From: lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: I'm Enraged: FEMA and The NWO
Date: 21 Jul 92 21:28:23 GMT

Now what in the world does this have to do with anything? What would happen
if your right to choose health care, family, association, freedom to speak your 
opinions, etc .... what if they were forceably taken from us? Would any of you
stand a fight? The only diffefrence IMHO between the Revolutionary War and
the 1990s is: The enemy is not *openly* the British government. And the enemy,
whoever that is, seems to like to buy out the American government to suit its 
own ends.......food for thought.

Len



----- Begin Included Message -----

---------------------------------REF1:FEMA-------------------------------------
SUBJECT: FEMA GULAG

 
 
                         SECRET CONCENTRATION CAMPS
 
       The September issue of THE OSTRICH reprinted a story from the
   CBA BULLETIN which listed the following principal civilian concentra-
   tion camps established in GULAG USA under the =Rex '84= program:
   Ft. Chaffee, Arkansas; Ft. Drum, New York; Ft. Indian Gap, Penn-
   sylvania; Camp A. P. Hill, Virginia; Oakdale, California; Eglin
   Air Force Base, Florida; Vendenberg AFB, California; Ft. Mc Coy,
   Wisconsin; Ft. Benning, Georgia; Ft. Huachuca, Arizona; Camp
   Krome, Florida.  The February OSTRICH printed a map of the expanding
   Gulag.  Alhough this listing and map stirred considerable interest,
   the report was not new.  For at least 20 years, knowledgeable Patriots
   have been warning of these sinister plots to incarcerate dissidents
   opposing plans of the =Elitist Syndicate= for a totalitarian
   =New World Order=.  Indeed, the plot was recognized with the insidious
   encroachment of "regionalism" back in the 1960's.  As early as 1968,
   the "greatest land steal in history" leading to global corporate
   socialism, was in a ="Master Land Plan"= for the United States
   by =Executive Orders= involving water resource regions, 
   population movement and control, pollution control, zoning
   and land use, navigation and environmental bills, etc.  Indeed,
   the real undercover aim of the so-called "Environmental Rennaissance"
   has been the abolition of private property.
       All prelude to the total grab of the =World Conservation Bank=,
   as THE OSTRICH has been reporting.  The map on this page and
   the list of executive orders available for imposition of an "emergency"
   are from 1970s files of the late Gen. =P. A. Del Valle's= ALERT,
   sent us by =Merritt Newby=, editor of the now defunct AMERICAN
   CHALLENGE.
       =Wake up Americans!=  The Bushoviks have approved =Gorbachev's=
   imposition of "Emergency" to suppress unrest.  =Henry Kissinger= 
   and his clients hardly missed a day's profits in their deals with
   the butchers of Tiananmen Sqaure.  Are you next?
*************************************************************************
SUBJECT: Executive Orders
 
 
                       APPLICABLE EXECUTIVE ORDERS
 
       The following =Executive Orders=, now recorded in the Federal
   Register, and therefore accepted by Congress as the law of the
   land, can be put into effect at any time an emergency is declared:
 
   10995--All communications media seized by the Federal Government.
   10997--Seizure of all electrical power, fuels, including
          gasoline and minerals.
   10998--Seizure of all food resources, farms and farm equipment.
   10999--Seizure of all kinds of transportation, including your
          personal car, and control of all highways and seaports.
   11000--Seizure of all civilians for work under Federal supervision.
   11001--Federal takeover of all health, education and welfare.
   11002--Postmaster General empowered to register every man, woman
          and child in the U.S.A.
   11003--Seizure of all aircraft and airports by the Federal
          Government.
   11004--Housing and Finance authority may shift population from
          one locality to another.  Complete integration.
   11005--Seizure of railroads, inland waterways, and storage facilities.
   11051--The Director of the Office of Emergency Planning authorized
          to put Executive Orders into effect in "times of increased
          international tension or financial crisis".  He is also to
          perform such additional functions as the President
          may direct.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
     A Dangerous Fact Not Generally Known
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
     THESE EXECUTIVE ORDERS GROSSLY AND FLAGRANTLY VIOLATE ARTICLE
     4 SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES.  "THE
     UNITED STATES SHALL GUARANTEE TO EVERY STATE IN THIS UNION A
     REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT, AND SHALL PROTECT EACH OF THEM
     AGAINST INVASION; AND ON APPLICATION OF THE LEGISLATURE, OR OF THE
     EXECUTIVE (WHEN THE LEGISLATURE CANNOT BE CONVENED) AGAINST
     DOMESTIC VIOLENCE."  "REGIONAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT A REPRESENTATIVE
     REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT!"

     When Government gets out of hand and can no longer be controlled
     by the people, short of violent overthrow as in 1776, there are
     two sources of power which are used by the dictatorial government
     to keep the people in line:  the Police Power and the Power of the
     Purse (through which the necessities of life can be withheld).
     And both of these powers are no longer balanced between the three
     Federal Branches, and between the Federal and the State and
     local Governments.  These powers have been taken over, with the
     permission of the Federal Legislature and the State Governments,
     by the Executive Branch of the Federal Government and all attempts
     to reclaim that lost power have been defeated.

     Stated simply:  the dictatorial power of the Executive rests primarily
     on three basis:  Executive Order 11490, Executive Order 11647, and
     the Planning, Programming, Budgeting System which is operated
     through the new and all-powerful Office of Management and
     Budget.

 E. O. 11490 is a compilation of some 23 previous Executive Orders,
     signed by Nixon on Oct. 28, 1969, and outlining emergency functions
     which are to be performed by some 28 Executive Departments and
     Agencies whenever the President of the United States declares
     a national emergency (as in defiance of an impeachment edict,
     for example).  Under the terms of E. O. 11490, the President
     can declare that a national emergency exists and the Executive
     Branch can:
     * Take over all communications media
     * Seize all sources of power
     * Take charge of all food resources
     * Control all highways and seaports
     * Seize all railroads, inland waterways, airports, storage facilities
     * Commandeer all civilians to work under federal supervision
     * Control all activities relating to health, education, and welfare
     * Shift any segment of the population from one locality to another
     * Take over farms, ranches, timberized properties
     * Regulate the amount of your own money you may withdraw from
       your bank, or savings and loan institution

     All of these and many more items are listed in 32 pages incorporating
     nearly 200,000 words, providing and absolute bureaucratic
     dictatorship whenever the President gives the word.

-->  Executive Order 11647 provides the regional and local mechanisms
-->  and manpower for carrying out the provisions of E. O. 11490.
-->  Signed by Richard Nixon on Feb. 10, 1972, this Order sets up Ten 
-->  Federal Regional Councils to govern Ten Federal Regions made up
-->  of the fifty still existing States of the Union. 
 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Don sez: 

*Check out this book for the inside scoop on the "secret" Constitution.*
 
SUBJECT:  - "The Proposed Constitutional Model" Pages 595-621
Book Title - The Emerging Constitution
Author - Rexford G. Tugwell
Publisher - Harpers Magazine Press,Harper and Row
Dewey Decimal - 342.73 T915E
ISBN - 0-06-128225-10
Note Chapter 14
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

     The 10 Federal Regions
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

     REGION I:  Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode
      Island, Vermont.
      Regional Capitol:  Boston
     REGION II:  New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, Virgin Island.
      Regional Capitol:  New York City
     REGION III:  Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West
      Virginia, District of Columbia.
      Regional Capitol:  Philadelphia
     REGION IV:  Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
      North Carolina, Tennessee.
      Regional Capitol:  Atlanta
     REGION V:  Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin.
      Regional Capitol:  Chicago
     REGION VI:  Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas.
      Regional Capitol:  Dallas-Fort Worth
     REGION VII:  Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska.
      Regional Capitol:  Kansas City
     REGION VIII:  Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota,
      Utah, Wyoming.
      Regional Capitol:  Denver
     REGION IX:  Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada.
      Regional Capitol:  San Fransisco
     REGION X:  Alaska, Oregon, Washington, Idaho.
      Regional Capitol:  Seattle

     Supplementing these Then Regions, each of the States is, or is to
     be, divided into subregions, so that Federal Executive control
     is provided over every community.

     Then, controlling the bedgeting and the programming at every
     level is that politico-economic system known as PPBS.

     The President need not wait for some emergency such as an impeachment
     ouster.  He can declare a National Emergency at any time, and freeze
     everything, just as he has already frozen wages and prices.  And
     the Congress, and the States, are powerless to prevent such an
     Executive Dictatorship, unless Congress moves to revoke these
     extraordinary powers before the Chief Executive moves to invoke
     them.

     THESE EXECUTIVE ORDERS GROSSLY AND FLAGRANTLY VIOLATE THE INTENT AND
     PURPOSE OF ARTICLE 4 SECTION 3.  THERE IS NO PROVISION IN THIS 
     SECTION OR THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES FOR FORMING A
     REGIONAL STATE OUT OF A GROUP OF STATES!  FURTHER, THESE EXECUTIVE
     ORDERS GROSSLY AND FLAGRANTLY VIOLATE THE 9TH AND 10TH
     AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION!

     By Proclaiming and Putting Into Effect Executive Order No. 11490,
     the President would put the United States under TOTAL MARTIAL LAW
     AND MILITARY DICTATORSHIP!  The Guns Of The American People Would
     Be Forcibly Taken!

--------------------------------END:REF1----------------------------------------
################################################################################
--------------------------------REF2:FEMA---------------------------------------

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Subject: 1988 National Emergencies Act--> Consolidating the Imperial Executive
Followup-To: alt.activism.d

>Sender:       Activists Mailing List <ACTIV-L@UMCVMB.BITNET>
>From:         dave 'who can do? ratmandu!' ratcliffe
>              <dave@ratmandu.corp.sgi.com>

Keywords: "To preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, so help me God."

    Bushie-Tail used the Gulf War Show to greatly expand the powers of the
    presidency.  During this shell game event, the Executive Orders signed
    into "law" continued Bushie's methodical and detailed program to bury
    any residual traces of the constitutional rights and protections of U.S.
    citizens.  The Bill of Rights--[almost too late to] use 'em or lose 'em:

    ||        The record of Bush's fast and loose approach to           ||
    ||   constitutionally guaranteed civil rights is a history of       ||
    ||   the erosion of liberty and the consolidation of an imperial    ||
    ||   executive.                                                     ||

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From "Covert Action Information Bulletin," Number 37, Summer, 1991 (see
    bottom 2 pages for subscription & back issues info on this quarterly):

                   Domestic Consequences of the Gulf War
                               Diana Reynolds
              Reprinted with permission of CAIB.  Copyright 1991

    Diana Reynolds is a Research Associate at the Edward R. Murrow Center,
    Fletcher School for Public Policy, Tufts University.  She is also an
    Assistant Professor of Politics at Broadford College and a Lecturer at
    Merrimack College.

          A war, even the most victorious, is a national misfortune.
                             --Helmuth Von Moltke, Prussian field marshall

       George Bush put the United States on the road to its second war in
    two years by declaring a national emergency on August 2,1990.  In
    response to Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, Bush issued two Executive
    Orders (12722 and 12723) which restricted trade and travel with Iraq
    and froze Iraqi and Kuwaiti assets within the U.S. and those in the
    possession of U.S. persons abroad.  At least 15 other executive orders
    followed these initial restrictions and enabled the President to
    mobilize the country's human and productive resources for war.  Under
    the national emergency, Bush was able unilaterally to break his 1991
    budget agreement with Congress which had frozen defense spending, to
    entrench further the U.S. economy in the mire of the military-
    industrial complex, to override environmental protection regulations,
    and to make free enterprise and civil liberties conditional upon an
    executive determination of national security interests.

    The State of Emergency
       In time of war a president's power derives from both constitutional
    and statutory sources.  Under Article II, Section 2 of the
    Constitution, he is Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces.  Although
    Congress alone retains the right to declare war, this power has become
    increasingly meaningless in the face of a succession of unilateral
    decisions by the executive to mount invasions.
       The president's statutory authority, granted by Congress and
    expanded by it under the 1988 National Emergencies Act (50 USC sec.
    1601), confers special powers in time of war or national emergency.
    He can invoke those special powers simply by declaring a national
    emergency.  First, however, he must specify the legal provisions under
    which he proposes that he, or other officers, will act.  Congress may
    end a national emergency by enacting a joint resolution.  Once invoked
    by the president, emergency powers are directed by the National
    Security Council and administered, where appropriate, under the
    general umbrella of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).[1]
    There is no requirement that Congress be consulted before an emergency
    is declared or findings signed.  The only restriction on Bush is that
    he must inform Congress in a "timely" fashion--he being the sole
    arbiter of timeliness.
       Ultimately, the president's perception of the severity of a
    particular threat to national security and the integrity of his
    appointed officers determine the nature of any state of emergency.
    For this reason, those who were aware of the modern development of
    presidential emergency powers were apprehensive about the domestic
    ramifications of any national emergency declared by George Bush.  In
    light of Bush's record (see "Bush Chips Away at Constitution" Box
    below) and present performance, their fears appear well-founded.

    The War at Home
       It is too early to know all of the emergency powers, executive
    orders and findings issued under classified National Security
    Directives[2] implemented by Bush in the name of the Gulf War.  In
    addition to the emergency powers necessary to the direct mobilization
    of active and reserve armed forces of the United States, there are
    some 120 additional emergency powers that can be used in a national
    emergency or state of war (declared or undeclared by Congress).  The
    "Federal Register" records some 15 Executive Orders (EO) signed by
    Bush from August 2,1990 to February 14,1991.  (See "Bush's Executive
    Orders" box, below)
       It may take many years before most of the executive findings and
    use of powers come to light, if indeed they ever do.  But evidence is
    emerging that at least some of Bush's emergency powers were activated
    in secret.  Although only five of the 15 EOs that were published were
    directed at non-military personnel, the costs directly attributable to
    the exercise of the authorities conferred by the declaration of
    national emergency from August 2, 1990 to February 1, 1991 for non-
    military activities are estimated at approximately $1.3 billion.
    According to a February 11, 1991 letter from Bush to congressional
    leaders reporting on the "National Emergency With Respect to Iraq,"
    these costs represent wage and salary costs for the Departments of
    Treasury, State, Agriculture, and Transportation, U.S. Customs,
    Federal Reserve Board, and the National Security Council.[3]
       The fact that $1.3 billion was spent in non-military salaries alone
    in this six month period suggests an unusual amount of government
    resources utilized to direct the national emergency state.  In
    contrast, government salaries for one year of the state of emergency
    with Iran[4] cost only $430,000.

     ____________________________________________________________________
     |                                                                  |
     |                 Bush Chips Away at Constitution                  |
     |                                                                  |
     |        George Bush, perhaps more than any other individual in    |
     |   U.S. history, has expanded the emergency powers of             |
     |   presidency.  In 1976, as Director of Central Intelligence,     |
     |   he convened Team B, a group of rabidly anti-communist          |
     |   intellectuals and former government officials to reevaluate    |
     |   CIA inhouse intelligence estimates on Soviet military          |
     |   strength.  The resulting report recommended draconian civil    |
     |   defense measures which led to President Ford's Executive       |
     |   Order 11921 authorizing plans to establish government          |
     |   control of the means of production, distribution, energy       |
     |   sources, wages and salaries, credit and the flow of money      |
     |   in U.S. financial institutions in a national emergency.[1]     |
     |        As Vice President, Bush headed the Task Force on          |
     |   Combatting Terrorism, that recommended:  extended and          |
     |   flexible emergency presidential powers to combat terrorism;    |
     |   restrictions on congressional oversight in counter-            |
     |   terrorist planning;  and curbing press coverage of             |
     |   terrorist incidents.[2]  The report gave rise to the Anti-     |
     |   Terrorism Act of 1986, that granted the President clear-cut    |
     |   authority to respond to terrorism with all appropriate         |
     |   means including deadly force.  It authorized the               |
     |   Immigration and Naturalization Service to control and          |
     |   remove not only alien terrorists but potential terrorist       |
     |   aliens and those "who are likely to be supportive of           |
     |   terrorist activity within the U.S."[3]  The bill superceded    |
     |   the War Powers Act by imposing no time limit on the            |
     |   President's use of force in a terrorist situation, and         |
     |   lifted the requirement that the President consult Congress     |
     |   before sanctioning deadly force.                               |
     |        From 1982 to 1988, Bush led the Defense Mobilization      |
     |   Planning Systems Agency (DMPSA), a secret government           |
     |   organization, and spent more than $3 billion upgrading         |
     |   command, control, and communications in FEMA's continuity      |
     |   of government infrastructures.  Continuity of Government       |
     |   (COG) was ostensibly created to assure government              |
     |   functioning during war, especially nuclear war.  The Agency    |
     |   was so secret that even many members of the Pentagon were      |
     |   unaware of its existence and most of its work was done         |
     |   without congressional oversight.                               |
     |        Project 908, as the DMPSA was sometimes called, was       |
     |   similar to its parent agency FEMA in that it came under        |
     |   investigation for mismanagement and contract                   |
     |   irregularities.[4]  During this same period, FEMA had been     |
     |   fraught with scandals including emergency planning with a      |
     |   distinctly anti-constitutional flavor.  The agency would       |
     |   have sidestepped Congress and other federal agencies and       |
     |   put the President and FEMA directly in charge of the U.S.      |
     |   planning for martial rule.  Under this state, the executive    |
     |   would take upon itself powers far beyond those necessary to    |
     |   address national emergency contingencies.[5]                   |
     |        Bush's "anything goes" anti-drug strategy, announced      |
     |   on September 6, 1989, suggested that executive emergency       |
     |   powers be used:  to oust those suspected of associating        |
     |   with drug users or sellers from public and private housing;    |
     |   to mobilize the National Guard and U.S. military to fight      |
     |   drugs in the continental U.S.;  to confiscate private          |
     |   property belonging to drug users, and to incarcerate first     |
     |   time offenders in work camps.[6]                               |
     |        The record of Bush's fast and loose approach to           |
     |   constitutionally guaranteed civil rights is a history of       |
     |   the erosion of liberty and the consolidation of an imperial    |
     |   executive.                                                     |
     |                                                                  |
     |   1. Executive Order 11921, "Emergency preparedness Functions,   |
     |      June 11, 1976.  Federal Register, vol. 41, no. 116.  The    |
     |      report was attacked by such notables as Ray Cline, the      |
     |      CIA's former Deputy Director, retired CIA intelligence      |
     |      analyst Arthur Macy Cox, and the former head of the U.S.    |
     |      Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, Paul Warnke for        |
     |      blatantly manipulating CIA intelligence to achieve the      |
     |      political ends of Team B's rightwing members.  See Cline,   |
     |      quoted in "Carter to Inherit Intense Dispute on Soviet      |
     |      Intentions," Mary Marder, "Washington Post," January 2,     |
     |      1977;  Arthur Macy Cox, "Why the U.S. Since 1977 Has        |
     |      Been Mis-perceiving Soviet Military Strength," "New York    |
     |      Times," October 20, 1980;  Paul Warnke, "George Bush and    |
     |      Team B," "New York Times," September 24, 1988.              |
     |                                                                  |
     |   2. George Bush, "Public Report of the Vice President's Task    |
     |      Force On Combatting Terrorism" (Washington, D.C.:  U.S.     |
     |      Government Printing Office), February 1986.                 |
     |                                                                  |
     |   3. Robert J. Walsh, Assistant Commissioner, Investigations     |
     |      Division, Immigration and Naturalization Service, "Alien    |
     |      Border Control Committee" (Washington, DC), October 1,      |
     |      1988.                                                       |
     |                                                                  |
     |   4. Steven Emerson, "America's Doomsday Project," "U.S. News    |
     |      & World Report," August 7, 1989.                            |
     |                                                                  |
     |   5. See:  Diana Reynolds, "FEMA and the NSC:  The Rise of the   |
     |      National Security State," "CAIB," Number 33 (Winter 1990);  |
     |      Keenan Peck, "The Take-Charge Gang," "The Progressive,"     |
     |      May 1985;  Jack Anderson, "FEMA Wants to Lead Economic      |
     |      War," "Washington Post," January 10, 1985.                  |
     |                                                                  |
     |   6. These Presidential powers were authorized by the Anti-      |
     |      Drug Abuse Act of 1988, Public Law 100-690:  100th          |
     |      Congress.  See also:  Diana Reynolds, "The Golden Lie,"     |
     |      "The Humanist," September/October 1990;  Michael Isikoff,   |
     |      "Is This Determination or Using a Howitzer to Kill a        |
     |      Fly?" "Washington Post National Weekly," August 27-,        |
     |      September 2, 1990;  Bernard Weintraub, "Bush Considers      |
     |      Calling Guard To Fight Drug Violence in Capital," "New      |
     |      York Times," March 21, 1989.                                |
     |                                                                  |
     --------------------------------------------------------------------

---Continued in FEMA pt 2 ------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.conspiracy
Subject: FEMA Summary Pt 2



----FEMA pt 2 continued ----------------------------------------------



       Even those Executive Orders which have been made public tend to
    raise as many questions as they answer about what actions were
    considered and actually implemented.  On January 8, 1991, Bush signed
    Executive Order 12742, National Security Industrial Responsiveness,
    which ordered the rapid mobilization of resources such as food,
    energy, construction materials and civil transportation to meet
    national security requirements.  There was, however, no mention in
    this or any other EO of the National Defense Executive Reserve (NDER)
    plan administered under FEMA.  This plan, which had been activated
    during World War II and the Korean War, permits the federal government
    during a state of emergency to bring into government certain
    unidentified individuals.  On January 7, 1991 the "Wall Street Journal
    Europe" reported that industry and government officials were studying
    a plan which would permit the federal government to "borrow" as many
    as 50 oil company executives and put them to work streamlining the
    flow of energy in case of a prolonged engagement or disruption of
    supply.  Antitrust waivers were also being pursued and oil companies
    were engaged in emergency preparedness exercises with the Department
    of Energy.[5]

    Wasting the Environment
       In one case the use of secret powers was discovered by a watchdog
    group and revealed in the press.  In August 1990, correspondence
    passed between Colin McMillan, Assistant Secretary of Defense for
    Production and Logistics and Michael Deland, Chair of the White House
    Council on Environmental Quality.  The letters responded to
    presidential and National Security Council directives to deal with
    increased industrial production and logistics arising from the
    situation in the Middle East.  The communications revealed that the
    Pentagon had found it necessary to request emergency waivers to U.S.
    environmental restrictions.[6]
       The agreement to waive the National Environmental Policy Act (1970)
    came in August.  Because of it, the Pentagon was allowed to test new
    weapons in the western U.S., increase production of materiel and
    launch new activities at military bases without the complex public
    review normally required.  The information on the waiver was
    eventually released by the Boston-based National Toxic Campaign Fund
    (NTCF), an environmental group which investigates pollution on the
    nation's military bases.  It was not until January 30, 1991, five
    months after it went into effect, that the "New York Times," acting
    on the NTCF information, reported that the White House had bypassed
    the usual legal requirement for environmental impact statements on
    Pentagon projects.[7]  So far, no specific executive order or
    presidential finding authorizing this waiver has been discovered.
       Other environmental waivers could also have been enacted without
    the public being informed.  Under a state of national emergency, U.S.
    warships can be exempted from international conventions on
    pollution[8] and public vessels can be allowed to dispose of
    potentially infectious medical wastes into the oceans.[9]  The
    President can also suspend any of the statutory provisions regarding
    the production, testing, transportation, deployment, and disposal of
    chemical and biological warfare agents (50 USC sec. 1515).  He could
    also defer destruction of up to 10 percent of lethal chemical agents
    and munitions that existed on November 8, 1985.[10]
       One Executive Order which was made public dealt with "Chemical and
    Biological Weapons Proliferation."  Signed by Bush on November 16,
    1990, EO 12735 leaves the impression that Bush is ordering an
    increased effort to end the proliferation of chemical and biological
    weapons.  The order states that these weapons "constitute a threat to
    national security and foreign policy" and declares a national
    emergency to deal with the threat.  To confront this threat, Bush
    ordered international negotiations, the imposition of controls,
    licenses, and sanctions against foreign persons and countries for
    proliferation.  Conveniently, the order grants the Secretaries of
    State and the Treasury the power to exempt the U.S. military.
       In February of 1991, the Omnibus Export Amendments Act was passed
    by Congress compatible with EO 12735.  It imposed sanctions on
    countries and companies developing or using chemical or biological
    weapons.  Bush signed the law, although he had rejected the identical
    measure the year before because it did not give him the executive
    power to waive all sanctions if he thought the national interest
    required it.[11]  The new bill, however, met Bush's requirements.

     ____________________________________________________________________
     |                                                                  |
     |                    BUSH'S EXECUTIVE ORDERS                       |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12722 "Blocking Iraqi Government Property and              |
     |    Prohibiting Transactions With Iraq," Aug. 2, 1990.            |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12723 "Blocking Kuwaiti Government Property," Aug. 2,      |
     |    1990.                                                         |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12724 "Blocking Iraqi Government Property and              |
     |    Prohibiting Transactions With Iraq," Aug. 9, 1990.            |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12725 "Blocking Kuwaiti Government Property and            |
     |    Prohibiting Transactions With Kuwait," Aug. 9, 1990.          |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12727 "Ordering the Selected Reserve of the Armed          |
     |    Forces to Active Duty," Aug. 22, 1990.                        |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12728 "Delegating the President's Authority To             |
     |    Suspend Any Provision of Law Relating to the Promotion,       |
     |    Retirement, or Separation of Members of the Armed Forces,"    |
     |    Aug. 22, 1990.                                                |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12733 "Authorizing the Extension of the Period of          |
     |    Active Duty of Personnel of the Selected Reserve of the       |
     |    Armed Forces," Nov. 13, 1990.                                 |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12734 "National Emergency Construction Authority," Nov.    |
     |    14, 1990.                                                     |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12735 "Chemical and Biological Weapons Proliferation,"     |
     |    Nov. 16, 1990.                                                |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12738 "Administration of Foreign Assistance and Related    |
     |    Functions and Arms Export Control," Dec. 14, 1990.            |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12742 "National Security Industrial Responsiveness,"       |
     |    Jan. 8, 1991.                                                 |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12743 "Ordering the Ready Reserve of the Armed Forces      |
     |    to Active Duty," Jan. 18, 1991.                               |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12744 "Designation of Arabian Peninsula Areas, Airspace    |
     |    and Adjacent Waters as a Combat Zone," Jan. 21, 1991.         |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12750 "Designation of Arabian Peninsula Areas, Airspace    |
     |    and Adjacent Waters as the Persian Gulf Desert Shield         |
     |    Area," Feb. 14, 1991.                                         |
     |                                                                  |
     |  * EO 12751 "Health Care Services for Operation Desert           |
     |    Storm," Feb. 14, 1991.                                        |
     |                                                                  |
     --------------------------------------------------------------------

    Going Off Budget
       Although some of the powers which Bush assumed in order to conduct
    the Gulf War were taken openly, they received little public discussion
    or reporting by the media.
       In October, when the winds of the Gulf War were merely a breeze,
    Bush used his executive emergency powers to extend his budget
    authority.  This action made the 1991 fiscal budget agreement between
    Congress and the President one of the first U.S. casualties of the
    war.  While on one hand the deal froze arms spending through 1996, it
    also allowed Bush to put the cost of the Gulf War "off budget."  Thus,
    using its emergency powers, the Bush administration could:

       * incur a deficit which exceeds congressional budget authority;

       * prevent Congress from raising a point of order over the
         excessive spending;[12]

       * waive the requirement that the Secretary of Defense submit
         estimates to Congress prior to deployment of a major defense
         acquisition system;

       * and exempt the Pentagon from congressional restrictions on
         hiring private contractors.[13]

       While there is no published evidence on which powers Bush actually
    invoked, the administration was able to push through the 1990 Omnibus
    Reconciliation Act.  This legislation put a cap on domestic spending,
    created a record $300 billion deficit, and undermined the Gramm-
    Rudman-Hollings Act intended to reduce the federal deficit.  Although
    Congress agreed to pay for the war through supplemental appropriations
    and approved a $42.2 billion supplemental bill and a $4.8 billion
    companion "dire emergency supplemental appropriation,"[14] it
    specified that the supplemental budget should not be used to finance
    costs the Pentagon would normally experience.[15]
       Lawrence Korb, a Pentagon official in the Reagan administration,
    believes that the Pentagon has already violated the spirit of the 1990
    Omnibus Reconciliation Act.  It switched funding for the Patriot,
    Tomahawk, Hellfire and HARM missiles from its regular budget to the
    supplemental budget;  added normal wear and tear of equipment to
    supplemental appropriations;  and made supplemental requests which
    ignore a planned 25% reduction in the armed forces by 1995.[16]

    The Cost In Liberty Lost
       Under emergency circumstances, using 50 USC sec. 1811, the
    President could direct the Attorney General to authorize electronic
    surveillance of aliens and American citizens in order to obtain
    foreign intelligence information without a court order.[17]  No
    Executive Order has been published which activates emergency powers to
    wiretap or to engage in counter-terrorist activity.  Nonetheless,
    there is substantial evidence that such activities have taken place.
    According to the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights, the
    FBI launched an anti-terrorist campaign which included a broad sweep
    of Arab-Americans.  Starting in August, the FBI questioned, detained,
    and harassed Arab-Americans in California, New York, Ohio,
    Pennsylvania, Virginia, Maryland, and Colorado.[18]
       A CIA agent asked the University of Connecticut for a list of all
    foreign students at the institution, along with their country of
    origin, major field of study, and the names of their academic
    advisers.  He was particularly interested in students from the Middle
    East and explained that the Agency intended to open a file on each of
    the students.  Anti-war groups have also reported several break-ins of
    their offices and many suspected electronic surveillance of their
    telephones.[19]

    Pool of Disinformation
       Emergency powers to control the means of communications in the U.S.
    in the name of national security were never formally declared.  There
    was no need for Bush to do so since most of the media voluntarily and
    even eagerly cooperated in their own censorship.  Reporters covering
    the Coalition forces in the Gulf region operated under restrictions
    imposed by the U.S. military.  They were, among other things, barred
    from traveling without a military escort, limited in their forays into
    the field to small escorted groups called "pools," and required to
    submit all reports and film to military censors for clearance.  Some
    reporters complained that the rules limited their ability to gather
    information independently, thereby obstructing informed and objective
    reporting.[20]
       Three Pentagon press officials in the Gulf region admitted to James
    LeMoyne of the "New York Times" that they spent significant time
    analyzing reporters' stories in order to shape the coverage in the
    Pentagon's favor.  In the early days of the deployment, Pentagon press
    officers warned reporters who asked hard questions that they were seen
    as "anti-military" and that their requests for interviews with senior
    commanders and visits to the field were in jeopardy.  The military
    often staged events solely for the cameras and would stop televised
    interviews in progress when it did not like what was being portrayed.
       Although filed soon after the beginning of the war, a lawsuit
    challenging the constitutionality of press restrictions was not heard
    until after the war ended.  It was then dismissed when the judge ruled
    that since the war had ended, the issues raised had become moot.  The
    legal status of the restrictions--initially tested during the U.S.
    invasions of Grenada and Panama--remains unsettled.

    A National Misfortune
       It will be years before researchers and journalists are able to
    ferret through the maze of government documents and give a full
    appraisal of the impact of the President's emergency powers on
    domestic affairs.  It is likely, however, that with a post-war
    presidential approval rating exceeding 75 percent, the domestic
    casualties will continue to mount with few objections.  Paradoxically,
    even though the U.S. public put pressure on Bush to send relief for
    the 500,000 Iraqi Kurdish refugees, it is unlikely the same outcry
    will be heard for the 37 million Americans without health insurance,
    the 32 million living in poverty, or the country's five million hungry
    children.  The U.S. may even help rebuild Kuwaiti and Iraqi civilian
    infrastructures it destroyed during the war while leaving its own
    education system in decay, domestic transportation infrastructures
    crumbling, and inner city war zones uninhabitable.  And, while the
    U.S. assists Kuwait in cleaning up its environmental disaster, it will
    increase pollution at home.  Indeed, as the long-dead Prussian field
    marshal prophesied, "a war, even the most victorious, is a national
    misfortune."

    FOOTNOTES:

 1. The administrative guideline was established under Reagan in Executive
    Order 12656, November 18,1988, "Federal Register," vol. 23, no. 266.

 2. For instance, National Security Council policy papers or National
    Security Directives (NSD) or National Security Decision Directives
    (NSDD) have today evolved into a network of shadowy, wide-ranging and
    potent executive powers.  These are secret instruments, maintained in
    a top security classified state and are not shared with Congress.  For
    an excellent discussion see:  Harold C. Relyea, The Coming of Secret
    Law, "Government Information Quarterly," Vol. 5, November 1988;  see
    also:  Eve Pell, "The Backbone of Hidden Government," "The Nation,"
    June 19,1990.

 3. "Letter to Congressional Leaders Reporting on the National Emergency
    With Respect to Iraq," February, 11, 1991, "Weekly Compilation of
    Presidential Documents:  Administration of George Bush," (Washington,
    DC:  U.S. Government Printing Office), pp. 158-61.

 4. The U.S. now has states of emergency with Iran, Iraq and Syria.

 5. Allanna Sullivan, "U.S. Oil Concerns Confident Of Riding Out Short Gulf
    War," "Wall Street Journal Europe," January 7, 1991.

 6. Colin McMillan, Letter to Michael Deland, Chairman, Council on
    Environmental Quality (Washington, DC:  Executive Office of the
    President), August 24, 1990;  Michael R. Deland, Letter to Colin
    McMillan, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Production and Logistics
    (Washington, DC: Department of Defense), August 29,1990.

 7. Keith Schneider, "Pentagon Wins Waiver Of Environmental Rule," "New York
    Times," January 30, 1991.

 8. 33 U.S. Code (USC) sec. 1902 9(b).

 9. 33 USC sec. 2503 l(b).

 10. 50 USC sec. 1521(b) (3)(A).

 ll. Adam Clymer, "New Bill Mandates Sanctions On Makers of Chemical Arms,"
     "New York Times," February 22, 1991.

 12. 31 USC O10005 (f);  2 USC O632 (i), 6419 (d), 907a (b); and Public
     Law 101-508, Title X999, sec. 13101.

 13. 10 USC sec. 2434/2461 9F.

 14. When the Pentagon expected the war to last months and oil prices to
     skyrocket, it projected the incremental cost of deploying and
     redeploying the forces and waging war at about $70 billion.  The
     administration sought and received $56 billion in pledges from allies
     such as Germany, Japan and Saudi Arabia.  Although the military's
     estimates of casualties and the war's duration were highly inflated,
     today their budget estimates remain at around $70 billion even though
     the Congressional Budget office estimates that cost at only $40
     billion, $16 billion less than allied pledges.

 15. Michael Kamish, "After The War:  At Home, An Unconquered Recession,"
     "Boston Globe," March 6, 1991;  Peter Passell, "The Big Spoils From a
     Bargain War," "New York Times," March 3, 1991;  and Alan Abelson, "A
     War Dividend For The Defense Industry?" "Barron's," March 18, 1991.

 16. Lawrence Korb, "The Pentagon's Creative Budgetry Is Out of Line,"
     "International Herald Tribune," April 5, 199l.

 17. Many of the powers against aliens are automatically invoked during a
     national emergency or state of war.  Under the Alien Enemies Act (50
     USC sec. 21), the President can issue an order to apprehend, restrain,
     secure and remove all subjects of a hostile nation over 13 years old.
     Other statutes conferring special powers on the President with regard
     to aliens that may be exercised in times of war or emergencies but are
     not confined to such circumstances, are:  exclusion of all or certain
     classes of aliens from entry into the U.S. when their entry may be
     "detrimental to the interests of the United States" (8 USC sec. 1182(f));
     imposition of travel restrictions on aliens within the U.S. (8 USC sec.
     1185);  and requiring aliens to be fingerprinted (8 USC sec. 1302).

 18. Ann Talamas, "FBI Targets Arab-Americans," "CAIB," Spring 1991, p. 4.

 19. "Anti-Repression Project Bulletin" (New York: Center for
     Constitutional Rights), January 23, 1991.

 20. James DeParle, "Long Series of Military Decisions Led to Gulf War News
     Censorship," "New York Times," May 5, 1991.

 21. James LeMoyne, "A Correspondent's Tale:  Pentagon's Strategy for the
     Press:  Good News or No News," "New York Times," February 17, 1991.

______________________________________________________________________________
                     Covert Action INFORMATION BULLETIN

                                Back Issues

No. 1  (July 1978):  Agee on CIA; Cuban exile trial; consumer research-Jamaica.*
No. 2  (Oct. 1978):  How CIA recruits diplomats;  researching undercover
       officers;  double agent in CIA.*
No. 3  (Jan. 1979):  CIA attacks CAIB;  secret supp. to Army field manual;
       spying on host countries.*
No. 4  (Apr.-May 1979):  U.S. spies in Italian services;  CIA in Spain;  CIA
       recruiting for Africa;  subversive academics;  Angola.*
No. 5  (July-Aug. 1979):  U.S. intelligence in Southeast Asia;  CIA in
       Denmark, Sweden, Grenada.*
No. 6  (Oct. 1979):  U.S. in Caribbean;  Cuban exile terrorists;  CIA plans
       for Nicaragua;  CIA's secret "Perspectives for Intelligence."*
No. 7  (Dec. 1979-Jan. 1980):  Media destabilization in Jamaica;  Robert
       Moss;  CIA budget;  media operations;  UNITA;  Iran.*
No. 8  (Mar.-Apr. 1980):  Attacks on Agee;  U.S. intelligence legislation;
       CAIB statement to Congress;  Zimbabwe;  Northern Ireland.
No. 9  (June 1980):  NSA in Norway;  Glomar Explorer;  mind control;  NSA.
No. 10 (Aug.-Sept. 1980):  Caribbean;  destabilization in Jamaica;  Guyana;
       Grenada bombing;  "The Spike";  deep cover manual.
No. 11 (Dec. 1980):  Rightwing terrorism;  South Korea;  KCIA;  Portugal;
       Guyana;  Caribbean;  AFIO;  NSA interview.
No. 12 (Apr. 1981):  U.S. in Salvador and Guatemala;  New Right;  William
       Casey;  CIA in Mozambique;  mail surveillance.*
No. 13 (July-Aug. 1981):  South Africa documents;  Namibia;  mercenaries;
       the Klan;  Globe Aero;  Angola;  Mozambique;  BOSS;  Central America;
       Max Hugel;  mail surveillance.
No. 14-15 (Oct. 1981):  Complete index to nos. 1-12;  review of intelligence
       legislation;  CAIB plans;  extended Naming Names.
No. 16 (Mar. 1982):  Green Beret torture in Salvador;  Argentine death squads;
       CIA media ops;  Seychelles; Angola; Mozambique; the Klan; Nugan Hand.*
No. 17 (Summer 1982):  CBW History;  Cuban dengue epidemic;  Scott Barnes
       and yellow rain lies;  mystery death in Bangkok.*
No. 18 (Winter 1983):  CIA & religion;  "secret" war in Nicaragua;  Opus Dei;
       Miskitos;  evangelicals-Guatemala;  Summer Inst. of Linguistics; World
       Medical Relief; CIA & BOSS; torture S. Africa;  Vietnam defoliation.*
No. 19 (Spring-Summer 1983):  CIA & media;  history of disinformation;
       "plot" against Pope;  Grenada airport;  Georgie Anne Geyer.
No. 20 (Winter 1984):  Invasion of Grenada;  war in Nicaragua;  Ft. Huachuca;
       Israel and South Korea in Central America;  KAL flight 007.
No. 21 (Spring 1984): N.Y. Times and the Salvador election;  Time and
       Newsweek in distortions;  Accuracy in Media;  Nicaragua.
No. 22 (Fall 1984):  Mercenaries & terrorism; Soldier of Fortune; "privatizing"
       the war in Nicaragua;  U.S.-South African terrorism;  Italian fascists.
No. 23 (Spring 1985):  Special issue on "plot" to kill the Pope and the
       "Bulgarian Connection";  CIA ties to Turkish and Italian neofascists.
No. 24 (Summer 1985):  State repression, infiltrators, provocateurs;
       sanctuary movement;  American Indian Movement;  Leonard Peltier;
       NASSCO strike;  Arnaud de Borchgrave, Moon, and Moss;  Tetra Tech.
No. 25 (Winter 1986):  U.S., Nazis, and the Vatican;  Knights of Malta;
       Greek civil war and Eleni;  WACL and Nicaragua;  torture.
No. 26 (Summer 1986):  U.S. state terrorism;  Vernon Walters;  Libya bombing;
       contra agents;  Israel and South Africa;  Duarte;  media in Costa
       Rica;  democracy in Nicaragua;  plus complete index to nos. 13-25.*
No. 27 (Spring 1987):  Special:  Religious Right;  New York Times and Pope
       Plot;  Carlucci;  Southern Air Transport;  Michael Ledeen.*
No. 28 (Summer 1987):  Special:  CIA and drugs:  S.E. Asia, Afghanistan,
       Central America;  Nugan Hand;  MKULTRA in Canada;  Delta Force;
       special section on AIDS theories and CBW.*
No. 29 (Winter 1988):  Special issue on Pacific:  Philippines,  Fiji, New
       Zealand, Belau, Kanaky, Vanuatu;  atom testing;  media on Nicaragua;
       Reader's Digest;  CIA in Cuba, Tibet;  Agee on "Veil;"  more on AIDS.*
No. 30 (Summer 1989):  Special:  Middle East:  The intifada, Israeli arms
       sales;  Israel in Africa;  disinformation and Libya;  CIA's William
       Buckley;  the Afghan arms pipeline and contra lobby.
No. 31 (Winter 1989):  Special issue on domestic surveillance.  The FBI;  CIA
       on campus;  Office of Public Diplomacy;  Lexington Prison; Puerto Rico.
No. 32 (Summer 1989):  Tenth Year Anniversary Issue:  The Best of CAIB.
       Includes articles from our earliest issues, Naming Names, CIA at home,
       abroad, and in the media.  Ten-year perspective by Philip Agee.
No. 33 (Winter 1990):  The Bush Issue:  CIA agents for Bush;  Terrorism Task
       Force;  El Salvador and Nicaragua intervention;  Republicans and Nazis.
No. 34 (Summer 1990):  Assassination of Martin Luther King Jr;  Nicaraguan
       elections;  South African death squads;  U.S. and Pol Pot;  Pan Am
       Flight 103;  Noriega and the CIA;  Council for National Policy.
No. 35 (Fall 1990):  Special:  Eastern Europe;  Analysis-Persian Gulf and
       Cuba;  massacres in Indonesia;  CIA and Banks;  Iran-contra
No. 36 (Spring 1991):  Racism & Nat. Security:  FBI v. Arab-Americans & Black
       Officials;  Special:  Destabilizing Africa:  Chad, Uganda, S. Africa,
       Angola, Mozambique, Zaire;  Haiti; Panama; Gulf War; COINTELPRO "art."
No. 37 (Summer 1990):  Special:  Gulf War:  Media;  U.N.;  Libya;  Iran;
       Domestic costs;  North Korea Next?  Illegal Arms Deals.

       * Available in Photocopy only

      Subscriptions (4 issues/year) (check one)

      ___$17 one year   ___$32 two years  U.S.
      ___$22 one year   ___$42 two years  Canada/Mexico
      ___$27 one year   ___$52 two years  Latin America/Europe
      ___$29 one year   ___$56 two years  Other
         $5 per year addition charge for institutions

      Books, etc.
	  $25    "Dirty Work II:  The CIA in Africa,"  Ray, et al.
	  $10    "Deadly Deceits:  25 Years in CIA,"   McGehee
	   $8    "Secret Contenders:  CIA and Cold War,"  Beck
	   $6.50 "White Paper/Whitewash,"  Agee/Poelchau
	  $10    "On The Run,"  Agee
	   $1    "No CIA" buttons (additionals $.50)

      BACK ISSUES:  Circle above, or list below.  $6 per copy in U.S.
      Airmail:  Canada/Mexico add $2;  other countries add $4.

      CAIB, P.O. Box 34583, Washington, DC   20043


                              KOYAANISQATSI

   ko.yan.nis.qatsi (from the Hopi Language)  n.  1. crazy life.  2. life
       in turmoil.  3. life out of balance.  4. life disintegrating.
         5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.


---------------------------------END:REF2---------------------------------

---------------------------------REF3:FEMA--------------------------------


Article 2132 of alt.activism:
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Subject: Plan to suspend the Constitution (1984; maybe 1991?)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

[PeaceNet forward from AML (ACTIV-L) -- see bottom for more info]
------------------------------------------------------------------
/** mideast.forum: 216.5 **/
** Written  8:11 pm  Jan 17, 1991 by nlgclc in cdp:mideast.forum **
An excellent book which deals with the REX 84 detention plan is:
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
``Guts and Glory:  The Rise and Fall of Oliver North,'' by Ben
Bradlee Jr.			(Donald I. Fine, $21.95. 573 pp.)
------------------------------------------------------------------
Reviewed by Dennis M. Culnan Copyright 1990, Gannett News Service All
Rights Reserved Short excerpt posted here under applicable copyright
laws

[Oliver] North managed to network himself into the highest levels of
the CIA and power centers around the world.  There he lied and
boastfully ignored the constitutional process, Bradlee writes.

Yet more terrifying is the plan hatched by North and other Reagan
people in the Federal Emergency Manpower Agency (FEMA): A blueprint
for the military takeover of the United States.  The plan called for
FEMA to become ``emergency czar'' in the event of a national emergency
such as nuclear war or an American invasion of a foreign nation.  FEMA
would also be a buffer between the president and his cabinet and other
civilian agencies, and would have broad powers to appoint military
commanders and run state and local governments.  Finally, it would
have the authority to order suspect aliens into concentration camps
and seize their property.

When then-Attorney General William French Smith got wind of the plan,
he killed it.  After Smith left the administration, North and his FEMA
cronies came up with the Defense Resource Act, designed to suspendend
the First Amendment by imposing censorship and banning strikes.

Where was it all heading?  The book's answer: ``REX-84 Bravo, a
National Security Decision Directive 52 that would become operative
with the president's declaration of a state of national emergency
concurrent with a mythical U.S. military invasion of an unspecified
Central American country, presumably Nicaragua.''

Bradlee writes that the Rex exercise was designed to test FEMA's
readiness to assume authority over the Department of Defense, the
National Guard in all 50 states, and ``a number of state defense
forces to be established by state legislatures.''  The military would
then be ``deputized,'' thus making an end run around federal law
forbidding military involvement in domestic law enforcement.

Rex, which ran concurrently with the first annual U.S. show of force
in Honduras in April 1984, was also designed to test FEMA's ability to
round up 400,000 undocumented Central American aliens in the United
States and its ability to distribute hundreds of tons of small arms to
``state defense forces.''

Incredibly, REX 84 was similar to a plan secretly adopted by Reagan
while governor of California.  His two top henchmen then were Edwin
Meese, who recently resigned as U.S. attorney general, and Louis
Guiffrida, the FEMA director in 1984.

If the review makes you nervous, you should read the book!

--Chip Berlet ** End of text from cdp:mideast.forum **

--------------------------------END:REF3-----------------------------------
###########################################################################
--------------------------------REF4:FEMA----------------------------------
Article 2231 of alt.activism:
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.conspiracy
Subject: WILL GULF WAR LEAD TO REPRESSION AT HOME? (_Guardian_ article)
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

[PeaceNet forward from AML (ACTIV-L) -- see bottom for more info]
------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the front-page article of the Jan. 16 issue of "The
Guardian," which describes some of the U.S. government's planning
for martial law in the event of the Gulf war. This is truly a
scary scenario that should concern all civil libertarians and
patriots.
------------------------------------------------------------------

 WILL GULF WAR LEAD TO REPRESSION AT HOME?
 by Paul DeRienzo and Bill Weinberg

On August 2, 1990, as Saddam Hussein's army was consolidating control
over Kuwait, President George Bush responded by signing two executive
orders that were the first step toward martial law in the United
States and suspending the Constitution.

On the surface, Executive Orders 12722 and 12723, declaring a
"national emergency," merely invoked laws that allowed Bush to freeze
Iraqi assets in the United States.

The International Emergency Executive Powers Act permits the president
to freeze foreign assets after declaring a "national emergency," a
move that has been made three times before -- against Panama in 1987,
Nicaragua in 1985 and Iran in 1979.

According to Professor Diana Reynolds, of the Fletcher School of
Diplomacy at Boston's Tufts University, when Bush declared a national
emergency he "activated one part of a contingency national security
emergency plan." That plan is made up of a series of laws passed since
the presidency of Richard Nixon, which Reynolds says give the
president "boundless" powers.

According to Reynolds, such laws as the Defense Industrial
Revitalization and Disaster Relief Acts of 1983 "would permit the
president to do anything from seizing the means of production, to
conscripting a labor force, to relocating groups of citizens."

Reynolds says the net effect of invoking these laws would be the
suspension of the Constitution.

She adds that national emergency powers "permit the stationing of the
military in cities and towns, closing off the U.S. borders, freezing
all imports and exports, allocating all resources on a national
security priority, monitoring and censoring the press, and warrantless
searches and seizures."

The measures would allow military authorities to proclaim martial law
in the United States, asserts Reynolds. She defines martial law as the
"federal authority taking over for local authority when they are
unable to maintain law and order or to assure a republican form of
government."

A report called "Post Attack Recovery Strategies," about rebuilding
the country after a nuclear war, prepared by the right-wing Hudson
Institute in 1980, defines martial law as dealing "with the control of
civilians by their own military forces in time of emergency."

The federal agency with the authority to organize and command the
government's response to a national emergency is the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). This super-secret and elite agency was
formed in 1979 under congressional measures that merged all federal
powers dealing with civilian and military emergencies under one
agency.

FEMA has its roots in the World War I partnership between government
and corporate leaders who helped mobilize the nation's industries to
support the war effort. The idea of a central national response to
large-scale emergencies was reintroduced in the early 1970s by Louis
Giuffrida, a close associate of then-California Gov. Ronald Reagan and
his chief aide Edwin Meese.

Reagan appointed Giuffrida head of the California National Guard in
1969. With Meese, Giuffrida organized "war-games" to prepare for
"statewide martial law" in the event that Black nationalists and
anti-war protesters "challenged the authority of the state."  In 1981,
Reagan as president moved Giuffrida up to the big leagues, appointing
him director of FEMA.

According to Reynolds, however, it was the actions of George Bush in
1976, while he was the director of the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA), that provided the stimulus for centralization of vast powers in
FEMA.

Bush assembled a group of hawkish outsiders, called Team B, that
released a report claiming the CIA ("Team A") had underestimated the
dangers of Soviet nuclear attack. The report advised the development
of elaborate plans for "civil defense" and post-nuclear government.
Three years later, in 1979, FEMA was given ultimate responsibility for
developing these plans.

Aware of the bad publicity FEMA was getting because of its role in
organizing for a post-nuclear world, Reagan's FEMA chief Giuffrida
publicly argued that the 1865 Posse Comitatus Act prohibited the
military from arresting civilians.

However, Reynolds says that Congress eroded the act by giving the
military reserves an exemption from Posse Comitatus and allowing them
to arrest civilians. The National Guard, under the control of state
governors in peace time, is also exempt from the act and can arrest
civilians.

FEMA Inspector General John Brinkerhoff has written a memo contending
that the government doesn't need to suspend the Constitution to use
the full range of powers Congress has given the agency. FEMA has
prepared legislation to be introduced in Congress in the event of a
national emergency that would give the agency sweeping powers. The
right to "deputize" National Guard and police forces is included in
the package. But Reynolds believes that actual martial law need not be
declared publicly.

Giuffrida has written that "Martial Rule comes into existence upon a
determination (not a declaration) by the senior military commander
that the civil government must be replaced because it is no longer
functioning anyway." He adds that "Martial Rule is limited only by the
principle of necessary force."

According to Reynolds, it is possible for the president to make
declarations concerning a national emergency secretly in the form of a
Natioanl Security Decision Directive. Most such directives are
classified as so secret that Reynolds says "researchers don't even
know how many are enacted."

DOMESTIC SPYING

Throughout the 1980s, FEMA was prohibited from engaging in
intelligence gathering. But on July 6, 1989, Bush signed Executive
Order 12681, pronouncing that FEMA's National Preparedness Directorate
would "have as a primary function intelligence, counterintelligence,
investigative, or national security work." Recent events indicate that
domestic spying in response to the looming Middle East war is now
under way.

Reynolds reports that "the CIA is going to various campuses asking for
information on Middle Eastern students. I'm sure that there are
intelligence organizations monitoring peace demonstrations."
According to the University of Connecticut student paper, the Daily
Campus, CIA officials have recently met there to discuss talking with
Middle Eastern students.

The New York Times reports that the FBI has ordered its agents around
the country to question Arab-American leaders and business people in
search of information on potential Iraqi "terrorist" attacks in
response to a Gulf war.

A 1986 Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) document entitled
"Alien Terrorists and Other Undesirables: A Contingency Plan" outlines
the potential round-up and incarceration in mass detainment camps of
U.S. residents who are citizens of "terrorist" countries, chiefly in
the Middle East. This plan echoed a 1984 FEMA nationwide "readiness
exercise code-named REX-84 ALPHA, which included the rehearsal of
joint operations with the INS to round up 40,000 Central American
refugees in the event of a U.S. invasion of the region. One of the 10
military bases established as detainment camps by REX-84 ALPHA, Camp
Krome, Fla., was designated a joint FEMA-Immigration service
interrogation center.

Recently, FEMA has been criticized in the media for inadequate
response to the October, 1989 San Francisco earthquake. What the
mainstream press has failed to cover is the agency's planned role in
repressing domestic dissent in the event of an invasion abroad.

Source: The Guardian, Jan 16 1991

 The Guardian is an independent radical news weekly. Subscriptions are
available at $33.50 per year from The Guardian, 33 West 17th St., New
York, NY 10011

 Origin:Socialism_On_Line 203-274-4639

 from the Radical_Politics conference on
The NY Transfer BBS 718-448-2358 & 718-448-2683

** End of text from cdp:mideast.forum **

----------------------------END:REF4------------------------------------
########################################################################
----------------------------REF5:NSDD 145-------------------------------

DATE OF UPLOAD:  November 17, 1989
ORIGIN OF UPLOAD:  Omni Magazine
CONTRIBUTED BY: Donald Goldberg
========================================================
PARANET INFORMATION SERVICE BBS
========================================================
     Although  this  article does not deal  directly  with  UFOs,
ParaNet  felt  it  important as an offering to  our  readers  who
depend  so  much upon communications as a way to  stay  informed.
This article raises some interesting implications for the  future
of communications.


THE NATIONAL GUARDS
(C) 1987 OMNI MAGAZINE MAY 1987
(Reprinted  with  permission and license to  ParaNet  Information
Service and its affiliates.)

By Donald Goldberg

     The  mountains bend as the fjord and the sea beyond  stretch
out before the viewer's eyes.  First over the water, then a sharp
left  turn,  then a bank to the right between the peaks,  and the
secret naval base unfolds upon the screen.
     The  scene is of a Soviet military installation on the  Kola
Peninsula in the icy Barents Sea,  a place usually off-limits  to
the gaze of the Western world.  It was captured by a small French
satellite called SPOT Image, orbiting at an altitude of 517 miles
above  the hidden Russian outpost.   On each of several passes --
made  over a two-week period last fall -- the  satellite's  high-
resolution  lens  took  its pictures at a  different  angle;  the
images  were  then blended into  a  three-dimensional,  computer-
generated video.   Buildings,  docks, vessels, and details of the
Artic landscape are all clearly visible.
     Half  a  world  away and thousands of feet  under  the  sea,
sparkling-clear images are being made of the ocean floor.   Using
the  latest bathymetric technology and  state-of-the-art  systems
known as Seam Beam and Hydrochart,  researchers are for the first
time  assembling  detailed  underwater maps  of  the  continental
shelves  and the depths of the world's oceans.   These scenes  of
the  sea  are as sophisticated as the photographs taken from  the
satellite.
     From  the three-dimensional images taken far above the earth
to  the charts of the bottom of the  oceans,  these  photographic
systems  have  three  things in common:   They both rely  on  the
latest  technology to create accurate pictures never  dreamed  of
even  25  years  ago;  they are being made  widely  available  by
commerical,  nongovernmental  enterprises;  and  the Pentagon  is
trying desperately to keep them from the general public.
     In  1985 the Navy classified the underwater  charts,  making
them  available  only  to approved researchers  whose  needs  are
evaluated on a case-by-case basis.  Under a 1984 law the military
has  been given a say in what cameras can be licensed to be  used
on American satellites; and officials have already announced they
plan  to  limit  the  quality  and  resolution  of  photos   made
available.   The National Security Agency (NSA) -- the secret arm
of the Pentagon in charge of gathering electronic intelligence as
well as protecting sensitive U.S.  communications -- has defeated
a move to keep it away from civilian and commercial computers and
databases.
     That   attitude  has  outraged  those  concerned  with   the
military's  increasing efforts to keep information not only  from
the public but from industry experts,  scientists, and even other
government  officials as well.   "That's like classifying a  road
map   for   fear  of  invasion,"  says  Paul   Wolff,   assistant
administrator   for   the  National   Oceanic   and   Atmospheric
Administration, of the attempted restrictions.
     These attempts to keep unclassified data out of the hands of
scientists,  researchers, the news media, and the public at large
are  a part of an alarming trend that has seen the military  take
an  ever-increasing  role in controlling the flow of  information
and communications through American society, a role traditionally
-- and  almost  exclusively  -- left  to  civilians.   Under  the
approving  gaze  of  the  Reagan  administration,  Department  of
Defense  (DoD)  officials have quietly implemented  a  number  of
policies,   decisions,   and   orders  that  give  the   military
unprecedented  control  over both the content and public  use  of
data and communications.  For example:

**The  Pentagon  has  created a new category of  "sensitive"  but
unclassified  information  that  allows it to  keep  from  public
access huge quantities of data that were once widely accessible.
**Defense Department officials have attempted to rewrite key laws
that  spell  out when the president can  and  cannot  appropriate
private communications facilities.
**The  Pentagon  has installed a system that enables it to  seize
control  of  the nation's entire  communications  network  -- the
phone system,  data transmissions, and satellite transmissions of
all   kinds  -- in  the  event  of  what  it  deems  a  "national
emergency."  As yet there is no single,  universally  agreed-upon
definition  of  what constitutes such a state.   Usually such  an
emergency  is restricted to times of natural  disaster,  war,  or
when  national  security is  specifically  threatened.   Now  the
military has attempted to redefine emergency.
     The  point man in the Pentagon's onslaught on communications
is  Assistant Defense Secretary Donald C.  Latham,  a former  NSA
deputy  chief.   Latham now heads up an interagency committee  in
charge of writing and implementing many of the policies that have
put  the military in charge of the flow of  civilian  information
and communication.  He is also the architect of National Security
Decision  Directive 145 (NSDD 145),  signed by Defense  Secretary
Caspar Weinberger in 1984,  which sets out the national policy on
telecommunications and computer-systems security.
     First  NSDD  145  set  up  a  steering  group  of  top-level
administration  officials.   Their job is to  recommend  ways  to
protect information that is unclassified but has been  designated
sensitive.   Such  information  is held not  only  by  government
agencies but by private companies as well.  And last October  the
steering  group  issued  a  memorandum  that  defined   sensitive
information and gave federal agencies broad new powers to keep it
from the public.
     According to Latham, this new category includes such data as
all medical records on government databases -- from the files  of
the National Cancer Institute to information on every veteran who
has ever applied for medical aid from the Veterans Administration
-- and all the information on corporate and personal taxpayers in
the  Internal  Revenue Service's  computers.   Even  agricultural
statistics, he argues, can be used by a foreign power against the
United States.
     In  his  oversize yet Spartan Pentagon office,  Latham  cuts
anything but an intimidating figure.  Articulate and friendly, he
could  pass  for a network anchorman or a  television  game  show
host.    When  asked  how  the  government's  new  definition  of
sensitive information will be used,  he defends the necessity for
it and tries to put to rest concerns about a new restrictiveness.
     "The  debate  that  somehow  the DoD and NSA  are  going  to
monitor  or  get into private databases isn't the case  at  all,"
Latham  insists.   "The definition is just a guideline,  just  an
advisory.   It does not give the DoD the right to go into private
records."
     Yet  the Defense Department invoked the NSDD 145  guidelines
when it told the information industry it intends to restrict  the
sale  of  data that are now unclassified and  publicly  available
from privately owned computer systems.  The excuse if offered was
that these data often include technical information that might be
valuable to a foreign adversary like the Soviet Union.
     Mead Data Central -- which runs some of the nation's largest
computer  databases,  such  as Lexis and Nexis,  and  has  nearly
200,000 users -- says it has already been approached by a team of
agents  from the Air Force and officials from the CIA and the FBI
who  asked  for the names of subscribers and inquired  what  Mead
officials might do if information restrictions were imposed.   In
response  to  government pressure,  Mead Data Central  in  effect
censured itself.  It purged all unclassified  government-supplied
technical  data  from  its  system  and  completely  dropped  the
National  Technical Information System from its  database  rather
than risk a confrontation.
     Representative Jack Brooks,  a Texas Democrat who chairs the
House Government Operations Committee,  is an outspoken critic of
the  NSA's  role in restricting civilian information.   He  notes
that  in 1985 the NSA -- under the authority granted by NSDD  145
-- investigated  a computer program that was widely used in  both
local  and federal elections in 1984.   The computer  system  was
used to count more than one third of all votes cast in the United
States.   While  probing  the system's vulnerability  to  outside
manipulation,  the  NSA  obtained  a detailed knowledge  of  that
computer  program.   "In  my  view," Brooks  says,  "this  is  an
unprecedented   and  ill-advised  expansion  of  the   military's
influence in our society."
     There are other NSA critics.   "The computer systems used by
counties  to  collect and process votes have nothing to  do  with
national  security,  and  I'm really concerned  about  the  NSA's
involvement," says Democratic congressman Dan Glickman of Kansas,
chairman  of  the  House  science  and  technology   subcommittee
concerned with computer security.
     Also,  under  NSDD  145 the Pentagon has  issued  an  order,
virtually  unknown  to all  but a few industry  executives,  that
affects  commercial communications satellites.   The  policy  was
made official by Defense Secretary Weinberger in June of 1985 and
requires  that all commercial satellite operators that carry such
unclassified  government data traffic as routine Pentagon  supply
information  and  payroll data (and that  compete  for  lucrative
government  contracts)  install costly protective systems on  all
satellites  launched after 1990.   The policy does  not  directly
affect the data over satellite channels, but it does make the NSA
privy  to vital information about the essential signals needed to
operate a satellite.  With this information it could take control
of any satellite it chooses.
     Latham  insists this,  too,  is a voluntary policy and  that
only  companies that wish to install protection will  have  their
systems  evaluated by the NSA.   He also says industry  officials
are  wholly  behind  the move,  and argues  that  the  protective
systems  are necessary.  With just a few thousand dollars'  worth
of  equipment,  a  disgruntled employee could  interfere  with  a
satellite's  control  signals  and disable or  even  wipe  out  a
hundred-million-dollar satellite carrying government information.
     At best,  his comments are misleading.  First, the policy is
not  voluntary.    The  NSA  can  cut  off  lucrative  government
contracts  to companies that do not comply with  the  plan.   The
Pentagon   alone  spent  more  than  a  billion  dollars  leasing
commercial  satellite  channels  last  year;  that's  a  powerful
incentive for business to cooperate.
     Second,  the  industry's  support  is  anything  but  total.
According  to the minutes of one closed-door meeting between  NSA
officials -- along with representatives of other federal agencies
--  and  executives from AT&T, Comsat, GTE Sprint, and  MCI,  the
executives  neither  supported  the  move  nor  believed  it  was
necessary.   The  NSA  defended  the policy  by  arguing  that  a
satellite  could  be held for ransom if the command  and  control
links  weren't  protected.   But  experts  at  the  meeting  were
skeptical.
     "Why is the threat limited to accessing the satellite rather
than  destroying  it  with lasers or high-powered  signals?"  one
industry executive wanted to know.
     Most  of the officials present objected to the high cost  of
protecting the satellites.  According to a 1983 study made at the
request of the Pentagon, the protection demanded by the NSA could
add  as  much as $3 million to the price of a  satellite  and  $1
million  more to annual operating costs.  Costs like these,  they
argue,  could cripple a company competing against less  expensive
communications networks.
     Americans  get  much of their information through  forms  of
electronic  communications,  from the telephone,  television  and
radio,  and information printed in many newspapers.   Banks  send
important  financial  data,  businesses their  spreadsheets,  and
stockbrokers  their  investment portfolios,  all  over  the  same
channels,  from  satellite signals to computer hookups carried on
long  distance telephone lines.   To make sure that  the  federal
government  helped  to promote and protect the efficient  use  of
this   advancing   technology,   Congress  passed   the   massive
Communications Act of of 1934.   It outlined the role and laws of
the communications structure in the United States.
     The  powers  of the president are set out in Section 606  of
that law;  basically it states that he has the authority to  take
control   of  any  communications  facilities  that  he  believes
"essential  to  the national defense."  In the  language  of  the
trade this is known as a 606 emergency.
     There  have  been  a number of attempts in recent  years  by
Defense Department officials to redefine what qualifies as a  606
emergency  and  make  it  easier for the military  to  take  over
national communications.
     In  1981  the Senate considered amendments to the  1934  act
that   would   allow  the  president,   on   Defense   Department
recommendation,  to require any communications company to provide
services,  facilities,  or  equipment  "to promote  the  national
defense  and  security  or  the  emergency  preparedness  of  the
nation,"  even  in  peacetime and without  a  declared  state  of
emergency.   The  general  language had been drafted  by  Defense
Department  officials.   (The  bill failed to pass the House  for
unrelated reasons.)
     "I  think  it is quite clear that they have snuck  in  there
some  powers that are dangerous for us as a company and  for  the
public  at large," said MCI vice president Kenneth Cox before the
Senate vote.
     Since President Reagan took office, the Pentagon has stepped
up  its  efforts to rewrite the definition of national  emergency
and give the military expanded powers in the United States.  "The
declaration  of  'emergency'  has always been  vague,"  says  one
former  administration official who left the government  in  1982
after ten years in top policy posts.   "Different presidents have
invoked  it  differently.   This administration would  declare  a
convenient 'emergency.'"   In other words,  what is a nuisance to
one  administration  might  qualify  as a  burgeoning  crisis  to
another.   For  example,  the Reagan administration might  decide
that a series of protests on or near military bases constituted a
national emergency.
     Should the Pentagon ever be given the green light,  its base
for  taking  over the nation's communications system would  be  a
nondescript yellow brick building within the maze of high  rises,
government  buildings,  and apartment complexes that make up  the
Washington  suburb of Arlington,  Virginia.   Headquartered in  a
dusty and aging structure surrounded by a barbed-wire fence is an
obscure   branch   of   the  military  known   as   the   Defense
Communications  Agency  (DCA).   It  does not have the  spit  and
polish  of  the National Security Agency or the dozens  of  other
government facilities that make up the nation's capital.  But its
lack of shine belies its critical mission:   to make sure all  of
America's  far-flung  military  units can  communicate  with  one
another.   It is in certain ways the nerve center of our nation's
defense system.
     On  the second floor of the DCA's four-story headquarters is
a  new  addition called the National Coordinating  Center  (NCC).
Operated  by the Pentagon,  it is virtually unknown outside of  a
handful of industry and government officials.  The NCC is staffed
around  the clock by representatives of a dozen of  the  nation's
largest  commercial  communications  companies  -- the  so-called
"common  carriers" -- including AT&T, MCI, GTE, Comsat, and  ITT.
Also  on hand are officials from the State Department,  the  CIA,
the  Federal  Aviation  Administration, and  a  number  of  other
federal agencies.  During a 606 emergency the Pentagon can  order
the  companies that make up the National Coordinating  Center  to
turn  over their satellite, fiberoptic, and land-line  facilities
to the government.
     On a long corridor in the front of the building is a  series
of offices, each outfitted with a private phone, a telex machine,
and  a combination safe.   It's known as "logo row" because  each
office  is occupied by an employee from one of the companies that
staff the NCC and because their corporate logos hand on the  wall
outside.   Each  employee  is  on  permanent  standby,  ready  to
activate his company's system should the Pentagon require it.
     The  National Coordinating Center's mission is as  grand  as
its  title  is  obscure:    to  make  available  to  the  Defense
Department  all  the  facilities of the  civilian  communications
network  in this country -- the phone  lines,  the  long-distance
satellite  hookups,  the  data transmission lines -- in times  of
national  emergency.   If war breaks out and communications to  a
key military base are cut,  the Pentagon wants to make sure  that
an  alternate  link can be set up as fast as  possible.   Company
employees assigned to the center are on call 24 hours a day; they
wear beepers outside the office,  and when on vacation they  must
be replaced by qualified colleagues.
     The center formally opened on New Year's Day, 1984, the same
day  Ma Bell's monopoly over the telephone network of the  entire
United States was finally broken.  The timing was no coincidence.
Pentagon  officials had argued for years along with AT&T  against
the  divestiture  of Ma Bell,  on grounds of  national  security.
Defense   Secretary  Weinberger  personally  urged  the  attorney
general to block the lawsuit that resulted in the breakup, as had
his predecessor,  Harold Brown.   The reason was that rather than
construct its own communications network,  the Pentagon had  come
to rely extensively on the phone company.   After the breakup the
dependence   continued.    The  Pentagon  still  used  commercial
companies  to  carry more than 90 percent of  its  communications
within the continental United States.
     The 1984 divestiture put an end to AT&T's monopoly over  the
nation's telephone service and increased the Pentagon's obsession
with  having its own nerve center.   Now the brass had to contend
with  several  competing companies to acquire  phone  lines,  and
communications was more than a matter of running a line from  one
telephone to another.  Satellites, microwave towers, fiberoptics,
and  other  technological  breakthroughs  never  dreamed  of   by
Alexander  Graham  Bell were in extensive use, and not  just  for
phone  conversations.  Digital data streams for computers  flowed
on the same networks.
     These  facts were not lost on the Defense Department or  the
White House.   According to documents obtained by Omni, beginning
on  December  14,  1982,  a number of secret meetings  were  held
between high-level administration officials and executives of the
commercial  communications companies whose employees would  later
staff  the  National Coordinating Center.   The  meetings,  which
continued  over  the next three years,  were held  at  the  White
House,  the  State  Department,  the Strategic Air Command  (SAC)
headquarters  at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska,  and  at  the
North  American  Aerospace  Defense Command (NORAD)  in  Colorado
Springs.
     The  industry officials attending constituted  the  National
Security  Telecommunications  Advisory Committee -- called  NSTAC
(pronounced  N-stack)  -- set up by President Reagan  to  address
those same problems that worried the Pentagon.   It was at  these
secret  meetings,  according to the minutes,  that the idea of  a
communications  watch center for national emergencies -- the  NCC
-- was born.   Along with it came a whole set of plans that would
allow   the  military  to  take  over  commercial  communications
"assets" -- everything from ground stations and satellite  dishes
to fiberoptic cables -- across the country.
     At  a  1983  Federal Communications  Commission  meeting,  a
ranking   Defense  Department  official  offered  the   following
explanation for the founding of the National Coordinating Center:
"We are looking at trying to make communications endurable for  a
protracted  conflict."   The  phrase  protracted  conflict  is  a
military euphemism for nuclear war.
     But  could  the NCC survive even the first volley in such  a
conflict?
     Not  likely.   It's located within a mile of  the  Pentagon,
itself  an obvious early target of a Soviet nuclear barrage (or a
conventional  strike,   for  that  matter).    And  the   Kremlin
undoubtedly knows its location and importance, and presumably has
included  it on its priority target list.   In sum,  according to
one  Pentagon  official,  "The  NCC itself is  not  viewed  as  a
survivable facility."
     Furthermore,  the  NCC's "Implementation Plan," obtained  by
Omni,  lists four phases of emergencies and how the center should
respond to each.   The first,  Phase 0,  is Peacetime,  for which
there would be little to do outside of a handful of routine tasks
and  exercises.   Phase 1 is Pre Attack,  in which alternate  NCC
sites  are alerted.   Phase 2 is Post Attack,  in which other NCC
locations  are  instructed to take over the  center's  functions.
Phase  3  is  known as Last Ditch,  and in  this  phase  whatever
facility survives becomes the de facto NCC.
     So far there is no alternate National Coordinating Center to
which   NCC  officials  could  retreat  to  survive  an   attack.
According  to NCC deputy director William  Belford,  no  physical
sites have yet been chosen for a substitute NCC, and even whether
the  NCC  itself  will survive a nuclear attack  is  still  under
study.
     Of  what use is a communications center that is not expected
to outlast even the first shots of a war and has no backup?
     The  answer  appears to be that because  of  the  Pentagon's
concerns about the AT&T divestiture and the disruptive effects it
might  have  on national security,  the NCC was to serve  as  the
military's peacetime communications center.
     The  center  is a powerful and unprecedented tool to  assume
control  over  the nation's vast communications  and  information
network.   For  years the Pentagon has been studying how to  take
over the common carriers' facilities.  That research was prepared
by  NSTAC  at the DoD's request and is contained in a  series  of
internal Pentagon documents obtained by Omni.   Collectively this
series is known as the Satellite Survivability Report.  Completed
in  1984,  it  is  the  only detailed analysis  to  date  of  the
vulnerabilities  of  the commercial satellite  network.   It  was
begun  as  a  way  of examining how to  protect  the  network  of
communications  facilities from attack and how to keep it  intact
for the DoD.
     A major part of the report also contains an analysis of  how
to   make  commercial  satellites  "interoperable"  with  Defense
Department  systems.    While  the  report  notes  that   current
technical   differences  such  as  varying  frequencies  make  it
difficult  for  the Pentagon to  use  commercial  satellites,  it
recommends ways to resolve those problems.  Much of the report is
a  veritable  blueprint  for the government on how to  take  over
satellites in orbit above the United States.   This  information,
plus  NSDD 145's demand that satellite operators tell the NSA how
their  satellites are controlled,  guarantees the military  ample
knowledge about operating commercial satellites.
     The Pentagon now has an unprecedented access to the civilian
communications network:  commercial databases, computer networks,
electronic  links,  telephone lines.   All it needs is the  legal
authority to use them.   Then it could totally dominate the  flow
of  all  information in the United States.   As one  high-ranking
White  House communications official put it:   "Whoever  controls
communications, controls the country."  His remark was made after
our  State  Department could not communicate  directly  with  our
embassy  in  Manila during the anti-Marcos revolution last  year.
To  get  through,  the  State Department had  to  relay  all  its
messages through the Philippine government.
     Government  officials have offered all kinds of scenarios to
justify   the  National  Coordinating   Center,   the   Satellite
Survivability  Report,  new domains of authority for the Pentagon
and  the NSA,  and the creation of top-level government  steering
groups to think of even more policies for the military.  Most can
be  reduced to the rationale that inspired NSDD  145:   that  our
enemies  (presumably  the  Soviets)  have to  be  prevented  from
getting too much information from unclassified sources.   And the
only  way  to  do that is to step in and take  control  of  those
sources.
     Remarkably,  the communications industry as a whole has  not
been  concerned about the overall scope of the Pentagon's  threat
to  its  freedom  of  operation.   Most  protests  have  been  to
individual  government actions.   For example,  a media coalition
that includes the Radio-Television Society of Newspaper  Editors,
and  the Turner Broadcasting System has been lobbying that before
the  government  can  restrict the use  of  satellites,  it  must
demonstrate  why such restrictions protect against a  "threat  to
distinct  and  compelling  national security and  foreign  policy
interests."  But the whole policy of restrictiveness has not been
examined.  That may change sometime this year, when the Office of
Technology  Assessment  issues  a report on  how  the  Pentagon's
policy  will affect communications in the United States.  In  the
meantime  the  military  keeps trying  to  encroach  on  national
communications.
     While  it may seem unlikely that the Pentagon will ever  get
total control of our information and communications systems,  the
truth  is  that  it  can happen all  too  easily.   The  official
mechanisms  are  already in place;  and few  barriers  remain  to
guarantee  that  what  we hear,  see,  and read will come  to  us
courtesy of our being members of a free and open society and  not
courtesy of the Pentagon.


---------------------------END FEMA SUMMARY----------------------


----- End Included Message -----