The question may be 'are we paranoid enough?' (Bleeping autoplay warning)
The conditions include military support needed “to prevent significant loss of life or wanton destruction of property and are necessary to restore governmental function and public order.” A second use is when federal, state and local authorities “are unable or decline to provide adequate protection for federal property or federal governmental functions.”
“Federal action, including the use of federal military forces, is authorized when necessary to protect the federal property or functions,” the directive states.
Military assistance can include loans of arms, ammunition, vessels and aircraft. The directive states clearly that it is for engaging civilians during times of unrest.
A U.S. official said the Obama administration considered but rejected deploying military force under the directive during the recent standoff with Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and his armed supporters.
Defense analysts say there has been a buildup of military units
within non-security-related federal agencies, notably the creation of
Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams. The buildup has raised
questions about whether the Obama administration is undermining civil liberties under the guise of counterterrorism and counternarcotics efforts.
agencies with SWAT teams reportedly include the Department of
Agriculture, the Railroad Retirement Board, the Tennessee Valley
Authority, the Office of Personnel Management, the Consumer Product
Safety Commission, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the Education