In October 2007 the Homeland Security department will be opening the National Applications Office (NAO). The new department will make use of new tools that the government can use to keep tabs on us, the populace of the United States of America. The order to implement the NAO was conceived by the Executive Branch with no Congressional input.
Part of the department’s new job is to act as a clearinghouse for various requests for data from military spy satellite operators who wish to view the U.S. These satellites have a resolution of mere inches, giving officials extremely close-up views of potential targets, suspects, and other people who may be worth looking in on. According to committee Chairman Bennie G. Thompson, the legal staff of Homeland Security and new NAO members declined to attend initial committee hearings for reasons regarding ACLU involvement on the panel.
Members of the House Committee on Homeland Security expressed worries that the program would be in violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, a federal legislation put in place during Reconstruction. The act originally aimed to protect the Southern states from the occupying Northern military forces by severing military involvement in civilian law enforcement. The act served as a precedent for the separation of military and civil law enforcement. According the Washington University Law Quarterly, though, there is a need for reaffirmation of the Posse Comitatus Act in our post-Clinton government.
Due to various problems that may pop up through the NAO, the Committee on Homeland Security put a moratorium on the program until the necessary problem areas are addressed. They want answers to the constitutional, legal and organizational questions that arise from the basic existence of such a department in a government claiming freedom and right to privacy.
This turn for the Orwellian holds many implications for the United States that raise questions that echo those surrounding the controversial Patriot Act. According to some Homeland Security Committee officials, this is new development may be bigger problem for civil liberties and privacy than its predecessor.
When all is said and done, whom can you trust? Enjoy the ensuing paranoia.