45
submitted 1 month ago by yogthos@lemmy.ml to c/usa@lemmy.ml

3.3. LEVELS OF AUTHORITY.

Subject to Paragraph 3.1., Defense Intelligence Components may provide personnel to assist a Federal department or agency, including a Federal law enforcement agency, or a State or local law enforcement agency when lives are in danger, in response to a request for such assistance, in accordance with the following approval authorities:

a. Secretary of Defense Approval.

(1) The Secretary of Defense may approve any type of requested permissible assistance described in Paragraph 3.2.

(2) The decision to approve requests for these types of permissible assistance described in Paragraph 3.2. to law enforcement agencies and other civil authorities are reserved to the Secretary of Defense:

(a) Provision of personnel to support response efforts for civil disturbances, which may also require Presidential authorization.

(b) DoD response to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield explosive incidents.

(c) Assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury. It also includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Such use of force must be in accordance with DoDD 5210.56, potentially as further restricted based on the specifics of the requested support.

(d) Provision or use of DoD unmanned systems in the United States except as delegated by the Secretary of Defense pursuant to the October 31, 2023 Secretary of Defense Memorandum.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

part of the plan for project 2025, made by the supreme court in advance. This SHOULD have you worried.

Edit -actually, it's completely made up! they TOTALLY had me!

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bc-us-election-2024-military-misinformation_n_671ac473e4b0ede6b2c0bbce

[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 month ago

The dems are now officially part of project 2025?

[-] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
[-] yogthos@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 month ago

This decisions was not made by the supreme court, but do go on.

[-] macabrett@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago

I have no idea what that person is going on about. Big bold letters say the change was approved by Kathleen H. Hicks, the Deputy Secretary of Defense under Biden.

[-] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

how would that have been approved?

edit - well, wait. are that expecting an uprising of some kind?

[-] macabrett@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

huh? are you okay? is something broken?

[-] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 month ago

This is part of a recent Biden executive order. Dems are leading the charge on this.

[-] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago
[-] TheOubliette@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 month ago

This is entirely consistent with decades of Democratic policy. Pro-cop, anti-peoples actions.

You know Democrats new "Midwest Dad" Tim Walz? He's the guy that sent the national guard at the George Floyd protests.

Democrats are not our friends.

[-] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

sounds like neither candidates are at this point. one is quiet about it, and the other is loud about it. well, nobody likes secrets, right?

[-] macabrett@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 month ago

There's no "if so". This is literally Biden's administration doing this. You can click the link, ya know? You can see who this was approved by. You can look up the executive order. It's all freely available information provided directly by the government.

[-] ohellidk@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

so what's the reason behind it, if there's even one mentioned?

[-] macabrett@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

No reason mentioned that I can find, but I do know it is a wholly negative change.

this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2024
45 points (100.0% liked)

United States | News & Politics

7231 readers
264 users here now

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS