Part 3: Statutes of Doom James L. Hirsen, J.D., Ph.D. November 16, 1999 The subject of emergency powers is not often discussed in newspapers, magazine publications, or even in public hearings in Washington, D.C. When this topic is brought up, for example, in the Iran Contra Hearings of 1987 or the Y2K Hearings of 1998, only obtuse and limited reference to any substantive content material is allowed. This is because documents relating to this area are almost always classified. To complicate matters, there are so many layers of statutes and executive orders surrounding the area of emergency powers that misconceptions abound. Some of the legal instruments involved revoke prior ones, and some absorb the content of others, so the confusion just seems to multiply. In 1933, at the request of President Franklin Roosevelt, the U.S. Congress passed the War and Emergency Powers Act. The act has never been repealed. This legislation was an amendment to the Trading with the Enemies Act that was originally passed by Congress in 1917. Due to the circumstances surrounding World War I, the president was granted full control over citizens of enemy countries, along with their property, who were living or working in this country. This act expressly excluded transactions being conducted domestically by American citizens. However, through the 1933 amendment to the 1917 Act, citizens were reclassified so as to be included within the "enemy" category. Numerous other statutes have been used to delegate emergency powers to the president. For example, in 1971 President Nixon declared an emergency because of the growing discrepancy in our federal balance of payments. He disconnected the value of the dollar from the gold standard, levied a surtax on imports, and froze domestic prices for 90 days. Once again, the situation clearly showed a president pushing the limits of constitutional power. In 1974 a special committee reported to Congress that there were some 470 provisions in federal law delegating special emergency authority to the executive branch. Still in effect were executive orders from Presidents Franklin Roosevelt, Truman, and Nixon that placed the nation in a state of emergency. Most Americans surely would have been surprised to discover that the nation had been in a state of declared national emergency since March 9, 1933. Two important acts further delegated emergency power to the executive branch. The National Emergencies Act of 1976 terminated any existing declarations of national emergency effective September 14, 1978. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 gave the president certain emergency powers to contend with the world economy. Today Americans may again be stunned to find out that the current president has declared more national emergencies than any other president in history, 14 to date, and that we continue to live in a state of declared national emergency. Why, one might ask, is this a danger? Well, in 1994 President Clinton signed an executive order that consolidated and subsumed powers that had been set forth in a number of executive orders issued by his predecessors. If one were to follow the genealogy of executive orders, the origin of this particular set of orders can be traced to a collection of ominous orders issued by John F. Kennedy in 1962 that dealt with emergency powers. The Kennedy orders were stark and obvious in their explicit clarity with regard to what they empowered the president and others in his administration to do in an emergency situation. The executive orders allowed the president and others in his administration to take over all of the media, all power and energy sources, all farms and food distribution channels including retail stores, all transportation, all labor, all hospitals and all medical care. They enabled the authorities to impose national registration, relocate populations, reallocate housing, and appropriate jobs. In short, these executive orders allowed the president and his administrative officials to suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. A report by the Congressional Research Service states a president, using these emergency powers, could "seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens." The danger of these executive orders is staggering, because they empower a single individual with this type of authority in the first place and because they essentially sidestep the Constitution. These powers have only multiplied over the years and reside in a most concentrated manner in the present administration. In the next installment of this series, we will probe into the laws that are kept secret from the press, the people, and even select committees of Congress. Part 4: Secret Governance James L. Hirsen, J.D., Ph.D. November 17, 1999 In the early 1950s, due to certain highly publicized Communist espionage cases, national security was foremost in the minds of American citizens. In 1953 President Dwight Eisenhower signed an executive order dealing with the subject of classification of information. Eisenhower, similar to his predecessor, President Truman, failed to cite any kind of statutory authority for this executive order but instead justified it from a general claim of presidential autonomy. The executive order itself provided no effective control over what would be designated as classified material. It also had no practical way of declassifying documents. In a 1968 hearing on the Tonkin Gulf incident, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was astonished at testimony given by Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara, indicating that government classifications now existed that were "above top secret." These classifications were outside of President Eisenhower's executive order and were themselves classified. In 1971 President Nixon issued an executive order that created new power for the executive branch to investigate individual American citizens, ostensibly to discover whether such persons constituted a threat to the security of the nation. The investigative activities that were authorized included secret wiretapping, forcible entry into offices, and use of undercover informants to infiltrate suspicious groups. Richard Nixon also issued an executive order in 1972 regarding the security classification of documents and information. The order included provisions that allowed the executive branch to more easily prevent Congress from inquiring into certain foreign policy areas. These same security classifications continued through executive orders issued by Presidents Carter and Reagan, and most recently through a new version issued by President Clinton. Executive orders have also been used over the years to keep certain information secret from the public, press, and even Congress. These types of orders originated from documents called National Security Council Policy Papers. The instruments go by various titles, including action memoranda, decision memoranda, and presidential decision directives (PDDs). Because of their classified status, though, we do not know the details or even the exact number of instruments presently on the books. However, what little information we do know about two PDDs in particular is most troubling because of the profound implications for our military policy and readiness. An executive order called Presidential Decision Directive 25 was signed by President Clinton in 1994. The fine points of this order remain a secret. However, a summary of the directive, along with a variety of reports leaked to the press, give a fairly clear indication of the content. This executive order apparently gives the president the power to place U.S. Armed Forces under foreign command. U.S. troops are now routinely ordered by the president to serve under UN command in UN operations, without any authorization from Congress. During the Clinton administration, U.S. military forces have joined in a number of United Nations interventionist efforts, including actions in Somalia, Macedonia, and Haiti. Most recently, the war in Yugoslavia, which violated NATO's own charter as well as the War Powers Resolution of 1973, also comes under the jurisdiction of this executive order. To this day, the U.S. military continues to serve under foreign command in a "peacekeeping" capacity. In yet another affront to constitutional procedure, a single presidential signature on a lone instrument changed four decades of military policy in an instant. The executive order that transformed our international demeanor and altered the global balance of power was Presidential Decision Directive 60. The massive shift in policy again required no involvement from Congress. Prior to the issuance of this executive order, our nation had a policy of launching a nuclear missile upon warning. In the event a missile was heading toward an American target and this fact was verified, our policy was to launch on receipt of verification. This approach, of course, was part of a calculated deterrent that came to be known as a policy of mutually assured destruction. It is precisely because of this firm approach that we have enjoyed a lengthy peace and have not actually had to use such weaponry. The new policy established by PDD 60 literally forces our nation to absorb a nuclear first strike before retaliating. This action dramatically reduces the deterrent factor and increases the chances that an enemy might launch a preemptory strike. When electromagnetic pulse warheads with the capacity to disable computers are added to the mix, it quickly becomes evident that this policy serves to encourage military aggression from our adversaries and undermines the geopolitical stability of the world. Not only does this course run counter to common sense, it diminishes our military advantage and fails to serve our country's best interests. In our next segment, we will examine ways in which executive orders are being used surreptitiously to advance a comprehensive global agenda. Part 5: Implementation of a Global Agenda James L. Hirsen, J.D., Ph.D. November 17, 1999 Executive orders are presently being used at the domestic level to promote a broad international agenda. The current administration has an unfortunate pattern of using executive orders to circumvent the Senate ratification process and enact individual provisions of treaties bit by bit. As an example, in 1993 President Clinton signed an executive order setting up the President's Council on Sustainable Development. Sustainable development is a notion that sprang forth from the United Nations Commission on Environment and Development. It reached a pinnacle of prominence in a document called Agenda 21, a consensus statement that came out of the Earth Summit of 1992. This document, along with the unratified Biodiversity and Global Warming Treaties, created an expansive, international legal platform that seeks to modify the fundamental habits, customs, and culture of American life. Agenda 21and an assortment of international documents are being used as templates to formulate local, state, and federal policy. The ultimate goal is to set up a lifestyle that is "sustainable within environmental strictures" in order to achieve conformance with extreme elements of the environmental movement. Some of the most radical components of Agenda 21 have actually become determinant factors for various environmental policies that have been advanced by the Clinton administration. In fact, the President's Council on Sustainable Development is aggressively implementing as many aspects of this "soft law" as possible throughout agencies of government. The strategy of piecemeal treaty implementation has also been utilized in the human rights arena. In December of 1998, President Clinton signed an executive order entitled Implementation of Human Rights Treaties. The language of the executive order seems to have been carefully chosen. It makes the implementation of human rights "obligations" the official policy of the United States government. No distinction was made between obligations that were already duly ratified and those that were not. There are a whole host of conventions that have never been approved by the Senate that this executive order purports to implement. The danger lies in the fact that many of the rudimentary components of so-called human rights treaties are purposely designed to pierce privacy barriers and influence the most intrinsically personal dimensions of our lives - the relationships between parents and children, husbands and wives, and families and homes. Despite growing opposition from various factions, President Clinton continues to hold fast to the theme of promoting the international agenda domestically via stealth treaty implementation. In June of 1999, he signed an executive order called " Greening the Government through Efficient Energy Management." This executive order specifically instructs federal agencies to begin implementation of the controversial Global Warming Treaty within the federal government. The order does not limit its scope merely to the government itself, but reaches out to all entities with whom the government conducts business. It describes the federal government as the "nation's largest energy consumer" and specifically requires the restrictions enumerated to be applied to all those contracting with the federal government for products or services. The long-range effect that the imposition of such requirements would have upon our nation's economy or our ability to compete fairly has not been given adequate consideration. As we delve deeper into the misuse of executive authority, one thing becomes more and more apparent. A portion of our system is broken. However, as serious as the issues may seem, there are dedicated men and women who have been working diligently to reverse the damage that we have sustained. So much can be done and there is great reason for optimism. Citizen action is playing a vital role in the restoration effort. As awareness grows and public involvement increases, changes are steadily occurring. For the first time since the 1970s, hearings on the subjects of executive orders and emergency powers were held in Congress. Remarkably, three pieces of legislation that seek to restore constitutional integrity are presently under consideration. H. Con. Res. 30 is a strongly worded resolution sponsored by Representative Jack Metcalf. It states that any executive order, which infringes on the power of Congress or requires the expenditure of unappropriated funds, is advisory only and has no force or effect. H.R. 3131 is a bill sponsored by Representative Bob Barr, which requires that Congress be given copies of any executive order and also be allowed thirty days to accept, reject, or modify the order. H.R. 2655 is the most comprehensive piece of legislation on this subject. Sponsored by Representative Ron Paul, it terminates all existing states of national emergency, removes from the executive branch any power to declare national emergencies, denies executive orders any force of law, gives individual citizens the right to bring lawsuits objecting to executive orders, and repeals the 1973 War Powers Resolution. We are making headway, but a steady monitoring of events and a continued willingness to accept our civic challenges are essential ingredients for achieving success. What we will receive in return for our efforts is peace of mind, knowing that we have preserved the fundamental components of a free system, and joy in recognizing that the considerable blessings of our nation have been rescued for our posterity. ^~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~^ James L. Hirsen, J.D., Ph.D., is an internationally recognized attorney and general counsel for a multinational corporation. Renowned as a speaker on constitutional, government and global issues, he currently hosts his own nationally syndicated radio show on the American Freedom Network. Dr. Hirsen is also a columnist, a regular contributor to the Orange County Register and is the author of the following two books, available through Newsmax.com's Booksite: The Coming Collision: Global Law vs. US Liberties, and a previous book on Executive Orders, Government by Decree: From President to Dictator Through Executive Orders. Dr. Hirsen is duly admitted to the US Supreme Court and the US Court of International Trade. He is a professor at Trinity Law School in California. <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html <A HREF="http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
