*I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq.
This situation constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.*
:rotfl: Iraqi Oil interests are now unsually and extraordinarly threatening to the National Security of USA!!!.. :rotfl:
You gotta give it to this administration.. they have really figured out how to take the flag waving American sheeple for a ride..
This was widely discussed. Because the Russians and the French have standing contracts with the corrupt and defunct Saddam regime they can lay claim to Iraqi oil, prevent it's sale, and attach the proceeds. Then the whole shebang can end up in court for 10 years, and the Iraqi's could get nothing. This order will allow people/countries/market-makers to buy Iraqi oil sitting in storage in Turkey and Syria without fear that the French or Russians can lay claim to it. It says the the US will gurantee to anyone buying the oil that they can have clear title to the oil, and that they are free to sell it. Without this guarantee buyers would be reluctant to buy the oil for fear that it could be confiscated or impounded by court order, and that they would be out a lot of cash, but the oil that they thought they were buying can really not be resold.
This is an important step in getting the Iraqi economy going again, without hamstringing oil production and sales. It is essentially a big screw you to the French and Russians who were contemplating seizing the oil to repay their Iraqi debts.
The declaration of a national emergency gives Bush extraordinary powers, in this case to offer guarantees of title to purchasers. The "National Emergency" would happen if Iraq were unable to fund it's own economy, and the US would be compelled to fund the entire reconstruction. Laugh if you want, but the actual mechanics of this are more mundane than the language might imply.
What discount price? Unlike the oil-for palaces program the oil is sold on the open market. Most oil in the world is sold without attachments, or the fear of attachments, so it is simply making Iraqi oil competetive with all other oil available for sale on the world market.
Under the oil-for-palaces program only Saddam approved middlemen could buy Iraqi oil, generally at a discount to the market. The middlemen would then turn over the money to the UN, not to Saddam. BUT, and here is the big qualifier, when the middlemen (all Russians coincidentally) sold the discounted oil on the open market, they made a killing, huge profits. Part of their profits were then kicked back to Saddam through special accounts in Jordan. Viola! Saddam gets cash while the people starve and he can blame it all on the US, and the UN. Only in the last year or so was this loophole shut down, and that the UN required that all oil be sold to middlemen at fair value. This was the "price" the Russians demanded for their support of the sanctions.
PA and Sholay: Perhaps English is a second language to you and you can be excused for not understanding what the language of the Executive Order says.
PA writes: "Iraqi Oil interests are now unsually and extraordinarly threatening to the National Security of USA???!!!!!"
The Executive Order deals with the threat posed by the "attachment or other judicial process" against the Redevelopment Fund or Iraqi oil. The "attachment or other judicial process" means that some third party tries to sue Iraq for (breach of prior contracts, debts, crimes against humanity, war crimes [choose any or all]) and then makes a legal claim (attachment, lien, etc.) against proceeds from the sale of Iraqi oil to satisfy their claim.
The Executive Order thus preserves the money from the future sale of Iraqi oil against suits based upon old wrongs. It is not the Iraqi oil interests that pose a threat to the US national security and foreign policy. It is efforts by third parties to interfere with redevelopment of the Iraqi economy that is the threat.
myvoice english is indeed a second language to me.. however common sense is the first and I can see why you can't understand/admit that Bush is abusing the powers which shouldn't exist in the first place..
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
myvoice english is indeed a second language to me.. however common sense is the first and I can see why you can't understand/admit that Bush is abusing the powers which shouldn't exist in the first place..
so much for 'checks and balances' in the system..
[/QUOTE]
American government isn't your forte either I can see. Issuance of Executive Orders by Presidents is one of the most common things to occur in our government. Clinton issued 364 EOs in 8 years, Bush I issued 166 in four years, Reagan issued 381 in 8 years and Carter issued 320 in 4 years.
In light of the history of EOs, tell me, how does your common sense come to a conclusion that Bush is "abusing" powers that shouldn't exist in the first place?
Does this strike you as the quintisential Anti-US blather? This is a rather mundane piece of governmental trivia, and yet we see it bandied about as if Bush were up to some dark and evil underhanded rapacious dealings. Nothing could be further than the truth. This EO gurantees that Iraqi oil will go back into a fund that will benefit the Iraqi people, not some Russian Mafiaosi as had been done over the last 12 years. Yet do we hear a peep of outrage at how the Russians enabled the Saddam regime to continue building 50 or more palaces, torturing it's people and deceiving the UN? NAWWWW.
It is so much more fun to bash the US for something that obviously no one understands, and it imply that there is some global Bush/oil conspiracy.
Your choice buddy, should we continue to educate these guys or simply laugh at the drivel?
Does this strike you as the quintisential Anti-US blather? This is a rather mundane piece of governmental trivia, and yet we see it bandied about as if Bush were up to some dark and evil underhanded rapacious dealings. Nothing could be further than the truth. This EO gurantees that Iraqi oil will go back into a fund that will benefit the Iraqi people, not some Russian Mafiaosi as had been done over the last 12 years. Yet do we hear a peep of outrage at how the Russians enabled the Saddam regime to continue building 50 or more palaces, torturing it's people and deceiving the UN? NAWWWW.
It is so much more fun to bash the US for something that obviously no one understands, and it imply that there is some global Bush/oil conspiracy.
Your choice buddy, should we continue to educate these guys or simply laugh at the drivel?
[/QUOTE]
It goes well beyond drivel. There is absolutely no undertanding of what the language of this Executive Order means. There is absolutely no understanding of what attachment and legal process means. There is absolutely no understanding of even of what an Executive Order is. About the only things the "usual suspects" understand is that this story has something to do with Bush, something to do with Iraq, and something to do with oil. Therefore, it must be negative and they'll spin it any way they want.
Perhaps we can try to educate a little longer. But, laughing in conjunction with the education is not precluded.
calm down old man you may pop an artery.... legal jargon aside, i have a difficulty correlating how the oil money from Iraq is handled and the National Security of the United States..
English, Arabic, Urdu and Punjabi all tend to become second languages to me, depending on which I am using at the time. Don't get jealous now.
Believe me my friend, Americans are the last set of people on earth who can try and justify the English language to the English!
Understanding English is not about putting pictures to the words or memorising the alphabet! It involves understanding the context of sentences and grammar.
How many previous President's issued executive orders stating that the oil of another country is a risk to their national security! Exactly.
The point is not about the order, but the context of the order.
However, in reality should we be surprised by Einstein Bush. He does have a track record for being the most intellectually backward President of modern times.
The question you need to ask yourself now is what language do you understand. Literally understand!
The President is the chief EXECUTIVE of the country. There are certain times and certain issues where the Chief Executive does not have to send a bill down to Congress and have to wait two years for it to be passed.
Just because the phraseology "National Security" is used does not imply Rumsfeld and troops will be charging some hill. Our system of laws generally does not allow the President to guarantee ownership of foreign oil. Therefore Bush is documenting that making these guarantees is in the "national interest", and he is assuming the power to do so on an expedited basis. The term "National Security" is a term of convenience, not one denoting war or conflict. In this case the "risk" is an economic one....
Now if Congress disagrees with this, they can pass a bill that says, "The President shall not, as the Chief Executive, seek to issue gurantees on other peoples oil.". The President would then argue that, while not an explcitly mandated executive power, that the Consitution gives broad and exclusive powers to the President to run matters of the Government, particularly in matters of foreign affairs, and in times of conflict and that he may assume unusual powers in circumstances that were previously unforseen.
This type of discussion and debate continues constantly regarding the powers of the President, as new circumstances and situations arise frequently. This EO is very pro forma, and is not unusual or controversial in anyway.
[QUOTE] Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
calm down old man you may pop an artery.... legal jargon aside, i have a difficulty correlating how the oil money from Iraq is handled and the **National Security* of the United States..
[/QUOTE]
PA, "National Security" "National interests" "Economy".... they all mean same to Bush, these are "interchangeable" terms for him... if one term skips his mind he can use the other.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by sholay: *
How many previous President's issued executive orders stating that the oil of another country is a risk to their national security! Exactly.
[/QUOTE]
Oh please Lord, give me strength.
Sholay, if you wish to engage in dialogue and perhaps learn something, you really must dedicate yourself to the proposition that you MUST really try to READ.
As my final effort, repeat after me: "This EO does NOT state that the oil of Iraq is a threat to US national security."
The ** "threat" ** mentioned is the ** "threat of attachment or other judicial process" ** by third parties against the resources of Iraq (including its oil).
And why is "attachment or other judicial process" a threat? It says so in the EO as follows: the threat ** "obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq."
It is that outcome (i.e. interfering in Iraq's reconstruction) that is a "threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States."
So, do you get it now.
Repeat after me: "This EO does NOT state that the oil of Iraq is a threat to US national security."
This EO DOES say that people trying to interfere with the redevelopment of Iraq by trying to attach (i.e. take away) Iraq's profits from its oil industry pose a threat to the US national security and foreign policy.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
PA, "National Security" "National interests" "Economy".... they all mean same to Bush, these are "interchangeable" terms for him... if one term skips his mind he can use the other.
[/QUOTE]
**The Executive Order deals with the threat posed by the "attachment or other judicial process" against the Redevelopment Fund or Iraqi oil.
The "attachment or other judicial process" means that some third party tries to sue Iraq for
(breach of prior contracts, debts, crimes against humanity, war crimes
[choose any or all])
and then makes a legal claim (attachment, lien, etc.) against proceeds from the sale of Iraqi oil to satisfy their claim. **
The part that bothers me is crimes against humanity, and the war crimes.
Those kind of debts should not be so easly forgiven or forgotten.
In laymans terms? What does that mean? The war crimes and crimes against humanity are forgiven because of a decree? I don't get it. What does that mean exactly? What does that mean to an avg Iraqi citizen?
Does it mean in essense that contracts Iraq signed with Russia and France are nullified? Is that fair? And if those countries sue for breach of promise..it doesn't matter?
Only America decides? And makes me wonder if these countries are going along with that.....what were they promised in return? and who?
A refig of corporations? And who is helped? Who is harmed?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
In laymans terms? What does that mean? The war crimes and crimes against humanity are forgiven because of a decree? I don't get it. What does that mean exactly? What does that mean to an avg Iraqi citizen?
Does it mean in essense that contracts Iraq signed with Russia and France are nullified? Is that fair? And if those countries sue for breach of promise..it doesn't matter?
Only America decides? And makes me wonder if these countries are going along with that.....what were they promised in return? and who?
A refig of corporations? And who is helped? Who is harmed?
[/QUOTE]
It doesn't mean war crimes are forgiven. It means that the Iraqi people (who would after all be the victims of the war crimes and crimes against humanity) will not be made to suffer further by having their future economic performance and their reconstruction held hostage to some smart lawyers who try to attach profits from their oil.
As to France, Russia and any existing contracts, you've got to remember that an Executive Order establishes US law NOT international law. If there are bona fide disputes about contracts under international law, the World Court would likely have jurisdiction and the EO wouldn't have much significance in terms of final outcome. The litigation would likely last years and the Iraqi oil profits would not have been tied up during the litigation.
As to any past contracts, there is a concept under contract law called "force majeure." These clauses excuse a party from liability if some unforseen event beyond the control of that party prevents it from performing its obligations under the contract. Typically, force majeure clauses cover natural disasters or other "Acts of God", war, or the failure of third parties--such as suppliers and subcontractors--to perform their obligations to the contracting party. Thus, the new government of Iraq could probably invoke "force majeure" to invalidate a lot of contracts entered into by the Saddam regime.