It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Alleged new executive orders

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 06:44 PM
I read on Capitol Hill Blue that Bush has signed executive orders "giving him sole authority to impose martial law, suspend habeas corpus and ignore the Posse Comitatus Act that prohibits deployment of U.S. troops on American streets."

The full article is here and is fairly interesting. However, I'm wary of this until I can see the actual executive order, which does not exist on government websites as far as I can tell so far. The article states:

The White House press office would neither confirm nor deny existence of Bush’s executive orders or the existence of the Northern Command for National Defense. Neither would the Department of Homeland Security.

If these show up in the near future, that will be interesting. And they need to be publicized.

Is there a legitimate list of related executive orders from the past? The lists I have seen, which are supposed to be of executive orders giving FEMA their power and whatnot, turned out to be different from what they claimed to contain once I read the actual orders they mentioned. Yet people still continue to post the list as fact, same as the REX-84 camps list.

Oh, and what is the consensus here on Capitol Hill Blue? Legitimate source for information or not?

mod edit:
please review this thread---Posting work written by others. **ALL MEMBERS READ**

[edit on 14-1-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 01:01 PM
Good questions here. I have been reading Capital Hill Blue now for a long time. My belief is that it is a legitimate news source and for what it's worth, I'm pretty good at detecting news sources with not much integrity. Doug Thompson is kind of a jerk I think but I've never found any of his claims to be false. He often writes about things that you cannot find much info on anywhere else. A year and a half ago, he fired one of his reporters because he claimed she did not have more than one source for an article and 2 were required. Well, she left and then about 6 months later I saw the same information on his website again, only it was written by him and confirmed. I think something else was going on but who knows? Anyway, if anything, it does say that he's trying to be as ethical as possible and is following a journalistic ethic. BTW, the article was about Bush's insanity and supposedly he is drinking again.

- Forestlady

posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 12:51 PM
According to the White House list, only one executive order has been issued so far this year.

So... is there any past precedent of secret executive orders? I'm just trying to gauge the legitimacy of this.

posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 01:16 PM
Here is a list of "all" th eexec orders so far. Nothing listed yet for 2006.

posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 01:21 PM
Yeah, that one appears to be a little behind, as the link I posted above does have one on January 13, 2006:

Designating the Global Fund to Fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria as a Public International Organization Entitled to Enjoy Certain Privileges, Exemptions, and Immunities

That's a long title.

posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 01:35 PM
Where are the executive orders that give them the right to make an ass out of the American people?

"Human life is a gift from our creator, and that gift should never be discarded, devalued or put up for sale."- GWB

MONSANTO, a drug company, runs the white house... we are all eating genetically modified food and the pollution our industry is allowed to spew has caused us all to become partially synthetic.

Everything that comes out of their mouths, and everything that they put on paper is a carefully orchestrated script.

MONSANTO! - Imagine

posted on Feb, 2 2006 @ 04:26 PM
The executive order in question (IIRC) came on the heels of Katrina. It was used to expedite the deployment of federal resources to the gulf coast, and specifically to use national guard troops as security to assist in the distribution of aid.

It has not been rescinded, to my knowledge. There might be some threads about it on ATS, maybe try the search function?

posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 12:19 AM
If they are denying it then its probably true when they come out and tell us stuff its probably a lie.

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 3-2-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 11:37 AM
Well, CHB said they neither confirmed nor denied the existence. If they do that, that makes me suspect that it is true. If it did not exist, they would say it doesn't exist. If it does exist, and is a public executive order, then they would say it was true. Neither confirming or denying says they have a secret.

So the question is more whether CHB is a trustworthy source or whether they have a trustworthy source, isn't it?

posted on Feb, 3 2006 @ 04:06 PM
Credible or not the government lies to cover their own agendas.

top topics


log in