P
Perseid
Guest
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/2019/81/
Protesting the War may be a Crime
Written by Peter Chamberlin
Monday, 23 July 2007
by Peter Chamberlin
On July 17, 2007, Bush quietly issued an executive order entitled
"Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten
Stabilization Efforts in Iraq."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html
By this order, he made it a crime to commit, or to pose a significant risk
of committing..., acts of violence that threaten "the peace and stability
of Iraq," or undermine "efforts to promote economic reconstruction and
political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the
Iraqi people."
It remains to be seen just how far Bush will stretch this law, in light of
ongoing attempts by neocon enemies of America, who charge Americans with
"subversive activities" and "providing support to the enemy," for
protesting the war. No one is safe from their crusade to brand most of
the American people as "treasonists," for opposing Bush's out-of-control
"leadership" of the war effort. Even Sen. Hillary Clinton has been
accused of these "crimes" by neocon stooges like Eric Edelman, who attacked
her for requesting a briefing for her committee from the Department of
Defense on contingency plans for withdrawal from Iraq.
The new Executive Order authorizes the Sec. or Treasury to seize the
property and economic assets of any American citizen who is "threatening
the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq...undermining
efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in
Iraq..," or those who "have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided
financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or
services in support of, such...person whose property and interests...are
blocked..."
Bush based this extraordinary measure on his belief that any American who
did these things, or supported those who did "...would seriously impair my
ability to deal with the national emergency declared in expanded...
Executive Order 13315..." This E.O. is a continuation of the policy set
by Jimmy Carter's executive orders, E.O. 12170, 11/14/79 (which blocked
Iranian government property) and E.O. 12211, 04/17/80 (which prohibited
transactions with Iran). Following Carter's precedent, George HW Bush used
his emergency power to put a "lien" on Iraqi assets when Saddam Hussein
invaded Kuwait in Gulf 1. Little Bush re-adapted his father's "national
emergency," to first, attach Iraqi assets and to prohibit transactions
with Iraq after Gulf 2 began, which he later rescinded to issue another
"emergency" declaration, to protect the Iraqi Development Fund. The latest
order is a bizarre stretch of the law, beyond any imaginable reasonable
interpretation, to justify a political clampdown, based on threats to that
fund. This "bizarro" interpretation is the basis for the new threatening
order.
Bush cited "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..., the National Emergencies Act..., and
section 301 of title 3, United States Code (which pertains to any function
which is vested in the President by law)," to justify his actions. His
crazy interpretation of these statutes greatly exceeds all the authority
that he claims to have derived from them.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act clearly defines those
powers as the authority to "investigate, regulate, or prohibit... any
transactions in foreign exchange... transfers of credit or payments
between...,or to any banking institution, to the extent that such transfers
or payments involve any interest of any foreign country or a national
thereof...,or the importing or exporting of currency or securities..." The
authority granted to the President by this section does not include the
authority to regulate or prohibit..."articles, such as food, clothing, and
medicine, intended to be used to relieve human suffering, (or the financial
means to attain them) except to the extent that the President determines
that such donations (A) would seriously impair his ability to deal with any
national emergency... The President, in every possible instance, shall
consult with the Congress before exercising any of the authorities
granted..." Under penalties listed in Sec. 1705, "...A civil penalty of
not to exceed $10,000 may be imposed on any person who violates any
license, order, or regulation issued under this chapter..." Under these
regulations, Congress has the authority to terminate any declared "national
emergency" by joint resolution.
The National Emergency Powers Act says that the "...emergency powers may be
stated explicitly or implied by the Constitution, if the Chief Executive
believes that they may be permissible Constitutionally, or inferred by
statutes. There are limits and restraints to the President's authority to
exercise the emergency powers that he has assumed. With the exception of
the habeas corpus clause, the Constitution makes no allowance for its
suspension, or of any of its provisions during a national emergency..."
He is still bound by the separation of powers and must consult with the
legislative and judicial branches before assuming these extraordinary
powers. During a legitimate "national emergency" the President can "...
seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize
commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize
and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of
private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the
lives of United States citizens. Furthermore, Congress may modify, rescind,
or render dormant such delegated emergency authority..."
This whole extended "national emergency," which Bush 1 set in motion and
Junior extended and modified, is based on Daddy Bush's declaration that
"...the policies and actions of the Government of Iraq constitute an
unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States...," which Iraq clearly is unable to do.
Junior replaced that emergency with his own, parroting Daddy's claims that
threats to "...the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to
promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq..." pose an
"...unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States..." Just like the imaginary "Iraq threat" that
was used to justify Gulf War 2, Iraq has never represented a credible
threat to anything but American pride and machismo.
This "national emergency" is the latest move in a succession of Executive
Orders and "signing statements" by Bush, that have continuously whittled
away at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, justified by the "war on
terror." This follows the last semi-secret signing of NSPD 51 and HSPD 20
(Homeland Security) on May 9,2007. This Executive Order will, in effect
elevate the President and his National Continuity Coordinator to an
unprecedented position above the entire government, when Bush decides to
declare the next "national emergency," where he alone, "...shall lead the
activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional
government...," under the Continuity Of Government program.
According to Prof. Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research, "... NSPD /51
HSPD 20 grant unprecedented powers to the Presidency and the Department of
Homeland Security, overriding the foundations of Constitutional
government...NSPD 51 allows the sitting president to declare a 'national
emergency' without Congressional approval... The adoption of NSPD 51 would
lead to the de facto closing down of the Legislature and the militarization
of justice and law enforcement...in a'Catastrophic Emergency'...,
defined... as any incident, regardless of location, that results in
extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely
affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or
government functions..." NSPD 51 ensures that "...appropriate support is
available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be
prepared at all times to implement those provisions." Many of us wonder
whether Cheney hasn't already assumed many of these special powers, judging
by his elevation of himself above the Congress and the Executive Branch.
The extremely serious threat that these orders represent to American civil
liberties and to our Constitutional rights cannot be overstated. On
October 17, 2006, Bush signed into law S. 3930, the Military Commissions
Act, which made it acceptable to violate the Geneva Conventions and the
Army Field Manual on Interrogations regulations banning torture, which
also enabled him to designate anyone, even American citizens, as "enemy
combatants," making Americans susceptible to everything that happens to
real terrorists in secret. The Defense Authorization Act of 2006 (H.R.
1815) empowered the President to declare martial law in the event of a
terrorist attack or disruption of "public order," leaving him to determine
which "disruption" is serious enough to warrant the declaration.
How much more proof do we need that our Constitution and our liberty are
severely imperiled by this administration's approach to the war on terror?
Blind administration support for whatever Israel does in alleged
conjunction with the war on terrorism has effectively locked us into an
escalating path to war with Iran, at a time of Israel's choosing.
According to Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman, the
Israeli government has been told by unnamed NATO and European Union
officials that, "If we start military operations against Iran alone, then
Europe and the US will support us." Judging from last summer's Israeli
invasion of Lebanon and the Administration's great public disappointment
with Israel for not finishing Hezbollah off, or not invading Syria,
Lieberman's words ring true.
In light of all this evidence that we are about to let Israel start a war
with Iran for us to finish, and the warnings about protests which
"endanger" Bush's plans for Iraq, our direction for opposing Bush's neocon
war of conquest becomes very clear. All protests against the Iraq war must
become protests of the Iran war, the war that Bush claims that he is not
planning. The antiwar movement in America must follow Bush's lead and
switch gears. We have to save our Constitution and we have to oppose
Israel and Israel's agents (AIPAC, the American Israeli Political Action
Committee in America), who are feverishly waging war against the common
will of the American people. Israel must face the wrath of the American
people. It is time for a total economic boycott of anything Israeli, until
the Knesset figures out that they must fight their own wars, especially
their wars of aggression. If it takes a national general strike to save
the Constitution from the Republican and Democratic representatives who
have joined together to do Israel's will, against the will of the people,
then that is what must be done. If we have to risk freedom itself to
preserve the sacred heritage that has been entrusted to our care, then that
is what we have to do.
Protesting the War may be a Crime
Written by Peter Chamberlin
Monday, 23 July 2007
by Peter Chamberlin
On July 17, 2007, Bush quietly issued an executive order entitled
"Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten
Stabilization Efforts in Iraq."
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/07/20070717-3.html
By this order, he made it a crime to commit, or to pose a significant risk
of committing..., acts of violence that threaten "the peace and stability
of Iraq," or undermine "efforts to promote economic reconstruction and
political reform in Iraq and to provide humanitarian assistance to the
Iraqi people."
It remains to be seen just how far Bush will stretch this law, in light of
ongoing attempts by neocon enemies of America, who charge Americans with
"subversive activities" and "providing support to the enemy," for
protesting the war. No one is safe from their crusade to brand most of
the American people as "treasonists," for opposing Bush's out-of-control
"leadership" of the war effort. Even Sen. Hillary Clinton has been
accused of these "crimes" by neocon stooges like Eric Edelman, who attacked
her for requesting a briefing for her committee from the Department of
Defense on contingency plans for withdrawal from Iraq.
The new Executive Order authorizes the Sec. or Treasury to seize the
property and economic assets of any American citizen who is "threatening
the peace or stability of Iraq or the Government of Iraq...undermining
efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in
Iraq..," or those who "have materially assisted, sponsored, or provided
financial, material, logistical, or technical support for, or goods or
services in support of, such...person whose property and interests...are
blocked..."
Bush based this extraordinary measure on his belief that any American who
did these things, or supported those who did "...would seriously impair my
ability to deal with the national emergency declared in expanded...
Executive Order 13315..." This E.O. is a continuation of the policy set
by Jimmy Carter's executive orders, E.O. 12170, 11/14/79 (which blocked
Iranian government property) and E.O. 12211, 04/17/80 (which prohibited
transactions with Iran). Following Carter's precedent, George HW Bush used
his emergency power to put a "lien" on Iraqi assets when Saddam Hussein
invaded Kuwait in Gulf 1. Little Bush re-adapted his father's "national
emergency," to first, attach Iraqi assets and to prohibit transactions
with Iraq after Gulf 2 began, which he later rescinded to issue another
"emergency" declaration, to protect the Iraqi Development Fund. The latest
order is a bizarre stretch of the law, beyond any imaginable reasonable
interpretation, to justify a political clampdown, based on threats to that
fund. This "bizarro" interpretation is the basis for the new threatening
order.
Bush cited "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..., the National Emergencies Act..., and
section 301 of title 3, United States Code (which pertains to any function
which is vested in the President by law)," to justify his actions. His
crazy interpretation of these statutes greatly exceeds all the authority
that he claims to have derived from them.
The International Emergency Economic Powers Act clearly defines those
powers as the authority to "investigate, regulate, or prohibit... any
transactions in foreign exchange... transfers of credit or payments
between...,or to any banking institution, to the extent that such transfers
or payments involve any interest of any foreign country or a national
thereof...,or the importing or exporting of currency or securities..." The
authority granted to the President by this section does not include the
authority to regulate or prohibit..."articles, such as food, clothing, and
medicine, intended to be used to relieve human suffering, (or the financial
means to attain them) except to the extent that the President determines
that such donations (A) would seriously impair his ability to deal with any
national emergency... The President, in every possible instance, shall
consult with the Congress before exercising any of the authorities
granted..." Under penalties listed in Sec. 1705, "...A civil penalty of
not to exceed $10,000 may be imposed on any person who violates any
license, order, or regulation issued under this chapter..." Under these
regulations, Congress has the authority to terminate any declared "national
emergency" by joint resolution.
The National Emergency Powers Act says that the "...emergency powers may be
stated explicitly or implied by the Constitution, if the Chief Executive
believes that they may be permissible Constitutionally, or inferred by
statutes. There are limits and restraints to the President's authority to
exercise the emergency powers that he has assumed. With the exception of
the habeas corpus clause, the Constitution makes no allowance for its
suspension, or of any of its provisions during a national emergency..."
He is still bound by the separation of powers and must consult with the
legislative and judicial branches before assuming these extraordinary
powers. During a legitimate "national emergency" the President can "...
seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize
commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize
and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of
private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the
lives of United States citizens. Furthermore, Congress may modify, rescind,
or render dormant such delegated emergency authority..."
This whole extended "national emergency," which Bush 1 set in motion and
Junior extended and modified, is based on Daddy Bush's declaration that
"...the policies and actions of the Government of Iraq constitute an
unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States...," which Iraq clearly is unable to do.
Junior replaced that emergency with his own, parroting Daddy's claims that
threats to "...the peace and stability of Iraq and undermining efforts to
promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq..." pose an
"...unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign
policy of the United States..." Just like the imaginary "Iraq threat" that
was used to justify Gulf War 2, Iraq has never represented a credible
threat to anything but American pride and machismo.
This "national emergency" is the latest move in a succession of Executive
Orders and "signing statements" by Bush, that have continuously whittled
away at the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, justified by the "war on
terror." This follows the last semi-secret signing of NSPD 51 and HSPD 20
(Homeland Security) on May 9,2007. This Executive Order will, in effect
elevate the President and his National Continuity Coordinator to an
unprecedented position above the entire government, when Bush decides to
declare the next "national emergency," where he alone, "...shall lead the
activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional
government...," under the Continuity Of Government program.
According to Prof. Michel Chossudovsky of Global Research, "... NSPD /51
HSPD 20 grant unprecedented powers to the Presidency and the Department of
Homeland Security, overriding the foundations of Constitutional
government...NSPD 51 allows the sitting president to declare a 'national
emergency' without Congressional approval... The adoption of NSPD 51 would
lead to the de facto closing down of the Legislature and the militarization
of justice and law enforcement...in a'Catastrophic Emergency'...,
defined... as any incident, regardless of location, that results in
extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely
affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or
government functions..." NSPD 51 ensures that "...appropriate support is
available to the Vice President and others involved as necessary to be
prepared at all times to implement those provisions." Many of us wonder
whether Cheney hasn't already assumed many of these special powers, judging
by his elevation of himself above the Congress and the Executive Branch.
The extremely serious threat that these orders represent to American civil
liberties and to our Constitutional rights cannot be overstated. On
October 17, 2006, Bush signed into law S. 3930, the Military Commissions
Act, which made it acceptable to violate the Geneva Conventions and the
Army Field Manual on Interrogations regulations banning torture, which
also enabled him to designate anyone, even American citizens, as "enemy
combatants," making Americans susceptible to everything that happens to
real terrorists in secret. The Defense Authorization Act of 2006 (H.R.
1815) empowered the President to declare martial law in the event of a
terrorist attack or disruption of "public order," leaving him to determine
which "disruption" is serious enough to warrant the declaration.
How much more proof do we need that our Constitution and our liberty are
severely imperiled by this administration's approach to the war on terror?
Blind administration support for whatever Israel does in alleged
conjunction with the war on terrorism has effectively locked us into an
escalating path to war with Iran, at a time of Israel's choosing.
According to Israeli Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman, the
Israeli government has been told by unnamed NATO and European Union
officials that, "If we start military operations against Iran alone, then
Europe and the US will support us." Judging from last summer's Israeli
invasion of Lebanon and the Administration's great public disappointment
with Israel for not finishing Hezbollah off, or not invading Syria,
Lieberman's words ring true.
In light of all this evidence that we are about to let Israel start a war
with Iran for us to finish, and the warnings about protests which
"endanger" Bush's plans for Iraq, our direction for opposing Bush's neocon
war of conquest becomes very clear. All protests against the Iraq war must
become protests of the Iran war, the war that Bush claims that he is not
planning. The antiwar movement in America must follow Bush's lead and
switch gears. We have to save our Constitution and we have to oppose
Israel and Israel's agents (AIPAC, the American Israeli Political Action
Committee in America), who are feverishly waging war against the common
will of the American people. Israel must face the wrath of the American
people. It is time for a total economic boycott of anything Israeli, until
the Knesset figures out that they must fight their own wars, especially
their wars of aggression. If it takes a national general strike to save
the Constitution from the Republican and Democratic representatives who
have joined together to do Israel's will, against the will of the people,
then that is what must be done. If we have to risk freedom itself to
preserve the sacred heritage that has been entrusted to our care, then that
is what we have to do.