Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 8
106
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
Whatever happened to States being autonomous and the Federal Government having less power than the States?

The Federal Government was just supposed to protect us from foreign invasion, protect our ships and other forms of protection.

States rights are disappearing left and right, we are the United States of America.
It's the individual states that make us great not the Federal Government controlling it all.

Hitler, Japan, Russia, China, Germany in WW1, and others have all expressed that they don't want a ground war on American soil because they know they would have to fight State by State, Door to Door.

Individualism built this country and made it great.
We need to stop relying on a central control agency.




posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


Nice try on sugar coating it for us. If they changed it because of DHS, then why didn't W change it? DHS was created by W, so why wouldn't he change the EO. I call BS on this.

If they put a clause in it, they plan to use it. Why word it so if they never intend on using?

I think you need to drink 100 oz of distilled water with a dose of activated charcoal daily for at least a week...this will flush your system of all the Big O Kool-Aid you've digested.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
The sky is falling, the sky is falling!

Please people, wipe the spittle off your computer screen and get a grip.

Remember the Constitution of the United States? It makes it the job of the Congress to make laws, and the job of the President to execute those laws.

Congress passed a law at least as far back as 1950 that the President should make plans for NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS.

I'm going to repeat that for emphasis: CONGRESS told the President to prepare these plans. The President is doing his job executing the laws that Congress has passed and amended several times.

This is NOT something new, or shocking, or out of place, or out of time. It is something that must be done, and if it wasn't being done, then we should be screaming to high heaven about it. And they darn well better keep them up-to-date.

From the text of the document it is replacing Executive Order 12919 of June 3, 1994 (Clinton) and parts of Executive Order 12656 of November 18, 1988 (Reagan). It also mentions that Executive Order 11858 of May 7, 1975 (Ford) and Executive Order 12472 of April 3, 1984 (Reagan) are unaffected.

Have you compared this EO to those EO's to see where they differ? Those probably replaced EO's from Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, and Carter. Notice that the law has been in effect for 62 years and you haven't been forced into concentration camps yet.

It seems to me that several things have happened since then that may have provided lessons that can be used to inform us about what should go into the idea of national defense resources preparedness. What were those things again? Oh, yeah, 9/11, Katrina, The (un)Patriot Act, reorganization of the Government civilian security organisations (Homeland Security), the growth of the Internet as a vital economic asset, peak oil. These things have completely changed the security outlook and expectations for Government response to emergency situations.

Bringing the national emergency procedures up-to-date to reflect new situations and new ideas is a good thing, and is an example of the President doing the job he was elected to do.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


^^^^^^^See Above ^^^^^^

You may need 10 days, good luck!



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 
Say Romney/Santorum/Gingrich wins in November.

You won't have a problem then?



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


Section 502 grants the authority to use unpaid consultants. This means the consultant's expenses can be paid which you couldn't do if you had no authority to do so. It doesn't say anything about conscripting anyone.

Think of the Jeff Goldblum character in the movie Independence Day.

Of course if you believe the movies, the President can pretty much pick up the phone and get any scientist to come to Washington to consult about any emergency just about any time he wants. Was Daniel Jackson 'conscripted' onto SG1? Even if so, he eventually got a paying gig out of it. Even an Industrial Tycoon like Tony "Iron Man" Stark picks up the phone when the President calls.
edit on 18/3/2012 by rnaa because: mark up



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 




So you think American Presidents should have such a horse to begin with?


I do, yes, absolutely.

And so does Congress, that is why they directed the President to prepare the plan.



By your logic since we haven't had a nuclear attack on civilians in 66 years we shouldn't worry about that either.


You have the logic backwards. This plan exists, in part, because even though we haven't had a nuclear attack in 66 years, it is still a very real possibility, and we need to have a plan for dealing with the aftermath.



I'm feel better already.


Excellent. You should be.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa

Remember the Constitution of the United States? It makes it the job of the Congress to make laws, and the job of the President to execute those laws.

Congress passed a law at least as far back as 1950 that the President should make plans for NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS.

I'm going to repeat that for emphasis: CONGRESS told the President to prepare these plans. The President is doing his job executing the laws that Congress has passed and amended several times.

This is NOT something new, or shocking, or out of place, or out of time. It is something that must be done, and if it wasn't being done, then we should be screaming to high heaven about it. And they darn well better keep them up-to-date.


This is true of course - we need contingency plans for many things. I was an Army Officer for many years, we had plans for almost everything. The reason is so that when these things happen we have systems and mechanisms in place to succeed.

However, the difference is when my superiors or (to use the example of congress) suggest a plan or require me to make one I can't just suspend the UCMJ (military law) and declare myself dictator just because it would make my job easier in a crisis for me to become a Warlord or dictator without all those pesky checks and balances.

That is crazy. Pull-up your big boy pants work within the law and solve the problems - without suspending the rights of the people. I guess that would be too hard...?

The fact these orders were ever issued or accepted as reasonable solutions is pure laziness on the part of the legislatures and the suspension of constitutional law to "assist" the President or any leader do his job in a crisis is plain and simple a violation of their oaths.

That's like saying well - it’s always been that way why change it now....say for slavery or something.


Originally posted by rnaa

President doing the job he was elected to do.


Here we agree - each time these are "updated" as you call it they add a little more ambiguity and change a few words here and there that make almost anything into an excuse for them to round us up, take our stuff etc...

They do it on a Friday or late at night and hope it misses the news cycle to avoid too much scrutiny. The congress is complicit in these crimes for they accept it - wonder if that's because their lives (and their families as well) will be deemed "as necessary for continuity of government" and therefore they will benefit a great deal from the food, labor and other things -confiscated for the good of the people.

Incidentally - the "people" will get what is left if the government so chooses and that will come with some serious strings attached.

Say like living in a camp divided from your families and having all your things taken. You know for the good of the people who are safe in their bunkers issuing orders...



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by HereAgainGoneTomorrow
 




Nice try on sugar coating it for us. If they changed it because of DHS, then why didn't W change it?


Bush was not into thinking ahead. Bush's way of dealing with disaster was to hide out until the emergency phase is over, then reward the people who behaved the worst and cause the most havoc.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:06 PM
link   
I haven't heard attitude about the population like this since I saw the movie The Last Emperor by Bertolucci, since I can't say I have ever experienced life in countries other than the USA, which is now getting a political shift to other free nations' chagrin.

It looks like political rehabilitation. Now in the movie, it was Chinese Communists doing the political rehab. And from a westerner's point of view just watching the movie reinactments, since I have no personal historical reference, a new movement of people with a new mission bulldoze the old way of life with blind love for their own futures under some new face. In essence, 20 year olds receive the power of a new generation, and along with that, much inexperience with failure. So it is a rocky beginning with the new movement; uprooting is never comfortable for the ones who have laid down roots. And some uprooters can't tell the difference between the weeds and the good plants, so it all goes down.

I have heard China and Russia undergoing such dramatic change before, and from an outsider's perspective, I was told by my elders that that was the behavior of a poor country, to require such radical change with little motivation for anything and from anything except charismatic leaders. The gold rush of newness moves the crowd, but then as the wave passes, it is the same, if not more difficult, because like burning bridges, you have to build a new one with your own labor force eventually, and the maps for building bridges were lost in the upheaval. Hindsight is 20/20.

This is USA's style of political rehabilitation. Which is another phrase for burning cultural bridges in favor of a fresh new face. After the "baby boomers" start getting alzheimer's expect the adrenaline rush of a new breed of forgetful people.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


Again, I have to ask, you would have no problem with the president having this kind of "authority" even if he were of a GOP type?



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
While there are many items of importance that have been included in this executive order, on the subject of conscripts, please consider the following items of discussion.

Imagine being able to begin a secret "draft", a comprehensive and organized conscription of our sons and daughters or anyone of any age and skill into involuntary military service in support of our national defense and without pay?

If this does not get you going, then add it the fact that Obama could begin building his secret armies anticipated for some near future global world war or for war on the people.

If the truth of such a fact could be kept secret from the public while promoting the involuntary conscription as day laborers needed for national social improvement programs, or disaster relief resources, then other nations would never catch on to the building of a secret army separate from the real military.

To add insult to injury, when the letter of conscription or however the children are drafted are notified, it could become a national secrets issue for parents and or prohibit anyone in the know from any public disclosure, interviews or speaking of such involuntary drafting of all those deemed fit to fight and die for the NWO elites who need secret chess pieces to offer up as the NWO game plays on.

This executive order may do a lot for taking control of resources and assets which include people, but because I know the NWO can be tricky to say the least, imagine getting a government letter stating you are needed to serve your country and you have to keep it all secret, and you then after in-processing are selected to either live as a NWO slave worker until death or be immediately sent to secretly die in some fake military training camp that turns out to be a FEMA death camp.

This is the evil Trixy that concerns me about this recent gesture.

There are many angles to this new act that concern me, but since I have already let you know what that is, I am certain that if you think on in a little bit, that some of you may come to the same cautious concerns that are going through my head as to how they could use and turn involuntary conscription into a systemic process for whole scale mass genocidal elimination of the public.

Add in the crime of refusing to comply as an act where you lose all rights and freedoms or are subjected to immediate execution and or death as a terrorist and this new executive order reveals many ways such an abuse of power could be used for nefarious purposes beyond that of being drafted for true needs in the military services.

This one recent political and executive gesture says things are getting ready to manifest that will either need a secret army to defend the nation or it is a "Trojan Horse" needed to get us to comply for something appearing noble and for the nation, while all the time forcing and mandating that we bring ourselves voluntarily to the NWO death camps disguised as training camps in order to get butchered to help the planet stay NWO green.

Thanks for the thread, but this one recent subject matter truly troubles me.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Love or hate Alex Jones, he summaries the yellow brick road we are on very well.



Anti-protest Feds, now this Executive Order- the table is being set.
Now is the time to scream bloody murder.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Okay, I just read the entire thread. I want to see if I grasp the points of view I have seen.

One point of view is that this is nothing new. Obama is among the long line of other Presidents who had Executive Orders like this. So essentially, our alarm is sounding because this is truly the first time this E.O. has been signed since before the internet was so successful - thus resulting in mass panic being more easily spread. Is that correct?

However, regardless of if this is something new (or not), we should not be so accepting of it. It is still dangerous in that the People should be able to volunteer their time, labor, land, or lives for the military. There should be no government force in the matter. I would find it incredible if the government could even succeed in such a matter considering how volatile the nation is.

Moving on, I am willing to overlook the absence of FEMA in the new E.O. with the addition of Homeland Security. But the absence of the Constitution from the 1988 E.O. to the one in 1994, and the present, is disturbing. Why toss that part out?

Also, as mentioned, Obama does have new laws under his administration that previous presidents did not. The NDAA, the No Trespass Law, the Enemy Expatriation Act. He resigned the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Overall, he is definitely set up to be a Dictator if he so chooses.

In conclusion, regardless of if this is new or not, it should not be embraced. It does say very plainly that the government has the right to take anything, without compensation. No one should dispute that because it has already been pointed out several times here. That along with the absence of the Constitution should make every member of this forum very uneasy.

... in my humble opinion.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Drudgereport posted a link to the Order with this headline:

MARTIAL LAW? OBAMA ISSUES EXECUTIVE ORDER: 'NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS'...

...document creates widespread worry



Now lets see what the rest of the MSM does.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:34 PM
link   
The federal government has primary jurisdiction over states when it comes to -
* - Nuclear
* - Chemical
* - Biological

Absent the above, the state is responsible for disaster prep and response. FEMA cannot just walk into any disaster and take over. The state must declare a disaster at the state level and then petition the President to declare the same area a major federal disaster zone. That is how FEMA is activated for emergencies. FEMA is an umbrella organization representing 22 different federal agencies. The states affected by disaster put together a shopping list of what they need and turn it over to FEMA who then goes and gets the items. It then turns those items back over to the state for distribution.

There is absolutely no need for the Federal government to need this type of authority based solely on a disaster that falls outside the above list. Using Katrina as an example why would the federal government need to seize industry / businesses / etc etc etc for a local / state or regional disaster? There is infrastructure in place outside the disaster zones so the interruption in supplies to the affected region is temporary.

The original law is in place as a result of WWII, where the US economy moved into a full military / war time production priorities machine. There is absolutely no need for the government to take the steps listed in the EO during peace time.

The person who stated Congress is responsible for the legislation and the President is responsible for enforcing it is correct to an extent. In this case we are not looking at a bill signed into law with the President doing the signature direction (I forget the term but its where the President can express how the law should be enforced).

Changing legislation that is already signed into law is the responsibility of Congress, not the President. The use of EO's in this matter creates a substantial injury to the Constitution, specifically separation of powers as well as injury to state sovereignty.

I am all for preparedness and having the needed items in place in hopes of never needing them. However the manner in which the EO is worded is not specific enough and can be interpreted in a manner that could allow for government abuse.

An executive order only applies to the executive branch and all of its agencies. Just because an EO states the DEA can seize houses used in drug deals (hypothetical) does not mean the action is lawful. Private individuals / corporations etc are not part of the executive branch and as such should not be subject to an EO. Again that requires actions on the part of Congress.

Why would the government need the ability to commandeer all sectors of the economy while leaving Congress out of the loop during peace time?
edit on 18-3-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The federal government has primary jurisdiction over states when it comes to -
* - Nuclear
* - Chemical
* - Biological

Absent the above, the state is responsible for disaster prep and response. FEMA cannot just walk into any disaster and take over. The state must declare a disaster at the state level and then petition the President to declare the same area a major federal disaster zone. That is how FEMA is activated for emergencies. FEMA is an umbrella organization representing 22 different federal agencies. The states affected by disaster put together a shopping list of what they need and turn it over to FEMA who then goes and gets the items. It then turns those items back over to the state for distribution.

There is absolutely no need for the Federal government to need this type of authority based solely on a disaster that falls outside the above list. Using Katrina as an example why would the federal government need to seize industry / businesses / etc etc etc for a local / state or regional disaster? There is infrastructure in place outside the disaster zones so the interruption in supplies to the affected region is temporary.

The original law is in place as a result of WWII, where the US economy moved into a full military / war time production priorities machine. There is absolutely no need for the government to take the steps listed in the EO during peace time.

The person who stated Congress is responsible for the legislation and the President is responsible for enforcing it is correct to an extent. In this case we are not looking at a bill signed into law with the President doing the signature direction (I forget the term but its where the President can express how the law should be enforced).

Changing legislation that is already signed into law is the responsibility of Congress, not the President. The use of EO's in this matter creates a substantial injury to the Constitution, specifically separation of powers as well as injury to state sovereignty.

I am all for preparedness and having the needed items in place in hopes of never needing them. However the manner in which the EO is worded is not specific enough and can be interpreted in a manner that could allow for government abuse.

Why would the government need the ability to commandeer all sectors of the economy while leaving Congress out of the loop during peace time?


For those of you who dont seem to get it yet, the answer is simple. Because were about to be #ED.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by koder
 


Not sure if your comment is aimed at me or in general.

I do get it... I dont care much for the EO and I think Obama is heading for a nice round of articles of impeachment.



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by koder
 


I do get it... I dont care much for the EO and I think Obama is heading for a nice round of articles of impeachment.


I hope you are right - but I fear that this will not happen any time soon.

The man is more teflon than Clinton ever was.
edit on 18/3/2012 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 18 2012 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


He cut his teeth in Illinois politics which is one of the most corrupt in the nation. I think its safe to assume he has people to do his bidding without direct contact for deniability.

For instance the lawyer Obama used for the whole birth certificate issue became white house counsel. His replacement was the lady who tried to get people on the bandwagon of Foxnews is not a real network. Who is she married to? The lawyer that became white house counsel.






top topics



 
106
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join