Subject:
|
Re: State of Emergency? (Since 1933?)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sun, 3 Feb 2002 23:38:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
246 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Kirby Warden writes:
> It seems that that President Rooseveldt (sp?) declared a state of emergency
> as the U.S. had become bankrupt. Apparently we have operated under this
> state of evergency ever since.
>
> I would like to know if anyone here has any current information on this matter.
>
> Or any information at all really. As some of you have learned, I do love a
> good conspiracy.
I have no information at all about this, and I did not read the whole
article (?). But I did get suspicious when I read the parts about "return to
the feudal system", "return to the League of Nations" and "worst economic
condition after the war".
Quite frankly, I always thought (and believe not to be alone in this) that
WW2 was actually the perfect way for the American economy to recover from
the depression, either by selling goods to Europe (39-41) or by supplying
the military as well (later on). Not to mention the aftermath... IN NO WAY I
mean that the Americans *wanted* the war, all I say is it ended up solving a
lot of problems favourably for them.
Besides, there were the "glorious thirty"...
As for the first two quotes... I suspect that someone was quite angry about
some land-related issue when this was written. PLUS that person has an
isolationist view of the world. I would not be surprised if the author was a
farmer, angry about the prices at which he is allowed to sell the goods he
produces.
Then again, I *am* speculating. I can be *totally* wrong.
As for the State of Emergency, who cares? I bet noone in the Executive even
knows if such a State is still declared... or if ever *was* declared. There
is, after all, a chance this is a bogus article. Needs further checking,
preferably by anyone with access to the documents cited.
Pedro
(This can turn up to be a very good debate about hidden politics!)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: State of Emergency? (Since 1933?)
|
| (...) Well, if we have operated under some sort of State of Emergency since 1933, it could explain a lot about how so many things have gone wrong in our government. A lot of things in that article were over my head or I simply brushed it aside. What (...) (23 years ago, 4-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | State of Emergency? (Since 1933?)
|
| During one of my random searches for "conspiracy" fodder, I came across this; (URL) link may not work of course, the *wavy* symbol appears to be a superscript in the origional link but I'm a bit ignorant about linking) The document appears mostly (...) (23 years ago, 2-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
