Friday, May 25, 2007
He's The Decider
Hell-oooooo, autocracy!
With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.
In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”
Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”
Now, obviously, this has to be some sort of dire emergency, right? Like, a nuke goes off in Washington while the president's down in Crawford... again. That's the kind of emergency we're talking about, right?
The subject of the document is entitled “National Continuity Policy.”
It defines a “catastrophic emergency” as “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 function.”
This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in California, I imagine, since it says it would include “localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies.”
So, basically, anything disastrous happens to any city across America, and the president assumes the reins of the entire US government. It could be a terrorist attack, or it could be a natural disaster. Either way, in case of emergency, we're screwed.
The document emphasizes the need to ensure “the continued function of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government,” it states.
But it says flat out: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.”
The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches, saying there will be “a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government.” But this effort will be “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.”
Yes, because the president has shown such great respect for the other branches of government up to today.
9/11 happened, and six years later, we're debating the validity of torture and whether the president has a right to spy on the American public without seeking a warrant. If another disaster happens, who knows what the hell we'll be agreeing to? All in the name of "safety", of course.
With scarcely a mention in the mainstream media, President Bush has ordered up a plan for responding to a catastrophic attack.
In a new National Security Presidential Directive, Bush lays out his plans for dealing with a “catastrophic emergency.”
Under that plan, he entrusts himself with leading the entire federal government, not just the Executive Branch. And he gives himself the responsibility “for ensuring constitutional government.”
Now, obviously, this has to be some sort of dire emergency, right? Like, a nuke goes off in Washington while the president's down in Crawford... again. That's the kind of emergency we're talking about, right?
The subject of the document is entitled “National Continuity Policy.”
It defines a “catastrophic emergency” as “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 function.”
This could mean another 9/11, or another Katrina, or a major earthquake in California, I imagine, since it says it would include “localized acts of nature, accidents, and technological or attack-related emergencies.”
So, basically, anything disastrous happens to any city across America, and the president assumes the reins of the entire US government. It could be a terrorist attack, or it could be a natural disaster. Either way, in case of emergency, we're screwed.
The document emphasizes the need to ensure “the continued function of our form of government under the Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of government,” it states.
But it says flat out: “The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government.”
The document waves at the need to work closely with the other two branches, saying there will be “a cooperative effort among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal Government.” But this effort will be “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.”
Yes, because the president has shown such great respect for the other branches of government up to today.
9/11 happened, and six years later, we're debating the validity of torture and whether the president has a right to spy on the American public without seeking a warrant. If another disaster happens, who knows what the hell we'll be agreeing to? All in the name of "safety", of course.
Comments:
<< Home
And to think, just several days ago my friend and I were having a half-serious conversation about how Bush administration is going to remain in power after 2008.
Post a Comment
<< Home
