War, and N.P.A.C. (National Peace Action Coalition).It ain't paranoia when the guns are pointing your way... 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by Nuevo Mexican on July 24, 2002 at 00:55:30 PT
Boston Globe demands change in Administration...
basically, 
great comments everyone!Well, C-news posters! The ship is going down this full moon and it'll be wild from here on as we all know what happens next, Martial law, no elections, Iraq disaster guaranteed, so then what? It falls apart before you can say 'ENRON!" The Iraq invasion already happening on the news brief, as in flyovers blah, blah, blah....
Read this brief article:Questions on Bush's War on Iraq 
by James Carroll http://www.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=193983&group=webcast
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by qqqq on July 23, 2002 at 20:01:38 PT
.....Doc Zombie...
"Check out FOX's Ultra-Fascist hand over heart superimposed on a flag pic too... Stomach-churning lap-dog patriotism.      They make me want to write open letters to the world asking them not to judge americans by FOX's awful fascism."
..yup...
 
.....It is quite disturbing to think about how the world judges America,and Americans..,,think about all the people who believe that Americans elected Bush!..it's rather embarassing..Dubya is like some inbred hillbilly..he is cut from the same cloth as Dan Quayle..I have made it a hobby to collect his speeches,,and it's really hard for me to believe,that there are people out there who actually think he's presidentchul muteeriul.,,at least Bill Clinton had a 3 digit IQ.
........"Stomach-churning lap-dog patriotism." ...that's a really polite way of putting it,,..I am a hardcore Patriot,and I love my country,,.....but I could have easily become a world class ,tournament grade,,projectile power-barf Champion,,when the big white,red and blue "God bless america" fad happened after 9/11..ignoramus people bought into an absurd ad campaign,,and were fooled into thinking that an "American patriot",is someone who blindly supports the GOVERNMENT,and walks around with flags stuck everywhwere,,,struttin' around waving old glory from their asses......Prior to 9/11 they had no real concept of what it means to be "patriotic". . .......................if you look at it from a "ruling government" point of view,it's kinda like you could imagine the kingpins of the empire,,,a week or two after 9/11,,saying,"it worked perfectly!".......There was quite an immediate,and definite media indoctrination frenzy that specificly encouraged this sickening "united we stand / god bless america" shit,that made it seem that America had alot to do with its government leaders and rulers..... The court appointed pResidunt was promoted like some subliminal Nike/AOL/Gatorade commercial.. Blind allegiance was almost mandatory,,,,it was "expected",,and the media faithfully portrayed the cultlike sham,of a new "united" america....Then there was the strangely immediate identification,and villification of the "enemy". ... ...and then ,,somehow,,there was no question about bombing the shit out of Afghanistan...It was as if it was a 'done deal'...I couldn't believe it..........
 ......[as usual,,I've wandered off into another mutant fillibuster..]......oh yeah,,now I remember,,I was talking about championship power barfing,,and I'm sorry,,but "god bless america" signs,make me GAG like bobbin' for turds underneath an outhouse at the circus!..(?)
 ......I guess I have said enuff...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on July 23, 2002 at 17:21:48 PT
Coorestions
"Fertizer" should have said fertilizer.and the 7th word in the 3rd line of post #5 should read "pre-regurgitated". I'm sure of it .
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on July 23, 2002 at 17:17:58 PT
Sample the strength of this fertizer
Theres a plan to break up the 9th circut court??They are the ones that issued the much-bally-hooed "pledge ruling".
The size of the court is the main issue for some. But others say the pledge decision is an example of the wacky activism taking place on the court. *******
The pledge issue demonstrates the fundamental problem of the court, said Al Lance, attorney general for the state of Idaho. "Attorneys general must be able to advise their governors, their legislators, their citizens, as to the status of the law. In the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals at the present time, that can be best facilitated with a Ouija board and not a law library," he said.Wacky. Ouija Board. Anytime something difficult to understand happenes its "wacky", if "they" dont like it.Check out FOX's Ultra-Fascist hand over heart superimposed on a flag pic too... Stomach-churning lap-dog patriotism.They make me want to write open letters to the world asking them not to judge americans by FOX's awful fascism.
House Panel Mulls Dividing 9th Circuit Court
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by qqqq on July 23, 2002 at 15:28:23 PT
...I remember....
..back when Ashcroft was undergoing the "review",before he was officially appointed AG...I thought, ;"..that freak will never make it.."......then,,there was John Walters,,,and I thought,...;.."..No way!.."...... ..then,,there was the usa/patriot act,,and I thought,,,, "..this is way too absurd to ever become law!..."..... ...now,,,,there is the new homeland security department,,and all the grotesque shit that is included like TIPS,,and domestic military police........ This is a Hellbound Gravy Train,,,and it's gonna Highball right through............Dubya and his henchmen are trying to JAM this thing thru before the end of this session...the whole thing is very reminiscent of the fucking USA/PATRIOT act,,which was shafted through ,with no real debate,or discussion....
 
...There is no stopping this Evil empire!..They are going to pretend everythings OK until the end!...The economic meltdown will not even slow them down,,as they attempt to reassure investors.....the whole scam is going to be like a huge Enron shell game,,where all of a sudden,,alot of people who thought they were "haves",,will find themselves down here with us "have-nots".........it aint gonna be pretty!
 
...shit...I remember NAFTA,and GATT,,and thinking that they would never pass,,then,at the eleventh hour,ol' slick Willie came up with the proper irresistable 'ho's',,to sneak it thru. 
 ..It's hard to believe that Ron Paul is a Republican..he is a rare voice of sanity from within the empire!.this is a good article.
http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul37.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by krutch on July 23, 2002 at 15:10:12 PT:
Nice Work by Gene Healy
He illustrates nicely how the government abused this power by lying about drug manufacturing in Waco. Why should we trust them? Our freedoms have been eroded enough. They have failed to use the military effectively to combat terrorism on foreign soil. Why should we allow it on US soil?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by BGreen on July 23, 2002 at 14:51:57 PT
As evil as this administration is ...
They are quickly losing support. Although the polls still give the shrub a 67% approval rating, the polls asking the question of whether he will be reelected are dropping. Every time shrub opens his mouth without regurgitating a pre-written speech, he keeps contradicting himself. His administration condemned Israel's bombing of innocent children, yet defended the killing of Afghani children because, as Ari Fleischer said, those were "errant bombs," and we didn't "mean" to kill them, but the Israeli's "intentionally" killed innocent kids.So, as long as the military "accidently" kills innocent citizens, it's A-OK with this administration. Do we want that on OUR soil?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by qqqq on July 23, 2002 at 14:47:18 PT
..defining "terrorism"...
...Here is the definition of terrorism,, from the US government subcommitee of the House..... this is not a joke!
 
 
"        The report presented the subcommittee's definition of terrorism.        "Terrorism is the illegitimate, premediated use of politically motivated violence or the threat of violence by a subnational
        group against persons or property with the intent to coerce a government by instilling fear among the populace," the
        report said."
 
 
....go ahead and read it a few times,,and see what you think..........
 
....hey phasetheory,,;does anything about this 'official' definition of terrorism bother you?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on July 23, 2002 at 14:30:19 PT:
Thank you
I've been warning CNews readers about this dangerous drift to try to meld police and military functions together for many years. Unfortunately, most Americans are too busy scratching themselves and saying "Baa-aah!" to notice what the War on (Some) Drugs has permited to take place...the very same melding. Cops that behave like shock troops of some foreign invading power. The US Marines shooting Esequiel Hernandez on the Texas border...after they had stalked him for at least a half hour and let him bleed white before they got medical attention for him. "Preserve and protect", my hirsute gluteus maximii.When this is combined with Fed 'grants' (how kind of them to be so charitable with our tax dollars!) to local law enforcement agencies (who would normally be controlled through budgetary restraints; again, with our tax dollars. ..don't they have enough of our hard earned and heavilly taxed 'daily bread'?) with the understanding that any more monies would be dependent upon their 'cooperation' in assisting Feds in Fed cases, and you have a very poisonous brew mixing here. I'm glad someone from CATO isn't asleep at the switch.Pity is, the very people who need to read this...think there's nothing wrong with fusing police and military together. Much more efficient and economical, don't you see? It'll make the next step that much easier...you'll be used to the idea, and won't mind when Congress and the Senate are abolished in the interests of 'efficiency and economy' and die Stadt reigns supreme.Given the Bush family's predilection for supporting fascist regimes (Prescott Bush and Hitler had many of the same ideas...and financial planners) can we blame them for finally succumbing to the siren song of empire and desire one of their very own?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by VitaminT on July 23, 2002 at 14:06:04 PT
Why indeed!
What benefit could the military possibly provide?We have all the cops we could ever need, they're simply being used for the wrong purposes. I'm not so troubled by the National Guard patroling airports but the value of that was 99.9% psychological. Only that had a positive impact on the psyche of travellers, if they were in the streets for weeks on end it would eventually have the same sort of effect only negative. And just wait until some freaked out squad of soldiers lose their collective head and mow down a group of civilians a la "4 dead in O-high-O!" What then? This leaves out entirely the possibility that those forces might be used for some nefarious purpose! Remember John Ashcroft is the Attorney General!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by xxdr_zombiexx on July 23, 2002 at 13:30:49 PT
Safe and Secure
This is no longer raving survivalist paranoia? Tin Soldiers and Rumsfied comin?Why do we need soldiers - our own family members - stationed right in our towns and cities to keep an eye on us? We were already attacked. The cows have left the barn. It's too late to protect them.I think it high time we start talking about limiting the powers of GW Bush, not expanding. Impeachment is nice but leads nowhere. President Cheney has a terrible ring to it.Homeland Security should cease to go forward. Combined witht the USA PATRIOT act I think we can kiss 2004 elections goodbye. Perhpas even the 2002, given that Bush wants the legislation on his desk (The Thief Executive) before September 11th. This is to make maximum value of the oppresive patriotism outburst they will be manipulating for the 1 year anniversary of the attacks. And there is NOTHING these soldiers can do to stop the sorts of attacks the fanatical Ones will attempt. Look at Isreal - they are fully militarized and they arent safe.Safe is a relative term , a moving target, and never comes with a guarantee. Freedom is Unsafe. "Safe and Secure" is a euphamism for "Prisoner in your Own Land.Embrace the danger of Freedom.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment