Sometimes I have to wonder if Cheney may have been just a bit of the monster his Leftist critics make him out to be.
WASHINGTON – The Bush administration in 2002 considered sending U.S. troops into a Buffalo, N.Y., suburb to arrest a group of terror suspects in what would have been a nearly unprecedented use of military power, The New York Times reported.
Vice President Dick Cheney and several other Bush advisers at the time strongly urged that the military be used to apprehend men who were suspected of plotting with al Qaida, who later became known as the Lackawanna Six, the Times reported on its Web site Friday night. It cited former administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.
The proposal advanced to at least one-high level administration meeting, before President George W. Bush decided against it.
Dispatching troops into the streets is virtually unheard of. TheConstitution and various laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property.
According to the Times, Cheney and other Bush aides said an Oct. 23, 2001, Justice Department memo gave broad presidential authority that allowed Bush to use the domestic use of the military against al-Qaida if it was justified on the grounds of national security, rather than law enforcement.
Among those arguing for the military use besides Cheney were his legal adviser David S. Addington and some senior Defense Department officials, the Times reported.
Opposing the idea were Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser; John B. Bellinger III, the top lawyer at the National Security Council; FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III; and Michael Chertoff, then the head of the Justice Department's criminal division.
Bush ultimately nixed the proposal and ordered the FBI to make the arrests in Lackawanna. The men were subsequently arrested and pleaded guilty to terrorism-related charges.
This is why we follow the Constitution -the original one NOT the 'living breathing' one-
ReplyDeletethe Founders knew that humans were -not to be trusted-not a single one -all of the time -
and never all- anytime ...
C-CS
Ah, CS. I'm glad to see you agree with me.
ReplyDeleteI expect that this post might piss off a few of our readers.
Note, by the way, the AP says Bush "mulled" sending troops into Buffalo.
ReplyDeleteThats the headline.
But, the truth is, Cheney pushed for it, and Bush rejected it.
Bush was a moderate. Cheney was more of a hardcore Conservative.
I like Bush.
;-)
Sorry, Pasto - in my lexicon a "hardcore Conservative" would never, ever, ever use the US military on US soil against US citizens - Posse Comitatus and all.
ReplyDeleteBush had no freaking problem intervening and FORCING banks who did not want or need TARP funds to take them. Perhaps that is not "shredding" but it sure as hell isn't obeying the fundamental law of the land.
Anyhoo - the left only cares if the shredding of the Constitution is done in the name of "national security." "Conservatives," or, if you rather "Classical Liberals" don't want it shredded for any reason. We'd like it obeyed.
There are, what, like seven of us left in the US who actually believe in separation of powers and limited government?
OK, kidding - but I bet you there are not fifteen people in Congress and not five in the Senate who actually believe that.
Really tempted to start talking about starting our own little "experiment in liberty" somewhere. . .
Wonder if there are any islands we could buy and colonize?
I think trying that in any state absent the state governor and legislature's full backing is hopeless. That is why I was hoping the 10th Amendment project would get more steam. But seems most of the states think that because they get "federal" money (how freakin' RICH is that??? THAT IS OUR MONEY!), that we can't piss off the feds and tell 'em to stick it.
If a majority of the states told the feds that we own them, and that they need to start doing (or not doing, as the case may be) what the PEOPLE want, that 10th amendment movement might mean something.
Thanks for letting me vent. . .
Ro
I agree that what Bush did with TARP was wrong. I'm with you on that.
ReplyDeleteAnd, good point, it isn't conservative of Cheney to have proposed violating Posse Comitatus.
Also, when the code pinkers were all over the Bush administration, and when that administration was being challenged on the detentions, on the Patriot Act, on the FISA stuff, I did have some comfort that folks were making real arguments about the real limitations of executive authority in a Constitutionally appropriate manner.
ReplyDeletePlus we had a non-stop media extravaganza of every single negative thing (some even made up!) about the administration.
None of that applies now. Seems like every other branch and every aggrieved party has just caved (I fear healthcare is a done deal, irrespective of the current kerfuffle in Congress). They either get threatened or bought off.
And the newspapers and teevee are pretty much just the Ministry of (dis) Information.
So if the left helped Bush decide that a blatant violation of law wasn't such a good idea, I say, "Bully for them." Now, if we only had the same checks with the current occupant of the WH. . .
If I have the scratch I plan to sue over a number of the provisions of the current "save healthcare for illegals by killing all the old people" plan.
It will be interesting to see how that goes. Probably be thrown out for standing, but we will see.
Ro
This is a bit OT but does anyone have any solid info on that swine flu vaccine flap? I'm being deluged with conspiracy theory info to the tune that the government and drug companies are plotting to KILL US ALL. No, they don't mean the healthcare bill. That's not sexy enough.
ReplyDeleteThe main concern I have with H1N1 is whether it will mutate into that 1918 form that is extremely deadly. That could be a real horror show. But the conspiracy theory stuff is apparently gaining momentum after the pattern of 9/11 trooferism.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI don't think healthcare will pass. The more the public learns about it, the more the polls show people reject the idea.
RRA,
ReplyDeleteThat conspiracy theory is so crazy. If the drug companies kill us all then who will they sell drugs to?
:)
RRA - I also heard at one point that there is debate on whether the 1918 pandemic might not have been a "SARS"-type illness rather than the "classic" influenza.
ReplyDeleteAnd also, I heard that if one got what was called the "Russian" flu back in the 70's, one may have resistance to this next H1N1.
I also read that folks who have been getting flu shots for years may have some resistance to this latest H1N1, as shots over the years have contained vaccine for similar strains.
I do not remember much about the old swine flu vaccine, but I have read recently that it paralyzed some people and that it was subsequently withdrawn, as the "side effects" were pretty bad and the swine flu? - Not so much.
Maybe the memory of the hugely mis-handled "Swine Flu - We Are All Going to Die" - scare of the 70's is the genesis of this latest conspiracy scare.
That plus how vague the information regarding the flu is. CDC no longer testing folks for it?? No longer reporting deaths from it??
Whassup with that? Because it is almost impossible to differentially attribute death from flu to death from other factors in so many cases? Because there are not really that many flu deaths?
Why not test? If you do get the
swine flu now, will you not have some immunity to it later? Why vaccinate people who have had it (assuming the H1N1 is not included in the usual shot and is a separate vaccination this year)?
Well, they don't have to answer to the likes of us, now, do they?
This official attitude of "trust us" has the exact opposite effect. Once again, maybe not an active conspiracy to hurt people, but certainly a culture of arrogance and secrecy that leads many to distrust the motives of the "government" who is "here to help." Since we have seen them "hurt" us so often in the past.
By the way - my kid gets the FluMist which is great. She never has any side effects, and apparently it covers more types of flu. It would be sweet if they could include the H1N1 in FluMist this year.
Ro
Pasto
ReplyDeleteThat's about the level it's at, too: "...the US government and pharmaceutical industries have been conspiring for years to engender a flu epidemic...". All the money goes to Donald Rumsfeld. Oh, and the government is going to "kidnap you at gunpoint and lock you in a concentration camp" if you refuse. This is starting to sound like somebody watched too much old footage of Peoples Temple.
Nice if they put that energy into blocking the healthcare disaster instead. These are the same people who claim thimerosol in vaccines causes autism. Of course 40 years ago it was believed that cruel parents caused autism, so I suppose that's a step up.
I'm hearing all this, btw, from an Obama voter with buyer's regret. What was that old saying that there's nobody more fanatic than an ex-anything?
Ro, I'm not sure if it was more SARS-like, but with the really virulent form people developed hemorrhagic pneumonia, turned mahogany color, drowned in their own fluid-filled lungs' sometimes in just a few hours. Very nasty stuff. It was especially hard on young, otherwise healthy adults who came down with viral pneumonia as a symptom. Something about an over-reaction by their stronger immune system causing a "cytokine storm" that just made the congestion in the lungs much worse.
Viruses are verrrrry strrrrange...
A mutated strain could be a major mess. A bad vaccine could be a major mess. The healthcare bill is already a major mess and this is drawing attention away from it.
RRA - sounds like you just described SARS. I wonder if it was a combo - like when you get a bacterial infection after a bad virus?
ReplyDeleteIn the old days when viral encephalitis was going around, the docs always told us - "well, we can't treat the virus, but we can manage the secondary bacterial infections."
I agree about resource drain though.
If those 55 and older actually knew that the "health care reform" (how ghastly is that moniker??) was to stop treating older people I think there would be an uprising.
But I just don't think people really believe that could happen here.
I don't know what else to do except buy a sandwich board and walk the streets. I have called and written reps and senators and contributed $$$ to the outfits opposing it.
I find it repugnant, let alone illegal to deny life-extending care to seniors while covering illegal residents' care. The Brits do it and no one there seems to give a crap. Ditto the Canadians.
Makes me so angry and sick to my stomach I can barely even think about it.
What a bunch of immoral ghouls the American people have elected.
Ro
I'm just awash now in emails with this CT stuff and I'm appalled. I thought I knew about "troofers" and all, but this stuff is total paranoia and probably a more serious distraction than I suspected. Could one reason not enough attention is being focused on the realities of the health bill be that too many people are working themselves up in the belief that WHO (can't help it, always makes me think of rock bands and Horton) is out to kill us all?
ReplyDeleteI do a lot of reading about and looking at natural disaster stuff (OK, so I'm morbid) and a distinct pattern I've noted is that people become absolutely fascinated with the idea of dangerous natural phenomena but many (excepting the already experienced) will not actually take action to save themselves until the danger is so immediate, obvious, and physical they can't avoid it. They rarely "panic" when warned in advance of danger, but instead will stand there staring in fascination at the approaching volcanic eruption/tsunami/flood/blizzard/hurricane until the overwhelming force actually hits them. About the only thing that will get them moving faster is fire, and even then many will wait until the heat is unbearable, at which point it is usually too late.
The other theory I have about CT is that the more outlandish the conspiracy theory is, the more "fun" it is to be a believer. The very unreality of the theory carries it into tha realm similar to science-fiction. At some unconscious level I think some of them know it's b.s. but they can't give it up. Add to that, the frenetic level of theorizing makes them look like they're doing a lot of "work" and "research" but in reality it's just making unsubstantiated assumptions. (The other day somebody claimed a cult leader I once knew is the son of a former First Lady. They happen to share the same name. Ergo... Sharing such a "shocking fact" with someone who has actually met said cult leader's late mom, does not add to one's credibility.)
RRA - your observation about panic over imaginary scaries while being in complete denial over real threats is amazing.
ReplyDeleteSo, so true. And quite frightening in and of itself, frankly.
Ro