By Martin Bosworth
Sunfell linked to an interesting bit of news that slipped under the radar a few weeks back–the Bush regime has issued its new continuity of operations plan in case of a national emergency or disaster.
If this were any other administration, at any other time, we’d probably just nod and be impressed that the Feddie Gov has it shit together enough to be concerned about such a thing. But the Bush regime has made it a life goal to ensure that the government is as close to a dictatorship as could humanly be achieved in this country without mass rebellion, so this sort of thing deserves closer examination.
The Rogue Government site outlines the major trouble points in this plan–specifically that the Presidency seems to now occupy a “first among equals” position in a post-disaster tripartite government, and that Homeland Security has been elevated to become the coordinating agency to handle affairs in the event of a catastrophe. There’s more on this over at KOS’ place.
Given that Homeland Security can’t go a week without trampling on our rights in some fashion, and that the very concept of this agency should send chills up the spine of anyone who can recognize its Teutonic/fascistic outlook for what it is, I feel it safe to say that placing them in charge of any disaster recovery effort is a recipe for, well, disaster. Remember, this is the agency that subsumed FEMA into its umbrella, and that worked out so well.
I tend not to believe that the Bush regime engineered 9/11–their years of ceaseless stupidity and incompetence have proven them incapable of such a Machiavellian scheme–but I have no doubt in my mind that they used the horror of that day to push forward their agenda for a unitary executive, military hegemony in the Middle East, and so on. All it would take is one anthrax envelope or one dirty bomb in a downtown thoroughfare, and this plan would trigger, turning our country into a “disaster area” with no end.
And that is something we all have to be afraid of with yahoos like Bush and his cronies at the helm. Because what if they decide the emergency is serious enough that they don’t want to give up their power?
What will you do then?
Categories: Freedom/Privacy, Politics/Law/Government
Progressive Culture | Scholars & Rogues 
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that I don’t see the Ministry of Homeland Security as fascist or intentionally rights-trompling in nature. Let’s say I think they’re actually folks who are doing the best they can and who have our best interests at heart.
Now that we have their motivations sorted out, can I ask a basic question? When have we seen evidence that they’re COMPETENT to manage something on this scale? When have we seen evidence that they have the savvy required to run a Junior League bake sale, let alone handle emergency powers of this scope without making things even worse?
The classic thing about evil I’ve learned is that it is uniformly banal. People don’t think they’re doing anything wrong–they just follow orders, do what they’re told, and collect the paycheck. There’s no malice aforethought in situations like this–just people who don’t have the balls to stand up.
Now, with that said, I do think that these guys would fall flat on their faces if given the opportunity to take over the country, but that doesn’t mean we have to *give* them said opportunity.
Oh, no – I wasn’t suggesting that they needed to be given the chance. I was just saying that it’s a case where their motives don’t bother me so much. I don’t TRUST the agency, of course, but their basic ineptitude strikes me as the graver threat to our well-being. I mean, when push comes to shove, if my freedom depends on their ability to execute a conspiracy plan, that’s the best I’ve felt about the Republic in a long time. But if it depends on their ability to do their jobs competently, THEN we have a problem….
A very valid point, and one which I often make in other circumstances–perhaps we should be grateful for the general incompetence and hackery of the Bush regime, as it keeps them from becoming a serious threat.
Or so we hope.