Thread: Very Scary Stuff: Bush Names Self Dictator.

Sam, I agree with you. Disillusioned, you are correct, too. The passage of this Act is pretty much the same wording as past Federal Code and Acts. This is actually two Directives but they're both the same:

NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51

HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20

I think it would be wise to use the OFFICIAL Directive to learn more. Try not to depend upon some journalist's editorialized summary of this -- there is too much sensationalism being utilized in this example.

The President of the United States has certain powers available that may be exercised in the event that the nation is threatened by crisis, exigency, or emergency circumstances (other than natural disasters, war, or near-war situations). There are limitations to a President's emergency powers.

The National Emergencies Act eliminated some emergency authority; it requires the President to formally declare the existence of a national emergency.

Read through the official Directives. Both of these Directives speak of the "continuity" of Federal government and operations of the government if an emergency state is declared. There is also the expected language of the 3 branches of government working together per the U.S. Constitution.

I am completely baffled as to why people are interpreting that Bush has created an avenue for a dictatorship with these Directives. Where is that stated??

Here is the direct quote where these Directives specify other appointed persons:

Implementation Actions
(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

Originally Posted by Disillusioned

OK...being serious now. Can someone please tell me what exactly is in this document that is so different from past documents? I am asking because I have a friend who poo poos everything I tell her. I mentioned this document to her and she said that the president has always had the power to declare martial law in an emergency. She doesn't think this is a big deal. Any help you can offer would be great. I'm tired of her telling me I'm wrong!

That is my question as well.

He signed something, this wasn't made up out of thin air I doubt. Did he "just" renew something that already existed? Possible. Doesn't make it right.

I just had a thought, the USA died after the Civil War when the true inheritors of the Founder's Principles were defeated in the CSA. I'm just talking off the cuff here, so I may be wrong. But let's explore this...

Didn't the CSA reject the Constitution? Yes. But without even looking, knowing the character of the people involved I'm sure they adopted one that mirrored the original. A quick search uncovers this:
http://www.law.ou.edu/ushistory/csaconstitution/

Preamble
We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity--invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God--do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America.

Yeah, I can see they were totally different.

So, what is more true to the original Founders (who were on record advocating revolution) - the entity that eschewed the PRINCIPLES of the Constitution, or the one that ahered to the principles under a different name? (assuming the CSA Constitution did)

No doubt the topic of slavery would be raised in such a discussion - even in this one-sided one I am typing out here.

Seems to me slavery exists today in the form of income tax. Don't believe me? What happens when the tax rate reaches 100%? It is getting there. Chattel slavery would have died a natural death, but taxes remain.

Well that was one heck of a tangent, I won't ramble on much further. But sometimes I wonder if the North, with its "industrial" focus gushed about in history books, which has led us directly to this point with upper class elitists prepared to sell out the common man and the nation was the "better" side so often portrayed in History. I think we are lucky we have gotten the years we have under the system. I just hope that if we make it out of these dark times no one rests on their laurels again and we root out the elements we have formerly been allowed to fester for lack of a will to get involved.

I found one long article that might help w/ some of the questions being raised here. It's about 22 pages but if you go directly to page 10, that begins the explanation of the National Emergency Act.

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...lnk&cd=5&gl=us

For what it's worth, and if my memory hasn't failed me,
Corsi was on the radio this evening and said that he
went back and looked at previous presidents emergency
powers declarations and could not find one with such
broad sweeping powers.

In the mean time chew on this...

Emergency detention plan

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55925

Hey Oldsalt!

Welcome to ALIPAC!

Ususally newcomers are treated to a royal welcome from the team but we are all really involved with emails, faxes and phone calls as the fight against this AMNESTY bill intensifys, so a lot of us are here in a very limited way right now. But just the same, we are very glad you are here and we look forward to getting to know you!
PAF

Originally Posted by oldsalt

For what it's worth, and if my memory hasn't failed me,
Corsi was on the radio this evening and said that he
went back and looked at previous presidents emergency
powers declarations and could not find one with such
broad sweeping powers.

In the mean time chew on this...

Emergency detention plan

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55925

Okay, I read the article. I still stand by my viewpoint. Sorry, but I won't allow logic to be swayed by sensational journalism. See how the story is slanted? The facts are somewhat distorted to propel the story into a sensationalistic concept of this U.S. citizen "roundup" into this facility!! Even the title smacks of neo-nazi behavior. The future detention center has a multi-use purpose all based on a national emergency. The center falls under the auspices of ICE and is not going to be some U.S. concentration camp for U.S. dissidents!

Originally Posted by Matthewcloseborders

Darn so Bush is now a Dictater?

that's Dick- tater.