'High priests of globalization' in Istanbul

'High priests of globalization' in Istanbul

'High priests of globalization' in Istanbul

http://www.turkishdailynews.com.tr/article.php?enewsid=74608

Thursday, May 31, 2007

TAYLAN BILGIÇ

ISTANBUL - Turkish Daily News

Some call it "the multinational government", some call it the "elite club which shapes world policies" while others say it essentially "fixes" the world's fate. It literally breeds conspiracy theories all around the world with its secrecy, while participants say it is only a private gathering that should be respected.

Whatever it is, the mighty Bilderberg is at our door: The "high priests of globalization," as Will Hutton from The Observer once famously put it, begin their ultra-secretive annual meeting today in Istanbul. While the international media's silence gives rise to yet more conspiracy theories, the Turkish media is going nuts about it: from mass-circulation dailies to well-known weeklies, the media is Bilderberg-busy nowadays. Daily Vatan calls it "the most secretive meeting in the world," announcing: "Bilderberg in Istanbul." Weekly Aktüel says the "multinational government" is here to determine the fate of the world. It seems the hype will continue until the "high priests" end their Istanbul meeting on Sunday.

For those who have not heard about it yet, the Bilderberg Group is an "unofficial annual invitation-only conference of around 130 guests" (Wikipedia), influential, powerful figures from the realms of economy, media and politics. The name comes from their first meeting in 1954, which was held in the Hotel de Bilderberg in Oosterbeek, Netherlands. As the date signals, Bilderberg is a creation of the Cold War. The idea came from Joseph Retinger, who was concerned about the growth of anti-Americanism in Western Europe at the time. So, Bilderberg, just like other organizations like NATO, aimed at strengthening the "unity of the West" against the "communist threat."

With the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the group focused on enhancing the American-led globalization. But then, the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington practically resulted in another focus, which one might call the relation between "civilizations."

Thus, after the first gathering in Istanbul (1959) and the second one in Izmir (1975), a third gathering in Turkey, widely regarded as a "bridge" between the East and the West, seems appropriate.

People that run the world:

If one aspect of Bilderberg that irks many is its secrecy, another one is the identity of its participants. Looking at the list of regular "Bilderbergers," one cannot but think that these are really "the people that run the world". Veterans like Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski are joined every year by newcomers such as former U.S. President Bill Clinton, soon-to-be-former-PM Tony Blair, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, former Pentagon adviser Richard Perle and countless others. Every year, the list also includes important "media people" from influential outlets such as The Financial Times, Washington Post, The Economist, The Times, Le Figaro and Die Zeit. The picture becomes complete with CEOs from the world's biggest companies such as Coca-Cola, Fiat, Suez-Tractebel, Royal Dutch Shell and British Petroleum.

With such a mixture, conspiracy theories abound; the most famous one being the "invisible hand" theory. According to some, those who are lucky enough to attend the meetings and get a blessing from the "inner circle" witness breath-taking career leaps. An "obscure governor" from Arkansas, one year after attending the Bilderberg meeting in 1991, became the President of the United States, while Tony Blair of Britain was elected prime minister three years after his attendance in 1993. But why did Margaret Thatcher, a regular Bilderberger, lose her job as Prime Minister in 1990? The theory says that she lost the support of Bilderberg because she did not accept the transfer of British sovereignty to a "European Super State." Of course, John Major, who took the job as Prime Minister after Thatcher, was also a Bilderberger.

One may choose to believe or not, but the secrecy of the meetings – no cell phones, no getting out of the hotel during three days, no notes, no interviews – creates fertile ground for conspiracy theories. When senior representatives of media giants such as the FT, the Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post attend the meetings every year and next to nothing is printed in the same papers about Bilderberg, one starts to wonder.

Dedicated journalists:

There are a few journalists who are dedicated to unveil the secret of the Bilderberg, though. People such as James P. Tucker, Daniel Estulin and Tony Gosling. The first two are in Istanbul, tracking down the participants, while Gosling, a Briton who runs the Web site www.bilderberg.org, could not come to the show. His Web site gets about three million hits a month, Gosling says, and attributes this great interest to the fact that "investigative journalism is pretty much dead" elsewhere. The Bilderberg is very powerful, especially financially, he told the Turkish Daily News over the phone: "So, if they come to a decision, it is effective."

Gosling has covered the last 10 meetings, and he thinks the gathering in Istanbul is of high importance. "There is a lot of tension on the Iran-Turkey border at the moment. Iraq is also right next door. This is an area of interest for Bilderberg," he said. "[The Bilderbergers] are worried that Islamic sentiment in Turkey is not in favor of an invasion of Iran. They are here to attempt to persuade the Turkish elite and bring them on board with the neocon plan for the Middle East."

But why the secrecy? Gosling posed the same question to David Rockefeller back in 2003. "He shrugged and said it was just a private meeting," he continues. "But the world does not buy this argument. There are politicians there and they are not private people. They are people who should be held accountable."

Gosling's claim, that the main topic of Bilderberg 2007 is Iran, is a widely held opinion. Other topics are energy policies and Turkey's bid for European Union membership, according to the daily Vatan. The paper is optimistic about the last item; it says the Istanbul meeting is a signal that the EU has "inched open the door" to Turkey, basing this claim on unnamed "Bilderberg sources."

A veteran of Bilderberg:

With four separate attendances in Atlanta, Ottawa, Stockholm and Lisbon, Turkey's former Central Bank governor, Gazi Erçel, is the most informed source one can find. "There are many international meetings such as Bilderberg, which have strict rules," he said to the TDN. As to the reason of the secrecy, he says it is a precaution to ensure that everyone talks sincerely on the topics, without the concern of being quoted.

The conspiracy theories stem from ignorance about the meetings, Erçel said, quoting Confucius: "Those who produce ideas without the knowledge are harmful. As they do not know what Bilderberg is, they believe in superstitions."

Erçel also got his share of mention in the conspiracy theories, as some accused him of "planning the 2001 financial crisis" at one of the meetings. "These are defective claims," he said. "Bilderberg is a high-level meeting. Everyone talks freely and very striking debates take place."

Over the years Bilderberg meetings had important Turkish participants. Among them are Süleyman Demirel, the former president; Gazi Erçel, former Central Bank chief; Mesut Yilmaz, former Prime Minister; Selahattin Beyazit, a businessman and a "constant participant"; Mustafa Koç, the CEO of Koç Holding; former ministers Ismail Cem, Hikmet Çetin and Kemal Dervis and also some well-known journalists. Among them, Fehmi Koru from the conservative daily Yeni Safak stands out, because until last year, he had written numerous critical columns on Bilderberg. Last year, things changed and he was also invited to the meetings. Afterwards, he wrote a six-day series on Bilderberg, telling much about the environment and the participants, but certainly not much on what was discussed. Koru is invited for a second time this year, but the "jump" in his career is yet to be seen!

As the Bilderbergers gather, probably giggling among themselves about the conspiracy theories abounding, it would be appropriate to quote Alasdair Spark, an expert in conspiracy theories, who had spoken to the BBC back in June 2004: "Should not we expect that the rich and the powerful organize things in their own interests? It is called capitalism!"

BILDERBERG 2007 INVITED GUESTS

(According to www.bilderberg.org)

Ali Babacan, Minister of Economic Affairs (Turkey)

Kemal Dervis, Administrator, UNDP (Turkey)

Mustafa V. Koç, Chairman, Koç Holding A.S. (Turkey)

Fehmi Koru, Senior Writer, Yeni Safak (Turkey)

George Alogoskoufis, Minister of Economy and Finance (Greece)

Edward Balls, Economic Secretary to the Treasury (UK)

Francisco Pinto Balsemão, Chairman and CEO, IMPRESA, S.G.P.S.; Former Prime Minister (Portugal)

José M. Durão Barroso, President, European Commission (Portugal/International)

Franco Bernabé, Vice Chairman, Rothschild Europe (Italy)

Nicolas Beytout, Editor-in-Chief, Le Figaro (France)

Carl Bildt, Former Prime Minister (Sweden)

Hubert Burda, Publisher and CEO, Hubert Burda Media Holding (Belgium)

Philippe Camus, CEO, EADS (France)

Henri de Castries, Chairman of the Management Board and CEO, AXA (France)

Juan Luis Cebrian, Grupo PRISA media group (Spain)

Kenneth Clark, Member of Parliament (UK)

Timothy C. Collins, Senior Managing Director and CEO, Ripplewood Holdings, LLC (USA)

Bertrand Collomb, Chairman, Lafarge (France)

George A. David, Chairman, Coca-Cola H.B.C. S.A. (USA)

Anders Eldrup, President, DONG A/S (Denmark)

John Elkann, Vice Chairman, Fiat S.p.A (Italy)

Martin S. Feldstein, President and CEO, National Bureau of Economic Research (USA)

Timothy F. Geithner, President and CEO, Federal Reserve Bank of New York (USA)

Paul A. Gigot, Editor of the Editorial Page, The Wall Street Journal (USA)

Dermot Gleeson, Chairman, AIB Group (Ireland)

Donald E. Graham, Chairman and CEO, The Washington Post Company (USA)

Victor Halberstadt, Professor of Economics, Leiden University, (the Netherlands)

Jean-Pierre Hansen, CEO, Suez-Tractebel S.A. (Belgium)

Richard N. Haass, President, Council on Foreign Relations (USA)

Richard C. Holbrooke, Vice Chairman, Perseus, LLC (USA)

Jaap G. Hoop de Scheffer, Secretary General, NATO (the Netherlands/International)

Allan B. Hubbard, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, Director National Economic Council (USA)

Josef Joffe, Publisher-Editor, Die Zeit (Germany)

James A. Johnson, Vice Chairman, Perseus, LLC (USA)

Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., Senior Managing Director, Lazard Frères & Co. LLC (USA)

Anatole Kaletsky, Editor at Large, The Times (UK)

John Kerr of Kinlochard, Deputy Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell plc (the Netherlands)

Henry A. Kissinger, Chairman, Kissinger Associates (USA)

Bernard Kouchner, Minister of Foreign Affairs (France)

Henry R. Kravis, Founding Partner, Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co. (USA)

Marie-Josée Kravis, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Inc. (USA)

Neelie Kroes, Commissioner, European Commission (the Netherlands/International)

Ed Kronenburg, Director of the Private Office, NATO Headquarters (International)

William J. Luti, Special Assistant to the President for Defense Policy and Strategy, National Security Council (USA)

Jessica T. Mathews, President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (USA)

Frank McKenna, Ambassador to the US, member Carlyle Group (Canada)

Thierry de Montbrial, President, French Institute for International Relations (France)

Mario Monti, President, Universita Commerciale Luigi Bocconi (Italy)

Craig J. Mundie, Chief Technical Officer Advanced Strategies and Policy, Microsoft Corporation (USA)

Egil Myklebust, Chairman of the Board of Directors SAS, Norsk Hydro ASA (Norway)

Matthias Nass, Deputy Editor, Die Zeit (Germany)

Adnrzej Olechowski, Leader Civic Platform (Poland)

Jorma Ollila, Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell plc/Nokia (Finland)

George Osborne, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer (UK)

Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa, Minister of Finance (Italy)

Richard N. Perle, Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (USA)

Heather Reisman, Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc. (Canada)

David Rockefeller (USA)

Matías Rodriguez Inciarte, Executive Vice Chairman, Grupo Santander Bank, (Spain)

Dennis B. Ross, Director, Washington Institute for Near East Policy (USA)

Otto Schily, Former Minister of Interior Affairs (Germany)

Jürgen E. Schrempp, Former Chairman of the Board of management, DaimlerChrysler AG (Germany)

Tøger Seidenfaden, Executive Editor-in-Chief, Politiken (Denmark)

Peter D. Sutherland, Chairman, BP plc and Chairman, Goldman Sachs International (Ireland)

Giulio Tremonti, Vice President of the Chamber of Deputies (Italy)

Jean-Claude Trichet, Governor, European Central Bank (France/International)

John Vinocur, Senior Correspondent, International Herald Tribune (USA)

Jacob Wallenberg, Chairman, Investor AB (Sweden)

Martin H. Wolf, Associate Editor, The Financial Times (UK)

James D. Wolfensohn, Special Envoy for the Gaza Disengagement (USA)

Robert B. Zoellick, Deputy Secretary of State (USA)

Klaus Zumwinkel, Chairman of the Board of management, Deutsche Post AG (USA)

Adrian D. Wooldridge, Foreign Correspondent, The Economist

Currently reading :
Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time
By Carroll Quigley
Release date: By June, 1975

Proof that Ron Paul is a uniter! A picture is worth a thousand words...

Proof that Ron Paul is a uniter! A picture is worth a thousand words...




At the Ron Paul Austin fundraiser, I took this picture from across the room with a telephoto lens so I would not disturb them. The older gentleman in the suit & tie is my father-in-law. He's a evangelical Christian who used to be a missionary in Mexico. He also founded a Christian Radio station in South Texas. He told me that the two of them had a very pleasant conversation that he enjoyed. This image really seemed powerful to me. Here we have two very different people sitting next to each other united by Ron Paul's message of freedom. There were Conservative Republicans, Independents, Libertarians, and even a fair number of Democrats who paid a $100 donation to support and hear Ron Paul.

Our country desperately needs a man who can unite people. We need Ron Paul to be our President

From: Republican Liberty Caucus Of Texas
Date: May 20, 2007 10:18 PM
------------------------------------------------------------
Here's the speech that they were viewing -

LIBERTY BOTH PROMOTES & UNITES DIVERSITY -
(Check out the multi-cultural, multi-partisan support here) 8 min.


pt. 2 (9 min.)





UPDATE: Check out the support for Ron coming from OUTSIDE of the COUNTRY!

Former Chief of the CIA’s bin Laden Unit On Dr. Paul

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/05/22/fmr-chief-of-cia-osama-unit-why-they-attack-us/

The following is a letter from Michael F. Scheuer, former Chief of the CIA's Osama bin Laden Unit, to the editor of Antiwar.com, regarding Congressman Ron Paul's exchange with Rudy Giuliani about why the al Qaeda network has targeted the United States.

Sir,

In the dozen-plus years I have been active in matters relating to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, I have watched them go from a small Islamist organization to a worldwide insurgent movement, while bin Laden has established himself as the primary source of inspiration and leadership for tens of millions of Muslim Islamists. This process has been made possible by two things: (a) the skill, courage, patience, and ruthlessness of bin Laden and his ilk, and (b) the refusal of the U.S. government to understand the motivation of bin Laden and his allies.

Last week, Representative Paul did all Americans an immense service by simply pointing out the obvious: Our Islamist enemies do not give a damn about the way we vote, think, or live. Though any country they ruled would surely not look like ours, they are motivated by the belief that U.S. foreign policy is an attack on Islam, its lands, and its believers. This, of course, is not to say that America is to blame for the war it is now engaged in, but it is to say that it is foolish – and perhaps fatal – for Americans to believe that are we are being attacked for such ephemera as primary elections, R-rated movies, and gender equality. If our Islamist enemies were motivated by such things their numbers would be minuscule and they would be a sporadic lethal nuisance, not, as they are, the most serious national security threat we face today.

Of the eighteen presidential candidates now in the field from both parties, only Mr. Paul has had the courage to square with the average American voter. We are indeed hated and being warred against because we are "over there," and not for what we are and how we live. Our failure to recognize the truth spoken by Mr. Paul – and spelled out for us in hundreds of pages of statements by Osama bin Laden since 1996 – is leading America toward military and economic disaster.

At day's end, Mr. Paul has at least temporarily shaken the pillars of the bipartisan consensus on U.S. foreign policy. Neither party, and none of the candidates, want to discuss the Islamists' motivation because they would have to deal with energy policy, support for Israel, and the 50-year record of U.S. support and protection for Arab tyrannies. These holy cows of U.S. politics have long been off limits to debate, but Mr. Paul has now accurately identified them as the source of motivation for our Islamist enemies, and implicitly has said that the obsessive interventionism of both parties has inspired al-Qaeda and its allies to kill 7,000-plus U.S. civilians and military personnel since 11 September 2001. The war we are engaged in with the Islamists is a long way from over, but it need end in America's defeat only if Mr. Paul's frank statements are ignored.

And no matter how you view Mr. Paul's words, you can safely take one thing to the bank. The person most shaken by Mr. Paul's frankness was Osama bin Laden, who knows that the current status quo in U.S. foreign policy toward the Islamic world is al-Qaeda's one indispensable ally, and the only glue that provides cohesion between and among the diverse and often fractious Islamist groups that follow its banner.

Respectfully,
Michael F. Scheuer
Falls Church, VA
----------------------------------------
See also:

Antiwar Radio: Scott Horton Interviews Dr. Ron Paul MP3

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/04/04/rep-ron-paul-2/

Antiwar Radio: Scott Horton Interviews Michael Scheuer

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/05/19/former-head-of-cias-osama-unit-backs-up-rep-ron-paul/
--------------------------------------------
UPDATE: CNN reports on today's Scheuer / Paul press conference, you have to see the positive multi-partisan support to believe it:



Here's the original press conference:


CNN - May 16

Ron Paul on Bill Maher Show 5-25-07

BRAND NEW BLOG - MORE TO COME!!!

Bush can NOW SUSPEND elections!

Bush can NOW SUSPEND elections!

As of May 9, President Bush HAS GIVEN HIMSELF the power to SUSPEND our elections and DISMISS CONGRESS for any reason he chooses, for any length of time! FULL DOCUMENTATION below:

Nobody has picked up this story yet! The press is NOT covering this (barely anyone – only Worldnetdaily.com, Coast to Coast AM, and Alex Jones) http://www.jonesreport.com/articles/230507_bush_martial_law.html

Call your Congresspeople and Senators ASAP and tell them to put a stop to

"The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive,"

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/05/20070509-12.html

a.k.a.

NSPD 51

or

HSPD 20

ASK to know why is there no congressional review of this executive directive!
REQUEST they put this on the agenda in Congress and tell them to challenge it!

Capitol switchboard - 202-224-3121

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/

http://www.senate.gov/

Call your local paper and tell them you want them to cover this story! Call the ACLU and anyone else you can think of to get this out to the public!

Breaking News:

Last night, on Wednesday, May 23rd, 2007, the world's largest late-night talk radio show aired this interview in which author and columnist Jerome Corsi discussed a new Presidential Directive, signed into law on May 9th, that he said grants dictatorial powers to the office of the president in the event of a national emergency. http://www.coasttocoastam.com/shows/2007/05/23.html#recap

For more, see his commentary for WorldNetDaily.

Bush Grants Presidency Extraordinary Powers: Directive for Emergencies Apparently Gives Authority Without Congressional Oversight by Jerome R. Corsi
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55825

During the interview Corsi reported that the directive was, "signed quietly on May 9," "without congressional approval or oversight."

Corsi reported that this Executive Order is known as "The National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive," a.k.a. NSPD 51 or HSPD 20

This creates a new un-elected office of a "national continuity coordinator, whose job is to make plans for national essential functions of ALL

- FEDERAL

- STATE

- LOCAL

- TERRITORIAL

- TRIBAL

governments

as well as

- private sector organizations

to continue functioning under the president's directives in the event of a "national emergency."

Corsi stated that a:

"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."

All the president has to do is "call" or "declare" a "national emergency" and this

includes - "the operation of business organizations."

- No necessity to go to congress

- Does NOT need Congressional approval

There will be NO congressional control "over" of which powers the president can use / "exert"…"once he's declared a national emergency by his own authority."

The host, George Noory, asks: "How does this differ, Jerry, prior to him signing? Could the president not have assumed control over everything in the first place?"

Jerry Corsi – "Prior to this, the only such authority would have been in National Emergency Act and that's defined in the US Code, Title 50, chapter 34, subchapter 2, section 1621 and under that US Code, the national emergency act allows the president to declare a national emergency BUT requires that the proclamation immediately go to Congress and be published in the Federal Register."

On May 9 the requirement to report to Congress was done away with!

Corsi notes:

"The Constitution was specifically crafted "to limit the power of the presidency. We have a Constitutional Republic where the different branches of government: Executive, Legislative and Judicial balance each other. Our Founding Fathers were well aware that the council of the ancient Romans, executive branch of the Roman government would declare emergencies and declare themselves to be dictators, or emperors, with all the powers of government in their office. If The Founding Fathers of the United States wanted to put such a provision in the Constitution they would have but they specifically eliminated any ability of the president to declare an emergency to assume the powers of a dictator, and that's basically what this national security directive that George Bush has signed on his own authority, on May 9, allows the president to assume virtually dictatorial powers."

George asks who created the document_

Jerry - "Totally, George, in the office of the president. This is George Bush's own creation."

George points out, and Corsi confirms, that it NEVER went to congress.

Corsi - "He signed it and it went into law, on his signature with no congress, no congressional oversight, no congressional review, no law being passed, this is George Bush's edict, pure and simple"

George: "Now with this wide-open definition of 'catastrophic emergency,' if we have another hurricane Katrina. One could assume, that's a catastrophic emergency."

Corsi confirms, "That's correct."

George - "Could you then kick all these powers into effect under this directive?"

Corsi - "Yes, you could."

"In my review today, the Security and Prosperity Partnership in North America, which was declared again by President Bush, no law, no treaty, in Waco, Texas on March 23, 2005 and the working groups, you know these Tri-lateral shadow government groups, consisting of the bureaucrats of the United States, Mexico and Canada. They've been reviewing 'Continental emergencies' that could occur in, say a health emergency, Avian Flu or Katrina, an emergency of weather or environmental disaster."

George - "Could they also then, under this directive cancel an election?"

Corsi - "I believe they could, I believe the president could say: 'we're in a national emergency, I'm assuming these extraordinary powers, to preserve the Constitution I'm cancelling the election. There's no limit in this directive of the powers the president may assume. I went to the Congressional Research Service, http://zfacts.com/p/576.html

which defined, under the National Emergency Act, what the presidents powers under an emergency would be":

- Sieze property

- Organize and control the means of production

- Seize commodities

- Assign military forces abroad

- Institute martial law

- Seize and control all transportation and communications

- Regulate the operation of private enterprise

- Restrict travel

- and in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens

Corsi emphasizes that the president "can declare on his own authority that a national emergency exists."

George asks a great question: "in a national emergency... can't government function without this directive anyway?"

Corsi - "Well absolutely George, I mean historically we've been through any, countless numbers of emergencies. We went through the flu epidemic following WWI. We've had countless earthquakes and tornados and hurricanes, Katrina etc. We've had wars, WWI and WWII and the president never had to have a... presidential directive that allowed him to become a dictator and assume all these powers."

Corsi - "There is NO LIMIT to the president's authority under this directive."

George - "Then what do we have Congress for then?"

Corsi - This would permit the president, if he wanted, to basically dismiss Congress... in the interest of preserving 'continuity of government'...the president might declare the emergency is so great that Congress cannot meet."

George – "Have any congressmen said anything to you or anybody about this?"

Corsi – "Entirely silent."

George – "Do they know about this?"

Corsi – "Its shocking how little congress knows about what the president is doing."

George – "How did you pick up on this story?"

Corsi – "I got emails from readers who said you've got to look at this directive from May 9…began looking at it… was shocked."

"There was NO press release of any substantive nature"

"The press release putting this on public notice, JUST published the directive. There wasn't even a Presidential statement EXPLAINING it."

"No discussion from the white house, they refused to explain it," according to Corsi.

"They just did a press release that posted the directive itself. No Press conference by president Bush.When I called the White House they refused to call me back and give me a statement on this"

George - "This is dangerous, this is dangerous."

Corsi - "This is EXTREMELY dangerous"

George - "Whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, or a Conservative, or a Libertarian the point is: no one person in this country should have omnipotent power."

Corsi - "That's right. When the Founding Fathers created the Constitution, they'd just got rid of King George the 3rd. They did not want an Imperial President that could become a dictator in the course of an emergency. This is equivalent to the Fuhrer of the Reichstags fire saying, 'I've got all the authority of the German state. It's the equivalent of a Roman dictator saying, the Roman state has an emergency and I am now the dictator, the emperor, not a council, but the dictator, in charge of the entire Roman government.

Our Founding Fathers knew this could be done by an executive and they created a LIMITED REPUBLIC with a balance of powers to prevent this EXACT type of directive from ever being written."

George - "If the power grid goes out for 2 hours, he can kick this directive into effect?"

Corsi - "Yes he can. ANY time the president decides there's a national emergency, he can kick this directive into effect and take over dictatorial powers

George - "So the day we have the election next year, the day we have it, if something happens in the morning, whatever it is can he cancel the election?"

Corsi - "YES. He can assume control of the Federal, State, Local, territorial and tribal governments."

George - "For how long?"

Corsi - "Unspecified George, until the President decides the emergency is over, could be YEARS, but that directive does not say how long it could be in existence, as long as the President wants."

George - "we've got to get congress to really go into an uproar about this. This is dictatorship. Whether its used or not, it should not be a law."

Corsi - "It's outrageous, George. It's a complete contradiction of the fundamental principles of the Constitution, which established limited government checks and balances between the different departments. This allows the President to negate CHECKS AND BALANCES and take over as a dictator, JUST by DECLARING a national emergency exists on his OWN authority."

Corsi - "This supersedes The National Emergency Act."

George asked why the President didn't call a news conference to explain this.

Corsi - "Why didn't Bush take this to congress and say I want to "pass this as a law [and this is WHY] amending the National Emergency Act. We already have an act in place which DEFINES the President's ability to declare an emergency, but that law requires the President to bring the declaration of an emergency to Congress and to PUBLISH it in the Federal Registry, where Congress would have the opportunity to overturn it, or negate it. This directive has NO specification that the President has to take a declaration of an emergency to Congress at all."

Corsi - "Part of this directive is classified, you can't even read the appendix."

George asked if, during WWII, FDR invoked "anything like this."

Corsi - "F.D.R. did NOT invoke extraordinary emergency powers of the presidency. The only thing I can think of in American history that's similar would be some of the actions taken by President Lincoln during the Civil War, which Constitutionalists have been arguing about ever since, suspending Habeas Corpus. There were any number of things that Lincoln did."

George - "Could he in theory say: I want everybody to get chipped. I want everyone to take a vaccine, under this directive?"

Corsi - "Absolutely. He could say, 'We've got an Avian Flu epidemic that's affecting the Continent, so I'm going to put together under my direction, a continental health service and I'm going to require that everybody be quarantined, unless they get a vaccine.'"

Corsi - "Remember on April 30, President Bush, on his own authority, signed a Transatlantic Agreement with the European Union, creating a Transatlantic Economic Council to integrate us with the E.U. and that ALSO did not go to Congress. So this Presidential directive, establishing these emergency powers, involves a series of decisions George Bush has made in his own office without going through Congress."

Corsi – "This looks like a power-grab that negates the Constitution."

Corsi clarified that this does not give the Vice President any special powers. "It's all in the office of President...In fact the President has created a 'national continuity director...she also has never been elected. She is now the czar for 'national continuity."

A caller called in and pointed out that this type of thing has been going on for decades, including during Bill Clinton's Administration.

Corsi - "Bill Clinton may have. The idea is an ancient idea. The Roman emperors knew how to use these emergency powers to declare themselves supreme leaders. Adolf Hitler knew it at the Reichstag fire. It's an old idea, its just shocking that President Bush has actually put it into a May 9, signed executive order which makes it law."

George asked what happens when people and soldiers say no?

Corsi - "It would take extraordinary efforts because the President would have the ability to CONSIDER IT AN ACT OF TRAITORSHIP. If someone refused to follow the President's orders, even as a dictator. This directive gives him the ability to direct any decision he wants."

George expressed that he thinks a soldier would be apt to first protect the Constitution.

Corsi – "I would hope so, but first OUR SENATORS AND CONGRESSMAN must first protect the Constitution and bring this Presidential directive under Congressional examination IMMEDIATELY."

At approximately 37 minutes into the first hour, a caller (Jim from Huntsville, AL) called in supporting the directive saying that the President should, "dissolve Congress" until we win the war, "and then perhaps if common sense comes back into politicians, allow Congress to be seated again. I think if he enacts these powers that it is the best thing for the people of the United States of America."

Corsi - "The problem is, is that the Constitution sets up limited powers. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, facing a war on two oceans, a world war STILL went to Congress and got a Declaration of War. That's something we've not done with Iraq, something we didn't do in Kosovo and we didn't do in Vietnam. We're not following the Constitutional procedures and we're going down this slippery slope to the point where the President, under this directive, could declare [by] himself, that there's an emergency, he's a dictator."
------------------------------------------------------------

Congressman Ron Paul is the ONLY elected representative to directly address this recently on the house floor. Here is the link to the Tuesday, May 22 speech on the house floor:

If you want to TAKE ACTION then please watch this historic speech and pass it on to everyone you know!

This speech is available @ 3 sources:

Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLn0tMdXd_Q

MySpace - small picture, great sound

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=2031142395

Google - big picture, not as good quality sound

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2697318050893284967&q=%22Ron+Paul%22+5%2F22

Preserve the rule of law that protects us all - the United States Constitution, the highest law of the land.

Currently reading: Trilateralism the Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management By: Holly Sklar Release date: November, 1980

What Really Divides Us?

Today's Propaganda alert:

[Thanks Squidink, for the following, @ the DISINFO blog]

A simple search brought up the following article. I've included a few pertinent lines. Please read, and tell others. Jeese, even Wonkette is smearing him as a racist. DO SOME RESEARCH!!!

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul68.html

What Really Divides Us?

"...it is the federal government more than anything else that divides us along race, class, religion, and gender lines."

"Racism is simply an ugly form of collectivism, the mindset that views humans only as members of groups and never as individuals. Racists believe that all individual who share superficial physical characteristics are alike; as collectivists, racists think only in terms of groups. By encouraging Americans to adopt a group mentality, the advocates of so-called "diversity" actually perpetuate racism. Their intense focus on race is inherently racist, because it views individuals only as members of racial groups."

"The true antidote to racism is liberty."

Rep. Ron Paul, MD
December 24, 2002

Posted by squidink on May 19, 2007 - Saturday at 6:39 PM

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=39244032&blogID=265742127&Mytoken=7C33871A-46AF-4058-9ECFED8E0ABA345117593505

SEE ALSO:

Ron Paul Rebuts Racist Views

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41822

Ron Paul a Racist?

Monday, May 21, 2007 - FreeMarketNews.com

http://www.freemarketnews.com/WorldNews.asp?nid=41721&fb=1

Ron Paul Racist Smear - Today's High Alert

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

http://www.freemarketnews.com/Analysis/134/7587/high%20alert%5B1%5D.asp?wid=134&nid=7587&fb=1#0

Dr. No is winning ALL major polls

Dr. Paul has WIDE bi-partisan support!!!

Paul wins the MSNBC poll for the first GOP debate (sponsored by MSNBC!) (May 3^rd)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18421356/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18436681

Paul wins MSNBC poll for the 2^nd GOP debate (May 15)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18659382

Paul wins ABC News poll for the 2^nd Republican debate

http://abcnews.go.com/politics/beseenbeheard/popup?id=3135373&POLL288=4000000

Paul wins ABC News poll for the 1^st Republican debate

http://bp2.blogger.com/_co2B7YC7SEY/Rj0e-hltlLI/AAAAAAAAAZg/qXVOjXkGg1w/s1600-h/6cn03g600.jpg

Paul comes in 2^nd in last nights FOX poll for the 2^nd debate

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,272493,00.html

The Fox News people were obviously desperate to prevent Ron winning the poll because they restricted it to text message only [ I didn't get to vote 'cause I don't have a cell phone], no Internet voting, and closed it down declaring Romney the winner after just three hours.

Fox News had an explanation for why Ron Paul did so well in their poll even after the deliberate smear job that constituted their presidential debate - online activists were skewing the numbers. There's only one problem with that claim - the poll was by text message only and no online votes were taken! (Last two paragraphs lifted from Alex' site).