STATE OF EMERGENCY: forget any rights you thought you had.

October 24, 2009

President Obama has declared a national emergency to deal with the "rapid increase in illness" from the H1N1 influenza virus.

"The 2009 H1N1 pandemic continues to evolve. The rates of illness continue to rise rapidly within many communities across the nation, and the potential exists for the pandemic to overburden health care resources in some localities," Obama said in a statement.

"Thus, in recognition of the continuing progression of the pandemic, and in further preparation as a nation, we are taking additional steps to facilitate our response."

It is a closely held belief, by many, that the US military would revolt against the POTUS if asked to impose martial law. I would like, here, to challenge that assumption. Dependent on the situation, the armed forces might very well support him (or her) with gusto.

One assumes that the imposition of martial law would occur only at times when a popular uprising (or the appearance of one) was exigent. However, many of our forces would refuse to support this if only based on their oath of service. Luckily for those in power, this need not be the case.

Suppose, instead, that a dangerous virus were spreading throughout the population. If the federal government and the CDC were supplied with serum to counter the disease, martial law very well might be declared in order to stem the spread of the virus. This would be in the national interest, and almost definitely would include the full support of the military. Under a state of emergency, FEMA would have ultimate power to direct 'rescue efforts'. Those who declined aid could be arrested and held without trial through targetted suspension of Habeus Corpus... especially since civilian courts could not operate for fear of the spread of disease.

Let us not forget that, during WWII the federal government interned individuals of German descent based only upon suspiscion of guilt. Those of Japanese descent were likewise interred, during the Pacific war, and again based only upon suspicion. There was no popular uprising against this in the Military.

Good catch. Can you provide a link?

Jeebus, herr. Is this why Congress hasn't repealed the Patriot Act? Because they can't until the President stands down the state of emergency?

Last Edited by Khim on 11/14/2010 11:44 PM

What pandemic was this?

Let's not forget the DREAM act which Nancy Pelosi wants to push for a vote on next week. If that thing passes you will see the ranks of the military swell with illegal aliens. And how loyal do you think they will be towards the constitution ?

Homeland Security, and its subsidiary organization the TSA, are able to function only because the US is currently under an extended State of Emergency. Protections against illegal search and seizure are suspended in specific situations. If you live within 100 miles of the border, if you are travelling on public transportation, or if you are suspected of terrorist ties, these protections do not apply. Suspicion is the only requirement, and just-cause need not be present.

TSA searches are now gutting the few remaining Fourth Amendment protections against search and seizure. Essentially, our government, supported by the courts, has defined a "Constitution-Free Zone" incorporating all airports and the area of the United States within one hundred miles of a border or the coast (termed the "functional equivalent of the
border, or extended border"), in which constitutional protections under the Fourth Amendment are deemed not applicable, and are routinely flouted by the Department of Homeland Security.

[link to www.americanthinker.com]

The UN quietly changed the definition of pandemic some time ago, and the first application of their new definitions was during the H1N1 scare--actually, it was probably part of the cause for the public fear on the subject, as most did not know that the new scary definitions were only recently changed. The Pandemic turned out to be nothing more dangerous than the normal flu. A similar 'pandemic' might easily be used in the scenareo I posited above.

This really needs to be pinned, please?

The Patriot Act is separate. Revocation would have to be done by a veto-proof majority, because the President (Democrat or Republican) would never cede power without extended battle. President Obama, as one of his campaign promises, said he would repeal it. This has not happened. Bush should have never put it into law, and I screamed about it when it was proposed. That's my way of saying it's not a republican thing or a democrat thing or a conservative or liberal thing. It's a power thing.

So 290 in the House and 67 in the Senate.

*ponders*

And keep in mind that all of those congressmen (and women) would have to agree that the act required repeal. There is a very strong faction within the US which likes the Patriot Act, regardless of its supercedence of constitutional rights, simply because it provides the illusion of safety.

Here's a shocker for you: no law need be passed to revoke your right to bear arms. Under a state of emergency, an armed populous might easily be seen as a threat to the general welfare.

And all this time there has been this back and forth about the 2nd Amendment when it was a non-issue to begin with?

Man...do I feel st00pid, and even though it has been a long time since I read the Patriot Act (gah..I don't even know if anything has been added to it since it was originally passed), I don't remember anything in there that specifically defined a "State of Emergency"

Never mind, herr. I just found the specific definition of a "State of Emergency"

This has become as stupid as it possibly can- this^ whilst our high court (?) decides that o' has the power to kill at random, anyone he personally deems a threat. What next, deem ALL AMERICANS as a threat?
Can he kill the whole populace of a America, LEGALLY, according these new laws?

NICE ONE thanks for that

In a state of declared war any rights can be suspended. Even Abe Lincoln suspended Habeaus Corpus (right to trial) during the Civil War.

Certainly, the USA did put Japanese Americans into camps during WWII. At the time and after Pearl Harbor, no doubt Roosevelt assumed the West Coast would be next and he was not sure if we had the forces to repell an attack or a landing in those states. He did not want those with families still in Japan to make any contact with them.

Also, considering the rage and hatred for the Japanese after Pearl Harbor, in an odd sort of way, he did it to keep them from being killed in the streets.

When it was over, they all should have been reimbursed for whatever property and businesses they lost because of it. However, reparations took decades and it was not nearly enough to make up for what they lost. Even after the war, it was still very difficult for Japanese Americans in this country. Yet, being the people they are, they got through it and prospered.

We spent a fortune rebuilding Japan after WWII but nothing for our own Japanese American citizens who were never really disloyal at all and had no intentions of going back to living under an Emperor.

German Americans were not treated that way. We did have German POW's here in the states and they assuredly were treated far better than Hitler's SS treated American POW's.

Anyway, back to the original subject. During a time of crisis, the government can declare martial (military) law, institute curfews, and suspend rights.

As for the FEMA camps, consider this....war with Mexico. Would you trust the estimated 12 million illegal Mexicans in the country not to be subversive and start killing us all? Most, even the ones who are citizens, consider themselves Mexicans first, then Catholics, and Americans last. Only those who have been here for more than a few generations consider themselves Americans first.

Also consider a scenario where China comes in through Mexico.

Then there are the unknown natural disasters. After Katrina and the unpreparedness for such a massive population needing assistance, might it not be better to have some places ready for mass evacuations? What happens to those in California when the Big One Earthquake hits? Where are those millions of people going to go?

Yes, let's question the intention of any camps that are proven to exist. However, let's not automatically assume they exist for a harmful intent.

FUCK OFF. The 4th Amendment RIGHTS are inalienable and cannot be suspended, fuck face.

I disagree only on your last paragraph. One should not trust one's government. One should judge it with suspicion, and watch its every move. Freedom is too easily lost to trust it to those with no reason to extend it.

Quite the intelligent retort. What I've quoted and referenced are fact, not supposition. Protections against illegal search and seizure do not apply within 100 miles of the border, any more than they apply when crossing the border. It's not just fact. It's in common practice right now by ICE and TSA. Or did you think all that groping at the airport was just randy teenagers? Open your eyes.

Are you referencing something in particular, and if so can you provide a link?

.


But both Congress and Obama renewed the Patriot Act in February.








.

Or a federal judge ... who isn't overturned.





.

Absolutely right. But the state of emergency required no permission from congress when it was renewed. I remember watching CSPAN when the notice was delivered to congress during debate. They barely blinked an eye, and that was when Republicans had the floor. I remember thinking, 'Jeez, does no one understand the awesome power that extention just allowed him?'

does anyone have capacity numbers

i understand these camps for rogue military, the largest threat

rogue military is not necessary. I don't know if the camps even exist, for sure. Yes J. Ventura did a program on them, but for all I know that was for ratings. Never laid eyes on them myself so I can't vouch for veracity. That being said, if they do exist I would expect that they are for citizens, not military. Military who disobey orders during national emergency may be summarily convicted under the UCMJ, which supercedes civilian law and the US Constitution for members of the military.

Wow, thanks for the pin. I didn't expect it, but I'm glad it's there, if only to educate.

Folks, Obama does not need the H1N1 State of emergency or any other.

He renewed the George W BUSH 9-11 State of Emergency on SEPTEMBER 10th 2009

[link to www.commondreams.org]

If you read the text of the original document on this, it sends chills up your spine