A Declaration of War on the Constitution

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lobotomy Boy

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2004
Messages
2,449
Looks like President Bush is getting ready to declare himself dictator. This really is a declaration of war against the Constitution (http://progressive.org/mag_wx051807):

Bush Anoints Himself as the Insurer of Constitutional Government in Emergency

By Matthew Rothschild
May 18, 2007

With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.

Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”

He laid this all out in a document entitled “National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51” and “Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20.”
The White House released it on May 9.

Other than a discussion on Daily Kos led off by a posting by Leo Fender, and a pro-forma notice in a couple of mainstream newspapers, this document has gone unremarked upon.

The subject of the document is entitled “National Continuity Policy.”
It defines a “catastrophic emergency” as “any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government function.”

This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in California, I imagine, since it says it would include “localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies.”

The document emphasizes the need to ensure “the continued function of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government,” it states.

But it says flat out: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.”

The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches, saying there will be “a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government.” But this effort will be “coordinated by the President, as a matter of comity with respect to the legislative and judicial branches and with proper respect for the constitutional separation of powers.”

Among the efforts coordinated by the President would ensuring the capability of the three branches of government to “provide for orderly succession” and “appropriate transition of leadership.”

The document designates a National Continuity Coordinator, who would be the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism.
Currently holding that post is Frances Fragos Townsend.

She is required to develop a National Continuity Implementation Plan and submit it within 90 days.

As part of that plan, she is not only to devise procedures for the Executive Branch but also give guidance to “state, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure.”

The secretary of Homeland Security is also directed to develop planning guidance for “private sector critical infrastructure owners and operators,” as well as state, local, territorial, and tribal governments.

The document gives the Vice President a role in implementing the provisions of the contingency plans.

“This directive shall be implanted in a manner that is consistent with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 USC 19), with the consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved.”

The document also contains “classified Continuity Annexes.”
 
How should it be worded instead?

What reception would it get if a progressive (progressive.org) had proposed the same thing?
 
what are you colors?

"With scarsely a mention in the mainstream media." I.e: Our Executive branch must get approval first, before any directives so that the m.media can "report;" -spin it!

"Welcome to total control." Editorial opinion, or election obfuscation?

I think that it is evident, just who desires control of our nation by those statements.

"Who are You? Duh, duh" The "Who"
 
Buffalo chips

You will all notice this was never mentioned during the Clinton Adminstration years? They had contingency plans as well.

Perhaps it has escaped the attention of some, but this is not a new idea. The concept of 'continuity of government' has been around for some time. I believe it was first considered during the Roosevelt Administration in the aftermath of the Pearl Harbor attack. (I think there were some similar plans during the Civil War; there should have been in the War of 1812, when the British burning our capitol.) Simply put, it's a way of keeping functions going in the event of some serious upheaval or disaster.

The 'media' from time to time reports on the 'secret government', waiting to take control. The only 'secret' involved is to prevent the continuity plans and locations from being attacked by the same enemy who would attack the normal government. That this is some deep, dark conspiracy is simply more propaganda of the leftist media attempting to promote distrust in the U. S. Government.
 
Let's see. A socialist magazine refferncing a socialist left wing Democrat blog site and the "mainstream press"? Who would that be...NY Times, Wash Post?

No, I don't think so. This articles is full of holes and lies. Best belongs in File 13.
 
I would be willing to bet that your state has some plan for continuity of government during a crisis as well. Probably your county and your municipality as well. Nothing new here. You can put away your tin foil hats.
 
I would be willing to bet that your state has some plan for continuity of government during a crisis as well. Probably your county and your municipality as well. Nothing new here. You can put away your tin foil hats.

They do, along with most corporations.
 
They probably don't want to mention the Clinton plan (which this one apparently repeals) because it was much, much worse. If I remember correctly.

But then when have the Kossites ever let facts get in the way of a good Bush bash?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top