![]() |
||
|
|
by
Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 01:16:46 PM EST
promoted by roxy317 -- we need to keep this story on our radar
From the White House, on July 17th comes this new executive order, signed by President Bush:Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq. It's short, easy to absorb the key points -- if one has a certain tolerance for legalese -- and scarey 'cuz it sounds as if the Tories are laying plans to seize the property of the American Patriots. 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come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, Jump below the fold to see how White House Press Spokesman Tony Snow describes it. commentary :: :: :: buzz-it!
from Kuna (for balance, a la Fox)
During a [July 17,2007] White House briefing, Bush spokesman Tony Snow said the order "targets terrorist and insurgent groups, including those assisted by Syria and Iran, that are not covered by existing authorities." " ... What we have is something that fills a gap left in other executive orders, to make sure that we have the means to go financially after anybody who is trying to go after the efforts to secure freedom and democracy in Iraq, " Snow said. The order is aimed at "insurgents and those who come across the border," he added.Okay. Breaking it down, what do these "certain people" (as referred to in the title of the Executive Order) have to do to get their property blocked? 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: I don't mean to be a stickler for details, but what is the criteria used to determine "pose a significant risk"? Would that entail participating in an antiwar rally? Writing letters to congressmen and women expressing anti war sentiments? Sending money to the Quakers (Friends) since they do significant outreach to help young men and women understand military recruitment and who wish to seek alternatives? Anyone buying a persian rug? Seriously, on what basis? The order goes on to explain item B -- which is in itself quicksand (Bush's only A grade is in Quagmire building) -- that lovely phrase, undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction or political reform -- Breathtaking. Can't get better, can it? Take a look: 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; orSo gawd help you if you donate to the legal fund for anyone who's property been ...what's that euphemism again?... blocked. There are several better dissections of this order by writers a whole lot smarter than I am. For a quick list:
Update [2007-7-23 10:26:42 by Cho]: Rba's commentary on the tactical "hows" of the shellgame /smoke this President and his administration employ to consolidate power is worth a read.
President Bush's Executive Order: Revoking the Right to Dissent? | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden)
President Bush's Executive Order: Revoking the Right to Dissent? | 19 comments (19 topical, 0 hidden)
|
Support ePluribus Media -- Support Citizen Powered Journalism! recent commentaries
front page
Tuesday November 27th
Monday November 26th
|