if you don't know what it is, go here:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55824
it's basically this: if there's some sort of major catastrophe anywhere in the world: congress gets thrown out, and bush and a select few others retain full authority. bush also takes control of all intra-u.s. governments. that means he takes control of all federal, state, and local governments/governmental organizations, and also takes control of the private sector. should this come around election time, the elections are cancelled, and bush continues to be dictator indefinitely.
i'm still waiting to see how conservatives will spin this one in defense of him. i really don't see how anyone could.
2007-10-28
12:29:31
·
9 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
lol, Scott B, you think i'm making this up? how do you reconcile the other answers that don't follow your statement, and who acknowledge it's validity?
2007-10-28
12:37:30 ·
update #1
it does not talk about it directly, but based on other governmental continuancy directives, it is implied and can be enforced. therefore, the issue stands
2007-10-28
12:47:57 ·
update #2
This is old news. Essentially, this has been the province of the executive branch for the last 100 years. The directive does not talk about throwing Congress out; as such a condition is unconstitutional and would have already been challenged immediately by the Democrats. The only ones concerned about the directive are weak minded individuals who seem to be incapable of reading the document and finding out exactly what it says. Instead, they rely on the paranoid delusions of some bloggers to interpret it for them.
2007-10-28 12:38:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
#1) Not reported in the news because the "news" is owned by major conservatives!!!
#2) The "spin" is that "this is always the way things are done; it is nothing new".
(If that were true, then why was a new directive needed????)
God help us if Bush is in charge of anything! Look at what a great job was done in New Orleans! (Ice trucks were sent to Maine, for Heaven's sake!!!!!) I don't want that donkey's behind, or his "people", "deciding" anything for me!!!
My personal belief is that there will be another trumped up, so-called terrorist attack before November 2008, elections won't be held, Dubya will "dictate" the words given to him by his PNAC buddies, and the lower classes will be wiped out. Heck, we might have to call on Iran to "save" us!!!
2007-10-28 19:41:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Joey's Back 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
That is not what the directive tells us.
IN fact it could be Nancy Pelosi who ends up running the nation for the duration of an Emergency depending on her location at the time of the Emergency.
The directive addresses continuity in government during national emergencies.
You have to read the National Emergency Powers act. For example declaring an Emergency can only last two years at the most.
I wish people would read things before they fall for propaganda some one writes.
2007-10-28 19:38:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
very biased reporting. This replaces the existing policy:
(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.
Status is no change and I would seriously verify the biased reporting of this site.
2007-10-28 19:37:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by rance42 5
·
2⤊
2⤋
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html
that's not exactly what it says. go read the actual bill at whitehouse.gov. but yes there is ditatorial powers. you can thank dick cheney for this. if we had an incident like katrina he could enact it. he may make up an excuse. if more americans knew about this and understood the ramifications of it there could possibly be extreme domestic problems, therefore they shove it under the carpets as it were.
note the answer right above.
2007-10-28 19:36:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
why dont we adopt congrssional directive 15 ???????? Thats where ALL the MEMBERS OF BOTH HOUSES have to pay restitution to EVERY LEGAL AMERICAN, & then their approval rating will to up from the tanked position to 15 %
2007-10-28 19:38:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Job1000 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because you got that link from a publication that's about as credible as the National Enquirer. You do realize your gulliability is being laughed at right now?
2007-10-28 19:34:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Scott B 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
Non news worthy stories usually don't get printed.
Seriously, turn off Air America!
2007-10-28 19:33:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by PNAC ~ Penelope 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
they actually did cover this story, months ago.
2007-10-28 19:34:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Random Black Woman 6
·
2⤊
0⤋