Posse Comitatis, Terrorism, and the New Perspective on Liberty

Posted on December 5, 2008. Filed under: A Theology of Patriotism, Contemporary Religion, News of the Day |

Monday, December 1, 2008–The Pentagon has announced plans to station 20,000 more troops around the country whose primary mission is to respond to any large event inside the borders of our country. An event would be like another 9/11 style attack, a chemical or biological attack, a nuclear attack or even a natural disaster. Here are the links to the stories:

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27989275/

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/30/AR2008113002217_pf.html

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

Since 9/11 the Left and the far Right have both been barking about the dangers to our civil liberties under the Patriot Act and the various other measures taken by the government in response to the terrorists. The Left can be excused because their default setting is automatically against Law Enforcement, the Military and the various Intelligence agencies while being very pro-criminal, and pro-terrorist (in the sense of wanting to protect the “rights” of terrorists and criminals). The Far Right can be excused because they are so paranoid of the government anyway and see conspiracies under every rug. It should be noted, however, that when the Left is in charge, they have a tendency to use the various law enforcement agencies and intelligence services and military in an even more oppressive way than the Republicans.

But what about those of us who are honorably conservative and do want to protect and defend the US Constitution but also to fight the war on terror vigorously and to be prepared for a huge disaster in the homeland? We do not like giving criminals more rights than they deserve, we love our law enforcement, military and spooks, and we think terrorists have no rights whatsoever. How can we fight the violence of Islam yet also honor the First Amendment? Is it a good idea to have Federal Troops throughout the US ready to impose martial law should the need arise?

I think it is prudent to have the Army have some designated units for assisting with a disaster in the Homeland. Frankly, I was a little bit nonplussed by the story because I thought every Army unit in CONUS had several oporders on file for handling stateside disaters anyway. I know back in the early to mid 1980’s when I was an Infantry Officer in the 9th Infantry Division at Fort Lewis, WA. that we had oporders on file for a variety of situations. We actually trained for a response to a disaster or terrorist event for the Hanford Nuclear site in Washington and we did some riot and crowd control drills. The summer of 1986, after I left, my unit was used to fight forest fires in Washington.

I guess what is new is the emphasis on responding to a large scale terror strike with nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Or, imagine a high altitude nuke blast that sent an EMP wave over one third of the country killing off 90% of all things electrical. Instantly we are back into the 18th century, or worse. Having some friendly troops close by to keep the peace is a good idea.

But the question I have is not really about the Posse Comitatus, it is about the first Amendment and how it might have to change in this age of terror. One of Islam’s stated goals is to spread all over the world so that all are either converted to Islam or enslaved under Islam. It has always been a violent, bloody, aggressive religion spread by the sword and government coercion. Their method in the West is to infiltrate our countries through our relaxed immigration laws, have lots of babies, and then use our legal and political system to slowly bring about sharia law and eventually take over. It is already happening in Europe and England.

Although I doubt Americans will care about this until it is almost too late, I think we ought to be discussing it NOW! If we keep the First Amendment the way it is, and allow total religious freedom, might we not be shooting ourselves in the foot? Is there another way to deal with Islam other than involving religion? We could ban all immigration from muslim countries, but that would again touch on the religious because the distinguishing factor would be their religion.

I cannot recall seeing a single blog, book or article by a reputable conservative scholar ( I am certainly conservative but no scholar and have no reputable reputation!) that addresses this issue.

Let me state it boldly and clearly: if America does not stop all immigration of muslims, and restrict the growth of their religion here, we will become like Europe in 50 years.

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

    About

    This blog exists to study the bi-vocational ministry, explore the Bible & Theology, and look at current events, history and other world religions through scripture, and have fun doing it!

    RSS

    Subscribe Via RSS

    • Subscribe with Bloglines
    • Add your feed to Newsburst from CNET News.com
    • Subscribe in Google Reader
    • Add to My Yahoo!
    • Subscribe in NewsGator Online
    • The latest comments to all posts in RSS

    Meta

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: