Brad Sherman shoulda known better...

Congressman Sherman was interviewed on a radio talk show in Austin.  Listen to him talk about what he said on the floor of the House.

What he is saying is that one or more members of the House (Whips probably) told him that they had been told by other members of the House that there would be various bad and catastrophic results if there was a second failure to pass the Paulson bailout law.

He does not say that the Executuve Branch threatened anything like that.  His statement has nothing to do with anything that Northcom is doing.

He is basically talking about the kind of feckless nonsense the Congressmen say to eash other when trying to line up members for a vote.

Naomi Wolf?  A flake if ever there was one.  Her piece, linked to below, is a tissue of fantasy.

What is the matter with you people????  pl

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bH1mO8qhCs&NR=1

http://www.alternet.org/rights/101958/thousands_of_troops_are_deployed_on_u.s._streets_ready_to_carry_out_%22crowd_control%22/

Comments

[Fred]

If Naomi feels this bad about the direction America is heading in she should run for office. If she could actually get elected then she could do something to change the direction of this country. The key question is once the troops come back from Iraq just where did she expect them to be deployed?

[greg0]

Sorry. But I like fantasy!
Thanks for the YouTube clip. It had nicely ominous Empire Strikes Back theme music. Rep Sherman's quotes sound believable, however: "overblown effort to create panic in order to pass a bad bill" and "panic takes a life of it's own".
Consider the censorship of journalism, mass arrests of citizens without regard to legalities, wiretapping on a broad basis, recent stolen elections, and hateful rhetoric, and you may have to excuse those who simply wonder when the other hobnailed boot is going to drop.
Let's hope it's just a fantasy.

[Strudel & Shotguns]

I'm surprised at the opacity of your analysis. Bad week?

[Dave of Maryland]

When the government thinks the natives are this restless, they're either completely out of touch, or they're on to something.

Neither possibility is exactly cheerful.

How about a government that actually works for a change?

[Patrick Lang]

S&S

Maybe you just don't agree with it? maybe you are having a bad week? pl

[Strudel & Shotguns]

No market worries here. It's all sunshine and unicorns from where I sit. John McCain even called his fellow Americans "fellow prisoners" in a stump speech recently. (See the youTube) Silly times we live in. I respect your analysis, generally. But this homeland "duty" smells from the head and you know it. When in American history have troops fresh out of combat been tasked with such an undefined "mission?" And when has it been necessary? Just what we need: Iraq-sharpened combat soldiers facing down hungry, frustrated, desperate Americans. Using the passive language of the military-industrial drones, "This idea isn't liked."

[Patrick Lang]

S&S

You are quite wrong here.

All troops stationed in the CONUS are available for a variety of tasks while they are here. Some of them are; training the reserves, conducting ROTC Summer training camp, fighting forest fires, their own training cycle, assistance to law enforcement in an emergency. Units are subject to these and many other taskings as a routine matter. What this particular tasking does is free that BCT from other taskings so that it can concentrate on training and planning for this one. Northcom probably asked for this in order to have some regular troops who would concentrate on their mission.

You do know, don't you that US Army and marine units are normally stationed in the US? The 82nd at Ft Bragg NC, the 1st Cavalry Division at Ft. Hood TX, etc.

I have the impression that people who are reeacting to this as you are, are either 1- don't want to understand or 2- know so little about the armed forces that the answers are incomprehensible to you.

Maybe the regular armed forces should just say to hell with you and let you deal with the next Katrina or whatever all by yourselves. pl

[Patrick Lang]

All

For the benefit of all, we (the USA) did not do unit rotations in WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam. Therefore, there could not be UNITS in CONUS during those wars that had recently been in combat.

It is a non-issue anyway unless you think that combat veterans are dangerous. If they are, you should be polite to them. pl

[jonst]

s&s

If PL "know[s] it" why would he not say what he "knows"? What, that has gone on on this blog, makes you think he "know[s] it" but won't say it? And if you think he is that deceptive what is the point of reading the blog? Not being confrontational here SS....just curious. People can disagree, even at this point in America, without automatically going to motives or deception. Disagree with him. Hell, bitterly disagree with him. But leave bad faith aside. So I would argue, anyway.

[Mad Dog]

"It is a non-issue anyway unless you think that combat veterans are dangerous. If they are, you should be polite to them. pl"

And hopefully, vice versa. *g*

[J]

Colonel,

What I'm reading here from some within your readership is not they fear our military and its personnel, but 'question' the 'motives and methods' of the civilian leadership that has been misusing and abusing both our military and civilian entities for its crooked civilian leadership's personal gains. When the civilian population witnesses sooo much money $1 Trillion plus budgeted by the Congress for the latest military budgeting, and at the same time these very same persons within the civilian leadership seemingly oblivious to the most basic needs and 'pain' of our nation's most vulnerable. It does make our civilian population just a wee bit skittish and leery whenever/however the civilian leadership moves the pawns (i.e. military units) on the chess board.

Just an 'observation' on my part, which may or may not be accurate depending on one's point of view.
Ahh, there's the supper bell, Bon Appetit all.

[DaveGood]

Colonel.

As I understand it there are two factors at play here.

One of them is that for the first time a Combat Unit of the US military has been specifically detailed to.... let us say... "restrain" any large scale protest by the citizens of the US.

And the other is the building on US military bases of up to 40,00 prison cells for the said Citizens.

Such prisons to be known collectively as the.. "Civilian Inmate Labor Program"

You might want to read and comment on the implications inherent this document published by the US Army.

http://www.army.mil/usapa/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf

DaveGood

[William R. Cumming]

Remember the "Help is on the way" message from Cheney as VP nominee in 2000 to the active forces? In addition to other writings Naomi Wolf's "Shock Doctrine" reaches conclusions that indicate much more considered misuse of institutions by the leadership of various countries, including the US, then I think can be documented by academic or even non-biased research. Clear though she has struck some nerves when the media is so in-ept and academics and policy wonks so in-ept in explaining civil-military relationships in the US. Although I also disagree with some of his conclusions, recommend Samuel Huntington's "The Soldier and the State" to readers of this blog. Most of the active military flag ranks are familiar with this book.

[HSDell]

I understand you believe that the fear of American troops being used against American citizens as described would never happen. Is there a line or some threshold that if crossed by this administration with or without the use of the military, would constitute a misuse of the military and cross over into tyranny? Or, can the government do no wrong or ever go too far in your view?

I'd really be interested in your response.

Thanks.

[TR Stone]

How did America get to this point in time, both in policy and campaigning.
It seems to me that the political divide is becoming similiar to the Sunni/Shia split.
I can only hope that the extremes on both sides, especially the right, are just dilettantes in this increasingly ugly run for the Presidency.

[Hawk Of May]

Americans have always liked a good conspiracy theory. From the assassination of President Lincoln to the assassination of President Kennedy to 9/11 a conspiracy theory of one sort or another has sprung up.
This time we happen to have a perfect economic storm combined with two overseas wars which is all ratcheting up the anxiety level here in the states.

Layer on top of this the quasi-imperial view that the current president has...well you have some pretty rich soil for conspiracy theories like the one involving "The Raiders".

I'm 99.99% sure that this one will end up in the trash bin like all the other conspiracy theories.

[Dick]

The 82nd Airborne was used in '67 in Detroit. The majority of those deployed in The Motor City were Vietnam combat vets. Clearly it was a situation that got beyond the control of the local authorities. The 82nd acted professionally and helped restore order, and went back to Fayetteville. Regular troops have been used within the US many times. Another e.g. the Bonus Army marchers after WWI. Anyway, Federal troops were not used, for example, during the great Civil Rights marches on Washington, or the '68 Dem Convention (however a large force of 82nd troopers and Marines were stationed on Homestead AFB for the Repub Convention of '72 in Miami Beach).
So, I conclude that it is not a question of a federal garrison in our midst, ready to suppress our Liberty. Naomi is crying wolf.
What I wonder and fear is someone like Cheney calling out the troops in a PREMEDITATIVE move of SUPPRESSION against something like a mass protest on Washington. That would be cause, in my opinion, for the second burning of the White House (symbolically speaking). Fortunately, with the upcomming (01.20.09) ouster of the scoundrels in power, that is an unlikely scenario.

[Patrick Lang]

HS Dell

"Is there a line or some threshold that if crossed by this administration with or without the use of the military, would constitute a misuse of the military and cross over into tyranny? Or, can the government do no wrong or ever go too far in your view?

I'd really be interested in your response."

Could you have been more insulting?

I have been very clear that use of the military in support of and at the request of civllian government is appropriate. I have been very clear that I believe in the US Constitution before everything but my religion.

I see that nothing has really changed in the last 40 years. You are the equivalent of the woman who spat on me in San Francisco in 1968.

The doctinaire left and the doctrinaire right are equally despicable.

There is an end to everything. pl

[David W.]

I dunno, Col, good faith for our current govt. is in short supply these days, and deservedly so. Sounds like Sherman broke some clubby ideal that was leftover from the previous century. Perhaps this fear mongering in the dark needs to stop, so why not throw some sunlight on it. After all, passive acceptance to the fear mongering around 9/11 is what led us into the tarpit. If the regime backers were playing up martial law, then let's hear about it. Hell, after 50 years of visions of mushroom clouds being planted in our heads, this ain't nothing to cover the kids' ears over.

I think any sort of 'tinfoil hat' accusations can be mollified by looking at the hyper-security attitude that has become the norm at such events as the Republican and Democratic National Conventions or WTO Conferences (they're having a hard time having those anywhere lately).

The worry that the Army would be used against us, while increasingly a possibility, is not likely, but for the reason that what those in power need most from We the People is for us to keep working, spending and shopping (which should be a clue to the key to our cell, my fellow prisoners).

Also, let's not confuse Naomi Wolf, the flaky feminist with Naomi Klein the journalist and author of The Shock Doctrine.

[frank durkee]

As an Episcopal priest at an innercity parish during the Washington, D.C riots after Dr. Kings killing, I can still remember how relieved we all were with the arrival of units of the 82nd in our area of the riot. It was the first element that was effective in the restoration of a semblence of order, in the midst of burning, looting, and armed threats in our neighborhood. that seemed to me a very legitimate use of our regular army then and would in comporable situations be today. If you have lived, even if for a very short time, in situations of violence without effective means of quelling it on the civilian side, the use of those who can do that task is most welcome. that relief was shared by our parishoners and our poor black neighborhood.
I am probably in the eyes of many of you a '60's radical social activist. However, when the civilian capacity to maintain the minimum of order fails, the use of our military forces to secure that is welcome, aat least to those in the midst of the violence, who were feeding, housing, and medically treating those at risk. What they are being trained for is not an abstraction but a past reality and an always present possibility. Be grateful that that capacity is there, just hope you are never where you need it.

[HSDell]

Colonel,

My sincere apologies for having insulted you--I see where sarcasm entered my thoughts. That is not what I intended, and I humbly take it back.

I have sincerely valued your perspective and experience over the few years I've frequented this website.

And, as an average citizen, I REALLY would value your thoughts on my actual question, about where you would draw that line.

My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that either government military or private forces (i.e. Blackwater) going door-to-door as they did in New Orleans, confiscating guns of law abiding citizens, or arresting citizens for peaceful civil disobedience, is right up against the line.

Thank you.

[William R. Cumming]

Stand corrected on the Naomis! Thanks!

[bstr]

Dear Sir, You ask "What is the matter with you people????" The answer is eight years of Executive Office lying. A crazy Market. A world in which Russia, not the UN not the USA, can bail out Iceland.An election in the 21st century which might hang on racism. If you think your readership is shaky now please recall that in the end we are a part of a very battered public. What we have to fear is the possibility of a reaction, as in the battered wife syndrome defense.

[drongo]

The continental US is approximately 3 million square miles and is the home to what? - 300 million people in perhaps twenty metropolitan areas the size of Baghdad. The paranoid apocalyptic fantasists on this blog who seem to imagine that the US Army is about to be turned on to the American population need to explain just how a division of that army could possibly be used to asssault the American people or occupy the American nation. Gen Shinseki estimated half a million men would be needed to control a post war Iraq that has a population of near 30 million and an area smaller than Texas; any planner expecting to impose some sort of military control over the US would logically be looking at a military force of perhaps ten million. My knowledge of American history tells me the US Army has not been that size since WW2. Quite apart from the wild improbability of American soldiers turning their arms against the constitution of the US, simple maths surely tells us that the scenario is as unlikely as Sarah Palin turning vegetarian and speaking intelligently.

[Patrick Lang]

Drongo

Its a brigade actually with some attechments, maybe 5,000 people. That makes your argument even more cogent.

There is alo the little matter of over 200 million guns in citizen hands. pl