Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Flesh420

Obama Signs Executive Order to Detain Americans With ‘Respiratory Illnesses’

Recommended Posts

Nice detective work.
[quote="OUR OWN GOD DAMN SOURCE"]The executive order, titled "'Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases', amends executive order 13295, passed by George W. Bush in April 2003, which allows for the 'apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of suspected communicable diseases.'”/[quote]
Hooray for your transmission.. Congratulations.

Share this post


Link to post

Goddammit, Obama. I had trust issues with him to begin with (in fact, I have trust issues with politicians in general), but now I just want him off the throne.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah... that's so horrible... I mean, the last thing we'd ever want in the event of an especially virulant flu outbreak or something is for the government to be able to actually do anything to contain it or something. No, I'm sorry, this is one of the few areas in which I'm giving the government a pass here. I'm just as much against evil scary dictatorships as the next guy, and I generally don't trust the government, but I can't really jump on board the scaremongering bandwagon here. Best I can come up with is maybe this power shouldn't be established through executive order, but the point still stands that in an emergency situation, I got no problem with the government having the ability to quarantine. Just doesn't sound like a good idea to me to have the quarantine process bogged down in committee meetings while a deadly epidemic is spreading.

I guess I can kinda understand the fear and paranoia associated with the government having that kind of power, but I seriously doubt Obama's going to use the ability to quarantine to seize control of the country. That would be absurd.

Share this post


Link to post
MFG38 said:

Goddammit, Obama. I had trust issues with him to begin with (in fact, I have trust issues with politicians in general), but now I just want him off the throne.

The fuck? How is quarantining sick people bad? Is the right to cause massive outbreaks and pandemias of potentially highly dangerous diseases a constitutional ammendment in America, or what? Would you stop for a moment and think before you type out retarded shit that makes Alex Jones hard?

Share this post


Link to post

Yet another executive order that may infringe on rights and freedoms. Scary? Somewhat.

Ebola - a deadly virus with a 50-90% kill rate. No cure. Contagious. Even scarier? Absolutely.

For once I agree this is probably the correct political decision.

Share this post


Link to post
dew said:

The fuck? How is quarantining sick people bad? Is the right to cause massive outbreaks and pandemias of potentially highly dangerous diseases a constitutional ammendment in America, or what? Would you stop for a moment and think before you type out retarded shit that makes Alex Jones hard?


Geez, thanks for the compliment. To be fair, I didn't even read the entire article and therefore had no idea what it was on about, so I apologize for my stupidity.

Share this post


Link to post

What's the problem here exactly? The potential for abuse, I assume, but there are many other laws out there with a much higher chance of being abused. This was the smart decision to make, all things considered.

Share this post


Link to post

Respiratory illness is so vague they can contain me for just having asthma. The problem is in it's obscurity. He should have specified Ebola-like symptoms. That too is hokey, but it would have been better then being contained for having hay fever.

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

Respiratory illness is so vague they can contain me for just having asthma. The problem is in it's obscurity. He should have specified Ebola-like symptoms. That too is hokey, but it would have been better then being contained for having hay fever.


That's a really good point. I think taking disease precautions is a good idea, but the abuse potential for this executive order is almost as scary as ebola itself.

Share this post


Link to post

Yea....so apparently many haven't read the Executive Order. It's very vague and broad, if you follow the nice wording you could call in someone for a cough. This is ridiculous, and the Problem Reaction Solution theory is really working out people.

I'll post the order after work as I can't link well on this shitty phone. If for instance, Ebola, is such a huge concern you would think it WOULD BE STATED CLEARLY AND CONCISELY.....not some vague bullshit that can be abused at some control freak's whim.

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

Respiratory illness is so vague they can contain me for just having asthma. The problem is in it's obscurity. He should have specified Ebola-like symptoms. That too is hokey, but it would have been better then being contained for having hay fever.

Hay fever? Does this really sound so severely ambiguous, obscure or highly suspect of government abuse?

Obama said:
Severe acute respiratory syndromes, which are diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled. This subsection does not apply to influenza.

I mean, you do seem to be panicking over an article written by an editor of Infowars.com and Alex Jones' Prison Planet.

Share this post


Link to post

edit: ninja'd

Technician said:

Respiratory illness is so vague they can contain me for just having asthma.

Fortunately, then, it's not as vague as just "respiratory illnesses":

The article said:

“Severe acute respiratory syndromes, which are diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled.”

I'm not really sure if you could consider asthma to have potential to cause a pandemic or be highly likely to kill people.

As for any tin foils who think this is a bad idea, I guess they wouldn't want government officials to quarantine people for plague either?

Share this post


Link to post
Technician said:

Respiratory illness is so vague they can contain me for just having asthma. The problem is in it's obscurity. He should have specified Ebola-like symptoms. That too is hokey, but it would have been better then being contained for having hay fever.

Why would you specify ebola-like symptoms when the next epidemic that could put thousands of lives at risk is FAR more likely to be a strain of influenza... you know, a respiratory illness? Even ignoring other respiratory ailments like SARS, influenza itself has historically proven to be pretty damn deadly. Not to mention, an illness like influenza is far more contagious, because in addition to being a respiratory ailment, it's airborne.

If you really think the president's gonna start sending people off to death camps for having allergies, then your problems are far greater than this specific executive order. If we're to that point, the exact wording of one specific executive order isn't the problem here.

Share this post


Link to post
Flesh420 said:

Yea....so apparently many haven't read the Executive Order. It's very vague and broad, if you follow the nice wording you could call in someone for a cough. This is ridiculous, and the Problem Reaction Solution theory is really working out people.

I'll post the order after work as I can't link well on this shitty phone. If for instance, Ebola, is such a huge concern you would think it WOULD BE STATED CLEARLY AND CONCISELY.....not some vague bullshit that can be abused at some control freak's whim.

Yeah, more like you didn't read it yourself. Do people even pay attention to what they read, or even link? Let's look at globalresearch.ca itself!

MH17 actually shot down by machine gun fire from an Ukrainian Su-25. They even got an eyewitness of that, even though it happened 10km high.

American biological warfare experts in West Africa. What if the outbreak wasn't natural?

This. Just look at that picture.

A piece on the possibilities of a nuclear war. This little gem caught my eye:

The crisis provoked by American and European charges of Russian responsibility for the shooting down of flight MH17 has brought the world the closest it has been to global war since the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. But the situation today may be even more dangerous.


Seriously, do you even check your sources? That site is utter trash by Alex Jones' cronies!

Share this post


Link to post

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/07/31/executive-order-revised-list-quarantinable-communicable-diseases

Executive Order -- Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases

EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

REVISED LIST OF QUARANTINABLE COMMUNICABLE DISEASES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 264(b) of title 42, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Amendment to Executive Order 13295. Based upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the Acting Surgeon General, and for the purposes set forth in section 1 of Executive Order 13295 of April 4, 2003, as amended by Executive Order 13375 of April 1, 2005, section 1 of Executive Order 13295 shall be further amended by replacing subsection (b) with the following:

"(b) Severe acute respiratory syndromes, which are diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled. This subsection does not apply to influenza."

Sec. 2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

Share this post


Link to post

The problem is that all of these seemingly harmless bills/executive orders keep adding up behind the scenes. I feel that the United States is becoming progressively more militarized. This shift towards a potential police state is more evident than ever before.

Share this post


Link to post

[QUOTE]TheCupboard said:
Nice detective work.
[quote="OUR OWN GOD DAMN SOURCE"]The executive order, titled "'Revised List of Quarantinable Communicable Diseases', amends executive order 13295, passed by George W. Bush in April 2003, which allows for the 'apprehension, detention, or conditional release of individuals to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of suspected communicable diseases.'”/

Hooray for your transmission.. Congratulations.


Yeah I always need to look deeper into stuff like this where the #1 source is 'Infowars.'

Share this post


Link to post
Linkrulezall said:

Respiratory illness? Uh oh, I'd better take my asthma and run for the hills!

“Severe acute respiratory syndromes, which are diseases that are associated with fever and signs and symptoms of pneumonia or other respiratory illness, are capable of being transmitted from person to person, and that either are causing, or have the potential to cause, a pandemic, or, upon infection, are highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity if not properly controlled.”

Asthma is a) not contagious (not "capable of being transmitted from person to person"), b) does not have "the potential to cause a pandemic" and c) is not "upon infection, highly likely to cause mortality or serious morbidity".

Share this post


Link to post

What, didn't you know that in the Land of the Free, whoever is not rich, blond, aryan and healthy, without respiratory illnesses, is just a seditious, unamerican commie pinko scum?

Share this post


Link to post

LOL the thread title sounds like parody news that mixes the current ebola problem with USA's latest attempts of "detaining without warrant".

Share this post


Link to post
printz said:

LOL the thread title sounds like parody news that mixes the current ebola problem with USA's latest attempts of "detaining without warrant".


I saw Fox News for the first time a few months ago after hearing for years about how awful it was. Fox News felt like watching a parody of the news that everyone working there knows its a parody, but everyone watching didn't know.

Share this post


Link to post

dew said:
This. Just look at that picture.

Meh, while I'd agree on much of what you say about Globalresearch, what kind of media do you normally read? Using portraits of public figures with funny or unbecoming expressions is a quite natural way to highlight a political point or a view on someone or their actions, ridiculing them. It does get ugly when it's particularly crass (as in NSFW, discriminatory, in expense of the person's health issues and such), but that's not the case. Unless you mean one should show more respect for Athena Promachos (I so love when a term in one language gets another incidental and on-target one from another), but here I quite agree with what that Swedish guy is saying.

Maybe my memory is fuzzy or I've changed but Globalresearch used to have more solid pieces and articles a few years ago, but I can't say that now, for the most part.

Share this post


Link to post

Using portraits of public figures with funny or unbecoming expressions is a quite natural way to highlight a political point or a view on someone or their actions, ridiculing them.


It's natural from people who have such weak arguments they need to employ cheap parlor tricks to convince anyone of their views, and in political media those people represent the majority, yes. What's your point? It's still a trashy manipulative tactic generally indicative of low quality content.

Share this post


Link to post

Wait, wait, hold the phone. I recognize "globalresearch.ca" from the back of a 9-11 conspiracy dollar with Bush on it. I can't find a picture of it right now, but there's another dead giveaway that this is likely bogus. This page bears multiple links to Infowars.com, home of Alex Jones and numerous other conspiracy nutjobs. The editors of that site have a long history of making shit up about what Obama's done. Moreover, this article was written by Paul Joseph Watson, the "editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com".

I wouldn't take this too seriously if I were you.

Share this post


Link to post
Phml said:

It's natural from people who have such weak arguments they need to employ cheap parlor tricks to convince anyone of their views, and in political media those people represent the majority, yes. What's your point? It's still a trashy manipulative tactic generally indicative of low quality content.


So, if you had to use your political adversary's image in your campaign (e.g. in a "Don't vote for this man" or "Would you trust this man?" poster), would you use his best mugshots for this task? Merely neutral ones? Or the ones where he appears old, tired, shifty, ridiculous or even outright creepy and evil?

G.W. Bush is a special case ;-)

Share this post


Link to post

I would personally use my opponent's best mugshots, to show that I am challenging him his ideas, not taking cheap shots. I would be happy to challenge him openly and honestly, not taking his words out of context. After all, in my opinion, the greatest victory is to show your opponent in the best possible light, and then show why he's still wrong. After all, it would give your position that much more strength if you could demonstrate that you can win without ever once taking a cheap potshot. But then, I'd probably lose horribly and that's why I'm not a politician.

However, I think I still have a point. George W. Bush was a terrible president, but it was kinda hard to challenge him, and so he managed to remain in power for two terms. Why was it hard to challenge him? Because so many people who opposed him kept doing things like comparing him to a chimp, mocking his slips of the tongue, insulting his intelligence, etc. All that did was ensure that no one would take any real criticism of him very seriously. After all, it's easy to dismiss real criticism when all you have to do is say, "So? You people keep comparing him to Hitler and making fun of his intelligence, why should we even listen to you if your position is so weak you need to resort of petty namecalling?"

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×