Obama's Police State: A "Civilian National Security Force" as Strong as Military

OutOfBreath · July 2008

Uhm, it may just be me, but couldn't Obama's statement be interpreted merely as that he feels more attention must be brought to other parts of national security in addition to the military part of it? Yes, you need more security, but not military security, but a larger national guard/civilian organizations playing a larger supporting role? "This cannot be won by military means, and actually other means are at least as or more important" kind of thing?

Maybe that's why noone else questioned that statement. And the capital letters are yours in this case.

Much ado for a single quote, I'd say.

Peace
Dan

DriftingByTheStorm · July 2008

Maybe THIS Is Why There Was Such A Ruccous?
Possibly the MOST POORLY WORDED\ARRANGED ARTICLE EVER?
(unless of course, the article is correct, and this is how Obama intended his remarks to be taken)

Is U.S. ready to serve?
Experts: Bipartisan support, societal woes could aid Obama's attempt to boost volunteerism
By John McCormick | Chicago Tribune reporter
July 3, 2008
From Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy to Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, presidents and those who aspire to be president have long put forth calls for greater public service. Some found success, while others fell short of their lofty rhetoric.

Roosevelt formed the Civilian Conservation Corps and Kennedy created the Peace Corps with strong support and participation, while Clinton's AmeriCorps has never fully realized its potential, hampered by continuing funding struggles since its 1994 inception.

Still, as Sen. Barack Obama called for greater public service Wednesday, some experts predict the potential now exists for programs seeking an expansion of volunteerism to succeed, despite a slumping economy and the nation being at war.

"This may be a moment in time that is different from when earlier calls did not prove that effective," said Stephen Goldsmith, a former Indianapolis mayor and chairman of the Corporation for National and Community Service.

Obama hopes to expand U.S. service programs: GRAPHIC Goldsmith, a Republican and professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, said bipartisan support, serious societal problems and heightened interest in service among young people could offer new or expanded service programs the ability for growth not seen in decades

He said surveys show today's youth, a group sometimes called the " 9/11 generation," is deeply attracted to service, even as such interest has fallen off for other age groups following the attacks in 2001.

"It may represent a real shift to interest in community service," Goldsmith said.

Amid that environment, Obama outlined several proposals to boost service, both at home and abroad, during a speech in Colorado Springs.

"Loving your country shouldn't just mean watching fireworks on the 4th of July," Obama said. "Loving your country must mean accepting your responsibility to do your part to change it. If you do, your life will be richer, our country will be stronger."

In his speech at a University of Colorado campus, he pledged that enhanced public service and active citizenship would be a central cause of his presidency.

"We will ask Americans to serve," the Illinois Democrat said. "We will create new opportunities for Americans to serve."

Obama's draw to youth
For supporters, Obama's credibility on the topic is enhanced because he proved during the primary campaign that he could captivate and then mobilize young voters. His campaign argues they might also follow him into community service.

Clinton had a similar, though not quite as powerful, pull among youth. But his AmeriCorps program, which recruits workers in exchange for an education stipend, has never caught on the way the Peace Corps did in the 1960s and '70s.

Funding for AmeriCorps has been strained amid agency mismanagement and disdain for the program among some Republicans.

Still, it recorded its 500,000th participant last year. Volunteers nationwide have served needy communities by tutoring children, feeding the homeless, caring for the elderly and rebuilding areas struck by disaster.

Obama promised to increase AmeriCorps slots from 75,000 to 250,000 and pledged to double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011.

Presumptive GOP nominee John McCain of Arizona also supports an expansion of both programs and has stressed public service, including in the military, during campaign appearances.

Obama repeated his pledge to boost the size of the active military. But he said the nation's future and safety depends on more than just additional service members.

"It also depends on the teacher in East L.A., or the nurse in Appalachia, the after-school worker in New Orleans, the Peace Corps volunteer in Africa, the Foreign Service officer in Indonesia," he said.

Obama had outlined many of the proposals offered Wednesday during appearances in Iowa last December.

Goals set for students
[From Here]"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set," he said Wednesday. "We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

He said he would make federal assistance conditional on school districts establishing service programs and set the goal of 50 hours of service a year for middle school and high school students.

For college students, Obama would set the goal at 100 hours of service a year and create a $4,000 annual tax credit for college students tied to that level of service.[To Here. See The Problem? CONTEXT. Yikes!]

In Chicago, meanwhile, billionaire investor Warren Buffett headlined two fundraisers to benefit Obama and the Democratic National Committee.

My3rdEye · July 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

Obama's "Civilian Nationals Security Force"
-Joseph Farah

With all the reporters covering the major presidential candidates, it amazes me no one ever seems to ask the right questions.

For several days now, WND has been hounding Barack Obama's campaign about a statement he made July 2 in Colorado Springs – a statement that blew my mind, one that has had me scratching my head ever since.

In talking about his plans to double the size of the Peace Corps and nearly quadruple the size of AmeriCorps and the size of the nation's military services, he made this rather shocking (and chilling) pledge: "We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Now, since I've never heard anyone inside or out of government use the phrase "civilian national security force" before, I was more than a little curious about what he has in mind.

Is it possible I am the only journalist in America who sought clarification on this campaign promise?

What does it mean?

If we're going to create some kind of national police force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, isn't this rather a big deal?

I thought Democrats generally believed the U.S. spent too much on the military. How is it possible their candidate is seeking to create some kind of massive but secret national police force that will be even bigger than the Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force put together?

Now, maybe he was misquoted by the Congressional Quarterly and the Chicago Tribune. I guess it's possible. If so, you would think he would want to set the record straight. Maybe he misspoke. That has certainly happened before. Again, why wouldn't the rest of my colleagues show some curiosity about such a major and, frankly, bone-chilling proposition?

Are we talking about creating a police state here?

The U.S. Army alone has nearly 500,000 troops. That doesn't count reserves or National Guard. In 2007, the U.S. Defense budget was $439 billion.

Is Obama serious about creating some kind of domestic security force bigger and more expensive than that?

If not, why did he say it? What did he mean?

So far, despite our attempts to find out, the Obama campaign is not talking.

At this point all I can do is enlist your help – and the help of every other journalist who still thinks the American people have a right to know the specifics about a presidential candidate's biggest and boldest initiatives before the election. I also want to ask radio talk-show hosts across America to start asking this same question. I have a feeling if others join our quest, we might yet get clarification on this proposal from Obama.

Who will Obama appoint to administer this new "civilian national security force"? Where will the money come from? Where in the Constitution does he see justification for the federal government creating such a domestic army?

The questions are endless.

But before we can hope to get to the specifics, we need much more in the way of generalizations from Obama.

Certainly there have been initiatives like this elsewhere – Cuba, the Soviet Union, China, Venezuela, North Korea. But has anything like this ever been proposed in a free country?

I have a feeling there would be more questions from the press if I myself had proposed the creation of something as preposterous as a "civilian national security force" than there has been about this proposal by the presidential candidate currently leading in most of the polls. I'm quite sure I would be hung out to dry as some kind of Nazi thug. Meanwhile, Obama makes this wild suggestion and it is met with a collective yawn from the watchdogs.

Help me out here. What am I missing?

Can I get a hand?
What IS he talking about?

WTF do we need a million well armed people ON THE STREET for?
WTF is he going to do with a "CIVILIAN NATIONAL SECURITY FORCE"?

As well funded and as strong as the ENTIRE Military?
For DOMESTIC used !?!

Is this a fucking joke?
Police State, anyone?

Obama supporters.
HELP YOUR BOY OUT HERE.
WTF!
:cool:

Just watched the speech on You Tube and in the context of the whole thing it looks to me like he was just talking about the importance of volunteering and public service. Talks about increasing available slots in the Peace Corp and AmeriCorp.. stuff like that.

I don't think he was talking about starting like a new branch of government like the Dept. of Homeland Sec or anything like that. Just a call to service. He also talked about increasing the number of troops in the military.

Just my take.

puremagic · July 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

just give me an idea what he really means?

--Bush used civilian Blackwater Security personnel in New Orleans to supplement the police force who had abandoned their posts.

--Bush used civilian militias from other States to stand in with border patrols in AZ and CA to supplement the promised increase to the border patrols.

Bush knew that his Administration would continue to utilize the National Guard in its efforts aboard. Governors were speaking out about lack of National Guard resources during domestic emergencies. So he came up with a volunteer corp.

--In 2007 President Bush in his State of the Union speech called for the creation of a new civilian corps ... that would function "much like our military reserve". ...

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0107/012307p2.htm

Obama's plan is in line with this idea for response to domestic emergencies.

fuck · July 2008

puremagic wrote:

--Bush used civilian Blackwater Security personnel in New Orleans to supplement the police force who had abandoned their posts.

Actually he didn't USE them. Blackwater went there on their own. Because that's what happens when you give all that power to mercenary companies like Blackwater, they do whatever the fuck they want.

Oh and Blackwater is NOT a civilian militia, it's a privatized corporation.

--Bush used civilian militias from other States to stand in with border patrols in AZ and CA to supplement the promised increase to the border patrols.

Companies like Blackwater are now building bases on the borders. These companies are NOT civilian militias.

--In 2007 President Bush in his State of the Union speech called for the creation of a new civilian corps ... that would function "much like our military reserve". ...

http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0107/012307p2.htm

Obama's plan is in line with this idea for response to domestic emergencies.

Sounds terrible.

puremagic · July 2008

_outlaw wrote:

Actually he didn't USE them. Blackwater went there on their own. Because that's what happens when you give all that power to mercenary companies like Blackwater, they do whatever the fuck they want.

Oh and Blackwater is NOT a civilian militia, it's a privatized corporation.

Companies like Blackwater are now building bases on the borders. These companies are NOT civilian militias.

Sounds terrible.

1. Blackwater is not part of the U.S. military force. They are civilian personnel of a corporation for hire. Yes, they were sent as armed personnel under contract by the U.S. government. Note, I did not refer to Blackwater as militia.

Civilian organized militias from various States were sent to AZ and CA to stand in with border patrol.

2. It doesn't matter where Blackwater or security companies like Blackwater build compounds. Unless the government authorizes them to act in the name of the government they are what they are, a private civilian security force for hire subject to the laws of the U.S., unlike their mission in Iraq.

3. As terrible as it sounds, it is Bush's plan and to me it does borders on a police state of action when put in use.

fuck · July 2008

puremagic wrote:

1. Blackwater is not part of the U.S. military force. They are civilian personnel of a corporation for hire. Yes, they were sent as armed personnel under contract by the U.S. government. Note, I did not refer to Blackwater as militia.

For New Orleans: http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=12634
You referred to civilian militias, but failed to mention Blackwater separately, which is why I assumed you thought them as militia.

Civilian organized militias from various States were sent to AZ and CA to stand in with border patrol.

Other than the fact that it's highly debatable whether this is a good idea (since there are lots of racists):

2. It doesn't matter where Blackwater or security companies like Blackwater build compounds. Unless the government authorizes them to act in the name of the government they are what they are, a private civilian security force for hire subject to the laws of the U.S., unlike their mission in Iraq.

Info on their base:
http://mexidata.info/id1416.html (older one)
http://socialistworker.org/2008/06/18/blackwater-border-base

Obama's Police State: A "Civilian National Security Force" as Strong as Military

Comments

Categories