Skip to main content

First indefinite detention. Now your assets can be seized if you criticize the war in Yemen

Thankfully, my "assets" pretty much consistent of $11.62 in an old savings account and a will leaving same to be distributed "by law."

Because now President Obama is apparently coming for me, and others who oppose US involvement in Yemen:

President Obama plans to issue an executive order Wednesday giving the Treasury Department authority to freeze the U.S.-based assets of anyone who “obstructs” implementation of the administration-backed political transition in Yemen.
The unusual order, which administration officials said alsotargets U.S. citizens who engage in activity deemed to threaten Yemen’s security or political stability, is the first issued for Yemen that does not directly relate to counterterrorism.
You could reasonably argue, I guess, that my own little posts on Yemen are so inconsequential that nobody could possibly want to freeze my assets (unless some Treasury Department agent really wants a cheap pizza, which is about what they would buy), but you'd be wrong.


The Obama administration has prosecuted people for speaking out against the so-called "War on Terror," has suggested that people could rceive the death sentence without trials, has executed American citizens abroad without notice or due process, and has asked for the power to detain American citizens indefinitely.


So let's be clear:  I oppose US involvement in Yemen.  I believe that US intervention and imposition of one-party rule in Yemen (ala Guatemala in the 1950s) is a disaster, and that "Yemen's security" is a euphemism for a foreign policy based on militarism and intimidation.


If anything I write is capable of threatening Yemen's security or stability, my $11.62 is waiting.


Why is it that anybody wants to re-elect this man?


Because he pretended to give you health care while he was removing your civil rights?

Comments

tom said…
And any day now, the IRS will be able to revoke your passport simply by alleging that you owe more than $50,000 in taxes--no proof necessary.

This lovely little bit of stealth fascism appears in the Transportation bill H.R.4348 / S.1813 AKA "MAP-21" which sailed through both the House and Senate and is now in a Conference Committee, once again demonstrating how desperately we need the Read the Bills Act and the One Subject at a Time Act.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...