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

Skip to comments.

Gov Tom Ridge To Take New Cabinet Post, Of "Homeland Defense"
DC Sources

Posted on 09/20/2001 6:01:51 PM PDT by MindBender26

He is former Repub Gov of PA. Wounded RVN Vet.<p<More will follow


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-216 next last
To: MindBender26
Wonderful. Just what we need. A new, bloated beauracracy (sp?), that will probably do nothing but rule over innocent men like all of the other illegitimate dictatorships with the power to do a job the Constitution expressly gave to Congress, and Congress alone (making law).

All of this while the armed forces have been chopped, the CIA castrated, and the FBI totally corrupted. What is next? Will we have a new Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines to do the job of the ones that we have now?

Like they said on the Star Wars movies, "I've got a bad feeling about this..."...JFK

101 posted on 09/20/2001 7:58:59 PM PDT by BADROTOFINGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
This would have been much more satisfying if Bush had mentioned, say, activating a formal citizens' militia, which would throw a scrap to those citizens who want to take part in the defense of their homeland. Instead we have another level of bureaucracy, another little something between us and them. Time will tell if this is as totalitarian as it sounds. If nothing else, it's painfully redundant and unimaginative.
102 posted on 09/20/2001 7:59:18 PM PDT by Semaphore Heathcliffe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Do you think this new post is connected to this story from March?

Homeland Defense Agency Legislation Introduced New Role for FEMA!!!

Source: Congress---Published: 20 Mar 2001

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Mac Thornberry (R-TX) today introduced legislation that would reorganize the federal government to better prepare for threats against the American homeland.
"We live in the freest and most open society in the world," Thornberry stated. "Yet with this freedom and openness comes an increased vulnerability to attack. This threat has only increased since the end of the Cold War. As the world's only superpower, America has become the number one target of terrorists.

"Numerous reports over the past few years have warned us of this threat. These reports paint a disturbing picture. Over $8.8 billion worth of goods, over 1.3 million people, over 340,000 vehicles, and over 58,000 shipments enter our country each day. Yet only 1 to 2 percent of these packages and vehicles are inspected at the border.

"But it's not just our border security we have to worry about. With the United States growing more and more dependent on computers and high technology, we also have to worry about our Nation's cyber-security. Between 1990 and 1999, for example, there were about 25,000 cyber incidents. Last year alone, the number of incidents skyrocketed to 21,000. Just yesterday, the head of the National Infrastructure Protection Center revealed that there are currently about 1,400 active investigations into cyber-crime.

"This is a clear indication of a real and growing threat to our country. Unfortunately, as these reports also make clear, the U.S. is not prepared to respond to these threats. The purpose of today's bill is to help make us prepared by reorganizing the federal government in a way that makes us better able to prevent and respond to homeland attacks."

The bill is called The National Homeland Security Agency Act. Based on a recent recommendation by the bipartisan Commission on National Security/21st Century, the measure would bring together four federal agencies currently on the front lines of homeland defense - the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Coast Guard, the Customs Service, and the Border Patrol.

Under this legislation, FEMA would be renamed the National Homeland Security Agency. The new NHSA would continue to be the federal government's principal response agency in times of natural disaster. But under this plan, it would also become the federal government's principal agency for coordination, response and prevention with regard to terrorist attacks and other manmade disasters, and the principal point of contact for state and local governments. In carrying out this mission, the NHSA would be assisted by the Coast Guard, Customs Service, and Border Patrol, which would be transferred to the new homeland security agency as independent entities.

Also transferred to the NHSA under this realignment would be the Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office and the Institute of Information Infrastructure Protection, which are currently in the Department of Commerce, and the National Infrastructure Protection Center and the National Domestic Preparedness Office, which are currently part of the Department of Justice/Federal Bureau of Investigation.

"The intent of establishing a new Homeland Security Agency is not to add another layer of fat to our already bloated federal bureaucracy," Thornberry noted. "Rather, the goal is to realign and consolidate a number of key federal agencies in a way that will help the federal government better prevent and respond to homeland threats."

According to Thornberry, the structure of the NHSA would be geared toward these threats and built around three main Directorates:

* The Directorate of Prevention - which will have responsibility for border security;
* The Directorate of Critical Infrastructure Protection - which will have responsibility for infrastructure and cyber-security; and
* The Directorate for Emergency Preparedness and Response - which will be responsible for organizing and coordinating prevention and response activities among the different levels of government.

The bill would also establish an Office of Independent Oversight, whose main responsibility would be to ensure that current federal privacy protection laws are followed, and a National Crisis Action Center which would provide the public with a federal focal point in times of emergency - something, Thornberry noted, is very important.

"As it stands now," Thornberry stated, "more than 40 federal agencies are responsible for homeland security. In the event of a terrorist attack, which agency would be in charge? The answer is, it depends. In some cases, it would be the FBI. In other cases, it would be FEMA. For state and local governments, this uncertainty could lead to confusion. That's the last thing you want. During times of crisis, the public needs a phone number, not a phone book, which is one thing this bill will help provide.

"Beyond that, I think one of the most significant things about this proposal is that it elevates homeland security up the list of national priorities and gives the director of homeland security a seat at the Cabinet table. At the same time, it puts in place a homeland security structure that meets the needs of today and the future rather than yesterday and the past.

"In short, it's a bill that will help strengthen our security at home. At a time when we're debating how to transform our military and reorganize our national defenses, it's an issue we can't ignore and shouldn't wait to address."

General Charles Boyd, the Executive Director of the Commission on National Security/21st Century, agreed with Thornberry and commended him for introducing the bill. "The U.S. is threatened, in an unprecedented way, by rogue states, and by terrorists increasingly armed with weapons of mass destruction," Gen. Boyd stated. "This is the security issue of the early 21st Century, and there is a growing awareness that our country has no strategy or coherent organization with which to deal with this very real threat. The Hart-Rudman Commission is extremely pleased that Congressman Thornberry has stepped forward with proposed legislation to begin the task of securing our national homeland."

Thornberry serves on the Armed Services Committee and the Budget Committee and is a leading congressional proponent of transforming our military so it is better prepared for future threats. He was the prime House author of legislation that established the Rumsfeld Space Commission and sponsored legislation two years ago that resulted in a Defense Science Board study which called for military transformation and an increased focus on space security.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I wonder if GW had a heads-up on this bill?

Wasichu

103 posted on 09/20/2001 8:00:22 PM PDT by Wasichu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VA Advogado
"Judging by the election returns libertarians are a lot like homosexuals - you both exaggaerate your numbers and your importance to society."

Let me quibble with your analogy: most libertarians vote for a major party candidate because they know that the libertarian has no chance and they are voting for the lesser of two evils. So election returns would tend to underreport the number of libertarians. Also, I tend to think that many people who don't identify themselves as libertarians, actually are libertarian if you go down a list of issues and ask their position. But I'm guessing that this type of discourse is of no real use because you sound like one of those people who think that libertarians are all drug addicts who want drugs legalized so that they can get their drugs at lower prices (apologies in advance if that is an incorrect assumption).

104 posted on 09/20/2001 8:04:49 PM PDT by Eugene Tackleberry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
The U.S., and the ship we ride known as liberty. Let us keep her Close hauled, all sheets squared, and rigged. Even with the decks awash in our own countrymens blood. We shall persavere. In the words of a national hero aboard the Bon Homme Richard vs. the Serrapis -John Paul Jones: "Sir, I have not yet begun to fight!"

Sword

105 posted on 09/20/2001 8:07:27 PM PDT by Sword_Svalbardt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Irrational calls to violate the constitution can not be excused. You dishonor the principles of a free republic.

Go back to sleep. We'll wake you and let you know if the courts strike this down as being unconstitutional. If they don't, then I suppose the only way open for you to prove your irrational point will be to take up arms against your own country and force it to fight on two fronts.

Are you willing to do that? Some of you might very well be. If so, you are budding terrorists in your right.

106 posted on 09/20/2001 8:08:57 PM PDT by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: VA Advogado
The libertarians are the first to assert the government has a duty to protect the citizen and then piss their pants when it actually takes action. Pathetic.

I couldn't have said it better.

107 posted on 09/20/2001 8:09:30 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: HalfIrish
Why "Homeland Defense"? Why not just go out all out and say, "Defense of der Fatherland!"

You should be ashamed of yourself. What a horrible thing to write.

108 posted on 09/20/2001 8:13:10 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: kidd, VAadvogado
I suppose there is some truth to that statement, but creating a new cabinet position to take the place of others that arent doing their jobs is hardly what I would call action...JFK
109 posted on 09/20/2001 8:13:22 PM PDT by BADROTOFINGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Wasichu
I remember Bill Clinton using the term Homeland Defense at some point during his impeachment. It may have been on a trip to England. It was alarming at the time because of the fascistic connotation of the wording. Then it was brought back to life as you have noted. Bush has used this opportunity to push it through. It must have been in the plans for several years. As some one pointed out tonight, Bush doesn't really understand the concept of liberty or how to define it. He knows what it feels like to be free. But he can't defend it intellectually. That's how he doesn't see the contradiction between starting a new big government agency that will deprive us of freedom (via identity cards, face recognition systems, state border checks, etc.) and starting a war to defend freedom.
110 posted on 09/20/2001 8:14:24 PM PDT by The Westerner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Damn Kevin, you would have fit right in with the Brits up to and including the point that the Founders handed their collective asses to them.
111 posted on 09/20/2001 8:15:39 PM PDT by Hard Case
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Palladin
The new department may start out 'clean', but it's still just another beauracracy. That just means a bigger government, not better security. This is not a good move. They will seek unprecedented powers to invade our privacy. Our security from terrorists will be no better and our security from our government will be worse.
112 posted on 09/20/2001 8:16:02 PM PDT by dixierat22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Hard Case, all
This is absolutely amazing. A bunch of conservatives who actually think that a government beauracracy (again, sp?) will be able to centralize and streamline a bunch of other beauracracy and form one, harmonious, imminently effective, and innocent friendly government success.

Some of you actually sound like Marxists...JFK

113 posted on 09/20/2001 8:22:11 PM PDT by BADROTOFINGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Let's forget this is Bush.  Let's forget this is Ridge.

Have any of you ever heard of a cabinet level position or new government agency that didn't grow into a major problem?  The rule of thumb is to eliminate government agencies or cabinet level positions.

I know these people are people you support.  The next administration will be some dim-wit Democrats that will appoint someone like a Clinton appointee to this position to replace Ridge.

Get it?

When I first heard the words "Homeland Safety" my first impression was "Sudatenland Rescue."  I've got a bad feeling about this.  This guy's whole mission in life is to develop new programs to make us safe.  I can't put my finger on it, but I smell deminishing rights and totalitarian state.  If not this guy, then the next will solidify my concerns.  I don't like it.

The rest of Bush's speach was well delivered and headed in the right direction from my viewpoint.

114 posted on 09/20/2001 8:30:16 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eugene Tackleberry
I tend to think that many people who don't identify themselves as libertarians, actually are libertarian if you go down a list of issues and ask their position.

The libertarian "quiz" is a ridiculous exercize meant to boost their pathetic low numbers, such as: Do you believe that the Constitution is good? Yes?!! Then you must be a libertarian!!!

Why don't you ask "many people": Do you believe that pre-emptive strikes against terrorist groups and the nations that support them are justified to defend against further loss of American life, as is allowed by the Constitution? Those who answer "no" must be libertarians.

But I'm guessing that this type of discourse is of no real use because you sound like one of those ...

Read: If you don't agree with the narrow libertarian point of view, then your right to free speech is unimportant.

115 posted on 09/20/2001 8:31:34 PM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: dixierat22
As the military is forbidden by law (generally) from operating, a new agency is needed. Who will be Ridge's successor? Republicans will not always control the White House.

Will National ID Cards be under the ægis of the Department of Homeland Defence (Defense?)? the FBI? Social Security? Medicare? Treasury? or Interior?

116 posted on 09/20/2001 8:31:58 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
Astonishing! On every thread tonight, Freepers are ecstatic about President Bush's speech. They say they love him, respect him, admire his judgement and intelligence, steely nerve, straight talk and honesty. Now that he has appointed a security chief to pull all those incompetent and internicene-warfare security agencies together, it appears to some trembling folks here that the president has made such a bad decision that it will destroy our freedoms. Do you people dumping on him have faith in him or not? Apparently not. I'm glad I don't live in such a continual state of apprehension and negativity about the leader we worked so hard to elect.

Leni

117 posted on 09/20/2001 8:32:45 PM PDT by MinuteGal (KeepYourPowderDry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
With Jane Garvey free of criminal charges and Minetta singing her praises; it's not a good sign.

The term,"Homeland Defense" seems to come from the Hart-Rudman report which forecast this event.

I'm suspicious that it's a back-door outlet for FEMA's powers. Time will tell.

There should be a Presidential Executive Order published, detailing the interactions.

So far, I don't like what I'm seeing. If the National Guard and Reserves are not enough, why do we need another agency - and, exactly - what the hell would it do?

I'm afraid it may be another "...spend tax dollars here" agency.
118 posted on 09/20/2001 8:33:32 PM PDT by SKYDRIFTER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: BADROTOFINGER
This is absolutely amazing. A bunch of conservatives who actually think that a government beauracracy...

They call themselves conservatives, but they secretly wish to wear the boot that stamps on your face forever.

119 posted on 09/20/2001 8:35:49 PM PDT by Semaphore Heathcliffe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: MinuteGal
Now that he has appointed a security chief to pull all those incompetent and internicene-warfare security agencies together, it appears to some trembling folks here that the president has made such a bad decision that it will destroy our freedoms. Do you people dumping on him have faith in him or not?

What makes you so certain that this will not become just another "incompetent and internicene-warfare security agency"? We have heard umpteen million times about just this sort of "Re-inventing Government" (remember that one?) garbage and that is all that it is, garbage. If the incomptetent and internicene-warfare agencies had any redeeming value they wouldnt need yet another one.

This is like moving just because your house got messy and you (not you specifically) were too [insert excuse here] to clean it up.

As far as having faith in Bush, I have eminent faith in his ability to take care of this problem overseas, but domestically this new cabinet postition is just more of the same top-heavy beaureau-nonsense...JFK

120 posted on 09/20/2001 8:41:56 PM PDT by BADROTOFINGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 201-216 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