What is Digg?402 Comments
- mrfreeziexp, on 10/11/2007, -16/+2072008 cannot come fast enough..
- thefaithful, on 10/11/2007, -10/+103Think long and hard about who you choose to elect in 2008 because they will have these powers.
- dshPls, on 10/11/2007, -55/+145It's so obvious, GW is going to create a super hurricane with his weather machine to destroy the US for no apparent reason. WAKE UP CUZ U ASLEEPZ
- JBURNES, on 10/11/2007, -19/+93Their is even language in their for an " economic catastrophe ",
- thatsmyaibo, on 10/11/2007, -18/+84"Their is even language in their for an "economic catastrophe"
How can you read into economic catastrophe but misuse the word "their" twice in one sentence? - EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -4/+66Okay. Hurricanes will not invoke this clause, not unless one wipes out DC, which is incredibly unlikely.
What is more likely is that the language in the "Catastrophic Emergency" definition could be abused for a non-emergency. It's written such that all it would take is DC being shut down for a day and evacuated due to a major threat (nuclear, biological, etc..). The language of this clause uses the word "or" for maximum flexibility.
If the government is disrupted by any event, real or fictional, Bush can step in with this order, or at least he might try.
But it won't work if the disruption is in Florida, not as long as Congress and SCOTUS are in place. - xrox, on 10/11/2007, -11/+65Noticed extra publicity over this hurricane season? .....hmm
- KyleRayner, on 10/11/2007, -6/+58Wait, the President can just give himself powers? Nobody has to vote on it or approve or anything?
- FyreGoddess, on 10/11/2007, -5/+51The point that I never see anyone making, but that scares me the most is not the idea that Bush might actually use these powers that he's granting to the presidency, but that some unknown future president WILL.
I don't see it as Bush being a tyrant as much as laying the foundation for one... - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+46Yes, that is right, wear a t-shirt. Forget about educating yourself and voting and all that. Just go out and by a t-shirt and wear it so people will know you are ignorant.
- Poisian, on 11/11/2007, -14/+53Like Bush, himself said, "The Constitution is just a goddamned piece of paper"...
So too are his "directives" - just pieces of paper. No one is going to dictate to me.
Stock up on food, water, ammo, guns, clothing, silver. Be independent! - guitarh3ro, on 10/11/2007, -10/+49If there is a catastrophic event (or a terror attack), Bush is most likely going to invoke Martial Law anyway. Granted, he probably wouldn't for a natural disaster, but you never know.
As dumb as he is, something tells me he wants to leave his presidency with a bang. And not a good bang, either. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -10/+47This is completely inaccurate. This in no way give the President any dictatorial powers. What this act says is that, in the event of an "Catastrophic Emergency", the President is in charge of the Executive Branch, that one of his assistance will be the primary point of contact, and that they are responsible for the Federal governments response to said "Catastrophic Emergency". It spells out the responsibilities of the executive branch. You know, the part of the federal government the President is the leader of.
Did you people even READ the directive?
From the actual directive:
"1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes "National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national emergency."
"(5) The following NEFs are the foundation for all continuity programs and capabilities and represent the overarching responsibilities of the Federal Government to lead and sustain the Nation during a crisis, and therefore sustaining the following NEFs shall be the primary focus of the Federal Government leadership during and in the aftermath of an emergency that adversely affects the performance of Government Functions:
(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government;"
"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" - beckymcmath, on 10/11/2007, -1/+28Damn! That's so...militant! Is this what we've come to? Is the only measure that will be effective?
- dovesong, on 10/11/2007, -1/+25Not legally. There are 3 branches of govt. He can't unless the other 2 branches let him and unless we don't speak up. Call and email your Congress people and senators and tell them this is NOT constitutional. If it doesn't line up with that "piece of paper" it should not be allowed to fly. It is after all the supreme LAW of our land isn't it?? Maybe we should email him and ask him if that is indeed what he plans to do. That would probably be somewhat of a shock don't you think?
- eclectro, on 10/11/2007, -5/+26I know whose face is on the penny and five dollar bill. I know who gave the gettysburg address. I eat cherry pie on President's day. Let me tell you, Dubya is no Lincoln.
- thcobbs, on 10/11/2007, -11/+30This is the second time this ***** has made it to the front page....
Some points....
This only affects the Executive Branch... It does nothing to the others... This is just a PLAN (which people criticize Bush for not having with Iraq) to continue a functioning government should the worst ever happen.
It specifically outlines that this order is to maintain a CONSTITUTIONAL Government.
=============================================================
Definitions:
(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, 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 branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;
and this part
Implementation
(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those of the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal Government.
This is actually replacing a previous directive that you can't even get the TEXT for.
============================================================
Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 ("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.
original: http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/pdd/pdd-67.htm and you can't even find the TEXT of that one... to me, this seems more open.
Yeah, sounds like a plan for dictatorship to me - jhnewt, on 11/04/2007, -2/+21"2009 cannot come fast enough.."
Fixed.
Just a note for those waiting for 2008- remember that only the election is in 2008. Bush will be president until the new one swears in, in January 2009. That's still almost half a term away, although you may not feel like there's that much time to go with all the presidential candidate talk that start quite some time ago... - bruenig, on 11/04/2007, -7/+26@cheeseron
Your two claims are completely different and should not be linked together for the sake of coherency.
Your first claim is that this is taken out of context. The entire text of the directive is given so it is not taken out of context of the directive and in terms of time period context, we are in the current time period so that can't be.
Your second claim is Lincoln did it. Now this claim has nothing to do with context at all but seems instead to say that if Lincoln does this that it somehow makes it good. I didn't realize Lincoln was infallible. If you want to make the case that he is and then on that standard assert that anything consistent with Lincoln is therefore good, I am interested to see that but until then that does nothing to refute the potential evil that this could lead to. - mjsteinbaugh, on 10/11/2007, -15/+33"Here we go folks, just wait till this administration pulls off another 9/11 style attack in this country..."
Get your facts straight. No digg. - Salgat, on 10/11/2007, -9/+26This isn't the civil war dubya.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23Maybe you should read what is in the directive.
- pianomahnn, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23@groovemaster
Wrong. Violence helped to created the United States of America. - Satanael, on 10/11/2007, -7/+23Clearly you forgot the major role werewolves played in both the Civil War and World War 2...
- johnnyDiggs, on 10/11/2007, -10/+26dugg up because people are f_cking idiots. ignorance is pathetic
- bigturns, on 10/11/2007, -11/+26"This is another step towards official martial law (see " US government fans homeland security fears "), which suggests that a new "catastrophic event" 9/11-type pretext could be in the pipeline."
If you don't believe that such a thing is in the realm of all things possible then A) you have your head in the sand or B) you could give a ***** because you still believe in the Flying Harp Dealer fairytale. You know the one, this is where a robe wearing hippy comes floating down out of the clouds, via a ray of anti-grav emitting light, fleecing his followers out of their sneakers and up, up and away into the clouds.
In order to keep the blood money flowing W and his fellow ***** need to stay in power -
In response to my quip, please provide your prediction, below, of what form W's next '9/11' will take (note to the reader: don't think for a moment that just because the Stay Fresh Marsh Mellow man is friendly on the box cover he won't ***** ***** up! - zephc, on 10/11/2007, -5/+19"Stock up on food, water, ammo, guns, clothing, silver."
Silver? For the werewolves?
But I agree, unjust laws and "directives" that are only effective as long as people agree to abide by them. - Setari, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15It also defines this however:
(e) "Enduring Constitutional Government," or "ECG," means a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government, 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 branches, to preserve the constitutional framework under which the Nation is governed and the capability of all three branches of government to execute constitutional responsibilities and provide for orderly succession, appropriate transition of leadership, and interoperability and support of the National Essential Functions during a catastrophic emergency;
This definition seems to state that there will indeed be three branches of government but they will be coordinated by the President. I'm not saying that it's necessarily as serious as people seem to believe, but it definitely should be watched. - plnegative1, on 10/11/2007, -9/+22"Am I the only one who thinks this order is being taken out of context? Look at Lincoln in the Civil War. He did something similar."
Except we aren't in a civil war.... - Fieri, on 10/11/2007, -11/+23No, you two are the idiots. The government counts on us to avoid violence.
- ruforealz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14Well, presidential directives are legal in most cases i think.
The internment of the Japanese-Americans started with a presidential directive. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -8/+20Did you read the directive, or just the infowar article, or even just the headline?
The directive doesn't give the President any powers. - itanshi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12I would read "The people's history of the USA" it's quite a romp
- catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15Sorry, I missed the edit.
You may want to direct your attention to article 5(a)
Implementation Actions: "Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government" - treed, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Actually, the constitution is pretty specific about what powers are granted to each branch of government, and then specifies that anything not given to the government is the domain of the states and the people.
- 1776jedi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10Dude, you need to calm down. You won't get to fight the good fight if you blow a gasket ,or have a shoot out with the FBI. When or if the ***** hits the fan be ready. Those bunkers can only hold so many supplies anyway. Just wait six months. They'll have to come out sooner or later :>
- dshPls, on 10/11/2007, -15/+25You're another idiot who's going to be laughed at because you blew your trailor up with fertilizer, try putting your face extremely close to the blast.
- whitecracker, on 10/11/2007, -8/+18"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
- 1776jedi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+10I think he means silver as a defacto currency. Precious metals would be the only thing other than vital consumables that would hold value after paper money becomes worthless.
- stepnw1f, on 10/11/2007, -3/+13Never should one person have this much power, NEVER! Not even in a time of catastrophe. Our forefathers founded this nation upon the imperative to safe guard freedom, liberty and justice against tyranny, yet many seem intent in giving in to tyranny out of fear. Our forefathers stood eye-to-eye with their enemy, and sacrificed their lives in the name of freedom, yet some wish to throw it away in the comforts of their 21st century homes. They gave their lives up in fighting against tyranny and absolute wealth. Their objective was a Constitutionally Limited Representative Democratic Republic. Every person here willing to give up their freedoms and power to a single man, does not deserve to live here. In fact you are an enemy to the Constitution and it's protector, Democracy. We the PEOPLE shall decide, not one man, nor the cowards who support only one man. You want a king? Go watch a Shakespearean play, preferably in an insane asylum.
- trghpy, on 10/11/2007, -5/+15@jburnes
Its been like that since they determined that schools are responsible for children from when they leave home till they get home.
Locking the children up at the school has been deemed safer then sending them home during a emergency - pianomahnn, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11@becky ... not yet, but it will eventually get there. An uprising against an unfair government happened once and it can certainly happen again.
- Morphinity, on 10/11/2007, -10/+19I swear, all of you think Ron Paul is the savior to the United States. I admit he's a great guy and a candidate I would definitely vote for, but your zeal for Ron Paul is childish and way overdone.
- lambda, on 10/11/2007, -3/+12Where in the constitution does it authorize "Presidential Directives"? Oh yeah, nowhere.
- americanjerm, on 10/11/2007, -0/+92008 might not help us. Hilary, Obama, Giuliani are all new world order puppets. If Ron Paul does not get elected than there is no difference.
- taylbx3, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11The probability of a horrible event occurring before the next 9.11 anniversary is high. The establishment can not risk another open season on the official story like last year.
- llbbl, on 10/11/2007, -10/+18IMPEACH FOR PEACE
- maskidat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Don't laugh...read history. It's happened before, and if we don't learn from history, aren't we bound to repeat it?
- maffick, on 10/11/2007, -5/+12Many of you seem very trusting of Bush. I think those of you trusting him, giving him the "benefit of the doubt" are going to be quite sorry about your ignorance. Or maybe you won't since your stupid enough to trust him after all the destruction he has already wrought.
- catalysis, on 10/11/2007, -11/+18I'm surprised nobody posted the directive yet, because it actually does not give Bush any dictatorial powers. The states retain all their rights and the federal government is still bound by law. All it does is outline plans for continuity of the government (i.e. succession).
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html
I'd like someone to at least read it and outline the parts that supposedly over-ride law and give Bush total control. Maybe I simply missed that part. -
Show 51 - 100 of 386 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is