Obama’s Yemen EO Still Lets Our Spooks Pay the Targets of the EO

As I noted earlier, Obama just signed an Executive Order ostensibly targeting the US assets of those who undermine Yemen’s stability, potentially including US citizens who do so. I’ve been comparing this EO to one of the analogous ones pointed out in Karen DeYoung’s article on the EO: one issued against Somalia in 2010 (h/t to Daveed Gartenstein-Ross for the link).

The EOs are very similar, including the language potentially targeting US citizens. But there are some interesting differences.

As DeYoung pointed out, the Yemeni EO, unlike the Somlia one, does not include an annex with named targets, even though the EO itself speaks of “certain members of the Government of Yemen.” As such, this EO seems to be a threat with consequences, not an immediate sanction.

The Yemen EO also uses slightly different language in the clause targeting those who materially support those destabilizing the country. Whereas the Somalia EO includes those who provide “logistical” or “technical” support, the Yemen EO includes those who provide “technological” support. So make sure you don’t serve as webmaster for someone Hillary Clinton thinks is destabilizing Yemen.

The most interesting difference, IMO, is this clause, which appears in the Yemen EO but does not in the Somalia one.

Sec. 5. Nothing in section 1 of this order shall prohibit transactions for the conduct of the official business of the United States Government by employees, grantees, or contractors thereof.

In other words, while Obama doesn’t want you, or Ali Abdullah Saleh’s leave-behinds, or the AP to destabilize Yemen, he reserves the right for US government employees, grantees, or contractors to do so. Which presumably means, as happened in Afghanistan, we are and plan to continue paying some of the people who are in violation of this EO.

I wonder. Among all the adjectives we might use to describe the Saudis, do we use “grantee” among them?

Tweet about this on Twitter6Share on Reddit0Share on Facebook2Google+2Email to someone

25 Responses to Obama’s Yemen EO Still Lets Our Spooks Pay the Targets of the EO

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25

Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel @JasonLeopold Holy shit. They're such a mockery of themselves. Please please please used that tweet the next time they Glomar you?
19mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @JasonLeopold: haha. Good 1! #GLOMAR RT @CIA Aug. 16, 1974: Hughes #Glomar Explorer arrives in Hawaii. Follow us next week to find out w…
19mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade And by "they" I should specify "John Brennan." Among others surely. But John Brennan.
21mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade That to. But it is definitely a fact that they used tortured derived claims to justify the dragnet. Fact.
21mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade You have to justify dragnet somehow. One way to do so is to ask people you're torturing to confirm theory that requires dragnets.
29mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @onekade I know this shocks you.
32mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Holy shit was torture ever useful for the security state.
34mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz I am simply despondent nobody in DC will go be my ears at the @930Club for the Big Star concert tomorrow night? Come on big time slackers.
37mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @janehamsher Can you not fix this?? https://t.co/Y8OfrJ5Hao
40mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Come on you DC mopes, I would do it for you in a heartbeat. @dcbigjohn @930Club
42mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz Seriously, apparently @dcbigjohn has failed, is there NOBODY in DC who will stand in for me at Big Star concert at @930Club tomorrow night??
43mreplyretweetfavorite
bmaz @lyssophobe May "the locals" find a sinkhole of social Darwinism. (Some my be distant relatives of mine).
2hreplyretweetfavorite