It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Obama Issues Executive Order Mandating “Lifestyle Behavior Modification”

page: 4
26
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
ah yes they have gotten to the stage where they want to mold us. and what does the MSM say? not a damn thing. they can go to hell




posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
■smoking cessation;
■proper nutrition;
■appropriate exercise;
■mental health;
■behavioral health;
■sedentary behavior (see Sec. 3 [c]);
■substance-use disorder; and
■domestic violence screenings

It's the sort of things they must be talking about when they meet in G20
ppl must stop smoking so they will have more money in their pockets so more taxes money income to pay,junk food=waste of money...

you always have to look at it from their perspective,their own interests.
edit coz


[edit on 14-6-2010 by SSimon]
edit;


[edit on 14-6-2010 by SSimon]



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 09:44 PM
link   


Sec. 2. Membership.
(a) The Surgeon General shall serve as the Chair of the Council, which shall be composed of:
(1) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(2) the Secretary of Labor;
(3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services;
(4) the Secretary of Transportation;
(5) the Secretary of Education;
(6) the Secretary of Homeland Security;
(7) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency;
(8) the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission;
(9) the Director of National Drug Control Policy;
(10) the Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic
Policy Council;
(11) the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Indian Affairs;
(12) the Chairman of the Corporation for National and Community
Service; and
(13) the head of any other executive department or agency that the
Chair may, from time to time, determine is appropriate.


...Why do 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 need to be involved?





Sec. 3. Purposes and Duties.


...(b) develop, after obtaining input from relevant stakeholders, a national prevention, health promotion, public health, and integrative health-care strategy that incorporates the most effective and achievable means of improving the health status of Americans and reducing the incidence of preventable illness and disability in the United States, as further described in section 5 of this order;

(c) provide recommendations to the President and the Congress concerning the most pressing health issues confronting the United States and changes in Federal policy to achieve national wellness, health promotion, and public health goals, including the reduction of tobacco use, sedentary behavior, and poor nutrition;





Sec. 5. National Prevention and Health Promotion Strategy.

Not later than March 23, 2011, the Chair, in consultation with the Council, shall develop and make public a national prevention, health promotion, and public health strategy (national strategy), and shall review and revise it periodically. The national strategy shall:

(a) set specific goals and objectives for improving the health of the United States through federally supported prevention, health promotion, and public health programs, consistent with ongoing goal setting efforts conducted by specific agencies;

(b) establish specific and measurable actions and timelines to carry out the strategy, and determine accountability for meeting those timelines, within and across Federal departments and agencies;




After reading the entire order, I have to ask---how, after all the absolute garbage that has already been forced down out throats, can we not find this disturbing? True, it isn't legislation, it doesn't create any new law, new program, etc, but it sure creates incentive for that to happen at a later date.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SSimon
 


From the perspective of taxation, cigarettes are heavily taxed. If everyone were to quit smoking this would deplete a significant amount of taxes.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:06 PM
link   
If only we (the royal we) understood the difference between a person and a human being. And which, if either, the corporation of the United States of America has control over. I'm a human being, and do not subscribe to Act, or Statutes, or any sort of legislation. A person is subject to the rules of the corporation which employs it. A person is not a human being, a person is also known as a corporation, which is why a corporation has the rights of a person. Just sayin. Don't register anything.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


ther is no EO atm this is atm a fiction written by a blog site. No writer has even taken credit for the article. Nothing on gov't sites or EO lists. I said earlier that this is fiction and the source is questionable.



posted on Jun, 14 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
■smoking cessation;
■proper nutrition;
■appropriate exercise;
■mental health;
■behavioral health;
■sedentary behavior (see Sec. 3 [c]);
■substance-use disorder; and
■domestic violence screenings.

I'm confused,
Is this list for the citizens of the U.S.,

Or is this a list of what U.S. polititians need to personally improve upon?????

Oh, wait. There is nothing in this list about sexual perversion or crimes against humanity.
This must be the list for the citizens.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


It is so sad that we were all indoctrinated in school to believe that Hitler was a bad man, yet we have policies here in the U.S. that are modeled after some of Hitler's own, just slightly modified. Its also sad that America's closest ally is treating the Palestinians with the same respect that Hitler gave the Jews.

Its also sad that the History Channel and the Military Channel run marathons on Hitler which basically glorify the guy.

You know, I read somewhere that the U.S. secretly shipped high ranking SS officers out of Germany at the tail end of the war. I was never able to confirm that though...



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Son of Will
 





But with this specific bill, is there anything specifically unconstitutional in it? The only thing I see when I read over it are recommendations for actual health benefits. I don't see anything in there regarding law enforcement. At the very worst, it seems like psychological manipulation into making people healthier.


Do I really need to explain to you that an Executive Order is not a Bill, and that The POTUS does not have the legal authority to legislate? Dear God what has happened to this country?


Ookay, calm down. That doesn't really address the question. Is there anything in this - excuse me - Executive Order - that is actually nefarious? Okay, so only Congress can create legislation. And true, Executive Orders are not in the Constitution. So technically this is unconstitutional. But there are about a hundred thousand unconstitutional elements in DC, currently. I've heard figures that on average, 58 EOs are issued every year by the president.

So again - is there anything specifically prescribed in this EO that is unconstitutional or nefarious, or is it just the fact that EOs are unconstitutional? I agree with the latter at least.

[edit on 15-6-2010 by Son of Will]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Son of Will

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Son of Will
 





But with this specific bill, is there anything specifically unconstitutional in it? The only thing I see when I read over it are recommendations for actual health benefits. I don't see anything in there regarding law enforcement. At the very worst, it seems like psychological manipulation into making people healthier.


Do I really need to explain to you that an Executive Order is not a Bill, and that The POTUS does not have the legal authority to legislate? Dear God what has happened to this country?


Lol, okay. Calm down. My point still stands. Is there anything in this - excuse me - Executive Order - that is actually nefarious? Okay, so only Congress can create legislation. And true, Executive Orders are not in the Constitution. So technically this is unconstitutional. But there are about a hundred thousand unconstitutional elements in DC, currently. I've heard figures that on average, 58 EOs are issued every year by the president.

So again - is there anything specifically prescribed in this EO that is unconstitutional or nefarious, or is it just the fact that EOs are unconstitutional? I agree with the latter at least.


The Federal Government isn't in the business of 'recommendations.' As far as I know, there isn't one piece of legislation that is only recommendations. These listed 'ideas' will be enforced one way or another. Either with higher taxes (penalties), criminal charges, or both.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Son of Will
 


In spite of the fact that I did answer your question you have now re-asked that question, answered it, and then asked it again. Do you believe playing three card Monty with fallacies make them any less fallacious?



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by monkeySEEmonkeyDO

The President’s desired lifestyle behavior modifications detailed in Sec. 6 (c) focus on:

■smoking cessation;
■proper nutrition;
■appropriate exercise;
■mental health;
■behavioral health;
■sedentary behavior (see Sec. 3 [c]);
■substance-use disorder; and
■domestic violence screenings.


This list appear to be nice ideas. But each person is unique and individual results may vary. To enforce such ideas is another matter to be added to the `creepy list` of what not to do when people choose free-will.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 03:26 AM
link   
reply to post by monkeySEEmonkeyDO
 



■smoking cessation;
■proper nutrition;
■appropriate exercise;
■mental health;
■behavioral health;
■sedentary behavior (see Sec. 3 [c]);
■substance-use disorder; and
■domestic violence screenings.


I'll call Obama and tell him to include mandatory Bible reading every day. That ought to make it all "OK" again. So see, we are not insensitive to the real issues which motivate the righties.



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by awakentired
reply to post by maybereal11
 


ther is no EO atm this is atm a fiction written by a blog site. No writer has even taken credit for the article. Nothing on gov't sites or EO lists. I said earlier that this is fiction and the source is questionable.


Yes, this executive order is documented on [url=http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-establishing-national-prevention-health-promotion-and-public-health]whitehouse.gov[/ur l]

edit to fix link

edit: don't know why link won't show up properly. Used the link tool in the same way I always do. Hmmmm....Mods?

[edit on 15-6-2010 by nunya13]

[edit on 15-6-2010 by nunya13]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 10:41 AM
link   
First post. Sorry if I offend, but:
Maybe Americans (Full Disclosure: I'm Canadian, and we're no better) NEED to have behavior dictated to them, as many have become too stupid (blame the education system) to think for themselves (or is that the point of the Education System, turn children into well-read but completely stupid adults).
You DON'T have a right to be obese (which is a choice), think of the strain it puts on the healthcare system... for what? so you can eat cheeseburgers for breakfast?
I think the wording and Idea of this is far more frightening and fear-mongering than the truth, which will be mostly benign.
Comparing Obama to Hitler is ridiculous, as is Good Ol' American Red Panic. Communism, in principle, is a GOOD thing. Taking/Being Given only what you need to live, working for the good of the COMMUNity, etc.
As for nutrition:
I've always felt that junk/processed food should be heavily taxed (I'm talking 100% tax), and that money used to subsidize healthy, fresh food.
As for the rest, it all seems like wasteful/a-hole behavior they're trying to curb. What's wrong with that?
Show you're mature enough to wear big-boy pants, and maybe you'll get a pair.

Now I'm off to report this thread to my Secret Reptilian Overlords. They will not be pleased by this resistance. (I'm not Canadian, I lied).



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 08:41 PM
link   
This is Jack - no-one should force anything on others - it's not right as all should be free to advocate their own life-style. BOO



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by enteri
 


What's wrong about that?... Have you heard that in this nation our Constitution gives us the RIGHT to pursue happiness as WE THE PEOPLE see it fit and not how the government sees it fit?...

For crying out loud get off that high horse thinking that you, the government, or anyone else has the right to FORCE people to follow a lifestyle...


How about we also "enforce" another healthcare rule.. people can't listen to rap, or heavy rock, and all loud music, including concerts, are forever banned because loud music is a health issue since loud music can damage your hearing...

It doesn't matter if you are in your house, or far away from all other people, YOUR health is at risk when you listen to such loud music...

This is nothing more than another slap in the face to the American people by "Barack Obama the savior"....

Here is a direct link to the executive order.
www.whitehouse.gov...



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Line in the sand time!



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by KillenfizzenHumboflorator
 

operation PAPERCLIP
search that you'll get a platefull
also werner von Braun - Mr NASA


Fuzzy:
the stat in N America is:
the average person has the science education of a twelve year old
this means
no concept of
"Scientific Method"


[edit on 15-6-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Jun, 15 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by enteri
 


Wow. Youre ignorant. Its not the fact of doing it yourself but the fact that the government is trying to make you do it. Hence trying to control more aspects of our lives which is the reason why some have a problem with this order.
People have the choice of how healthy they want to live.

[edit on 15-6-2010 by Destiny Curious]



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join