THE CHURCH MILITANT
Ephesians 5:11-"And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them". This Christian News Blog maintains a one stop resource of current news and reports of its own related to church, moral, spiritual, and related political issues, plus articles, and postings from other online discernment ministries, and media which share the aims to obey the biblical commands to shed light on and refute error, heresy, apostasy, cults, and spiritual abuse.
Pope Francis has appointed radically liberal, pro-homosexual Dominican Father Timothy Radcliffe as a consultor for the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.
ROME, May 19, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Pope Francis has appointed radically liberal, pro-homosexual Dominican Father Timothy Radcliffe as a consultor for the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace.
The Holy Father made the appointment on Saturday, according to Vatican Radio.
Father Radcliffe, an Englishman, author and speaker, was Master of the Dominican order from 1992 to 2001, and is an outspoken proponent of homosexuality.
"We must accompany [gay people] as they discern what this means, letting our images be stretched open,” he said in a 2006 religious education lecture in Los Angeles. “This means watching 'Brokeback Mountain,' reading gay novels, living with our gay friends and listening with them as they listen to the Lord."
As a contributor to the 2013 Anglican Pilling Report on human sexual ethics Father Radcliffe said of homosexuality:
How does all of this bear on the question of gay sexuality? We cannot begin with the question of whether it is permitted or forbidden! We must ask what it means, and how far it is Eucharistic. Certainly it can be generous, vulnerable, tender, mutual and non-violent. So in many ways, I would think that it can be expressive of Christ’s self-gift. We can also see how it can be expressive of mutual fidelity, a covenantal relationship in which two people bind themselves to each other for ever.
Father Radcliffe often celebrated Mass for the U.K. dissident group Soho Masses Pastoral Council (now renamed the LGBT Catholics Westminster Pastoral Council).
The priest is also a supporter of the proposal of to allow communion for divorced and remarried Catholics.
He currently works as director of the Las Casas Institute of Blackfriars at Oxford University, a social justice center.
Social justice is the focus of the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace, established in 1967 by Pope Paul VI in response to the Vatican II proposal for establishment of a body of the universal Church that would “stimulate the Catholic Community to foster progress in needy regions and social justice on the international scene.”
The pope appoints roughly 40 members and consultors to the pontifical body, according to their background and experience, who serve for five years, giving input to the planning for the Council.
When the Council gathers for assemblies, it’s for discernment of the "signs of the times," Vatican.va states.
London, Ontario's Father Paul Nicholson suggested in his blog that observers can wonder how much Pope Francis knows about Father Radcliffe.
“The Holy Father is only a man, and is limited in how much he can know about any and every appointment,” Father Nicholson wrote. “His primary language is Spanish and perhaps he has not been sufficiently briefed. And that may be done intentionally by those around him.”
The Boston Globe’s Catholic website CRUX called the appointment “a move sure to raise eyebrows among the Church’s traditional guard,” and termed Father Radcliffe “a strong ally of Pope Francis,” before listing various controversies surrounding the Dominican over the years.
The selection of Father Radcliffe by the Holy Father drew criticism from many Catholics.
The Scottish blog Catholic Truth blog called it an “absolutely shocking papal appointment.”
“It’s very clear indeed now, that to be 'a priest in good standing' means to be opposed to all that is truly Catholic – and that includes true morals,” the post read, and called for prayers for the Holy Father.
“Interesting that these appointments are going out over the weekend so people can't comment as readily,” The Eponymous Flower blogged in a post titled, “Evil Dominican Tapped For Important Post.
“Good times for dissident Dominicans” was the headline of the Rorate Caeli post on the papal appointment, which called Father Radcliffe “Uber-liberal.”
“It is true that Radcliffe has ‘opposed’ ‘gay marriage,’” the post said, “but his farcical ‘opposition’ rests on grounds entirely contrary to those of the Church: Radcliffe opposes it because, in his words: ‘gay marriage’ ultimately, we believe, demeans gay people by forcing them to conform to the straight world."
“Radcliffe's acceptability has just received a major upgrade with this latest appointment,” Rorate Caeli stated. “A tremendous slap to the face of so many good Catholics who had opposed him out of fidelity to the faith.”
A CRAFTED MEDIA IMAGE & CHRISTIAN TESTIMONY DESTROYED BY HISTORY OF SELF AGGRANDIZEMENT, HYPOCRISY & DECEPTION THAT SUPPRESSED TRUTH FOR A WHILE; DAMAGE CONTROL TOO LATE
1 John 1:8-10-"If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us."
"Following the release of the 2006 police report containing accusations against Josh Duggar last Thursday, TLC removed 19 Kids and Counting from its lineup for the foreseeable future, and at least four major corporations decided to stop supporting the show. General Mills, Walgreens, Choice Hotels, and Payless ShoeSource caved to customer complaints and the media but announcing that they will not longer be advertising during 19 Kids and Counting. We have provided contact information for each organization below."
DIGGING UP THE DUGGARS
FOR TRUTH & RIGHTEOUSNESS
Titus 3:3-"For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another."
James 1:16-"Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren."
This was the image put forth by Jim Bob Duggar and TV producers in the marketing of his family soon after his son, Josh, was caught molesting four of his sisters and a girl outside of the family. It was far from true.
The Police Investigation & Report
On December 7, 2006, Detectives Darrell Hignite and Barbra Denney of the Springdale Police Department in Arkansas filed an Offense Report that cited Josh’s alleged crimes as “Sex Offense – Forcible Fondling,” which they classified as “Sexual Assault 2nd” degree. These are not mistakes or youthful indiscretions. Josh was accused of serious crimes. Unfortunately, the case was closed because the 3 year statute of limitations had expired. Josh Duggar was not prosecuted.
In Touch Magazine, who broke the story, reported, “Other bombshells in the police report are: Josh Duggar was investigated for multiple sex offenses – including forcible fondling – against five minors. Some of the alleged offenses investigated were felonies.”
Back 12 years ago [2003] our family went through one of the most difficult times of our lives. When Josh was a young teenager [age 14 & 15], he made some very bad mistakes and we were shocked. We had tried to teach him right from wrong. That dark and difficult time caused us to seek God like never before. Even though we would never choose to go through something so terrible, each one of our family members drew closer to God. We pray that as people watch our lives they see that we are not a perfect family. We have challenges and struggles every day. It is one of the reasons we treasure our faith so much because God’s kindness and goodness and forgiveness are extended to us — even though we are so undeserving. We hope somehow the story of our journey — the good times and the difficult times — cause you to see the kindness of God and learn that He can bring you through anything.
In this statement, they admit to no deficiencies in their “right from wrong” parenting. Given their teaching, they were “shocked” by Josh’s “very bad mistakes.” That is revealing. Most parents would question their approach and accept some responsibility if their oldest child and first born son sexually abused multiple family members.
They also commend themselves and all 14 children for seeking “God like never before” during “that dark and difficult time.” Jim Bob and Michelle don’t realize it, but they are putting themselves forward as “a perfect family.” No one fell short in their response to God. Everyone responded flawlessly. If anyone sinned during that time, you would never know it.
To “watch our lives” as presented in this statement reveals one thing. The entire family is an extraordinary example of godliness according to the parents. Yes, they have “challenges and struggles everyday” but these are met with perfect obedience or so it appears. That is the message that comes through this statement. Except for Josh, I fail to see how anyone in the family needed God’s undeserved kindness, goodness and forgiveness according to the parents. Only sinners need such and that is completely missing from the picture they paint.
So Many Disturbing Elements to the Story
There are so many disturbing aspects to this story of sexual abuse. For example, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported on May 23.
“A Washington County Juvenile Court judge ordered the [police] report destroyed on Thursday, saying one of the victims is still a minor and that the child’s identity might be revealed. The Northwest Arkansas Democrat Gazette obtained the report before it was ordered destroyed.”
The female victim is still a minor. That means she is not yet 18 years of age. The sexual abuse occurred in 2002 or 2003. Therefore, the little girl was under the age of 6.
There are also so many other serious issues related to how the sex abuse was handled. For example, “Jim Bob also refused to allow the police to interview Josh when they opened a felony investigation in 2006.”
I’d recommend the following articles for a much fuller understanding of the facts and issues at hand.
There are so many parallels between Sovereign Grace Ministries and the Duggars; between C.J. Mahaney and Jim Bob Duggar. The truth about both needs to be told. I am working on a book regarding “C.J. Mahaney, Covenant Life Church & the Conspiracy to Protect Child Predators.” I believe the same type of thing is needed with the Duggar’s but that is not my calling. Here are but a few thoughts related to a few subjects concerning them. (PLEASE SEE OUR POSTS ABOUT SOVEREIGN GRACE SEX ABUSE ON THIS BLOG)
The TV Special, “14 Children & Pregnant Again” – September 6, 2004
Josh Duggar first got caught in March 2002. Then again in March 2003. The crimes were not investigated until December 2006 but by then it was too late. The statute of limitations had expired.
In September 2004, the Duggar’s starred in their first TV special. That was 18 months after the last known molestation. I wrote the following on my Facebook page.
“One of the reasons, I posted this article [“A timeline of the molestation allegations against Josh Duggar” by the Washington Post] was to show how soon after the alleged molestation of five girls including four sisters, the father, Jim Bob, started promoting his family on TV specials as a model of virtue attributable to their parenting practices. That lacked a tremendous degree of humility and integrity.
“At that point, the elders in Jim Bob’s church should have stopped him and redirected his attention to the care and protection of his family – not its promotion. There were 14 children then, there are 19 children now. Having more children was a major part of Duggar’s marketing success. Stop having kids and the audience loses interest. That’s why the shows were always called the latest number of children “and pregnant” or the latest number of children “and counting.” If they stopped having children, their celebrity ended. So did their show unless rebranded under another name.
“Jim Bob and Michelle should have seriously considered having no more children when they learned their oldest child and first born son, Josh, was a sexual predator according to reports. Not as a punishment, but as a matter of priority and wisdom. The family was in deep trouble and their parenting had not produced as advertised. These were not ordinary family problems. Things were seriously wrong. It was time to refocus and reevaluate, not build a family empire.”
The TV special was called “14 Children & Pregnant Again.” It aired on September 6, 2004 and was produced by Advanced Medical Productions (a.k.a. Figure 8 Films).
“We are storytellers. Accuracy is very important, as is sensitivity and respect for our subjects and our audience. Primarily, we tell stories about incredible people and challenging situations.”
I have no reason to doubt “accuracy is very important” to this film company. I assume they had no idea what was really going on in the Duggar household.
They said the following in their advertisement for the TV special.
“Advanced Medical Productions has been invited to the Duggar household in Springdale, Arkansas to get an unprecedented look at how this incredible family works as a team to insure a happy, healthy and balanced life for each member. We’ll settle in for several, busy days with the Duggars and “walk in the sixteen sets of individual shoes” as they go about their daily tasks. We’ll take a trip to the grocery store with Michelle, ride in the family “bus” to church and watch Jim Bob and the boys work on the new house they’re building for their growing family.”
This film company that valued "accuracy" should have been told the truth by Jim Bob Duggar before he “invited [them] to the Duggar household in Springdale, Arkansas.” Of course, they would never have come to produce the TV special if he had been honest with them.
Instead, Jim Bob created a brand in conjunction with the company that did not correlate with reality. It was encapsulated in the sentence, “Get an unprecedented look at how this incredible family works as a team to insure a happy, healthy and balanced life for each member.”
I wrote on Facebook this week.
“The Duggar’s are a family franchise. There is tremendous pressure to put forward a superior “family life” product. It is the key to their fame, and honestly, their fortune. With the marketing of that product comes tremendous temptation to pretend righteousness and cover up unrighteousness. You can’t do a reality TV show as a Christian unless you are going to be real. And furthermore, what parents would do a TV series about their family knowing their oldest son recently abused four of his sisters? The Duggar’s have not been real. It is like Sovereign Grace Ministries. It continues to put forth a “gospel life” product while covering up all manner of evil.”
“I don’t follow the Duggar’s but I see they put Josh forward as an example of purity for first kissing his wife, Anna, on the day of their wedding. This gave the false impression that Josh had a history of purity, when he had a history of sexual predation that was covered up. Millions of people were led to believe a lie. Josh also put himself forth as an example. He told a national audience, “Not only to us but to all the other young people in the room it was quite a testimony to say, ‘They waited.’”
“If they waited, that’s good. Here’s what’s not good. Putting yourself forward as a model of virtue and allowing people to believe you don’t have a history of sexual sin (let alone sex crimes) when in fact you do. If Josh said anything about himself, it should have been something like this. “A few years ago I was involved in sexual sin of a serious nature. I broke the law. I turned myself into police. I repented and confessed to my church. I got accountability and I have been honest with everyone around me. By God’s grace, I changed. As a result, Anna and I were able to save our first kiss for our wedding day. I am not an example of purity but I am ‘quite a testimony’ of God’s extraordinary mercy.
“Josh and his parents led people to believe Josh had no previous history of sexual sin when they promoted the “first kiss.” That’s called false advertising in the world of marketing. It’s called deceit and hypocrisy in the Bible. I hope the Duggar’s come to realize this so they can clearly acknowledge it. They have brought reproach to the cause of Christ. I hope they will make repairs.”
In June 2013, Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council (FRC) and Family Research Council Action (FRC Action) hired Josh Duggar to be the Executive Director of FRC Action, the legislative action arm of the FRC. Josh never told Perkins about his past. Nor did his father. That was a terrible disservice to Perkins, FRC, FRC Action and millions of supporters throughout the nation.
In his position, Josh Duggar fought against the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender agenda in Washington D.C. That is good work but not work he was qualified to do given his history of molestation and attempts to cover it up. He and his father kept this information from Perkins during the hiring process even though it was known in other circles. They were willing to put FRC and FRC Action at risk for the sake of landing a powerful and prestigious job. Like everything else, they publicized the accomplishment and the move to D.C. on their TV series and in the press. See for example.
“And as I’ve said before, no one starts a TV program to put forth your family as a model when “Exhibit A,” your firstborn son and oldest child, recently abused his younger sisters and at least one other girl. Nor does a father support his son as a lobbyist for “family values” knowing his son’s past and the fact his past was undisclosed to his employer. Jim Bob Duggar should have revealed this information to Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council if Josh was unwilling to be honest during the interview process.
“If anything, Josh should be helping families by honestly telling his story so they can learn how to protect against child abuse by family members and others. He could also lobby for legislation designed to overturn the statute of limitation for pedophilia – that is, after he fully discloses his past to law enforcement and clearly acknowledges his hypocrisy to the general public.”
Conclusion
I’ve only commented on four issues. The extraordinary response, the first TV special, the first kiss and the job as executive director. There are so many other issues that deserve treatment but I must leave that to others.
The Duggar’s, like Sovereign Grace Ministries, excelled at marketing an image. The Duggar’s, like Sovereign Grace Ministries, are now being exposed and humbled by the Lord. Neither is out of the woods. I suspect more will be revealed about the Duggar’s. I know more will be revealed about Sovereign Grace Ministries. Maybe I should produce a reality TV show.
COUNSELING BY CHURCH ELDERS DIDN'T CURE MORAL RELATIVISM
EXCUSES PREMARITAL INTIMACIES
HISTORY OF PURITY?-NO, HISTORY OF PREDATION!
"THEY WAITED" FOR THE FIRST KISS
"RIGHT FOR US, BUT MAYBE NOT FOR EVERYONE"???
"I ACTED INEXCUSABLY" BY MOLESTING VERY YOUNG GIRLS;
FATHER'S ROLE IN COVER UP, DELAY
VICTIMS OF ABUSE BLAMED
A.T.I. HOMESCHOOLING PROGRAM THAT BLAMES VICTIMS FOR CAUSING MOLESTATION/RAPE USED
Published on May 27, 2015
New details are surfacing about Josh Duggar, the oldest son on TLC's "19 Kids and Counting." He is accused of molesting five underage girls when he was 14. His parents, Jim Bob and Michelle, reportedly knew about the accusations, but didn't report them to police for over a year. The Duggars followed a Christian homeschooling program called Advanced Training Institute (ATI). Dr. Drew and his panelists discuss the the program and the alleged counseling Josh Duggar received as a teen. For more information please visit http://www.hlntv.com/video/2015/05/27...
TESTIMONY DESTROYED BY MAXIMUM HYPOCRISY
Josh Duggar Molestation Investigation Record Just Destroyed By Arkansas Police
LIBERAL MEDIA SEE THE MORAL & LEGAL FAILURES;
HUCKABEE GIVES JOSH DUGGAR A PASS ("FORGIVENESS"):
When FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler (shown) began pushing the most recent attempt at Net Neutrality, his first public salvo was an op-ed piece written for Wired. The February 4 article was his attempt to make the case for the necessity of government regulation of the Internet. Throughout the article, his disdain for the free market is evident. The only way for the Internet to survive, he would have us believe, is to allow the FCC to regulate it as a public utility and make rules for acceptable practices that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have to follow. Wheeler wrote,
After more than a decade of debate and a record-setting proceeding that attracted nearly 4 million public comments, the time to settle the Net Neutrality question has arrived. This week, I will circulate to the members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposed new rules to preserve the internet as an open platform for innovation and free expression. This proposal is rooted in long-standing regulatory principles, marketplace experience, and public input received over the last several months.
One is left to wonder how the Internet ever survived all these years without government regulation. Wheeler seems to believe — or at least expect the American public to believe — that government regulation can do what the free market cannot: “preserve the internet as an open platform for innovation and free expression.”
Going even further, Chairman Wheeler claimed that it was regulation of the telephone industry that made the Internet possible in the first place:
The internet wouldn’t have emerged as it did, for instance, if the FCC hadn’t mandated open access for network equipment in the late 1960s. Before then, AT&T prohibited anyone from attaching non-AT&T equipment to the network. The modems that enabled the internet were usable only because the FCC required the network to be open.
Companies such as AOL were able to grow in the early days of home computing because these modems gave them access to the open telephone network.
Wheeler’s claim is based in a lack of faith in the free market. He assumes that the modems that were developedafter telecom regulation were necessary for the Internet to emerge, and he speculates that some other form of communication device would not, could not, have been developed in the absence of that regulation. The free market answer to that is that the Internet would have simply evolved differently. Other technology would have been invented to make the connections needed for people to access the Internet. The modems that he claims required government intrusion into private-sector business simply would not have been needed because there would have been something else that did not require government intrusion. The best evidence of that is that the Internet has continued to evolve by using newer technology. Not many people are using dial-up modems anymore.
The truth is, even without telecom regulation requiring telephone companies to allow open access for Internet modems, “companies such as AOL” would likely have found another way to get the job done. That’s just how free market innovation works.
As Wheeler continued his effort to make his case, his anti-free market bias became even more obvious. He related a story of his own failed business model, which he seemingly believes proves the case for the glories of government regulation:
I personally learned the importance of open networks the hard way. In the mid-1980s I was president of a startup, NABU: The Home Computer Network. My company was using new technology to deliver high-speed data to home computers over cable television lines. Across town Steve Case was starting what became AOL. NABU was delivering service at the then-blazing speed of 1.5 megabits per second — hundreds of times faster than Case’s company. “We used to worry about you a lot,” Case told me years later.
But NABU went broke while AOL became very successful. Why that is highlights the fundamental problem with allowing networks to act as gatekeepers.
While delivering better service, NABU had to depend on cable television operators granting access to their systems. Steve Case was not only a brilliant entrepreneur, but he also had access to an unlimited number of customers nationwide who only had to attach a modem to their phone line to receive his service. The phone network was open whereas the cable networks were closed. End of story.
End of story, indeed. Setting aside the assertion that failing at something makes one an expert at it, his point is irrelevant. And misleading. His business did not fail because of a lack of government regulation; and AOL did not succeed because of government regulation. There are some important facts missing from Wheeler’s narrative of why his company failed and AOL succeeded:
• NABU’s network operated primarily in Ottawa, Canada, whereas AOL (which was known as Quantum Computer Services until 1991) was based in New York and covered the United States. Consequently, Quantum/AOL had a larger base from which to attract subscribers.
• NABU’s Internet service required the purchase of a very expensive specialized computer (made by NABU) to connect to its network. Quantum/AOL was designed (at first) to work on the very popular Commodore 64. Quantum/AOL later expanded its software and network to support other popular computers as the market changed.
• NABU relied on cable systems that did not support bi-directional connections that were essential to the network NABU was developing (NABU stands for Natural Access to Bi-directional Utilities). Quantum/AOL used telephone lines, which are bi-directional.
• NABU was heavily subsidized by the Canadian government. Quantum/AOL was a privately owned company that went public in 1992. If government involvement equaled success, NABU should have succeeded and Quantum/AOL should have failed.
That Wheeler overlooks all of that and sees the sole reason for his company’s failure and AOL’s success as the presence or absence of government regulation says more about his worldview than it does of the proper province of government. Rather than take responsibility for the failure of his company and learn a lesson that could be applied to future endeavors, he chooses to blame the free market for his failure. Now he is simply attempting to apply that broken worldview and failed logic to the greatest innovation man has ever known. It’s as if he wants to destroy the Internet for everyone because he couldn’t succeed in business with it. If you can’t join them, beat them.
That worldview is really at the heart of the whole Net Neutrality debate. Do we as a people believe in a free market, or do we believe that only government can do what none of us can do? How we answer that question will decide the fate of liberty for generations to come. In the digital age, there is no distinction between digital liberty and any other liberty. If we allow government to take over the Internet, we will lose the greatest tool for liberty we have ever known. End of story.
RAND PAUL MALIGNED BY FELLOW REPUBLICANS FOR EXPOSING TRUTH
SANTORUM, RUBIO & CHRISTIE ACTUALLY BELIEVE THE NSA IS NOT COLLECTING PHONE RECORDS BY THE MILLIONS & THAT THE REPUBLICANS HAVE NOT AIDED ISIS WITH WEAPONS DROPS
Republican rivals gang up on Rand Paul
Rick Santorum Slams Rand Paul on ISIS: 'I'd Expect to Hear That From Maybe Bernie Sanders'; Paul Detained by TSA at Airport
Santorum: Rand Paul Has A 'Fundamental Misunderstanding' Of ISIS
Presidents have always exercised emergency powers, but now thanks to dozens of new laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders, Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history. Of course the U.S. Constitution does not actually give the president any special powers during a time of national emergency, but over time presidents have decided that they should be able to exercise such powers and the courts have generally agreed with them.
During World War II and prior to that, these emergency powers were largely uncodified and were primarily used during times of war. But since World War II things have completely changed, and this has particularly been true since 9/11. Over the past decade or so, a whole host of extraordinary powers have specifically been given to the office of the president, and all that it takes to exercise them is a major “national emergency”. So if we do have a full-blown economic collapse, a historic natural disaster, a significant war or a massive pandemic, Barack Obama could use the emergency powers that he has been given to essentially take authority over everything.
There is not a single document or series of documents that contain all of the emergency powers that Barack Obama could potentially wield during a major national emergency. As I mentioned above, these powers come from literally dozens of laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders. But in this article I will discuss a few important documents. One of these is a presidential directive that was issued during the second term of George W. Bush. It is entitled NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD – 51/HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD – 20, and you can take a look at it on the FEMA website right here. This document is primarily concerned with the continuity of our federal government in the event of a catastrophic emergency. So precisely what would constitute a “catastrophic emergency”? The following is how the document defines that term…
“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;
That sounds quite broad to me. It could apply to all sorts of scenarios.
If we do have such a “catastrophic emergency”, the president essentially becomes a dictator at that point. The document certainly talks about the need to ensure that “constitutional government” continues, but during the course of the emergency there really is not much of a role for the other two branches of government to play. Instead, the “shadow government” takes over under the overall command of the president. The following is a short excerpt from the document…
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.
Of course the 11 page document that we have on the FEMA website is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to continuity of government planning. Unfortunately, most of the plans are top secret and are not allowed to be seen by the public. Astonishingly, this even applies to members of Congress. The following comes from Wikipedia…
On July 18, 2007, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), a member of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, requested the classified and more detailed version of the government’s continuity of government plan in a letter signed by him and the chairperson of the House Homeland Committee, which is supposed to have access to confidential government information. The president refused to provide the information, to the surprise of the congressional committee.
Another document that raises a lot of red flags is an executive order entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness” that was issued by Barack Obama on March 16th, 2012. This particular executive order updates previous executive orders, and it gives the president extraordinary authority during a time of national emergency. Below, I have posted most of section 201 of that executive order. As you can see, it potentially gives Barack Obama authority over just about everything during a time of national emergency if he feels it is needed for “national defense”…
Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
(2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
(6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.
(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 order.
A similar executive order regarding national communications was issued on July 6th, 2012.
But the powers that Barack Obama could potentially wield during a time of national emergency are not just limited to what is written down. This may shock many Americans, but it is true. In the past, presidents have used their “emergency powers” to suspend habeas corpus, to place American citizens in internment camps and to seize private property. The following comes from Wikipedia…
A claim of emergency powers was at the center of President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus without Congressional approval in 1861. Lincoln claimed that the rebellion created an emergency that permitted him the extraordinary power of unilaterally suspending the writ. With Chief Justice Roger Taney sitting as judge, the Federal District Court of Maryland struck down the suspension in Ex Parte Merryman, although Lincoln ignored the order. 17 F. Cas. 144 (1861).
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt similarly invoked emergency powers when he issued an order directing that all Japanese Americans residing on the West Coast be placed into internment camps during World War II. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld this order in Korematsu v. United States. 323 U.S. 214 (1944).
Harry Truman declared the use of emergency powers when he seized private steel mills that failed to produce steel because of a labor strike in 1952. With the Korean War ongoing, Truman asserted that he could not wage war successfully if the economy failed to provide him with the material resources necessary to keep the troops well-equipped. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, refused to accept that argument in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, voting 6-3 that neither Commander in Chief powers nor any claimed emergency powers gave the President the authority to unilaterally seize private property without Congressional legislation. 343 U.S. 579.
And it is important to keep in mind that Barack Obama now possesses far more power than any of those presidents ever did. All it is going to take for him to exercise those powers is a major national emergency. This is something that Jim Powell discussed in an article for Forbes…
Not long after that, we found ourselves in an open-ended national emergency declared on September 14, 2001 and extended since by both George W. Bush and Barack Obama. This means the president has standby powers from hundreds of statutes that would enable him to re-introduce military conscription, seize private property and in myriad ways establish a government-run economy.
Thankfully, things are still somewhat stable for the moment so Obama does not have a reasonable excuse to use all of the powers that he has been given. But that could change at any time. If we do see a “catastrophic emergency” in the next year or so, there are very few limits on what Barack Obama would be able to do. That includes potentially postponing or suspending the 2016 election so that he can remain in office throughout the course of the national emergency.
We have never seen such a thing happen before, and hopefully we never will. And of course it isn’t just Barack Obama that we need to be concerned about. A future leader of this nation could potentially be even worse than him. It has been exceedingly foolish for us to give a single person so much power in the event of a “catastrophic emergency”, and in the end we may regret this bitterly.
Presidents have always exercised emergency powers, but now thanks to dozens of new laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders, Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history. Of course the U.S. Constitution does not actually give the president any special powers during a time of national emergency, but over time presidents have decided that they should be able to exercise such powers and the courts have generally agreed with them. http://www.infowars.com/emergency-pow...
In a White House statement released on May 26, President Obama stated: “I called on the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to clear up the confusion and uphold our basic duty to protect these vital [water] resources.”
Obama went on the explain that the two federal bodies will provide businesses and industry with the “clarity and certainty” they need to determine which waters are protected by the Clean Water Act, and ensure that polluters “can be held accountable.”
