Ave Caesar!
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come within the possession or control of United States persons, are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,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.
This means YOU, sucker!
July 26th, 2007 at 11:03 pm
OK, so, I cannot write a post because I “do not have sufficient permissions to access this page.” I guess I’ll just post a comment.
This BLOG software used here sucks ass. I apologize to the guy that gave his time to the party to install and manage it—and I apologize for not remembering his name after talking to him for quite a while after the last meeting I went to—but this BLOG software is really convoluted and difficult to use. I would really recommend taking a look at Drupal. Anyway, again, I really do apologize for ripping on the guy that volunteered his time to do this when I don’t ever volunteer for the party.
The reason I mention Drupal above is because I have spent several months looking for free/open source BLOG/community software and I found Drupal to be a good option. So, leading to the first reason for this post: I used Drupal to implement my political rap site http://www.DanKilo.com. At this point, I have little time to dedicate to writing for the site but I am trying to get up a few articles up every month. Please take a look at the site and please feel free to be the first person to post a comment or a BLOG entry. Excuse the cuss words but they are there to get what I think is my important audience—I could give a fuck about soccer-moms.
The second, and most important, reason for this post is to ponder a thought.
I just returned form a trip to So Cal and the person I was traveling with wanted to take a look at Tijuana. So we drove to the US side of the border and walked into Mexico.
Currently, and for the last 200 plus years, when you walked out of the US into Mexico, there is no US port of exit. You leave the US by passing through a gate and then you walk into Mexico. There is no US official at that gate—there are no questions—you simple leave the US. This is a free country, you can leave at anytime and NOBODY asks any questions.
I now ponder, because I have no more trips planned to any US border in the near future, this was the last time—ever—that I will exit the United States without having to show documentation to US officials. Sometime in early 08 (I forget the date) the US government will complete the lockdown of our boarders and nobody will be allowed to exit the country without the proper documentation—a valid passport.
This is a major departure from the status quo. Currently, about 230 million Americans do not have a passport and all of those Americans plus all of the undocumented people in the US can go to the border and simply walk out of the US without showing anything to any US official. In early 08 none of the same 200 million plus people will be allowed to leave the US without showing “proper documentation.”
When I talk to fellow Libertarians and friends about this issue they do not seem terribly upset. I am baffled as to why not. My guess is that most of them are used to showing a passport (or, proper documentation) to the airline they are flying with when leaving the US. The original reason the airlines started requesting a passport is because they wanted to make sure that the passenger would not be turned away at the port of entry where, if that happened, the airline would have some burden to return the passenger on an unscheduled bases and maybe for no charge to the passenger. Earlier this year, that requirement for a passport has been transformed in to: “the government requires you to have a passport to fly out of the country.” But, you can still walk out of the country.
So, this July marks a milestone for my personal freedom. I will tell my grandkids about the last time, in 2007, I walked out of the country without showing any documentation to ANY US official. They will respond, “Wow! You mean, back then, ANYBODY could just walk out of the country without any reason!” A milestone.
And, if you are still reading. . .
Currently, there are several reasons why a US citizen cannot obtain a passport. They start with failure to pay child support and a few other infractions. The list will grow with the government.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:52 am
The blog software allows any unsolicited comment in response to a monitored post. This place is not for rants and raves, nor for irrelevant spam. We limit the response space, believing anyone can make their point(s) succinctly–without inappropriate language. (Comments requiring expletive deletion will be eliminated entirely–we only “edit” for length.) Debate is encouraged. For the whole text of DanKilo’s post, you may contact him via his Web site.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:45 am
Hi bmartin. Sorry, but I do not understand your post. What is a “monitored post?” When I am logged on I cannot (or could not last night) post a new BLOG entry. I have to believe that this is NOT the way this BLOG is supposed to work. Are you telling me that only a select group of users can post new BLOG entries and that registered users can only post comments? If that is the case, it’s stupid.
I don’t know what you mean by “not for rants and raves, nor for irrelevant SPAM.” Is that a problem on this site or are you calling my post that? Spamming this site would be a waste of time because there is hardly anybody here. I thought I’d post here because I know some of you and I thought it would help attract attention to the site if more people posted topics of interest.
I still do not understand the rest of your post. “Debate is encouraged.” What is that supposed to mean? Do you mean debate on this site or a debate to remove my post?
bmartin, you are on a LIBERTARIAN site talking about editing and/or deleting posts. That’s a very bad idea.
July 27th, 2007 at 10:51 am
I regret your lack of comprehension. It is certainly not our intent to deny anyone access to the blog site who follows our rules. However, libertariansim does not advocate chaos and anarchy as a mission method–not in government, nor in communication. All societies have rules. Libertarians advocate minimum rules, literally to protect the innocent.
For example, you can say you disagree with the policies of the Bush administration, or Mr. Putin, or me. Your choice of words, however, can’t be: “He’s a motherf*cking, dumb-arse sh*thead …”, sic, which may only inflame the objects of your insults, contrary to the stated Libertarian ideals.
We monitor, i.e., review for cultural taste–political correctness, polite debate. If a writer cannot express a thought without crude and offensive language, his ideas are probably (in my opinion) unworthy of distribution–at least, on a site that is hopefully dedicated to positive reinforcement of stated ideals. You don’t shout “Fire!” in a movie theatre, and other such examples.
Everything written may be read by anyone. And there is some consequence for every action.
A “blog” is a personal statement, and you can say whatever you want on your own site. However, posting on another’s site is like visiting their home. I have found most (declared) Libertarians are tolerant … to a point. But, in my experience, there are certain limits in every household beyond which you will be asked to leave. All cultures have rules of appropriate conduct, and methods of enforcement.
For example, calling a police officer, “Stupid,” may have unexpected consequences. [S/he’s liable to demonstrate who’s stupid!] The reason for social controls generally are to inhibit misuse of power … even “free (?) speech.” Of course, what is misuse is a matter of opinion. An intelligent, educated person can get a point across without being culturally offensive. An editor makes an attempt to keep comments on track, readable, useful.
As for “hardly anybody (here),” we know there is somebody (here). You, for example. The creation of change involves “butterfly effect,” small steps on the road to a destination.
“Debate” is an exchange of differing ideas (pro-con) on specific subjects, in specific format.
As a former professional journalist, I eschew the idea of censorship–indeed, have complained about Colorado Libertarian censorship.. But “editing” is a necessity when some anomalies in composition are patently offensive, grammatically incorrect, “off the subject,” inconcise, or inappropriate. Personally, I think it’s a good idea.
“Blog” responses are monitored by several volunteers, just as in most on-line groups. If you don’t like our methods–just as with those of government–vote the rascals (volunteers) out! We–the Jeffco steering committee–believe the Web site is a useful vehicle, and will continue to serve until replaced. Until you replace us, do it our way.
Thanks for the update on your views. And, good luck on your Web site!
August 1st, 2007 at 5:19 pm
DanKilo: I do appreciate the feedback (though not the tone). I’ll clarify a few policy points:
1) the blog software used here is WordPress, which is an extremely popular open-source blog package which seems fits our needs well and is compatable with the operating system and hosting software we use for the site. Drupal is also a good option. I spent a bit of time looking at various blog software and decided on wordpress. I’m prepared to use something else, but I need a more convincing argument to spend my time redoing something than “sucks ass” and is “really convoluted”.
2) the policy here, as with nearly every blog on the planet, is that the blog owners post articles and blog readers or subscribers can comment on the articles. This is the primary difference between a blog and a forum. A few months ago we changed our comment policy to allow any registered user to comment on an article. We also use akismet to trap spam comments (occasionally it incorectly labels a valid comment as spam but this blog would be completely unreadable if we didn’t use it). Bud and others also actively monitor comments. We have a policy of not deleting comments for opposing viewpoints (that would defeat the purpose and stifle useful discussion) but as Bud has said we may remove comments for various other reasons.
3) At the moment Mike, Bud, and I (as the elected officers of the affiliate) are authorized to create new posts. I have said at each and every LP Jeffco meeting since this site was launched that we’re looking for blog contributors and to contact me if you’d like to contribute posts. Mike has also offered to post articles if people email them to him.
Hopefully this experience hasn’t turned you off to this blog. We’re all volunteers here trying to make the site as useful as possible with limited time. Everything I’ve said here is open for amendment if there’s good reason to do it and I do appreciate feedback aimed at making this site better and I value your opinions since you’re more experienced in internet marketing and traffic generation than I am. Hopefully this was all misunderstanding and has now been clarified. If you’d like to discuss how this blog is run further, please contact me.
– Pete
July 27th, 2010 at 5:25 am
Hi Pete,
I’m not certain why so many people have issues with WordPress since it is one of the most popular Content Management Systems in use, but I know from past experience as a blog manager for nearly 300 blogs that a lot of people have difficulty with it.
I use WordPress extensively for my own blogging. Partly because I find it rather easy to use and partly because it has so many plugins that makes it even easier to get some love from the search engines.
Stan
July 27th, 2010 at 5:40 am
I have to say that after spending 21 years in the military with much of that time overseas followed by a few years in law enforcement I don’t see having to show identification as an infringement on my freedom. I can still go wherever I want whenever I want with a few exceptions…Cuba, Iran, North Korea (I’ve already been there a few times already and no one was around to ask for an ID).
Currently I live in Europe and I carry a passport with all my documents in order…it was time consuming and expensive, but once I went through the process it is painless.
I mention expensive because every office I went to charged me a fee to file paperwork, translate English into German etc. Maybe I’m getting soft in my old age or maybe it is watching our government crushed under mounting piles of debt, but paying for the services I was using didn’t bother me much.
July 27th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
@Stan Smith I totally agree with you I’m a newbie blogger / Child care advisor and since I’ve been working with wordpress I have produced so much more compared to the other software I was using.
August 30th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
Sick of obtaining low numbers of useless visitors to your site? Well i wish to let you know about a fresh underground tactic that makes me personally $900 every day on 100% AUTOPILOT. I really could be here all day and going into detail but why dont you simply check their website out? There is really a excellent video that explains everything. So if your serious about making effortless money this is the site for you. Auto Traffic Avalanche