Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 5 of total 5 in this topic |
Sparky
Trad climber
vagabon movin on
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 31, 2007 - 03:13pm PT
|
[image: Slate Magazine]
the spectator Who Will Rule Us After the Next 9/11? The reality of NSPD-51
is almost as bad as the paranoia.By Ron Rosenbaum
Posted Friday, Oct. 19, 2007, at 2:23 PM ET
----------------------
Oh, god. I'm reluctant to write this particular column. I've been scarred by
this kind of story before. I've learned that it's difficult to write about
the sources of paranoia without spreading paranoia.
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.
Nonetheless, *the specifics of the directive are a matter of legitimate
concern that has not been given the urgent and sustained attention it
deserves by Congress or the mainstream media.*
I first became aware of the extent of the paranoia when I read the following
comment, which was appended to an essay Naomi Wolf wrote for the Huffington
Post:
Scenario for 2008: Sometime in middle to late summer, perhaps early fall, a
"terrorist attack," or a natural disaster occurs, allowing Bush to suspend
the elections in the name of "national security," and take the control of
the government via the "National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51"
and "Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20," released by the WH
May 9th of this year. He could remain in control as long as he wanted. Now,
wouldn't THAT be an interesting nightmare?
Crazy, right? Well after I read it I Googled *"NSPD-51"* and got something
like 36,000 hits. (HSPD-20 is essentially the same directive under a
different title.) Most of the ones I sampled elaborated on the "nightmare"
coup scenario above. Of course, *Google hits are not evidence of the facts*,
only of the temper of the times, and the times are seething with paranoia.
*But that doesn't mean NSPD-51 doesn't deserve careful scrutiny.* Consider
that an election-eve al-Qaida attack, for instance, is not inconceivable.
What if a nuclear device goes off in New York, Chicago, or Los Angeles the
weekend before the election and a warning is issued that the other two
cities will be hit on Election Day?
Who will decide whether the elections in those heavily Democratic states
should be put off or whether the entire election should be postponed until
... when? Until the bodies are cleared, the gamma radiation has subsided?
Just how wise and fair—and constitutional—are the brand-new mechanisms for
"continuity of government" that NSPD-51 has put into effect with almost no
prior and little subsequent discussion last May?
And there's another paranoia-inducing element of the story: The existence of
"classified continuity annexes" whose content has been kept secret even from
the House Committee on Homeland Security. A troubling aspect of the story
that, so far as I know, only one mainstream media reporter, Jeff Kosseff of
the *Portland Oregonian, *has pursued.
As it happens, I had a troubling experience in the past writing about
paranoid fears that an unpopular president will cancel a presidential
election. The experience helped turn me into a conspiracy theory skeptic, so
let me briefly recount that incident—which, curiously enough, also involved
the* Portland Oregonian*—so you'll understand the perspective I bring to the
question.
Return with me to 1970, another moment of seething paranoia two years before
Richard Nixon's 1972 re-election campaign, before Watergate was even a gleam
in Gordon Liddy's eyes. A time of war and of an increasingly frustrated and
suspicious anti-war movement. It was my first year as a reporter, and the
whole episode started with a cab driver from Staten Island.
As historian and frequent *Slate* contributor David Greenberg recounts it in
his thoughtful book *Nixon's Shadow*, "the rumor [that Nixon had a secret
plan to cancel the '72 presidential election] first appeared in print on
April 5 in the *Portland Oregonian*, the *Staten Island Advance* and other
Newhouse-owned newspapers. According to the item, the administration had
asked the RAND Corporation ... to study whether 'rebellious factions using
force or bomb threats would make it unsafe to conduct an election' and how
the president might respond. Ron Rosenbaum, a reporter from the *Village
Voice,* heard about the article from a Staten Island cab driver and
investigated. He reported in *The Voice* on April 16 that RAND and the
administration denied that any such study existed, but then playfully
pointed out that they would surely deny it if it were true. Rosenbaum added
that the country would just have to wait until 1972 to see."
Lesson here: Don't get too "playful" when writing about conspiracy theories.
The problem with being "playful" back then was that much of the anti-war
movement read the *Voice *at the time, and my story ignited a firestorm of
paranoia. Soon there were "documents" of dubious authenticity circulating
that purported to be RAND memos outlining plans to round up and lock up
leaders of the anti-war movement. Eventually Pat Moynihan, then a Nixon *
consigliere*, thundered against the rumor as an example of the intrusion of
irrationality into politics.
The thing is, there's nothing wrong with planning for "continuity of
government," especially in the nuclear age. Planning for continuity doesn't
*necessarily* mean plotting a coup, although that's the way my story was
read and spread. (Of course, meanwhile—proving that reality can outrun
paranoia—the Nixon administration *was* planning to subvert the election,
anyway, with the assortment of illegal actions and dirty tricks that became
known as Watergate.)
Still, there's nothing I feel the need to apologize about for pursuing that
story then (or this one now). Indeed, it was marginally possible back then,
when the anti-war movement had become massive and some were turning to
violence, that the RAND Corp. might have been involved in planning how to
maintain "continuity" in the face of violent disruptions.
But the fact that the extreme worst-case scenario didn't happen in 1972 (no
coup attempt) left one big question unanswered—and NSPD-51 illustrates it
still hasn't been settled in any satisfactory way: What *are* the
contingency plans for holding or postponing a national election in the midst
of a traumatic national emergency?
I've studied the actual presidential directive, which you can find
here
. *(found at the end of this article. CAP)*
In many respects, it's innocuous. It doesn't, for instance, tamper with the
procedures for presidential succession in case, say, the chief executive and
vice president are killed. And there's a value to requiring that every
government agency prepare a plan to deal with a catastrophe.
But consider provision 2E of the directive:
*"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. (Italics mine.)*
Do you see those five weasel words "as a matter of comity"? *Just what
elements of the legislative and judicial branches will be allowed to
participate in "executing constitutional responsibilities" and "providing
for orderly succession [and] appropriate transfer of leadership"? *
In other words, who gets to call the shots? What does *comity* mean in this
context? Informally, it means good-natured, good-faith camaraderie. In its
jurisprudential sense, the *American Heritage Dictionary* defines it as "the
principle by which the courts of one jurisdiction may accede or give effect
to the laws or decisions of another."
In other words, in the weasel-speak of NSPD-51, it implies that one or more
branches of the government will have to cede power to another. And since
everything is to be "coordinated by the president," I'm guessing that the
members of the Supreme Court left alive and some congressional leaders left
alive (How chosen? What party balance?) will in effect have to sit around a
big conference table and do a lot of "ceding" to the executive.
And given the current state of relations between Congress and the executive,
such comity will not necessarily translate into camaraderie.
If it comes down to whether to pull the nuclear trigger, who will get to
vote, and how large a majority will be required to launch?
*Comity*—that innocent-sounding word—could well turn out to be the excuse
for junking those pesky checks and balances the Founding Fathers seemed so
obsessed with. For an indeterminate period of time.
The document is also hazy on when our new continuity policies will be set in
motion. The directive tells us that they'll kick in whenever the nation
faces a "catastrophic emergency." But look how vaguely "catastrophic
emergency" is first defined:
"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.
These are profoundly, potentially calamitously, broad terms. *Who defines
what is extraordinary? Who defines how severe severely is? Is there any
procedure to challenge the junking of constitutional government?*
Worse, "catastrophic emergency"—woefully vague to start out with—is later
expanded to include even "localized acts of nature and accidents" as well as
"technological or attack-related" emergencies.
In other words, even if you don't believe the most sinister paranoid coup
theories, the document does nothing to allay one's fears that it *could *be
used in a sinister way.
I wish I did, but I see nothing in the document to prevent even a
"localized" forest fire or hurricane from giving the president the right to
throw long-established constitutional government out the window, institute a
number of unspecified continuity policies, and run the country with the
guidance of the "National Continuity Coordinator" and with the "Continuity
Policy Coordination Committee" for as long as the president sees fit.
This order has been issued by executive fiat and has not been subjected to
any public examination by the other two branches, which have behaved in a
supine way that suggests how they'll behave when comity time arrives and
urgent decisions on the fate of the nation and perhaps the world (nuclear
retaliation being what it is) need to be made immediately.
The fact that Congress has not scrutinized and challenged the potential here
for an emergency-situation power grab is scandalous, unacceptable.
Let Congress pass a law posthaste nullifying the directive, and then when
the executive nullifies the nullification, challenge it in the courts. I
can't believe even this Supreme Court, with its deference to executive
power, could take this clownishly drafted document seriously.
It's not that others haven't noticed the problem. The Wikipedia entry on
NSPD-51,
for instance, cites rational warnings against it from both right and left:
Conservative activist Jerome Corsi and Marjorie Cohn of the [left wing]
National Lawyers Guild have interpreted this as a break from Constitutional
law in that the three branches of government are equal, with no single
branch coordinating the others. … The directive does not specify whose
responsibility it would be to either declare a catastrophic emergency or
declare it over.
Good point. And then there are the final two provisions of the NSPD, which
mysteriously refer to unseen secret "annexes" to the directive. Needless to
say, if what they've made public is so shameless in its disregard for the
Constitution, the following two sections on secret provisions don't allay
suspicion:
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are
hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.
(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be
protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A,
the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded
appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.
So, how many secret annexes are there in addition to "annex A," and what
kinds of things do they say that even the paranoia-inducing public document
can't include?
Here's where Jeff Kosseff of the* Portland Oregonian* comes in. In an e-mail
to me, he said he believed he was the first mainstream media reporter to
pursue the classified annex issue (although Charles Savage reported on the
disturbing public aspects of the directive itself in the *Boston Globe* in
May).
Kosseff told me he got onto the story when Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio
expressed puzzlement that he was having trouble seeing what was in the
classified "annexes." DeFazio was a member of the homeland security
committee and cleared to read classified material in a supersecure "bubble
room" designed to prevent any kind of surveillance. But DeFazio's initial
request was, as Kosseff reported, "denied" by the White House, which cited
national security concerns.
DeFazio said this was the first time he had been denied access to classified
documents. He brought in the chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security,
Bennie Thompson, and the chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on
Management, Investigation and Oversight, Chris Carney, to back his request
for access to the classified annexes.
In a phone conversation, Jeff Kosseff told me the latest development. In
August, these requests were denied as well. On grounds of "national
security."
I don't want to be alarmist, I have no evidence there's a coup brewing. But
I think the American people and their congressional reps deserve some say in
how they will be ruled when the ordinary rules go out the window in a
national emergency. For one thing, what will happen to the Bill of Rights'
guarantees of individual liberty and the courts that are supposed to enforce
them?
If you ask me, setting aside any paranoid fantasies, it is clear on the most
basic level—read it yourself—that NSPD-51 is the creation of irresponsible
incompetents, bulls in the china shop of our constitutional framework. It is
a recipe for disaster. For a catastrophe of governance that would match
whatever physical catastrophe it followed and threaten the re-establishment
of constitutional democracy. It would make the partisan warfare over the
2000 election in Florida seem like child's play. We might recover from a
disaster but we might never recover from the "continuity coordination" that
followed, "coordination" that could forever undermine any faith in the *
actual* continuity of constitutional liberty in America since it would put
it at the mercy of any president who wants to "coordinate continuity" rather
than govern legally.
I think it's urgent that we bring these questions out of the shadows of
phony comity. I'd urge readers to call or e-mail their members of Congress
and senators now. Call for an emergency joint congressional hearing to end
this farce, give us some transparency about what our government will do if
we suffer another 9/11. Let all branches of government participate in the
attempt to reach some consensus on rational and effective continuity
planning. Something more specific and sophisticated than the clumsy but
dangerously Orwellian "Continuity Coordination Committee."
*Ron Rosenbaum is the author of *The Shakespeare
Wars
* and *Explaining
Hitler
*.*
*National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive *
[image: RSS Feed] White House News
*NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD 51 *
HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD-20
Subject: National Continuity Policy
Purpose
(1) This directive establishes a comprehensive national policy on the
continuity of Federal Government structures and operations and a single
National Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development
and implementation of Federal continuity policies. This policy establishes
"National Essential Functions," prescribes continuity requirements for all
executive departments and agencies, and provides guidance for State, local,
territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector organizations in
order to ensure a comprehensive and integrated national continuity program
that will enhance the credibility of our national security posture and
enable a more rapid and effective response to and recovery from a national
emergency.
*Definitions *
(2) In this directive:
(a) *"Category"* refers to the categories of executive departments and
agencies listed in Annex A to this directive;
(b) *"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;
(c) *"Continuity of Government,"* or "COG," means a coordinated effort
within the Federal Government's executive branch to ensure that National
Essential Functions continue to be performed during a Catastrophic
Emergency;
(d) *"Continuity of Operations,"* or "COOP," means an effort within
individual executive departments and agencies to ensure that Primary
Mission-Essential Functions continue to be performed during a wide range of
emergencies, including localized acts of nature, accidents, and
technological or attack-related emergencies;
(e) *"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;
(f) *"Executive Departments and Agencies"* means the executive departments
enumerated in 5 U.S.C. 101, independent establishments as defined by 5 U.S.C.
104(1), Government corporations as defined by 5 U.S.C. 103(1), and the
United States Postal Service;
(g) *"Government Functions"* means the collective functions of the heads of
executive departments and agencies as defined by statute, regulation,
presidential direction, or other legal authority, and the functions of the
legislative and judicial branches;
(h) *"National Essential Functions,"* or "NEFs," means that subset of
Government Functions that are necessary to lead and sustain the Nation
during a catastrophic emergency and that, therefore, must be supported
through COOP and COG capabilities; and
(i) *"Primary Mission Essential Functions,"* or "PMEFs," means those
Government Functions that must be performed in order to support or implement
the performance of NEFs before, during, and in the aftermath of an
emergency.
*Policy *
(3) It is the policy of the United States to maintain a comprehensive and
effective continuity capability composed of Continuity of Operations and
Continuity of Government programs in order to ensure the preservation of our
form of government under the Constitution and the continuing performance of
National Essential Functions under all conditions.
*Implementation Actions *
(4) Continuity requirements shall be incorporated into daily operations of
all executive departments and agencies. As a result of the asymmetric threat
environment, adequate warning of potential emergencies that could pose a
significant risk to the homeland might not be available, and therefore all
continuity planning shall be based on the assumption that no such warning
will be received. Emphasis will be placed upon geographic dispersion of
leadership, staff, and infrastructure in order to increase survivability and
maintain uninterrupted Government Functions. Risk management principles
shall be applied to ensure that appropriate operational readiness decisions
are based on the probability of an attack or other incident and its
consequences.
(5) 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:
(a) Ensuring the continued functioning of our form of government under the
Constitution, including the functioning of the three separate branches of
government;
(b) Providing leadership visible to the Nation and the world and maintaining
the trust and confidence of the American people;
(c) Defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies,
foreign and domestic, and preventing or interdicting attacks against the
United States or its people, property, or interests;
(d) Maintaining and fostering effective relationships with foreign nations;
(e) Protecting against threats to the homeland and bringing to justice
perpetrators of crimes or attacks against the United States or its people,
property, or interests;
(f) Providing rapid and effective response to and recovery from the domestic
consequences of an attack or other incident;
(g) Protecting and stabilizing the Nation's economy and ensuring public
confidence in its financial systems; and
(h) Providing for critical Federal Government services that address the
national health, safety, and welfare needs of the United States.
(6) The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for
ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the
President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland
Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National
Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination
with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA),
without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and
implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies.
The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior
Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the
National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such
policy coordination.
(7) For continuity purposes, each executive department and agency is
assigned to a category in accordance with the nature and characteristics of
its national security roles and responsibilities in support of the Federal
Government's ability to sustain the NEFs. The Secretary of Homeland Security
shall serve as the President's lead agent for coordinating overall
continuity operations and activities of executive departments and agencies,
and in such role shall perform the responsibilities set forth for the
Secretary in sections 10 and 16 of this directive.
(8) The National Continuity Coordinator, in consultation with the heads of
appropriate executive departments and agencies, will lead the development of
a National Continuity Implementation Plan (Plan), which shall include
prioritized goals and objectives, a concept of operations, performance
metrics by which to measure continuity readiness, procedures for continuity
and incident management activities, and clear direction to executive
department and agency continuity coordinators, as well as guidance to
promote interoperability of Federal Government continuity programs and
procedures with State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, and
private sector owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as
appropriate. The Plan shall be submitted to the President for approval not
later than 90 days after the date of this directive.
(9) Recognizing that each branch of the Federal Government is responsible
for its own continuity programs, an official designated by the Chief of
Staff to the President shall ensure that the executive branch's COOP and COG
policies in support of ECG efforts are appropriately coordinated with those
of the legislative and judicial branches in order to ensure interoperability
and allocate national assets efficiently to maintain a functioning Federal
Government.
(10) Federal Government COOP, COG, and ECG plans and operations shall be
appropriately integrated with the emergency plans and capabilities of State,
local, territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and
operators of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to promote
interoperability and to prevent redundancies and conflicting lines of
authority. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall coordinate the
integration of Federal continuity plans and operations with State, local,
territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector owners and operators
of critical infrastructure, as appropriate, in order to provide for the
delivery of essential services during an emergency.
(11) Continuity requirements for the Executive Office of the President (EOP)
and executive departments and agencies shall include the following:
(a) The continuation of the performance of PMEFs during any emergency must
be for a period up to 30 days or until normal operations can be resumed, and
the capability to be fully operational at alternate sites as soon as
possible after the occurrence of an emergency, but not later than 12 hours
after COOP activation;
(b) Succession orders and pre-planned devolution of authorities that ensure
the emergency delegation of authority must be planned and documented in
advance in accordance with applicable law;
(c) Vital resources, facilities, and records must be safeguarded, and
official access to them must be provided;
(d) Provision must be made for the acquisition of the resources necessary
for continuity operations on an emergency basis;
(e) Provision must be made for the availability and redundancy of critical
communications capabilities at alternate sites in order to support
connectivity between and among key government leadership, internal elements,
other executive departments and agencies, critical partners, and the public;
(f) Provision must be made for reconstitution capabilities that allow for
recovery from a catastrophic emergency and resumption of normal operations;
and
(g) Provision must be made for the identification, training, and
preparedness of personnel capable of relocating to alternate facilities to
support the continuation of the performance of PMEFs.
(12) In order to provide a coordinated response to escalating threat levels
or actual emergencies, the Continuity of Government Readiness Conditions
(COGCON) system establishes executive branch continuity program readiness
levels, focusing on possible threats to the National Capital Region. The
President will determine and issue the COGCON Level. Executive departments
and agencies shall comply with the requirements and assigned
responsibilities under the COGCON program. During COOP activation, executive
departments and agencies shall report their readiness status to the
Secretary of Homeland Security or the Secretary's designee.
(13) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall:
(a) Conduct an annual assessment of executive department and agency
continuity funding requests and performance data that are submitted by
executive departments and agencies as part of the annual budget request
process, in order to monitor progress in the implementation of the Plan and
the execution of continuity budgets;
(b) In coordination with the National Continuity Coordinator, issue annual
continuity planning guidance for the development of continuity budget
requests; and
(c) Ensure that heads of executive departments and agencies prioritize
budget resources for continuity capabilities, consistent with this
directive.
(14) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy shall:
(a) Define and issue minimum requirements for continuity communications for
executive departments and agencies, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the
APNSA, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of
Staff to the President;
(b) Establish requirements for, and monitor the development, implementation,
and maintenance of, a comprehensive communications architecture to integrate
continuity components, in consultation with the APHS/CT, the APNSA, the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and the Chief of Staff to
the President; and
(c) Review quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications
capabilities, as prepared pursuant to section 16(d) of this directive or
otherwise, and report the results and recommended remedial actions to the
National Continuity Coordinator.
(15) An official designated by the Chief of Staff to the President shall:
(a) Advise the President, the Chief of Staff to the President, the APHS/CT,
and the APNSA on COGCON operational execution options; and
(b) Consult with the Secretary of Homeland Security in order to ensure
synchronization and integration of continuity activities among the four
categories of executive departments and agencies.
(16) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall:
(a) Coordinate the implementation, execution, and assessment of continuity
operations and activities;
(b) Develop and promulgate Federal Continuity Directives in order to
establish continuity planning requirements for executive departments and
agencies;
(c) Conduct biennial assessments of individual department and agency
continuity capabilities as prescribed by the Plan and report the results to
the President through the APHS/CT;
(d) Conduct quarterly and annual assessments of continuity communications
capabilities in consultation with an official designated by the Chief of
Staff to the President;
(e) Develop, lead, and conduct a Federal continuity training and exercise
program, which shall be incorporated into the National Exercise Program
developed pursuant to Homeland Security Presidential Directive-8 of December
17, 2003 ("National Preparedness"), in consultation with an official
designated by the Chief of Staff to the President;
(f) Develop and promulgate continuity planning guidance to State, local,
territorial, and tribal governments, and private sector critical
infrastructure owners and operators;
(g) Make available continuity planning and exercise funding, in the form of
grants as provided by law, to State, local, territorial, and tribal
governments, and private sector critical infrastructure owners and
operators; and
(h) As Executive Agent of the National Communications System, develop,
implement, and maintain a comprehensive continuity communications
architecture.
(17) The Director of National Intelligence, in coordination with the
Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall produce a
biennial assessment of the foreign and domestic threats to the Nation's
continuity of government.
(18) The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of
Homeland Security, shall provide secure, integrated, Continuity of
Government communications to the President, the Vice President, and, at a
minimum, Category I executive departments and agencies.
(19) Heads of executive departments and agencies shall execute their
respective department or agency COOP plans in response to a localized
emergency and shall:
(a) Appoint a senior accountable official, at the Assistant Secretary level,
as the Continuity Coordinator for the department or agency;
(b) Identify and submit to the National Continuity Coordinator the list of
PMEFs for the department or agency and develop continuity plans in support
of the NEFs and the continuation of essential functions under all
conditions;
(c) Plan, program, and budget for continuity capabilities consistent with
this directive;
(d) Plan, conduct, and support annual tests and training, in consultation
with the Secretary of Homeland Security, in order to evaluate program
readiness and ensure adequacy and viability of continuity plans and
communications systems; and
(e) Support other continuity requirements, as assigned by category, in
accordance with the nature and characteristics of its national security
roles and responsibilities
*General Provisions *
(20) This directive shall be implemented in a manner that is consistent
with, and facilitates effective implementation of, provisions of the
Constitution concerning succession to the Presidency or the exercise of its
powers, and the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 (3 U.S.C. 19), with
consultation of the Vice President and, as appropriate, others involved.
Heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure that appropriate
support is available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary
to be prepared at all times to implement those provisions.
(21) This directive:
(a) Shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and the authorities
of agencies, or heads of agencies, vested by law, and subject to the
availability of appropriations;
(b) Shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect (i) the functions
of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget,
administrative, and legislative proposals, or (ii) the authority of the
Secretary of Defense over the Department of Defense, including the chain of
command for military forces from the President, to the Secretary of Defense,
to the commander of military forces, or military command and control
procedures; and
(c) Is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits,
substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party
against the United States, its agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its
officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
(22) Revocation. Presidential Decision Directive 67 of October 21, 1998
("Enduring Constitutional Government and Continuity of Government
Operations"), including all Annexes thereto, is hereby revoked.
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are
hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.
(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be
protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A,
the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded
appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.
GEORGE W. BUSH
* *
*"Only by zealously guarding the rights *
*of the most humble, the most unorthodox, *
*and the most despised **among us *
*can freedom flourish and endure in our land."*
* *
*Frank Murphy.*
*Associate Justice to the Supreme Court*
Barbara and Craig Perkins
14631 National Drive
Chantilly, VA 20151
perkins_family2@verizon.net
|
|
AbeFrohman
Trad climber
new york, NY
|
|
|
Oct 31, 2007 - 03:52pm PT
|
whatever.
FDR was pres for 12 years and we survived...
who cares.
|
|
Sparky
Trad climber
vagabon movin on
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 31, 2007 - 03:56pm PT
|
FDR and Bush....
Hmmmm...
Who cares?
|
|
Chaz
Trad climber
So. Cal.
|
|
|
Oct 31, 2007 - 04:13pm PT
|
Wow! That Rosenbaum Dude's all worked up over nothing.
Might make a good movie, though.
|
|
TitaniumTendons
Sport climber
LA, CA
|
|
Sorry, I only had an hour to check out the thread so I just finished about a quarter of it, but, being the son of a conspiracy FANATIC, I'm extremely conspiracy skeptical. Every "civilization-as-we-know-it" ending theory has always turned out to be wrong, from Y2K to Ebola. I think the government has much more subtle ways of controlling the population- frankly, I'd love it if they tried to just go all-out marshal law instead of just stealing from my paycheck every week. I'd get a few friends together, form a guerrilla faction, and take pot-shots at National Guardsmen. But that's just me.
|
|
| Messages 1 - 5 of total 5 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!