BUSH'S LATEST ABUSE OF POWER
ANOTHER STEP TOWARD A POLICE STATE?
http://www.libertynewstv.com/Documents/execorder.htm
An Executive Order was signed on July 17, 2007 by President Bush that
authorizes him to block the personal property of anyone in the United States
who opposes his Middle East foreign policy.
Read the document here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html.
If this link does not work, here is a backup source:
http://www.freedom-force.org/newsarchive/EO_2007-07-17.mht
The response [to the first message they sent out about this] was immediate,
huge, and encouraging. However, not everyone was equally concerned, and they
wrote to say that I had misunderstood the language and intent of the
document. There were two primary objections. The first was that the Order
was written to prevent acts of violence, not political dissent. The second
was that it applies only to people and organizations whose names appear on a
list attached to the Executive Order but not made public. Larry Becraft,
nationally respected Constitutional attorney, said:
"I have no doubt that there was a list of the names of certain people
attached to that EO that was not published. Bush provided the full document
with the names of "the following persons" to certain members of Congress,
but that list was not published for the public, nor was that list published
in the Federal Register. … The EO clearly addresses foreign funds and
property brought into this country and held either by foreigners or US
persons. To contend that Americans holding their own property or having
others hold that property (funds, financial instruments, etc), are going to
have that property seized is a contention plainly outside the clear language
of the EO. To assert that those [sic] protesting the war subjects those
protesters to seizures is groundless."
We are not convinced by this argument. A reading of the EO, itself, points
to a contrary interpretation. It may be true that there was a list attached
to the EO, but that does not mean the list cannot be expanded at any time.
In describing whose property may be blocked, the document says:
"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."
The phase "any person" completely negates the concept that this applies only
to a few specifically named bad guys from the Middle East who happen to be
in the U.S.
If you think this EO applies only to those who have committed or intend to
commit acts of violence, then read the words again: It applies to any person
who poses "a significant risk of committing an act of violence." Who would
that be?
In case you haven’t noticed, the trend of all collectivist governments over
the past few decades has been to embrace the principle of pre-emptive
punishment. In other words, political scientists, working closely with
government-funded psychiatrists, have created the myth that it is possible
to determine who will commit crimes in the future. They can do this, they
say, by studying everyone’s school records, voting records, reading habits,
organizations they support, and a myriad of other metrics for personal
preferences and beliefs. There is no doubt that tabulations of this kind can
lead to valid statistical predictions, but they can never identify who will
fall within the expectations and who will not. It is an affront to common
sense and a travesty of justice to punish people for crimes they did not
commit but which some social scientist says they probably will. This is a
special horror when the cloak of science is used, not to reduce crime, but
to single out political dissidents and then define their thoughts as
criminal behavior.
So, who poses "a significant risk of committing acts of violence?" Whoever
the President adds to the list.
And so, we repeat what we said last week. This is about as serious as it
gets. There have been many assaults on our freedom recently, but none with
such totality and finality as this. We must draw the line in the sand on
this issue. The American people must re-discover their indignation, get off
their couches, and send a tsunami of protest to Washington.
This is a second call to action.
1. Send your Congressman and Senators a short but explicit message to the
effect that you expect them to (1) introduce or support fast-track
legislation to rescind the Executive Order and (2) call for impeachment of
the President NOW. Here is how to contact them:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/candlist.asp?Sort=S&Cong=110
2. Compile a list of every organization, publication, journalist, web site,
talk-show host, and community leader who understands the significance of
this Executive Order and send it to ge.griffin@verizon.net. The immediate
goal is to build a communications hub for a national coalition of activists
on this issue.
3. Send a copy of this message to everyone you know.
4. Drop everything else and do this NOW.
http://www.libertynewstv.com/Documents/execorder.htm
Ron Paul is Here! "Three Shoes Posse" Reggae Jam!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naMtwqBzja0