English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Read the entire article and tell me Presidential EOs aren't placed for future use, even when they look benign at the time....

"Reporter banned from secret meeting on selling U.S. assets"

"Why is it that all these PPP and SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership) meetings are behind closed doors," Corsi asked, "and government officials and their supporters think that's normal? But when investigative reporters want to attend and report on what is being said, we are the ones who get accused of being the conspiracy theorists?"

"Public-private partnerships, or PPPs, were authorized by Executive Order No. 12803 President George H.W. Bush signed on April 30, 1992, clearing federal barriers for cities and states to lease public works infrastructures to private investors."

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57717

2007-09-19 02:12:41 · 8 answers · asked by Cookies Anyone? 5 in Politics & Government Government

Kacy, Excellent point. Look up Clintons 12919. It consolidated most of the previous directives. Pay close attention to Sec. 601; Labor. I love the wording....."The head of each department or agency assigned functions under this order is delegated authority under sections 710(b) and (c) of the Act to employ persons of outstanding experience and ability without compensation and to employ experts, consultants, or organizations. The authority delegated by this section shall not be redelegated."

Isn't labor w/o compensation, slavery??

2007-09-20 02:43:47 · update #1

Kacy, this scares me more:
"......Section 1076 of the John Warner Defense Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 2007 grants the president the right to commandeer federal troops or state National Guard to use them domestically. The language of that legislation allows the president to use federal troops or the National Guard in federal service in a wide range of emergencies, including natural disasters, epidemics or other public health emergencies, terrorist attacks, insurrections, or domestic violence, including conspiracies to commit domestic violence....."

NSPD-51 and HSPD-20 make no specific reference to the National Security Act under U.S.C. Title 50 or the requirement of that act that the president bring a declaration of a national emergency to Congress immediately and publish the declaration in the Federal Register.

**So much for Posse Comitatus**

2007-09-20 02:45:29 · update #2

Dianer...
Check out this link...I was biatching about this in '98..

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/us-wild.jpg

2007-09-20 02:48:27 · update #3

8 answers

I agree with everything that has been said except, it goes much deeper than one president---this has been planned for many many years and it is NOT a dem or rep or con or lib thing. And as much as some seem to love Ron Paul for some reason, he won't stop it. Nothing will stop it. The UN and our parks thing is decades old and nobody has stopped it, not even Ron Reagan! This is what is to be! Cookies, you've been showing us this for a long long time. And at least 4 or 5 of us here have been right here with you for quite awhile. But, those of you still getting your panties in a bunch hating Bush, you better start looking at the bigger picture. This is going to happen! And even if we never heard of GW, it would still happen. He was just a pawn! The thing is, keep your eyes and ears open. Be thankful we have people like Cookies that somehow seem to scan vast amounts of info each day and to keep talking amongst each other. Keep our faith in God and realize, this is what is suppose to happen!!

2007-09-21 19:23:04 · answer #1 · answered by Gabriel Archangel 3 · 0 0

A group of Executive Orders that are a little more dangerous to Americans and their freedoms are the ones associated with FEMA.
http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/fema.htm
Lists all the executive orders that give full control of our lives and our government over to the control of FEMA in the event of an emergency.

FYI.. constitution does state rebellion as a form of emergency that would legally allow president to claim martial law.

Just like the rest of the vague and undefined wording in the constitution, rebellions & riots are not defined. How long until the 'protests' are considered rebellions?


The constitutionality of executive orders has not been challenged in the supreme court (to my knowledge, I have looked and have not found any supreme court rulling)
Many presidents this past century have used them for various reasons.

The problem most people see is that executive orders are being used to create laws without the use of the legislative branch. The presidents also have used them to intrepret the laws (the job of the judicial branch).

In doing so, the executive branch is taking away the duties and the authority of the other two branches leaving us wihtout the checks and balances our founding fathers created in the constitution.

Ron Paul is the Only presidential canidate that fully understands how limited the presidents powers should be, and how the recent abuse of powers have stripped americans of their consitutional rights. Ron Paul is the Only canidate that is running for president who wants to defend the constitution from the tyrranny our government has become.

2007-09-19 02:29:48 · answer #2 · answered by Kacy H 5 · 2 0

Kacy H, you hit the nail on the head. All of the idiots I see here every day saying, "Prove to me that our rights have been infringed", don't understand that when things get bad enough for them to notice it will be too late. The time to stand up is now, while we still have some rights remaining. We have a right to know what our government is doing, especially when they've demonstrated poor judgement in the past by trying to sell our ports to Middle Eastern countries. If they want to earn our trust, they need to stop hiding their agenda and be honest with us.

2007-09-19 05:09:57 · answer #3 · answered by ConcernedCitizen 7 · 1 0

Bush refuses to deny that there is a North American agenda

The $64,000 question was posed by Fox News reporter Bret Baier. He asked all three heads of state, "Can you say today that this is not a prelude to a North American Union, similar to a European Union?"

Their response was positively sensational. Not one denied that SPP is leading to a North American Union. The White House transcript of the news conference allows us to assume that the elites of the three countries are, indeed, moving toward North American integration.

2007-09-19 02:20:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6 0

There are no words in the English language to adequately express my deep hatred for this dictator currently squatting in the White House.

The man has sold America to the highest bidder. He is a TRAITOR.

2007-09-19 02:25:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 7 0

Ok, have you heard of UNESCO? They are part of the United Nations ane they have control of most of our parks and national treasures.For some reason we are not trusted to protect our own assets.

2007-09-19 11:49:50 · answer #6 · answered by dianer 5 · 1 0

The next tee shirt will read
"Bush sold America"

2007-09-19 02:31:36 · answer #7 · answered by PATRICIA MS 6 · 1 0

Treason comes to my mind.

To answer your question; "How long has this gone on???!!!!?"

Too bloody long and it's past time for change!

2007-09-19 02:37:51 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers