This country has been in a contrived national state of emergency for five decades (with the exclusion of a short time in the '70's when our congress repealed all current national states of emergency), courtesy of your executive branch and the ability to execute the 'executive order' and secret orders like the PDD (presidential decision directive.

We are currently in at least 2 national states of emergency, one dealing with the imminent threat from Burma (told you it was contrived) and the other is E.O. 12938 signed in Nov. 94 lasting through to July 2000 dealing with the imminent threat from China and Russia (in light of the nuclear weapons scandal with Clinton and China, I knew you'd like this one.)

So I ask what's the big deal? This is posturing as much as the other national states of emergency have been. This so called national state of emergency does afford many far reaching implications, but why get your panties in a bunch about this particular one and not pay attention to all the others?

I don't get it. Oh, h*ll maybe I do. You are focusing, right? Yeah, focusing. That's the ticket.

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), November 30, 1999

Answers

Because the words "National State of Emergency" give pres clint power to declare marshall law, at which point fema has pres authority to make decisions on his behalf, directing the military and (now) also the national guard. Is this correct, or have I misunderstood the documents (EO's,PDD's)?

Opps, hey, wait, under a national state of ER the marines can still act right? Cause they were not in existence when the stautes for martial law originated. Right?

-- Hokie (nn@va.com), November 30, 1999.

Because the words "National State of Emergency" give pres clint power to declare marshall law, at which point fema has pres authority to make decisions on his behalf, directing the military and (now) also the national guard. Is this correct, or have I misunderstood the documents (EO's,PDD's)?

Opps, hey, wait, under a national state of ER the marines can still act right? Cause they were not in existence when the stautes for martial law originated. Right? ....yikes.

-- Hokie (nn@va.com), November 30, 1999.

The Marine Corp has been around since before the Declaration of Independence. The Marines were deliberately left out of Possee Commitatus because the perceived evil to be prevented was occupation by the U.S. Army, as it was in Reconstruction.
-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in January.com), November 30, 1999.

errr, I be-thinks the phrase is "Getting thy panties into a wad" You must be of the childhood "dryer establishment". Sure, you had "Fluff panties, some of us may had "Frozen Cotton, sticking to our bottom!".

-- Clothes line in Freezing Weather (dryers@beautiful.com), November 30, 1999.

Hokie:

Hate to tell you this, but you've likely lived your entire life under a state of national emergency and not even known it. The US has been under a state of national emergency since 1934, when Roosevelt declared it. It has not been repealed to the best of my knowledge, and has been extended by every president since.

-- Bill (billclo@msgbox.com), November 30, 1999.

Hi all!

I will now entertain you with a dazzling display of my boundless ignorance...

Up here in frozen Canada, troops on the streets isn't seen as a great threat to our lives. Understandably, there are mitigating facts, like operation abacus (good one!) will involve max. 20,000 soldiers, and that our soldiers are trained to respect the community they occupy, as many units have men from all over God's creation!

Additionally, troops are highly trained to recognize and defend national vital points (Tim Horton's coffeeshops and the like...)

This is not rumour, because I used to be a groundpounder with 'em--I outta know.

Would someone please enlighten me on this?

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), December 01, 1999.

See Ammendment II Right to keep and bear arms.

See 50 years of abridgement culminting SOON.

See Ammendment IV (I think) Unreasonable searches and the abridgement of that one (can you say RICO?).

The list is VERY LONG.

N T

-- jes a furious footballer (nighttr@in.lane), December 01, 1999.

Bill,

An Act was passed in 1976 that took effect in 1978, that cancelled all previously declared national states of emergency. If I remember right, it's USC 50 ch34.

Since then, WJC has declared a national state of emergency 14 times in 7 years.

-- hunter (way@up.north), December 01, 1999.

Yesterday, I would have been with you. Then I saw Seattle, and it woke me up. It's not the state of emergency per se that's frightening, it's that it makes martial law and curfews not only possible but probable.

Irrespective of who the masked WTO rioters were, the point is that the police reacted by attacking any target not in uniform with chemical weapons and good old fashioned big sticks. I'm out in the suburbs and I'm short-term prepped, but that doesn't mean that I can't feel for those in the cities.

It's not going to be pretty. :(

-- Colin MacDonald (roborogerborg@yahoo.com), December 01, 1999.

Hunter:

Thanks for that info. I was unaware of it. Goes to show you that no matter how much you think you know about a subject, someone always has some tidbit of knowledge that you don't. :)

-- Bill (billclo@msgbox.com), December 01, 1999.

All thoughtful answers so far, but still no one has addressed why this upcoming national state of emergency is different from all of the others including the 2 currently in operation right now as we speak. The one coming up doesn't afford any additional powers over the 2 currently in effect.

So, once again, WHAT'S THE BIG DEAL ABOUT THE ONE KLINTON IS PROPOSING FOR LATE DECEMBER?

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), December 01, 1999.

Because it is a preplanned, evil act. Emergencies declared because of Natural, Mother Nature "happenings" are one thing.This, if it happens, is something, totally different.

-- Watching Seattle (Lovechild@70's.com), December 01, 1999.

Having had friends and relatives living under a 'State of Emergency' with effective martial law for most of the last quarter-century (in Northern Ireland)I can vouch from personal experience that it's not a lot of laughs. What the 'authorities' are capable of doing with impunity in such a situation is almost beyond belief in a supposedly 'democratic' Western society. Be afraid, be very afraid ...

-- Risteard MacThomais (uachtaran@ireland.com), December 01, 1999.

Sorry, but most of the facts presented here are wrong about the Marines. The actual reason the Marines are exempted from posse comitatus is because they're a division of the US Navy. The Marines have been around since the beginning. The NAVY is exempt, therefore so is the Corps.

-- Powder (powder@keg.com), December 01, 1999.

Because it's pre-planned; because the Clintons are in power and wish to remain in power; because the national media wants them to remain in power - and are no longer independent observers reporting facts; and because the (probable) national state of emergency (with respect to year 2000 events) can be manipulated to cover internal events and laws (that an outside event like threats from China/USSR cannot); and because (politically and propaganda) they (the Clintons) have prepared the press and their supporters to expect (and demand, and wish for) martial law to oppose (and fear) heavily-armed, gun-toting, "right-wing" terrorist militia hoarding supplies behind locked doors in their bunkers - as the FBI put as early as last September.

If ANYBODY but the Clintons were in power, I too would not fear martial law.

But they are - and they have no morals nor ethics to restrain their conduct, and no respect for laws, the truth, nor the Constitution.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 01, 1999.

Risteard, Could you elaborate, please?

Georgia Peach

-- (the.patch@worldnet.att.net), December 01, 1999.

Robert Cook seemed to hit it as close to the mark as possible.

We are NOW in a declared national state of emergency. YOU NOW are waking up to the probability that ANOTHER declared national state of emergency will usher in tangible bad news/conditions, because we do not have a president or administration that values morals, ethics, integrity and honesty, but then we haven't really had that for a very very long time, thus you have hundreds upon hundreds of ominous executive orders on top of repeated contrived (I repeat, contrived) national states of emergency for the last 5 decades.

How is this one different? Thats the point. It is not different. You are waking up to the reality of that. It is contrived, anticipated and planned for to the hilt, and has been for some time.

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), December 01, 1999.