http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html July17th Glorious leader signed another "execdutive order" "blocking" the property of any one ( (especially US citizens) who impede progress in iraq( protestors?).. I guess alex mentioned it on his show, it came up tonight on coast to coast, If anyone can make heads or tales of this please enlighten us....text follows: [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq [/FONT] <table align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="205"> <tbody><tr><td> White House News </td></tr></tbody> </table> Message to the Congress of the United States Regarding International Emergency Economic Powers Act 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come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, (i)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. # # # <!-- END --> <!-- <table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" border="0"> -->
Broad New Exec. Order Targets Iraq-Related Finances By Spencer Ackerman - July 19, 2007, 4:04 PM In a little-noticed executive order issued on Tuesday, President Bush directed the Treasury Department to block the U.S.-based financial assets of anyone deemed to have threatened "the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq" or who "undermin(e) efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq." The order empowers Treasury, in consultation with the State and Defense Departments, to target those individuals or organizations that either "have committed, or ... pose a significant risk of committing" acts of violence with the "purpose or effect" of harming the Iraqi government or hindering reconstruction efforts. It applies to "U.S. persons," a category including American citizens. It had not previously been disclosed -- and still hasn't -- that U.S. persons are abetting the Iraqi insurgency, nor that Iraqi insurgents have property in the United States, raising questions about who in fact the order targets. "The part where they reserve lots of discretion to themselves is the list of conditions that goes beyond determination of acts of violence. 'Threatening the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq,' that could be anything," says Ken Mayer, an expert in executive orders and a University of Wisconsin political scientist. "Think of the possibilities: it could be charities that send a small amount of money (to groups linked to) the insurgency, or it could be the government of Iran that has assets in the U.S. and has money that flows through a U.S. bank or something like that." The order permits the targeting of those who aid someone else whose assets have been blocked under the order -- wittingly or not. And under Section Five, the government does not have to disclose which organizations are subject to having their assets frozen: 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. The scope of the order has raised civil-liberties concerns. "Certainly it is highly constitutionally questionable to empower the government to destroy someone economically without giving notice," says Bruce Fein, a Justice Department official in the Reagan administration. "This is so sweeping it's staggering. I've never seen anything so broad that it expands beyond terrorism, beyond seeking to use violence or the threat of violence to cower or intimidate a population. This covers stabilization in Iraq. I suppose you could issue an executive order about stabilization in Afghanistan as well. And it goes beyond even attempting violence, to cover those who pose 'a significant risk' of violence. Suppose Congress passed a law saying you've committed a crime if there's significant risk that you might commit a crime." Representatives from the ACLU are still studying the executive order. But preliminarily, says spokeswoman Liz Rose, the order appears to expand the assets-seizure provisions of the Patriot Act, known as Section 806, to organizations linked to Iraqi insurgent groups. Much like the order, Section 806 allows the government to seize assets of banned organizations without prior notice and without a conviction of involvement in banned activity. "It is by far the most significant change (in the law) of which political organizations need to be aware," the ACLU wrote in 2002, contending that the vagueness of Section 806 potentially implicates legitimate political protest as well as material support for terrorism. Mayer isn't as certain. "I don't think this is the kind of authority that poses any kind of broad risk, because they're freezing assets, they're not confiscating them. They're making it impossible to move them around," he says. "Look at the other examples after 9/11. There are comparable (executive) orders freezing the assets of groups like the Holy Land Foundation. This looks a little bit different: they're not formally designating groups as terrorist, but they want the authority to block their money from going around." That leaves unanswered a basic question: why was the order issued? Tony Snow briefly addressed that question on Tuesday -- a day when the news was dominated by the morning release of the National Intelligence Estimate on terrorism and the Senate's marathon debate on Iraq. Snow led his press briefing with a description of the executive order and described it as "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." When asked who the act was aimed at, Snow replied, "Well, what this is really aimed at is insurgents and those who come across the border," meaning the Syrian and Iranian borders. The order itself makes no mention of either country, and focuses exclusively on financial assets within the United States deemed to assist the Iraqi insurgency. It's possible that the order means to target charitable or business organizations inside the U.S. that have ties to Syrian or Iranian entities considered by the Bush administration to be in league with the insurgents. ...................................................... Here is the problem with these executive orders, in and of themselves they are benign. They attempt to empower the government to deal with valid contingencies ie; continuity of government, financing terrorists etc. But they have the potential to be abused. Their vagueness leaves them open to interpretations that may not have been the original intent. They give powers to the executive without congressional debate or oversight. It removes the checks and balances that were designed to prevent executive abuse of power.
Thanks for the analysis, guess I should have attempted to re-read it after the guiness wore off... By the time a caller mentioned this on "coast to coast" I was well into my friday night pints...trying to decipher the original white house posting made my head hurt...
Oh yeah,Almost forgot, heard somebody on the Alex jones radio show, saying Hillary and the democrats were recently accused of hindering the war effort ,the future use of this EO would be to lock up hilliary and obamas' election funds if we actually got to an election.
They are using Hiltler's play book all over again. Same things they did in 1933-4. Since he stole the first election, with a planted supreme court and the second election with electronic voting machines, his power is null and void. Prescott Bush funded Hitler and got caught, GW did Iran contra and the son has come to finish their work. He can write all the executive orders he wants, Let's see if he can enforce them. Computer models says he can't. They will fall like a house of cards. How is a lying La Rasa Attorney general gonna enforce it.? Cheney will start it with a WMD, and then M/Law, and one of his own men will make him say "eh to brutus"? Bush has bought property in Paraguay, and Cheney will be in Dubai. Near the new Tower of Babel. They must have all those Senators filmed in their child orgy sex parties. They can't get out of the web. RON PAUL people!
