PDA

View Full Version : New Executive Order. If you thought NSPD51 was bad....




TheEvilDetector
07-19-2007, 12:07 AM
If the NSPD51 was not enough, King George has released a proclamation which will punish people who oppose Iraqi War (though of course it is not written that way, the effect is the same). The title of the order is Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq

Check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html (text below)

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, as amended (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)(IEEPA), the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.)(NEA), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code,

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that, due to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by acts of violence threatening the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people, it is in the interests of the United States to take additional steps with respect to the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 of May 22, 2003, and expanded in Executive Order 13315 of August 28, 2003, and relied upon for additional steps taken in Executive Order 13350 of July 29, 2004, and Executive Order 13364 of November 29, 2004. I hereby order:

Section 1. (a) Except to the extent provided in section 203(b)(1), (3), and (4) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(1), (3), and (4)), or in regulations, orders, directives, or licenses that may be issued pursuant to this order, and notwithstanding any contract entered into or any license or permit granted prior to the date of this order, all property and interests in property of the following persons, that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported,

withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,

(i) to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence that have the purpose or effect of:

(A) threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq; or

(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;

(ii) to have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or services in support of, such an act or acts of violence or any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order; or

(iii) to be owned or controlled by, or to have acted or purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.

(b) The prohibitions in subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, (i) the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order, and (ii) the

receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person.

Sec. 2. (a) Any transaction by a United States person or within the United States that evades or avoids, has the purpose

of evading or avoiding, or attempts to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.

Sec. 3. For purposes of this order:

(a) the term "person" means an individual or entity;

(b) the term "entity" means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization; and

(c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

Sec. 4. I hereby determine that the making of donations of the type specified in section 203(b)(2) of IEEPA (50 U.S.C. 1702(b)(2)) by, to, or for the benefit of, any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Sec. 5. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that, because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets

instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1(a) of this order.

Sec. 6. The Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, is hereby authorized to take such actions, including the promulgation of rules and regulations, and to employ all powers granted to the President by IEEPA as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government, consistent with applicable law. All agencies of the United States Government are hereby directed to take all appropriate measures within their authority to carry out the provisions of this order and, where appropriate, to advise the Secretary of the Treasury in a timely manner of the measures taken.

Sec. 7. Nothing in this order is intended to affect the continued effectiveness of any rules, regulations, orders, licenses, or other forms of administrative action issued, taken, or continued in effect heretofore or hereafter under 31 C.F.R. chapter V, except as expressly terminated, modified, or suspended by or pursuant to this order.

Sec. 8. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

July 17, 2007.

---

Questions:
1) If a group of war protesters clash with police, do all their properties get taken away from them?
2) If someone talks passionately about opposition to the war in Iraq, do all their properties get taken away from them? (After all, they could pose a risk of committing an act of violence because they are so passionate).
3) If someone got their property blocked, and perhaps need some financial assistance to survive, do you get your property blocked when trying to help them?
4) Do all members of a group that the blocked person was part of, get their property blocked too?
5) If someone sells a cup of coffee to a blocked person, do they get their property blocked, because they provided a service?
6) Lets not forget the King has decided that the order will be sudden and without notice. What is the constitution again?

Nice laws King, what an ace way to destroy a person or a group in opposition to your illegal wars. I give you 5/5 for effectiveness King.
Your use of NAZI Germany tactics is inspiring. Your very clever order protects your foreign policies from being questioned by intimidation.

BLS
07-19-2007, 12:09 AM
Nah, this is just King George's way of posturing himself politically to attack Iran.

Oddball
07-19-2007, 12:15 AM
Everyone not in compliance is a criminal.

Rand was right.

Razmear
07-19-2007, 12:16 AM
So Bush just wrote an executive order that seizes all his and Cheney's assets???

TheEvilDetector
07-19-2007, 12:46 AM
This is yet another proof that the next election is critical. The fascists and socialists are running out of time to cement a stranglehold because the internet is spreading the message of freedom so effectively.

To the poster above: In a way I would agree, after all, military activities in Iraq are acts of violence and it could be argued that they are the ones that threaten the stability and peace in Iraq.

As long as the US military is in Iraq, Iraqis will not resolve the insurgency, for the insurgency draws its popular support and recruitment by the very presence of US military on the Iraqi soil. How does the US expect to win? All the insurgents just stop fighting? The US kills every Iraqi insurgent in existence and prevents any new ones taking up arms? Thats unrealistic, it is in fact impossible. There is no military solution to the Iraq situation, alot of intelligent people have said as much. So you have to wonder, how much longer will this insanity go on.

It could also be argued that those military actions are the ones that directly led to the evolution of the sectarian violence in the first place, for before the war, Iraq was held together and terrorism in that country was non-existent. In a way, it could be argued, the war in iraq is the direct cause of the now widely accepted destabilisation in the country.
There is no improvement, for if you check the rate of the killings, it has not slowed down, rather the opposite is true, it is accelerating.

http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx

jondisx
07-19-2007, 12:54 AM
Executive orders are orders given to federal administrative agencies used to direct agencies. After its been written for 30 days, it becomes a law. But wait, in sec 8 it says this executive order does not apply to anyone in the government more or less. Therefore, this Executive order is only useful in 30 days if it becomes law. It takes 2/3rds of congress to overrule this order and it can be challenged it court.

So basically he issued this edict for no reason other then to wait 30 days and see if it becomes law. Hope for the best.

TheEvilDetector
07-19-2007, 12:56 AM
Executive orders are orders given to federal administrative agencies used to direct agencies. After its been written for 30 days, it becomes a law. But wait, in sec 8 it says this executive order does not apply to anyone in the government more or less. Therefore, this Executive order is only useful in 30 days if it becomes law. It takes 2/3rds of congress to overrule this order and it can be challenged it court.

So basically he issued this edict for no reason other then to wait 30 days and see if it becomes law. Hope for the best.

Do you really believe anyone in congress will do anything? Congress is ineffective. Just look at the democrats. They were elected to stop the war and have done nothing of the sort. Congress has long list of very valid reasons to impeach Bush and Cheney and have not done so either. If your only safety net is the courts, then I fear for the american people. Since the executive and the legislative branches are already out of touch with the people and the constitution, how long before the judicial branch follows suit?

jondisx
07-19-2007, 12:58 AM
I do not believe this will be overridden by a 2/3rds majority of congress. Its hard to be that naive, congress probably wont even challenge it. But it can be challenged in court for its constitutionality.

Razmear
07-19-2007, 12:59 AM
OK, I just re-read section 8 and the last words:
or any other person.
would seem to exempt all humans.

Now I'm confused. Must be time for bed.

jondisx
07-19-2007, 01:01 AM
man, this piece of "legislation" is just stupid.

TheEvilDetector
07-19-2007, 01:02 AM
OK, I just re-read section 8 and the last words:
or any other person.
would seem to exempt all humans.

Now I'm confused. Must be time for bed.

Persons engaged in a maniacal quest for absolute power sometimes make mistakes.

jondisx
07-19-2007, 01:04 AM
Sec. 8. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.




does this mean that this law does not create anything beneficial for anyone? can someone break this down for me

TheEvilDetector
07-19-2007, 01:07 AM
Sec. 8. This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right, benefit, or privilege, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or entities, its officers or employees, or any other person.




does this mean that this law does not create anything beneficial for anyone? can someone break this down for me

I think this was a mistake. I think the intent was to protect federal government employees.

jondisx
07-19-2007, 01:15 AM
i understand it now, its saying it doesnt create and reason for anyone to bring legal charges against ANYONE. wtf?

aravoth
07-19-2007, 01:18 AM
Executive orders are orders given to federal administrative agencies used to direct agencies. After its been written for 30 days, it becomes a law. But wait, in sec 8 it says this executive order does not apply to anyone in the government more or less. Therefore, this Executive order is only useful in 30 days if it becomes law. It takes 2/3rds of congress to overrule this order and it can be challenged it court.

So basically he issued this edict for no reason other then to wait 30 days and see if it becomes law. Hope for the best.

good luck getting a 2/3rds vote in august. Isn't congress out for a while then?

purepaloma
07-19-2007, 07:46 AM
Are you saying these executive orders become law, and remain law into subsequent administrations, unless succeeding presidents revoke them?

And is that the same about W's whacky signing statements? Are they still in effect after he's replaced, so that the next Prez has to go through each one to clean up the mess, or do they expire with the change in presidents?

rg123
07-19-2007, 09:54 AM
These laws pass from pres to pres. just like the presidential directive. On another post I put up in the begining of the week with Bill Moyer and Impeachment they were discussing that very issue on how the next president elect will have the same dictorial power as Bush does now and why it is so important to Impeach him asap he very well could be the last president ever elected. He has that power now
This new order seems to be along the lines that if you say anything against the adminstration involveing Irag you will be in deep doo doo if you know what I mean

ChooseLiberty
07-19-2007, 10:10 AM
If Bush won't leave they will try to close the borders to everyone evacuating. Good thing the Mexican border is like a sieve.

torchbearer
07-19-2007, 10:56 AM
That is why executive orders are unconsitutional. ALL legislative power is to be in the LEGISLATIVE branch.

freelance
07-19-2007, 06:16 PM
And now THIS on the heels of the EO:

Pentagon Rebukes Sen. Clinton on Iraq

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070719/D8QFUN500.html

How scary is this the day after the EO?

And here's a little preview of Keith Olbermann's special comment on the subject (Hillary, not the EO). Methinks it was his way of addressing the EO. I suspect that the EO is just too hot to touch right now on TV, even for Keith.

Oh Lordie, I was wrong, he's got a segment coming up about it with Richard Wolfe, I believe--teaser was something about those who dare to criticize him.

I cannot even bring myself to think about '09 without a President Ron Paul.