Cohen Sketches Future of Homeland Defense By Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service
Brooke Rowe
Forces Press Service
(EXCERPT) WASHINGTON, Oct. 6, 2000 -- What happens if a terrorist
sarin gas attack occurs in New York or Washington or Los Angeles -- or
all three at once? Who is to respond?
Defense Secretary William S. Cohen asked these questions Oct. 2 in a
http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2000/s20001002-secdef.htmlspeech
to the Center for Strategic and International Studies here. The
answer, he said, is the Department of Defense.
Cohen said when he first proposed formation of a "commander-in-chief
for homeland defense" the idea was controversial. "Immediately there
were questions being raised as to whether or not this would intrude
upon the constitutional prohibitions of getting our military involved
in domestic affairs," he said.
But a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction would quickly
overwhelm any local response. "Is there any other institution in this
country that has the organizational capability, the logistics
capability, other than the Department of Defense, to respond, to
provide transportation, to move medicines and personnel, provide the
hospital beds, etc.?"
Cohen said the United States must deal with the question now. "I
believe that we, as a democratic society, have yet to come to grips
with the tension that exists between our constitutional protection of
the right to privacy with the demand that we made on the need to
protect us," he said.
He cited what DoD is doing now to support first responders. He said
the department is working with officials in 120 U.S. cities to ask and
answer questions now so they won't have to be answered in an actual
attack. The issues DoD and cities are addressing include how to
protect the fire fighters, police and other first responders on the
scene, and how first responders would identify the agent used.
He said DoD trainers are going over all contingencies with city
officials. One he noted was what cities should do with contaminated
casualties.
"Right now we're preparing the local agencies from the fire, the
police, the health care facilities, the National Guard under the
governor's jurisdiction," he said. "But if you start to have multiple
attacks with mass casualties, then I think that it will be very
logical and probably imperative that you have to turn to the Defense
Department to provide assistance.
"We need to work this out in advance so we don't have the kind of
constitutional challenge or confusion taking place in those times of
crises."
Cohen said the American people also should debate what changes, if
any, need to be made regarding the right of privacy. He said the best
way to defend against terrorists is to make sure their attacks do not
succeed. Greater intelligence capabilities are needed to stop
terrorists, he suggested.
The United States and its friends and allies already share information
on terrorists because terrorism knows no national boundaries, he
noted. But, he said, sources are needed in the United States --
Timothy McVeigh was not a foreign terrorist.
"Greater information means a greater invasion of privacy," Cohen said.
"Do you start to profile? Do we say certain types of people are more
likely than others to be carrying these noxious weapons?
"We have to be very careful how we go about gathering greater
information and greater intelligence, because that comes right up
against the wall of constitutional protections against your right of
privacy."
---------------------------
Brooke Rowe
Associate Librarian
The American War Library
www.americanwarlibrary.com
Fredric L. Rice
> Cohen Sketches Future of Homeland Defense By Jim Garamone American
> Forces Press Service
> (EXCERPT) WASHINGTON, Oct. 6, 2000 -- What happens if a terrorist
> sarin gas attack occurs in New York or Washington or Los Angeles -- or
> all three at once? Who is to respond?
> Defense Secretary William S. Cohen asked these questions Oct. 2 in a
> http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2000/s20001002-secdef.htmlspeech
> to the Center for Strategic and International Studies here. The
> answer, he said, is the Department of Defense.
> Cohen said when he first proposed formation of a "commander-in-chief
> for homeland defense" the idea was controversial. "Immediately there
> were questions being raised as to whether or not this would intrude
> upon the constitutional prohibitions of getting our military involved
> in domestic affairs," he said.
Damned interesting. I suspect that domestic terrorists would
use local biological agents; cultists and these self-proclaimed
"militia" gun nut groups using easily-manufactured biological
agents such as antrax and -- what's been done here in California
-- the agent which produces botchulism. (sp?)
There's a Benefit concert in Clearwater, Florida coming up at
a club which will help to fund reforms of a well-known organized
crime syndicate that tries to hide behind the banner of religion.
(The organized crime syndicate is responsible for the single most
expensive and broad case of domestic espionage in America's
history.) That would be a _perfect_ place for the crooks to
introduce a biological agent into the food.
Nutters can contaminate foods at public resturaunts and bars
very easily so I expect that domestic terrorism has to be concerned
with _that_ rather than with nerve gas attacks.
--
The Skeptic Tank http://www.skeptictank.org/ fr...@skeptictank.org
http://www.nots.org/ http://www.taxexemptchildabuse.net/
http://www.xenu.net/ http://mp3.cafepress.com/skeptictank/
http://www.bobminton.org/