Bush grants presidency extraordinary powers
Directive for emergencies apparently gives authority without congressional oversight
Posted: May 23, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush has signed a directive granting extraordinary powers to the office of the president in the event of a declared national emergency, apparently without congressional approval or oversight. The "National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive" was signed May 9, notes Jerome R. Corsi in a WND column. It was issued with the dual designation of NSPD-51, as a National Security Presidential Directive, and HSPD-20, as a Homeland Security Presidential Directive.
The directive establishes under the office of the president a new national continuity coordinator whose job is to make plans for "National Essential Functions" of all federal, state, local, territorial and tribal governments, as well as private sector organizations to continue functioning under the president's directives in the event of a national emergency.
"Catastrophic emergency" is loosely defined 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 functions."
Corsi says the president can assume the power to direct any and all government and business activities until the emergency is declared over. The directive says the assistant to the president for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, currently Frances Fragos Townsend, would be designated as the national continuity coordinator.
Corsi says the directive makes no attempt to reconcile the powers created for the national continuity coordinator with the National Emergency Act, which requires that such proclamation "shall immediately be transmitted to the Congress and published in the Federal Register."
A Congressional Research Service study notes the National Emergency Act sets up Congress as a balance empowered to "modify, rescind, or render dormant" such emergency authority if Congress believes the president has acted inappropriately. But the new directive appears to supersede the National Emergency Act by creating the new position of national continuity coordinator without any specific act of Congress authorizing the position, Corsi says.
The directive also makes no reference to Congress and its language appears to negate any requirement that the president submit to Congress a determination that a national emergency exists.
It suggests instead that the powers of the directive can be implemented without any congressional approval or oversight. Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke affirmed to Corsi the Homeland Security Department would implement the requirements of the order under Townsend's direction.
The White House declined to comment on the directive.
While the National Emergency Act has been in existence since the days of FDR it had previously required the consent of Congress. I'm curious as to the current motivation to write congress out of the loop? Could this be a path to circumvent our constitution and cement the role of dictator? The "DECIDER" can implement the start AND the end of the event... I can see it now... the internet shut down as a security risk!!!!! What do you think?
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Thursday, May 10, 2007
OxyContin Maker, Execs Plead Guilty
AP
ROANOKE, Va. (May 10) - The maker of the powerful painkiller OxyContin and three of its current and former executives pleaded guilty Thursday to misleading the public about the drug's risk of addiction, a federal prosecutor and the company said.
Purdue Pharma L.P. and the executives will pay $634.5 million in fines, U.S. Attorney John Brownlee said in the news release.
The plea comes two days after the Stamford, Conn.-based company agreed to pay $19.5 million to 26 states and the District of Columbia to settle complaints that it encouraged physicians to overprescribe OxyContin.
"With its OxyContin, Purdue unleashed a highly abusable, addictive, and potentially dangerous drug on an unsuspecting and unknowing public," Brownlee said. "For these misrepresentations and crimes, Purdue and its executives have been brought to justice."
Inserted from AP
Is there any doubt about the greed in the Pharma industry? And they were able to convince Congress that our buying drugs from outside the US is so dangerous that the FDA must certify anything imported (even from US Co's). So how come the FDA approved OxyContin and its marketing plan in the first place?
ROANOKE, Va. (May 10) - The maker of the powerful painkiller OxyContin and three of its current and former executives pleaded guilty Thursday to misleading the public about the drug's risk of addiction, a federal prosecutor and the company said.
Purdue Pharma L.P. and the executives will pay $634.5 million in fines, U.S. Attorney John Brownlee said in the news release.
The plea comes two days after the Stamford, Conn.-based company agreed to pay $19.5 million to 26 states and the District of Columbia to settle complaints that it encouraged physicians to overprescribe OxyContin.
"With its OxyContin, Purdue unleashed a highly abusable, addictive, and potentially dangerous drug on an unsuspecting and unknowing public," Brownlee said. "For these misrepresentations and crimes, Purdue and its executives have been brought to justice."
Inserted from AP
Is there any doubt about the greed in the Pharma industry? And they were able to convince Congress that our buying drugs from outside the US is so dangerous that the FDA must certify anything imported (even from US Co's). So how come the FDA approved OxyContin and its marketing plan in the first place?
Friday, May 4, 2007
Reasons for Iraq War: Bush or Cheney?
When elected, Bush was opposed to "nation building," but Dick Cheney brought in eight fellow neocons who advocated "regime change" and re-building Iraq. This was before 9/11 and had nothing to do with Bush's war on terrorism.
Cheney's group all belonged to PNAC or IASPS. IASPS advocated regime change to increase Israeli security, while PNAC focused on our Middle East allies but named only Israel. Using 9/11, Cheney and the neocons convinced Bush to go against the long-standing conservative principles he proclaimed during his election campaign.
The 9 Iraq-War Planners Surrounding Bush
A Short History of the Neocons' Push for War.
1996. Report: why removing Saddam is crucial to Israel.
Written by Feith, Wurmser and Fairbanks.
Delivered in person by Perle to the Israeli Prime Minister.
1997. PNAC's founding "principles" signed by necons:
Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Abrams.
1998. PNAC letter to Clinton: removal of Saddam ... military efforts
signed by: Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Bolton, Abrams
Bombing Iraq Isn't Enough (NY Times) / A way to Oust Saddam ("the Wolfowitz plan ... US military might") —PNAC
1999. The Neocons' book on US/Israeli strategic interest in Iraq
"Iraq also has large, proven oil reserves, water, ..." —Wurmser
PNAC Memo: "Above all, only ground forces can remove Saddam."
2000. Talk of war with Iraq was discontinued during the election.
2001. War planning by neocons' PNAC.
Liberate Iraq—PNAC "At minimum, 50,000 troops." "Thousands of Iraqi soldiers would likely change sides and fight." "Chalabi may be ideal man to lead the opposition. He is rich and upper class."
From www.zfacts.com
How much more info is required before our Congress stops this madness and restores an even handed approach to the Middle East. It would do more to fight Islamic radicals than our military could ever hope to do.
Cheney's group all belonged to PNAC or IASPS. IASPS advocated regime change to increase Israeli security, while PNAC focused on our Middle East allies but named only Israel. Using 9/11, Cheney and the neocons convinced Bush to go against the long-standing conservative principles he proclaimed during his election campaign.
The 9 Iraq-War Planners Surrounding Bush
A Short History of the Neocons' Push for War.
1996. Report: why removing Saddam is crucial to Israel.
Written by Feith, Wurmser and Fairbanks.
Delivered in person by Perle to the Israeli Prime Minister.
1997. PNAC's founding "principles" signed by necons:
Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, Abrams.
1998. PNAC letter to Clinton: removal of Saddam ... military efforts
signed by: Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Bolton, Abrams
Bombing Iraq Isn't Enough (NY Times) / A way to Oust Saddam ("the Wolfowitz plan ... US military might") —PNAC
1999. The Neocons' book on US/Israeli strategic interest in Iraq
"Iraq also has large, proven oil reserves, water, ..." —Wurmser
PNAC Memo: "Above all, only ground forces can remove Saddam."
2000. Talk of war with Iraq was discontinued during the election.
2001. War planning by neocons' PNAC.
Liberate Iraq—PNAC "At minimum, 50,000 troops." "Thousands of Iraqi soldiers would likely change sides and fight." "Chalabi may be ideal man to lead the opposition. He is rich and upper class."
From www.zfacts.com
How much more info is required before our Congress stops this madness and restores an even handed approach to the Middle East. It would do more to fight Islamic radicals than our military could ever hope to do.
Mystery of the Missing Meters:Iraq"s missing oil revenues
By Pratap Chatterjee
CorpWatch
March 22, 2007
The line of ships at the Al Basra Oil Terminal (ABOT) stretches south to the horizon, patiently waiting in the searing heat of the Northern Arabian Gulf as four giant supertankers load up. Close by, two more tankers fill up at the smaller Khawr Al Amaya Oil Terminal (KAAOT). Guarding both terminals are dozens of heavily-armed U.S. Navy troops and Iraqi Marines who live on the platforms.
These two offshore terminals, a maze of pipes and precarious metal walkways, deliver some 1.6 million barrels of crude oil, at least 85 percent of Iraq's output, to buyers from all over the world. If the southern oil fields are the heart of Iraq's economy, its main arteries are three 40-plus inch pipelines that stretch some 52 miles from Iraq's wells to the ports.
Heavily armed soldiers spend their days at the oil terminals scanning the horizon looking for suicide bombers and stray fishing dhows (boats). Meanwhile, right under their noses, smugglers are suspected to be diverting an estimated billions of dollars worth of crude onto tankers because the oil metering system that is supposed monitor how much crude flows into and out of ABOT and KAAOT - has not worked since the March 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Officials blame the four-year delay in repairing the relatively simple system on "security problems." Others point to the failed efforts of the two U.S. companies hired to repair the southern oil fields, fix the two terminals, and the meters: Halliburton of Houston, Texas, and Parsons of Pasadena, California. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) is scheduled to publish a report this spring that is expected criticize the companies' failure to complete the work.
Rumors are rife among suspicious Iraqis about the failure to measure the oil flow. "Iraq is the victim of the biggest robbery of its oil production in modern history," blazed a March 2006 headline in Azzaman, Iraq's most widely read newspaper. A May 2006 study of oil production and export figures by Platt's Oilgram News, an industry magazine, showed that up to $3 billion a year is unaccounted for.
see Corpwatch for complete text
I wonder how much of Big Oil's profits are coming from "unmetered"oil.
CorpWatch
March 22, 2007
The line of ships at the Al Basra Oil Terminal (ABOT) stretches south to the horizon, patiently waiting in the searing heat of the Northern Arabian Gulf as four giant supertankers load up. Close by, two more tankers fill up at the smaller Khawr Al Amaya Oil Terminal (KAAOT). Guarding both terminals are dozens of heavily-armed U.S. Navy troops and Iraqi Marines who live on the platforms.
These two offshore terminals, a maze of pipes and precarious metal walkways, deliver some 1.6 million barrels of crude oil, at least 85 percent of Iraq's output, to buyers from all over the world. If the southern oil fields are the heart of Iraq's economy, its main arteries are three 40-plus inch pipelines that stretch some 52 miles from Iraq's wells to the ports.
Heavily armed soldiers spend their days at the oil terminals scanning the horizon looking for suicide bombers and stray fishing dhows (boats). Meanwhile, right under their noses, smugglers are suspected to be diverting an estimated billions of dollars worth of crude onto tankers because the oil metering system that is supposed monitor how much crude flows into and out of ABOT and KAAOT - has not worked since the March 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.
Officials blame the four-year delay in repairing the relatively simple system on "security problems." Others point to the failed efforts of the two U.S. companies hired to repair the southern oil fields, fix the two terminals, and the meters: Halliburton of Houston, Texas, and Parsons of Pasadena, California. The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) is scheduled to publish a report this spring that is expected criticize the companies' failure to complete the work.
Rumors are rife among suspicious Iraqis about the failure to measure the oil flow. "Iraq is the victim of the biggest robbery of its oil production in modern history," blazed a March 2006 headline in Azzaman, Iraq's most widely read newspaper. A May 2006 study of oil production and export figures by Platt's Oilgram News, an industry magazine, showed that up to $3 billion a year is unaccounted for.
see Corpwatch for complete text
I wonder how much of Big Oil's profits are coming from "unmetered"oil.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)