Washington Post: "The U.S. military expects to have 20,000 uniformed troops inside the United States by 2011 trained to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear terrorist attack or other domestic catastrophe, according to Pentagon officials. The long-planned shift in the Defense Department's role in homeland security was recently backed with funding and troop commitments after years of prodding by Congress and outside experts, defense analysts said. ...
Military preparations for a domestic weapon-of-mass-destruction attack have been underway since at least 1996, when the Marine Corps activated a 350-member chemical and biological incident response force and later based it in Indian Head, Md., a Washington suburb. Such efforts accelerated after the Sept. 11 attacks, and at the time Iraq was invaded in 2003, a Pentagon joint task force drew on 3,000 civil support personnel across the United States.
In 2005, a new Pentagon homeland defense strategy emphasized "preparing for multiple, simultaneous mass casualty incidents." National security threats were not limited to adversaries who seek to grind down U.S. combat forces abroad, McHale said, but also include those who "want to inflict such brutality on our society that we give up the fight," such as by detonating a nuclear bomb in a U.S. city.
In late 2007, Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England signed a directive approving more than $556 million over five years to set up the three response teams, known as CBRNE Consequence Management Response Forces. Planners assume an incident could lead to thousands of casualties, more than 1 million evacuees and contamination of as many as 3,000 square miles, about the scope of damage Hurricane Katrina caused in 2005."
Passe Comitatus anyone?
"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. "
The failings of Bush's leadership grow more apparent. Paulson running another socialization program and waxing poetic about the brilliance of social safety nets. a standing Army in the United States of America, and abhorrent failures in domestic policy.
It's enough to get me agreeing with the far right prophets decrying the coming North American Union.
Posts
3 comments:
I wouldn't say it's just "far right" prophets. There are quite a few people -- Christians and non-Christians alike -- who are concerned about the advancing globalist agenda. Or, as Pat Buchanan once sagely called it, "messianic globaloney."
One does have to wonder if it does any good to elect either party to power. Both seem committed to a New World Order.
Sola, I place my self in the far right of the political spectrum, so it wasn't a derogatory comment.
I didn't take it as derogatory. I was just pointing out that concerns about globalism aren't just within the conservative camp, although I would say that's where the main opposition is.
Post a Comment