http://www.ron-paul-business-directory. ... ranny.html

 

 

 

I really dont know what to say other than this is some scary stuff

Sounds a bit like propaganda. Got any real source for such a move by Bush?

Sounds like the same pre-election crap the ALP and Liberals like to throw at each other. At least they're man enough not to do it by proxy.

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 ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâExecutive OrderÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ 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 ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâso broadlyÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ 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.

 

 

 

© 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 ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâservicesÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ 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 ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃâenemyÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ and therefore threatens the ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹Ãâstabilization of IraqÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢.

 

 

 

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 donÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢t want to hear.

 

 

 

With this being so, the American people should, likewise, contemplate their ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¹ÃânewÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢ 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."

 

 

 

http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1023.htm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You can send a message to your elected leaders here about this if you really want to.

 

 

 

http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm

 

 

 

 

 

You can read it at the Whitehouse' own website.

 

 

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases ... 717-3.html

That's scary stuff... Especially since it's not just propaganda. :shock:

Protesting didn't do anything, even with so many people. Kinda pointless other than showing mass disapproval.

I dont know what the Usa is right now, but what's certain is that its not a democracy anymore.

I dont know what the Usa is right now, but what's certain is that its not a democracy anymore.

 

+1

 

 

 

I'm glad I don't live in the Usa :uhh:

"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."

 

 

 

You'd think America would have seen it coming, what with those recent and subsequent 'expansions'.

This can't happen. They can't remove the right to protest since it was one of the fundamental ideas that the country was founded on. It just can't happen.

Draconian, and unfair. But the usa doesn't exactly have a good record in this area. The treatment of japanese americans in ww2, and of suspected communists in the cold war.

 

 

 

In fact it seems as if the constitutional protections have always been only for the right sort of people. How can slavery ever have been legal? The american constitution is a wonderful idea, its just a shame that people cant stick to the spirit of it.

Draconian, and unfair. But the usa doesn't exactly have a good record in this area. The treatment of japanese americans in ww2, and of suspected communists in the cold war.

 

 

 

In fact it seems as if the constitutional protections have always been only for the right sort of people. How can slavery ever have been legal? The american constitution is a wonderful idea, its just a shame that people cant stick to the spirit of it.

the 'right sort of people' dont exist with this latest move. Applies to anyone, they can lose it all on a hunch of all things. And I'm willing to bet the chances of getting it back are slim if it is taken.

I still don't see why someone hasn't murdered Bush yet -.-

sure, it applies to everyone.

 

 

 

But will it be applied to everyone? I'm guessing that muslim immigrants who send money back to their relations will be jumped on with the slightest suspicion that those relatives are terrorists, or support terrorists

Ron Paul is pretty big on the Internet, at least on digg, but the latest poll puts him at not having 1% of the vote yet. Still my favourite candidate, if no one better comes along I will be voting for him.

The treatment of japanese americans in ww2, and of suspected communists in the cold war.8/quote]

 

 

 

Or kidnapping suspected terrorists and torturing them from abroad, even people who are europeans. This in 2007&2008.

 

 

 

USA is probably the biggest hypocrite when we compare countries in their acts and values. Their war against terrorism is nothing but a war to gain what they need and want. The only difference between USA, its allies and its intelligence services and these so called terrorist groups is that USA+others got more money, they are ahead of their rivals in technology and they have managed to justify their acts in the eyes of a western man.

 

 

 

Personally that doesn't really surprise me. It's a logical step in this "war" they are having. In the first years of this century when USA was still planning the trip to Iraq, Bush declared that the countries in Europe are either with USA or with the "terrorists", no matter do their people want to go for Iraq or not. Now this same attitude is coming to their own ground: either you agree with the goverment or you are its enemy.

 

 

 

This can't happen. They can't remove the right to protest since it was one of the fundamental ideas that the country was founded on. It just can't happen.

 

 

 

This isn't the first of their own fundamentals they are breaking. It's a bit like freedom of speech: when it gives more than it takes, it's worth it to allow it. When the protesting goes too far, laws can be set to avoid the unwanted things. In many European countries this for example works with denying holocaust. In various places denying it is against the rules and people are actually even at the moment in jail because of denying it, even historians. However you can deny whole WW2 and that's allowed. Is this freedom of speech?

This confirms it, I'm moving to Mars. Who's with me? \

I dont know what the Usa is right now, but what's certain is that its not a democracy anymore.

 

It never was in the first place, it's a Representative Republic. It means that you choose the leaders (senators, presidents, etc), but they can do whatever they want with the votes of agreeing representatives, not the people.

 

 

 

This can't happen. They can't remove the right to protest since it was one of the fundamental ideas that the country was founded on. It just can't happen.

 

It CAN happen, who's stopping them? A piece of paper? The Contistution works perfectly if people actually followed it, but who says you must?

 

 

 

Anyway, this stuff reminds me of Star Wars, seriously.

 

Galatic Republic (USA) + Clone Wars (Iraqi War) + Palpatine (George Bush) = Galatic Empire (Post-USA) :P...now if it's true or not, who knows. 'cept for King George. (Bush's nickname)

I dont know what the Usa is right now, but what's certain is that its not a democracy anymore.

 

It never was in the first place, it's a Representative Republic. It means that you choose the leaders (senators, presidents, etc), but they can do whatever they want with the votes of agreeing representatives, not the people.

 

 

 

This can't happen. They can't remove the right to protest since it was one of the fundamental ideas that the country was founded on. It just can't happen.

 

It CAN happen, who's stopping them? A piece of paper? The Contistution works perfectly if people actually followed it, but who says you must?

 

 

 

Anyway, this stuff reminds me of Star Wars, seriously.

 

Galatic Republic (USA) + Clone Wars (Iraqi War) + Palpatine (George Bush) = Galatic Empire (Post-USA) :P...now if it's true or not, who knows. 'cept for King George. (Bush's nickname)

Well it can't go much further than this or there will be some mass protest/riot. People have the right to protest and they will use it.

 

 

 

"the people should not be afraid of their government. The government should be afraid of their people" - V

I still don't see why someone hasn't murdered Bush yet -.-

 

Um... Good post?

 

 

 

I wouldn't really care if they didn't allow people to protest. Those kinds of people that go to those things get on my nerves anyways

Well it can't go much further than this or there will be some mass protest/riot. People have the right to protest and they will use it.

 

 

 

"the people should not be afraid of their government. The government should be afraid of their people" - V

 

Of course, they can protest, but there's no guarantee what the government will do. According to the 'government' you can protest peacefully. But with the new government, they could shoot you even if you're protesting peacefully.

I still don't see why someone hasn't murdered Bush yet -.-

 

Um... Good post?

 

 

 

I wouldn't really care if they didn't allow people to protest. Those kinds of people that go to those things get on my nerves anyways

it depends on what you're protesting for. Some are kinda silly but others have a good purpose. But you stand can't ignore the fact that we have the right as Americans to protest and should be allowed to do it.

Well it can't go much further than this or there will be some mass protest/riot. People have the right to protest and they will use it.

 

 

 

"the people should not be afraid of their government. The government should be afraid of their people" - V

 

Of course, they can protest, but there's no guarantee what the government will do. According to the 'government' you can protest peacefully. But with the new government, they could shoot you even if you're protesting peacefully.

 

 

 

Exactly. The police and army will follow the law. And if the law says that you cannot protest, or the current constitution is ammended to take away your current rights, then the police and army will follow that. It is possible for a country to go from democracy to dictatorship like this (the Wiemar republic).

 

 

 

And that is truely worrying. It is unlikely to happen in the US because of the individualistic 2 party system. The 2-term maximum also helps, and all your checks and balances. But its possible. It is far more likely in a proportional representation system, but still possible in first-past-the-post. It worries me. I dont see it happening in britain any time soon either, but it is possible (more likely than the US).

I still don't see why someone hasn't murdered Bush yet -.-

 

Um... Good post?

 

 

 

I wouldn't really care if they didn't allow people to protest. Those kinds of people that go to those things get on my nerves anyways

it depends on what you're protesting for. Some are kinda silly but others have a good purpose. But you stand can't ignore the fact that we have the right as Americans to protest and should be allowed to do it.

 

Even if it is a "good" purpose, and even something I agree with, I still think it's pointless, but yea I agree with your second point.

I still don't see why someone hasn't murdered Bush yet -.-

 

 

 

It's not for lack of trying.

 

 

 

I tried to have a pressurized envelope of strychnine sent to him, but then I realized

 

I don't know the address of the White House, and looking it up would take so much effort. :(