Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Should Consider Giving Military Arrest Powers, Ridge Says
Bloomberg.com ^ | 7/21/02 | Alex Canizares

Posted on 07/21/2002 9:38:40 AM PDT by GeneD

Edited on 07/19/2004 2:10:08 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Washington, July 21 (Bloomberg) -- The government should consider reversing a more than a century of tradition and law to give the military authority to make arrests and fire their weapons on U.S. soil in the event of a terrorist attack, Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said.


(Excerpt) Read more at quote.bloomberg.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; defensedepartment; dod; donaldrumsfeld; homelandsecurity; joebiden; possecomitatusact; terrorism; tomridge; usmilitary; vetscor
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-223 next last

1 posted on 07/21/2002 9:38:41 AM PDT by GeneD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GeneD
Whoa here hoss.... Arrest powers???? Never....Arrest Ridge for not caring a damn about individual freedom and the constitution. We already have to many Federal cowboys with the power of arrest

This is no longer a citizen army, it is a "professional" army. I want no part of them enforcing the law...Never...

2 posted on 07/21/2002 9:43:15 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
"Let's just open the door a crack and see if anyone hollers."

If Joe Biden -- or any Democrat for that matter -- is in favor of this kind of assault on our civil liberties, then it should be setting off alarms all over Conservative-dom.

This is probably the most dangerous period in American history. It is the turning point at which the government finally had the courage to admit that it is planning war on its own citizens. If anyone if naive enough to believe that this is about terrorism, don't buy a watch in New York City.

Any attempt to revise Posse Comitatus should be met with howls of rage and a quiet determination to resist at all costs. It means that "working within the system" just got to be a much narrower option.

Note to Mr. Ridge: The terrorists are OUTSIDE this country, and the military is not supposed to be deployed domestically. We already have a POLICE force. How can you leave our borders wide open to every swarthy bomb-thrower, then demand the right to march soldiers up and down our town square to "protect" us? Why not stop the rats before they get off the ship? Because you, sir, are a liar and a tool of tyrants.

3 posted on 07/21/2002 9:52:02 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
I could see support for a constitutional amendment to PROHIBIT use of the United States Armed Forces in domestic situations.

This is frightening on an Orwellian scale.

4 posted on 07/21/2002 9:55:28 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
Can't the President declare Martial Law in some situations which would override the Posse Comitatus Act?
5 posted on 07/21/2002 9:55:32 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
The government should consider reversing a more than a century of tradition and law to give the military authority to make arrests and fire their weapons on U.S. soil in the event of a terrorist attack, Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said.

Uh... No.

6 posted on 07/21/2002 9:56:19 AM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Iron

We are being sold down the river by republicans, with the aid of democrats that would never have dared pull this one off. The republican sheep better wake up and smell the gun powder. Ridge should be given the boot now.

The Gestapo moves closer to being every day and the citizens are asleep.

7 posted on 07/21/2002 9:57:30 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
I don't like the sound of this......
8 posted on 07/21/2002 9:58:00 AM PDT by proudofthesouth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
nope its a bad idea,time to pop that trial balloon
9 posted on 07/21/2002 9:58:00 AM PDT by linn37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
That was an asinine thing to say "giving soldiers arrest powers".

They already have the ability to detain until Law Enforcement arrives. And if the Law Enforcment officers think he/or she is a terrorist then he/or she could be transferred back to Military authority in order to go before a military tribunal.

Some of these Conservative politicians need to think before they speak......all that statement is going to do is piss off Liberals and Conservatives. Ridge screwed up saying something like that.....that in the end is a stupid solution to anything.

10 posted on 07/21/2002 9:58:44 AM PDT by VaBthang4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
I could see support for a constitutional amendment to PROHIBIT use of the United States Armed Forces in domestic situations.

This would have been a good idea about 20 years ago .... now? Never happen.

America is dead .... the police state curtains are descending.

11 posted on 07/21/2002 9:59:22 AM PDT by Centurion2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
Any body who believes this power would only be used against foriegn terrorists and not US Citizens please signify by smashing your head through your monitor!!!!

Its OK. You aren't using it anyway.

12 posted on 07/21/2002 9:59:30 AM PDT by Ahban
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
"then it should be setting off alarms all over Conservative-dom. "

It won't. After all, it's just in the interest of keeping us safe. </sarcasm off>

13 posted on 07/21/2002 9:59:36 AM PDT by Kerberos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
March along, single file, "citizen" and be prepared to 'show your papers' as required...
14 posted on 07/21/2002 10:01:12 AM PDT by RCW2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
This will not stand. It's foolhardy and dangerous.
15 posted on 07/21/2002 10:01:49 AM PDT by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz
Fred...

I would add it is "dictatorial"...

16 posted on 07/21/2002 10:03:38 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
This is a very bad idea.

The military should never be used for domestic law enforcement.

17 posted on 07/21/2002 10:04:34 AM PDT by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
This is no longer a citizen army, it is a "professional" army. I want no part of them enforcing the law...Never...

Just wait until the army consists of felons, illiterates, and foreigners.

They know that most of the American officers and senior enlisted men will support the US Constitution, so they will send them off to Timbuktu, while they bring in the Hessians.

18 posted on 07/21/2002 10:09:44 AM PDT by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
Gene

Bush better refute this one real quick as it will be another nail in his re-election coffin. He better disown this bastard child real quick. Even better take Ridge to the woodshed or fire the man.

19 posted on 07/21/2002 10:09:47 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne; Abundy; dirtboy; Tancredo Fan; agrandis; Demidog

Reichstag Bump..

20 posted on 07/21/2002 10:10:45 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeneD; cynicom; IronJack; Rebelbase; Prodigal Son; proudofthesouth; linn37; VaBthang4; ...
Ok. How do you reconcile that you were willing to use military forces to augment "police" on our borders? Or the National Guardsmen at the airports? Or the Coast Guard in our ports?

This says that you are not completely aginst using the military domestically.

21 posted on 07/21/2002 10:14:32 AM PDT by NetValue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
Bush better refute this one real quick as it will be another nail in his re-election coffin. He better disown this bastard child real quick. Even better take Ridge to the woodshed or fire the man.

Bush hasn't a clue. I doubt he has even read the US Constitution. He certainly holds no allegiance to it, based on his actions in office.

He is simply a puppet for the NWO tyrants.

22 posted on 07/21/2002 10:15:59 AM PDT by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
WHAT? WHAT?

You don't trust the military? this is "war" you know.. You bunch of liberal pansies. It's us or the enemy. Dubya can be trusted with these powers, he's our king! If you aren't a terrorist, then you have nothing to fear! We all have to give up some "liberties" to be safe you know!

(/Devils Advocate)

I am amazed at the short sightedness in the shadow of 9/11..

It's shocking.

23 posted on 07/21/2002 10:16:34 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NetValue
Net...

Securing our national borders is already in the constitution. That does not give them arrest powers at large at someone elses discretion.
24 posted on 07/21/2002 10:16:47 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NetValue

Not against American citizens.. That's the difference.

25 posted on 07/21/2002 10:17:59 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
The government should consider reversing a more than a century of tradition and law to give the military authority to make arrests and fire their weapons on U.S. soil...

It is because of that century-old "tradition" that the U.S. Coast Guard was never made a part of the DoD. The USCG is the only part of the US Armed Forces that has law enforcement powers in the US.

And it damn well better stay that way. Anything else is martial law.

26 posted on 07/21/2002 10:18:53 AM PDT by Semper911
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
"Even better take Ridge to the woodshed or fire the man."

Tie him up, put him in the wood shed, and then burn it down!

27 posted on 07/21/2002 10:18:59 AM PDT by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
The term "Dept of Homeland Security" implies they should have special domestic powers. I don't want this department that will probably become another bloated bureaucratic agency. Its a bad idea.
28 posted on 07/21/2002 10:19:45 AM PDT by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mulder
Mulder...

Old man Bush said it first and not enough people were listening. At the time, I wondered what he knew that I did not. Now I know. Our government is expanding in power and depth by leaps and bounds, all in the name of security. Beware, that is what Hitler promised his people as he guided their neck into the noose.

29 posted on 07/21/2002 10:21:35 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: NetValue
Ok. How do you reconcile that you were willing to use military forces to augment "police" on our borders? Or the National Guardsmen at the airports? Or the Coast Guard in our ports?

Border and coastal security is a legitimate use of the military, since it defends against foreign invasions. The military has been routinely used throughout American history for frontier security.

As to the Guard in the airports, most of us realized it for the joke that it was, and therefore opposed it.

30 posted on 07/21/2002 10:22:13 AM PDT by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: dalereed

LOL!

31 posted on 07/21/2002 10:22:24 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GeneD
The bigger picture is coming into focus-- the first bells went off at the astounding rate at which news outlets released polls showing Americans were willing to give up freedoms for security. The releasing of those polls seemed premature given the urgency of the events at the time (>3000 lives lost, Pentagon attacked, President flying all over the place, people are not sure what's going on,and the media are reporting on POLLS??)

32 posted on 07/21/2002 10:24:04 AM PDT by saltlick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: GeneD
Department of Homeland Siegcurity reichstag. we will arrest you but we will not bother doing it to illegal aliens, they will become our obedient government servants.
34 posted on 07/21/2002 10:26:36 AM PDT by bok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #35 Removed by Moderator

To: Mulder
Mulder...

If tomorrow, Bush does not refute this idea, we will know full well that Ridge and his cohorts were acting with full freedom from Bush.

36 posted on 07/21/2002 10:27:33 AM PDT by cynicom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: saltlick

Sure enough.. It was like a mass advertisment for tyrants to come saying: "Hey, you wanna be the next Hitler? Just scare everyone silly for a few days.. Here, look at the way they reacted after the WTC attack!"

We are setting a bad, bad precedent that is going to come back to bite us eventually.

We are openly admitting that when FEDGOV screws up that we will respond not by taking them to task, but by rolling over and surrendering our "liberties" so they can have a second chance at keeping us "safe"

A whole bunch of people have lost their right to tease the French since 9/11, imo..

37 posted on 07/21/2002 10:28:55 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: IronJack
Your #3 is right on the money. Ridge is a fat-faced "right to 'choose'" RINO trying to make a name for himself.

Instead of sealing our borders and expelling the real enemy, these morons are turning our country upside down to protect us from ourselves.

By the time these people are done with us, we'll all be broke and living in a quasi National Socialist state.

38 posted on 07/21/2002 10:31:37 AM PDT by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
Some Islamic militant terrorists in the US are US citizens. Do you think they aren't here already?
39 posted on 07/21/2002 10:32:03 AM PDT by NetValue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NetValue
” Ok. How do you reconcile that you were willing to use military forces to augment "police" on our borders?”

Because that is a function of our military, to protect our boarders from external threats. Which incidentally is not happening. And the military’s weapons should be pointed at everything on the outside of the boarder. There should be no police involvement in protecting our boarders; the police are for maintaining the peace internally.

” Or the Coast Guard in our ports?”

Again, because that is a function of the Coast Guard, to protect our seaboard and ports from external threats.

Or the National Guardsmen at the airports?

And I don’t necessarily support using troops to maintain our airports. It’s highest and best use, as a function, would seem to be getting the public accustom to having a military presence around them, particularly in light of the fact that they don’t have ammunition in their weapons.

40 posted on 07/21/2002 10:33:30 AM PDT by Kerberos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: NetValue

The FBI is the tool to catch said terrorists.

41 posted on 07/21/2002 10:34:21 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
A whole bunch of people have lost their right to tease the French since 9/11, imo..

LOL.

I'd say many Americans are making the French look bold as of late. It's embarassing.

42 posted on 07/21/2002 10:34:50 AM PDT by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GeneD; First_Salute
Amerika
43 posted on 07/21/2002 10:35:23 AM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mulder
"The military should never be used for domestic law enforcement."

Think about what you are saying! Do you think the police are equipped or adequately trained to protect our canals, power plants, reservoirs, nuclear power facilities, the power distribution grid, refineries, and dams? You will need the military to protect these if this war really takes hold as expected. Let's not make foolish decisions.

44 posted on 07/21/2002 10:37:03 AM PDT by NetValue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NetValue
I would consider protecting our borders to be a matter of National security that should be, in part, the responsibility of the Armed Forces.
45 posted on 07/21/2002 10:37:16 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson
I don't mean to bother you..

But I would bet money you wouldn't want this to slip by without reading it.

46 posted on 07/21/2002 10:38:07 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list
Bang

(Not exactly about guns, but extremely relevant in principle.)
47 posted on 07/21/2002 10:38:47 AM PDT by Beelzebubba
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
"He better disown this bastard child real quick"

Bush doesn't "own" Biden- so how is he to disown Biden for advocating a weakening of Posse Comitatus?

Ridge merely says "it may come up as a part of a discussion. It does not mean that it will ever be used or that the discussion will conclude that it even should be used.'' "

48 posted on 07/21/2002 10:40:13 AM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cynicom
I agree. The military should not be in the business of being a police force. Leave that power in the hands of the local authorities.
49 posted on 07/21/2002 10:40:37 AM PDT by CIB-173RDABN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Confucius
The other was Clinton waiving it so that the Delta Force could participate in Waco.

There are two existing exceptions to Posse Commitatus, as I understand the law: Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Drugs.

The reason that Janet Reno conjured up non-existent evidence of a Meth Lab at Mount Carmel was specifically so that the miliary could be called in.

I don't think clinton had to waive the Posse Commitatus act, even if he had the power to do so (doubtful).

50 posted on 07/21/2002 10:41:12 AM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-223 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson