TangoBlue
American Adventurist
This is a perfect example of one who has nothing better to do than call out names and insult one whose opinion they do not like, no biggie.
I see the illusion of freedom and liberty is real in your realm perhaps from behind a curtain FULL OF LIES I'm now willing to bet you specialize in psyops.
So, you deny Leon Panetta and cohorts telling the U.S. Congress that the U.S. MILITARY is beholding to the UNITED NATIONS and not the congress relating to its war making powers? In your mind that's civilian control of the military I'd bet. Again, see it in their own words; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zNwOeyuG84&feature=player_embedded
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/decad031.asp
Or how about the U.S. Supreme court rendering rulings based upon international law? I won't waste any time citing the many cases you can research them yourself. I'm well aware of Codes cited are broad and always subject to interpretation and I reserve the right to interpret the PATRIOT ACT & HOMELAND SECURITY as a malignancy to freedom and liberty DIGEST THAT SOME along with your grandmas fruitcake!
Again, As for DOD controlling LE again see emergency management assistance compacts (military compacts); emergency support functions (ESF) for law enforcement within the various states of the union, but again you'll just deny they exist.
"The truth you can't handle the truth"!
You remind me of the phrase, "it may not be legal/lawful or constitutional but that's the way it is" doesn't appeal to me and a vast majority of private Americans these days.
I'm guessing you will just keep up the tantrum and stay in the state of denial I'll not respond further.......................Have a nice day.:ylsmoke:
Gosh, I don't have anything against you, I just think some of your interpretations are nutty - like my Grandma's fruitcake. No, my military specialty wasn't PSYOPS; worse, I was a staff officer and I'm here to help. But I was a successful staff officer who adhered to truth and fact.
I find it ironic that you quote the iconic movie character from "A Few Good Men," Jack Nicholson as Col Nathan Jessup, who after having been caught in a lie exclaimed, "You can't handle the truth!"
I wonder if you actually read what you cite. The video represents Mr. Sessions in an act of political grandstanding. The subject at hand is the concept of America actually respecting our international treaties. Treaties signed by the Executive and approved by the Legislative branch are part of the law of this land. We have agreements with nations and organizations globally - are you suggesting we not honor them? The SECDEF and COS of the Army are engaged in a precision vocabulary exchange with Mr. Sessions as he tries to challenge (which has been done since 1951 with every president irrespective of political affiliation) the relationship between the Executive and Legislative branches.
The second document you cited is an act from our legislature that states, "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "United Nations Participation Act of 1945." Under section 6 of that act is the legal basis for the Executive and the military to consult with those treaty organizations to conduct military operations. That is the basis of Mr. Panetta's and the General's reply - don't you find it odd that Mr. Sessions appears ignorant of that law?
Now, if we were as a Nation to declare war against Syria then constitutionally the President has the obligation to seek approval from Congress -- that's provided for under the "War Powers Act."
You do realize too we are a founding member of NATO, right? Since 1949 our treaty with those 28 member-states across North America and Europe has provided for our collective defense and a significant contribution to the demise of the former Soviet Union.
I'm very familiar with the National Strategy for Homeland Security and the National Response Framework (NRF). There are several Emergency Support Function Annexes under the NRF, which is essentially an operational plan and supporting (ESF) Annexes to the plan. I've worked within the Incident Command System and also taught it to other personnel over the years when I was on active duty. That's how I can discern that you really have no idea of what you speak, other than to cite some official-sounding titles and acronyms in defense of your specious claims.
This concludes my "tantrum" of fact to your fallacious hyperbole. However, I'm pretty certain you'll be back and continue to respond with your entertaining half-truths.
I'll do my job to counter your misinformation and I'm sure you'll continue to spread incomplete and misleading information and misattribution... say, you wouldn't happen to be in PSYOPS, would you? I think you're actually trying to use retroactive interference techniques on the forum. :Wow1: