Posted on 12/17/2002 11:13:33 PM PST by Joe 6-pack
"Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
Circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution....
Article I.
Section 8. The Congress shall have power to...
...provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
...define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
... declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
... make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
... make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
Section 9.
...The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.
Article II
Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States..."
The facts of the matter are thus...
We have been attacked...in a manner more viscious than Pearl Harbor, the incursions of Pancho Villa, the sinking of the Lusiitania, or any other assault against our nation suffered during the 20th Century.
Efforts to continue attacks against our nation continue.
Liberal immigration policies have permitted the enemy to grow within.
Posse Comitatus is NOT an integral part of the Constitution; rather a proscription against the use of the Federal military in a law enforcement capacity against U.S. Civilians, UNDER MOST CIRCUMSTANCES. Exceptions have been written into the law, and, believe it or not, U.S. Military frequently supports U.S. Law enforcement in the following capacities...
1. Virtually not a day goes by where U.S. Army bomb detector K9s support the U.S. Secret Service, State deprtment, or DoD who request K9 sweeps in anticipation of dignitary visits.
2. U.S. Army / AF EOD personnel support local law enforcement who encounter unexploded U.S. or foreign, "souvenier," munitions or other IEDs which exceed the technical capacity of local EOD personnel.
When the enemy is within, are we to believe that the Department of Defense no longer has a role because the opponent is on U.S. soil? This is perhaps one the most absurd notions that political commentators of any stripe have ever proffered. Most curiously, the concept is most fiercely advocated by those who've tried to minimize the DoD's role abroad, suggesting that forward projection is not a matter of defense. We are a nation at war, and the warfighting component of the government should be given the lead.
Persons arguing aginst the DoD's role in the current conflict on Constitutional grounds need to realize that the DoD, formerly, the War Department, is Constitutionally organized and has a Constitutional role...on U.S. soil and beyond.
While I don't pretend to know more than anyone else on the subject, I can confidently assert that I know more than most. I served as an active duty military police officer in the U.S. Army for ten years. In my last two years, I served on a Defense Coordinating Element (DCE) responsible for organizing DoD support for FEMA ops in the event of natural or man-made disasters. I resigned effectively, in December 2000, prior to 9/11. Up to that time, to my awareness, FEMA officials, and military supervisors were painfully cognizant of the implications of Posse Comitatus and virtually all contingency planning was conducted with such considerations...even in cases where, in my opinion, justifications for exceptions were valid.
I've been deployed to quite a few of the world's finest sh!t-holes and have been inoculated against everything from Bubonic Plague, to Japanese Encephilitas to Yellow Fever. I've never developed any symptoms greater than an itchy arm. My immunization record is far longer and more replete than my resume will ever be, and I've yet to suffer ill-effects. Should a small-pox vaccine come available tomorrow, I'd accept it, not because it was mandated, but simply, because I really don't want to contract small-pox!
All I care about is the truth. There is so much disagreement even among medical professionals concerning smallpox. I don't think anyone really knows the hard facts. It's sad that we are faced with this situation in the first place.
This is about 99% untrue. There may be disagreement about whether or not smallpox bioweapons are a real danger, but the efficacy of vaccination is a thoroughly proven success story, and any doctor who is not a quack knows it.
When you talked about something scary and Clintons, were you perhaps referring to Hillary? Did you actually see her or something? Is that why you have been consuming the adult beverages today?
I saw her on CNN earlier. I am very afraid of that woman. People had been saying not to worry, that she has taken herself out of the lime-light and will not run for president; I didn't believe that for a second. And now she's suddenly all over the tv again with an improved appearance. Bad sign.
FL was a lamb by comparison, and FL meant well for all of us, I think he/she really believed the smallpox vaccine issue is a great threat and is worried over it. Of course I hope those of us who are worried are wrong. I hope Sabertooth and the rest are correct, because the whole issue is about staying alive and healthy. I think we all want what is best for our country and each other.
No, I enjoy making up stories that the other 400 New York freepers can shoot full of holes in mere seconds, and posting them here just to embarass myself. You see, I enjoy losing face. Especially since I'm going to see about fifty freepers at our party next Saturday. They'll all have my number. That should be especially humiliating. I can't wait.
Now she is saying she will not run for president in 2004. I'm afraid she will. I don't think she can resist it as she is a very power-hungry individual. I think there is a good chance that she will win too, as she has lots of dirt on prominent people, and too many Americans actually want her for our president. I can't understand the logic of those people. She's a mean-spirited monster.
In that thread you provided a link to, someone mentioned that she called a man a f-----g Jew b------. According to Dick Morris, who is Jewish, she screamed at him, "All you people care about is money!" And yet she is untouchable as Trent Lott is forced to resign for saying something much more benign. God save us all from Hittlary.
That's interesting. It sounds like they want people to think they are still together. I guess it's not practical to get a divorce when you want to run for president. Those 2 are rotten to the core.
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.