Executive Order Update

Posted on April 23, 2010. Filed under: General Info | Tags: |

President Obama continues his penchant for Executive Orders as a way to circumvent Congress. To date he has signed 49 executive orders, averaging 3 a month.They are as follows: 

 April 21, 2010

Executive Order — President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology

 April 19, 2010

Executive Order– Establishing the President’s Management Advisory Board

 April 14, 2010

Executive Order–Interagency Group on Insular Areas

 April 13, 2010

Executive Order concerning Somalia

 March 24, 2010

Executive Order — Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s Consistency with Longstanding Restrictions on the Use of Federal Funds for Abortion

 March 11, 2010

Executive Order – National Export Initiative

 March 01, 2010

Executive Order– Providing an Order of Succession within the Department of Defense

 February 26, 2010

Promoting Excellence, Innovation, and Sustainability at Historically Black Colleges and Universities

 February 26, 2010

Executive Order– Historically Black Colleges and Universities

 February 18, 2010

Executive Order — National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform 

January 29, 2010

Executive Order — President’s Advisory Council on Financial Capability


January 17, 2010

Executive Order and Letter Regarding Haiti


January 11, 2010

President Obama Signs Executive Order Establishing Council of Governors


December 30, 2009

Executive Order — Medical Countermeasures Following a Biological Attack

December 29, 2009

Executive Order – Original Classification Authority

December 29, 2009

Executive Order – Classified National Security Information

December 23, 2009

Executive Order — Adjustments of Certain Rates of Pay

December 17, 2009

Executive Order — Amending Executive Order 12425

December 11, 2009

Executive Order — Half-Day Closing of Executive Departments and Agencies on Thursday, December 24, 2009

December 09, 2009

Executive Order: Creating Labor-Management Forums To Improve Delivery of Government Services

November 23, 2009

Executive Order– Reducing Improper Payments and Eliminating Waste in Federal Programs

November 17, 2009

Executive Order – Establishment of the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force

November 09, 2009

Executive Order – Veterans Employment Initiative

November 02, 2009

Executive Order Amending Executive Orders 13183 and 13494.

October 29, 2009

President Obama Signs Executive Order to Amend Executive Order 13462

October 14, 2009

Executive Order – Asian American and Pacific Islander Community

October 05, 2009

President Obama signs an Executive Order Focused on Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance

October 01, 2009

Executive Order-Federal Leadership on Reducing Text Messaging while Driving

September 29, 2009

Executive Order Federal Advisory Committees

June 23, 2009

Establishing a White House Council on automotive communities and workers

May 12, 2009

Executive Order Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration

April 08, 2009

Executive Order Establishing The White House Office Of Health Reform

March 11, 2009

Executive Order Creating the White House Council on Women and Girls

March 09, 2009

Removing Barriers to Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells

February 20, 2009

Amending Executive Order 13390

February 19, 2009

Executive Order: Establishment of the White House Office of Urban Affairs

February 06, 2009

Executive Order: Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects

February 06, 2009

Presidential Executive Order Establishing the President’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board

February 05, 2009

Executive Order – Further Amendments To Executive Order 12859,Establishment Of The Domestic Policy Council

February 05, 2009

Executive Order: Further Amendments to Executive Order 12835, Establishment of the National Economic Council

Amendments to Executive Order 13199 and Establishment of the President’s Advisory Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships

January 30, 2009

Revocation Of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Regulatory Planning And Review

January 30, 2009

Executive Order — Economy in Government Contracting

January 30, 2009

Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts

January 30, 2009

Executive Order — Notificiation of Employee Rights Under Federal Labor Laws

January 22, 2009

Ensuring Lawful Interrogations

January 22, 2009

Review of Detention Policy Options

January 22, 2009

Closure Of Guantanamo Detention Facilities

January 21, 2009

Ethics Commitments By Executive Branch Personnel

January 21, 2009

Presidential Records

Keeping in mind this is typical for progressives and FDR signed a record 3466 executive orders as president, we can only hope POTUS is not going for a record. The federal register provides the following information:

Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index

Barack Obama (2009-Present)
EO’s 13489 –
13537   |   Subject Index

The Disposition Tables list the status of Executive Orders from:

  • January 8, 1937 – April 14, 2010

Disposition Tables contain information about Executive Orders beginning with those signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and are arranged according to Presidential administration and year of signature. The tables are compiled and maintained by the Office of the Federal Register editors.

The Disposition Tables include the following information:

  • Executive order number;
  • Date of signing by the President
  • Federal Register volume, page number, and issue date
  • Title
  • Amendments (if any)
  • Current status (where applicable)

Learn More About Executive Orders And About These Tables

George W. Bush (2001-2009)
EO’s 13198-13488   |  
Subject Index

William J. Clinton (1993-2001)
EO’s 12834-13197   |  
Subject Index

George Bush (1989-1993)
EO’s 12668-12833

Ronald Reagan (1981-1989)
EO’s 12287-12667

Jimmy Carter (1977-1981)
EO’s 11967-12286

Gerald R. Ford (1974-1977)
EO’s 11798-11966

Richard Nixon (1969-1974)
EO’s 11452-11797

Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-1969)
EO’s 11128-11451

John F. Kennedy (1961-1963)
EO’s 10914-11127

Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953-1961)
EO’s 10432-10913

Harry S. Truman (1945-1953)
EO’s 9538-10431

Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1945)
EO’s 6071-9537

Herbert Hoover (1929-1933)
EO’s 5075-6070
1,011 EO’s issued

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 1 so far )

Council of Governors Nominees Named

Posted on February 5, 2010. Filed under: General Info | Tags: , , |

Thank you to Whenifhow on freerepublic for bringing this to my attention:

On January 11th, President Obama created his 40th executive order with the decree a Council of Governors be formed to oversee and coordinate the “partnership” between Washington and the states regarding security.

Thursday, he nominated the chosen few for positions on that council. I have included the executive order, the press release naming the nominees and have also added a link to votesmart for each nominee. At the link, you can scroll through recent news stories for each nominee and are encouraged to click tabs for their voting records, stand on issues, campaign contributors, etc. How these choices stack up will illuminate any behind the scenes manuvering by the administration. States, under the constitution, are soveriegn and the “council of governors” edges very close to the line, and most likely crossing it, as to what would be considered constitutional.

I will take the weekend, like you, to look at this information and will report back with findings Sunday night.

Executive Order 13528 of January 11, 2010


Establishment of the Council of Governors

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the

laws of the United States of America, including section 1822 of the National

Defense Authorization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110–181), and in order

to strengthen further the partnership between the Federal Government and

State governments to protect our Nation and its people and property, it

is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Council of Governors.

(a) There is established a Council of Governors (Council). The Council

shall consist of 10 State Governors appointed by the President (Members),

of whom no more than five shall be of the same political party. The term

of service for each Member appointed to serve on the Council shall be

2 years, but a Member may be reappointed for additional terms.

(b) The President shall designate two Members, who shall not be members

of the same political party, to serve as Co-Chairs of the Council.

Sec. 2. Functions. The Council shall meet at the call of the Secretary of

Defense or the Co-Chairs of the Council to exchange views, information,

or advice with the Secretary of Defense; the Secretary of Homeland Security;

the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism;

the Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement;

the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and

Americas’ Security Affairs; the Commander, United States Northern Command;

the Chief, National Guard Bureau; the Commandant of the Coast

Guard; and other appropriate officials of the Department of Homeland Security

and the Department of Defense, and appropriate officials of other executive

departments or agencies as may be designated by the Secretary of

Defense or the Secretary of Homeland Security. Such views, information,

or advice shall concern:

(a) matters involving the National Guard of the various States;

(b) homeland defense;

(c) civil support;

(d) synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities

in the United States; and

(e) other matters of mutual interest pertaining to National Guard, homeland

defense, and civil support activities.

Sec. 3. Administration.

(a) The Secretary of Defense shall designate an Executive Director to

coordinate the work of the Council.

(b) Members shall serve without compensation for their work on the

Council. However, Members shall be allowed travel expenses, including

per diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by law.

(c) Upon the joint request of the Co-Chairs of the Council, the Secretary

of Defense shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability

of appropriations, provide the Council with administrative support, assignment

or detail of personnel, and information as may be necessary for the

performance of the Council’s functions.

(d) The Council may establish subcommittees of the Council. These subcommittees

shall consist exclusively of Members of the Council and any

designated employees of a Member with authority to act on the Member’s

behalf, as appropriate to aid the Council in carrying out its functions under

this order.

(e) The Council may establish a charter that is consistent with the terms

of this order to refine further its purpose, scope, and objectives and to

allocate duties, as appropriate, among members.

Sec. 4. Definitions. As used in this order:

(a) the term ‘‘State’’ has the meaning provided in paragraph (15) of section

2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101(15)); and

(b) the term ‘‘Governor’’ has the meaning provided in paragraph (5) of

section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance

Act (42 U.S.C. 5122(5)).

Sec. 5. General Provisions.

(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(1) the authority granted by law to a department, agency, or the head

thereof; or

(2) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget

relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and

subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit,

substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party

against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers,

employees, or agents, or any other person.

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

February 04, 2010

President Obama Announces More Key Administration Posts, 2/4/10

WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to appoint the following individuals to the Council of Governors.  The Council, created January 11 of this year by Executive Order, will work closely with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and other defense and national security advisors to exchange views, information and advice on matters of mutual interest pertaining to the National Guard, homeland defense, synchronization and integration of State and Federal military activities in the United States, and civil support activities.

  • Governor James H. Douglas, Co-Chair, Council of Governors
  • Governor Chris Gregoire, Co-Chair, Council of Governors
  • Governor Janice K. Brewer, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor Luis G. Fortuño, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor Brad Henry, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor Robert F. McDonnell, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor Martin O’Malley, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor Beverly Eaves Perdue, Member, Council of Governors
  • Governor M. Michael Rounds, Member, Council of Governors

President Obama said, “I am pleased that these Governors of exceptional experience have agreed to join the Council of Governors.  This bipartisan team strengthens the partnership between our State Governments and the Federal Government when it comes to ensuring our national preparedness and homeland defense.  I look forward to working with them in the years ahead.”

President Obama announced today his intent to appoint the following individuals:

Governor James H. Douglas, Appointee for Co-Chair, Council of Governors
James H. Douglas was first elected Governor of Vermont in 2002 and is now in his fourth term. He serves as Chair of the National Governors Association and is past president of the Council of State Governments. As Governor of Vermont, Governor Douglas established Vermont’s Homeland Security Advisory Council to assess Vermont’s overall homeland security preparedness, policies, and communications and to advise the governor on strategies to improve the current system. Prior to being elected governor, he was elected State Treasurer and served as president of the National Association of State Treasurers. Governor Douglas has also served as a state legislator and Secretary of State. He graduated from Middlebury College.

Governor Chris Gregoire, Appointee for Co-Chair, Council of Governors
Chris Gregoire is the Governor of the State of Washington.  She was first elected in 2005 and re-elected in 2009. She sits on the National Governors Association Executive Committee, Economic Development and Commerce Committee, as well as the Special Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety.  From 1993 – 2005, Governor Gregoire was a three-term Washington State Attorney General. She graduated from the University of Washington with a Bachelor of Arts degree in speech and sociology, and received her law degree from Gonzaga University.

Governor Janice K. Brewer, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Janice K. Brewer became the 22nd Governor of Arizona taking the oath of office on January 21, 2009. She serves on the National Governors Association Health and Human Services Committee. Governor Brewer was first elected as the Secretary of State in 2002 and re-elected in 2006. She served as an appointee on the Governor’s Military Task Force dealing with base closure issues. Prior to becoming Secreatry of State she served as Maricopa County Supervisor, and as a member of both houses of the Arizona Legislature.

Governor Luis G. Fortuño, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Luis G. Fortuño is the current governor of Puerto Rico.  He was elected in 2008. He sits on the National Governors Association Economic Development and Commerce Committee.  He was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2004. In 1994, he became Puerto Rico’s first secretary of the Department of Economic Development and Commerce. Governor Fortuño earned a bachelor’s degree from the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University and a law degree from the University of Virginia Law School.

Governor Brad Henry, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Brad Henry is currently serving his second term as governor of Oklahoma. Governor Henry is a member of the National Governors Association Education, Early Childhood and Workforce Committee. Originally elected in 2002, Governor Henry was re-elected in 2006. Before his election as governor, he served ten years in the Oklahoma State Senate. Governor Henry attended the University of Oklahoma as a President’s Leadership Scholar and earned a bachelor’s degree in economics   He was awarded his law degree from the University of Oklahoma College of Law.

Governor Robert F. McDonnell, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Robert F. McDonnell was elected in 2009, and is the 71st Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Governor McDonnell serves on the National Governors Association Health and Human Services Committee. He began his career in public service as a prosecutor in the Virginia Beach Commonwealth’s Attorney’s Office. In November 1991, he was elected to the Virginia House of Delegates. He served 14 years in the Virginia House of Delegates from Virginia Beach. Previously, he served as Attorney General of Virginia. Governor McDonnell served as a medical supply officer in the United States Army for four years and in the U.S. Army Reserve for 16 years, retiring with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. McDonnell attended the University of Notre Dame on a ROTC scholarship, graduating with a BBA in Management. McDonnell received a MSBA from Boston University and a MA/JD from the Regent University School of Law.

Governor Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Jeremiah W. Nixon was elected as Missouri’s 55th governor in 2008. Governor Nixon serves on the National Governors Association Health and Human Services Committee. He is responsible for operating Missouri’s innovative fusion center, the Missouri Information Analysis Center. Governor Nixon has also served four terms as the state attorney general and was first elected Missouri Attorney General in 1992. Governor Nixon received his undergraduate and law degrees from the University of Missouri and after practicing law for several years, he was elected to the Missouri State Senate in 1986.

Governor Martin O’Malley, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Martin O’Malley is the Governor of Maryland. He was first elected in 2006. Governor O’Malley sits on the National Governors Association Committee on Education, Early Childhood, and Workforce and co-chairs the National Governors Association Special Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety. He has been a leader in the area of national security, releasing the first comprehensive inventory of any state’s cyber security assets. Before being elected governor, he served as the Mayor of Baltimore City for seven years. He has also served on the Baltimore City Council. Governor O’Malley graduated from Catholic University and received a law degree from the University of Maryland.

Governor Beverly Eaves Perdue, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
Beverly Eaves Perdue was elected Governor of North Carolina in 2008. She sits on the National Governors Association Committee on Economic Development and Commerce and Committee on Homeland Security and Public Safety, and is a Lead Governor on the National Guard.   Governor Perdue has a long history of public service, including her tenure as Lt. Governor from 2000 -2008 as well three years in the North Carolina House of Representatives and nine years in the State Senate. As Lt. Governor she led North Carolina’s response during the 2005 round of the Base Closure and Realignment Commission.  Prior to running for office she worked as a public school teacher and as director of geriatric services at a community hospital.  Perdue holds a Ph.D. in Education Administration.

Governor M. Michael Rounds, Appointee for Member, Council of Governors
M. Michael Rounds was sworn-in as South Dakota’s 31st governor in 2003, and re-elected in 2006. Governor Rounds is Chair of the National Governors Association Health and Human Services Committee. He formerly chaired the Western Governors Association. From 1991 to 2000, he served five terms in the South Dakota State Senate. In 1995, he was chosen by his peers to serve as senate majority leader, a post he held for six years. Governor Rounds graduated from South Dakota State University with a  degree in political science.

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 4 so far )

2010: The Year the Second Amendment Dies?

Posted on January 13, 2010. Filed under: Enemies of The State, General Info | Tags: , , , , , , |

I don’t like what my gut is telling me. The constant assault by UN driven policy in the United States. With all of the executive orders being signed, not just the ones signed by President Obama since taking office, but going back many years as detailed in a column I wrote several months back, something is going on. A closer look at the coming assault later this year on our guns makes everything make a little more sense. It’s all here. I am not telling you what to think, but I am giving you a heads up – they ARE coming for your guns. What I lay out here is just the tip of the iceberg. If you follow these leads given you here, you will see a virtual mountain of evidence. Please sign the petition against US participation in the UN Small Arms Treaty. The EO’s involving martial law are linked above. In addition are the two signed in the past week or two by the President. They are EO12425 (an amendment regarding allowing special privileges to Interpol) and (no number given) one creating a Council of Governors to oversee National Guard. The next meeting on the Small Arms Treaty is in New York in mid July. I hope the NRA will launch a tea party demonstration that dwarfs the 1.7 million who were at the capital on 09/12/2009. Please, if you care anything of the second amendment, watch this NRA video:
Armed Violence and Development
Increasingly, it is understood that social and economic development can only take off if people feel safe in their communities. This concept brings together issues of disarmament and development in an exciting new way. The 2009 Secretary-General’s report:

Armed violence — the intentional, threatened or actual use of arms to inflict death or injury — takes many forms, ranging from political to criminal to interpersonal violence, and appears in a wide range of contexts. Armed violence not only destroys lives, it also damages infrastructure and property, limits the delivery of public services, undermines investment in human, social and economic capital, and contributes to unproductive expenditures on security services. Armed violence undermines development and constitutes an impediment to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. The present report examines different aspects of the relationship between armed violence and development. Across diverse contexts, the risk factors and effects of armed violence are often similar. Young men make up the majority of perpetrators, as well as victims, of armed violence. In certain situations — including in some armed conflicts — women, girls and boys suffer from acute forms of sexual violence. Factors such as weak institutions, systemic economic and horizontal inequalities, exclusion of minority groups, unequal gender relations, limited education opportunities, persistent  unemployment, organized crime and illicit markets, and the availability of firearms, alcohol and drugs play an important role in shaping the onset, duration and severity of armed violence.

The United Nations system, regional and subregional organizations, national and local governments, and civil society organizations have mobilized to prevent and reduce armed violence through evidence-based interventions, but responses need to be scaled up. Armed violence prevention and reduction efforts must be carefully designed, targeted and monitored. Programming options include interventions related to conflict prevention and peacebuilding, to interventions targeting demand and risk factors at the individual, relationship and societal levels.

The report places particular emphasis on tackling the risks and effects of armed violence and underdevelopment. This includes implementing existing conventions and agreements associated with armed violence and development; improving the effectiveness of armed violence prevention and reduction policies through investment in the production, analysis and use of evidence; strengthening capacities to diagnose, articulate strategies and implement programmes; developing measurable goals, targets and indicators for armed violence prevention and reduction; building partnerships among the United Nations system and with regional organizations, national authorities and civil society to ensure coherent policy and programming; increasing resources for armed violence prevention and reduction; and fostering greater international action.

V. Observations and recommendations

63. Tackling armed violence successfully requires coordinated responses that draw on different areas of expertise. Many Governments, civil society actors and United Nations entities are starting to work together to address risk factors and the negative effects of armed violence on development, but the international response is still somewhat fragmented. In bringing together donors, Governments of affected States and civil society, as well as in uniting core competencies and developing good practices, the United Nations system is well-positioned to help catalyse more coherent, comprehensive, coordinated and integrated initiatives, and to encourage targeted armed violence prevention and reduction policies and programmes at the international, national and local levels.

64. In order to be successful, policy responses must involve meaningful and legitimate local ownership, and full partnerships between Governments and civil society. They must also be integrated into regional and subregional approaches.

65. In order to be effective in its role as a convenor and catalyst, the United Nations system, as well as national and local governments and civil society, will need to scale up support to affected States in designing and implementing armed violence prevention and response strategies. The following recommendations are proposed:

(a) Strengthen the implementation of existing global conventions and agreements. There is a range of existing agreements that can contribute to the prevention and reduction of armed violence. United Nations agencies should support national Governments to uphold, implement and strengthen existing global and regional norms and measures, including relevant international and regional treaties, conventions and other instruments that contribute to the reduction and prevention of all forms of armed violence. These include the Firearms Protocol; the Programme of Action; the universal conventions and protocols against terrorism; the three conventions on narcotic drugs; the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the conventions on the rights of women and children; Security Council resolutions 1325 (2000) and 1820 (2008) on women, peace and security; and the 2005 World Summit Outcome document. There should also be a concerted effort to ensure that international norms and standards are reflected and implemented at the national and local levels through the adoption of national legislation and other domestic measures.

(b) Improve the effectiveness of armed violence prevention and reduction policies and programmes through investments in the production, analysis and use of evidence. Effective approaches to armed-violence prevention and reduction will require investments by national Governments and international organizations in high-quality data-gathering and analysis capacities. Comprehensive, reliable and timely information is critical for informed policymaking and programming, monitoring and evaluation, and the forecasting of future trends and needs. This will involve ongoing and baseline data collection and analysis, the regular transfer of knowledge and lessons learned and innovative approaches to bring evidence and analysis into the programming process. The most comprehensive picture of conflict, non-conflict and interpersonal armed violence is likely to be obtained from a combination of data drawn from the public health and criminal justice systems, combined with population-based surveys, civil society monitoring, as well as rich historical and cultural research. Routine monitoring and evaluation of armed violence prevention programmes will increase the range of evidence-based options to prevent armed violence available to national authorities, local authorities and civil society.

(c) Strengthen national and local capacities for armed violence prevention and reduction. States have the primary responsibility for preventing and reducing armed violence. Multilateral and bilateral agencies can support Governments of affected countries by strengthening national and local capacities to address armed violence, including capacities to collect reliable data on the scope and scale of armed violence and victimization, and on different risk and resilience factors. This could include the development of national armed violence prevention and reduction strategies, investments in national and local surveillance systems, establishment of effective criminal justice systems based upon the rule of law, including reinforcement of counter-terrorism and policing capacities, and support for programmes targeting specific risk factors and at-risk groups. International agencies and national Governments can also ensure that armed violence prevention and reduction practices are integrated into wider development strategies, such as United Nations Development Assistance Frameworks, Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers, and other national and local plans. Local actors and in particular governments, community authorities (including local governments and community peace and security committees), research institutions and the media should be supported and strengthened in order to design, implement and measure the effectiveness of local strategies and interventions. Several United Nations stakeholders can be involved in these activities, including the three United Nations regional centres for peace and disarmament.

(d) Develop measurable goals, targets and indicators for armed-violence prevention and reduction. A growing body of evidence demonstrates how armed violence hinders the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals and, more generally, social, economic, political and human development. Yet armed violence reduction efforts are seldom incorporated into strategies for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. The Millennium Development Goal Review Process, starting in 2010, provides an opportunity to consider the reduction of armed violence as an important requisite to meeting the Millennium Development Goals, in particular through the development and endorsement of a set of goals, targets and indicators to achieve measurable reductions in armed violence and tangible improvements in human security. Developing measurable goals on armed violence towards 2015 will offer the opportunity to integrate security-related themes into the possible follow-up of the Millennium Development Goals (see S/2008/258).


First Committee of the UN General Assembly, 2009

Throughout October 2009, governments are attending the First Committee, which proposes and adopts resolutions on disarmament and international security. Their discussions include resolutions on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) and small arms control. North American Members List is shown below. Contact information provided for your convenience.

Amnesty International – Canada
214 Montreal Road
K1L 1A4
Telephone: + 1 613 744 7667
Fax: + 1 613 746 2411
Canadian Peacebuilding Coordinating Committee (CPCC)
1, Rue Nicholas Street, #1216
K1N 7B7
Telephone: +1 613 241 3446
Fax: +1 613 241 4846
Coalition for Gun Control
3300 Boulevard Rosemont
Bureau 211
Telephone: +1 514 725 2021
Fax: +1 514 725 5926
Group of 78
145 Spruce Street, Suite 206
K1R 6P1
Telephone: +1 230 0860
Fax: +1 563 0017
One Sky
PO Box 3352
Telephone: +1 250 877 6030
Fax: +1 250 877 6040
Oxfam Canada
300 – 294 Albert Street
K1P 6E6
Telephone: +1 613 237 5236
Fax: +1 613 237 0524
Physicians for Global Survival (PGS)
208-145 Spruce Street
K1R 6P1
Telephone: +1 613 233 1982
Fax: +1 613 223 9028
Project Ploughshares
57 Erb Street West
N2L 6C2
Telephone: +1 519 888 6541
Fax: +1 519 888 0018
lgriffiths@ploughshares.ca eregehr@ploughshares.ca
Small Arms Firearms Education Research Network (SAFER-Net)
3300 Boulevard Rosemont
Bureau 211
Telephone: +1 416 979 5000 ext. 6740
Fax: +1 416 979 5249
South Asia Partnership – Canada (SAP Canada)
1 Nicholas Street
Suite 200
K1N 7B7
Telephone: +1 613 241 1333
Fax: +1 613 241 1129
David Jackman (individual)
95 Main Street
Apt. 206
K1S 1B8
Telephone: +1 613 237 8762
Peggy Mason (individual)
2077 Kinburn Side Road
RR#2 Kinburn
K2A 2H0
Telephone: +1 613 832 9322
Alan Simons (individual)
1 Kenwood Avenue,
Suite 2,
Canada M6C 2R6
Tel. (416) 473.0354
Skype: alansimons
United States
Go to the top of the page
Adopt-A-Minefield, UNA-USA
801 Second Avenue
New York
Telephone: +1 212 907 1314
Fax: +1 212 682 9185
Amnesty International – USA – Military, Security and Police Transfers Working Group
202 East Riverside Street
Telephone: +1 202 544 0200
Fax: +1 202 546 7142
Arms Trade Resource Center
66 Fifth Avenue
9th Floor
New York
Telephone: +1 212 229 5808
Fax: +1 212 229 5579
Coalition To Stop Gun Violence – USA (CSGV)
1023 15th Street NW
Suite 600
Telephone: +1 202 408 0061
Fax: +1 202 408 0062
Crime Gun Solutions LLC (CGS)
2214 West Greenleaf Drive
Telephone: +1 301 631 2950
Fax: +1 301 631 2950
Derechos Human Rights
46 Estabrook Street
San Leandro
Phone: +1 510 483 4005
Fax: +1 603 372 9710
Economists Allied for Arms Reduction (ECAAR)
330 East 38th Street
New York
Telephone: +1 212 490 6494
Fax: +1 212 490 6494
Firearm Injury Center – Medical College of Wisconsin
Medical College of Wisconsin
8701 Watertown Plank Road
Telephone: +1 414 456 7676, +1 414 456 7670
Fax: +1 414 456 6472
Five College Program in Peace and World Security Studies
Hampshire College
893 West Street
Telephone: +1 413 559 5563
Fax: +1 413 559 5620
Franciscans International
211 East 43rd Street.
Room 1100
New York
Telephone: +1 212 490 4624
Fax: +1 866 283 0134
Global Action to Prevent War
211 East 43rd Street
New York
Telephone: +1 212 818 1861
Fax: +1 212 818 1857
HELP Network
2300 Children’s Plaza #88
Telephone: +1 773 880 3826
Fax: +1 773 880 6615
Human Rights Watch – Arms Division – USA
1630 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 500 Washington
Telephone: +1 202 612 4321
Fax: +1 202 612 4333
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)
727 Massachusetts Avenue. 2nd floor Cambridge
Telephone: +1 617 868 5050 ext 203
Fax: +1 617 868 2560
Join Together
Boston University School of Public Health
1 Appleton Street
Telephone: +1 617 437 1500
Fax: +1 617 437 9394
Legal Community Against Violence (LCAV)
Firearms Law Center
268 Bush Street, Suite 555
San Francisco
Telephone: +1 415 433 2062
Fax: +1 415 433 3357
Maha Vajra Films
2811 Iroquois Road
IL 60091
Phone: +1 847 736 1954
Million Mom March / Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence
1225 Eye Street NW, Suite 1100
Telephone: +1 202 289 7319
Fax: +1 202 408 1851
Monterey Institute of International Studies – Program on Security & Development (SAND)
460 Pierce Street
Telephone: +1 831 647 4142
Fax: +1 831 647 4199
New Yorkers Against Gun Violence
Telephone: +1 212-679-2345
Fax: +1 212-679-2484

NGO Committee on Disarmament, Peace and Security
777 United Nations Plaza, 3B
New York
Telephone: +1 212 687 5340
Fax: +1 212 687 1643

Oxfam America
1112 16th Street
NW #600
Telephone: +1 202 496 1304
Fax: +1 202 496 1190
Oxfam International
355 Lexington Avenue, Third Floor
New York
Telephone: +1 212 687 2091
Fax: +1 212 687 2092
Program on Global Security & Disarmament
3140 Tydings Hall
College Park
Telephone: +1 301 405 4969
Fax: +1 301 405 8822
Quaker United Nations Office – New York (QUNO)
777 United Nations Plaza
New York
Telephone: +1 212 682 2745, +1 212 682 8713
Fax: +1 212 983 0034
Small Arms Working Group (SAWG)
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW
Telephone: +1 202 797 5283
Fax: +1 202 462 4559
Task Force for Child Survival & Development
750 Commerce Drive, Suite 400
Telephone: +1 404 687 5635
Fax: +1 404 371 1087
The Fund for Peace
1701 K Street NW, 11th Floor
Telephone: +1 202 223 7940
Fax: +1 202 223 7947
Trauma Foundation
San Francisco General Hospital
San Francisco
Telephone: +1 415 821 8209
Fax: +1 415 282 2563
Veterans for Peace (VFP)
216 South Meramec Ave
St. Louis MO

Telephone: +1 314 725 6005
Fax: +1 314 725 7103

Vivat International
211 East 43rd Street, Suite 706
New York
Telephone: +1 646 487 0003
Fax: +1 646 487 0004
Watchlist on Children & Armed Conflict
C/o Women’s Commission for Refugee Women & Children
122 East 42nd Street, 12th Floor
New York
Telephone: +1 212 551 2743
Fax: +1 212 551 3180
www.watchlist.org www.womenscommission.org
Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND)
691 Massachusetts Avenue
Telephone: +1 781 643 6740
Fax: +1 781 643 6740
Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom (WILPF)
777 UN Plaza, 6th Floor
New York
Telephone: +1 212 682 1265
Fax: +1 212 286 8211
www.reachingcriticalwill.org www.peacewomen.org
World Conference on Religion and Peace (WCRP)
777 United Nations Plaza, 9th Floor
New York
Telephone: +1 212 687 2163
Fax: +1 212 983 0566
World Peace Foundation
79 John F. Kennedy Street
Telephone: +1 617 496 9812
Fax: +1 617 491 8588
World Vision International (WV)
800 West Chestnut Avenue
Telephone: +1 626 301 7715
Fax: +1 626 301 7786
Worldwatch Institute
25 Treasure Road
Telephone: +1 631 369 6896
Fax: +1 626 608 3189
Loretta Bondi (individual)
Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies
1717 Massachusetts Avenue NW, 5th Floor Washington
Telephone: +1 202 663 5956
Fax: +1 202 663 5879
Barbara Frey (individual)
214 Social Sciences Building
267 Avenue 19 South
Telephone: +1 612 626 1879
Fax: +1 612 626 2242
Bill Godnick (individual)
Telephone: +1 305 251 6813
w.h.godnick1@bradford.ac.uk wgodnick@aol.com wgodnick@international-alert.org
Matt Schroeder (individual)
Arms Sales Monitoring Project
Federation of American Scientists
1717 K Street
Telephone: +1 202 454 4693
Fax: +1 202 675 1010
Rachel Stohl (individual)
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NW Washington
Telephone: +1 202 797 5283
Fax: +1 202 462 4559
Daniel Webster (individual)
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
624 North Broadway
Telephone: +1 410 614 3243
Fax: +1 410 614 9055

Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 3 so far )

H1N1 Power.gov – Flu in the Age of Obama:This Flu May Take Your Freedom

Posted on November 2, 2009. Filed under: Enemies of The State, General Info | Tags: , , , , , , , , |


On October 24, 2009, President Obama signed a proclamation declaring the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic a National Emergency to facilitate our ability to respond to the pandemic by enabling – if warranted – the waiver of certain statutory Federal requirements for medical treatment facilities. In particular, this proclamation is aimed at providing HHS the ability to waive legal requirements that could otherwise limit the ability of our nation’s health care system to respond to the surge of patients with the 2009 H1N1 influenza virus. Here is the official declaration . 

Does this mean anything? I can not answer that question. It does illicit curiosity, however. Due to the government’s power grab over the past several years, and exacerbated by the fact the “H1N1” flu does not seem important enough at this point to illicit such a powerful response, I became interested in learning more.  

I have noted a brief summary of the National Emergency Powers Act, a report to Congress on Martial Law and National Emergency, and listed the Executive Orders that brought us to a place where, by the stroke of the President’s pen, our rights, our property, our freedom could be gone without due process or consideration of the Constitution.  

At one point in life I had trust in my government. Those days are long gone. Our government no longer deserves our trust. We must stay vigilant and look to the future from a base of knowledge. It is to that end I present the following information.  


The National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601-1651) is a United States federal law passed in 1976 to stop open-ended states of national emergency and formalize the power of Congress to provide certain checks and balances on the emergency powers of the President. The act sets a limit of two years on states of national emergency. It also imposes certain “procedural formalities” on the President when invoking such powers. 

The perceived need for the law arose from the scope and number of laws granting special powers to the executive in times of national emergency (or public danger). 

At least two constitutional rights are subject to revocation during a state of emergency: 

  • The right of habeas corpus, under Article 1, Section 9;  
  • The right to a grand jury for members of the National Guard when in actual service, under Fifth Amendment.  

In addition, many provisions of statutory law are contingent on a state of national emergency, as many as 500 by one count. 

It was due in part to concern that a declaration of “emergency” for one purpose should not invoke every possible executive emergency power that Congress in 1976 passed the National Emergencies Act. Among other provisions, this act requires the President to declare formally a national emergency and to specify the statutory authorities to be used under such a declaration. 

There were 32 declared national emergencies between 1976 and 2001.  Most of these were for the purpose of restricting trade with certain foreign entities under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) (50 U.S.C. 1701-1707). 

CRS Report for Congress: Martial Law and National Emergency 


Crises in public order, both real and potential, often evoke comments concerning a resort to martial law. While some ambiguity exists regarding the conditions of a martial law setting, such a prospect, nonetheless, is disturbing to many Americans who cherish their liberties, expect civilian law enforcement to prevail, and support civilian control of military authority. An overview of the concept of, exercise of, and authority underlying martial law is provided in this report, which will be updated as events warrant.  

Here are the executive orders I could identify by scouring the web. There may be more and if you know of any, please leave a comment with the information.


EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows government to seize control of communication media.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows government to take control of all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows government to take control over all food resources and farms.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows government to mobilize civilians for work brigades under government supervision.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows government to take control over all health, education and welfare functions.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows government to take control over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows government to take control over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.


EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.


EXECUTIVE ORDER 11490 assigns emergency preparedness functions to federal departments and agencies, combining EOs 11001-11005 and 11051 into a single executive order.


EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months. 


Executive Orders 12127 & 12148 creating FEMA :

(from wikipedia)

FEMA was established under the 1978 Reorganization Plan No. 3, and activated April 1, 1979 by Jimmy Carter in his Executive Order 12127. In July, Carter signed Executive Order 12148 shifting disaster relief efforts to the new federal level agency. FEMA absorbed the Federal Insurance Administration, the National Fire Prevention and Control Administration, the National Weather Service Community Preparedness Program, the Federal Preparedness Agency of the General Services Administration and the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration activities from HUD. FEMA was also given the responsibility for overseeing the nation’s Civil Defense, a function which had previously been performed by the Department of Defense’s Defense Civil Preparedness Agency.


Executive Order 12656 gives National Security Council authority to determine use of requisite emergency powers


Executive Order 13010 gives FEMA control over all government agencies in cases of national emergency.


Recently I came across an article which tied all this together:


Remember President Obama’s Executive Order basing 80,000 active troops at home for the first time in the history of the peacetime military establishment to “help with civil unrest and crowd control or to deal with potentially horrific scenarios such as massive poisoning and chaos in response to a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear or high-yield explosive, or CBRNE, attack….”
Now connect that information to the recent announcement that the military has established regional deployment locations all across the United States to “assist civilian authorities in the event of a significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall, according to Defense Department officials.”
Civil unrest and crowd control?  Significant outbreak of the H1N1 virus this fall?  What do they know that we don’t?
Swine flu has been made into a crisis in the minds of the public, even though swine flu, or H1N1, is the most non-lethal “killer” virus ever uncovered.   As a cataclysmic event demanding military assistance, it ranks near zero.  It is doubtful whether swine flu could even be classified as an “epidemic,” much less a “pandemic.”
Regular influenza, the common flu, kills 36,000 people every year. The 1918 flu pandemic killed an estimated 50-100 million people worldwide over a period of two years, approximately one-third the population of
Europe at that time.  Global swine flu deaths topped just 1,000 this year.
But President Obama is predicting death tolls of 90,000 and possible infection of up to half the
US population.
While every life matters, in statistical terms swine flu is a comparatively minor problem, which makes the hype by those in government and the military all the more suspicious.
Washington certainly seems to be looking for some rationale for enhanced domestic military involvement, whether credible or not.US military at home—in the wake of Hurricane Katrina.  With impeccable timing, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has gone before Congress asking for the unprecedented authority to base 400,000 soldiers in communities all across the United States.
A recent US Army War College Report even outlined the conditions under which martial law could be introduced, listing:


…unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters are all paths to disruptive domestic shock. [Emphasis added.]


The CDC is finalizing quarantine regulations formulated during the Bush years that provide for quarantining “a large group of persons” suspected of having swine flu or other illnesses listed in an executive order. This means that President Obama can quarantine anyone as long as they have an illness he determines to be dangerous.  These new regulations even permit “provisional” quarantine of persons not actually carrying any virus.   In one section, the regulations empower the president to quarantine anyone that does not agree to be vaccinated, an ominous condition since recent investigations have revealed that swine flu vaccines can cause serious medical complications. Thousands of doctors have voiced strong opposition to the proposed swine flu vaccine, due to its association with neurological disorders. No matter, a bill before the Massachusetts State Senate would permit authorities to enter homes and detain without warrant citizens who do not agree to be forcibly vaccinated.  Iowa just released a new Orwellian quarantine policy directive that states in the event of a swine flu outbreak, “your home and other less restrictive alternatives are not acceptable.”  These moves appear to be the result of federal incentives advancing mandatory vaccination.


The Army hasn’t missed a step, putting out ads for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists.”  And, though most of the wild claims about “FEMA camps” have been appropriately and properly discredited, the fact remains that the Homeland Security Department has signed a $385 million contract with Halliburton subsidiary KBR Construction to build such facilities on an “as-needed” basis.
If you’re not already feeling nervous, revisit President Obama’s spine-chilling campaign pledge:



We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

With the Serve America Act, this alarming proposition has become reality.  The broad authority given to this force is staggering.  Section 1505 gives the newly created National Civilian Community Corps the power to address national “needs” related to “natural and other disasters,” “infrastructure improvement,” “environmental stewardship and conservation,” “energy conservation,” and “urban and rural development.”  The legislation reiterates that the corps will “combine the best practices of civilian service with the best aspects of military service.”


Nowhere have these two spheres ever been combined that tyranny has not resulted. 


We need to all pay attention and know what Martial Law entails. We will keep an eye on events and declarations from the government and from what I call “State TV”.  We should not panic at this point over the flu or over the declaration of National Emergency. Keep your eyes and ears open and know going forward suspicion may be warranted.

Lastly, here is what I found through Dept of Health and Human Services:



HHS will be guided by the following principles in initiating and directing its response activities:


1) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS will work with federal, state, and local government partners and the private sector to coordinate pandemic influenza preparedness activities and to achieve interoperable response capabilities.


2) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS will encourage all Americans to be active partners in preparing their states, local communities, workplaces, and homes for pandemic influenza and will emphasize that a pandemic will require Americans to make difficult choices. An informed and responsive public is essential to minimizing the health effects of a pandemic and the resulting consequences to society.


3) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners, will work with the

pharmaceutical industry to develop domestic vaccine production capacity sufficient to provide vaccine for the entire U.S. population as soon as possible after the onset of a pandemic and, during the pre-pandemic period, to produce up to 20 million courses of vaccine against each circulating influenza virus with pandemic potential and to expand seasonal influenza domestic vaccine production to cover all Americans for whom vaccine is recommended through normal commercial transactions.


4) In advance of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners and in collaboration with the States, will procure sufficient quantities of antiviral drugs to treat 25% of the U.S. population and, in so doing, stimulate development of expanded domestic production capacity sufficient to accommodate subsequent needs through normal commercial transactions. HHS will stockpile antiviral medications in the Strategic National Stockpile, and states will create and maintain local stockpiles.


5) Sustained human-to-human transmission anywhere in the world will be the triggering event to initiate a pandemic response by the United States. Because we live in a global community, a human outbreak anywhere means risk everywhere.


6) The US will attempt to prevent an influenza pandemic or delay its emergence by striving to arrest isolated outbreaks of a novel influenza wherever circumstances suggest that such an attempt might be successful, acting in concert with WHO and other nations as appropriate. At the core of this strategy will be basic public health measures to reduce person-to-person transmission.


7) At the onset of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in concert with federal partners, will work with the

pharmaceutical industry to procure vaccine directed against the pandemic strain and to distribute vaccine to state and local public health departments for pre-determined priority groups based on pre-approved state plans.


8 ) At the onset of an influenza pandemic, HHS, in collaboration with the states, will begin to distribute and deliver antiviral drugs from public stockpiles to healthcare facilities and others with direct patient care responsibility for administration to pre-determined priority groups.


HHS will follow the WHO published guidance for national pandemic planning, which defines pandemic

activities in six phases. WHO Phases 1 and 2 are the Interpandemic Period, which includes phases where no

new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans.


The Pandemic Alert Period includes a phase when human infection with a novel influenza strain has been identified but no evidence has been found of transmission between people or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact (WHO Phase 3) and includes phases where person-to-person transmission is occurring in clusters with limited human-to-human transmission (WHO Phases 4 and 5). WHO Phase 6 is the Pandemic

Period, in which there is increased and sustained transmission in the general population. (Appendix C describes the WHO pandemic phases in detail.)


Each pandemic phase is associated with a range of preparedness and response activities directed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, after consultation with international authorities and others, as necessary. Given that an influenza pandemic may not unfold in a completely predictable way, decision-makers must regularly reassess their strategies and actions and make adjustments as necessary. This section highlights

critical pandemic preparedness and response activities to be implemented by HHS.


Table C-1: Summary of WHO Global Pandemic Phases (WHO Global Influenza

Preparedness Plan, 2005) – As of April, we are at Phase 5

Interpandemic Period

Phase 1. No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. An influenza virus subtype that has caused human infection may be present in animals. If present in animals, the risk of human infection or disease is considered to be low


Phase 2. No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. However, a circulating animal influenza virus subtype poses a substantial risk of human disease


Pandemic Alert Period


Phase 3. Human infection(s) with a new subtype but no human-to-human spread or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact


Phase 4. Small cluster(s) with limited human-to-human transmission but spread is highly localized, suggesting that the virus is not well adapted to humans


Phase 5. Larger cluster(s) but human-to-human spread is still localized, suggesting that the virus is becoming increasingly better adapted to humans but may not yet be fully transmissible (substantial pandemic risk)

Pandemic Period


Phase 6. Pandemic phase: increased and sustained transmission in the general population


An influenza pandemic may require activation of the National Response Plan (NRP), especially if the first

appearance of the disease in the United States occurs in one or a few isolated communities and an intense multi-party containment effort led by the federal government seems feasible. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in collaboration with HHS and other response partners, developed the NRP and the associated

National Incident Management System (NIMS) pursuant to the requirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) #5 – Management of Domestic Incidents. Full descriptions of the NRP and the NIMS, respectively, are available at  www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NRP_FullText.pdf  and



The intent of the NRP is to reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, major disasters, and other emergencies;

to minimize the damage resulting from these emergencies; and to facilitate recovery. The NIMS aligns the special-purpose incident management and emergency response plans of federal government agencies into a unitary structure. Together, the NRP and the NIMS provide a conceptual and operational framework to

integrate the capabilities and resources of various governmental jurisdictions, incident management and emergency response disciplines, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), and the private sector into a cohesive, coordinated, and seamless national framework for domestic incident management. The federal government can invoke the NRP partially or fully in the context of a threat, anticipation of a significant event, or the response to a significant event.


Other sources you may want to consult:

Selected Executive Orders on National Security


Federal Registry Database on Executive Orders





Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( 2 so far )

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...