Dada asks the candidates a question, nearly melting under Clinton's icy glare..In the most recent democratic candidate debate, I got a chance to ask the presidential hopefuls a question:
How is it I can hear an "important" story on Fox News about an 11 year old kid in Oshkosh, Wisconsin who got punched out and the $20 he raised selling lemonage stolen by a teenager with the headline, "There's a bully loose in Oshkosh!" but I don't hear about the president's Executive Order that could outaw Iraq war dissent by any American with the penalty of full property and asset seizure without notice when so determined "guilty" by the "Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense"?
Why haven't I heard the headline, "There's a bully loose in the White House" on Fox News? Or CNN? Or MSNBC, CBS, ABC? Huh? Why not?
And in that this Executive Order effectively grants president Bush dictatorial powers and becomes effective 30 days after being put forth in the federal register (on 18 August 2007) unless congress rejects it, I'd like to ask those candidates serving in congress, in particular, who among you has even heard of this order and, of those of you who have, who of you will stand up against it, or will you simply go home for your August 6-September 3rd congressional recess, allowing fomation of a Bush authoritarian state?
Dada is still awaiting their answers!
How is it I can hear an "important" story on Fox News about an 11 year old kid in Oshkosh, Wisconsin who got punched out and the $20 he raised selling lemonage stolen by a teenager with the headline, "There's a bully loose in Oshkosh!" but I don't hear about the president's Executive Order that could outaw Iraq war dissent by any American with the penalty of full property and asset seizure without notice when so determined "guilty" by the "Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense"?
Why haven't I heard the headline, "There's a bully loose in the White House" on Fox News? Or CNN? Or MSNBC, CBS, ABC? Huh? Why not?
And in that this Executive Order effectively grants president Bush dictatorial powers and becomes effective 30 days after being put forth in the federal register (on 18 August 2007) unless congress rejects it, I'd like to ask those candidates serving in congress, in particular, who among you has even heard of this order and, of those of you who have, who of you will stand up against it, or will you simply go home for your August 6-September 3rd congressional recess, allowing fomation of a Bush authoritarian state?
Dada is still awaiting their answers!
7 comments:
I confess, I didn't care if I ever came back from cruising in that '49 Merc lent me on my birthday by Enigma this past Sunday. I didn't think anything was more important that getting away for awhile. But I was wrong. This Bush Executive Order could mean a whole new way of life for each and every American if allowed to slip past.
I particularly enjoyed the recent ramping up of the fear factor in us all by detailing items being smuggled aboard commercial aircraft recently (by terrorists on dummy runs?) that conclude with Homeland Security claiming there is no cause for we citizens to be alarmed at all.
Hmmm, then I wonder why the fuck they bothered to get it aired on all the major networks for the past week?
Yet, no one seems to have heard about this Executive Order on those same "news" channels and that should strike real terror in the heart of every American.
With Bush's approval rating sinking faster than the Andrea Dorea, it's easy to imagine something's afoot in the White House as warned by Paul Craig Roberts. It's called terrorism, but it's source isn't necessarily Al Qaeda in origin and it just may be the America we knew is about to go "Bye-bye!" forever while our "checks and balances" congress is on recess in August.
The Reich Wing has crossed the line. People should be out in the streets pitching a fit over the Exec. (Dis)order. The bush admin wants us to live in Pleasantville- people would have to come up with "code" of how to speak of dissent. Perhaps speaking in opposites- here is a sample:
The death toll rose again today, clearly we just need more time. That president bush is doing a heck-of-a-job. That Iraq occupation has been a good idea since it's inception. I think it will go out & buy one of those new Support the Troops license plates.
Yikes!
In reality-- I'm going to hold out for the "Impeach Bush" license plates.
Yes, a lot of us couldn't believe our eyes or ears when the executive order was issued (on a Friday afternoon, if I recall correctly). All of us, myself included, have been so brow-beaten by this administration's extra-constitutional grabs, loading the SC with "their people," firing US attorneys for political reasons, stonewalling on Congressional requests, fear mongering, swift-boating, that we simply keep our heads slightly above water praying we don't drown (which we are). Will the frog leave the boiling water if brought to a boil really slow? Frogs legs for dinner before they even know what hit them!
Now I'm certain I have been watching too much TV for I did NOT hear about this executive order! I read your link with increasing nervous tics & vocal eruptions.
So, Congress can still reject it? I hope they at least have the self-interest to realize if they don't reject it, their lack of funding (if they find the 'nads to see that through) or attempt to set deadlines in iraq will put them first in line for asset seizure. Oh, without notice, I noticed. Have they become so inured to the eventual totalitarianism of the US, they cannot see that this is NOT just another step, but the final BIG step that fully opens the door? Why haven't they already rejected it? One reading was enough for me, they could reject this in an hour, both houses.
Dada, if this goes through & the news starts reporting asset seizures (big if), I forsee a mass removal of assets from the financial world, thus causing economic collapse & the emergence a soviet style black market economy here. Not to mention an actual use for those detention camp gulags.
One tiny loophole, I see dogs aren't listed in their definition of persons or entities. Expect a whole lot of dogs to be carrying protest signs. Signs made & mounted without any human or entities' DNA. Hah! One bright spot in an otherwise very dismal future.
ps, loved you "asking the candidates"! can't imagine what their response would've been. in fact, an executive order like this makes we wonder if we'll even get to an 08 election. ~~ D.K.
If King George II & his Dick start taking away ppls TVs & they won't be able to watch American Idol there will be riots in the streets.
I wouldn't hold your breath that congress will stop it.
TOLL FREE CALL CONGRESS
1 (800) 828 - 0498
1 (800) 459 - 1887
1 (800) 614 - 2803
1 (866) 340 - 9281
1 (866) 338 - 1015
1 (877) 851 - 6437
America where are you now?
Don't you care about your sons and daughters?
Don't you know we need you now
We can't fight alone against the monster
Steppenwolf
But really, I'm not sure I understand the Executive Order....
(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
>>>>We used to joke about the State of the Union Address having become the *State of Iraq* address because almost all of it was about Iraq.
But correct me if I am wrong-- does having a massive military presence complete with tanks, and semi automatic weapons constitute threatening the peace of Iraq (granted this question is 5 year old), but it seems to me teh Bush admin would be the #1 offenders.
(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;
>>>> Say what? $$ matters & political reform -Good
Provide humanitarian assistance- Bad?
Which category did Abu Ghraib abuses fall under?
political reform?
There are stories of US having tons of medical supplies & equipment, refusing woman & children medical care due to US presence in Iraq. Schrapnel & burn victims denied.
(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
>>> How do they define "acts" a protest?
(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.
>>> So if the Red Cross does prison inspections & finds the US in violation, are donations considered in violation of a prohibition?
(b) Any conspiracy formed to violate any of the prohibitions set forth in this order is prohibited.
>>>This piece of legislation is so vague & broad sweeping, you really don't even know quite what the hell it is actually saying, other than you can get in trouble based on broad interpretations.
How shall we rattle cages & get this on major news- besides lemonade bully news, that is.
Which "persons" in America were the ones who, according to the National Intelligence director , manipulated and altered the intelligence on Saddam Hussein's weapons capabilities because they "didn't like the answers" they were provided, thus providing a pretext to undermine the stability of the government of Iraq in the first place?
Which "persons" in America are responsible for initiating a war which has seen somewhere in the region of 655, 000 innocent Iraqis lose their lives?
Which "persons" in the U.S. are responsible for the orchestration of Death squads in Iraq?
Which "persons" in America, according to high ranking army officials and investigators are responsible for operating coordinated torture programs throughout Iraq?
Who are the "persons" in the U.S. calling for the balkanization of Iraq and its dissolution into three territories, and which "persons" have formulated plans such as the Salvador Option and P2OG , the objective of which is to provoke violence and separation amongst Iraqi tribal groups?
Which "persons" in the US are responsible for constructing highly unpopular separating walls around Baghdad neighborhoods despite the continued protests of the Iraqi government?
Which "persons" in America are arming, training and funding Sunni insurgents , the very same people they are supposedly in pitched battle with?
Which "persons" in the U.S.are now reportedly planning to topple the democratically elected government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki because they are opposed to his strong criticism of widespread and unwarranted interference by Washington in Iraqi domestic affairs?
Which "persons" are responsible for sending a further fifty thousand troops into the country saying they wish to quell the violence but instead end up increasing it to all time highs ?
So given all these facts, whose actions towards Iraq are responsible for endangering the national security of the U.S.and whose properties and interests should be at risk?
One thing is for sure, it's not peaceful anti-war protestors.
http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/bush_exec_order_total_hypocrisy.htm
Post a Comment