Presidential Directives NSPD-51 and HSPD-20

chuckbaldwinlive.com | May 26, 2007 | John Leland 1789

[John Leland 1789]

Below is an excerpt from Chuck Baldwin's latest about President Bush. See the source. -------------------------------

Then again, perhaps George Bush knows something we don't know. Writing for World Net Daily, Dr. Jerry Corsi reports that President Bush has just signed a Presidential Directive that would give the President dictatorial powers should he decide to declare a "national emergency."

Corsi writes, "President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement, on May 9 signed a directive that granted near dictatorial powers to the office of the president in the event of a national emergency declared by the president.

"The 'National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive,' with the dual designation of NSPD-51, as a National Security Presidential Directive, and HSPD-20, as a Homeland Security Presidential Directive, establishes under the office of president a new National Continuity Coordinator."

Corsi continued by saying, "Translated into layman's terms, when the president determines a national emergency has occurred, the president can declare to the office of the presidency powers usually assumed by dictators to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over."

In much the same way that President Bush has committed the United States to a new hemispheric governmental entity with Mexico and Canada under the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) agreement, he has created a new position of "National Continuity Coordinator," complete with dictatorial powers, without the knowledge or consent of Congress.

So, the sixty-four million dollar question seems to be, Is George W. Bush an egomaniac, without conscience or regard for his own party, or is he a bumbling, stumbling, simpleton-cowboy who is really as dumb as he talks, or is he deliberately and meticulously (with much help, of course) orchestrating America's entrance into Daddy Bush's "New World Order"? I personally believe the correct answer is found behind curtain number three.

------------------------------------ end excerpt

[John Leland 1789]

This is an excerpt from Chuck Baldwin's latest. My purpose is to see what others may have on the two presidential directives. I've been off for a while. I'm in Shanghai. Have tried to get news on shart wave, too. Nothing about the directives there.

[Frank_Discussion]

“shart wave”? Are you Irish? LOL, it just struck me funny.

[mnehring]

Dr. Jerry Corsi reports that President Bush has just signed a Presidential Directive that would give the President dictatorial powers should he decide to declare a "national emergency."

This should be corrected that by signing this he re-authorized this directive. The overall jist of the directive has been around for decades. The article is misleading to make it seem that this is a new 'power grab' by the President versus a necessary statute that all recent presidents have renewed.

[unkus]

I heard Corsi on Coast to Coast night before last. Sounds very bogus to me. An exampe: Corsi said no President had ever violated the Constitution except Lincoln. He made no mention of FDR and the Japanese internments. All this would all be out in a New York Minute if true. Clever propaganda directed to the ignorant masses.

[statered]

Clinto signed some EO similar to this and everyone here was wondering what planned disaster he had up his sleeve LOL. I guess 9-11 came 10 months too late.

[MacDorcha]

Your explanation would point to why there was “little media coverage” on the issue. Also, how it could possibly have any lawful effect without the current congress deliberating it.

[KarlInOhio]

An exampe: Corsi said no President had ever violated the Constitution except Lincoln.

Huh? How about few or none have obeyed it since Washington?

[John Leland 1789]

“Shart wave.” Yes, I thought I had proof read it. No, not Irish; Danish-English. Bad keyboard and 3:30 a.m. here in Shanghai.

[AuntB]

An exampe: Corsi said no President had ever violated the Constitution except Lincoln. Huh? How about few or none have obeyed it since Washington?

You're right about that, unfortunately. And for the same reason, because we let them.

[LibFreeOrDie]

The directives are posted on the White House’s Web site:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

[unkus]

My point.

[John Leland 1789]

“The directives are posted on the White House’s Web site:

“http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html “

---

Thanks. Sometimes can’t get such sites inside China (they block a lot of sites); some at all times, some just temporarily. But I’ll look again there.

[steelmagnolia1]

This is so not true, mnehrling. This is not a re-authorization. It gives the Executive powers that prior did not exist.

[mnehring]

You should check before you respond.. NSPD-51/HSPD-20 is a direct reformulation of Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998 (”Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government Operations”). NSPD-51 basically recreates and replaces 67. It is different in some function due to this falling under Homeland Security’s jurisdiciton, but the primary goal of government continuity in the case of national emergency.

Every single administration for at least the past 40 years (that I can cite similar orders thereof) has had similar orders- which are essential to outline the structure of government if there is a disaster.

All presidential directives can be found here:
http://www.loc.gov/rr/news/directives.html

You should be careful who you get your information from (as I see from your posts..) there are a lot of fruitloops out there who like to kneejerk react to orders like this without the slightest understanding of history.

[G Larry]

Think about Katrina for a minute:

- You had an idiot Governor and an idiot Mayor REFUSE to cooperate with FEMA and the Red Cross.
- By refusing to allow the Feds to manage the National Guard and many other aspects of emergency management, you ended up with the mess that was Katrina.

[mnehring]

This account has been banned or suspended.

Buh Bye...

[John Leland 1789]

One must be careful though not to generalize that the Feds are somehow smarter than the people down in our States. This feeds the elitist notion of the Fed. The Louisiana (Katrina) situation might be basically the problem of that current Mayoral and Gubernatorial lack of .... well, lack of.

I want to believe that there are people in Louisiana who could have handled (and could still handle) the Katrina mess much better than THAT may and THAT governor, and much better than FIMA, too. The Red Cross is a private organization.

The money the FED has to “fix” Louisiana shouldn’t have been in the FED’s treasury to begin with. It should have been either in the pockets of the people of Louisiana or much of it in the coffers of that state. I believe that even in the worst of the bureaucracies of the several states, much less money is wasted than in FED bureaucracies.

[G Larry]

It was the Feds who took the hit, when in fact it was the locals that got in the way.