New Obama Exec Order: Government Can Steal Your Money From Bank Account
October 17, 2012
President Barack Obama has signed an executive order (EO) earlier this month that claims governmental authority to steal money out of customer bank accounts under the guise of assisting Iran with “certain transactions” that would facilitate their ability to economize on their petroleum resources. And this agenda is hidden within the EO that redirects attention to the sanctions imposed by the US and UK.
Obama has empowered himself, Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State and Timothy Geithner as Secretary of the US Treasury to use authority imbued to them by the President that the US government would impose any amount of sanctions on Iran for the sake of bringing the nation to its economic knees.
This includes prohibition of:
• US banks loaning money to Iran or any person involved in Iranian interests
• Using credit cards to facilitate interests of Iran or any person involved with Iran
• Acquisition of property and interests in property by the US government of any person suspected of aiding Iran or their interests
• Sanctioning individuals against investing or purchasing with intended profit for Iran
• Prohibition of individuals importing goods, services, or technology for the benefit of Iran
In essence, if Obama, Clinton or Geithner suspects any American citizen of dealing with or for the benefit of Iran, they will have their bank accounts seized; property repossessed by the federal government and will face further suppression as defined by the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
In 1995, then US President William J. Clinton signed EO 12957 which stated that Iran was deemed an “extraordinary threat to national security, foreign policy and the economy of the US.”
As far back as the early 1990’s Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was warning that Iran had acquired a nuclear weapon. The same propaganda that is being portrayed onto the American public with the assumption that their memory is short and their ignorance is long.
• In 1992, Netanyahu predicts that Iran was “3 to 5 years” from having a nuclear weapon.
• In 1992, Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres predicts an Iranian nuclear warhead by 1999 to French TV.
• In 1995, New York Times reports US and Israel claim Iran would have the bomb by 2000.
• In 1998, speaking before Congress Donald Rumsfeld proclaims Iran could have an intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit the US by 2003.
Leon Panetta, US Defense Secretary, has recently asserted that the US government assumes Iran is behind recent cyber-attacks against Saudi Arabian oil refineries and American financial institutions.
According to rumored “US intelligence”, Iran’s military is suspected of having created a cybercorps in 2011 that would respond to potential cyberwar from the US. Highly classified documents held by the Joint Cheifs of Staff’s Intelligence Directorate claim that Iranian hackers are committing cyber-attacks against US financial institutions. These anonymous “officials” say that Iran’s cyber capabilities are far greater than those of Russia and China based on covert probes that confirmed the Middle Eastern nation was aiming toward stealing intellectual property for the expressed purpose of attacking US banking institutions as well as hacking into government agencies.
Yet simultaneously, the US House Intelligence Committee (USHIC) have recently warned that certain Chinese telecommunications corporations have become national security threats and have had a hand in recent cyber-attacks on US government websites.
The timing of the newly formed “digital al-Qaeda” and their expressed anger over the US-produced anti-Muslim film are questionable considering how the US and Israeli government are setting the stage for a justified war with Iran. This fake hacker group is threatening other countries controlled by the Zionist regime, such as France, Germany and Britain. According to the false flag group: “The army was recently formed and we have started to work as a team after we used to work individually. The hacking operations are of course a response to the offence against the prophet, peace and blessing be upon him.”
This report assures that US mega-banks are a “valid target” of the Iranian “cyber army”. However, the attackers used a known forum that is utilized by the CIA-controlled Anonymous to issue threats and brag about their successes.
In August, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals (CCA) ruled that customer funds were property of the bank once they were deposited and could be used by the bank as collateral or to pay off debts owed by the bank.
Since 2010, our financial institutions have been planning for a financial collapse wherein the US government will not offer assistance. The resolution plans required by the Federal Reserve Bank, described schemes to have the major domestic banks remain afloat by selling off assets, finding alternative sources of funding, reducing risky measures that make a quick buck. These strategies were to be perfected with “no assumption of extraordinary support from the public sector.”
Framing Iran for the American banking system’s computer failure kills two birds with one stone. Not only would the banking cartels be able to shut down all banking computers (and simultaneously syphon the remaining money in their customer’s accounts) but also use this fake cyber-attack to engage the American public against Iran and justify their highly anticipated military strike.
By blaming Iran, the technocrats could initiate the shutdown of all domestic banking computer systems in order to “purge” the virus and reconfigure their systems. However this would be a false flag meant to pacify the public to avert mass panic. While the general public would fall for the cover story, the banking cartels would simply electronically transfer all customer funds from private checking accounts out to off-shore banks where they could not be touched and cover their tracks.
Globalist James A. Lewis, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, explained in the Council on Foreign Relations publication, Foreign Policy, that “[Panetta’s] speech laid the dots alongside each other without connecting them. Iran has discovered a new way to harass much sooner than expected, and the United States is ill-prepared to deal with it.”
It is suspected by Panetta that Russian assistance has aided Iran in their “concerted effort to use cyberspace to its advantage.”
Obama’s EO warns that if any individual is suspected of engaging in “any transaction, directly or indirectly with the Government of Iran” that person would be subject to persecution within the US and that this action would be considered a terroristic action against the US government.
The EO explains that the “Secretary of State, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Commerce, and the United States Trade Representative, and with the President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and other agencies and officials as appropriate, is hereby authorized to impose on a person any of the sanctions described in section 6 or 7 of this order.”
According to Pentagon analysis, “Iran’s cyber aggression should be viewed as a component, alongside efforts like support for terrorism, to the larger covert war Tehran is waging against the west.”
Gholam Reza Jalali, head of Iran’s Civil Defense Organization, denies Iranian involvement. “Iran has not hacked the U.S. banks.”
This style of propaganda keeps the average American in fear that somewhere in the stratosphere there are Islamic extremists waiting to destroy the US. It is the same fear-mongering that occurred just after 9/11 to gain support for the coming “war on terror” – which never seems to end when the terror is state-sponsored.