Thursday, May 29, 2014

of course they did

Government Considered Using Military to Defeat Cliven Bundy

If you thought it was illegal for the United States military to be used against American citizens, the current administration disagrees with you. According to the Washington Times, the White House considered calling out the military to deal with Cliven Bundy.  Happily, they didn’t do so, but they could have.

A 2010 Pentagon directive on military support to civilian authorities details what critics say is a troubling policy that envisions the Obama administration’s potential use of military force against Americans.
The directive contains noncontroversial provisions on support to civilian fire and emergency services, special events and the domestic use of the Army Corps of Engineers.
The troubling aspect of the directive outlines presidential authority for the use of military arms and forces, including unarmed drones, in operations against domestic unrest.
“This appears to be the latest step in the administration’s decision to use force within the United States against its citizens,” said a defense official opposed to the directive.

Directive No. 3025.18, “Defense Support of Civil Authorities,” was issued Dec. 29, 2010, and states that U.S. commanders “are provided emergency authority under this directive.”
“Federal military forces shall not be used to quell civil disturbances unless specifically authorized by the president in accordance with applicable law or permitted under emergency authority,” the directive states.
“In these circumstances, those federal military commanders have the authority, in extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances” under two conditions.
The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”
“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the directive states.

So we came closer than we knew to seeing the military put down “civil unrest” in this country. I am not sure why that would be necessary with every federal department being armed to the teeth and SWAT teams occupying the country. But I am glad it did not happen. I hope Congress will legislatively ban this directive.

Read more at http://politicaloutcast.com/2014/05/government-considered-using-military-defeat-cliven-bundy/#rQWyRlOEBcHwsVLc.99

No comments: