Note: You can usually open the interesting advertisement/sponsor links in a new window/tab by RIGHT CLICKING the Ad-Link
then selecting 'Open in New Window' or 'Open in New Tab' from the drop down box. (depending on ad type)





What Do You Think? Forum Index What Do You Think?
A discussion board of different ideas and topics.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
TRoach.Net
r_frame.gif TRoach.Org

Did Obama sign a martial law executive order?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    What Do You Think? Forum Index -> General Opinion Questions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
kimtoyn
member


Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:29 am    Post subject: Did Obama sign a martial law executive order? Reply with quote

http://rt.com/usa/news/obama-executive-order-national-929/


Did Obama sign a martial law executive order?

Link copied to clipboardemail story to a friend print version Published: 19 March, 2012

As folks headed out to happy hour last Friday evening, President Obama signed an executive order that could potentially give him the power to institute martial law in the United States in times of peace or during a national threat.

The National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order will give Obama power over “resources and services needed to support such plans and programs.”

Many Americans were shocked to find out that this order gives the president practically unlimited power over US citizens and their property. All in the name of national security of course.

In the order it states, “in the event of a potential threat to the security of the United States actions are necessary to ensure the availability of adequate resources and production capability, including services and critical technology, for national defense requirements.”

According to a White House press release, the US “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 the order the Secretary of Agriculture can allocate material such as “food resources, livestock resources, and the distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer.”

The same goes for all forms of energy, health resources, transportation, and even water resources.

According to the White House press release the purpose is to “delegate authorities and addresses national defense resource policies and programs under the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended (the "Act").”

The sneaky tactics couldn’t have come at a worst time, especially after the newly signed HR 347 or the “Trespass bill” and even more terrifying the National Defense Authorization Act that allows the president to detain and torture American citizens without due process.

Although many see this as another power grab by the Obama administration this isn’t the first time that a US president has signed an executive order such as this.

His new motion is just an update to executive orders signed in 1994 by President Clinton, which invoke similar powers in a time of crisis.
Even Clinton’s EO 12919 was an amendment to EO 10789 which was issued by the Eisenhower administration back in 1958.

Therefore lawyers claim that this Executive Order wouldn't grant the president authority he didn't have before signing it.

William A. Jacobson, an associate clinical professor at Cornell Law School said to WND.com, “If someone wants to make the argument that this is an expansion of presidential powers, then do so based on actual language.”
“There is enough that Obama actually does wrong without creating claims which do not hold up to scrutiny,” Jacobson added.

But that's exactly the language of this order that terrified too many of those who bothered to read it in full.

Even if the president never uses this power, the fact that he has such unlimited authority over Americans and their property doesn't sound comforting to people assuming they live in the land of free.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kimtoyn
member


Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.westernjournalism.com/will-obama-attempt-to-declare-martial-law-before-november-election/

Will Obama Attempt To Declare Martial Law Before November Election?
May 15, 2012 By Doug Book

Canada Free Press contributor Doug Hagmann has reported that a longtime friend and Department of Homeland Security official revealed to him “…the uppermost echelon of the DHS is actively preparing for massive social unrest inside the United States,” and not only “…expecting and preparing for it, they are actually facilitating it.”

According to Hagmann’s DHS source, the Obama Regime—which initiates Department agenda and dominates its thinking—will proceed by implementing “economic chaos, chaos through racial division and chaos through class division, all joined by Barack Hussein Obama and his stable of unelected czars.”

For three years, the Administration has worked to destroy the private sector and destabilize the value of the dollar. It has injected race and class into every argument, setting the stage for “summer riots” organized by Regime operatives. And when economic calamity and civil unrest are at their zenith, “…a false flag event against Obama or his family, something that will outrage ‘black America’ ” will be crafted, its purpose, to “…evoke the ugliest of reactions and create racial chaos in this country that will make the Watts riots, 1968 and the Rodney King riots pale in comparison.”

At this juncture, the federal government will be “forced” to take a hand for the well-being of the nation and the American public, of course. Martial law will be declared by an appropriately “reluctant” Barack Obama, who will offer a television persona clearly dis-inclined to the exercise of such staggering authority. Naturally, he will promise the duration of his absolute power to be brief and its use, strictly and fairly measured. The 2012 election will–for the purposes of fairness and equity—be indefinitely postponed.

Although claims in the Canada Free Press article sound very much like the ravings of “tin foil hat”-wearing conspiracy theorists, it should be remembered who the enemy is, the extraordinary sweep and authority they have already attained, and the arrogance and lust for power that drives them.

These are people brazen and lawless enough to have placed a Manchurian Candidate in the White House. From politicians to journalists to judges, they have threatened into silence or collaboration any with the slightest inclination or ability to stand in their way. They have near-total ownership of the national media, a vitally important accomplishment in any plan to overthrow a government. They have absolute authority over the executive branch, giving them the ability to not only implement (or ignore) law and enforce it, but also the means and power to punish those who stand in their way. For only the executive has the ability to enforce its will as it is the only branch of government with armed troops and therefore the power of arrest and detention.

In short, nothing can be put past this group and, as a result, little can be considered too far from the realm of possibility.

It’s true that Americans are the most widely armed people in the world. But consider the indignities we have already endured and the way in which we have meekly surrendered liberty in the past. Why should anyone expect sudden bravery from a public that has exhibited little but sheepish submission over the past 5 decades?

Conspiracy theories or not, it will be a very interesting and potentially very dangerous campaign season.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kimtoyn
member


Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Mon Sep 03, 2012 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/07/do_obamas_executive_orders_reveal_a_pattern.html


July 16, 2012
Do Obama's Executive Orders Reveal A Pattern?
By Warren Beatty


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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    What Do You Think? Forum Index -> General Opinion Questions All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group