End Times and Current Events
August 16, 2017, 09:59:45 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

Obama ushers in Police State with N.D.A.A.

Shoutbox
July 24, 2017, 11:47:30 am Exodus 3:14-15 says: Yeah, just saw Dr. Johnson talking about it in his last audio study. Haven't listened to it yet, but looking forward to hearing that.
July 23, 2017, 03:58:47 am Christian40 says: i learnt that magnesium is one of the best things for the body and should be like a number one for good health
July 18, 2017, 04:09:19 am Christian40 says: BBC International on youtube has some good videos by Dr Gene Kim
June 21, 2017, 05:50:35 pm Exodus 3:14-15 says: Mark, I don't want to flood your pm box. But just wanted to say I emailed bro Scott about this issue.
April 29, 2017, 05:20:18 am Christian40 says: What i'm thinking a strike on North Korea possible on some occultic date May 1? the aftermath of WW3 will bring in the Antichrist? Yeah Mayhem in May?
April 20, 2017, 04:55:44 pm Mark says:
April 06, 2017, 09:26:29 pm Mark says: TRUMP LAUNCHES 50+ MISSILES AIMED AT SYRIA
March 05, 2017, 01:16:17 am Christian40 says: i hope the rapture is this year i encourage You to keep working for the Lord
March 05, 2017, 01:06:24 am Christian40 says: i'm glad that the summer is over in Australia the heat was making me feel crazy its a good month to be in now
February 19, 2017, 07:55:44 am Exodus 3:14-15 says: The month of February just FLIES BY, doesn't it? It being a < 30 day month helps too! (Unusually warm this month too!)
View Shout History
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Obama ushers in Police State with N.D.A.A.  (Read 3190 times)
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #30 on: February 09, 2012, 03:44:38 am »

and, "There is no fear in love..."
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #31 on: February 27, 2012, 06:23:58 am »

Can Obama's detention plans be stopped?
'Journalists aren't safe. Union leaders aren't safe. Liberty is not safe'


A bipartisan team ranging from former Al Gore consultant Naomi Wolf to Ronald Reagan Justice Department official Bruce Fein have committed to working with state and local governments to make sure the citizen detention plans signed into law by Barack Obama are not enforced.

“Journalists aren’t safe. Union leaders aren’t safe. Activists aren’t safe. Liberty is not safe,” Wolf, an author of half a dozen books, said during a telephone conference call announcing plans.

The focal point of their worry is the National Defense Authorization Act, which includes several sections that provide for the unrestricted detention of even U.S. citizens under some circumstances.

Obama, in signing the law, suggested that such detentions are a possibility but promised not to exercise his power.


Outside opinions on exactly what the law allows vary widely.

Commentator Chuck Baldwin, who himself has been the target of smears by the Department of Homeland Security-related apparatus, explained the law, “for all intents and purposes, completely nullifies a good portion of the Bill of Rights, turns the United States into a war zone, and places U.S. citizens under military rule.”

“When signing the NDAA into law, Obama issued a signing statement that in essence said, ‘I have the power to detain Americans … but I won’t,” Baldwin wrote.

Baldwin was vilified by an anti-terror campaign in Missouri several years ago when authorities there described suspicious characters as those who might have supported him or other third-party candidates during a presidential election.

A state agency, and later the Department of Homeland Security, offered warnings that returning veterans, those who oppose abortion and others who advocate conservative issues could pose a danger to the nation.

Others have pooh-poohed the concerns about the apprehension of Americans. Wayne Bowen, a professor at Southeast Missouri State University not far from where state officials had issued that warning about Baldwin, said, “The NDAA not only does not empower the U.S. military to detain American citizens indefinitely, it specifically prohibits this.

“The NDAA confirms as U.S. law the practice that foreign terrorists … will be held indefinitely by the U.S. military. Indeed, this is a far more generous policy than allowed under international law,” he wrote.

It was the Bill of Rights Defense Committee that arranged the online meeting of experts. Officials there noted that during the first few weeks of 2012, at least six jurisdictions have enacted local resolutions opposing the military detention provisions of the NDAA.

And legislation to nullify the act has been introduced in several state legislatures. Just last week a Virginia bill passed the House of Delegates 96-4.

“Concerns about NDAA detention provisions transcend political party, ideology, and geography, and representatives in these diverse jurisdictions have stood up to resist an ongoing bipartisan assault on constitutional rights by federal officials,” the committee announced. “While a debate about the scope of the NDAA’s potential abuses continues to distract congressional policymakers, who voted without realizing the law’s terrifying implications, their counterparts in state and local governments are proving more conscientious, proactively acting on their oaths of office to defend the Constitution.”

Scheduled also to speak were Missouri State Rep. Paul Curtman, a Republican; North Carolina state Sen. Ellie Kinnaird, a Democrat; Washington state Rep. Matt Shea, a Republican; Northampton, Mass., city councilor Bill Dwitght, a Democrat; and El Paso, Colo., county commissioners Peggy Littleton, a Republican.

The Bill of Rights Defense Committee is working with the Tenth Amendment Center as well as Demand Progress on the project.

The Defense Committee works to defend the rule of law and rights and liberties, while the Tenth Amendment Center is a national think tank that works to preserve and protect the principles of strictly limited government. Demand Progress promotes civil rights, civil liberties and progressive government reform.

It was the Tenth Amendment Center that earlier started monitoring states and local governments rejecting Obama’s detention plan.

It reported on the Virginia bill, which would “prevent any agency, political subdivision, employee, or member of the military of Virginia from assisting an agency of the armed forces of the United States in the conduct of the investigation, prosecution, or detention of a citizen in violation of the United States Constitution, the Constitution of Virginia, or any Virginia law or regulation.”

Shortly after HB1160 reached a vote in Virginia, the Arizona Senate Border Security, Federalism and States Sovereignty Committee approved on a 6-1 vote SB1182, which brings the bill to the verge of a full vote in the Senate.

The Arizona plan “prohibits this state and agencies of this state from participating in the implementation of Sections 1021 and 1022 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012 and classifies the act of attempting to enforce or enforcing these sections as a class 1 misdemeanor.”

WND reported earlier when Rep. Daniel P. Gordon Jr. drafted a resolution in the Rhode Island legislature to express opposition to the sections of the NDAA “that suspend habeas corpus and civil liberties.”

The Tenth Amendment Center reported “lawmakers in Maryland, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Washington” also are considering laws or resolutions pushing back against NDAA detention plans.

“Resistance to indefinite detention without due process is not limited to states,” the organization reported. “Six local governments have passed resolutions condemning sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA.”

The report said the town council of Macomb, N.Y., unanimously adopted such a statement, and in Fairfax, Calif., officials approved a resolution on a 4-1 vote. New Shoreham, R.I., also adopted a resolution, as have three local governments in Colorado.

“Most Americans recognize that the federal government rarely, if ever, relinquishes power once it grasps it. So state and local governments are taking James Madison’s word to heart and interposing on behalf of their citizens,” said Mike Maharrey, the communications director for the center.

He noted that there are individuals who argue the sections really don’t authorize detentions, but Maharrey said those assurances don’t provide much comfort.

“The very fact that so many legal experts come up with so many diverse readings of those NDAA sections should give us all pause,” he said. “The language is vague and undefined. Are we really going to trust the judgment and good intentions of Pres. Obama or whichever Republican sits in the White House to protect us?”

Fein said on the conference call that fears about the NDAA detention provisions are truly alarming.

“It authorizes the president to employ the military to show up on any doorstep, and based on secret facts, say you’re connected some way with some kind of associated power of al-Qaida. … You can go to Guantanamo Bay and rot,” he said.

He said Americans could expect to see Predator drones flying overhead.

An official for the Tenth Amendment Center say the liberty threat is real.

“You might consider the use of the word kidnapping to be mere hyperbole,” Blake Philippi said, “But when you remove due process, arrest and detention is nothing more than government kidnapping.”

Shea said, “Where something is very clearly unconstitutional … is it our duty not to comply.”

He said the plan he has proposed in Washington, HB 2759, would make it “so that that bill regarding unlawful detention … would not be lawful in the state of Washington.”

He said the federal legislation violates 11 provisions of the U.S. Constitution.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/dems-gop-work-together-to-stop-detention-plans/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #32 on: March 01, 2012, 04:02:16 pm »

FEMA Preparing “National Responder Support Camps” Eerily Similar to KBR’s “National Quick Response Team”


On February 24, 2012 the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) posted the final draft solicitation for what they are calling a National Responder Support Camp (NRSC).

The announcement was posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website and boasts a great deal of similarity to a solicitation put out by KBR, Inc. on November 16, 2011.

While neither one of these solicitations are sinister when considered in isolation – as horrific natural disasters are an unfortunate fact of life – when one thinks about the historical precedents at work and the possibilities for how these camps could be used, it gets a little less hunky-dory.

Furthermore, we must consider the fact that the solicitation actually puts some harsh restrictions on what the contractors are allowed to say about the contract and the fact that the potential scenarios outlined in the solicitation both put the camps on military bases.

Let us not forget about the plans for mass-migration or the previous contracts from Homeland Security (the FEMA parent agency) for detention centers in the United States, which just happen to also have been given to KBR.

This is regularly done under the guise of creating detention centers for “temporary immigration” and other possibilities (either real or contrived) which could result in a national emergency.

Under section C.2.1 we read, “All press releases or announcements about agency programs, projects, and contract awards must be cleared by the Program Office as authorized by the CO, working in conjunction with the Office of External Affairs.

Under no circumstances shall the Contractor, or anyone acting on behalf of the Contractor, refer to the supplies, services, or equipment furnished pursuant to the provisions of this contract in any publicity news release or commercial advertising, or communicates with any media without first obtaining explicit written consent to do so from the Program Office and the CO.”

The second paragraph under this section seems much more reasonable, given that it deals with making sure companies do not give the impression in commercial advertisements that their products or services are “endorsed or preferred by the Federal Government or [are] considered by the Government to be superior to other products or services.”

The problem I see with the first paragraph is the restriction on even referring to the “the supplies, services, or equipment furnished pursuant to the provisions of this contract” even if it was just communicated with the media.

Why the secrecy if this is just a benevolent project to house people in response to a natural disaster? Wouldn’t they encourage people going out and publicizing these wonderful projects FEMA is engaged in given their horrific track record when it comes to responding to natural disasters?

KBR’s document (which was incidentally released immediately after S.1867, the final Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, was introduced) was dealing with the establishment of what they called National Quick Response Teams for their current and future contracts with FEMA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

It appears that KBR’s Quick Response Teams are not enough for FEMA when it comes to their projections of massive numbers of “displaced citizens,” thus the need for additional contracts.

Like the KBR solicitation, FEMA’s solicitation focuses on making Responder Support Centers (RSCs) operation in an extremely short period of time.

Section C.2.0 of the solicitation says, “The Contractor shall be capable of establishing and maintaining a RSC within disaster-impacted areas within 72 hours of task order award.”

It is specified that the capacity of the RSC will be no less than 301 and no more than 2,000 RSC occupants, although it is said that the contractor should have early phasing capabilities.

This means that if requested, the contractor will have to provide partial support for the RSC which they classify as, “sleeping, feeding, i.e. commercial ready to eat meals, medical and sanitation” within 36 hours for just 100 people, likely staff who are preparing the camp.

The contractor has to provide the staff to set-up, operate and manage the camp and “have sufficient equipment readily available for rapid deployment as well as preventive maintenance programs to ensure optimum equipment readiness levels at all times.”

However, one thing it appears that the contractor is not held responsible for is security. Indeed in section C.2.2 it is specifically said that “RSC Security will be provided by the Government” and “The Government reserves the right to provide any other equipment or services to support Camp operations.”

There is also a focus on fencing and barricades “to ensure the health and safety of occupants” which still meet “any applicable FEMA security requirements as defined by the Joint Field Office (JFO) Security Officer.”

It appears that these camps are not meant to be used for a short period of time as within three days after the setup of the camp it is required that the contractor provide a “Morale Welfare and Recreation (MWR)” facility with television, internet access, charging stations, reading materials and games, along with refrigerators and microwaves.

However, the MWR is only required for 10% of the total occupancy, which makes me think it might only be provided for workers.

The security situation in these camps is obviously quite tight with photo identification cards to be mandatory to access lodging, RSC facilities, meals and laundry services.

It is also written on page 80 of the PDF that a fence or barricade 6 feet tall must be provided to surround the Responder Support Camp.

There are Occupant Identification Cards which “will be clearly distinctive from other categories of identification cards” and “Non-Occupant Identification cards will also be provided to authorized, non-occupant RSC visitors and will allow these authorized visitors access to the RSC dining and laundry on a self-pay for services basis.”

Employees of the contractor and any sub-contractors are required to “have identifiable markings on their outer clothing displayed at all times. Contractor Identification badges shall display their name and photograph identifying they are employees of the Contractor which shall be visible at all times.

These ID badges will be clearly distinctive from other categories of ID badges stating “Under Contract to FEMA”. FEMA Security will have a badge machine at the RSC to issue badges to contractor personnel that have background checks and fingerprints completed on file.”

Interestingly, contractor workers are even required to have badges when they are performing work on the camp prior to the camp site even being fully accepted.

Contractors are also required to send two individuals to participate in a FEMA-sponsored training conference every year to be no longer than four days.

The contracts are a year long and may continue up to five years total if all of the four one-year options are exercised by FEMA.

All of this is to be performed in the Continental United States (CONUS) and the Task Orders themselves will specifically designate the locations where services will be provided by contractors.

There are some guides for wage determination rates included with the information. These include rates for “Montgomery, Alabama to be Used for Scenario I” and for “Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio to be Used for Scenario II.”

Attachments two and three both outline what Scenario I and II consist of with Scenario I being located on the FEMA leased portion of Craig Field (by Craig Air Force Base) and Scenario II in Wright Patterson Air Force Base, OH, Area B.

They even provide some crude templates for Responder Support Camp ID cards including a red temporary ID card and a blue occupant ID card for the actual RSC occupants.

As I said before, if this was evaluated on its own, it would not seem at all suspicious or sinister.

However, when one considers the fact that the NDAA – which authorizes the indefinite detention of American citizens without charge or trial, among other horrors – comes into effect in March and there is constant fear mongering surrounding a terrorist attack on the United States (see here, here and here for a sliver of the evidence), a different picture emerges.

We must also consider the great deal of economic trouble which has befallen many Americans and the nationwide discontent with how we are being treated as evidenced by movements like the Occupy movement and others.

If such widespread civil unrest was to erupt again on a larger scale or under different conditions, there very well might be an even harsher reaction from the government, especially considering that the Department of Defense actually once officially considered protesting a low-level act of terrorism.

Yet we must also consider the fact that this appears to actually be nothing new, and is indeed a kind of renewal, at least that is the impression one gets from FEMA’s response to questions as seen in this document.

Back in December of last year I asked, “With all of the pieces in place, when will the hammer drop?”

Thankfully, the hammer hasn’t dropped since then but unfortunately the pieces have only continued to be added to and reinforced.

As always, I hope that the hammer will never drop and I’ll look like an idiot for even bringing these things up. There is truly nothing I wish more than to be proven wrong and shown that our government is not the hopelessly corrupt and criminal organization that they show themselves to be on a daily basis.



REST: http://theintelhub.com/2012/02/28/fema-preparing-national-responder-support-camps-eerily-similar-to-kbrs-national-quick-response-team/
« Last Edit: March 01, 2012, 04:04:23 pm by Mark » Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: March 17, 2012, 08:38:37 pm »

What does everyone here make of this?

Obama Executive Order: Peacetime Martial Law!
http://beforeitsnews.com/story/1906/406/Obama_Executive_Order%3a_Peacetime_Martial_Law.html

This Executive Order was posted on the WhiteHouse.gov  web site on Friday, March 16, 2012, under the name National Defense Resources Preparedness. In a nutshell, it's the blueprint for Peacetime Martial Law and it gives the president the power to take just about anything deemed necessary for "National Defense", whatever they decide that is.    It's peacetime, because as the title of the order says, it's for "Preparedness".  A copy of the entire order follows the end of this story.


Specifically, it orders:

"to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1)  the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2)  the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3)  the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4)  the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5)  the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6)  the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

About all I can say is "Have a nice day!"

whitehouse link
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #34 on: March 18, 2012, 04:08:12 pm »

President Obama Signs Executive Order Giving Government Total Control Over ALL US Resources During Emergency

On March 16th, President Obama signed a new Executive Order which expands upon a prior order issued in 1950 for Disaster Preparedness, and gives the office of the President complete control over all the resources in the United States in times of war or emergency. The National Defense Resources Preparedness order gives the Executive Branch the power to control and allocate energy, production, transportation, food, and even water resources by decree under the auspices of national defense and national security.  The order is not limited to wartime implementation, as one of the order's functions includes the command and control of resources in peacetime determinations. "Section 101.  Purpose.  This order delegates authorities and addresses national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (the "Act"). (b)  assess on an ongoing basis the capability of the domestic industrial and technological base to satisfy requirements in peacetime and times of national emergency, specifically evaluating the availability of the most critical resource and production sources, including subcontractors and suppliers, materials, skilled labor, and professional and technical personnel...

http://www.examiner.com/finance-examiner-in-national/president-obama-signs-executive-order-allowing-for-control-over-all-us-resources

Quote
The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release March 16, 2012
Executive Order -- National Defense Resources Preparedness
EXECUTIVE ORDER

NATIONAL DEFENSE RESOURCES PREPAREDNESS
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/03/16/executive-order-national-defense-resources-preparedness

“National Defense Resources Preparedness” executive order: Power grab or mere update?
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/03/18/national-defense-resources-preparedness-executive-order-power-grab-or-update/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: March 18, 2012, 09:42:54 pm »

http://theextinctionprotocol.wordpress.com/2012/03/19/is-america-preparing-for-an-unprecedented-crisis-reminiscent-of-wwii/

Is America preparing for an unprecedented crisis reminiscent of WWII?

March 19, 2012 – WASHINGTON – The following excerpt is from an Executive Order signed by U.S. President Obama on March 16, 2012. The Executive Order coordinates and mobilizes all national resources, technological and industrial, under Federal auspicies in the event of a national emergency. This sounds like a major preparatory step before a crisis eerily reminiscent of WWII. An excerpt from the document reads: “The United States must have an industrial and technological base capable of meeting national defense requirements and capable of contributing to the technological superiority of its national defense equipment in peacetime and in times of national emergency. The domestic industrial and technological base is the foundation for national defense preparedness. The authorities provided in the Act shall be used to strengthen this base and to ensure it is capable of responding to the national defense needs of the United States. Each resource department shall act, as necessary and appropriate, upon requests for special priorities assistance, as defined by section 801(l) of this order, in a time frame consistent with the urgency of the need at hand. This is to help foster cooperation between the defense and commercial sectors for research and development and for acquisition of materials, services, components, and equipment to enhance industrial base efficiency and responsivenessIn situations where there are competing program requirements for limited resources, the resource department shall consult with the Secretary who made the required determination under section 202 of this order. Such Secretary shall coordinate with and identify for the resource department which program requirements to prioritize on the basis of operational urgency. In situations involving more than one Secretary making such a required determination under section 202 of this order, the Secretaries shall coordinate with and identify for the resource department which program requirements should receive priority on the basis of operational urgency.” –The White House
Report Spam   Logged
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2012, 12:33:48 pm »

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-executive-order-paves-the-way-for-nationalization-of-economy.html

Obama Executive Order Paves the Way for Nationalization of Economy

3/19/12

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
 Prison Planet.com
 Monday, March 19, 2012
 
The Obama administration’s move to update an executive order to allow the government to seize control of virtually every aspect of society in both emergency and non-emergency situations lays the groundwork for the future nationalization of the U.S. economy.
 
Entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” Obama signed the executive order late Friday afternoon. Such timing is normally a deliberate ploy to prevent a controversial issue from being picked up by the news cycle. Recall that Obama signed the highly contentious National Defense Authorization Act on New Year’s Eve.

more
Report Spam   Logged
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3828


View Profile
« Reply #37 on: March 21, 2012, 04:20:39 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: March 21, 2012, 09:11:44 pm »

http://news.yahoo.com/could-peacetime-martial-law-near-221900976.html

Could Peacetime Martial Law Be Near?
By L.L. Woodard

PostsWebsiteBy L.L. Woodard | Yahoo! Contributor Network – Tue, Mar 20, 2012

COMMENTARY | President Barack Obama signed an executive order Friday titled "National Defense Resources Preparedness." The news media is unsure of the precise meaning of the information included in the order and average citizens are left to figure out what it means in general. As a longtime supporter of the president, I've been reluctant to jump to conclusions, but the general tide of recent legislation and this order give me reason for concern about the intentions of this administration.

The order lists items such as the power of the executive departments of the U.S. federal government and its agencies to "identify requirements for the full spectrum of emergencies, including essential military and civilian demand." This same section, labeled "General Functions," also enumerates these departments and agencies might ensure availability of domestic resources and industries to secure national defense. Do these and other line items signal that America is on the verge of another war -- and will that war be with another nation or on U.S. citizens?

The first step in the direction of applying military law to private citizens occurred Dec. 31, when the president signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. This legislation sounded the initial alarm to me because although its main purpose is for providing necessary funding of the military, it included provisions that allowed the indefinite detention without charge of private citizens.

The next signal of alarm came on March 8, when the president signed into law H.R. 347, the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. The law restricts protests at political functions among other things. This is offensive since the U.S. was founded upon protest and revolution.

Perhaps each law taken individually wouldn't be a cause for concern, but the totality of these three suggests the federal government is envisioning more control over the civilian population than it has ever enjoyed. The president's order on Friday suggests to some the executive branch might be ready to enact martial law in peacetime.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #39 on: March 29, 2012, 07:55:19 pm »

Obama’s National Preparedness order creates a ‘martial law matrix,’ author says

A little-noticed executive order issued earlier this month would allow the federal government to seize all national resources (including food), draft civilians into the military or forced “labor,” regulate all communications, and ration health care to “promote the national defense.” Congress may be briefed on the government’s actions but lacks any power to alter them. This completes a “martial law matrix” that hands all national resources to Washington, a prominent author told LifeSiteNews.com.

Barack Obama issued the executive order, “National Defense Resources Preparedness,” on March 16.

Jim Garrison of The Huffington Post summarized its provisions:
President Barack Obama

• The Secretary of Defense has power over all water resources;
• The Secretary of Commerce has power over all material services and facilities, including construction materials;
• The Secretary of Transportation has power over all forms of civilian transportation;
• The Secretary of Agriculture has power over food resources and facilities, livestock plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment;
• The Secretary of Health and Human Services has power over all health resources;
• The Secretary of Energy has power over all forms of energy.

Each power includes all its component parts. For example, “Civil transportation includes movement of persons and property by all modes of transportation in interstate, intrastate, or foreign commerce within the United States, its territories and possessions, and the District of Columbia, and related public storage and warehousing, ports, services, equipment and facilities.” Similarly “Food resource” means all commodities and products, (simple, mixed, or compound), or complements to such commodities or products, that are capable of being ingested by either human beings or animals.”

“These are entirely illegitimate powers from a Constitutional perspective,” author and editor William Norman Grigg told LifeSiteNews.com. “There is not even a hint or a whisper or legitimacy here.”

“You’re dealing with someone who clearly doesn’t see the presidency as susceptible to any limits whatsoever, either legal or constitutional,” he said.

Grigg, who is managing editor of Republic Magazine, said, “What is especially troubling is that he shows no compunction at all about exercising all of the powers that have been claimed by his predecessors and adding to that corpus of extra-constitutional presidential powers.”

These sweeping new powers may be invoked “in peacetime and in times of national emergency,” whenever they are “deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense.” The president would determine when those circumstances apply.

Congress would be briefed on the agencies’ actions – annually – but could not alter policy.

The president’s defenders, including some Republicans, say the executive order only updates the Defense Production Act of 1950 and of Bill Clinton’s Executive Order 12919, written in 1994. The chief difference is the new order transfers functions from FEMA to the Department of Homeland Security.

Ed Morrissey of Hot Air wrote, “Barack Obama may be arrogant, and the timing of this release might have looked a little strange, but this is really nothing to worry about at all.”

But Grigg says the change from a wartime to peacetime emergency alone is troubling.“When you’re dealing with semantic engineering that is that finely tuned, that ooks very much like evidence of bad intent,” he said. “They have dispensed with the idea that there needs to be a discrete event that would trigger a national emergency is significant.”

The reliance on previous executive orders also troubles Grigg. “Obama has…spoken about the supposed virtues of the domestic regimentation of the entire civilian population along military lines,” he said. “That goes right back to Bernard Baruch,” chairman of the National War Industries Board under President Woodrow Wilson during World War I. He wrote in 1918, “We are living today in a highly organized state of socialism. The state is all; the individual is of importance only as he contributes to the welfare of the state.”

“That is an aspiration that has been alive in the bosom of pretty much every collectivist since time immemorial,” Grigg told LifeSiteNews.com.

Some who support the order are troubled by its reliance on a 62-year-old law. Doug Mataconis, who believes the executive order is nothing to worry about, wrote, “The fact that the President of the United States is still exercising authority granted during the Korean War and the height of the Cold War is yet another reflection of how power, once assumed by the Imperial Presidency, is never surrendered.”

The president’s defenders in both parties say the order is merely a worst case scenario in the event of a nuclear strike or catastrophic disaster that would disable the normal flow of daily life. This would let the federal government maintain order.

“There really is no strategic or tactical case to be made for executive dictatorship as an emergency management strategy,” Grigg said. “The problem here is the assumption that the best way to deal with that kind of tragedy is to centralize power and thereby give one convenient target to our enemies. In a strategic sense, that makes no sense.”

On the contrary, widely defusing and localizing power would make it more difficult for an enemy to completely disrupt national life.

“I think there really ought to be an element of humility being displayed by the same govt that conveyed the benefit of toxic FEMA trailers to the survivors of Hurricane Katrina,” he said.

However, the greatest loss is the loss of liberty, they say. Chuck Norris wrote, “enacting this martial law even during a time of peace is an unprecedented and out-of-control abuse of executive power…Our Founding Fathers never would have allowed it, and we shouldn’t, either.”

Some say that is doubly true under the current president. “By his actions he’s displayed a disposition that can be described as dictatorial,” Grigg told LifeSiteNews.com. “It’s a case of the man and the moment having met. They created this institutional architecture of executive dictatorship. Now the dictator is taking residence therein.”

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/obamas-national-preparedness-order-creates-a-martial-law-matrix-author-says
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #40 on: April 08, 2012, 07:45:34 am »

Judge Napolitano: I Think the President Is Dangerously Close to Totalitarianism

Don’t hold back, Judge. FOX News contributor Judge Napolitano told Neil Cavuto today, “I think the president is dangerously close to totalitarianism. A few months ago he was saying the Congress doesn’t count. The Congress doesn’t mean anything. I am going to rule by decree and by administrative regulation. Now he’s basically saying the Supreme Court doesn’t count. It doesn’t matter what they think. They can’t review our legislation. That would leave just him as the only branch of government standing.”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/04/judge-napolitano-i-think-the-president-is-dangerously-close-to-totalitarianism-video/


Former White House Speechwriter Suggests Military Coup Oust Obama

Former White House speechwriter John L. Perry has courted controversy by suggesting that the U.S. Military, upholding their oath to defend the Constitution against domestic enemies, could stage a bloodless coup to oust President Obama. In an article originally posted on the Newsmax website, Perry wrote, “There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.” Despite the fact that Perry was not explicitly advocating such a coup, Newsmax later removed the article to ensure it “was not misinterpreted”. The article outlines how military officers, outraged at Obama’s “trampling” on the Constitution, nationalization of American institutions, rising deficits, unemployment and taxes, could peaceably seize power from the “radical-left commissars” of the Obama administration.
http://thebladereport.com/2012/03/25/former-white-house-speechwriter-suggests-military-coup-could-oust-obama/


Could Obama Secretly Order Pelican Brief Assassination Of Supreme Court Justices?

One of the best films from 1993 was a crime thriller titled The Pelican Brief, starring Julia Roberts and Denzel Washington. The movie opens up with the assassination of two Justices of the United States Supreme Court. It turns out that an oil tycoon, who happened to be a friend of the US president, had them assassinated because they opposed the tycoon’s efforts to drill for oil in a Louisiana marshland that happened to be the habitat of a rare species of pelican. The deaths of the two Supremes would allow the president to appoint two new Justices that were more favorable to the oil tycoon’s plans. If you’ve never seen the movie, I highly recommend it. Would Obama and those supporting him like Bill Ayers and George Soros stoop to such measures to protect his flagship piece of legislation? Obama has already openly defied the US Constitution and numerous federal laws, so why would the simple act of murder be out of the question?
http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/could-the-pelican-brief-become-reality-by-the-assassination-of-supreme-court-justices-to-save-obamacare/10863
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: April 08, 2012, 08:00:35 am »

^^

1) There's been how many assassination rumors on Obama now over his 3+ years in office? I don't know what's going on behind closed doors, but it's rather obvious that as we're the end times are really on the cusp now, Satan's kingdom is really, really on the divide now. Yeah, it's always been, but nonetheless the divide is probably at its worst right now. Not that I endorse Lindsey Williams, but his "sources" have said the "elite" is unhappy with Obama b/c Obama has "overstepped his boundaries"(para) against them.

2) I was living in New Orleans when "The Pelican Brief" was filmed in 1993. One of the (conservative)USSC justices that were assasinated in the movie was a homosexual.(he was assasinated at a gay p0rn theater) How it (somewhat)relates to the current USSC is that from what I've read, John Roberts(and I think a couple of other justices) are homosexuals as well. As for the USSC itself, it's rigged, just like with the rest of Capitol Hill. Recently, the "conservative" leaning court favored strip-searching even for minor crimes. Yes, the "swing voter" Kennedy favored it too. So it's not like anyone should put their trust in this court in any way.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #42 on: April 08, 2012, 07:33:40 pm »

OBAMA IMPOSES MARTIAL LAW

By Attorney Jonathan Emord
Author of "The Rise of Tyranny" and
"Global Censorship of Health Information" and
"Restore The Republic"
April 2, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

On March 16, President Obama without public notice unilaterally assumed dictatorial power over the entire country, issuing an Executive Order (“Executive Order—National Defense Resources Preparedness”) that would permit him in times of peace or war, in his sole discretion, to control all of the nation’s industry and resources for “purposes of national defense.”

Under Article I, Section 9, Clause 2, Congress has the exclusive power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus (the right of one to be released by a court from military or police custody) in “cases of rebellion or invasion” when “the public safety may require it.” Although not synonymous with martial law, which the Constitution never mentions by name, it is nevertheless clear that the Founding Fathers did not intend the President either to declare a state of war or to act independent of Congress to suspend the writ. Moreover, there is no executive power to impose blanket regulations over the economy independent of Congress, even in times of war. In this Executive Order, President Obama assumes that extraordinary power beyond the limits of the Constitution. Indeed, so sweeping are the areas of control, that there is no substantive difference between the powers he has assumed and those of a dictator.

Under the March 16 Executive Order, the President invokes a 1950 Act of Congress, the Defense Production Act, as a basis for asserting extraordinary control over the entire economy in service to the national defense needs of the United States. In effect, President Obama has unilaterally expanded the authority of Commander-in-Chief to include not only command of the military but also to command all private parties and resources in support of the military and objectives of his administration.

The powers assumed are vast, comparable to those exercised by dictators. Part II of the Order includes the following section, which delegates to the various secretaries of the administration the power to supplant private contracts with federal controls over every part of the economy.

    Sec. 201. Priorities and Allocations Authorities. (a) The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act . . . to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

    (1) the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;
    (2) the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;
    (3) the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;
    (4) the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;
    (5) the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and
    (6) the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

The Executive Order expressly does not limit the use of these extraordinary powers to times of war or the theater of war but, rather, they can be used for “purposes of national defense,” entirely in the discretion of the President. The powers are delegated to the cabinet secretaries. There is no provision for prior authorization from Congress, so the President assumes that he may act unilaterally.

The National Defense Authorization Act declared the entire country a “battlefield” in the war on terror and granted the President the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus, permit military arrest and detention without notice of charges or any right of due process any American accused of providing support to terrorists. The President’s Executive Order grossly expands the constitutional violations in the NDAA by replacing the Constitution with a presumed power of the President to govern the entire economy. In the history of the United States, there has never been a more profound and grave moment of the exercise of imperial executive power than this. This President who would be Emperor, now is.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Emord/jonathan239.htm
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #43 on: April 09, 2012, 12:01:54 pm »

McGrath: “The Control Grid is Being Put Into Place to Handle What They Know Is Coming.”
By Mac Slavo
SHTFPlan.com

Charlie McGrath of Wide Awake News offers an insightful and succint breakdown of what’s really going on behind the scenes of government and finance, and says that the people have had enough. The push-back has been growing for quite some time, starting first with Tea Party protests in 2009 and then with widespread Occupy protests in 2011.

With the system already in the midst of collapse and slowly destabilizing, many have not yet realized what’s happening.

Excerpted from Charlie McGrath (video follows excerpt):

You’re going to see what’s happening in the rest of the world come to this country. It Is Inevitable. It Is Going To Happen.

Do you think for one second Department of Homeland Security is ordering 450 [million] man shredder rounds so that they can sit back and plink at gofers on the weekend? Absolutely not.

Do you think this one internet bill after another, this trying to clamp down on the sharing and free ideas on the internet because it’s not good for people? No. The control grid is being put into place to handle what they know is coming. They already know this is coming. A kinder gentler government is on its way out the door. Par tyranny is what’s on the menu.



Two days ago we have an elderly pharmacist go before parliament [in Greece], put a gun to his head, and blow his head off. In his suicide note he writes “I would rather die than rummage through the garbage. This is sparking a new onslaught of riots inside of Greece.

But it’s not going to stop with Greece. Just like the Greek debt deal did not fix the problem.

The problem is people are being abused and thrown away like trash; they’re being treated like serfs. At some point they’re going to push back.

So, isn’t it fortunate that we have all these pieces of legislation waiting in the wings? Isn’t it fortunate for the government that we have the security industrial complex squarely aiming 450 million forty caliber human shredder rounds at the people that might want to push back.



An unbiased look at the evidence suggests that the financial, economic and political systems of the world are in the process of destabilizing, and the only thing world leaders have been able to do is extend the deadline for the inevitable breaking point.

Despite throwing trillions of dollars and tens of thousands of pages of government regulations at the problem, nothing has been resolved.

In fact, the American economy, our quality of life, our government’s respect for the rule of law, and our liberty as outlined by our founding documents are worse off today than at any time in our nation’s history. We are, by all accounts, in the midst of a massive paradigm shift that promises to fundamentally alter the American way of life – and not for the better.

While the majority of Americans are oblivious to the warning signs around them, recent actions taken by our government and the governments of other industrialized nations suggest The Powers That Be know very well where we’re head. They are and have been taking steps for quite some time to prepare for what is coming next.

What is the purpose of the National Defense Authorization act unless they plan on indefinitely detaining American citizens without charge or trial?
Why does the President of the United States (and his proxies) have the ability order the assassination or execution of an American citizen, again without trial, charge or reason?
For what reason does President Obama’s ‘Doomsday’ executive order (National Defense Resources Preparedness) allow the seizure of food, land, energy resources and skilled laborers?
Why is the Pentagon actively war-gaming economic collapse scenarios and the civil unrest that would follow such an event?
With roughly 1 million active law enforcement officers in the United States, why is the US military training tens of thousands of personnel for domestic urban response, riot control and mass detentions?
For what purpose do we require some 30,000 armed surveillance drones over American cities?
Why has the Department of Homeland Security acquired in excess of 140 million emergency rations, over 450 million rounds of ammunition, bullet resistant checkpoint booths, and expedited the regionalization of supplies.
When it hits the fan, and things go critical, the recent actions of our government demonstrate that it is only capable of responding in one way – through brute force and tyranny.

Everything they have done in recent years with respect to liberty-restricting legislation, the militarization of our police forces and the expansion of the security industrial complex has been to prepare for the inevitable.

They already know it’s coming. They’re getting ready for it. You might want to consider doing the same.

LOTS O' LINKS: http://www.blacklistednews.com/McGrath:_%e2%80%9cThe_Control_Grid_is_Being_Put_Into_Place_to_Handle_What_They_Know_Is_Coming.%e2%80%9d/18847/0/38/38/Y/M.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #44 on: April 09, 2012, 04:11:06 pm »

Quote
They already know it’s coming. They’re getting ready for it. You might want to consider doing the same.

Already way ahead of you. I got Jesus!
Report Spam   Logged
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #45 on: May 07, 2012, 10:32:09 pm »

Hey Kilika, don't mean to call you out here again, but b/c you were in the Navy, are you familiar with NCIS? I thought this was nothing more than fiction when this tv show has had a long successful run(#1 in the ratings for awhile now). But apparently, they do exist Huh

Propaganda Selling the NDAA though TV SHow
!

Do not be fooled by a prepackaged script given to actors selling the NDAA as reasonable for terrorist only. As you see the suspect is a white American and not a Muslim accused of blo0wing up a navy ship.What they do not tell you if the NDAA will be used for pre-crime. Regardless if a person is guilty or innocent. No person shall be deprived life, liberty or property without due process of law. Do not been fooled by actors reading from a script.

I talked with an NCIS agent in real life. WHat is on TV and the real world if entirely different. NCIS cannot by a push with a few strokes on a computer keyboard or with a phone call cannot get personal or financial information without a warrant signed by a judge. Nor do they have big screen TVs and a giant room.

It just shows this is all an illusion. NCIS and many of the Military are against NDAA. All these TV shows like NCIS, Criminal minds are just propaganda shows to make the feds out to be the patriots and good guys violating people constitutional rights as the only way yo solve crimes.

TV Shows and actors play cop and the real world are two different things.
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #46 on: May 08, 2012, 03:12:27 am »

Yes, and there is such an agency. Their agents busted a guy and his wife (both Navy) that worked in the same command I was in at NAS Jacksonville. They tried to sell an ounce of coke to an NCIS agent, on base! They are still in federal prison.

http://www.ncis.navy.mil/Pages/publicdefault.aspx

Quote
I talked with an NCIS agent in real life. WHat is on TV and the real world if entirely different. NCIS cannot by a push with a few strokes on a computer keyboard or with a phone call cannot get personal or financial information without a warrant signed by a judge. Nor do they have big screen TVs and a giant room.

Sorry Timmy McHacker!

No, unlike the show, you can't legally do many of the things they do on that show, such as breaking and entering, hacking personel records, etc. They can't just hack into a government site and do what they want like the tv show.

I also have noticed that these shows have the characters breach HIPPA laws on medical rcords and how a patients info is handled. They violate HIPPA all the time on these shows. Even had one show with a nurse that was feeding patient records to her cop boyfriend! TOTALLY illegal and unconstitutional.
Report Spam   Logged
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #47 on: May 09, 2012, 12:08:19 am »

http://rt.com/usa/news/georgia-county-us-way-743/

Published: 07 May, 2012, 23:53

Authorities in Muscogee County, Georgia say they’ve found a great way to let veterans of US wars share their experience with one another. It’ll just happen behind steel bars and under lock and key.
 
Officials from the Muscogee County Sheriff’s Office recently held a press conference to discuss once of the department’s newest endeavors and they believe that it is the first of its kind in the country. Tucked in a corner of the county jail in rural Georgia is a dormitory specifically reserved to house inmates that have fought for America.

"There ought to be a place in our city that provides a facility where veterans can stay for a period of time while being treated, physically and mentally," Ret. Col. Roy Plummer said, reports the local Ledger-Enquirer. "Soldiers will find a way to link together

Never mind the Veterans Affairs bureaus and commonplace community centers that are constructed across the country. Authorities in Georgia have noticed an alarming number of US vets being convicted of crimes after returning home and are hoping that the best way to handle the influx of inmates is by grouping them together.

"They'll find a way to revisit some of their experiences and share it,” added Plummer.

Unfortunately, those experiences are often traumatic ones — so traumatic, in fact, that an alarming number of veterans are developing mental disorders after returning to the States and, without proper treatment, ending up on the streets. Lacking adequate help, American war vets are often left to live on the streets, where entering a life of crime can be just one wrong turn away.

“They are coming home to a disproportionate rate of homelessness, of foreclosures and evictions. In 2010 a whopping 75,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans in the United States were homeless; were sleeping on the streets,” Iraq war veteran Michael Prysner tells RT.

“When you come home, you’re foreclosed on, your job is gone, and then they want you to go to shelters. And shelters pretty much housing criminals, drug addicts, and a lot of us can’t tolerate that lifestyle,” adds homeless US army veteran Joe Mangione.

For those that can get by with soldiers-turned-junkies, however, the homeless shelter now has some competition with the Muscogee County jail. County Sheriff John Darr says that, for now, the dorm can only accommodate 16 veterans, but if a trend of vets-turned-convicts continues, other states might soon follow suit.

Raw Story reports that there are around 140,000 veterans detained at US federal and state prisons in 2004. Outside of the cell and on the streets, the latest numbers out of the White House estimate that US veterans on the street make up a chunk of around 900,000 of the country’s homeless.
Report Spam   Logged
Christian40
Moderators
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3828


View Profile
« Reply #48 on: May 21, 2012, 03:53:13 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Charrington
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 250


View Profile
« Reply #49 on: May 21, 2012, 10:14:43 pm »

Military Detention Law Blocked by New York Judge

Opponents of a U.S. law they claim may subject them to indefinite military detention for activities including news reporting and political activism persuaded a federal judge to temporarily block the measure.

U.S. District Judge Katherine Forrest in Manhattan yesterday ruled in favor of a group of writers and activists who sued President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and the Defense Department, claiming a provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law Dec. 31, puts them in fear that they could be arrested and held by U.S. armed forces.

The complaint was filed Jan. 13 by a group including former New York Times reporter Christopher Hedges. The plaintiffs contend a section of the law allows for detention of citizens and permanent residents taken into custody in the U.S. on “suspicion of providing substantial support” to people engaged in hostilities against the U.S., such as al-Qaeda.

“The statute at issue places the public at undue risk of having their speech chilled for the purported protection from al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and ‘associated forces’ - i.e., ‘foreign terrorist organizations,’” Forrest said in an opinion yesterday. “The vagueness of Section 1021 does not allow the average citizen, or even the government itself, to understand with the type of definiteness to which our citizens are entitled, or what conduct comes within its scope.”
Enforcement Blocked

Forrest’s order prevents enforcement of the provision of the statute pending further order of the court or an amendment to the statute by Congress.

Ellen Davis, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in Manhattan, declined to comment on the ruling.

The plaintiffs claim Section 1021 is vague and can be read to authorize their detention based on speech and associations that are protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Hedges and two other plaintiffs testified in a hearing before Forrest in March, the judge said. A fourth plaintiff submitted a sworn declaration. The government put on no evidence, Forrest said.

Forrest, an Obama appointee who has served on the Manhattan federal court since October, rejected the government’s arguments that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue over the law and that it merely reaffirmed provisions in an earlier law, the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which was passed in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
Plaintiffs’ Activities

In her opinion, Forrest said the government declined to say that the activities of Hedges and the other defendants don’t fall under the provision. Forrest held a hearing in March at which government lawyers didn’t call any witnesses or present evidence, according to the judge. The government did cross- examine the plaintiffs who testified and submitted legal arguments.

“The government was given a number of opportunities at the hearing and in its briefs to state unambiguously that the type of expressive and associational activities engaged in by plaintiffs -- or others -- are not within Section 1021,” Forrest said. “It did not. This court therefore must credit the chilling impact on First Amendment rights as reasonable -- and real.”

Hedges, who testified he has been a foreign news correspondent for 20 years, said he has reported on 17 groups that are on a State Department list of terrorist groups. Hedges testified that after the law was passed, he changed his dealings with groups he had reported on, Forrest said.

“I think the ruling was not only correct, but courageous and important,” Hedges said in a telephone interview yesterday.

The case is Hedges v. Obama, 12-cv-00331, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Manhattan).


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-16/military-detention-law-blocked-by-new-york-judge.html
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #50 on: May 28, 2012, 05:56:01 am »

http://edition.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_c3#/video/world/2012/05/28/mckenzie-kenya-becoming-queen.cnn

I just learned that the British queen was in, of all places, Kenya when she became queen. Go figure!
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #51 on: May 30, 2012, 11:23:23 am »

UPDATE ON NDAA AND DRONES FLYING OVER THE US
 

By Chuck Baldwin
May 24, 2012
NewsWithViews.com

In a stunning upset for the Obama administration and big-government zealots in general, a federal judge in New York has issued an injunction against the citizen detention portion of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Bob Unruh at World Net Daily has the story.

"A district-court judge has suspended enforcement of a law that could strip U.S. citizens of their civil rights and allow indefinite detention of individuals President Obama believes to be in support of terror.

"The Obama administration has refused to ensure that the First Amendment rights of authors and writers who express contrary positions or report on terror group activities are protected under his new National Defense Authorization Act.

"Targeted in the stunning ruling from U.S. District Judge Katherine B. Forrest of New York was Paragraph 1021 of the NDAA, which Obama signed into law last Dec. 31. The vague provision appears to allow for the suspension of civil rights for, and indefinite detention of, those individuals targeted by the president as being in support of terror.

"Virginia already has passed a law that states it will not cooperate with such detentions, and several local jurisdictions have done the same. Arizona, Rhode Island, Maryland, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Washington also have reviewed such plans.

"The case was before Forrest on a request for a temporary restraining order. The case was brought on behalf of Christopher Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, Jennifer Bolen, Noam Chomsky, Alex O'Brien, Kai Warg All, Brigitta Jonsottir and the group U.S. Day of Rage. Many of the plaintiffs are authors or reporters who stated that the threat of indefinite detention by the U.S. military already had altered their activities.

"Constitutional expert Herb Titus filed a friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the sponsor of the Virginia law, Delegate Bob Marshall, and others.

"Titus, an attorney with William J. Olson, P.C., told WND that the judge's decision to grant a preliminary injunction halting enforcement of paragraph 1021 'affirms the constitutional position taken by Delegate Marshall is correct.'

"The impact is that 'the statute does not have sufficient constitutional guidelines to govern the discretion of the president in making a decision whether to hold someone in indefinite military detention,' Titus said.

"The judge noted that the law doesn't have a requirement that there be any knowledge that an act is prohibited before a detention, he said. The judge also said the law is vague, and she appeared to be disturbed that the administration lawyers refused to answer her questions.

"The opinion underscores 'the arrogance of the current regime, in that they will not answer questions that they ought to answer to a judge because they don't think they have to,' Titus said."

Unruh went on to say, "The brief was on behalf of Marshall and other individuals and organizations including the United States Justice Foundation, Downsize DC Foundation, Institute on the Constitution, Gun Owners of America, Western Center for Journalism, the Tenth Amendment Center and Pastor Chuck Baldwin [yours truly]."

As an aside, was I the only pastor in America to be included as an amici in this brief? Let me challenge readers, the next time you go to church, ask your pastor what he is doing or what he would do to prevent military personnel from taking you off to a military prison without an arrest warrant, without issuing Miranda, without telling you why you are being seized, without allowing you access to an attorney, without recognizing that you have any constitutional rights, without any requirement to release you, or even without any requirement to keep you in the United States of America for a trial or judicial proceeding. I challenge you: ask him! And if his answer is something like, "The Lord will take care of you," or "That could never happen in the United States," what in the name of liberty are you doing attending that church?

See Unruh's report here.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/obama-citizen-detention-plan-in-trouble/

Now, I wonder how many of these pseudo-conservative talking heads at FOX News, as well as the myriads of local reporters and journalists throughout the country, will at least be honest enough to admit that there was substantial reason to be concerned about the citizen detention provision of the NDAA? Ever since NDAA was signed into law, these phony guardians of liberty have been pooh-poohing the warnings that many of us columnists and independent journalists have been issuing. Now, a federal judge has also recognized the threat posed to our constitutional liberties by this provision of the NDAA, and has issued an injunction against it.

That's the good news. The bad news is the US House of Representatives defeated an amendment that would have repealed the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA. The Tenth Amendment Center covers the story.

"In a shameful display of disregard for the Constitution and for liberty, on Friday, the House of Representatives voted to perpetuate the president's power to indefinitely detain American citizens.

"By a vote of 238-182, members of Congress rejected the amendment offered by Representatives Adam Smith (D-Washington) and Justin Amash (R-Michigan) that would have repealed the indefinite detention provision passed overwhelmingly last year as part of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012.


"The Fiscal Year 2013 NDAA retains the indefinite detention provisions, as well as the section permitting prisoners to be transferred from civilian jurisdiction to the custody of the military.

"'The frightening thing here is that the government is claiming the power under the Afghanistan authorization for use of military force as a justification for entering American homes to grab people, indefinitely detain them and not give them a charge or trial,' Representative Amash said during House debate."

The report goes on to say, "Each of these freedom-phobes [the congressmen who voted to keep the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA] invoked the specter of terror (in one way or another: 'terrorist,' 'al-Qaeda,' 'enemies') to justify the abolition of constitutionally guaranteed civil liberties.

"Seemingly, those promoting these provisions would offer Americans as sacrifices on the altar of safety, the fires of which are fed by the kindling of the Constitution."

Hear! Hear!

The report astutely includes this warning from "The Father of The US Constitution," James Madison: "It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad."

Oh! Take a guess as to who was the only candidate for President who supported the Smith-Amash amendment to repeal the indefinite detention provision of the NDAA? You got it: Congressman Ron Paul.

See the Tenth Amendment Center report.
http://tinyurl.com/7eklrp4

This goes to prove that sometimes our enemies are not the courts; sometimes our enemies are the legislatures of this country. This was the case in the aforementioned actions. So, now we have a federal court and the US Congress (allied by the White House) in conflict. It's going to get very interesting!

And speaking of how the legislatures are often the ones inflicting more and more tyranny upon the US citizenry, try this report on for size:

"The federal government is moving quickly to open the skies over America to drones--both for commercial and government purposes--and respected Washington Post and Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer is forecasting 'rifles aimed at the sky all across America.'

"The comments from Krauthammer, who won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 1987 after serving as a speechwriter for Vice President Walter Mondale and then beginning his journalism career at The New Republic, were on 'Special Report' with Bret Baier.

"'I would predict, I am not encouraging, but I predict the first guy who uses a Second Amendment weapon to bring a drone down that's been hovering over his house is going to be a folk hero in this country,' Krauthammer said.

"The conversation arose as the federal government announced it is beginning to allow public safety agencies to fly unmanned aircraft--drones--with fewer and fewer restrictions.

"According to yesterday's report from Bloomberg, police, fire and other government agencies now are being allowed to fly drones weighing as much as 25 pounds without special approvals previously needed.

"The Federal Aviation Administration said on its website that the move was an interim step until the agency finishes rules that will open the door for commercial operation of drones, as well as those uses for government purposes.

"Congress has adopted the position of encouraging more drone flights, with the 'goal of adapting technology used by the military in Iraq and Afghanistan.'"

See the report here.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/05/feds-clearing-way-for-drones-over-your-house/

There you have it, folks. Your federal government--along with numerous local and State police agencies--is preparing to use instruments of war against the citizens of the United States. And numerous local and State police agencies are standing in line to participate. I ask you, do the US Congress, the FAA, and our local and State authorities plan to arm these drones with more than surveillance cameras (as if that's not bad enough)? Should we expect that the drones that will be flying over our neighborhoods would be armed with machine guns and missiles? That's the "technology used by the military in Iraq and Afghanistan," after all.

What is wrong with the American people? What is wrong with our representatives? What is wrong with our State legislators? What is wrong with our local and State police agencies? What is wrong with our pastors and churches? What is wrong with our reporters and journalists? Are they THAT blind? Do they want a paycheck THAT badly? Are they THAT willing to allow this free republic to be thrown into the trash bin of history, only to be replaced with a giant Police State? Are we THAT ignorant of history? Is THAT really where we are?

Ladies and gentlemen, the emerging police state is the foremost issue confronting the people of the United States today! And on this issue, the labels Democrat and Republican mean absolutely nothing! Nothing! If the voters of this country do not awaken quickly to what is going on in front of their very eyes, it won't matter to a tinker's dam which party or which candidate is put into office. If we do not have the right to live in privacy and peace, all of the other rights we talk about mean absolutely nothing!

http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin702.htm
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #52 on: July 10, 2012, 08:19:47 pm »

Executive Order Grants Authority to Seize Private Communications Facilities

http://epic.org/2012/07/executive-order-grants-authori.html

The White House has released a new Executive Order seeking to ensure the continuity of government communications during a national emergency. The Executive Order grants new powers to the Department of Homeland Security, including the ability to collect certain public communications information. Under the Executive Order the White House has also granted the Department the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications. In 2011, Congress considered similar provisions in cybersecurity legislation, which would have allowed the government to disconnect communications traffic in times of national security. Following public protest, congress abandoned the proposal. For more information, see EPIC: Cybersecurity Privacy Practical Implications.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/07/06/executive-order-assignment-national-security-and-emergency-preparedness-

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
July 06, 2012
Executive Order -- Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions

EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

ASSIGNMENT OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions. Survivable, resilient, enduring, and effective communications, both domestic and international, are essential to enable the executive branch to communicate within itself and with: the legislative and judicial branches; State, local, territorial, and tribal governments; private sector entities; and the public, allies, and other nations. Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies, and improve national resilience. The views of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and the public must inform the development of national security and emergency preparedness (NS/EP) communications policies, programs, and capabilities.

Sec. 2. Executive Office Responsibilities.

Sec. 2.1. Policy coordination, guidance, dispute resolution, and periodic in-progress reviews for the functions described and assigned herein shall be provided through the interagency process established in Presidential Policy Directive-1 of February 13, 2009 (Organization of the National Security Council System) (PPD-1).

Sec. 2.2. The Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) shall: (a) issue an annual memorandum to the NS/EP Communications Executive Committee (established in section 3 of this order) highlighting national priorities for Executive Committee analyses, studies, research, and development regarding NS/EP communications;

(b) advise the President on the prioritization of radio spectrum and wired communications that support NS/EP functions; and

(c) have access to all appropriate information related to the test, exercise, evaluation, and readiness of the capabilities of all existing and planned NS/EP communications systems, networks, and facilities to meet all executive branch NS/EP requirements.

Sec. 2.3. The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP shall make recommendations to the President, informed by the interagency policy process established in PPD-1, with respect to the exercise of authorities assigned to the President under section 706 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended (47 U.S.C. 606). The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP shall also jointly monitor the exercise of these authorities, in the event of any delegation, through the process established in PPD-1 or as the President otherwise may direct.

Sec. 3. The NS/EP Communications Executive Committee.

Sec. 3.1. There is established an NS/EP Communications Executive Committee (Executive Committee) to serve as a forum to address NS/EP communications matters.

Sec. 3.2. The Executive Committee shall be composed of Assistant Secretary-level or equivalent representatives designated by the heads of the Departments of State, Defense, Justice, Commerce, and Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), the General Services Administration, and the Federal Communications Commission, as well as such additional agencies as the Executive Committee may designate. The designees of the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall serve as Co-Chairs of the Executive Committee.

Sec. 3.3. The responsibilities of the Executive Committee shall be to: (a) advise and make policy recommendations to the President, through the PPD-1 process, on enhancing the survivability, resilience, and future architecture of NS/EP communications, including what should constitute NS/EP communications requirements;

(b) develop a long-term strategic vision for NS/EP communications and propose funding requirements and plans to the President and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), through the PPD-1 process, for NS/EP communications initiatives that benefit multiple agencies or other Federal entities;

(c) coordinate the planning for, and provision of, NS/EP communications for the Federal Government under all hazards;

(d) promote the incorporation of the optimal combination of hardness, redundancy, mobility, connectivity, interoperability, restorability, and security to obtain, to the maximum extent practicable, the survivability of NS/EP communications under all circumstances;

(e) recommend to the President, through the PPD-1 process, the regimes to test, exercise, and evaluate the capabilities of existing and planned communications systems, networks, or facilities to meet all executive branch NS/EP communications requirements, including any recommended remedial actions;

(f) provide quarterly updates to the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and the Director of OSTP, through the Co-Chairs, on the status of Executive Committee activities and develop an annual NS/EP communications strategic agenda utilizing the PPD-1 process;

(g) enable industry input with respect to the responsibilities established in this section; and

(h) develop, approve, and maintain a charter for the Executive Committee.

Sec. 4. Executive Committee Joint Program Office.

Sec. 4.1. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish an Executive Committee Joint Program Office (JPO) to provide full-time, expert, and administrative support for the Executive Committee's performance of its responsibilities under section 3.3 of this order. Staff of the JPO shall include detailees, as needed and appropriate, from agencies represented on the Executive Committee. The Department of Homeland Security shall provide resources to support the JPO. The JPO shall be responsive to the guidance of the Executive Committee.

Sec. 4.2. The responsibilities of the JPO shall include: coordination of programs that support NS/EP missions, priorities, goals, and policy; and, when directed by the Executive Committee, the convening of governmental and nongovernmental groups (consistent with the Federal Advisory Committees Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.)), coordination of activities, and development of policies for senior official review and approval.

Sec. 5. Specific Department and Agency Responsibilities.

Sec. 5.1. The Secretary of Defense shall: (a) oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment of NS/EP communications that are directly responsive to the national security needs of the President, Vice President, and senior national leadership, including: communications with or among the President, Vice President, White House staff, heads of state and government, and Nuclear Command and Control leadership; Continuity of Government communications; and communications among the executive, judicial, and legislative branches to support Enduring Constitutional Government;

(b) incorporate, integrate, and ensure interoperability and the optimal combination of hardness, redundancy, mobility, connectivity, interoperability, restorability, and security to obtain, to the maximum extent practicable, the survivability of NS/EP communications defined in section 5.1(a) of this order under all circumstances, including conditions of crisis or emergency;

(c) provide to the Executive Committee the technical support necessary to develop and maintain plans adequate to provide for the security and protection of NS/EP communications; and

(d) provide, operate, and maintain communication services and facilities adequate to execute responsibilities consistent with Executive Order 12333 of December 4, 1981, as amended.

Sec. 5.2. The Secretary of Homeland Security shall: (a) oversee the development, testing, implementation, and sustainment of NS/EP communications, including: communications that support Continuity of Government; Federal, State, local, territorial, and tribal emergency preparedness and response communications; non-military executive branch communications systems; critical infrastructure protection networks; and non-military communications networks, particularly with respect to prioritization and restoration;

(b) incorporate, integrate, and ensure interoperability and the necessary combination of hardness, redundancy, mobility, connectivity, interoperability, restorability, and security to obtain, to the maximum extent practicable, the survivability of NS/EP communications defined in section 5.2(a) of this order under all circumstances, including conditions of crisis or emergency;

(c) provide to the Executive Committee the technical support necessary to develop and maintain plans adequate to provide for the security and protection of NS/EP communications;

(d) receive, integrate, and disseminate NS/EP communications information to the Federal Government and State, local, territorial, and tribal governments, as appropriate, to establish situational awareness, priority setting recommendations, and a common operating picture for NS/EP communications information;

(e) satisfy priority communications requirements through the use of commercial, Government, and privately owned communications resources, when appropriate;

(f) maintain a joint industry-Government center that is capable of assisting in the initiation, coordination, restoration, and reconstitution of NS/EP communications services or facilities under all conditions of emerging threats, crisis, or emergency;

(g) serve as the Federal lead for the prioritized restoration of communications infrastructure and coordinate the prioritization and restoration of communications, including resolution of any conflicts in or among priorities, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense when activities referenced in section 5.1(a) of this order are impacted, consistent with the National Response Framework. If conflicts in or among priorities cannot be resolved between the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, they shall be referred for resolution in accordance with section 2.1 of this order; and

(h) within 60 days of the date of this order, in consultation with the Executive Committee where appropriate, develop and submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism, a detailed plan that describes the Department of Homeland

Security's organization and management structure for its NS/EP communications functions, including the Government Emergency Telecommunications Service, Wireless Priority Service, Telecommunications Service Priority program, Next Generation Network Priority program, the Executive Committee JPO, and relevant supporting entities.

Sec. 5.3. The Secretary of Commerce shall: (a) provide advice and guidance to the Executive Committee on the use of technical standards and metrics to support execution of NS/EP communications;

(b) identify for the Executive Committee requirements for additional technical standards and metrics to enhance NS/EP communications;

(c) engage with relevant standards development organizations to develop appropriate technical standards and metrics to enhance NS/EP communications;

(d) develop plans and procedures concerning radio spectrum allocations, assignments, and priorities for use by agencies and executive offices;

(e) develop, maintain, and publish policies, plans, and procedures for the management and use of radio frequency assignments, including the authority to amend, modify, or revoke such assignments, in those parts of the electromagnetic spectrum assigned to the Federal Government; and

(f) administer a system of radio spectrum priorities for those spectrum-dependent telecommunications resources belonging to and operated by the Federal Government and certify or approve such radio spectrum priorities, including the resolution of conflicts in or among such radio spectrum priorities during a crisis or emergency.

Sec. 5.4. The Administrator of General Services shall provide and maintain a common Federal acquisition approach that allows for the efficient centralized purchasing of equipment and services that meet NS/EP communications requirements. Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect the procurement authorities granted by law to an agency or the head thereof.

Sec. 5.5. With respect to the Intelligence Community, the DNI, after consultation with the heads of affected agencies, may issue such policy directives and guidance as the DNI deems necessary to implement this order. Procedures or other guidance issued by the heads of elements of the Intelligence Community shall be in accordance with such policy directives or guidelines issued by the DNI.

Sec. 5.6. The Federal Communications Commission performs such functions as are required by law, including: (a) with respect to all entities licensed or regulated by the Federal Communications Commission: the extension, discontinuance, or reduction of common carrier facilities or services; the control of common carrier rates, charges, practices, and classifications; the construction, authorization, activation, deactivation, or closing of radio stations, services, and facilities; the assignment of radio frequencies to Federal Communications Commission licensees; the investigation of violations of pertinent law; and the assessment of communications service provider emergency needs and resources; and

(b) supporting the continuous operation and restoration of critical communications systems and services by assisting the Secretary of Homeland Security with infrastructure damage assessment and restoration, and by providing the Secretary of Homeland Security with information collected by the Federal Communications Commission on communications infrastructure, service outages, and restoration, as appropriate.

Sec. 6. General Agency Responsibilities. All agencies, to the extent consistent with law, shall: (a) determine the scope of their NS/EP communications requirements, and provide information regarding such requirements to the Executive Committee;

(b) prepare policies, plans, and procedures concerning communications facilities, services, or equipment under their management or operational control to maximize their capability to respond to the NS/EP needs of the Federal Government;

(c) propose initiatives, where possible, that may benefit multiple agencies or other Federal entities;

(d) administer programs that support broad NS/EP communications goals and policies;

(e) submit reports annually, or as otherwise requested, to the Executive Committee, regarding agency NS/EP communications activities;

(f) devise internal acquisition strategies in support of the centralized acquisition approach provided by the General Services Administration pursuant to section 5.4 of this order; and

(g) provide the Secretary of Homeland Security with timely reporting on NS/EP communications status to inform the common operating picture required under 6 U.S.C. 321(d).

Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) For the purposes of this order, the word "agency" shall have the meaning set forth in section 6.1(b) of Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009.

(b) Executive Order 12472 of April 3, 1984, as amended, is hereby revoked.

(c) Executive Order 12382 of September 13, 1982, as amended, is further amended by striking the following language from section 2(e): "in his capacity as Executive Agent for the National Communications System".

(d) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the OMB relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(e) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(f) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: July 10, 2012, 10:40:13 pm »

Looks like it's at the "dress rehearsal" stage now...
Report Spam   Logged
Kilika
Guest
« Reply #54 on: July 11, 2012, 02:57:22 am »

Quote
In 2011, Congress considered similar provisions in cybersecurity legislation, which would have allowed the government to disconnect communications traffic in times of national security. Following public protest, congress abandoned the proposal.

Looks like Obama doesn't care what the public thinks. Can't get it through by Congress, he just writes an Executive Order. In fact, he's made a practice of bypassing Congress with over 130 executive orders and counting. Look at some of those and tell me it's an emergency that they had to use an Executive Order. Baloney! None of them were an emergency. It's just a channel for law when something is important and they have to get it passed, so they shove it through the Executive Order path. They also like to conduct the White House as they see fit under what they call "Unitary Executive Theory".

http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/executive-orders
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #55 on: July 16, 2012, 03:48:41 pm »

Govt to supervise credit reporting for first time

The companies that determine Americans' credit scores are about to come under government oversight for the first time.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said Monday that it will start supervising the 30 largest firms that make up 94 percent of the industry. That includes the three big credit reporting firms: Equifax Inc., Experian and TransUnion.

In remarks prepared for a speech Monday, Richard Cordray, the government agency's director, said that scorekeeping by credit bureaus plays such a large role in Americans' financial lives, it requires scrutiny.

The CFPB said its oversight may include on-sight examinations, and that it may require credit bureaus to file reports.

Cordray said the agency's oversight will extend to niche companies that "focus on payday loans or checking accounts, as well as resellers of credit reports and those that analyze credit report information."

The announcement wasn't a total surprise, said Jon Ulzheimer, president of consumer education at SmartCredit.com and a former Equifax employee. He said the CFPB had hinted earlier this year that it was considering supervising the industry.

To Ulzheimer, the CFPB's move implies that it will soon clarify what the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires of credit bureaus, a constant source of debate in the consumer credit world. When a person challenges what's in their credit report, the Fair Credit Reporting Act requires the bureaus to investigate.

"But what exactly constitutes a reasonable investigation?" Ulzheimer asks. "The act doesn't say."

Each of the three biggest credit reporting agencies maintains files on more than 200 million Americans. These reports are filled with details on an individual's payment history with credit cards, mortgages, auto loans and other borrowing, applications for credit, medical account information and other financial details. Past behavior, like late payments or carrying high balances on credit cards, is used to determine credit scores.

Lenders, like banks or auto finance companies, use credit scores to measure eligibility for mortgages, credit cards and a wide variety of other consumer loans. Low scores based on missed or late payments, for instance, can mean higher interest rates or rejected applications.

There have been thousands of complaints about the bureaus by consumers who claim they are unsuccessful getting credit reporting agencies to correct inaccurate information contained within credit reports.

The protection bureau will start regulating the industry after the new rule takes effect on Sept. 30.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_CONSUMER_PROTECTION_CREDIT_REPORTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-07-16-14-39-45
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: July 16, 2012, 03:51:40 pm »

Government takeover of the private sector slowly but surely...we may not see this "global economic collapse" before the tribulation, but Socialism is being set up right before our eyes.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: July 16, 2012, 03:54:11 pm »

Government takeover of the private sector slowly but surely...we may not see this "global economic collapse" before the tribulation, but Socialism is being set up right before our eyes.

Yes, this right here is very scary as the Government will now decide what kind of credit you will have.
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20872



View Profile
« Reply #58 on: July 20, 2012, 09:35:44 am »

Do Obama's Executive Orders Reveal A Pattern?

President Barack Hussein "kill list" Obama has offered over 900 Executive Orders (EO), and he is not even through his first term.  He is creating a wonderland of government controls covering everything imaginable, including a list of "Emergency Powers" and martial law EOs.  And while Obama is busy issuing EOs to control everything inside the US, he has been issuing EOs to force us to submit to international regulations instead of our US Constitution.

And comments by North Carolina governor Beverly Perdue and former OMB director Peter Orszag only contribute to this pattern.

Is it now time to start connecting the dots?  Obama signed EO 13603 on March 22, 2012.  Then he signed EO 13617 on June 25, 2012, declaring a national emergency.  Then he signed EO 13618 on July 6, 2012.

In EO 13603, entitled, "National Defense Resources Preparedness," Obama says (among other things) that [we must]:


be prepared, in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States, to take actions necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements;

Obama has the power, through this EO, to "nationalize" (not seize) private assets in order to protect national interests.  Further, the EO effectively states that he can:

1.   "identify" requirements for emergencies

2.   "assess" the capability of the country's industrial and technological base

3.   "be prepared" to ensure the availability of critical resources in time of national threat

4.   "improve the efficiency" of the industrial base to support national defense

5.   "foster cooperation" between commercial and defense sectors

There are pundits that suggest that by signing  EO 13603, Obama has given himself power to declare martial law and suspend elections.

The main problem with EO 13603 is that the words/phrases in quotes can be interpreted in many ways, including ways that favor Obama and Democrats.  Wait, we can have our Supreme Court decide what they mean.  But that won't work since we know four of them to be Democrat hacks, and one justice can be influenced by the MSM.

In EO 13617, entitled "Blocking Property of the Government of the Russian Federation Relating to the Disposition of Highly Enriched Uranium Extracted From Nuclear Weapons," Obama says (among other things)that"

the risk of nuclear proliferation created by the accumulation of a large volume of weapons-usable fissile material in the territory of the Russian Federation continues to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.

Obama, by signing this EO, actually declared a national emergency.  I guess that President Theodore Roosevelt's famous saying, "Speak softly and carry a big stick," can't apply in this case because we don't want to offend the Russians by having them honor treaties they signed (the "HEU" Agreement).  But what's more important is that Obama can now "justify" any action he wants to take by citing EO 13617 since it declares a national emergency.

Then, in EO 13618, entitled, "Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions," Obama states (among other things) that:


The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions. ...  Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies, and improve national resilience.


Obama cites "national security" in this EO.  I guess Obama sees ANY excuse for declaring a national security emergency will appear better than taking over the nation's communications assets by force

Want more examples of what Obama is doing?

EO 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
EO 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.
EO 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision
EO 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.
EO 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
EO 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations.
EO 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.
Are we beginning to see a pattern here?  We're being prepared  for a national emergency.  Then there's taking control.  I personally think that what Obama is doing goes way beyond being prepared.

North Carolina governor Beverly Perdue (Democrat), on September 28, 2011, suggested that perhaps elections should be suspended for two years by canceling, until the economy recovers, the 2012 elections. After that remark got the reception it deserved, Pardue's staff tried to pass it off as a joke.

Former White House director of the Office of Management and Budget Peter Orszag, who, on September 14, 2011, in a The New Republic article entitled "Too Much of a Good Thing: Why we need less democracy," said that we are that we are hampered by too much democracy, that the constitutional system (not really a democracy) is too slow to react, and the deliberations and negotiations are simply too cumbersome. Orszag suggests that the constitutional rules of limiting government offers impediments to autocratic, dictatorial actions, and are just too great.

That North Carolina governor Perdue would even joke (if it was a joke) about canceling an election is frightening enough, but that Orszag, a former official in Obama's administration, believes that doing away with the US Constitution is a viable solution should cause every AT reader to quake.

I'm never comfortable with laws that give the government broad reaching powers in the event of a "national emergency," especially when there is no clear, set, unchangeable definition of what actually constitutes a "national emergency."

Circumvention of the US Constitution by any means possible is the ultimate goal of Democrats and the Obama administration because the 2012 election is shaping up to be a repeat of the 2010 election.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, but these three latest EOs and previous EOs Obama signed, coupled with Perdue's and Orszag's comments, suggest that something besides coincidence is going on.



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/do_obamas_executive_orders_reveal_a_pattern.html#ixzz21Ap8ZUOq
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Exodus 3:14-15
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 27576


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: July 20, 2012, 09:50:25 am »

Quote
The main problem with EO 13603 is that the words/phrases in quotes can be interpreted in many ways, including ways that favor Obama and Democrats.  Wait, we can have our Supreme Court decide what they mean.  But that won't work since we know four of them to be Democrat hacks, and one justice can be influenced by the MSM.

Isn't that what the modern bible per-versions do? Interpret in many ways?
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines