FC: More on military apparently videotaping protesters in DC

[Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>]

Previous Politech message:
http://www.politechbot.com/p-04056.html

---

From: "mobiustrip () the44 net" <mobiustrip () the44 net>
To: declan () well com
Subject: Re: Military apparently videotapes DC protesters; PosseComitatus
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:22:06 -0400

i agree, but i was in farragut sq that saturday and soon after outside the
worldbank, and i saw the military standing side by side w/the metrocops.

---

From: "Bill Hanson" <hansonwe () pldi net>
To: <declan () well com>
Subject: RE: Military apparently videotapes DC protesters; Posse Comitatus
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 05:30:02 -0500

Declan,
I was unable to tell from the pictures (too blurry to fix out the unit
insignia), but from the context it's likely that those shown are members of
the National Guard.  The National Guard works for the governor of the state
unless they are federalized.   While working with the state, posse comitatus
doesn't apply, as they are under Title 32, USC instead of Title 10, which
governs the active duty military.
Bill H

---

Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 10:38:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: "J.D. Abolins" <jda-ir () njcc com>
To: Declan McCullagh <declan () well com>
Subject: Re: FC: Military apparently videotapes DC protesters; Posse Comitatus
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.0.20021009000617.01e3a628 () mail well com>

Off-the-cuff FWIW speculations about the "odd" reduncy of military
surveillance of the DC protesters:

1. Practice for future possibilities of dealing with urban environments
where protesting civilians may be expected. Having rpactice intelligence
collection in the States may be seen as preparation for various Operations
Other Than War.

2. Concerns that some of the protestors ("troublemakers") will become
people of concern to the US DoD somewhere along the line. Getting to know
who they are for future reference.

Just speculations, no evidence on hand.

For something more solid on the issue of the military and domestic
operations, the October 2002 issue of the US Naval Institutes
"Proceedings" carried an op-ed piece "Broaden Armed Forces' Roles at Home
and Abroad" by Captain James F. Kelly Jr., USN (Ret.)

Kelly argues strongly for great powers to use the military in USA domestic
law enforcement and anti-terrorism operations. Among his arguments is that
US police department already are modeled after military units and that
regular military personnel, unlike National Guard members or the local
police, do not live in the area where they will operation. That lessens
the worries about civilian response to the operation resulting in off-duty
repercussions for the enforcers. <!!!>

Although he doesn't expand on the second argument, it is a chilling echo
of the practice by the USSR and others to use troops from distant regions
to enforce harsh measures. Such troops would not have to live with the
consequences when they go home, they lack relational ties with the people
they might have to handle roughly, and they'd have regional and ethnic
prejudices that lessen empathy for the civilians. The last is not as
strong of a factor for USA situations but it can still play a role via
cultural differences as dealing, say, urban operations.

Kelly seemed to have distorted several things in his piece. He totally
neglects history of why Britain and, by extension, the USA developed a
civilian police force with strong disticntions form the military.

Also he claims that military doing domestic policing is fine because
soldiers swear to defend the *nation* from all enemies foreign and
domestic. It This is a major distortion for a military person. The
oath one
swears upon enlistment is to defend the Constitution not the nation or its
people. It goes:

"I, ___________________________________, do solemly swear (or affirm) that
I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against
all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and
allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President
of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed overme,
according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help
me God."

Ref. http://usmilitary.about.com/library/milinfo/blenlistmentoath.htm

Alas, Kelly's piece is not online at the USNI.org site. I'll snail mail
you a paper copy.

J.D. Abolins




-------------------------------------------------------------------------
POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
Recent CNET News.com articles: http://news.search.com/search?q=declan
-------------------------------------------------------------------------