Additional Titles










Vote Fraud: What They Aren't Telling You

Forced Mental Health Screening for Your Children















By: Devvy
July 23, 2007

� 2007 -

"Certainly it is highly constitutionally questionable to empower the government to destroy someone economically without giving notice. This is so sweeping it's staggering. I've never seen anything so broad that it expands beyond terrorism, beyond seeking to use violence or the threat of violence to cower or intimidate a population..." Bruce Fein, Justice Department official during the Reagan Administration

Last week while a disinterested, self-absorbed population concerned themselves with fun times, Harry Potter and Britney Spears flashing her private parts at a local beach in Malibu, Bush executed another executive order (Blocking Property of Certain Persons Who Threaten Stabilization Efforts in Iraq) that has caused a huge firestorm on the Internet. Is this yet another assault on the Bill of Rights should it be used against domestic Americans? Bush's justification for this latest EO: He doesn't want anyone threatening the stabilization and financial reconstruction of Iraq. The war in Iraq is immoral, it was built on a mountain of lies, it was/is an unconstitutional invasion. The almost one TRILLION BORROWED dollars thrown at another, predictable failure at nation building is clearly nothing more than rape and plunder of the people's treasury, not to mention the loss of precious life - our military and innocent civilians who know nothing of the games evil men play. Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are not fighting for my freedom, they are fighting for a new world order and establishment of the U.S. as a bully empire.

A few years ago I wrote a column on the proper use of America's military. My mail box immediately filled up with hate filled messages that I support terrorism (all citing the government's conspiracy theory about what happened on 911), accusations that I hate the military (my husband is a 27-year veteran who served in Viet Nam), I'm un-American and a left wing radical; the only thing left out was the kitchen sink. It is extremely difficult to criticize a president when our troops are in harm's way, but when that president uses lies to justify military action, we the people cannot remain silent.

The U.S. Constitution does not authorize Congress to steal from the people's treasury to reconstruct or rebuild any foreign country. If it's not direct funding by Congress writing hot checks, it's stealing from the people's purse by channeling the money through the Communist United Nations, another unconstitutional travesty, to fund all of these components for a one world totalitarian government. It MUST stop or the American people will find themselves in rags to support this anti-American agenda. Just because it's been going on since W.W.II, doesn't mean it's right or legal. When he ran for president, Bush said, "I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation-building." He lied. Morton Abramowitz and Heather Hurlburt correctly pointed out in a July 12, 2004, piece, "No fewer than nine times over the past decade, Western powers have deployed noble rhetoric, soldiers and taxpayer dollars in the service of nation-building. And no fewer than nine times, they have, to one degree or another, failed to build stable, self-sustaining nations. The litany consists of Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Sierra Leone, East Timor, Liberia, Afghanistan and Iraq. The best one could say is that they are works in progress. The worst: Too many of them still can't function on their own and continue to pose threats to their own citizens as well as U.S. national interests. While genuine good-both humanitarian and security-related-has come of these efforts, the results have fallen far short of our professed objectives, consumed enormous resources and political capital, and left uncertainty about the U.S. and international commitment."

No where in the U.S. Constitution does it authorize a president or Congress the authority to steal from the people's treasury to fund humanitarian efforts or nation building. Humanitarian efforts should and are funded through private organizations. The fact that there's never enough money is the fault of these dictators, potentates and crooks running these countries. New world order advocates like William Kristol, who cares nothing for the U.S. Constitution, is a favorite on FAUX (FOX) News beating the drum for perpetual wars:

"Among the first to advocate the assertive use of U.S. military forces around the world were William Kristol and Robert Kagan. In a 1996 article in Foreign Affairs, they urged the United States to adopt a posture of "benevolent global hegemony." This means "actively promoting American principles of governance abroad-democracy, free markets, respect for liberty" (27). To John Quincy Adams's advice that America should not go "abroad in search of monsters to destroy," they mockingly replied, "But why not?" (31). In their endorsement for foreign-policy activism, Kagan and Kristol have been joined by a number of policy wonks, journalists, and academics, a group that has come to be known as "neoconservatives." In their enthusiasm for nation building by force of arms, neither the theorists nor the practitioners have examined the historical experience with this kind of policy. They are aware that a historical record exists, but they do not take it seriously."

Kristol, draped in his thousand dollar suit, isn't the one ripped from his family to go fight undeclared wars, but then one has to remember Kristol's father: "And, in Kristol's case - if one will pardon an unavoidable pun - the apple has not fallen far from the tree. William's father, Irving Kristol, is considered the founder of American neoconservatism. The elder Kristol was an active Trotskyite while a student at the City College of New York, from which he graduated in 1940 with a B.A. in history. Years later, in 1983, Kristol wrote that that he was proud to have been a member of Trotskyite Fourth International back in 1940." Trotskyism is defined as: The political and economic theories of Communism advocated by Leon Trotsky and his followers, usually including the principle of worldwide revolution.

Bosnia and the surrounding region is in worse shape now than when Marxist Bill Clinton invaded a non threatening country. After the Iraq WND propaganda wore thin, Bush switched to different page of deception. The U.S. Constitution does NOT authorize a sitting president to invade any foreign country simply to remove a dictator. Bush's father did it in Panama against Manuel Noreiga; our military killed over 2400 innocent civilians to protect Bush Sr's illegal activities with Noreiga. Do the research, it's true. Bush Jr. had no more authority to invade Iraq over "Saddam Hussein is a bad man and the world is better off without him" than his father did against drug king-pin Noreiga. All the talk going on about surges, more troops, exit plans and what will happen over this ill-conceived, illegal invasion of Iraq isn't going to change the end result: utter and complete failure. Not because of our troops. The tribal wars will continue with religious in fighting whether we're there or not. Their so-called "new democracy" - coerced by brute force - will fail because no democracy lasts and during their duration there is no true freedom.

Bush and his new world conspirators intend for America to continue sacrificing hers sons and daughters forever in these foreign countries as they build and order up a nightmare. Those who deny this reality or think I'm "out to lunch" haven't spent 18 long years as I have studying all these issues. In order to save a lot of time and hot tempers: I do not belong to nor do I support or any of the other anti-war organizations. I don't belong to any political party or group of any kind; I left the Republican Party in 1996 and am registered no party. The most you can say is I'm a decade plus financial supporter of Disabled Veterans of America; I also donate regularly to Veterans of Foreign Wars and Paralyzed Veterans of America.

We know that Iraq and it's former dictator had zero to do with 911. We know that Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with 911 and that's why he is NOT on the FBI's Most Wanted List; the FBI has admitted it. Bush then dragged forth the worn out communist propaganda about "liberating" the Iraqi people, and let me quote a fine, meticulous researcher, Jeri Lynn Ball: "Using Marxist-Leninist strategies, the Russian, Chinese, and U.S. ruling elites have sought to frighten Americans and other populations with the specter of ruthless mass terror. They have created enemies and blamed them for everything including terrorist acts. They have used them manipulate Americans into supporting government hunts for "traitors," "terrorists," and these never ending "wars of national liberation." Their aim is to manipulate whole populations into supporting "wars of national liberation" and achieving not only the sovietization of "liberated" underdeveloped countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, but also the full altruization and sovietization of the United States and other Western nations." The full quote is here.

Bush's latest Executive Order has very dangerous language in it IF it applies domestic Americans:

(B) undermining efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq or to provide humanitarian assistance to the Iraqi people;

(c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.


While these two provisions may seem "reasonable" for "national security," as Bruce Fein said, they are so far reaching, this EO could give the Secretary of Treasury some magical authority to steal my assets with zero due process. If you think I'm just blowing smoke, here is the language:

"Sec. 5. For those persons whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States, I find that, because of the ability to transfer funds or other assets instantaneously, prior notice to such persons of measures to be taken pursuant to this order would render these measures ineffectual. I therefore determine that for these measures to be effective in addressing the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13303 and expanded in Executive Order 13315, there need be no prior notice of a listing or determination made pursuant to section 1(a) of this order." Who might have a "constitutional presence in the US?

"Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government." James Madison

The question is: Does this executive order apply to you or me? In order to determine that, you will have to spend hours determining the justification used and here's how you do it. First hit Then you go to legal professionals, click on that. Up comes a page, hit Cases & Codes. Then hit U.S. Code and enter the first one in the EO: 50 U.S.C. 1701. From there you'll get the statute; at the bottom are two categories, notes and next. After a couple of hours, you'll feel like you've sifted through tons of confetti. The average American has no knowledge of the process and most don't have the time to sit and meander through all this legal jargon. The bottom line is that Bush must have a statute to base his actions on; he is not a king (though he thinks he is). See this important U.S. Supreme Court decision (thank you to constitutional attorney, Larry Becraft, for providing it to me): YOUNGSTOWN CO. v. SAWYER, 343 U.S. 579 (1952) 343 U.S. 579: "The Founders of this Nation entrusted the lawmaking power to the Congress alone in both good and bad times. It would do no good to recall the historical events, the fears of power and the hopes for freedom that lay behind their choice. Such a review would but confirm our holding that this seizure order cannot stand." Larry also notes the original act itself deals with "things foreign"; see PUBLIC LAW 95-223-DEC . 28, 1977, 91 STAT. 1625, Public Law 95-223. Also see: International Emergency Economic Orders as it relates to 1702; see 50 U.S.C. 1701 above.

George Bush is nothing but a naked emperor determined to silence any and all efforts to expose the lies about 911, the real reasons behind the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, destroying their cultures and way of life, promote failure under the guise of democracy and bankrupt the American people in the process. If this EO does apply to domestic Americans, think a journalist or activist against the war won't be charged? Let me give you an example of history: The Great Sedition Trial of 1944. This W.W.II trial was sensational for the time and one of the most famous in the history of American jurisprudence. The justification for this circus was that anyone who opposed that war must hate people of the Jewish faith. Anyone who questioned Pearl Harbor and Roosevelt must hate people of the Jewish faith. A selected number of individuals who offended a certain minority group were targeted big time for their political opinions and heartfelt feelings. One of the charges brought against the defendants was "attempting to cause mutiny in the armed forces." The late, great Taylor Caldwell was one of the defendants. This woman was no "anti-Semite." She was a remarkable woman, a prolific writer with great wisdom. When I first learned of this momentous event in our legal system's history, I ordered the book published in 1946 by the National Civil Rights Committee. Every defendant and anyone who agreed with their right to express their opinion and vocalize their opposition to a war and encourage soldiers not to fight, all guaranteed under the First Amendment, were smeared as "anti-Semitic." It is a remarkable story.

If you'll look at (B) above, it is clear that I am one of the millions in America working to undermine efforts to promote economic reconstruction and political reform in Iraq using American military and funds stolen from the people's treasury for an undeclared war that is blatant nation building. The method I use are my columns protected under the true meaning and intent of the First Amendment. Those who are working to destroy this constitutional republic are becoming very concerned that more and more Americans realize the danger to our republic (the big picture) and are saying NO to their agenda. Would the Bush Administration try to get away with charging Americans who oppose his agenda under this EO? Just remember the Ramos/Campeon travesty: they were charged under the wrong statute. These two Americans are innocent, but their lives have been destroyed and both are serving sentences of more than 10 years in a federal pen.

The worst is yet to come because the Republicans let Bush get away with implementing the agenda of his world handlers since 911. The Democrats are too cowardly to take the necessary steps to stop this push for globalization and all its horrors because they are also owned by corporate America. As I have written so many times: America is a nation committing suicide. Thankfully, there are millions of us who will not allow this to happen, no matter the cost, no matter the battle because what would we do without freedom?

Important Information:

1, A Letter to My Son: Regarding the Problem of War
2, The Unconstitutional UN Treaty
3, WH Press release on EO
4, Executive Orders and National Emergencies: How Presidents Have Come to "Run the Country" by usurping Legislative Power
5, The Immaculate Deception: The Bush Crime Family Exposed by Retired Brigadier General Russell 6, Bowen
6, Taylor Caldwell books
7, Iraq for Sale - Powerful DVD
8, Elizabeth de la Vega, Indicting Bush United States v. George W. Bush et al
9, Learn the difference between a democracy and a republic

� 2007 - - All Rights Reserved

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Devvy Kidd authored the booklets, Why A Bankrupt America and Blind Loyalty; 2 million copies sold. Devvy appears on radio shows all over the country, ran for Congress and is a highly sought after public speaker. Devvy belongs to no organization.

She left the Republican Party in 1996 and has been an independent voter ever since. Devvy isn't left, right or in the middle; she is a constitutionalist who believes in the supreme law of the land, not some political party. Her web site ( contains a tremendous amount of information, solutions and a vast Reading Room.

Devvy's website:

Before you send Devvy e-mail, please take the time to check the FAQ section on her web site. It is filled with answers to frequently asked questions and links to reliable research sources.

E-mail is:











Just remember the Ramos/Campeon travesty: they were charged under the wrong statute. These two Americans are innocent, but their lives have been destroyed and both are serving sentences of more than 10 years in a federal pen.