Category Archives: Martial law

Jonathan Turley, Obama stated that he can have any American Citizen killed anywhere, CSPAN interview, Video, Professor Turley legal scholar

Jonathan Turley, Obama stated that he can have any American Citizen killed anywhere, CSPAN interview, Video, Professor Turley legal scholar

“Our Constitution is in actual operation; everything appears to promise
that it will last; but nothing in this world is certain but death and
taxes.”...Benjamin Franklin

“If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation, for through this in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”…George Washington

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”…Abraham Lincoln

Jonathan Turley, a nationally recognized legal scholar, was interviewed on CSPAN. He was asked by a Democrat caller about Obama’s statement that he can
have any American Citizen killed anywhere.

Jonathan Turley Bio.

“Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, and other schools.

After a stint at Tulane Law School, Professor Turley joined the George Washington faculty in 1990 and, in 1998, was given the prestigious Shapiro Chair for Public Interest Law, the youngest chaired professor in the school’s history. In addition to his extensive publications, Professor Turley has served as counsel in some of the most notable cases in the last two decades ranging, representing whistleblowers, military personnel, and a wide range of other clients.

In 2010, Professor Turley represented Judge G. Thomas Porteous in his impeachment trial. After a trial before the Senate, Professor Turley (on December 7, 2010) argued both the motions and gave the final argument to all 100 U.S. Senators from the well of the Senate floor — only the 14th time in history of the country that such a trial of a judge has reached the Senate floor. Judge Porteous was convicted of four articles of impeachments, including the acceptance of $2000 from an attorney and using a false name on a bankruptcy filing.

In 2011, Professor Turley filed a challenge to the Libyan War on behalf of ten members of Congress, including Representatives Roscoe Bartlett (R., Md); Dan Burton (R., Ind.); Mike Capuano (D., Mass.); Howard Coble (R., N.C.); John Conyers (D., Mich.); John J. Duncan (R., Tenn.); Tim Johnson (R., Ill.); Walter Jones (R., N.C.); Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio); and Ron Paul (R., Tx). The lawsuit is pending before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Other cases include his representation of the Area 51 workers at a secret air base in Nevada; the nuclear couriers at Oak Ridge, Tennessee; the Rocky Flats grand jury in Colorado; Dr. Eric Foretich, the husband in the famous Elizabeth Morgan custody controversy; and four former United States Attorneys General during the Clinton impeachment litigation. In the Foretich case, Turley succeeded recently in reversing a trial court and striking down a federal statute through a rare “bill of attainder” challenge. Professor Turley has also served as counsel in a variety of national security cases, including espionage cases like that of Jim Nicholson, the highest ranking CIA officer ever accused of espionage. Turley also served as lead defense counsel in the successful defense of Petty Officer Daniel King, who faced the death penalty for alleged spying for Russia. Turley also served as defense counsel in the case of Dr. Tom Butler, who is facing criminal charges dealing with the importation and handling of thirty vials of plague in Texas. He also served as counsel to Larry Hanauer, the House Intelligence Committee staffer accused of leaking a classified Presidential National Intelligence Estimate to the New York Times. (Hanauer was cleared of all allegations).

Among his current cases, Professor Turley represents Dr. Ali Al-Timimi, who was convicted in Virginia in 2005 of violent speech against the United States. He also represents Dr. Sami Al-Arian, accused of being the American leader of a terrorist organization while he was a university professor in Florida. He also currently represents pilots approaching or over the age of 60 in their challenge to the mandatory retirement age of the FAA. He also represents David Murphee Faulk, the whistleblower who disclosed abuses in the surveillance operations at NSA’s Fort Gordon facility in Georgia. Most recently, Professor Turley agreed to serve as lead counsel representing the Brown family from the TLC “Sister Wives, a reality show on plural marriage or polygamy. He also agreed to serve as the legal expert in the review of polygamy laws in the British of Columbia (Canada) Supreme Court. In the latter case, he argued for the decriminalization of plural union and conjugal unions.

Turley has served as a consultant on homeland security and constitutional issues, including the Florida House of Representatives. He also served as the consultant to the Puerto Rico House of Representatives on the impeachment of Gov. Aníbal Acevedo Vilá.

Professor Turley is a frequent witness before the House and Senate on constitutional and statutory issues as well as tort reform legislation. Professor Turley is also a nationally recognized legal commentator. Professor Turley was ranked as 38th in the top 100 most cited “public intellectuals” in the recent study by Judge Richard Posner. Turley was also found to be the second most cited law professor in the country. He has been repeatedly ranked in the nation’s top 500 lawyers in annual surveys (including in the latest 2010 rankings by LawDragon) – one of only a handful of academics. In prior years, he was ranked as one of the nation’s top ten lawyers in military law cases as well as one of the top 40 lawyers under 40. He was also selected in 2010 and 2011 as one of the 100 top Irish lawyers in the world.

Professor Turley’s articles on legal and policy issues appear regularly in national publications with over 750 articles in such newspapers as the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal. He is a columnist for USA Today. In 2005, Turley was given the Columnist of the Year award for Single-Issue Advocacy for his columns on civil liberties by the Aspen Institute and the Week Magazine. Professor Turley also appears regularly as a legal expert on all of the major television networks. Since the 1990s, he has worked under contract as the on-air Legal Analyst for NBC News and CBS News to cover stories that ranged from the Clinton impeachment to the presidential elections. Professor Turley is often a guest on Sunday talk shows with over two-dozen appearances on Meet the Press, ABC This Week, Face the Nation, and Fox Sunday.Professor Turley teaches courses on constitutional law, constitutional criminal law, environmental law, litigation, and torts. He is the founder and executive director of the Project for Older Prisoners (POPS). His work with older prisoners has been honored in various states, including his selection as the 2011 recipient of the Dr. Mary Ann Quaranta Elder Justice Award at Fordham University.

His award-winning blog is ranked in the ten most popular legal blogs by AVVO.

Professor Turley received his B.A. at the University of Chicago and his J.D. at Northwestern. In 2008, he was given an honorary Doctorate of Law from John Marshall Law School for his contributions to civil liberties and the public interest.”

http://jonathanturley.org/about/

 

EPA armed, Homeland Security ammunition order, Martial law?, Winchester ammunition order, EPA Glock handguns, Protect human health and safeguard the natural environment?, 200 million rounds of ammunition?

Why does the Department of Homeland Security need up to 200 million, 40 calibur rounds of ammunition over the next five years? This is the same Department of Homeland Security, headed by Janet Napolitano, that has been under more scrutiny since the Christmas day terrorist attack.

From the Winchester Ammunition Co. website, August 20, 2009.

“Winchester Awarded Department of Homeland Security Contract”

“Winchester Ammunition was recently awarded a contract by the Immigration, Customs and Enforcement (ICE) division of the Department of Homeland Security to supply a maximum of 200 million, 40 cal. rounds over the next five years.

“Winchester has a proud tradition of providing high quality ammunition to our nation’s law enforcement agencies,” said Dick Hammett, president, Winchester Ammunition. “No matter if they’re protecting our block, our city or our borders, each special agent is an invaluable resource and we are committed to giving them the best products available.”

The load selected for this contract is a 135-grain, hollow point designed for the office of Field Operations of Customs and Border Protection. It will fall under the Winchester® Ranger® line of products.

For more information about Winchester Ammunition and its complete line of products visit www.winchester.com.

WINCHESTER BALLISTICS CALCULATOR
The new Winchester® Ammunition Ballistics Calculator is the most innovative program on the market, using cutting-edge technology to offer ballistics information for shooters and hunters.

The Winchester Ballistics Calculator allows users to choose their type of ammunition and compare up to five different Winchester products with easy-to-read, high-tech ballistic charts and graphs. You can customize shooting conditions by entering wind speed and outside temperature, adjust zero marks for sighting in—then print the ballistics for later reference on the range or in the field. The calculator is now live at www.winchester.com/ballistics.”

http://www.winchester.com/library/news/Pages/Winchester-Awarded-Contract.aspx
If the above does not pique your curiousty or concern you, perhaps the following will.

 
The EPA, long known for dictatorial, out of control powers, has ordered 40 Model G-19, 9mm frame handguns.
From the EPA mission statement:

Our Mission

The mission of EPA is to protect human health and to safeguard the natural environment — air, water and land — upon which life depends.

EPA’s purpose is to ensure that:

all Americans are protected from significant risks to human health and the environment where they live, learn and work;

national efforts to reduce environmental risk are based on the best available scientific information;

federal laws protecting human health and the environment are enforced fairly and effectively;

environmental protection is an integral consideration in U.S. policies concerning natural resources, human health, economic growth, energy, transportation, agriculture, industry, and international trade, and these factors are similarly considered in establishing environmental policy;

all parts of society — communities, individuals, businesses, and state, local and tribal governments — have access to accurate information sufficient to effectively participate in managing human health and environmental risks;

environmental protection contributes to making our communities and ecosystems diverse, sustainable and economically productive; and

the United States plays a leadership role in working with other nations to protect the global environment.

http://www.epa.gov/epahome/aboutepa.htm

From the EPA Procurement Office, September 14, 2009:
Posted Date : September 14, 2009

Procurement Office : U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Headquarters Procurement Operations Division, (3803R)

Response Date: September 23, 2009, 4:00 PM EDT

NAICS code 332994 – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Criminal Investigations Division intends to award a sole source firm-fixed-price Purchase Order to Glock, Inc. under the authority of FAR Part 13, Simplified Acquisition Procedures for 40 Model G-19, 9mm frame handguns with finger grove and rail frames, Tijico night sights, extended magazine catches and 3.5lb/NY1 Trigger magazines. The Glock model G-19 is the Agency standard firearm and is the only pistol that fits our training, certified repair technician contracts, and equipment capabilities without a major change to Agency operations. Our agents are trained with the Glock pistol, and changing to another manufacturer would require transition training for each agent that could range from 1 to 3 days depending on the manufacturer. Additionally, our Agents are outfitted with holsters and magazine clips that are fitted to the Glock model firearm. Furthermore, EPA-CID has a large amount of spare parts for the Glock weapons and to retool these parts would require substantial expenditure for the Government.

NO SOLICITATION OR REQUEST FOR QUOTE WILL BE MADE FOR THIS PROCUREMENT. No contract will be awarded on the basis of offers received in response to this notice. All comments and questions regarding this procurement shall be addressed in writing to the Contracting Officer, Cara Lynch by COB on Wednesday, September 23, 2009. Telephone inquiries will not be accepted. The decision not to compete this requirement is within the discretion of the Government. Any response to this notice shall show clear and convincing evidence that competition would be advantageous to the Government in future procurements

The point of contact for this procurement is Cara Lynch, Contracting Specialist, at lynch.cara@epa.gov

http://www.epa.gov/oamhpod1/admin_placement/0902080/index.htm

So now the EPA, an out of control government agency, with no apparent regard for the US Constitution is now going to be armed. No wonder many citizens are concerned about the spectre of martial law and NWO theories.

From the EPA on how they develop regulations:

Developing Regulations: From Start to Finish
When EPA identifies the potential need for a regulation, we form a workgroup to learn more. The workgroup is led by the EPA office that will be writing the regulation (i.e., the “lead office”) and includes members from other parts of the Agency with related interests or responsibilities. The workgroup may work for months – employing expert scientists, economists, and other analysts – before an appropriate course of action is decided upon. The process generally goes like this:

1. Commence Activity. EPA typically operates under statutory authority (Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, etc.) to create regulations. Additionally, we adhere to the Principles of Regulation described in Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.  When we have determined that an issue exists that cannot be addressed in the absence of regulatory activity, we commence a new regulatory action.

2. Analyze the Problem. The workgroup begins by developing a work plan that will guide the regulatory development process. This plan is called an Analytic Blueprint and outlines the major questions that must be answered, the data needed, the experts who should be consulted, the anticipated costs, and other rulemaking needs. EPA’s senior management provides guidance on the Analytic Blueprint early in the process at a meeting called Early Guidance. After the Early Guidance meeting, the workgroup uses its Analytic Blueprint to begin studying the problem. We may draw information from EPA’s research, scientific literature, other government agencies, or other researchers in the United States and abroad.

3. Identify Options. The workgroup then considers the available options for addressing the problem. This may require evaluating environmental technologies, changes in environmental management practices, and incentives that can motivate better environmental performance. The workgroup also takes related issues into account at this stage, such as the impact of various options on small businesses, on children’s health, or on state and local governments. Sometimes the workgroup might find there is no need for regulation.

4. Publish a Proposal & Request Public Comments. If the preliminary analysis recommends the need for regulation, the workgroup drafts a proposed regulation for publication in the Federal Register. Experts from EPA, other federal agencies, advisory groups, and more help inform the proposed regulation.

The draft publication is called a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). A law called the Administrative Procedure Act (5USC Ch. 5) generally requires EPA (and other federal regulatory agencies) to request comments from the public before finalizing the regulation. The public comment period typically lasts 60 to 90 days. Federal Register notices related to the environment are available online from many Web sites, including the Government Printing Office’s Federal Register site and Regulations.gov.

At the same time we publish an NPRM, EPA will sometimes publish an Information Collection Request (ICR). The Paperwork Reduction Act requires all agencies to ensure that their regulations do not impose an undue paperwork burden on individuals, businesses, and others. Therefore, we seek approval of an ICR when our proposed regulations might require more than 10 members of the public to report similar information back to us. The public can comment on these ICRs just as they can the NPRMs. See EPA’s ICR Web site for more information.

5. Review Public Comments. Next, the workgroup reviews and evaluates all the comments received. Depending on the regulation, these comments may range from recommendations for minimal change to extensive rewriting. The workgroup carefully weighs and evaluates the comments before developing a draft final regulation for review and approval by EPA senior management. All public comments and our responses are posted in the regulation’s docket. (Learn more about how to comment and how to access dockets.)

6. Issue Regulation. After approval by senior management, the EPA Administrator or his delegee reviews the final regulation and decides whether it should be issued. If the Administrator decides to issue the regulation, it is published in the Federal Register. Effective dates vary. A regulation may be effective on the day it is published, for example, or it may be effective a year later. These dates are specified in every regulation. Congress may decide to overturn a regulation after the Administrator has issued it, but it rarely does.

7. Analyze Our Regulations. When a final regulation is issued, our work has just begun. After promulgation, we work with regulated businesses, governments, and non-profits to help them comply with the requirements. In some cases, enforcement actions are necessary. And, we analyze our regulations to make sure they are effective.

Occasionally there are additional steps in this process. For instance, the workgroup might decide to draft a notice seeking public comment and information before the proposal is even developed. This pre-proposal is called an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and is also published in the Federal Register. Sometimes the workgroup receives new data from the public during a comment period, in which case we might publish in the Federal Register a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) so interested parties can learn more and submit additional comments. Finally, the workgroup might decide to take a new direction after receiving new data, which in some cases results in a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

EPA has a central staff within the Administrator’s Office to support all the regulations under development. The Office of Regulatory Policy and Management supports and monitors the status of regulatory workgroups, helps with Federal Register publication, and ensures that EPA is following the various laws and Executive Orders that govern how regulations are written.

Working with Other Federal Partners
Because EPA is part of the Executive Branch, we solicit the input of other federal departments and agencies when our regulations relate to their work. The White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) ensures rules are consistent with the Administration’s environmental priorities and policies, and coordinates review by other federal agencies that might have an interest in the issue.

Generally, OMB coordinates reviews of regulations that could impose more than $100 million in annual costs on society, present controversial legal or policy issues, or require multi-agency input. E.O. 12866 governs how the OMB review process operates. You may view the current and past regulations under E.O.12866 review at RegInfo.gov.

Where to Look for Regulations
We publish all of our proposed regulations, final regulations, and notices in the Federal Register. All general and permanent regulations are then codified in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which is maintained for all federal departments and agencies by the Government Printing Office (GPO). Known as the CFR, this compilation of government regulations is divided into 50 titles that represent topics of federal authority, such as education, transportation, and agriculture. Environmental regulations are mainly in Title 40: Protection of the Environment.

 
http://www.epa.gov/lawsregs/brochure/developing.html

Major Nidal Hasan, Homeland Security, Presidential transition task force, George Washington University, Non partisan think tank, For the Administration taking office in January 2009

Major Nidal Hasan, the Muslim shooter at Fort Hood, apparently was in attendance at the Homeland Security Policy Institute, Presidential Transition Task Force. From the Task Force report.

“Initiated by HSPI’s Steering Committee in Spring 2008, the Task Force sought to further policy discussions of the top strategic priorities in the area of security in order to generate actionable recommendations, for the Administration taking office in January 2009, designed to effectively meet the most vexing challenges the United States faces today.”

Here are some exerpts from the report.

“The nation is in the midst of a crossroads in its consideration of security policy. A coherent strategy to address 21st century threats to the United States, one that treats national and homeland security as a seamless whole, has yet to emerge. Washington is now marked by a new Administration, a new tone, and a new space – offering a rare opportunity to catch our collective breath, to think creatively and anew about the most vexing challenges this country faces, and to put the most powerful of those reasoned ideas into action.”

“The Task Force held internal deliberations, which included a number of briefings from subject-matter experts at the forefront of their fields.1 From these discussions and debates, four strategic priorities emerged that serve to inform the new Administration:
• development and implementation of a proactive security strategy at the federal level that integrates international and domestic aspects of security, is founded upon the concepts of resilience, and is effectively resourced;
• enhancement of a national approach to preparedness and response through the development of a risk-based homeland security doctrine that effectively draws upon and coordinates all available assets (governments, the private sector, nongovernmental organizations, and the public);
• realistic public discussion of the threats the nation faces and constructive engagement of the American public in preparedness and response efforts; and
• re-invigoration of the United States’ role in the world, through a recognition that our security and that of our allies depends upon the stability and engagement of other nations.”

“Findings
• The US has adopted reactive rather than proactive strategic approaches to homeland security and national security.
• The US has not built sufficient resilience into its strategic security posture.
• Since 2003, homeland security and national security policy have been treated as separate and distinct enterprises.
• The budgeting process for homeland security investment priorities is opaque and oriented towards the short-term.”
“Recommendations
The President should:
• develop homeland security doctrine that includes a multi-layered approach to threat response—utilizing all aspects of the federal government, to include homeland and national security entities—to improve regional capability;
• incorporate anti-crime and counterterrorism planning, “intelligence-led policing,” and all-hazards preparedness into preparedness planning;
• utilize and foster State and local law enforcement intelligence relationships with DHS via fusion centers;
• continue incorporating the National Guard into Northern Command’s mission; and
• encourage the formulation of strategic relationships with academia and the private sector at the national and regional levels to inform security policy.”

“Recommendations
The President should:
• employ a strategy that amplifies voices within the Muslim world that seek to counter radicalization and recruitment, and that exercises care regarding the use of lexicon;
• foster respect for and adherence to international law in the form of longstanding, fundamental and widely accepted norms; and
• engage productively with international organizations and institutions to build security abroad”

“Crowley specified, saying it was imperative for the next ad-ministration to practice transparency and the rule of law, which means closing Guantanamo Bay. HSPI Director Frank Cilluffo went further, stating that we ought to abandon the label “Global War on Terror”, which has the effect of elevating our adversaries and isolating our allies. In response, Crowley agreed and suggested the British term, “struggle against violent extremism,” as a more viable alternative.”

NidalHasanHomelandSecurity

NidalHasanHomelandSecurity2

Homeland Security report:

http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&pid=gmail&attid=0.1&thid=124df4300250bab2&mt=application%2Fpdf&url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.google.com%2Fmail%2F%3Fui%3D2%26ik%3D2485918dad%26view%3Datt%26th%3D124df4300250bab2%26attid%3D0.1%26disp%3Dattd%26zw&sig=AHBy-hbj6S1hvA22vNmfZDbIrweHCUhVjg

H1N1, Obama Declares National Emergency, October 24, 2009, Bill of Rights revoked?, Stafford Act, National Emergencies Act, Public Health Emergency Fund, Federal emergency authorities, Rights have been now officially suspended.

I first heard about Obama declaring a national emergency due to the H1N1 flu this morning as I was driving down the highway. I was warned many months ago that the flu was coming and that Obama would use it as an excuse to exercise more power over the American public. One of the people that warned me of this, in March of 2009, before the public awareness of a coming flu, a retired military officer, just sent me some information.

October 24, 2009,  approx 7:50 PM ET.

“Obama declares swine flu a national emergency”

“President Barack Obama declared the swine flu outbreak a national emergency and empowered his health secretary to suspend federal guidelines at hospitals and speed up how infected people might receive treatment in a disaster.

The declaration that Obama signed late Friday means Health and Human Services chief Kathleen Sebelius to bypass federal rules when opening alternative care sites, such as offsite hospital centers at schools or community centers, if needed.

Hospitals could modify patient rules — for example, requiring them to give less information during a hectic time — to quicken access to treatment, with government approval. The declaration, which the White House announced Saturday, allows HHS in some cases to let hospitals relocate emergency rooms offsite to reduce flu-related burdens and to protect noninfected patients.

Administration officials said the declaration was a pre-emptive move designed to make decisions easier when they need to be made. Officials said this was not in response to any single development on an outbreak that has lasted months and has killed more than 1,000 people in the United States.

It was the second of two steps needed to give Sebelius extraordinary powers during a crisis. On April 26, the administration declared swine flu a public health emergency, allowing the shipment of roughly 12 million doses of flu-fighting medications from a federal stockpile to states in case they eventually needed them. At the time, there were 20 confirmed cases in the U.S. of people recovering easily. There was no vaccine against swine flu, but the CDC had taken the initial step necessary for producing one.”

Read more:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091024/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_swine_flu

 

“What does this mean for YOU?   It means the Federal Government has just declared its right to revoke the Bill of Rights:
 
A National Emergency, under the Stafford Act:
 
Quote:
With respect to the current outbreak, the Public Health Emergency Fund is available (but is
currently unfunded)17 and Emergency Use Authorizations have been granted by FDA.18 However,
the Secretary’s waiver and modification authority has not been activated because there is no
concurrent presidential declaration under either the Stafford Act or the National Emergencies Act.
(comment: report published in May 2009)
 
So declaring this emergency doesn’t really make more funds available.  They don’t EXIST!  So, that’s not the reason……
Quote:
A presidential declaration under the Stafford Act triggers federal emergency authorities that are
independent of the Secretary’s public health emergency authorities. Declarations under the
Stafford Act fall into two categories: emergency declarations and major disaster declarations. As
of this point in time, there have been no Stafford Act declarations pertaining to the current
influenza A(H1N1) virus outbreak. A presidential emergency declaration under the Stafford Act
authorizes the President to direct federal agencies to support state and local emergency assistance
activities; coordinate disaster relief provided by federal and non-federal organizations; provide
technical and advisory assistance to state and local governments; provide emergency assistance
through federal agencies; remove debris through grants to state and local governments; provide
assistance to individuals and households for temporary housing and uninsured personal needs;

and assist state and local governments in the distribution of medicine, food, and consumables.19
The total amount of assistance available is limited in an emergency declaration to $5 million,
“unless the President determines that there is a continuing need; Congress must be notified if the
$5 million ceiling is breached.
 
Source:  Document prepared for Congress in May, 2009:  http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/R40560_20090506.pdf
 
Now, we’re getting down to the real reasons…..
 
Further of interest from this document:
 
Quote:
A major disaster declaration authorizes the President to offer all the assistance authorized under
an emergency declaration, and further authorizes funds for the repair and restoration of federal
facilities, unemployment assistance, emergency grants to assist low-income migrant and seasonal
farm workers, food coupons and distribution, relocation assistance, crisis counseling assistance
and training, community disaster loans, emergency communications, and emergency public
transportation.23 Additionally, the total amount of assistance provided in a major disaster
declaration is not subject to a ceiling in the same way as under an emergency declaration.
 
And here is the money quote:
 
Quote:

The Public Health Service Act and the Stafford Act contain authorities that
allow the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the President, respectively, to take certain
actions during emergencies or disasters. While the primary authority for quarantine and isolation
in the United States resides at the state level, the federal government has jurisdiction over
interstate and border quarantine. Border entry and border closing issues may arise in the context
of measures designed to keep individuals who have, or may have, influenza A(H1N1) from
crossing U.S. borders. Aliens with the H1N1 virus can be denied entry, but American citizens
cannot be excluded from the United States solely because of a communicable disease, although
they may be quarantined or isolated at the border for health reasons. Airlines have considerable
discretion to implement travel restrictions relating to the safety and/or security of flights and other
passengers and crew. In addition, the federal government has broad legal authority to regulate and
control the navigable airspace of the United States in dealing with incidents involving
communicable diseases. States have authority to initiate other emergency measures such as
mandatory vaccination orders and certain nonpharmaceutical interventions such as school
closures, which may lessen the spread of an infectious disease. The International Health
Regulations adopted by the World Health Organization in 2005 provide a framework for
international cooperation against infectious disease threats.

The use of these emergency measures to contain the influenza A(H1N1) virus outbreak may raise
a classic civil rights issue: to what extent can an individual’s liberty be curtailed to advance the
common good? The U.S. Constitution and federal civil rights laws provide for individual due
process and equal protection rights as well as a right to privacy, but these rights are balanced
against the needs of the community.
 
And there you have it, in black and white.  I make no determination as to whether H1N1A is truly the public threat they are presenting, although there have been deaths of children at a concerning rate, even here in Michigan – the fact is, the Stafford Act allows the Federal Government to strip away all your rights.  While this National Emergency is in effect, this gives the Federal Government carte blanche to use this declaration for whatever it pleases.  Rights have been now officially suspended.”
 
Stephanie S. Jasky,   Founder, Director
Follow Us on Twitter

https://twitter.com/FedUpUSA

http://fedupusa.org

Jim Moran, Virginia Democrat representative, Town hall meeting, Poster, August 25th, 2009, Reston VA, Howard Dean, Wesley Cheeks, Jr, School security officer, This used to be America, It ain’t no more, Video

OrgNatlSocialistsHealthCare

 

*** See Update below ***

Correct me if I am wrong, once they opened this public property up to politicians of the Democrat party, for a public forum, how can they legally exclude opposing views?

 

“This video was taken on Tuesday, August 25th, 2009 at Rep. Jim Moran’s (D-VA) Town Hall meeting on Obama Deathcare (Howie Dean was there too) held at South Lakes High School in Reston, VA.

Many people were left outside when the school filled to capacity. School security officer Wesley Cheeks, Jr. did not like my anti-Obamacare poster which used one of the gone-viral “Joker” graphics.

When I said to Officer Cheeks, “This used to be America!” his response was: “It ain’t no more, OK?”

I feel sorry for Officer Cheeks. He, like many African-Americans are being played by the racist Obama administration. Wake up people. They used to want you only for your votes, but now with the huge hispanic illegals pouring in they won’t even need you for that. Watch those inner city abortion clinics get stimulated though. Democrat and church leaders sure seem to have time and money to build those.

Google “margaret sangar black children eugenics” (no quotes) and find out what’s REALLY behind those Democrat abortuariums run by Planned Parenthood. Democrat eugenicists like Rahm Emanuel and his brother Zeke “Dr. Mengele” Emanuel and John Holdren and George Soros and Mr. Abortion himself, Barack Obama can’t kill enough black babies. The ovens are fired up. Wake up people.

Satan is in da house.”

 

Thanks to commenter Fernley Girl

*** Update ***

I have sent an email request to the Reston, VA police requesting the statute allowing the police officer to demand that the poster be taken down.

China, Flu pandemic, Vaccines, biological weapons, Chi Haotian, 2005 speech, Chairman, China Military Commission, Bird Flu, natural resources, Kill millions of Americans

For many years I have stated that of the large power countries, China was the one that concerned me most. They have an enormous population and have the potential for desperately needing water and other natural resources. The Germans faced this dilemna after World War I as they looked to grow their economy. They needed more living room, “lebensraum.”

Because of some flu related controversies I am researching, I went back into my email archives. An article that I received on March 18, 2009 from a retired military officer now appears more plausible and ominous.

“The following is the actual text of a speech delivered in December, 2005 by Comrade
Chi Haotian –the Vice-Chairman of China’s Military Commission to top officers
and generals. Keep in mind that China has for many years advocated deceitful
and covert warfare against its enemies. This is their Modus Operandi. There
should be little question that a “Bird Flu” Pandemic would deeply excite them.
(Don’t forget how they have poisoned thousands of American pets and knowingly
placed lead paints on toddler’s toys.)”

““Comrades, I’m very excited today, because the large-scale online survey sina.com
that was done for us showed that our next generation is quite promising and our
Party’s cause will be carried on. In answering the question, “Will you shoot at
women, children and prisoners of war,” more than 80 per cent of the respondents
answered in the affirmative, exceeding by far our expectations.”

“The central issue of this survey appears to be whether one should shoot at
women, children and prisoners of war, but its real significance goes far beyond
that. Ostensibly, our intention is mainly to figure out what the Chinese people’s
attitude towards war is: If these future soldiers do not hesitate to kill even noncombatants,
they’ll naturally be doubly ready and ruthless in killing combatants.
Therefore, the responses to the survey questions may reflect the general attitude
people have towards war……..We wanted to know: If China’s global development
will necessitate massive deaths in enemy countries, will our people endorse that
scenario? Will they be for or against it?”

“The first pressing issue facing us is living space. This is the biggest focus of the
revitalization of the Chinese race. In my last speech, I said that the fight over basic
living resources (including land and ocean) is the source of the vast majority of
wars in history. This may change in the information age, but not fundamentally.
Our per capita resources are much less than those of Germany’s back then. In
addition, economic development in the last twenty-plus years had a negative impact,
and climates are rapidly changing for the worse. Our resources are in very short
supply. The environment is severely polluted, especially that of soil, water, and air.
Not only our ability to sustain and develop our race, but even its survival is gravely
threatened, to a degree much greater than faced Germany back then.”

“Would the United States allow us to go out to gain new living space? First, if
the United States is firm in blocking us, it is hard for us to do anything significant
to Taiwan and some other countries! Second, even if we could snatch some land
from Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or even Japan, how much more living space can we
get? Very trivial! Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia
have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.”

“Only by using special means to ‘clean up’ America will we be able to lead the
Chinese people there. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many
people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid
development of modern biological technology, and new bio weapons have been
invented one after another. Of course we have not been idle; in the past years we
have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of
achieving our purpose of ‘cleaning up’ America all of a sudden. When Comrade
Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to
make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focused instead
on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy
country.

Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the
Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are
strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place.
According to the computations of the author of Yellow Peril, more than half of the
Chinese will die, and that figure would be more than 800 million people! Just after
the liberation, our yellow land supported nearly 500 million people, while today the
official figure of the population is more than 1.3 billion. This yellow land has
reached the limit of its capacity. One day, who know how soon it will come, the
great collapse will occur any time and more than half of the population will have to
go.

It is indeed brutal to kill one or two hundred million Americans. But that is the
only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the CCP leads the
world. We, as revolutionary humanitarians, do not want deaths, But if history
confronts us with a choice between deaths of Chinese and those of Americans, we’d
have to pick the latter, as, for us, it is more important to safeguard the lives of the
Chinese people and the life of our Party.
The last problem I want to talk about is of firmly seizing the preparations for
military battle. The central committee believes, as long as we resolve the United
States problem at one blow, our domestic problems will all be readily solved.
Therefore, our military battle preparation appears to aim at Taiwan, but in fact is
aimed at the United States, and the preparation is far beyond the scope of attacking
aircraft carriers or satellites. Marxism pointed out that violence is the midwife for
the birth of the new society. Therefore war is the midwife for the birth of China’s
century.””

Entire article:

http://www.rense.com/general85/ChinaSpeaks.pdf

This article, confirmed or not, represents a realistic scenario with many historical precedents.

It is also a huge wakeup call to lower our debt and dependence on China.

And remember, this was sent to me on March 18, 2009.

Obama thugs, Acorn, Health care townhall meeting, Acorn and police block right to free speech, Youtube video, Health care reform discussions, Obama lied about Acorn

Barack Obama

Pathological Liar

 

Obama lied about his connections to Acorn:

  • Obama helped Acorn in organizing of “Project VOTE” in 1992.
  • Obama was a community organizer.
  • Obama represented Acorn as attorney, ACORN vs. Edgar.
  • Obama was involved in Acorn leadership training sessions.
  • Obama, Annenberg Challenge, William Ayers, Acorn.
  • Acorn, New party endorsement of Obama.
  • February 25th to May 17th 2008, Obama camp paid $832,598 to Acorn.
  • Acorn Voter fraud.
  • Obama may have stolen the nomination through Acorn voter fraud.

 
Read more
 

IL Senate candidate Obama meets with Acorn members

IL Senate candidate Obama meets with Acorn members

 

Obama Thugs and Acorn in action

 

This site is apparently the origin of the Youtube video:

http://www.breakdownofamerica.com/?p=351