Remember NSPD-51? Re: "Economic Catastrophic Emergencies" and Martial Law?

[99th_Monkey]

You may want to dust off your tinfoil hat for a moment and consider this: could THIS be the reason the Democrats have their
lips locked onto W's ass with this bailout thing? Could this be the sword of Damocles that Bush dangles over their heads
to get their "cooperation"? I mean, if this current economic meltdown is not "catastrophic", then I don't know what the
fuck is.

Remember when Congressman Peter DeFazio (D-OR) requested to see the classified sections of this Directive, and was repeatedly
denied access by the White House, even though he had every legal right to do so?
http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2007/11/05/nspd_51_and_the_potential_for_a_coup_d_e

I really don't mean to be inciting fear and paranoia, but it certainly seems at least plausible that Congress is simply
being blackmailed into it: give Bush what he wants, or else.

:scared:

It makes me sick to my stomach to even be raising this question, but I don't want to be in a state of denial either, about
the likelihood that martial law is already well underway in the wake of this financial disaster. :shrug:

******************* NSPD 51 *****************************
"Catastrophic Emergency" means 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 functions ...

...SNIP ...

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:
...SNIP ...
g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public confidence in its financial systems ....

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

***********************************************************

Also, this article, written just a few days ago, seems to be asking some of the same questions:

Do I Have to Obey Orders From an Unconstitutional Government?
September 16th, 2008 by irdial

I am a loyal citizen of the United States of America, and I believe deeply in the vision of the Founding Fathers, the rule of law as enshrined in the Constitution, and the liberty that our forefathers fought and died for.

I have therefore felt a duty to obey the laws of the U.S. my whole life.

However, it is likely that the U.S. no longer has a constitutional form of government.

As the Washington Post noted in March 2002, Bush hid from Congress the fact that Continuity of Government (COG) plans were implemented on 9/11 and were still in effect many months later, and stated:

It was unclear yesterday whether any federal documents — prepared either by the current White House or by Bush’s predecessors dating to Dwight D. Eisenhower — specify whether congressional leaders should be told if the plan is put into effect. At least one relatively general document, a 1988 executive order entitled “Assignment of Emergency Preparedness Responsibilities,” said the White House’s National Security Council “shall arrange for Executive branch liaison with, and assistance to, the Congress and the federal judiciary on national security-emergency preparedness matters.”

The executive order, signed by President Ronald Reagan, is a precursor to documents outlining the contingency plans in greater detail, which have not been made public. Regardless of whether Bush had an obligation to notify legislative leaders, the congressional leaders’ ignorance of the plan he set in motion could raise the question of how this shadow administration would establish its legitimacy with Congress in the event it needed to step in for a crippled White House.

At least some members of Congress suggested yesterday that the administration should have conferred about its plans, which were first reported in The Washington Post yesterday.

“There are two other branches of government that are central to the functioning of our democracy,” said Rep. William Delahunt (D-Mass.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee. “I would hope the speaker and the minority leader would at least pose the question, ‘What about us?’ “

So What?

Remember that, in the summer 2007, Congressman Peter DeFazio, on the Homeland Security Committee (and so with proper security access to be briefed on COG issues), inquired about continuity of government plans, and was refused access. Indeed, DeFazio told Congress that the entire Homeland Security Committee of the U.S. Congress has been denied access to the plans by the White House (video; or here is the transcript). The Homeland Security Committee has full clearance to view all information about COG plans. DeFazio concluded: “Maybe the people who think there’s a conspiracy out there are right”.

And University of California Berkeley Professor Emeritus Peter Dale Scott has warned:

“If members of the Homeland Security Committee cannot enforce their right to read secret plans of the Executive Branch, then the systems of checks and balances established by the U.S. Constitution would seem to be failing.

To put it another way, if the White House is successful in frustrating DeFazio, then Continuity of Government planning has arguably already superseded the Constitution as a higher authority.”

Indeed, White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said that “because of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the American public needs no explanation of plans”.

What Does This All Mean?

Continuity of government documents probably require that Congress be notified of the details of implementation of COG plans. But since the executive is hiding such documents from Congress and the people, so we can’t be sure.

http://irdial.com/blogdial/?p=1322