posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 03:24 PM
You all are missing the point that the OP was posting about....
My emphasis added (take from Section 201 of the new Executive Order):
(b) The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations
to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense,
under both emergency and non-emergency conditions. Each Secretary shall authorize the heads of other agencies, as appropriate, to place
priority ratings on contracts and orders for materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this
This does NOT exist, and the verbiage is COMPLETELY different, as verified by the following:
(b) The Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the heads of those departments and agencies specified in subsection 201(a) of this order, shall
administer the Defense Priorities and Allocations System ("DPAS") regulations that will be used to implement the authority of the President conferred
by section 101 of the Act as delegated to the Secretary of Commerce in subsection 201(a)(6) of this order. The Secretary of Commerce will redelegate
to the Secretary of Defense, and the heads of other departments and agencies as appropriate, authority for the priority rating of contracts and orders
for all materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order. The Secretary of Commerce shall
act as appropriate upon Special Priorities Assistance requests in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the need at hand.
All under the claim of "promoting national defense"? How far does that go exactly? Adding "non-emergency" completely opens a door to another world of
interpretive law, with several more rounds through the courts to determine it's legal position. Through this phrase alone, it allows the heads of the
stated agencies to TAKE or IMPLEMENT whatever they find fit, of both government and private property. I don't see how people are missing this
This is exactly the type of insidious behavior I've come to expect from all of our Presidents in the last 100 years. I'm appalled.......
An "emergency" can be somewhat vague, but in most cases indicates a severe problem that needs critical attention. Who is going to define what a
"non-emergency" is? Isn't that basically EVERYTHING???????
No matter how you slice it, this is bad.
edit on 17-3-2012 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: (no reason given)