Directive 51

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dimisfh1,

Extract from DS1:



[ QUOTE ]
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't that tell you there are part of DS51 that are not public?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, the government has classified information, what a subversive concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

Classified legal directives are indeed subversive. Classifying the very way the govt is permitted to act is clearly usurping democratic principles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the disclosure of those directives subverts the value of the underlying programs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except you can't determine the value of the underlying programs if they are classified, and thus they subvert democracy because we just have to trust their value and aren't able to judge their value for ourselves or through our leaders.

Your statement in no way refutes this fact, and is not a logical response to charge of subverting the democratic process.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course it is, you just have never demonstrated any ability to complete a logical train of thought.

The primary purpose of our representative democracy is the protection of its citizens. If there is a program that is protecting the citizens, but its revelation would negate its effectiveness, then it is entirely consistent to withhold that information.

[MidGe]

To add a bit to the issue

[ QUOTE ]
Constituents called Rep. Peter DeFazio’s office, worried there was a conspiracy buried in the classified portion of a White House plan for operating the government after a terrorist attack.

As a member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, DeFazio, D-Ore., is permitted to enter a secure “bubbleroom” in the Capitol and examine classified material. So he asked the White House to see the secret documents.

On Wednesday, DeFazio got his answer: DENIED.

“I just can’t believe they’re going to deny a member of Congress the right of reviewing how they plan to conduct the government of the United States after a significant terrorist attack,” DeFazio said.

[/ QUOTE ]

Link

Looking more and more sinister to me!

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dimisfh1,

Extract from DS1:



[ QUOTE ]
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't that tell you there are part of DS51 that are not public?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, the government has classified information, what a subversive concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

Classified legal directives are indeed subversive. Classifying the very way the govt is permitted to act is clearly usurping democratic principles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the disclosure of those directives subverts the value of the underlying programs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except you can't determine the value of the underlying programs if they are classified, and thus they subvert democracy because we just have to trust their value and aren't able to judge their value for ourselves or through our leaders.

Your statement in no way refutes this fact, and is not a logical response to charge of subverting the democratic process.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course it is, you just have never demonstrated any ability to complete a logical train of thought.

The primary purpose of our representative democracy is the protection of its citizens. If there is a program that is protecting the citizens, but its revelation would negate its effectiveness, then it is entirely consistent to withhold that information.

[/ QUOTE ]

The democratic process != do whatever you have to to provide security

If you want to redefine what "democratic" means, then there is no point to debate.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dimisfh1,

Extract from DS1:



[ QUOTE ]
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't that tell you there are part of DS51 that are not public?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, the government has classified information, what a subversive concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

Classified legal directives are indeed subversive. Classifying the very way the govt is permitted to act is clearly usurping democratic principles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the disclosure of those directives subverts the value of the underlying programs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except you can't determine the value of the underlying programs if they are classified, and thus they subvert democracy because we just have to trust their value and aren't able to judge their value for ourselves or through our leaders.

Your statement in no way refutes this fact, and is not a logical response to charge of subverting the democratic process.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course it is, you just have never demonstrated any ability to complete a logical train of thought.

The primary purpose of our representative democracy is the protection of its citizens. If there is a program that is protecting the citizens, but its revelation would negate its effectiveness, then it is entirely consistent to withhold that information.

[/ QUOTE ]

The democratic process != do whatever you have to to provide security

If you want to redefine what "democratic" means, then there is no point to debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

deleted

The primary purpose of any government is protection of its citizens. OUR form of government (read what I said) is a representative democracy. Ergo the primary purpose of OUR representative democray (reread what I said) is protection of its citizens. Spend some time with truth tables, you will benefit greatly.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dimisfh1,

Extract from DS1:



[ QUOTE ]
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't that tell you there are part of DS51 that are not public?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, the government has classified information, what a subversive concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

Classified legal directives are indeed subversive. Classifying the very way the govt is permitted to act is clearly usurping democratic principles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the disclosure of those directives subverts the value of the underlying programs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except you can't determine the value of the underlying programs if they are classified, and thus they subvert democracy because we just have to trust their value and aren't able to judge their value for ourselves or through our leaders.

Your statement in no way refutes this fact, and is not a logical response to charge of subverting the democratic process.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course it is, you just have never demonstrated any ability to complete a logical train of thought.

The primary purpose of our representative democracy is the protection of its citizens. If there is a program that is protecting the citizens, but its revelation would negate its effectiveness, then it is entirely consistent to withhold that information.

[/ QUOTE ]

The democratic process != do whatever you have to to provide security

If you want to redefine what "democratic" means, then there is no point to debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for again proving you are incapable of logical thought without being led through it.

The primary purpose of any government is protection of its citizens. OUR form of government (read what I said) is a representative democracy. Ergo the primary purpose of OUR representative democray (reread what I said) is protection of its citizens. Spend some time with truth tables, you will benefit greatly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two thumbs down.

[Copernicus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dimisfh1,

Extract from DS1:



[ QUOTE ]
(23) Annex A and the classified Continuity Annexes, attached hereto, are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this directive.

(24) Security. This directive and the information contained herein shall be protected from unauthorized disclosure, provided that, except for Annex A, the Annexes attached to this directive are classified and shall be accorded appropriate handling, consistent with applicable Executive Orders.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't that tell you there are part of DS51 that are not public?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, the government has classified information, what a subversive concept.

[/ QUOTE ]

Classified legal directives are indeed subversive. Classifying the very way the govt is permitted to act is clearly usurping democratic principles.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the disclosure of those directives subverts the value of the underlying programs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Except you can't determine the value of the underlying programs if they are classified, and thus they subvert democracy because we just have to trust their value and aren't able to judge their value for ourselves or through our leaders.

Your statement in no way refutes this fact, and is not a logical response to charge of subverting the democratic process.

[/ QUOTE ]

of course it is, you just have never demonstrated any ability to complete a logical train of thought.

The primary purpose of our representative democracy is the protection of its citizens. If there is a program that is protecting the citizens, but its revelation would negate its effectiveness, then it is entirely consistent to withhold that information.

[/ QUOTE ]

The democratic process != do whatever you have to to provide security

If you want to redefine what "democratic" means, then there is no point to debate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you for again proving you are incapable of logical thought without being led through it.

The primary purpose of any government is protection of its citizens. OUR form of government (read what I said) is a representative democracy. Ergo the primary purpose of OUR representative democray (reread what I said) is protection of its citizens. Spend some time with truth tables, you will benefit greatly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Two thumbs down.

[/ QUOTE ]

"Insightful" comments like that are taken as a concession. Thank you. We can put this one to rest.

And BTW, thumbs are generally more useful if they arent stuck in an orifice.

[MidGe]

trying out a Google search on Directive 51, I it is very hard to find supportive posts.

Amazing it hasn't had a better run in the US news.

[Kaj]

[ QUOTE ]
trying out a Google search on Directive 51, I it is very hard to find supportive posts.

Amazing it hasn't had a better run in the US news.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.feldgrau.com/dir51.html

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[boracay]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
trying out a Google search on Directive 51, I it is very hard to find supportive posts.

Amazing it hasn't had a better run in the US news.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.feldgrau.com/dir51.html

[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

"A society whose citizens refuse to see and investigate the facts, who refuse to believe that their government and their media will routinely lie to them and fabricate a reality contrary to verifiable facts, is a society that chooses and deserves the Police State Dictatorship it's going to get." - Ian Williams Goddard

"Behind the visible government there is an invisible government upon the throne that owes the people no loyalty and recognizes no responsibility. To destroy this invisible government, to undo the ungodly union between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the task of a statesman." - Teddy Roosevelt, during his 1912 election campaign

"Where you have a concentration of power in a few hands, all too frequently men with the mentality of gangsters get control." - Lord Acton (1834-1902)

"I am concerned for the security of our great nation, not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within." — General Douglas MacArthur

"When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader." - Plato (427-347 B.C.)

[dmisfh1]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
trying out a Google search on Directive 51, I it is very hard to find supportive posts.

Amazing it hasn't had a better run in the US news.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.feldgrau.com/dir51.html



[img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

"Amazing it hasn't had a better run in the US news."

This is what I don't understand. How is it that more people from around the world knew about this than US citizens? And why did the MSM fail to see this as important enough to cover?