chris floyd: Nightmare On Main Street - an analysis of the asset seizure iraq exec order
someone with the money to hire a good attorney should preemptively challenge this order. the mear existence of this threat does us all harm, and infringes on our free speech rights, potentially. it puts us at risk of uncostitutional unreasonable search and seizure.
can the Decider issue an order to extrajudicially murder americans who oppose the iraqi war, and speak out politically? if such an order were issued, an individual would surely have the right to judicial review BEFORE becoming a victim of the Decider's death squads.
i would ASSUME we similarly have the right to judicial review of this unconstitutional EO that allows for unreasonable search and seizure.
... attorney Den Valdron. who draws out the very dangerous implications of the order's wording in convincing detail. Perhaps most disturbing is Valdron's insight that the executive order doesn't even have to be formally invoked in order to have a chilling effect on political dissent. Just its mere existence and the ever-present threat of social and legal obliteration that it represents will be enough to quell all but the hardiest opponents of the Leader's criminal rampage in Iraq.
You should scoot on ever to Orcinus and read [link to dneiwert.blogspot.com] "That Executive Order" in full, but below is an excerpt about the "chill factor" that Valdron identifies:
Essentially, in this Executive Order the President is assuming unbelievably vast powers to simply sidestep normal criminal or civil procedure, and to operate quite explicitly on the basis of guilt by anticipation, guilt by pre-emption, guilt by association and guilt for any reason in the mind of the decider. There is literally no limitation on authority, except that the person's actual physical being is unaffected.
However, a person so designated by this Order could be rendered into a non-person literally instantaneously. They could be stripped of every asset, have every financial or commercial opportunity denied to them. Worse, this literally creates a power to shun. Anyone who employs this person, who hires them, who pays them for work, lends them money to tide them over, who rents them an apartment, or allows them to sleep on the couch, who drops them a few coins as they panhandle would be liable to becoming subject to this order. The only protection would be to fire this person, to not hire them, to not pay them, to not lend them money, evict them from your apartment, kick them off the couch, and look away if you see them begging on the street. ... (continues at [link to www.rense.com] )