RSS Feed
March 30th, 2012 
FAKE NEWS for the Zionist agenda 
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
March 30, 2012
Asawin Suebsaeng, who is an editorial fellow at Mother Jones, seems to have a problem understanding the Constitution and the national security state. He takes the political “right” to task for warning about the National Defense Resources Preparedness executive order signed by Obama earlier this month. This particular EO is no big deal and if you really want to place blame, place it on Harry Truman, Suebsaeng writes.
He’s right about Truman. The National Security Act of 1947 was passed by Congress and signed into law by president Truman. It has allowed the Pentagon and the CIA to encroach on our civil liberties ever since. It created a national security establishment that has issued a number of unconstitutional executive orders. Mr. Suebsaeng mentions these in passing. It enabled the military-industrial complex president Dwight D. Eisenhower warned about in his farewell address in 1961.
Both the national security state and the military-industrial complex (which are actually inseparable) experienced a renaissance following the engineered demise of the Soviet Union, the supposed (and endlessly celebrated) end of the Cold War and the attacks of September 11, 2001. Eisenhower warned that the “potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist” and this is precisely what happened prior to and following his speech.
Suebsaeng tells us the National Defense Resources Preparedness EO is not unique and it is basically a rerun of executive orders by Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Dwight Eisenhower. “It’s your standard government readiness policy – nothing particularly exciting or groundbreaking,” he writes without delving into what a “readiness policy” is and what it means for a nation that is supposedly a republic based on the Constitution.
“Manufacturing a far-fetched conspiracy out of something so routine is a distraction,” Suebsaeng complains in what we can only conclude is ignorance of the issue and a knee-jerk reaction in defense of Obama, who many liberals still blindly follow despite the obvious fact he is a teleprompter reading stooge little different than his predecessor.
The National Defense Resources Preparedness EO and most of the FEMA EOs before it almost completely eviscerate due process (explicitly stated in the Fifth Amendment with a heritage going back to the Magna Carta). The EOs sprouting from the Defense Production Act of 1950 allowing the government to mobilize national resources in the event of “national emergencies” set the stage for a complete government takeover and the implementation of martial law and confiscate private property.
Reading the EOs make this abundantly clear despite the arguments of apologists like Mr. Suebsaeng, who dismisses legitimate concerns about egregious violations of the Constitution as the “right’s latest phony freak-out about Obama’s wielding of executive power.”
Supposed liberals usually only complain about abuses of executive power when so-called conservatives are in the White House. They routinely give Democrat presidents a blank check to attack the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. For them, the Constitution is a partisan football.
If Mr. Suebsaeng were a fair and impartial observer instead of a Democrat apologist for maximum state power over the individual, he would mention that presidents regardless of party affiliation have repeatedly violated the Constitution – from Abraham Lincoln to Woodrow Wilson to Bush and Obama.
The commentary of Sean Hannity, Pamela Geller, the Daily Paul, Reason and Alex Jones – all excoriated as right-wing nuts and extremists by Suebsaeng – come in a distant second to the in-your-face derogation of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights given the nod by Mother Jones’ editorial fellow.
Addendum
Although technically not an executive order, the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) was not mentioned by Suebsaeng. Obama had attached a signing order to the legislation passed into law by Congress. The ACLU, usually identified with liberals such as Suebsaeng, stated following Obama’s signature on the NDAA that “it will damage both his legacy and American’s reputation for upholding the rule of law. The last time Congress passed indefinite detention legislation was during the McCarthy era and President Truman had the courage to veto that bill. We hope that the president will consider the long view of history before codifying indefinite detention without charge or trial.”
Moreover, Mr. Suebsaeng did not mention the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act and other legislation passed into law or signed by executive fiat. The National Defense Resources Preparedness EO is part of a larger and increasingly portentous effort by the government to establish the framework of a police state and an excuse to impose martial law.
The NDAA gives the government the power to arrest without warrant (as stipulated under the Fourth Amendment) any U.S. citizen and hold him or her indefinitely, a concept abhorrent to the founders and more likely to be the practice of a military dictatorship.
Both the so-called liberal and conservative sides of the establishment ignored the NDAA – not because they are unaware of the legislation and its purpose (which has nothing to do with al-Qaeda), but because the establishment does not want the NDAA discussed.
It looks like Suebsaeng has decided to respect their wish as well.
Share this article:
9 Responses to “Concern Over National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order a “Distraction””
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Posted in 
Tags: 
It’s true. The founding fathers would be shocked to see what our Federal government is doing in the area of individual and financial liberties. Our rights and freedoms are actually less today that what people have in many third world dictatorships.
I’m shocked at the way the Trayvon Martin case is going viral. It is not in just one media source, but it is everywhere. We have CNN having big stories on ‘getting to know Trayvon’. We have MSNBC spinning the story and demonizing Zimmerman’s black friend who just wanted to say that Zimmerman wasn’t some evil racist monster. We have fools in congress taking testimony from the family and wearing hoodies. This is being ‘played’ to it’s maximum effect to try and produce racial divides for the benefit of Obama’s re-election and to end gun and self-defense rights. This is a truly evil campaign, which will divide the country. Personally, I wouldn’t vote for Barry Soetoro, after this deal, even if the Republicans dig up Joe Stalin and run him.(and the three guys they are running besides Dr. Paul aren’t far from Stalin)
Government that acts like a predator on its citizens
is an enemy and a terrorist, so it must be abolished.
Thoughts for Incurable Kinds of Images.
Click hotlink.
Yeah, yeah, Antwan Sussbag or whatever you’re name is… We’ve heard it all before but there is a great disparity in what people say and what they do. We’ve seen many other oppressive laws enacted recently that have already spurred various enforcement agencies into committing unreasonable acts against innocent people — all in the name of personal and unwarranted control.
The universal laws of ambition, control, and their attendant corollaries of comfort and elite preference; and also the corollaries of deception and ruthlessness insure that criminal acts under “legal” cover are likely to occur.
And because of what you’re saying it and HOW you’re saying it, let’s add another law… the law of THE DECEPTION OF LIMITED USAGE… where one declares emphatically that a broad-scope and potentialally threatening program can ONLY be limited and thus result ONLY in harmless effects on the people.
So you’re argument against people’s concern about the NDAA is in valid.
* that’s INVALID.
The writer of this article stated:
“Manufacturing a far-fetched conspiracy out of something so routine is a distraction,” Suebsaeng complains… in what we can only conclude is ignorance of the issue and a knee-jerk reaction in defense of Obama, who many liberals still blindly follow despite the obvious fact he is a teleprompter reading stooge little different than his predecessor.
This paragraph aptly sums up the assault on these laws and reveals our leaders’ true intentions.
Remember that the term “conspiracy theorist” is most often used as a SLUR meant to degrade by denying people’s concerns about what could happen and indeed HAS happened.
And what’s so “routine” about it?
Until recently, this Operation Paperclip type stuff wasn’t routine at all.
Makes sense, right EXCEPT for the fact that anyone who stores up for a disaster is now labeled a potential terrorist.
So the gov’t is telling you to prepare, but if you listen to them and DO prepare, you’re considered a terrorist.
The worst thing about it is that one walks through the world with no ill intentions, one seeks to do well by others and self, and the system mentioned above has a view on you as a problem, by virtue of its very existence and design.