Drones, Lethal Force, and the Death of the Constitution
How the Biden-Harris Directive Threatens American Freedoms
As the Biden-Harris Administration nears the end of its first term, Americans are facing an unsettling reality: the federal government is quietly expanding its power in ways that threaten the very freedoms upon which this country was founded. On September 27, 2024, the Department of Defense issued Directive 5240.01, a document that, on its face, appears to be an administrative update. But buried within its provisions are dangerous expansions of federal authority that threaten to undermine the Constitution, particularly the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. More than just an innocuous policy adjustment, this directive could transform the military and intelligence agencies into tools for domestic surveillance and control, raising serious questions about the true intentions of the Biden-Harris administration.
This directive must be scrutinized in light of past abuses by federal agencies like the FBI and DOJ. Both institutions have demonstrated their willingness to exceed their mandates and violate the rights of U.S. citizens. Directive 5240.01 could very well exacerbate these trends, particularly given its vague language and the unprecedented powers it grants to military and intelligence agencies on U.S. soil.
Expanding Military Power Over Domestic Law Enforcement
One of the most alarming aspects of the directive is Section 3.2, which authorizes Defense Intelligence Components to provide intelligence and operational assistance to law enforcement agencies. While some of this assistance appears justified for national security purposes, much of the language is dangerously broad, allowing intelligence to be shared with law enforcement under murky conditions. The directive allows intelligence components to share information with law enforcement to "protect U.S. intelligence community personnel, property, and information," while also investigating "international terrorist activities or international narcotics activities" (Department of Defense [DoD], 2024, p. 12).
The vague nature of these authorizations is a recipe for abuse. With such a wide mandate, intelligence agencies could share data on U.S. citizens with law enforcement without probable cause, violating the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches and seizures. The FBI's abuse of the FISA process to surveil Trump campaign staffers offers a troubling precedent for how these powers could be misused (Durden, 2023). This provision, under the guise of national security, grants law enforcement the ability to circumvent traditional checks on surveillance, placing Americans’ privacy in jeopardy.
Warrantless Surveillance Under Exigent Circumstances
Section 3.5 outlines the circumstances under which Defense Intelligence Components can bypass standard approval processes in cases of "exigent circumstances." These circumstances are defined as situations where a person’s "life or physical safety is reasonably believed to be in imminent danger" (DoD, 2024, p. 15). While the military must report the details to higher authorities within 72 hours, this provision opens the door for warrantless surveillance and intelligence gathering without the necessary oversight.
The FBI’s infiltration of the January 6th protests illustrates how vague national security concerns can be used to justify excessive surveillance of American citizens (Tucker, 2023). This directive grants military intelligence components the ability to conduct similar operations, raising serious concerns about the abuse of power. What’s to stop these intelligence agencies from conducting surveillance on political dissidents or ordinary Americans who hold views opposed to those in power? The potential for warrantless actions without judicial review threatens to erode due process protections under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Militarization of Intelligence: The Use of Lethal Force
Perhaps the most alarming section of Directive 5240.01 is Section 3.3, which grants the Secretary of Defense the authority to approve the use of lethal force and unmanned systems (such as drones) in domestic operations. The directive explicitly authorizes the use of "assets with potential for lethality," under circumstances where the use of force might reasonably result in "lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury" (DoD, 2024, p. 13).
This provision is a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of military forces in domestic law enforcement. More importantly, it sets a dangerous precedent for the militarization of intelligence and policing within the United States. In an increasingly polarized political climate, could protests be classified as "threats" requiring the use of military drones? The introduction of lethal force in civilian contexts is a slippery slope that could easily lead to the suppression of free speech and political dissent.
The Hidden Clause: Contracts Without Disclosure
Section 1.2.g of the directive permits Defense Intelligence Components to enter into contracts with private organizations or individuals without disclosing their affiliations if the contracts are deemed necessary for "approved activities" (DoD, 2024, p. 4). This provision allows for intelligence operations to be carried out covertly, without any public or judicial oversight. The risk of this clause being used to conduct surveillance on political dissidents, journalists, or other targets is extremely high.
The lack of transparency means that intelligence gathering operations can be conducted in secret, potentially infringing on the rights of citizens who are unaware they are being monitored. This undermines the protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment and further expands the shadowy reach of intelligence agencies into domestic life.
The Inclusion of Foreign Laws: A Threat to U.S. Sovereignty?
One of the most perplexing and concerning aspects of the directive is found in Section 3.2.a.6, which allows for the dissemination of intelligence to U.S. law enforcement if the information "indicates a violation of Federal, State, local, or foreign laws" (DoD, 2024, p. 12). The inclusion of "foreign laws" as a justification for sharing intelligence raises a host of troubling questions. Why are violations of foreign laws relevant to U.S. law enforcement? What kinds of foreign laws are being referred to here? Are these international laws imposed by organizations such as the United Nations (U.N.) or the World Health Organization (WHO)? Are we opening the door to the enforcement of foreign norms and standards on U.S. soil?
This inclusion presents a clear risk to U.S. sovereignty. By granting U.S. intelligence agencies the authority to act on violations of foreign laws, we could be interjecting foreign authority into domestic law enforcement. Could this provision be used to enforce U.N. climate mandates, WHO health regulations, or other foreign laws that may not align with American values and constitutional rights? It is entirely possible that future administrations could use this directive to justify the enforcement of foreign regulations in the U.S., creating a dangerous precedent for foreign influence in domestic affairs.
The inclusion of foreign laws also raises concerns about accountability. What if the intelligence used to justify enforcement is based on foreign legal standards that conflict with U.S. constitutional protections? The ambiguity surrounding the term "foreign laws" opens the door for potential abuses, particularly when it comes to information sharing between U.S. law enforcement and international bodies.
Past Abuses: The FBI and DOJ’s Deprivation of Rights
The FBI and DOJ have long histories of abusing their powers in the name of "national security," often with little to no accountability. The illegal surveillance of Trump campaign staffers through the misuse of FISA warrants is a glaring example of how federal agencies can exceed their mandates (Durden, 2023). In addition, the DOJ’s weaponization of federal law to target pro-life activists and concerned parents—while ignoring violent attacks by pro-abortion groups—illustrates the growing authoritarianism within these institutions (Housley, 2022).
Despite numerous whistleblowers coming forward, accountability remains elusive. These abuses demonstrate that when government agencies are given unchecked power, they will inevitably abuse it. Now, with Directive 5240.01, military intelligence components are being granted powers that could be used to violate the rights of American citizens with even less oversight.
Is a False Flag Operation in the Making?
The timing of this directive, just months before the 2024 presidential election, raises even more questions. With a highly polarized political environment and an election that promises to be fiercely contested, one must wonder: what is the real purpose of this directive? Could this be laying the groundwork for a false flag operation, a manufactured crisis that would allow the Biden-Harris administration to justify even greater authoritarian control?
Imagine a scenario in which election results do not go as the current administration desires. Could they declare a national emergency or insurrection and use this directive to deploy military assets and intelligence agencies against the American people? The vague language and sweeping powers granted in this directive make such a scenario entirely possible.
The Call to Action: Protect Our Freedoms Before It’s Too Late
Directive 5240.01 is a ticking time bomb for civil liberties. The potential for warrantless surveillance, the use of lethal force, and the enforcement of foreign laws all present clear threats to the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. We must act now to safeguard our republic from these encroachments.
Americans must demand transparency and accountability. Contact your representatives and call for an investigation into the Biden-Harris administration’s directive. Demand to know why such dangerous provisions were allowed to be included and what the true motivations are behind this power grab.
The future of our nation—and our freedoms—depends on it.
References
Department of Defense. (2024, September 27). DoD Directive 5240.01: DoD intelligence and intelligence-related activities and defense intelligence component assistance to law enforcement agencies and other civil authorities. https://www.esd.whs.mil/DD/
Durden, T. (2023, January 22). FBI’s FISA abuses exposed: How surveillance was used to undermine Trump. Zero Hedge. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/fbis-fisa-abuses-exposed-how-surveillance-was-used-undermine-trump
Housley, C. (2022, March 15). FBI’s war on parents: The weaponization of law enforcement against dissenters. Washington Examiner. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/fbis-war-on-parents-the-weaponization-of-law-enforcement-against-dissenters
Tucker, E. (2023, June 5). FBI’s involvement in January 6 raises new questions. The Epoch Times. https://www.theepochtimes.com/fbi-involvement-january-6