All right guys, this is going to be a short one. For weeks there have been arguments ad nauseum on the subject of homeland security, and the use of our military for domestic defense vs. the possible loss of personal freedoms (the old 'slippery slope' don't ya know) which that might entail. The writer is not an alarmist but not sure where is the switch which turns on the alarm which should now be sounding for all of us.

Here is the case layout:

First of all, do you also find it interesting that the arguments which we are all currently hearing are even being made?

Obviously this discussion is being caused by a total lack of knowledge about U.S. History or even world history on the part of all too many of our citizens? As originally written, the Constitution of the United States assigns to the Federal Government two duties/responsibilities. That's right, two (2), only two. The first is the security of this country's borders and the second is the safety of its citizens. That's it. End of sentence. Since they are not specifically assigned to the Federal Government, all other duties are, according to the Ninth Amendment, the responsibility of the various 50 States. But the States' Rights argument is going to have to wait for its turn which will occur another time.

Let us not quibble. The Posse Comitatis of 1878 is the law of our land, no question about that. However, even the best of laws may require revisitation and adjustment from time to time as circumstances change. Even our Constitution, a leg of the base triad of support of our Government has been amended 15 times as circumstances warrant. Please note that the above referenced law was passed by the United States Congress and signed into law in 1878. I suspect that its passage was a delayed reaction to what happened in 1861-1865 because, had it been in place during that earlier time, the Civil War (or as a Southern friend of mine refers to it most definitively "The War of the Rebellion") either it would not have been possible or the United States would have been disallowed from defending itself since that involved the use of U.S. troops on domestic territory.

There, by the way, is the first key, the war of 1861-1865 was fought on our own soil. This is an extremely important piece of the puzzle. But such has not been the case from that day to this. Perhaps that seems strange however, please consider that we are now once again involved in a serious effort to defend our own borders. It is true that we have been through several wars in the twentieth century. Our troops fought valiantly in all of them in our name. But now the war isn't just 'over there'. It is not conveniently 'out of sight and mind'. It is here. It is on our doorstep, at our ports of entry, both sea and air, our borders north and south, and our coasts east, west, and gulf.

Thomas Jefferson, when asked what had been created by the Constitutional Convention replied, "A republic, if you can keep it!!" Now is the time to take those steps and engage in those actions which will assure the existence of our democratic republic. Is it just me or what? Haven't we always had a personal responsibility to fulfill if we wish to live in peace within our own borders. Today that means not only in our choice of leaders and shouldering of responsibility, but also physical considerations. As Bill O'Reilly of the Fox News Channel would say, "Where am I wrong?"

So our alternatives are few, ('Guns and Butter' ain't gonna get the job done this time) in some cases singular. Not by our own choice but by the actions of those whose activities have been clearly announced and openly demonstrated. There are many who made fun of and derided John Wayne's unabashed patriotism, Bob Hope's herculean military support efforts over the years. They had their fun. But please consider that it might require that same sort of attitude and action of each one of us if we are going to be sufficiently motivated to do that which must be done in order to achieve that which we all desire.

I particularly appreciate the published comment of the head of the Government of Lithuania. The lady did not mince words. At the N.A.T.O. meeting at which the invitation was extended for her Country to join that organization, she stated that she and her country were backing this country's efforts carte blanche because she and the citizens of her country were all too familiar with and appreciative of the difference between liberty and a lack of it as well as the effort necessary to keep it. We too must take infinite care to protect and defend that which we have. Otherwise we could easily lose our liberty and freedom by default. God knows there are enough people currently in power in this world who would dearly love to 'take us down' and make us as they. For example, one of the latest diatribes out of the Taliban/Al Quaeda in which we were informed that the only way that the people of the United States could avoid a promised/threatened total annihilation would be to get totally out of the Middle East and totally convert to Islam. Or have we forgotten that?

May I suggest that the immediate assumption of the personal responsibility which is required of each and every one of us is a concept with which we all should make an effort to become reacquainted....while we still have that choice to make?

Opinion Piece # 23

Click to Read

Home / List of Topics