Skip to comments.
NSPD 51: President can now establish Dictatorship under Emergency Conditions
WorldNetDaily ^
| May 23rd, 2007
| Jerome Corsi
Posted on 05/24/2007 3:20:05 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Yay! The president can grant himself dictatorial powers in the event of a major emergency.
I'm sure most FReepers don't have a problem with it though, because it might be a republican in power.
To: Remember_Salamis
Article is BS. Bush is simply renewing an order to handle catastrophic events. Same order has been around for 50 years.
2
posted on
05/24/2007 3:21:40 PM PDT
by
bnelson44
(http://www.appealforcourage.org)
To: Remember_Salamis
Hillary must be dancing in the streets.
To: Remember_Salamis
More like we don’t trust Corsi’s accuracy in reporting.
4
posted on
05/24/2007 3:23:13 PM PDT
by
atomicpossum
(Replies must follow approved guidelines or you will be kill-filed without appeal.)
To: bnelson44
No; this supersedes the Depression-era "National Emergency Act", which required Congress to "modify, rescind, or render dormant" Presidential Emergency acts considered inappropriate.
The word Congress isn't even in the directive. All three branches of government are listed, but it says that the President will coordinate among the three to direct policy.
5
posted on
05/24/2007 3:24:31 PM PDT
by
Remember_Salamis
(A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!)
To: Toddsterpatriot; Mase; expat_panama; nopardons
President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement . . . . Yet Jerome Corsi and World Net Daily found out about it somehow.
6
posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:21 PM PDT
by
1rudeboy
To: Remember_Salamis
Ironically, the directive sees no contradiction in the assumption of dictatorial powers by the president with the goal of maintaining constitutional continuity through an emergency. Ironic indeed.
That's unbelievable, since the moonbats continually claim (as John Edwards did) that 911 was simply an excuse for an Executive Branch power grab.
This plays into such suspicions. Bad politics.
7
posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:36 PM PDT
by
ovrtaxt
(I would rather vote for Lindsay Lohan than Lindsey Graham.)
To: Remember_Salamis
I’m disappointed in Corsi. He usually does better than this. I read the act and it clearly specifies that it only applies to the EXECUTIVE BRANCH of govt. Last time I checked, he already was the “dictator “ of the exec branch as are all POTUS.
8
posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:49 PM PDT
by
tightwadbob
(There is no right way to do the wrong thing.)
To: atomicpossum
Read the directive; that’s all he’s reporting.
9
posted on
05/24/2007 3:25:55 PM PDT
by
Remember_Salamis
(A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!)
To: Remember_Salamis
A Congressional Research Service study notes that under the National Emergency Act, the president "may seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens." Doesn't that just give you the warm & fuzzies? Especially if someone with a black heart (and ugly calves) were to become President.
BTW, if my guns and ammo get requisitioned/seized under this act, then the ammo will get turned in first.
To: 1rudeboy
They posted it on the website; all new WhiteHouse postings come up on the website; that’s where the blogs picked it up at.
11
posted on
05/24/2007 3:26:39 PM PDT
by
Remember_Salamis
(A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!)
To: tightwadbob
""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;" I read it as that the Executive branch will consult with the other two as a courtesy ("comity"). That's how I read it.
12
posted on
05/24/2007 3:30:26 PM PDT
by
Remember_Salamis
(A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!)
To: 1rudeboy
13
posted on
05/24/2007 3:30:50 PM PDT
by
bnelson44
(http://www.appealforcourage.org)
To: Remember_Salamis
Hasn’t something like this been around since the 1930s?
So, unless we have been living in a dictatorship for almost 75 years, this article is nothing but alarmist moonbattery.
To: bnelson44
“Same order has been around for 50 years.”
It’s been around since the dawn of the Nuclear Age, but they don’t teach history anymore in Public Schools.
The Federal Civil Defense AdministrationOffice For Emergency Management was established in 1950 by HARRY TRUMAN!
15
posted on
05/24/2007 3:33:53 PM PDT
by
tcrlaf
(VOTE DEM! You'll Look GREAT In A Burqa!)
To: 1rudeboy
This must be how Bush creates the NAU in 2010. He never leaves office. I’m glad Corsi exposed the plot.
16
posted on
05/24/2007 3:35:50 PM PDT
by
Toddsterpatriot
(Why are protectionists (and goldbugs) so bad at math?)
To: bnelson44
And to think—WND used to be a source of information.
17
posted on
05/24/2007 3:37:01 PM PDT
by
RedQuill
To: Remember_Salamis
Corsi needs a king size roll of foil.
18
posted on
05/24/2007 3:42:49 PM PDT
by
jazusamo
(http://warchronicle.com/TheyAreNotKillers/DefendOurMarines.htm)
To: RedQuill
They must be lying because Bush is infallible...
19
posted on
05/24/2007 3:43:23 PM PDT
by
Remember_Salamis
(A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!)
To: jazusamo
Right; because Bush would never do anything wrong.
20
posted on
05/24/2007 3:43:59 PM PDT
by
Remember_Salamis
(A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson