Government training pastors to quell public unrest

[Chairboy]

A heads up:

http://www.ksla.com/Global/story.asp?S=6937987

The government appears to be training religious figures like priests and pastors to keep people from resisting the government in time of trouble.  Romans 13 is supposedly being used as the rationale.

If this is true, don't let your faith get hijacked.  From the article:

But gun confiscation is exactly what happened during the state of emergency following Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, along with forced relocation.  U.S. Troops also arrived, something far easier to do now, thanks to last year's elimination of the 1878 Posse Comitatus act, which had forbid regular U.S. Army troops from policing on American soil.
     If martial law were enacted here at home, like depicted in the movie "The Siege", easing public fears and quelling dissent would be critical.  And that's exactly what the 'Clergy Response Team' helped accomplish in the wake of Katrina.

[Yeager]

I think we have finally found the leader of we the peoples resistence!

WTG Chairboy!

I have faith the republic will be saved

[Leslie]

I wouldn't worry too much about it.  If all people listened to their pastors there wouldn't be a need for guns to start with.



Les

[Airscrew]

Civil rights advocates believe the amount of public cooperation during such a time of unrest may ultimately depend on how long they expect a suspension of rights might last.

there should no such thing as suspension of rights ever.  Temporary things have a bad habit of becoming permanent.   I dont trust anyone that says they are doing something for my own good or to protect me.

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by Chairboy
to last year's elimination of the 1878 Posse Comitatus act, which had forbid regular U.S. Army troops from policing on American soil.
 

Is this true? Anyone got a link? That is scary if it is the case.


You going to start stalking me now like you did Curval?

[storch]

why is it scary?  in another thread you are all for the government meddling in the affairs of a man doing what he likes on his property.  who can figure out these girly men?

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by storch
why is it scary?  in another thread you are all for the government meddling in the affairs of a man doing what he likes on his property.  who can figure out these girly men?

There is a difference between local law enforcement locking up a dirt bag who abuses animals and the Fed rolling out tanks in a "time of disaster" and rolling over the bill of rights.

If you can't see it, you’re not smart enough to have a conversation with Storch. But I knew that anyway.

[Airscrew]

I know its wiki but I'm supposed to be working
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

there are other links

In 1971, Deputy Secretary of Defense David Packard wrote the "Packard Memo" or "Employment of Military Resources in the Event of Civil Disturbances" which modified the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 32, Volume 2, Chapter 1, Part 215, Section 6. This addition revoked a substantial part of the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act providing for 'exceptions' to the Act "to prevent loss of life or wanton destruction of property and to restore governmental functioning and public order when sudden and unexpected civil disturbances, disasters, or calamities seriously endanger life and property and disrupt normal governmental functions to such an extent that duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation" and "to protect Federal government functions when the need for protection exists". "Packard's directive (stated) that turning over law enforcement will 'normally' require a Presidential Executive Order, but that this requirement can be waived in 'cases of sudden and unexpected emergencies... which require that immediate military action be taken." (Lindorff, 1988) Packard's directive, in essence, reinstated the possibility of Martial Law in the United States, prohibited since 1878. "Martial law was defined in an integral Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) memo written in 1982... The memo, written by FEMA official John Brinkerhoff to agency director Louis Giuffrida, notes that martial law 'suspends all prior existing laws, functions, systems, and programs of civil government, replacing them... with a military system." (Lindorff, 1988).

In early 2006, the 109th Congress passed a controversial bill which grants the President the right to commandeer Federal or even State National Guard Troops and use them inside the United States. This bill, entitled the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122.ENR), contains a provision, (Section 1076) which allows the President to:
“...employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal service, to...
restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or possession of the United States..., where the President determines that,...domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order; suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy...” [3] Senator Patrick Leahy and others have condemned Section 1076 because it effectively nullifies the Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act (10 U.S.C. 331-335) and gives the President the legal ability to define under what conditions martial law may be declared. [4]

http://www.homelandsecurity.org/journal/articles/Trebilcock.htm

this is from 2000.  

Congress has also approved the use of the military in civilian law enforcement through the Civil Disturbance Statutes: 10 U.S.C., sections 331–334. These provisions permit the president to use military personnel to enforce civilian laws where the state has requested assistance or is unable to protect civil rights and property. In case of civil disturbance, the president must first give an order for the offenders to disperse. If the order is not obeyed, the president may then authorize military forces to make arrests and restore order. The scope of the Civil Disturbance Statutes is sufficiently broad to encompass civil disturbance resulting from terrorist or other criminal activity. It was these provisions that were relied upon to restore order using active-duty Army personnel following the Los Angeles “race riots” of the early 1990s.

The erosion of the Posse Comitatus Act through Congressional legislation and executive policy has left a hollow shell in place of a law that formerly was a real limitation on the military’s role in civilian law enforcement and security issues. The plethora of constitutional and statutory exceptions to the act provides the executive branch with a menu of options under which it can justify the use of military forces to combat domestic terrorism. Whether an act of terrorism is classified as a civil disturbance under 10 U.S.C., 331–334, or whether the president relies upon constitutional power to preserve federal functions, it is difficult to think of a domestic terrorism scenario of sizable scale under which the use of the military could not be lawfully justified in view of the act’s erosion. The act is no longer a realistic bar to direct military involvement in counterterrorism planning and operations. It is a low legal hurdle that can be easily cleared through invocation of the appropriate legal justification, either before or after the fact.[12]

[Terror]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
There is a difference between local law enforcement locking up a dirt bag who abuses animals and the Fed rolling out tanks in a "time of disaster" and rolling over the bill of rights.

If you can't see it, you’re not smart enough to have a conversation with Storch. But I knew that anyway.

I guess the problem lies in who gets to make the decisions when its "ok" to suspend rights when its just a dirt bag or when it's a  "time of disaster".  And then, who polices/monitors the person who gets to make those decisions?  And who protects the persons who are the targets of the "local law enforcement" or "rolled out tanks".  And finally, how do you punish the individuals who have made the decision to suspend rights when inevitably they suspend those rights for their own self interest?

Terror

[storch]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
There is a difference between local law enforcement locking up a dirt bag who abuses animals and the Fed rolling out tanks in a "time of disaster" and rolling over the bill of rights.

If you can't see it, you’re not smart enough to have a conversation with Storch. But I knew that anyway.

what you fail to see is that it involves people's rights to their properties but I guess it's hard for a woman to separate from her emotions.

[DYNAMITE]

Originally posted by storch
what you fail to see is that it involves people's rights to their properties but I guess it's hard for a woman to separate from her emotions.

Good lord you are such a Troll... You are such a one trick pony if all you can do in an argument is attack your opponents sexuality.  Like anyone gives a $h**.  Are you that desperate for attention or do you just get your kicks taunting people in an attempt to get them riled up?

You fascinate me storch

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by storch
what you fail to see is that it involves people's rights to their properties but I guess it's hard for a woman to separate from her emotions.

Just like its hard to seperate a dirtbag from his culture I guess.

[GtoRA2]

Originally posted by DYNAMITE
Good lord you are such a Troll... You are such a one trick pony if all you can do in an argument is attack your opponents sexuality.  Like anyone gives a $h**.  Are you that desperate for attention or do you just get your kicks taunting people in an attempt to get them riled up?

You fascinate me storch

Disgust is is my word.

He can't win the other argument so he going to play the board stalker card. Watch out he will call you a women to.

the mods should  make his icon the ripped up dog posted by eagler since thats the culture he is defending by calling me a women.

[storch]

why would he get riled up?  why would anyone even be bothered by intardnet banter?  that is just silly.

[Maverick]

Erosion of the Posse Comitatus is not something I like to think about at all and I've been on both sides of that particular situation. I think they definitely need to be kept seperate functions. The Military folks, including the MP's (all branches) are not properly trained in LEO functions especially in a civilian area.