Mentioned yesterday by a commenter and cited today by Codrea, this RAND Report advocating the creation of a "Security Police Force" for the US will pickle your cabbage.Read it, then come back here, please.
George Ure of Urban Survival files this interesting related synthesis on the ever-accelerating dash down the road to serfdom:
“Fear Mongers” and the Stabilization Police Force
This is rich: Word that president Obama is telling GOP leader “Stop trying to frighten the American people“. But it’s as good a starting point as any this morning, since the American people, by my reckoning, have plenty to be frightened about, even though it’s hidden and obfuscated by the advertiser-owned MainStreamMedia.
For one thing, the entire global financial system, most admit, is still walking on eggshells and could crack at any time. Then we have Climategate to deal with and despite the hoopla in Copenhagen, the best (ok, devastating) analysis I’ve read of the jiggered data in contained in Willis Eschenbach’s analysis “The Smoking Gun at Darwin Zero“.
Australian media is reporting that Climate Change Minister Perry “Wong plays down climate talk tensions”. Wong answer.
But here’s something more worrisome than Climategate or Swine Flu out in the wings. Every so often I get an email that spells out a possible US future in crystal-clear terms - the discussion of which is not fear mongering at all: It’s revealing actual planning… but for what? A new kind of police authority is in the works for America.
The document I’ve been studying is a Rand report called “A Stability Police Force for the United States: Justification and Options for Creating U.S. Capabilities.“
In this paper - which to those of us with a strong Constitutional bent and respect for posse comitatus is an exercise in ‘thinking the unthinkable’ - there’s a sort of working conclusion that a new super police agency - a “Stability Police Force” it’s called - run by either the military (MP) system or the U.S. Marshall’s Service, are achievable options for the US central government to consider implementing.
An extract of the Rand study is illustrative of their thinking:
“Discussion of Options
The present chapter omits any discussion of cost, which appears in Chapter Seven. Of the options presented, our analysis suggests that the hybrid Marshals Service option is preferable. With the ability of civilian agencies to significantly enhance their tactical suitability by placing SPF members in those police agencies that excel in their skill area, the Marshals Service could significantly increase its tactical suitability by leveraging placements to the point where it would dominate the other options, with the exception of the variable “Experience in Building Indigenous Capacity.” However, even with respect to this variable, any SPF would build this capability over time. An MP SPF could not achieve the same benefit, without relief from the Posse Comitatus Act. Soldiers could not serve in civilian policing capacity to the same extent, and so could not maximize an MP SPF’s tactical suitability rating through the experience to be gained by the hybrid option. If relief from Posse Comitatus were forthcoming, then the MPs could benefit from the advantages offered by this staffing option as well.”
“Relief from the Posse Comitatus Act”? Stabilization Police Force? Stabilizing what? How?
A check of Wikipedia on the health of Posse Comitatus reveals:
“Recent legislative events On September 26, 2006, President Bush urged Congress to consider revising federal laws so that U.S. armed forces could restore public order and enforce laws in the aftermath of a natural disaster, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.
These changes were included in the John Warner National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 (H.R. 5122), which was signed into law on October 17, 2006.[3]
Section 1076 is titled “Use of the Armed Forces in major public emergencies”. It provided that:
The President may employ the armed forces… to… restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition… the President determines that… domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public order… or [to] suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy if such… a condition… so hinders the execution of the laws… that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law… or opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.[4]
In 2008, these changes were repealed in their entirety, reverting to the previous wording of the Insurrection Act.
There’s a fair amount of discussion in the Rand paper of things like financial disincentives for failing to deploy against fellow citizens and so forth. Chilling stuff to read.
—
After a quick read of the Rand study, I figure the emergence of a new Stabilization Police Force is only a matter of time, and depending on how the political winds blow in Washington, I’m just guessing the U.S. Marshall’s Service will be a lot of hiring down the road. Either that, of the MP recruiting budget of the Army will be going up.
—
When one takes the 2006 announcements that Halliburton subsidiary KBR was awarded up to $385-million to construct temporary detention centers - and couples it with the Rand report - a picture emerges of a vastly less free, much more militarized internal governance structure in America.
A very realistic question to be asked is whether simply reporting these developments in some way sets up a self-fulfilling mechanism. A student of history can see an eerie similarity in temporal markers between the opening of Dachau in 1933 and the ramp-up in hiring of the German SS in the 1932-33 period.
No, there’s no detention camps operating yet that I’m aware of, but when they do, it’s important to note the discussion of a special “Stabilization Police Force” here in the USA which could be applied against enemies of the State, whatever that definition might include.
—
In a chicken & egg sense, which comes first? The talk of a paradigm-changing ‘revolution’ or excessive State response to dissent? Does it all somehow track back to those Constitution-free zones around the national political conventions because they have become so institutionalized that dissent is no longer honored? I can’t say; but the opposites of consensus is dangerous to complex societies; those societies where the marginal rate of return on additional hard work falls below zero which one could argue is in danger of happening planet-wide.
—
To what degree is talk of revolutionary change a precursor to its realization or iron-fisted repression? History only provides data; not simple formulas. But the divisions within America between left and right seem to be widening and logically, the more divided a country is, the easier its conquest by those who would argue persuasively for the replacement of its Constitution as somehow ‘outdated’ and not applicable to what will surely be packaged and sold by the MSM as ‘extraordinary times’ which will require a ‘fresh look’. Kinda like the ‘Change’ sloganeering.
—
I’d also remind you that the U.S. is still under federal state of emergency (e.g. there is no posse comitatus in force right now due to the federally declared pandemic flu emergency) despite the waning of public interest in seasonal flu shots and a lot of right wing charges that it’s ‘phony flu’ and part of some vast conspiracy of the left. Arguably, swine flu is a money-making scam because global business needs something to act as a financial stimulus although word is now leaking out that key WHO advisors may have been paid by big pharma for their efforts to stampede government purchase orders…
—
The country is on a delicate path at the moment and while my recent endorsement of Ben Bernanke for a second term at the Fed is cast as some readers as ‘cowardice’, I’m mindful based on the Rand report and other information I’ve sought out that the best case forward is a migration path to a new consensus. Absent that - a means of moving in an orderly way as a culture into an evolving and peaceful future - the detention centers and the SPF are forming in the wings and a fine 200+ year experiment in Freedom becomes even more seriously endangered.
Toss into the mix a national leader winning a Nobel Prize while simultaneously committing 30,000 more soldiers to the Afghanistan fray and all I can say to those who charge ‘fear mongering’ is this:
If you’re not at least a little fearful based on the under-reported developments going on just under the surface, you don’t fully comprehend nor appreciate the scope of the problems and State & PTB responses we’re facing as a Nation and as world of humans.
They are already doing it.
ReplyDeleteMany local police officers in anti-gang, anti-drug and immigration units are cross-commissioned as U.S. Marshals or ICE agents to expand their jurisdictions. They already work with state, county and local departments to conduct 'safety checkpoints', which are covers for searching for firearms.
As a Three Percenter and a police officer, I warn you all that these guys are the ones to watch out for when SHTF. Their loyalties lie with Uncle Sugar. I've quizzed several of them locally and they will not side with us if it came down to more than words.
Now google LESO, and you'll find that the feds are sugaring up police forces all over the country with new and used equipment to strengthen their combat capabilities and keep them loyal.
The nat'l police force is being constructed right under our noses.
The whole thing is available as a PDF. I just skimmed it and there's plenty they are already up to, more than I thought.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, this was published first in 2009, conveniently after the election of a president who indicated that he wanted a national police force.
Right in the preface:
The project was conducted for the U.S. Army’s Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI). Its purpose was to make recommendations to PKSOI, the Army, and the community of rule-of-law researchers, practitioners, and policymakers on the need for (and characteristics of) a U.S. Stability Police Force.
This research was conducted within RAND Arroyo Center’s
Strategy, Doctrine, and Resources Program. RAND Arroyo Center,
part of the RAND Corporation, is a federally funded research and
development center sponsored by the United States Army.
And like I said in my last post, right from the horse's mouth:
Mission When Not Deployed. Embedding personnel in police
departments and sheriffs’ offices would meet a significant national need.
Many U.S. law enforcement agencies, both large and small, currently
face significant challenges in recruiting and retaining personnel.23 Any
assistance from the federal government to lessen critical staffing shortages
would likely be warmly received by most law enforcement managers
throughout the country
In their conclusion, they realize that establishing a new police force with national powers would be challenged legally (Posse Comitatus, separation of powers) and that other federal agencies already engaged in police work would object, plus costs would be higher for a new agency than expanding an existing agency or agencies.
So basically, they want to expand the U.S. Marshal's office to sidestep all this because the Marshals already have the broadest legal powers currently.
They would rotate Marshals through police departments and recruit experienced police officers because they would have skills that would be better suited to domestic tasks.
They would also keep a certain percentage on standby so they could rapidly respond to a crisis to keep an insurgency from having sufficient time to organize. They deeply fear any delay of initial deployment in a crisis because the insurgency is harder to root out once it develops and gains legitimacy.
My conclusion:
I feel this report really shows why we need to work hard now more than ever. We need an existing structure that can quickly deploy insurgent forces, and perhaps more importantly we need to gain legitimacy in the communities in which we live before crisis hits.
When SHTF our people need to be up and going (and peacefully, but visibly armed) so any aggression on the part of federal agents will translate to sympathy for our cause and public support.
WRSA,
ReplyDeleteNot to doubt your word on these Halliburton camps, but do you know anyone who has worked on building one? Or seen one? Or know where they are?
It would be nice to have a map of these installations, for intel, for when the balloon goes up.
Thanks
B Wodman
III-per
Mr. Woodman:
ReplyDeleteI too am dubious of any "camp" stories.
The link in Ure's story was from the NYT, so I give it the credence associated with any story from the MSM.
I too would like to see lat/longs for anything like this.
On the other hand, I have friends whom I trust enough to run in front of them as they are firing live rounds who have noted at least one large-scale facility that they believe could be used as a "detention area".
"the more divided a country is, the easier its conquest by those who would argue persuasively for the replacement of its Constitution as somehow ‘outdated’ and not applicable to what will surely be packaged and sold by the MSM as ‘extraordinary times’ which will require a ‘fresh look’. Kinda like the ‘Change’ sloganeering."
ReplyDeleteIn times like these it is helpful to remember there have always been times like these- Paul Harvey
I read through the Rand document-- rather quickly and cursorily, since it's hardly a quick read, but the general idea is to establish an SPF that can deploy quickly and efficiently to other countries to establish the rule of law there. In order to keep the individual members proficient in their policing capabilities, they should also be doing similar tasks here in the US until they're needed in some unnamed host country.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure there are a lot of names such an organization could be called, some unprintable, but it still sounds to me like a "standing army." Of course, when the ATF can call in the FBI, the USMS and the Army to bail them out (as they did at Waco) we already have a de facto standing army.
Like most of us here, I read about the "camps" that are supposed to be built around the country but I have yet to see one (perhaps I will, someday.) Regardless, I know that any open land can be transformed into such a facility quickly by the simple means of erecting tents and porta-potties and I have no doubt that someone, somewhere in the bowels of our government has a thick folder with all the details for doing so.
what ever happened to the newly built, empty prison in Hardin, Montana? Sort of fell off the radar.
ReplyDeletewhat ever happened to the newly built, empty prison in Hardin, Montana? sort of fell off the radar.
ReplyDeletewhat ever happened in Hardin, Montana? sort of dropped off the radar.
ReplyDeleteOne very important factor is missing in this discussion of a national polce force or similar type of agency. Unless the agents are from another country,all of thier families and friends now become vulnerable to retaliation. This has to be on the minds of anyone that sides with a unconstitutional government.
ReplyDeleteA scan of the report tells me the decision has been taken; the only bits left are the end strength and continuing funding.
ReplyDelete