Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Executive Order: Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq
The Whitehouse ^ | today | W

Posted on 07/19/2007 1:17:36 PM PDT by Rodney King

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withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in: any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense,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.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: constitution; eo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last
To: Petronski; All

My thoughts exactly. I suppose all of code pink, John Mutha, et al.’s assets can now be seized?


21 posted on 07/19/2007 1:35:49 PM PDT by enough_idiocy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: HOTTIEBOY

Ha! Very good!


22 posted on 07/19/2007 1:36:33 PM PDT by Attention Surplus Disorder (When Bubba lies, the finger flies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SubGeniusX

Maybe its just me and my realistic way of thinking that is wrong.....but we (society) know less that .001% of what goes on in the world. So I am thinking there is a reason for this. I am thinking the reasons are decided by very smart men that DO know whats going on.

I am setting in a cubicle diagnosing a man’s computer fault codes in his car from 600 miles away and typing in a forum. Thats why I don’t judge things like this. Cawz I don’t know what or why it was done. I do know that it was done by people a hellofa lot smarter than me.


23 posted on 07/19/2007 1:37:07 PM PDT by HOTTIEBOY (The more people I meet, the more I like my dog.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0

I’m guessing Iran owns some land in the United States?


24 posted on 07/19/2007 1:37:57 PM PDT by visionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dixie Yooper

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I wish that were true!


25 posted on 07/19/2007 1:38:11 PM PDT by avacado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

“Does this include Democrats?”


26 posted on 07/19/2007 1:38:15 PM PDT by K-oneTexas (I'm not a judge and there ain't enough of me to be a jury. (Zell Miller, A National Party No More))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Fishtalk

Thanks... glad I could help


27 posted on 07/19/2007 1:39:29 PM PDT by SubGeniusX ($29.95 Guarantees Your Salvation!!! Or TRIPLE Your Money Back!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: absolootezer0
So he's going after about half of congress, right?

No, left! LOL

28 posted on 07/19/2007 1:40:19 PM PDT by fish hawk (The religion of Darwinism = Monkey Intellect)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

Over 4 years of fighting and now this...

About damn time.


29 posted on 07/19/2007 1:41:22 PM PDT by abercrombie_guy_38
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HOTTIEBOY

Excellent point.. to bad knee jerk is usually the rule of the day.. I also wonder if this is simply a reauthorization or updating something that has gone back to Lincoln like other article like this ended up being..


30 posted on 07/19/2007 1:41:52 PM PDT by mnehring (Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
No wonder Mexico is so filthy. Everybody who does cleaning jobs is HERE!......
Great tagline!
31 posted on 07/19/2007 1:41:56 PM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King
Interesting that you take the position that this violates the 5th. For reference, I’ve included the text below

Amendment V

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.


As I read the EO, it prohibits the transfer of property but does not “take” the property in the aspect of depriving someone other than a specific use.

Perhaps a bit technical, but it seems to me that one could argue both sides.

32 posted on 07/19/2007 1:42:51 PM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

I haven’t any idea what the man is saying, but I kinda get the idea that he is Pi——d with someone. Perhaps reinstating the Sedition Act would fill the bill for grabbing AQ supporters in legislators clothing.


33 posted on 07/19/2007 1:44:02 PM PDT by ANGGAPO (LayteGulfBeachClub)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

Wow. That is completely unConstitutional.


34 posted on 07/19/2007 1:44:21 PM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
I wonder if the people who are screaming that this is Unconstitutional have read this part of the Fifth amendment:
..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...
35 posted on 07/19/2007 1:48:13 PM PDT by mnehring (Virtus Junxit Mors Non Separabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Rodney King

Constitution has been in perpetual suspension since the 40s... every president declares a state of emergency, which grants them powers... we’ve been perpetually in this state for 60+ years if memory serves.


36 posted on 07/19/2007 1:48:48 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
IE, the Executive branch is given power to make laws that are necessary for it to enforce other areas of the Constitution.

A good post to bring that up. It would seem to me that allowing the President to do things to enforce the consitution would precisely not allow him to do things that violate the consitution.

37 posted on 07/19/2007 1:49:13 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

Internment Camps? Somebody translate?


38 posted on 07/19/2007 1:49:56 PM PDT by Scythian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling
I wonder if the people who are screaming that this is Unconstitutional have read this part of the Fifth amendment: ..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...

That says that the 5th amendment doesn't apply to soldiers i.e. you can execute deserters on the spot.

Don't see how this applies to taking citizens stuff without so much as a hearing.

39 posted on 07/19/2007 1:50:32 PM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dixie Yooper

Maybe Searchlight Nevada is about to become a national asset.


40 posted on 07/19/2007 1:50:51 PM PDT by Truth29
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson