Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Posse Comitatus?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Schema Thing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:35 AM
Original message
Posse Comitatus?
Am I safe in calling a freeper on this as bullshit?

There seems to be a right wing inspired meme floating around that the President's hands were tied by Posse Comitatus in NO.

I feel pretty sure in my gut that Posse Comitatus is written in such a way that a President is not in any way prevented from using the military to help his own people out in a natural disaster.

Am I correct about that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
1. As long as the military is not there
to be police, there is nothing to prevent them from engaging in relief efforts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Even in police work as long as actual troops are not used
They can use military aircraft and espionage equipment and weaponry and virtually any military equipment and backup other than personnel.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KharmaTrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
2. Ruby Ridge Is Your Example
Yes, Posse Comitatus is specificially written to prevent U.S. Military forces to be used in a police or military action within the United States. However, that doesn't cover sending in troops to provide support services. Meaning, the 82nd airborne couldn't be flow into NOLA to shoot down looters, but they sure could have been ordered in to airdrop water and food. Meeester boosh had the authority all along and never used it until that Friday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
4. Google is your friend
"SEC. 15. From and after the passage of this act it shall not be lawful to employ any part of the Army of the United States, as a posse comitatus, or otherwise, for the purpose of executing the laws, except in such cases and under such circumstances as such employment of said force may be expressly authorized by the Constitution or by act of Congress;..."

<>

"The Secretary of Defense shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to ensure that any activity (including the provision of any equipment or facility or the assignment or detail of any personnel) under this chapter does not include or permit direct participation by a member of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps in a search, seizure, arrest, or other similar activity unless participation in such activity by such member is otherwise authorized by law."

http://www.dojgov.net/posse_comitatus_act.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. From "Southeast Louisiana Catastrophic Hurricane Plan"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4816218&mesg_id=4816218

Some federal officials have blamed state and local governments for the response, but the plan noted: "The response capabilities and resources of the local jurisdiction ... may be insufficient and quickly overwhelmed."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LincolnMcGrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
6. If that were true, civil rights might never have come to fruition.

In 1963, the governor of Alabama was George Wallace. He had run for and won the office on the slogan of "segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." In June of 1963, a federal court barred any state government interference with the enrollment of two black students, Vivian Malone and James Hood, at the University of Alabama. Despite this order, Governor George Wallace appointed himself the temporary University registrar and stood in the doorway of the administration building to prevent the students from registering. In response, President Kennedy federalized the Alabama National Guard. One hundred guardsman escorted the students to campus and their commander, General Henry Graham, ordered George Wallace to "step aside." Thus were the students registered.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
7. Dupe, n/t
Edited on Mon Sep-19-05 10:49 AM by converted_democrat


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
converted_democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. More or less.....
Edited on Mon Sep-19-05 11:40 AM by converted_democrat
The act bans the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines from participating in arrests, searches, seizure of evidence and other police-type activity on U.S. soil. The Coast Guard and National Guard troops under the control of state governors are excluded from the act.

On edit- It does not stop the military from carrying out surveillance, information gathering, logistical support(aid).

What should really scare the fuck out of anyone is that this is the second time that this administration has tried to get rid of this. The first time was after 9-11, and Sen. Warner brought it up, and said we needed to get rid of it to effectively fight terror, which is bullshit.

Look up the Stafford Act, I'm not all that familiar with it, but I believe that it gives the president the power he seeks, without disturbing the Posse Comitatus Act. Which begs the question, if he has the power under the Stafford Act and the Posse Comitatus Act(remember he can use military for aid), why are they hell bent on getting rid of the Posse Comitatus Act??


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
9. PC prohibits military from being used for police activities; doesn't
prevent them from rendering aid.

Yes, you are free to call bullshit on this.

Here's a nice story from NPR last week that explains.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4851777
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ozymandius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #9
13. This is a good answer.
And allow me to rephrase something (as noted in NPR's piece:

Let's say a soldier sees someone committing a crime. This soldier alerts a civilian police officer that a crime is taking place. The soldier transports the police officer to the crime scene and the officer arrests the suspect. The soldier then transports the officer and the suspect to a police station for processing.

This is not a violation of Posse Comitatus. The soldier may be present at arrest and may facilitate arrest by alerting the civilian police and providing transport. However, the soldier has not directly engaged in apprehending the suspect because a soldier has no power to do so.

The military is readily available to render humanitarian aid. Period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Schema Thing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 10:58 AM
Response to Original message
10. Here's a good link for debunking:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TWiley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
11. Bush violated the possee comatatus act.
He did it when he put the dept of homeland security in charge of FEMA, and placed the Northern Command (homeland securities military force) in charge of response. From an earlier e-mail:

Once again the bushtapo is circumventing the federal laws during a disaster in order to set a precidence. US military personnel are performing domestic police functions in New Orleans while the National Guard (the constitutionaly authorized rescource) is fighting a war in Iraq.

All this is being done by the new Military Branch of the Department of Homeland Security known as "Northern Command" Under the Possee Comatatus Act, the military can only be used for domestic affairs during periods of martial law.

These implications are CHILLING.

Links:

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aanorthcom.htm

NorthCom NOT to be a Domestic Military Police Force
Recognizing growing allegations that Americans' Constitutional rights are being carved away in the name of terror-fighting, Gen. Eberhart emphasized that Northern Command would not function as a homeland police force: No armed patrols, spying, searches and seizures or other roles reserved for civilian law enforcement.

Current federal law forbids the use of military personnel as a domestic police force, except under a declaration of martial law. However, Gen. Eberhart added that he ''won't hesitate to propose changes if we see something we think will tie our hands."

This is a different claim than the one made here:

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0205/022305tdpm2.htm

Adm. Timothy Keating, commander of North American Aerospace and Defense Command at Northern Command, said his division must use available commercial technology as well as advanced devices that incorporate nanotechnology, satellite imagery and detection technology for its various missions.

Keating said Northern Command has "very few assigned resources" but can employ tools from other agencies, such as satellite imagery, bomb-detection dogs, the Coast Guard's fleet or Federal Emergency Management Agency resources.

Their homepage is here:

http://www.northcom.mil/index.cfm

There is an online discussion just beginning here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4519574&mesg_id=4519574



Besides, it has been his reckless spending and brazen restructuring efforts that have caused problems as well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1560351,00....

-snip-
The damage done this time may be also linked to White House cuts in funding for hurricane defence to pay for homeland security terrorist defences.

Lloyd Dumas, professor of political economy and economics at the University of Texas at Dallas, criticised the government's failure to oversee a more efficient evacuation. "It's remarkable that with the massive restructuring of the federal government that took place with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, they don't have more well thought-out plans to evacuate a city like New Orleans," he said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
12. Army/Navy folks may not make actual arrest - and that is it - the end
they can drive a National Guard person to trouble spot who then makes arrest, and they can then drive arrested person back to jail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ridgerunner Donating Member (368 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-19-05 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
14. Ever hear of the Bonus Army?
Same shit, different repuke.

In 1924, a grateful Congress voted to give a bonus to World War I veterans - $1.25 for each day served overseas, $1.00 for each day served in the States. The catch was that payment would not be made until 1945. However, by 1932 the nation had slipped into the dark days of the Depression and the unemployed veterans wanted their money immediately.

In May of that year, some 15,000 veterans, many unemployed and destitute, descended on Washington, D.C. to demand immediate payment of their bonus. They proclaimed themselves the Bonus Expeditionary Force but the public dubbed them the "Bonus Army." Raising ramshackle camps at various places around the city, they waited.

>snip

June 17 was described by a local newspaper as "the tensest day in the capital since the war." The Senate was voting on the bill already passed by the House to immediately give the vets their bonus money. By dusk, 10,000 marchers crowded the Capitol grounds expectantly awaiting the outcome. Walter Waters, leader of the Bonus Expeditionary Force, appeared with bad news. The Senate had defeated the bill by a vote of 62 to 18. The crowd reacted with stunned silence. "Sing America and go back to your billets" he commanded, and they did. A silent "Death March" began in front of the Capitol and lasted until July 17, when Congress adjourned.

A month later, on July 28, Attorney General Mitchell ordered the evacuation of the veterans from all government property, Entrusted with the job, the Washington police met with resistance, shots were fired and two marchers killed. Learning of the shooting at lunch, President Hoover ordered the army to clear out the veterans. Infantry
and cavalry supported by six tanks were dispatched with Chief of Staff General Douglas MacArthur in command. Major Dwight D. Eisenhower served as his liaison with Washington police and Major George Patton led the cavalry.

By 4:45 P.M. the troops were massed on Pennsylvania Ave. below the Capitol. Thousands of Civil Service employees spilled out of work and lined the streets to watch. The veterans, assuming the military display was in their honor, cheered. Suddenly Patton's troopers turned and charged. "Shame, Shame" the spectators cried. Soldiers with fixed bayonets followed, hurling tear gas into the crowd.

more:http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/snprelief4.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC