Bush mulled sending troops into Buffalo

[Bob Hubbard]

No word on if he asked the Brits for information on how best to invade Buffalo.

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. The Constitution and various laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090725/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_terror_domestic_raid

 

[Carol]

*chuckle*

And in other news, with President Obama's approval ratings tumbling further, the Washington press corps have resorted to talking about what Bush DIDN'T do in hopes of creating a distraction. Film at 11.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Lol!

 

[celtic_crippler]

Dispatching troops into the streets is virtually unheard of. The Constitution and various laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property.

...and when was the last time the government let the Constitution stand in the way doing whatever they please?

It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see soldiers on every corner stopping people and asking to see their papers.

Vere are your paperz?-:armed:

Papers? I don't need no stinkin' papers!-:moon:

:snipe2:-Oh ya? Zmart Alex...take zat!

 

[CoryKS]

...and when was the last time the government let the Constitution stand in the way doing whatever they please?

I don't know... maybe when Bush decided not to send troops to Buffalo?

 

[Empty Hands]

*chuckle*

And in other news, with President Obama's approval ratings tumbling further, the Washington press corps have resorted to talking about what Bush DIDN'T do in hopes of creating a distraction. Film at 11.

Nonsense. Finding out what has been kept from us is important. To the extent that we do so, it is necessary in order for the people to hold their government accountable. We have a right to know, about this, about the massive and illegal expansion of surveillance, about all of it.

We have a right to know when Obama does it too. Our government takes enough power to itself as it is.

I for one find it troubling that any administration would consider using the military for such purposes. Besides the obvious imagery of it, the only logical reason I can think of for it is a reason to avoid accountability. Perhaps they wanted these guys to join Padilla in the limbo world where habeas corpus doesn't exist. Not much else makes sense. These plotters weren't trained military units, and even if they were, our own police have many such units now trained in such tactics.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Look I don't get it. Why on earth would you need the military to apprehend 6 men? 1 SWAT unit should be able to do it.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Because they were suspected terrorists, and the army descending on a suburb would have been the most awesome of "see we're winning the war citizens" ops.

 

[Marginal]

Because they were suspected terrorists, and the army descending on a suburb would have been the most awesome of "see we're winning the war citizens" ops.

It'd also be easier to vanish 'em into the enemy combatant limbo if the military nabbed 'em.

 

[David43515]

Look I don't get it. Why on earth would you need the military to apprehend 6 men? 1 SWAT unit should be able to do it.

I can understand it being mentioned as a option just because: 1) people somehow get the image that the military gets some kind of elite training not available to SWAT. They forget that most SWAT officers are former military, and spend thier down time training anyway. And 2) the image we have of terrorists, as opposed to crimminals motivated by good honest greed, is that they don`t mind dying for the cause as long as they can take enough others with them.

I wouldn`t presume to say that was the thought behind it, but I suppose it`s a possability.