“National Def. Preparedness” Exec. Order OKs Conscripts, Nationalization of Private Industry

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer

Again, why now?

The section you pointed out as being "new" is not at all new - the exact phrasing has been written into every single previous "National Defense Resources Preparedness" EO, signed by Bush or Clinton, only the section title has changed some.

The one signed by Obama is a virtual rehash of the one signed by Clinton in 1994, which was largely a re-write of the one signed by Bush in 1988.

1994 - EXECUTIVE ORDER 12919 NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS (Disastercenter.com)

edit on 17-3-2012 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)

Ok, so you are using history to justify this? Just because it has been going on a long time or the precedence was set a while ago its "ok"???

By this same logic I could rip peoples hearts out on top of my house cut off their heads and let it roll off the roof because the Mayans did a long time ago? Or I could nail my neighbor to a cross and say..."psh the Romans did this thousands of years ago...so its all good in the hood!!! nail please!

You are senselessly defending Obama because you feel he is being attacked....whatever who cares, that is not the point.

The point is crap like this shouldn't have ever been introduced into our goverment by bush, jfk, obama or anyone...doesnt matter when it was implemented just that it WAS implemented...I think that is really where people's outrage sits.

Between this (EO worded to take anything they want from you whenever they want!), the wave of banker resignations, and the NDAA, i have to ask what do they know is coming?

A financial collapse of the US dollar? Something worse?

reply to post by Elostone


GREAT PICTURE.... thank you for posting it... how true...

“National Defense Resources Preparedness” executive order: Power grab or mere update?

What's changed since the 1994 EO? The creation of the Department of Homeland Security for one.

The fact that the DPAS is no longer just about wartime/national defense but now includes emergency preparedness from national disasters and FEMA, being a part of the DHS is now included in it.

Again, this is almost identical to EO 12919 from 18 years earlier. Note what this EO specifically orders: identify, assess, be prepared, improve, foster cooperation. None of these items claim authority to seize private property and place them at the personal disposal of Obama. What follows after Section 103 are the directives for implementing these rather analytical tasks, mostly in the form of explicit delegations of presidential authority to Cabinet members and others in the executive branch.

Why the update? If one takes a look at EO 12919, the big change is in the Cabinet itself. In 1994, we didn’t have a Department of Homeland Security, for instance, and some of these functions would naturally fall to DHS. In EO 12919, the FEMA director had those responsibilities, and the biggest change between the two is the removal of several references to FEMA (ten in all). Otherwise, there aren’t a lot of changes between the two EOs, which looks mainly like boilerplate.

In fact, that’s almost entirely what it is. The original EO dealing with national defense resources preparedness was issued in 1939 (EO 8248) according to the National Archives. It has been superseded a number of times, starting in 1951 by nearly every President through Bill Clinton, and amended twice by George W. Bush.

DPAS was largely independent prior to the creation of the DHS, which is primarily aimed at government contracts between the government and it's defense contractors. this "just restates the Bush-amended 12919 with current Cabinet nomenclature"

Update: It’s worth noting, too, that the second change by Bush to EO 12919 came through an amendment to EO 11858 that eliminated requirements of Cabinet officials to report on attempts by foreigners to invest in “critical technologies” in the US or “industrial espionage activities” targeting defense contractors (Section 801). Obama’s new EO doesn’t reverse that action, either.

Update II: William Jacobson comes to the same conclusion I do at Legal Insurrection

Since section 308 is causing all the furor;

Update IV: Section 308 is new, but all it does is delegate authority already granted to the President under US statute. Here’s the EO language:

The author shows the new provision incorporates the DPAS provision into one order, as opposed to maintaining those as separate entities. (again the source article is HERE)

Another author has a more condensed summary of these changes:

Executive Order: "National Defense Resources Preparedness"

So let's be clear about what this EO does not do.

(1) It does not allow the President or the named cabinet secretaries in either emergency or non-emergency conditions to conscript people without (or even with) compensation.

(2) It does not allow the President or the named cabinet secretaries in either emergency or non-emergency conditions to nationalize anything.

(3) It is not a power grab from Obama.

See his article for how he makes these conclusions.

Obama's EO is just an update for the National Defense Preparedness order issued by Reagan (12656) and Bush Sr. (12919), incorporating the DHS, which at the time of the last overhaul of this order (1994) didn't exist.

Originally posted by OldCorp
reply to post by jdub297

 

Why in the world are you putting this in such a pretty package? "Nationalizing industry?" Let's call a spade a spade shall we? This is SLAVERY!

Ironic that it was signed by a black man. Can the brainwashed Left, the cult of Barry Obama see it yet? You've been LIED TOO.

He's not leaving us much choice is he?

edit on 3/17/2012 by OldCorp because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/17/2012 by OldCorp because: (no reason given)

FYI Canadians are in the same boat, here is the evidence for anybody who has a technical enough mind to understand:
Pages 98 and 99.

Continuing business transformation in this area is also supported by anticipated changes in Identity Management and the BC Services card. The BC Services Card is anticipated to allow residents to identify themselves for over-the-counter or online transactions, and can also form the basis for proof of authorizations and certifications. The Sector goal in this direction is to reach a point at which any resident anywhere in the province can use their BC Services Card as the basis for accessing their entire NR business relationship with the province, online, over the phone, or in person. (Corporate clients would not have BC Services Cards, and for them BCeIDs would provide single identifiers into their business relationship with the Sector.) Service Card examples include: ? Attachment of government licenses and certifications to the card, such as: Free Use Permit (BC Forests), Free Miners Certificate (Mines), Pesticide Applicators Certificate (Environment), hunting and fishing licenses (Environment), Licensed Trappers (Environment); ? Use of the Services Card as the basis for proof of a third-party status held by an individual, such as: professional status as a forester or biologist; public safety/park certification; completion of a conservation & recreation course; or BC residency status. Beyond that, the Sector imagines a time when indirect (on-behalf-of) claims-based role authorizations can allow residents to use their BC Services Card in its relationships with the province where the resident acts on behalf of another organization. For example, a forestry worker could use his Services Card as the key to proving they are acting on behalf of a forest licensee in the in a particular role, such as tree faller, in an area where the licensee is authorized to harvest. Development and promotion of strong privacy controls for BC Service Card users is likely to be a key success factor in the residentuptake of these advanced BC Services Card functions. Significant technology advances are required to fully realize these possibilities, especially in the areas of (a) Claims-based identity management (which is within the plans and directions of the government’s IDM initiative), (b) enforcement of interoperability standards through NR Sector applications, and (c) rural/remote electronic connectivity (which remains a persistent challenge in British Columbia, but which is being incrementally addressed through private sector telecommunication advances). In the mean time, the NR Sector plans to conduct business preparedness and process rationalization; and to build a foundation framework for integrated citizen-centred service, through the ‘One Project, One Process’ and ‘One Window’ initiatives.

And this one describes the rest of the picture:
www.csps-efpc.gc.ca...

There you have it, new world order my friends.

The province requires the blessing of the canadian federal government to authorize adding social insurance numbers to their all in one RFID cards. Not to mention replacing canadian money with their government micro-managed all-in-one id card money system. Cash is dead according to these documents. THIS IS SLAVERY IN BOTH CANADA AND THE STATES! North American Union of Tyranny and Micro Management. Enjoy not having a free-will of your own, so many are so dumbed down they are willing to let this happen. This is a nightmare, thanks to idiots we may very well get a hell on earth.

pay attention to the URLS these are actual government websites people. 100% VERIFIED EVIDENCE.

Everyone on this site is like a coward dog. You guys will never revolt. You all obviously don't even care enough. People should start banding together. Why wait? It will only get worse and worse. I say we start setting up meetings. And start planning. If the government can plan so can we. The governments have turned into complete dog sh**.

This radio program is two hours long but it breaks everything down about the order. This is being set up for all future presidents and totally over rides congress. Check it out. Welcome to the New America.

www.youtube.com...



People have start waking up and realizing that the face of whoever is President does not matter. George Bush got away with murder, literally, thousands of our troops and innocent citizens of Iraq. The office of the President and who we vote in is not where the problem lies. The facade that there is really a choice between two different parties is just a game to keep the American people occupied and thinking we have some sort of say in things. I found this out here in Missouri when citizens voted on a couple of bills only to have them over turned by the governor later on. Our government is owned, all of it, by the money men. Do some research on who the money men really are and then your eyes will become open to the real problem we face. No election is gonna fix it. Stop hating Obama and thinking he is where the problem lies. Like I said, that is just a facade to keep us distracted from who really has control of this country, and right now it isn't "we the people".

missed and duped the thread. (Sorry about that).

My thread was closed but you may glean something from the discussion.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hope we can continue the train.

Originally posted by Donahue
Everyone on this site is like a coward dog. You guys will never revolt. You all obviously don't even care enough. People should start banding together.

Point one : To be clear for TPTB and the site monitors - I am not a member of a group that advocates the violent overthrow of the US Government at this time.

That said some people are banding together my friend but doing it in the ways that are not likely to get one arrested before the ball even starts rolling. It's clear you don't know very much about how an insurgency works. am a graduate of the Q course at the JFK Special Warfare Center; not once but twice - once as an enlisted man and once as an officer.

While it is somewhat of an antiquated concept even for Special Forces training the main focus is how to contact, gain the confidence of, train, and finally help a guerrilla force conduct an insurgency. In the strictest sense the US has not run an insurgency in that manner for some time. Perhaps Lybia was the most recent exception but it was not a traditional ground-up mission.

An insurgency is a tricky thing and jumping the gun will (much like a teenage boy - lead only to a quick one sided messing ending).

Originally posted by Donahue
Why wait? It will only get worse and worse. I say we start setting up meetings. And start planning. If the government can plan so can we.

First of all waiting - is not always a strictly passive activity my friend. The first step to having a successful insurgency even according to our own manuals on how to counter one is building networks

Insurgents require supporters, recruits, safe havens, money, supplies, weapons and intelligence on government actions. A robust insurgency can be waged with the support of just a small percentage of a given population. From the remaining majority, insurgents require only compliance (acquiescence or inaction). The position of an active individual within an insurgent network will be determined by the combination
of a number of factors including:

• The level of respect and trust they hold within a community;
• Their reputation established through previous insurgent actions;
• Their degree of motivation, ideological or otherwise;
• Their perceived loyalty to other network members;
• Their level of expertise in a particular field;
• Their access to resources, human or otherwise;
• The degree of risk they are prepared to accept.

Insurgent networks provide life support for the movements they support, but they also entail vulnerability. Command and support networks establish lines between isolated cells whose operational security may otherwise be impeccable. Some key functions may be deliverable only by individuals with dubious loyalty, for example
criminal smugglers enabling logistics supply or personnel movement.

Here is the point I think you are missing by posting a call for insurgency on the internet:

Modern information infrastructure including mobile phones and the internet provide means of rapid communications and networking between insurgents, but are also open to exploitation.

Do not assume because you see no evidence in the media or on the internet that this first step is not occurring.

Please understand that the most secure insurgent networks involve small numbers of active personnel
who are trustworthy and employ tight operational security.

People are organizing both overtly - like the Oathkeepers, Tea Party even OWS, but all the public faces of an insurgency are just ways to funnel money to the non-public and more "action" oriented operators who you will most likely never meet until the insurgency is either won or they are caught, killed or both.

Hope that helps you out - read up on the subject please.

ooops, double post removed per request of Golf66

Do you honestly think that SHTF is going to be "cute"?

I know this will not be a popular post here, but some need to think a little.

Out of all of the posts I read on here most are geared towards "the end".

It is obvious to me myself and I that most around here are still unaware that the TPTB here in the states will not let SHTF happen the way you think it is going to be.........

They will fight for every little bit of power that "they"(congress) holds. It has been prepared this way for as long as we have been a country.........

The people will be rationed food, but you get to stay in your house(not fema camps) type of control......

They know damn well that most of the country is armed, they wont do it forcefully. In the event of a serious breakdown in society they know that the people will want security, and that is what we will get...

Some people need to face the fact of the matter, the government will be in total control for as long as humanly possible.............by any means necessary.

Hollywood has made "the end" all pretty with the doom and gloom.................people are falling for it.

It will be way different....

They will not let go of the power.

That is the way it is.......

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer


So let's be clear about what this EO does not do.

(1) It does not allow the President or the named cabinet secretaries in either emergency or non-emergency conditions to conscript people without (or even with) compensation.

Sec. 502. Consultants. The head of each agency
otherwise delegated functions under this order is delegated the
authority of the President under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act, 50
U.S.C. App. 2160(b), (c), to employ persons of outstanding experience
and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or
organizations. The authority delegated by this section may not be
redelegated.

So let me get this straight this thing has been around since 1931. And most Presidents update it, in this case changing the word FEMA to Homeland Security several dozen times and now you notice it? Granted if you read it, it is not very exciting and since it has been around for 81 years and none of the crazy talk that has gone here has happened maybe you all should find some other horse to ride.

I bet we don't even make it to the election before Obama declares martial law and appoints himself emperor.

And the one big difference of this EO from the others in the past, besides the NDAA, is the fact that we will lose total control of social media/The Internet is they choose. This in itself scares me.

reply to post by jdub297


Talk about trying to push the narrative! You mean the 1950 Defense Production Act....or the multitude of Executive Orders since then have been part of a long drawn out plan to....provide a means to provide loans based on National Defense and not a competitive bid....to allow the Government, in voluntary contract with a private business to place government assets, etc upon and in those private lands and buildings?

I specifically like your cherry picking and piecemeal of the EO.

Your quote, though paraphrased, leads the reader to believe that the action is related to the subject. You said, "authorizing his administration to begin "under both emergency and non-emergency conditions," ... " to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation," and to retain other individuals and organizations with specialized knowledge or abilities, or otherwise important to the adminstration."

Below, I give clearly where those quoted texts you used come from -- which are unrelated sections of the Executive Order.

Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (b) The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.

Sec. 502. Consultants. The head of each agency otherwise delegated functions under this order is delegated the authority of the President under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2160(b), (c), to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section may not be redelegated.

I don't like the President's ideology but I am not going to lie to try and serve my own ideology. This is a gross negligence and flat-out hit piece you produced. But we need to address your other claims.

Section 308, which isn't anything new, gives authority for those Departments delegated, the ability to work with private companies that they have a voluntary contract with.

Here is the whole of the section you quoted, not chopped up to make it sound scary:

Sec. 308. Government-Owned Equipment. The head of each agency engaged in procurement for the national defense is delegated the authority of the President under section 303(e) of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2093(e), to:

(a) procure and install additional equipment, facilities, processes, or improvements to plants, factories, and other industrial facilities owned by the Federal Government and to procure and install Government owned equipment in plants, factories, or other industrial facilities owned by private persons;

The case for "blanket" nationalization was set during the end of President Bush's presidency and has continued under President Obama -- the "too big to fail" doctrine does more damage than this re-authorization of delegation and direction. All of which is based on legislation enacted in 1950.

Jahwohl, mein Fuhrer.
Would you like a holocaust to go with your new super powers?
You want proof dear leader is insane with delusions of grandeur this is it.
He might even surpass the shrub in narcissism and paranoia.

How dare he proclaim such powers as President under the Constitution.
Many of us have read it, apparently he should as well.

Originally posted by MrSpad
So let me get this straight this thing has been around since 1931. And most Presidents update it, in this case changing the word FEMA to Homeland Security several dozen times and now you notice it? Granted if you read it, it is not very exciting and since it has been around for 81 years and none of the crazy talk that has gone here has happened maybe you all should find some other horse to ride.

So you think American Presidents should have such a horse to begin with?
By your logic since we haven't had a nuclear attack on civilians in 66 years we shouldn't worry about that either.
I'm feel better already.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
Jahwohl, mein Fuhrer.
Would you like a holocaust to go with your new super powers?
You want proof dear leader is insane with delusions of grandeur this is it.
He might even surpass the shrub in narcissism and paranoia.

How dare he proclaim such powers as President under the Constitution.
Many of us have read it, apparently he should as well.

All he is... is a mouthpiece for his puppetmasters. They've had him by the balls since day one.

I love how all the Obama supporters use prior existing Orders to justify this one. The expansion of prior Executive Orders that should not have happened does not excuse the action of this President.

This President is all about transparency.
This President is all about "the people".
This President isn't about big Government.

Right? Isn't that why you all voted for him?

Change, change, change.

Expand. Expand. Expand. I guess that is technically change, but when do his voters realize you were duped? I am not saying vote Republican -- I am saying don't vote Obama.

One would have thought that Obama and all of his ideals would have nullified prior Executive Orders -- not expand them to give even more power to himself and his cronies.