Powers Granted to FEMA In A National Emergency

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by FFTT, Sep 9, 2005.

  1. FFTT macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #1
    I'm re-posting this with the hope that more people will begin to undertand what our honorable leaders
    have WRITTEN ;) into law.

    Perhaps NOW people will FINALLY take notice and become more active in their state and local governments.

    Here are just a few Executive Orders associated with FEMA that would suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. These Executive Orders have been on record for nearly 30 years and could be enacted by the stroke of a Presidential pen:

    I hope you will pass this on.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10990 allows the government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels and minerals.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 10998 allows the government to take over all food resources and farms.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11001 allows the government to take over all health, education and welfare functions.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways and public storage facilities.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institution in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.
    The Federal Emergency Management Agency has broad powers in every aspect of the nation. General Frank Salzedo, chief of FEMA's Civil Security Division stated in a 1983 conference that he saw FEMA's role as a "new frontier in the protection of individual and governmental leaders from assassination, and of civil and military installations from sabotage and/or attack, as well as prevention of dissident groups from gaining access to U.S. opinion, or a global audience in times of crisis."

    YES MY FRIENDS,

    FEMA HAS THE POWER TO SHUT DOWN THE INTERNET.

    http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/gvcon6.html
     
  2. miloblithe macrumors 68020

    miloblithe

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #2
    Oh no! The government has the authority to respond to an emergency. What dastardly plan will those fat cats think of next.
     
  3. rdowns Suspended

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #3
    Executive orders are issued by the President and not voted into law.

    Would you prefer the federal gov't to not have these powers in times of emergency?
     
  4. FFTT thread starter macrumors 68030

    FFTT

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Location:
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    #4
    You are correct about the executive order reference, I should have rephrased.

    The rest of these executive orders fall under "looks good on paper"
    until someone is forcing you to leave your home at gunpoint, shutting down
    the internet to repress opposing points of view or forcing you and your family into a work camp.

    Generally I have found that those defending FEMA's actions lately
    are more concerned about how this affects their preferred political party.

    FEMA was turning away life saving help deliberately.
    FEMA delayed action until they were forced to act by public outrage
    and to most of us it is quite clear that FEMA FAILED AMERICA.
     
  5. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #5
    Instead of canning FEMA because they didn't perform, as some of the small-government folks around here have suggested, I'd rather see it become effective again. That means continuing Clinton's tradition of not using FEMA's top posts as patronage positions.
    Emphasis mine.
    There's a guy who gets it.

    But then again, there's a sizable contingent of people around here who hate anything Clinton with a fiery passion, and won't hesitate to deride anything he did. :rolleyes:
     
  6. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #6
    Fema sucks, i think we would have done much better if they would have stayed out of it and let people do what they were doing. Instead Fema caused a lot of problems trying to be "in charge". Lets pull back power to the states. I iam very bothered with everything i have seen happening at the federal level. These disasters happen at the local and state level hence its where they should be managed. Again Fema CAUSED a lot of the Problems with the Im in charge here comes the Govt B.S. Less Govt rather then more is allways a good thing. Like Reagan said........................
     
  7. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #7
    Some things belong on a federal level, this kind of multi-state emergency being one of them. Just because the federal authority in this instance was run by a complete twat who had absolutely no qualifications for the job does not necessarily mean that federal responsibility is a bad thing. Look to the man who gave the job to such a klutz.
     
  8. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #8
    True and Fema would have done better if it was left as it was before Bush and his Homeland Security Crap. What we have is yet another gigantic beauracracy, who now is doing everything from storms to searching Grandma when she gets on the plane. The reality is we have more waste,more abuse,bigger Govt,thats out of touch except for the propaganda it pushes. If luggage isnt being checked and our border isnt enforce why bother with a false Homeland Security crap?
     
  9. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #9
    FEMA worked well under James Witt by all accounts, but Clinton didn't appoint him because of patronage. Witt had headed up disaster management at the state level previously, and had years of experience in the field. Apparently there is a quote in Clinton's memoir where he talks about viewing the damage from Andrew under Bush Sr. and recalling the lack of federal ability to respond and noting that the head of FEMA was a patronage position. So his story goes, he vowed not to make the same mistake because he realized that when a disaster strikes it becomes the most important thing in the world for the victims. He saw that it hurt Bush Sr. politically as well as permitted needless suffering and deaths. Thus he chose Witt and the feds reacted much better with someone with experience at the helm.

    IMO, Bush is trying to kill off government programs by creating self-fulfilling prophesies wherein he underfunds and/or allows incompetent management of programs conservatives don't like, then they jump up and down saying look how ineffective government is! when the feces hits the vertical rotor. He's trying to do it to the EPA, the Dept' of Education, FEMA, off the top of my head, and probably a number of others I can't think of right now.

    Of course the states can do a better job when the feds are deliberately flubbing things up. But when the fed stuff runs right it's far better than a patchwork of state responses.
     
  10. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #10
    You know, I used to think that was just a conspiracy theory. But now, I'm not so sure. I mean, maybe it's just incompetance, but maybe it isn't. Based on responses of people like DHM, if it was on purpose, it may actually be working. :mad: Don't fall for it man, that's what they want you to think!
     
  11. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    Just ask Grover Norquist . He'll tell you:
     
  12. Xtremehkr macrumors 68000

    Xtremehkr

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #12
    There hasn't been a lot of argument about this lately. Usually there is a more spirited defense of anything the administration does. Maybe this is a turning point when it comes to incompetence.
     
  13. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #13
    This is really scary. I'm all for bypassing state and local government in times of emergency, but this is insane.
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Anybody notice how our ultra-conservative members haven't been saying much lately? Hmm...wonder why?
     
  15. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #15
    Does anybody think we'd be hearing more from them if the Pres was a Dem? How many of us would still be criticizing, and how many of them would stop defending? Considering the fact that I strongly disliked Kerry, I think I would still be pissed. Yeah local and state didn't do great, before or after. But FEMA really dropped the ball. This is what they are there for, and they not only didn't help, but after dragging their butts for a couple of days, actually kinda made some things worse. And who put the head of FEMA in charge because he was a buddy of his?

    But yeah, I know... I'm sure somehow I'm just an unpatriotic, partisan hack. :rolleyes:
     
  16. Don't panic macrumors 603

    Don't panic

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2004
    Location:
    having a drink at Milliways
    #16
    i think that most would still be criticizing.
    of course there is also the likely possibility that someone better would have done, well, better.
     
  17. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #17
    Let me say this again- I don't care what party is in office. I've always criticized/praised both when appropriate. If you screw up, you should be held accountable. If it were Kerry or Clinton, it would be no different.
     

Share This Page