Finally!

[url]www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42765-2002Jan26.html[/url]

[b]Pentagon Plans New Command For U.S.
Four-Star Officer Would Oversee Homeland Defense[/b]


The Pentagon has decided to ask the White House for approval to set up a new four-star comma
nd to coordinate federal troops used to defend North America, part of an intensified effort to bolster homeland security, defense officials said.

The move was prompted by the new domestic security demands placed on the military after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and the Bush administration's declared war on terrorism.

Although the Pentagon has regional commanders in chief, known as CINCs, who are responsible for Europe, the Pacific, Latin America, and the Middle East and South Asia, none exists for U.S. forces in the United States and Canada. The proposed change would give a single four-star officer authority over such domestic deployments as Air Force jets patrolling above U.S. cities, Navy ships running coastal checks and Army National Guard troops policing airports and border crossings.

Before September, military leaders had resisted the idea of a homeland CINC (pronounced "sink"), reflecting a traditional aversion to -- and legal limits on -- the use of federal armed forces for domestic law enforcement. Opposition also existed outside the Pentagon on both the political left and right, with civil libertarians and right-wing militia groups alike warning against military forces encroaching on areas traditionally considered the responsibility of civilian emergency response, law enforcement and health agencies.

But in recent months, as military air, sea and land patrols pressed into action by the Pentagon have answered to several four-star commanders, the Defense Department's top military officers have come to accept the need for streamlining the chain of command.

Earlier opposition from such groups as the American Civil Liberties Union has also waned, although concerns persist about possible "mission creep" and the risk that any military forces deployed around the country could end up threatening individual rights.

Initially, the military chiefs had argued for assigning the homeland defense mission to one of two commands already headquartered in the United States -- either the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) in Colorado, which is responsible for protecting U.S. skies, or the Joint Forces Command in Virginia, which has been charged with guarding the maritime approaches to North America and the land defense of the continental United States. The thinking was that setting up an entirely new command would entail needless additional bureaucracy and expense.


For the whole article:  [url]www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42765-2002Jan26.html[/url]

Doesn't sound to me like they are going to oversee law enforcement. Just getting a dedicated command together for defense of the continental US. Ironic, eh? Not so many years ago, defense of the continental US was the ONLY mission. Now it's a new one.

And he'll look like [u]this[/u]:

[img]http://movieweb.com/movie/thesiege/co4.jpg[/img]

A standing army "protecting" the United States...one that will eventually take over law enforcement.  That doesn't violate the constitution in any way, does it?

Gus, this isn't even new news.
This idea was discussed well before Christmas.

Guess one of the Post reporters was extra lazy and dug this up.

Says who?

It couldn't possibly happen here......

The next step will be the creation of a true federal police force.  

Real domestic surveillance will have to be a part of effective policing.

Don't think it could happen?  If a statist like Bill or Al was in office this past 6 months, it would have.  

you saw the siege too huh, accurate and scarry as hell if you ask me.

I saw the "Seige" too.

EDITED before you started coming after me

The Seige was the first thing I thought of after 9/11.