The threat of martial law

In a column called "Giving Democracy The Bird," Ted Rall explains why some of us are so alarmed at President Bush's suggestion that the military could be called out to enforce quarantines in the unlikely event that avian flu becomes a human pandemic. Bush wants to alter the Posse Comitatus law to allow the use of the U.S. military for domestic policing.

"Overturning Posse Comitatus would allow troops to break into houses and apartments and sweep the streets for flu victims, and forcibly contain them in Guantánamo-style camps," Rall writes. "They could seal off cities or whole states. These extreme measures could also be deployed against U.S. citizens after hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, or even election disputes - whenever and wherever a president decides they are necessary."

What's the problem with using Team America, the World Police Force, against Americans?

"Civilian cops may be rude or even abusive, but they're not supposed to shoot you without a good reason. You're their boss, or at least they work for the mayor you elected. Not so with soldiers. Military troops are responsible only to their chain of command, which is likely to end thousands of miles away in Washington. They shoot sooner and quicker than cops, and they have much bigger guns. Regimes that use the military to maintain order tell their citizens: do what we tell you, or else. They rely upon violence rather than tacit consensus to stay in charge.

"Rule under the point of a gun is not democracy."

This is my first exposure to Rall, whom I fear is a simple Democratic Party partisan - his latest column opines "No matter who wins in 2008, we'll be better off than we are now," something many people believed about 2000 and have since been bitterly disillusioned. But he's right on the subject of the Posse Comitatus law, and if Congress actually goes along with Bush, we're in a heap of trouble.

The ever reliable Walter Williams also checks in on this outrage.

"Enacted during Reconstruction, the purpose of the Posse Comitatus Act was to severely limit the powers of the federal government to use the military for local law enforcement. Would Americans tolerate such a gigantic leap in the federalization of law enforcement? I'm guessing the answer is yes. In the name of safety, we've undergone decades of softening up to accept just about any government edict that our predecessors would have found offensive."

Will Americans wake up and listen to reason? I'm afraid it's 50-50 optimistically, and probably something like 10-90 realistically. In case you haven't gotten the gist after four installments of my Bill of Rights ramblings, our liberties have been cheerfully jettisoned a long time ago.