It’s hard to overstate how much different NSPM-7 is from the over 200 executive orders Trump has frantically signed since coming back into office.
NSPM-7 directs a new national strategy to “disrupt” any individual or groups “that foment political violence,” including “before they result in violent political acts.”
In other words, they’re targeting pre-crime, to reference Minority Report.
The Trump administration isn’t only targeting organizations or groups but even individuals and “entities” whom NSPM-7 says can be identified by any of the following “indica” (indicators) of violence:
- anti-Americanism,
- anti-capitalism,
- anti-Christianity,
- support for the overthrow of the United States Government,
- extremism on migration,
- extremism on race,
- extremism on gender
- hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on family,
- hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on religion, and
- hostility towards those who hold traditional American views on morality
Suggesting a separation of church and state potentially violates 3 of those.
Separation of church and state is traditional American values. Violating a separation of church and state is against traditional American values and anti American
What are traditional views on morality? Like how the death penalty has been used on innocent people? How it’s OK for Trump to weasel out of his legal responsibilities? What morality are you even talking about?
But the Trump administration are the ones constantly and repeatedly violating all those ‘indica’. That’s kinda weird.
“Extremism” and “hostility” are complete wiggle words, along with “traditional American.”
A traditional American view on race is a person of color is 3/5ths of a person. We’ve evolved past that, at least most of us with a brain & conscious have.
Is raping children on this list?
We’re all centrists now.
- extremism on migration,
- extremism on race,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Dolezal
- extremism on gender
I would say that Trump and the republicans violated most of these. Violations of the separation of church and state are anti-American, violating the constitution is anti-American and a violation of traditional values, kidnapping people and violating habius corpus is anti-American and a violation of traditional values….I could go on and on but I think you all get the picture
Are these directives revokable?
Yes, by another president. If we get one.
I was wondering if courts may be a recourse…
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
Theoretically, but in practice the supreme court would probably hand wave any accusations of the orders being unconstitutional. In actuality a new president would be the remedy.
It’s not an executive order, as the article details the difference.
Apologies, found the one for presidential directives: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_directive
However, two thirds of congress in the house and especially the senate is equally unlikely.
Oh thank you, I need to work on my query skills, I searched the abbreviation.
With all the ones left in place, that says a lot about the “reasonable” party.
Soon as they stop I’ll stop talking like them, and I’ll follow the Bible like they do, not at all, and till then, fuck em.
