I just can't get over this Exec Order by * giving Halliburton Iraqi oil

The article below references an EO signed May 22, 2003. According to the EO and the article, HalliB was given free reign in Iraq, it was "removed from civilization" (I think that's how it was written) with this EO. HalliB was/is no longer subject to any legal action here and could/can do whatever it wanted over there and profit from it.

Remember recently the post about HalliB taking oil that isn't being measured, monitored, counted...I don't remember the right word but the meaning is the same.

After reading about this, I have this nagging question. How can that be legal? It seems to me criminal and Unconstitutional...not that this matters to this evil regime, but to the rest of us it matters. Can a "pResident" create an EO that is Unconstitutional and/or illegal? Can that EO stand?

One other thing, is that the fingerprint of Chumpy? Is that where he's implicated? It would seem so eh.

Here's the link to the EO
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/20030522-15.html

Here's the link to the article
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5077724#5078163

Edited to fix links

and not know it. I mean its so damaging to the country...Its not taking a little tax break or a little back door subsidy or something, its destroying America. How can your head be so up your ass that you fail to see america for your company?

in favor of a system global capitalist oligarcy via WTO, globalism etc?

what the HELL ARE THEY DOING??? That's been my question since day 1.

We American need to meet in the streets NOW!

btw, "about HalliB taking oil that isn't being measured, monitored, counted..." I think the term is metered.;-)

how his poll numbers will soon be raising. Dan thinks Dick Clark hasn't a brain.

If you didn't catch the News Hour. Read this interview that Ray Suarez had with Dan Bartlett.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june04/bartlett_03-22.html&h=120&w=160&sz=4&tbnid=8PtSoThJpaoJ:&tbnh=69&tbnw=92&hl=en&start=3&prev=/images%3Fq%3D%2Bbartlett%2Bin%2Bthe%2Bbush%2Badministration%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3Dcom.netscape:en-US%26sa%3DG

I read the EO over a few times and don't see Halliburton specifically mentioned, anywhere.

Thanks ! :hi:

unconsitutional--but I would hate to be defending it at the World Court.

Halliburton, a corporation, is implicated in Sec.1(b):

"come within the possession or control of United States persons."

Remember, a corporation is a person in U.S. law.