It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In order for this to work, it has to be collaborative.They have to trust the government
Officials said the proposed regulations focused mainly on detaining small numbers of individuals. However, the rules also discussed scenarios “when it is necessary to provisionally quarantine a large group of persons on a very short time frame.”
That would have at least some of the rules in place if swine flu returns with a vengeance later this year, though officials are reluctant to make that link publically.
While quarantines are sometimes imposed by state and local officials on uncooperative patients federal quarantine has been almost unheard of in recent decades
The proposals to limit liberty represent a dangerous precedent to constitutional theory, particularly when there’s almost no evidence it will matter. ... It wouldn’t surprise me if they try to sneak this past in August, when people are away.”
The plan is backed by the CDC. “It’s important to public health to move forward with the regulations,” said Christine Pearson, a spokeswoman for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “We need to update our quarantine regulations, and this final rule is an important step.” The Office of Management and Budget has confirmed the lock-down plan is currently in “an interagency review process.”
As the flu outbreak approaches — promised to hit this autumn — we are beginning to see the full extent of the government’s plan to declare martial law and further violate the Constitution, or sideline it completely.
An outbreak of the flu is only a convenient pretext. According to Politico, analysts said the administration may want to hold new quarantine powers in reserve, for “unforeseen situations” or for diseases other than the flu.
In other words, the government may use the new lock-down regulations for political reasons. Late last year, the IMF said U.S. troops may need to be used to quell protests and bank runs during an economic crisis, according to the U.S. Army War College’s Strategic Institute.url
It was revealed at the time by Sen. James Inhofe and Rep. Brad Sherman that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson considered the possibility of civil unrest while he pushed for September’s Wall Street bankster bailout and even suggested martial law might be required.
Originally posted by Kords21
And we still wonder how the Germans let Nazi Germany happen.
Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
Smell that? That is the smell of fascism in our midst.
"The evidence that we the people, are at risk of being placed under martial law, and losing all of our rights as guaranteed by the Constitution is overwhelming." - Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA)
The federal act, introduced soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, was intended to combat chemical warfare threats more than flu pandemics at a time when bio-terrorism was a greater threat than swine flu, critics say.
Now eight years later, the federal model's provisions compromise constitutional rights and personal freedoms more than they protect citizens, according to state Rep. Jeffrey Perry, R-Sandwich. "I'm a big student of history. ... We hope we've learned lessons from the things we've done as a nation in times of crisis," said Perry, Cape Cod's lone representative to the House Ways and Means committee, which has been reviewing the proposal. "Apparently, some people have not."
The state Senate approved the bill unanimously in April, following the recommendations of Moore, a former regional director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, according to state Sen. Robert O'Leary, D-Barnstable.
Excerpts from the bill:
During a declared emergency, a designated health officer, with the approval of the state health commissioner, may exercise the authority to:
"require the owner or occupier of premises to permit entry into, and investigation of, the premises."
"close, direct, and compel the evacuation of ... any building or facility."
"decontaminate or ... destroy any material."
"require in-state health care providers to assist in the performance of vaccination, treatment, examination, or testing of any individual."
Source: Senate Bill 2028, An Act Relative to Pandemic and Disaster Preparation and Response in the Commonwealth.
.........To date, three states — Delaware, Oklahoma and South Carolina — have adopted the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act in its entirety. A total of 37 states have adopted portions of the federal model, though most have avoided contentious issues such as home entry and required assistance with vaccination efforts, according to George Annas, chairman of Boston University's Health Law, Bioethics and Human Rights Department.
No state, including Louisiana during Hurricane Katrina, has ever taken action on the federal model's provisions.
"Overall, it's totally unnecessary," said Annas, a vocal opponent of the bill. "Almost everybody now concedes that it makes no sense for pandemics. ... All it does is undermine public trust in public health."