This is the last straw!

George W. “Little Dictator” Bush just broke the camels back.

WHY ISN’T THIS ON EVERY FRONT PAGE IN AMERICA???

Below you will find an article that alerted me to an Executive Order Bush [quietly] signed a couple of days ago, and what can only be described as a break with the Bill of Rights and a serious violation to his oath of office — look at all the wiggle room in this document and clutch your heart, citizen! Over 70% of Americans that want to end this war have just been put on notice!

I found the first article in “one of those” websites, and it’s evidently Russian, so it’s a bit strong. Then I went hunting. I found a single horrified op/ed. But I also found the actual Order posted by the government — it’s below, in its entirety; and below that, the Fifth Amendment, portions of which it appears to override [not to mention our First Amendment guarantee of free speech!]

Compare this to the Pentagon’s accusing Hillary Clinton of “aiding the enemy” by asking for a progress report on the troop withdrawal plans and the flap that’s ensued, and you can see the pattern emerging. This can’t be random, my friends — it comes on the heels of a number of aggressive unitary decisions in the last weeks, and it makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up!

Conservatives across the board, wringing their hands over Islamofascists [WHO made up that ridiculous word ... it's as much a contradiction in terms as Orwell's "War is Peace"] and those who still have a smidgen of trust in our own homegrown Mob Boss would probably advise me not to get my panties in a twist over this. The pundits might just shrug it away as a warning to Congress to back off. Well, they can BITE ME! Just about every single “conspiracy theory” out there in the last seven years has been proven real — care to take odds this won’t come in handy for the Bushies at some point?

The Dubby just went one toke over the line with this one. We hired him, we can fire him! It’s past time and now there’s no question.

Below these articles, you’ll find a couple of others that add to the whole picture … these are Very Dangerous Dots — connect them, and CALL YOUR CONGRESSMAN! Then pass this around — your neighbors aren’t going to find it in mainstream media.

Jude

Bush Outlaws All War Protest In United States
Sorcha Faal, NWO Report

In one of his most chilling moves to date against his own citizens, the American War Leader has issued a sweeping order this week outlawing all forms of protest against the Iraq war.

President Bush enacted into US law an ‘Executive Order’ on July 17th titled “Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq”, and which says:

“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.”

According to Russian legal experts, the greatest concern to the American people are the underlying provisions of this new law, and which, they state, are written ’so broadly’ as to outlaw all forms of protest against the war. These provisions state:

“(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

(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.

(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.

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.”

To the subsection of this new US law, according to these legal experts, that says “…the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit…”, the insertion of the word ’services’ has broad, and catastrophic, consequences for the American people in that any act deemed by their government to be against the Iraqi war is, in fact, supporting the ‘enemy’ and therefore threatens the ’stabilization of Iraq’.

In an even greater affront to the American people are the provisions of a law called The Patriot Act, and that should they run afoul of this new law they are forbidden to allow anyone to know about it, and as we can read as reported by the Seattle Times News Service:

“The [Patriot] act also expands the use of National Security Letters, which are a kind of warrant that the Justice Department writes for itself, authorizing its agents to seize such things as records of money movements, telephone calls and Internet visits. Recipients of a National Security Letter are not allowed to tell anyone about them, and so cannot contest them.”

It is interesting to note, too, that this is not the first time that the United States has unleashed the brutal power of their government against its citizens to further their war aims and stifle domestic dissent, as during the European conflict of World War I they enacted a law called The Sedition Act of 1918 and which “…forbade Americans to use “disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language” about the United States government, flag, or armed forces during war.”

It is curious to note that after the enactment of this new law there has been no protest by any of the other political leaders in the United States, with the exception of the only Muslim member of the United States Congress, Minnesota Democrat Keith Ellison, and who compared President Bush to the Nazi War Leader Adolph Hitler by stating the attacks upon the World Trade Center could be likened to the burning of the Reichstag.

Today, as the United States faces an imminent economic collapse, while at the same time its war bill has reached the staggering amount of $648 billion, one of the last freedoms the American people have had to protest their leaders actions against them, and other peoples in the World, has now been taken away from them, the freedom to speak and write in opposition to what is being done to them.

“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”, said the great British writer George Orwell, but, and sadly, liberty has been lost to the once free people of the United States who are no longer allowed to tell their leaders, or each other, what they don’t want to hear.

With this being so, the American people should, likewise, contemplate their ‘new’ future, and as, also, stated best by George Orwell, “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.” ++

Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html

White House News

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.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Wikipedia

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
Wikipedia

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

This “Presidential Executive Order” is Grounds for Arrest
Timothy Gatto
Jul 21 2007

The time has actually come. If the reports of Bush’s new Executive order to seize the assets of anyone that interferes with his Iraq policy is true, than we are now under attack by our own government. If he implements this policy, than he has declared war on 75% of the US population. If this becomes reality, the State Governors have the option to put the National Guards of their States under State control and refuse to let them be federalized by the Administration to enforce martial law. The President cannot impose his will on a nation that refuses to bend to it. The Governors of the States have the power to use their National Guards to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.

For all of the Americans that say the time is right to leave this Country, don’t let the door hit you on the ass when you go. If that’s the way you feel, you can’t do any good here except to “knuckle under”. If someone tries to take my assets for standing against this administration, then they had better come armed. I really don’t have much to take, what I have they could fit inside a small U-Haul and probably would have to sell for scrap, but its mine and it stays with me.

For everyone that thought this war in Iraq was akin to a big international football game, you are now seeing how imperialistic governments work. There were reasons that they talked about civics in High School and College, they were trying to prepare us for a day like today. Apparently many of you skipped that class or were asleep. I know that many of you have been against the War from the beginning like me and I salute you, but this so called Presidential Directive is no reason to make you still. The time to get louder is now.

The time for a massive march on Washington is now. The time for a General Strike across America is now. The time for all of the Generals in all the Services, The Army, The Navy, The Air Force and the Marines to refuse to follow orders from an illegitimate government that has overstepped its authority is now.

If Bush puts this Presidential Directive in play it is time for Congress to arrest this administration and demand all of the cabinet members to either take an oath to Congress or step down and if that doesn’t happen, then to follow the administration to jail. Nancy Pelosi will be the De Facto President once Bush puts this Presidential Directive into play. She should then appoint a Vice-President and Congress must, according to established law, bring this administration to a fair and just trial, something that this administration has failed to do for thousands of other people that have been charges under terrorism laws.

This is our only recourse to a Directive such as this. The President has no power to tell the American people what they can and cannot support. If we were in a state of declared war with Iraq, he could conceivably charge those that give aid and comfort to the enemy. We are not in a declared war. Iraq is not our enemy any longer as if they ever were. The President has no legal right to implement such a Presidential Directive. This smacks of dictatorship and is unlawful. People MUST choose what they will do. They must either choose to stand up to dictatorship and tyranny, or give into a dictatorship of the right. It is your choice. It has come to this. Tell your elected officials that they must act, that it is their Constitutional duty to act. Maybe we will all meet each other in some detention camp, or celebrate the demise of a threat to our democracy. Time will tell. It always does. ++

A New Bush “Executive Privilege” Theory
Timothy Gatto
Jul 20 2007

The Bush Administrations claim today that it has “Executive Privilege” in so far as submitting to contempt charges by Federal Attorneys because the Federal Attorneys work for the Executive branch smacks of Soviet style government claims that the State can do no wrong to the people because the people are the state. The recent story in the Washington Post said that;

“A U.S. attorney would not be permitted to bring contempt charges or convene a grand jury in an executive privilege case,” said a senior official, who said his remarks reflect a consensus within the administration. “And a U.S. attorney wouldn’t be permitted to argue against the reasoned legal opinion that the Justice Department provided. No one should expect that to happen.”

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly, added: “It has long been understood that, in circumstances like these, the constitutional prerogatives of the president would make it a futile and purely political act for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. attorneys.”

So now we have a President that virtually says that he is above the law because he is the law because he hires the lawyers and they work for him. What chutzpah! If this is allowed to stand, then Congress could use its “inherent contempt powers allowing either body to hold its own trials and even jail those found in defiance of Congress. According to the Post this was “widely used during the 19th century, the power has not been invoked since 1934 and Democratic lawmakers have not displayed an appetite for reviving the practice.”

It’s about time that Congress started using it again. The old saying that “drastic times call for drastic measures” could not be as appropriate as they are now. These indeed are drastic times. The American people would have no problem with Congress using drastic measures. In fact they have been calling for Congress to do just that for months now. The handwriting is on the wall. This President does not play by pre-ordained rules of civilized behavior. It’s time for Congress to play the game as if they want to win, not just act that way. They might believe that allowing Bush to make a mockery of the Executive branch will open the doors to the White House for them in 2008, but they may find Bush won’t leave under some new “Presidential Mandate” when that time comes. I don’t trust Bush to leave the White House willingly unless Congress starts enforcing the rule of law on this “runaway executive branch” that has already caused such heartbreak and misery on the world. ++

All in a Day’s Work
David Bromwich, HuffPo
July 20, 2007

A decision yesterday by U.S. District Judge John D. Bates threw out the lawsuit by Valerie Plame against Vice President Cheney and several other government officials. Several news reports have pointed out that the judge followed a narrow jurisdictional view of the case; but not much attention has been given to his reasoning or its implications.

Judge Bates found that government officials are protected under the Privacy Act from liability for actions performed in the course of their normal duties. “The act of rebutting public criticism,” he wrote, “such as that levied [sic: he means leveled] by Mr. Wilson against the Bush administration’s handling of prewar foreign intelligence, by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants’ duties as high-level Executive Branch officials.” Notice his choice of words: not prerogatives but “duties.” They were obliged by law and compelled by custom to blow the cover of a CIA agent.

At bottom, the opinion accepts the Cheney Circle view that the vice president’s and the president’s men are exempt from inquiry and prosecution. In rebutting public criticism with a startling private revelation that ended a career, they were only doing what government officials are expected to do. This amounts to a simple restatement of the higher lawlessness. Legal action (it is said) against corrupt conduct by government officials makes political life impossible because it “criminalizes political differences.” But that is to beg the question whether the ordinary business of government includes the exposure of a secret agent to the glare of publicity — an extraordinary action that in other circumstances might well lead to a charge of treason.

The opinion by Judge Bates declines to say whether the legitimate work of rebutting criticism includes the newfound power of the vice president to declassify government secrets by an ad lib process free from oversight. After the calculated leak, Brewster Jennings, the CIA front that Valerie Plame worked for when monitoring the purchase of materials for WMD, was dismantled: a result that must have been thought tolerable by the leakers, and that perhaps was desired for other reasons. Who profited? Brewster Jennings no longer exists to sort out the true from the spurious reports of arms procurements by Iraq or, more to the point, Iran. For the time being, the decision by the district court has released the administration to “rebut” the next agent who dares to challenge a public lie about a country the administration wants to attack.

The federal judiciary is thickly planted now with judges who can be relied on for opinions that cooperate with the claims of arbitrary power. A staff lawyer for Kenneth Starr from 1995 through mid-1997, John D. Bates was appointed to the U.S. District Court by President G.W. Bush in December 2001. In December 2002, he dismissed the GAO lawsuit in Walker v. Cheney, which had sought information about the vice president’s secret dealings on energy policy. The warrant for dismissal, in that case, turned on a failure to demonstrate “injury.”

Of course, oversight agencies perform their work in order to discover injuries; they can hardly name in advance and with perfect precision the injuries they seek to discover. But such are the arguments by which a political judge may give his decisions an appearance of standing above politics. In February 2006, after the resignation from the FISA court of James Robertson — an unusual act of protest against the circumvention of FISA by unauthorized government wiretaps — Judge Bates was picked by the new Chief Justice, John Roberts, to sit as the newest judge on the FISA court. ++

“So keep fightin’ for freedom and justice, beloveds, but don’t you forget to have fun doin’ it. Lord, let your laughter ring forth. Be outrageous, ridicule the fraidy-cats, rejoice in all the oddities that freedom can produce. And when you get through kickin’ ass and celebratin’ the sheer joy of a good fight, be sure to tell those who come after how much fun it was.”
~ Molly Ivins, 1944 - 2007

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

1 comment July 22nd, 2007