Who Will Be in Control If Another 9/11 Were to Happen

[NaughtyGeek]

But the subject, NSPD-51?that's National Security Presidential Directive 51?and the attendant explosion of blogospheric paranoia about it deserve attention. Even if you don't believe, as I don't, that NSPD-51 is a blueprint for a coup in the guise of plans for "continuity of government" in the event of a national emergency (such as a terrorist attack during an election campaign). Even if you don't believe, as I don't, that it will be used as a pretext for canceling the upcoming presidential election and preserving "continuity" of this administration in office.

Full article here.


OK, so I've proven that I'm a nut who believes that the current administration has no intentions of giving up their offices, but here's an article from someone who would call me a nut and they point out the fatal flaws of the current directive. My point is, what would prevent the "nightmare scenario" from occurring? What could we do to circumvent the new "rule of law" should this type of scenario come to pass? Someone please put my paranoid fears to rest so maybe I can go back to sleeping at night. :laugh:

 

[Genx87]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news...07/05/20070509-12.html

Read it and be your own judge. I glanced over it and didnt see anything in there that was over the top. Most of it deals with if a major catastrophe happens the plan for the govt to stay intact.

 

[NaughtyGeek]

Did you bother to read the article? Yes? Then respond to the points brought up in the article dealing with the vague language of the directive rather than just say here's the directive, I think it's OK. Oh wait, no you didn't read the article did you? Simply glancing over a directive that in short turns all governing power over to the executive for an undetermined period of time with a classified chain of command that isn't reviewable by people with normal access to classified information doesn't really address the potential problems now does it? But hey, it's easier to ignore the direction things are heading and pretend everything is "A OK" than to face the fact that inaction at this very moment will likely lead to the "tin foil hat" theories coming to fruition.

 

[dahunan]

If any attack happens in DC Bush can now declare Martial Law.. correct?

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

OK, so I've proven that I'm a nut who believes that the current administration has no intentions of giving up their offices, but here's an article from someone who would call me a nut and they point out the fatal flaws of the current directive. My point is, what would prevent the "nightmare scenario" from occurring? What could we do to circumvent the new "rule of law" should this type of scenario come to pass? Someone please put my paranoid fears to rest so maybe I can go back to sleeping at night. :laugh:

Firstly, it's gonna take more than the President, or even everybody in the WH helping, to pull off something like you fear.

I really don't expect many Repub Congresspersons, and exactly zero Dems, to act like neutered drones and acquies all their power. Never step betwen a politition and his power (or a TV camera).

How could it be done? It would take the military to pull it off, and I really really don't see that happening at all. H3ll, many are out-of-country.

Notwithstanding this Directive, if some big deal (Katrina or 9/11 etc) were to occur at election time it would be a problem. You can't just disenfranchise a bunch of voters because they have to flee their city or are stuck in a flood.

It would end up causing a delay in the election and likely a lot of SCOTUS litigation.

Even so, I can't see it pushing back the new inauguration by much, if at all.

The BIG problem would be if a significant portion of our polititions and Judiciary were killed or wounded. That would cause a longer dysfunctional period while awaiting their replacements (particularly those not even up for re-election). And if you fear that GWB and some co-horts are gonna do that (kill everybody in DC), there just ain't enough tin foil for you.

There's just too many actual real things to worry about instead focusing on such Hollywood-type fictional plots.

Fern

 

[heyheybooboo]

Be. Very. Afraid. :shocked:

Not really. Though Dubs and his Corrupt Cabal have crapped all over the Constitution this ain't The Seige. The Posse Comitatus Act and the Insurrection Act limit and define how and why the Fed can use the military on a state and local level.

Some have envisioned senarios whereby martial law be declared on a Federal level due to 'immediate' and unexpected ""civil disturbances"" allowing a Presidential executive order which authorizes the use of the military for law enforcement on a local level.

Too broad. Too vague. Not gonna happen across the USA. This ain't *24*.

At an isolated locale? Possible, but highly unlikely. During the 1960's it happened quite frequently during desegregation - the Civil Rights Act set forth conditions which allowed federal marshalls and troops to maintain order in sometimes violent integrations when local law enforcement was corrupt and useless.

Also during the 60's Federal troops were used during war protests and riots - but that was always at the request of a governor. It was the best of times . . . . and it was the worst of times. The national guard was called in at Kent State after the Burning of the ROTC building. 4 dead in Ohio

A directive which cancels a Federal election? Short of a nuke-yoo-lar war ain't gonna happen.

If any attack happens in DC Bush can now declare Martial Law.. correct?

Don't think he can - unless the DC Mayor specificly requests it. DC is much, much different though since it is effectively a Federal creation.

He couldn't declare marshall law across the country for something like that without looking like a real putz.

If an attack happened in DC, 98.8% of America might well support it.

(to the NSA agent monitoring this communication - It's a joke)

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Fern

Notwithstanding this Directive, if some big deal (Katrina or 9/11 etc) were to occur at election time it would be a problem. You can't just disenfranchise a bunch of voters because they have to flee their city or are stuck in a flood.

mmmm. Reasoning needs a little adjustment. You don't disenfranchise an entire country because of a local problem.

They would cast provisional votes as allowed by state statute. It's up to the lawyers after that

 

[umbrella39]

Q. Who would be in control if another 9/11 were to happen?

A. None other than our own Dave McOwen.

 

[NaughtyGeek]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
Q. Who would be in control if another 9/11 were to happen?

A. None other than our own Dave McOwen.

ROFL

 

[Lemon law]

I agree that such a scenario could occur and GWB&co. would be more than willing to take advantage of it. Which is why its very important for congress to keep the executive branch
under very tight control. And make it quite apparent to the population as a whole and the military leadership that any moves in that direction are clearly only for the benefit of GWB&co.

The USA has a very long tradition of ALWAYS holding elections as scheduled during war time.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
Q. Who would be in control if another 9/11 were to happen?

A. None other than our own Dave McOwen.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Fern


I really don't expect many Repub Congresspersons, and exactly zero Dems, to act like neutered drones and acquies all their power...

Why not? They passed the damn Patriot Act after 9/11, didn't they?

If you want to get an idea of how this directive plays out, hop over to the FEMA website, read the National Response Plan (NRP), and take the online classes on the NRP and the NIMS.

http://training.fema.gov/

You'll be better informed, utterly bored, and vow never to use an acronym again.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

It's unlikely to happen. In Osama's latest speech he seemd a little down and apparently he's tired of getting his organization's butt kicked by the Republicans. Pretty sure he doesn't want Bush to stay in office. It's likely the terrorists will support the Dems in the upcoming election to see if they can make some headway again with little consequences, like they did under Bill.

Unless you're suggesting that Bush himself might manufacture a crisis to remain in power? Another flawlessly executed Bush Co. plan like 9/11? :chuckle:

 

[First]

Won't ever happen. American people would never allow it and yes, neither would Congress.

 

[LongTimePCUser]

Remember the "weapons of mass destruction" that were created out of thin air that allowed Bush to seize control of the government for several years and to invade Irag even though all the evidence from the U.N. weapons inspectors said that there was no evidence for their existence?

It may not even take a real 9-11 event to generate the invocation of NSPD-51.

Congress and the Supreme Court need to be very vigilant over the next year to preserve what is left of constitutional elections in 2008.

This is a president who created the concept of "signing statements" so that he could refuse to execute laws passed by Congress without having to veto them. Congress simply can't over ride a signing statement.

If I were to guess what sort of events would lead to the invocation of NSPD-51 next year I would guess that it might be related to the invasion of Iran.

I hope that this will not happen.

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It's unlikely to happen. In Osama's latest speech he seemd a little down and apparently he's tired of getting his organization's butt kicked by the Republicans. Pretty sure he doesn't want Bush to stay in office. It's likely the terrorists will support the Dems in the upcoming election to see if they can make some headway again with little consequences, like they did under Bill.

Unless you're suggesting that Bush himself might manufacture a crisis to remain in power? Another flawlessly executed Bush Co. plan like 9/11? :chuckle:

The Republicans have proved to be incompetent terrorist hunters. Clinton's WTC bombers are in prison. Bin Laden whiles away the day working on his MySpace page.

 

[NoStateofMind]

We promise baby bush, not to make you do stuff, you've done enough already

 

[WiseOldDude]

Originally posted by: Genx87
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news...07/05/20070509-12.html

Read it and be your own judge. I glanced over it and didnt see anything in there that was over the top. Most of it deals with if a major catastrophe happens the plan for the govt to stay intact.

The point(s) you seem to be conveniently forgetting is that Bush gets to name the event, and it can be really a minor event, his choice.

Second, the event doesn't have to happen in this country, it can be any event in any country on the planet, Does that not give you some concern? Given the performance and integrity of this administration, it scares the hell out of me.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: LongTimePCUser
Remember the "weapons of mass destruction" that were created out of thin air that allowed Bush to seize control of the government for several years and to invade Irag even though all the evidence from the U.N. weapons inspectors said that there was no evidence for their existence?

It may not even take a real 9-11 event to generate the invocation of NSPD-51.

Congress and the Supreme Court need to be very vigilant over the next year to preserve what is left of constitutional elections in 2008.

This is a president who created the concept of "signing statements" so that he could refuse to execute laws passed by Congress without having to veto them. Congress simply can't over ride a signing statement.

If I were to guess what sort of events would lead to the invocation of NSPD-51 next year I would guess that it might be related to the invasion of Iran.

I hope that this will not happen.

I remember those WMDs. The Democrats, and even Hillary herself, swore they were real long before Bush even came into office. Incredible plan.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: ironwing

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It's unlikely to happen. In Osama's latest speech he seemd a little down and apparently he's tired of getting his organization's butt kicked by the Republicans. Pretty sure he doesn't want Bush to stay in office. It's likely the terrorists will support the Dems in the upcoming election to see if they can make some headway again with little consequences, like they did under Bill.

Unless you're suggesting that Bush himself might manufacture a crisis to remain in power? Another flawlessly executed Bush Co. plan like 9/11? :chuckle:

The Republicans have proved to be incompetent terrorist hunters. Clinton's WTC bombers are in prison. Bin Laden whiles away the day working on his MySpace page.

Clinton didn't capture or kill OBL either.

Many of AQ's top level guys are in prison right now too under the Republicans. Many others are dead. Considering that it's advantage Republicans in my book. ymmv.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Unless you're suggesting that Bush himself might manufacture a crisis to remain in power? Another flawlessly executed Bush Co. plan like 9/11? :chuckle:

Don't you know? Cheney is going to declare Martial Law just prior to the 2008 election. Or is it Bush. Well, one of them. :laugh:

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Fern
polititions

Well, they are a bunch of boobs.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Unless you're suggesting that Bush himself might manufacture a crisis to remain in power? Another flawlessly executed Bush Co. plan like 9/11? :chuckle:

Don't you know? Cheney is going to declare Martial Law just prior to the 2008 election. Or is it Bush. Well, one of them. :laugh:

Cheney could certainly pull it off. He just needs to walk around with a shotgun in hand and everyone will be running for cover.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Unless you're suggesting that Bush himself might manufacture a crisis to remain in power? Another flawlessly executed Bush Co. plan like 9/11? :chuckle:

Don't you know? Cheney is going to declare Martial Law just prior to the 2008 election. Or is it Bush. Well, one of them. :laugh:

Cheney could certainly pull it off. He just needs to walk around with a shotgun in hand and everyone will be running for cover.

Looks like cheney use to have sense. Sadly he has gotten drunk on power

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: umbrella39
Q. Who would be in control if another 9/11 were to happen?

A. None other than our own Dave McOwen.

There goes my coffee onto the keyboard

THANKS