Obama Executive Order: Allows Seizure of Americans' Bank Accounts

page: 5
45
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 





I've given up on politics and am now sort of considering becoming a 2012'er. I figure Niburu is more likely, at this point, than an honest POTUS.


With this, you have undeniably, but i am almost certain not fully unintentionally, exposed the true nature of this unspeakable evil, the real conspiracy. Can you see it now...?


reply to post by PvtHudson
 




But, you ARE voting Obama, right?


No, he'll write-in Nibiru.



Nibiru for President!


edit on 16-10-2012 by talklikeapirat because: The noble metal is my only cure, A fine dust of it, will make me live,




posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1


This guy is Dangerous.


He had no problem resigning the Patriot Act, and enacting NDAA.

It Goes beyond Fascism.




Just think. There are those that want another 4 years, of this........








That pose catches the arrogant essence of this a$$hole.

But .... back to the subject -- when they start to steal from individuals, will we finally start treating them like thieves?

Yaknow .... the one interesting thing about Sharia Law is that they tend to cut the hands off thieves.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Sissel
 


thats the spirit. I'm good so TB for the rest of you.
The gov is going direct deposit on all the entitlements. with nearly half the country getting them, half the country is vulnerable. military pay is direct deposit. many employers are going that route too. you get no choice.
Sweden is just a test case. sooner or later it will be here too. there will be no escape. you are seeing the groundwork for that day.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by AngelofTheSun
 


I see this as good news. Close your back accounts now, and the problem is solved.

I would agree if it wasn't so unrealistic. Also - 'all assets' may be seized and any and all assets owned by a third person who's dubbed to be acting as a 'go between'.
So that means your house, car, computer etc can be sized just not your cash. And if you're using anything that's owned by someone else (on paper) but it's decided that person bought the item for you? It's gone too.

I agree that change starts with us - but change at this late date? I just don't see it happening.

peace



Silo, thanks for making this thread. This is indeed quite frightening, and so many people are willing to re elect the tyrant dictator because they want abortion rights and subsidized health insurance. He is no Capitalist by any means. I wonder if Soros gave him this idea to seize assetts for any old reason, as he did this when he was 14 for the Nazis.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 





And I remind you that your precious Bush created the Patriot Act and removed more of your liberties and freedoms than anyone cares to admit.


But Joe Biden wrote it and takes credit for it, albeit it was called the Omnibus Antiterrorist Act and was originally drafted during the Clinton admin. Who needs those little details though? Oh and Obama continued it and then signed NDAA.

fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com...

"Smirking Joe" wrote the Patriot Act.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   
All the pro Obama people are defending this EO, saying it only applies to people dealing with Syria and Iran. If Bush had enacted this EO would you still be defending it? Just wondering. Be honest to yourselves, I do not need an answer.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
All the pro Obama people are defending this EO, saying it only applies to people dealing with Syria and Iran. If Bush had enacted this EO would you still be defending it? Just wondering. Be honest to yourselves, I do not need an answer.


Ya,

Nail on the head regards how those folks justify the emporors actions. May not apply to you today but trust that tommorrow they'll find reason - just a little shism in language, belief and programming.

Jeesh and his supporters were worried about Bush, bygods I remember constitutional republican members worrying about follow-on administrations treatment of emergency powers and such as they were poo-poo'ed by making mention.

Pot meet Kettle!
edit on 16-10-2012 by Phoenix because: typing



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
All the pro Obama people are defending this EO, saying it only applies to people dealing with Syria and Iran. If Bush had enacted this EO would you still be defending it? Just wondering. Be honest to yourselves, I do not need an answer.


Bush did have EO's and Directives that are very similar in content -

check out Directive 51 that enabled him to merge teh 3 branches of Govt under the executive!

Or 13438 blocking "certain dealings" in regard to Iraq or 13396 in regard of Cote d'Ivoire

These are not quite the same - but they use a lot of the same wording & a lot of the same provisions



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 08:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 


I agree, at this point it doesn't really matter who we put in office, TPTB will still pull the puppet strings of whatever lobbyist funded crook gets in next.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by silo13
[
So what's my point? If you can be labeled a terrorist for such mundane and really idiotic reasons? Then you'd better read up because the below applies to you.


The order says that if an individual is declared by the president, the secretary of state, or the secretary of the treasury to be a “sanctioned person,” he (or she) will be unable to obtain access to his accounts, will be unable to process any loans (or make them), or move them to any other financial institution inside or outside the United States. In other words, his financial resources will have successfully been completely frozen. The EO expands its authority by making him unable to use any third party such as “a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, subgroup or other organization” that might wish to help him or allow him to obtain access to his funds.

newamer ican

And there's not a thing you can do about it. Not. One. Thing. But hey! The good news? Now our money is just as 'safe' as we are.


Calling this "seizure" seems to be a sensationalist nonsense.

Freezing bank accts has been done for ages - IIRC there are still people taking court cases to get hold of Iranian accts seized as a result of the hostage fiasco aren't there??

Freezing accts was allowed under Bush too.

I say it's a BS beatup



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


Four more years of of Obama, or four new years of Mittens.

I see very little difference, in fact they both uphold the same status quo --- if you watched the GOP "debates" you would see that Romney would have passed the NDAA faster than you can say "terrorist".

So "four more years of this" = not specific to one party.



posted on Oct, 16 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by detachedindividual


And I remind you that your precious Bush created the Patriot Act and removed more of your liberties and freedoms than anyone cares to admit.


My Precious Bush?


I never voted for the guy !!!!



Priceless................



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 12:33 AM
link   
NO! What im saying is when the president does it , ITS NOT ILLEGAL!!..........think hes been watching to many movies.

well ive taken out all but 5000 dollars in mine(and thats just to cover auto- payments), i just convert it to metal or toys ^^ . this is great its all leading up to the country eventualy freezing everyones account(you know to start a new "better" sytem of currency/lending) , thats why they are buying up tons of ammo and are worried of people who have stored food and amunition, because they are going to do it in the winter. most the ammo will go to the south/west where its warm, and up here all they have to do is shut off power in a storm and poof theres easy control of those who havent stocked up wood/food/gas ,either that no social security checks any more.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
every time i see more information like this i am a little muddled to where this "erosion of freedoms" are going to end ... in the name of the safety and INTEREST of the public lol - do the everyday americans realise what is happening and where this seems to be heading or like bill hicks said, bar a minority is it a "go back to sleep america" (BHicks) situation? Are people starting to wake up yet ....



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
perhaps if people realise that in being consumers they are funding or at least allowing this behaviour to continue ... we DONT need fancy phones to make us happy, we dont need pretty cars to make us happy, we dont need to stuff our faces with junk to find happiness and everyone knows deep down it isnt real happiness .. u realise this when your bored of your phone on the 5th day, the car starts to look more ordinary and you got a gut full of dough and are using every bit of energy the body can muster to digest it ... happiness can be found in everything around us, the mountain, the sea, the landscape, walks etc - all are free and ssoo overlooked .. don't be scarred of boredom as you will find things to replace it if you open your eyes ;-)
edit on 17-10-2012 by mrjoones because: i thought it is unneccesary to specify brand - it was accidental in original post



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 01:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Hefficide
 




Heff for president!!

No really!



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 03:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by phroziac

Originally posted by AngelofTheSun
reply to post by silo13
 


I see this as good news. Close your back accounts now, and the problem is solved.


If anyone who knows truth still has an account, then you too are part of the problem. Change starts with you.

Some people travel so much on the job that they have to have direct deposit for their paychecks......


Then pull your money out as soon as it's deposited and store it in a safe. That's what I do.
edit on 17-10-2012 by SalientSkivvy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by AngelofTheSun
 
Closing a bank account is not so easy where I happen to live. At least 9 out of 10 employers mandate direct deposits. Getting cash or a paper check is not possible. So what does a person do?



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by silo13
[
So what's my point? If you can be labeled a terrorist for such mundane and really idiotic reasons? Then you'd better read up because the below applies to you.


The order says that if an individual is declared by the president, the secretary of state, or the secretary of the treasury to be a “sanctioned person,” he (or she) will be unable to obtain access to his accounts, will be unable to process any loans (or make them), or move them to any other financial institution inside or outside the United States. In other words, his financial resources will have successfully been completely frozen. The EO expands its authority by making him unable to use any third party such as “a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, subgroup or other organization” that might wish to help him or allow him to obtain access to his funds.

newamer ican

And there's not a thing you can do about it. Not. One. Thing. But hey! The good news? Now our money is just as 'safe' as we are.


Calling this "seizure" seems to be a sensationalist nonsense.

Freezing bank accts has been done for ages - IIRC there are still people taking court cases to get hold of Iranian accts seized as a result of the hostage fiasco aren't there??

Freezing accts was allowed under Bush too.

I say it's a BS beatup


Agreed. People posting this stuff and trying to pass it off as some new thing that Obama has done are simply looking for attention. Freezing of assets and account is nothing new; as you said, it has been done for ages. But many of these people that are seemingly unable to think for themselves are just jumping on a bandwagon without putting any sort of thought into it.



posted on Oct, 17 2012 @ 08:25 AM
link   
It's him being a jerk of jerks agains.

Legalized thievery is at it again.






top topics



 
45
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join