Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns,alt.law-enforcement From: baldwin@netcom.com (J.D. Baldwin) Subject: Re: CHP engages in felony theft Date: Thu, 15 Jan 1998 15:11:49 GMT > > You claim it was fabricated, however I suspect that you wouldn't believe > > anything the ATF said. > > It is documented in several places. It is also documented that the ATF > lied to the military to get helicopters. As you should know, except > on rare occasions, it is against the law for the military to exercise > police powers on the civilian population unless they are on government > property. Not quite true. The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the military in law enforcement unless a special dispensation has been granted by the President. He has delegated this authority to the Attorney General, and some functionary in the DoJ has the authority to approve specific missions under specific guidelines. Basically, the guidelines are that the military (in the form of JTF-6) may provide assistance and support in cases where it would further the "War on Drugs." So of course it became standard practice to just "throw in some stuff about drugs" when applying for this assistance, whether the "stuff" had any basis in reality or not. The practice was winked at for years, but came to light rather spectacularly in the Waco disaster, and now JTF-6 scrutinizes these applications a bit more closely. And they just plain won't work with ATF. Period. -- From the catapult of J.D. Baldwin |+| "If anyone disagrees with anything I _,_ Finger baldwin@netcom.com |+| say, I am quite prepared not only to _|70|___:::)=}- for PGP public |+| retract it, but also to deny under \ / key information. |+| oath that I ever said it." --T. Lehrer ***~~~~----------------------------------------------------------------------- Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,talk.politics.guns,tx.general From: baldwin@netcom.com (J.D. Baldwin) Subject: Re: !What BC did at Waco, He will do to you Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 16:00:21 GMT In article <34e6a551.68788454@news1.mnsinc.com>, Carol A. Valentine <SkyWriter@Public-Action.com> wrote: > Do you think the US military would lend out their equipment without > supplying the operators? There were no "FBI agents driving tanks," as > WTROE and other apologists would have us believe . . . unless the FBI > is now staffed by the military. No one driving tanks at Waco was on active duty in the U.S. armed forces. I forget who they were, exactly, and you're correct that the military "len[t]" the tanks -- I'm sure they trained the operators, but they didn't "supply" them. If they had, someone would now be in prison for it. > Now THERE is something worth exploring. The deputy director of the > FBI anti-terrorism unit, Col. Ellis, is active duty Army. The FBI's > Hostage Rescue Team commandos are trained by military commandos. Fer > gosh sakes, Tim, the big FBI training center is situated at the > Quantico Marine base, in Virginia. Get that? Quantico MARINE base. There's a USMC training base at Quantico. There's an FBI training "base" in Quantico (including the FBI Academy). There's a DEA training "base" there, too (also including their Academy). Probably other federal law enforcement stuff. They don't mix much with the Marines, who have plenty of their own stuff to worry about. There are *no* operational USMC units at Quantico. > I wonder how many FBI agents are on military pensions, None, I'd venture. If you enlist when you're 17, then serve 20 years, you'll be 37 when you retire. That is the *absolute* maximum age at which U.S. federal law enforcement agencies will consider making you an agent. And if an enlisted term of service is all you have behind you, they won't give you a second look. You have to have a four-year college degree and in almost all cases *some* kind of graduate degree. > in the military "reserves," the "national guard," or other posse > comitatus dodges? Probably quite a few (I know a couple, myself), though I'm not sure why you think this is a "posse comitatus dodge." The Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the use of the armed forces *themselves* in domestic law enforcement activities. It is silent on whether individuals who happen to have a past or present affiliation with military forces may, while not actually on duty with same, act in a law enforcement capacity. If you think the restriction should be stricter, take it up with Congress, but don't call the current state of affairs a "posse comitatus dodge." It's no more a dodge than taking a deduction for mortgage interest is a tax "dodge." > And I wonder how many are flat-out posse comitatus violations? Well, I'm not going to aver that the PCA *never* gets violated, but it's not quite the cavalier matter you seem to believe it is. At JTF-6, they took the Act *very* seriously and were scrupulous about getting the appropriate waivers for any support provided to civilian law enforcement. (You *did* know that the President can waive PCA any time he feels like it, didn't you? And that he's delegated this authority to the Department of Justice?) I have personally flown anti-drug missions out of San Diego, when I was in the Navy. Aircrews don't concern themselves with the details of the Posse Comitatus Act, but I happen to know that the waiver process was lengthy and had to be approved by *very* senior individuals in the Department of Justice. You may also be interested to know that, when it came out that ATF agents had lied to obtain waivers for military support of the raid at Waco, and that they routinely threw in a "suspected drug nexus," whether it really existed or not, to obtain such support, JTF-6 swore off working with them. As far as I know, JTF-6 hasn't given ATF the time of day since then. It's debatable whether the JTF-6 staff knew or had reason to believe that ATF lied routinely about this -- military officers can be surprisingly naive sometimes about such things. Reading over the above, it looks like I'm claiming that the military in general, and JTF-6 in particular, are completely blameless in the events that led up to Waco. I don't believe that. I believe there should have been a really hard, serious look at the way JTF-6 did business back then. (Frankly, I'd be happier if it were just closed down, but that's another thread.) But your specifics are off base here, and there's no evidence that "the military" did anything criminal or really wrong in connection with Waco. Certainly nothing like ATF/FBI's misdeeds. -- From the catapult of J.D. Baldwin |+| "If anyone disagrees with anything I _,_ Finger baldwin@netcom.com |+| say, I am quite prepared not only to _|70|___:::)=}- for PGP public |+| retract it, but also to deny under \ / key information. |+| oath that I ever said it." --T. Lehrer ***~~~~----------------------------------------------------------------------- |