Obama's 2012 signing of "Executive Order" Allowing for SEIZURE of American's Bank Accounts continues the rampage of Neo-Con DICTATORSHIP being rammed down America's throats...

 As Barack Obama's despicable and insanely corrupt presidency gives a huge "free pass" to bankers to print themselves $85 billion (in freshly printed Bernanke bucks 'Fed' funny-money) each and every month  - on top of allowing them to park billions upon trillions of dollars of toxic 'derivatives' fraudulent financial deals in "off balance sheet" accounting while simultaneously turning a blind eye to every case of Jon Corzine style looting and defrauding of American investors & savers funds and accounts....

  ...and, worse,  as Obama's State Department, CIA, & military,  with the support of a craven and corrupted Con-gress and the insane corporate press/media fund AL QAEDA MASS-MURDEROUS TERRORIST BOMBINGS in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Africa, Iran,  and anywhere else Obama's Neo-Con puppet-masters want to sow chaos, bloodshed, and disaster as an excuse to bring in the U.S. military
(and launch eternal wars of robotic killer drones cruising the world's skies, 24/7/365 unto eternity) -

 - America's murderously hypocritical and treasonous 'elites' are drawing  up plans to terrorize and seize the assets of ordinary Americans - effectively creating a SOVIET commissar style PRISON GULAG STATE in (what is left of) the 21st century late, great U.S.A....

Another Obama Executive Order Allows Seizure of Americans’ Bank Accounts
by Bob Adelmann,  New American Oct 13, 2012

The latest executive order (EO) emanating from the White House October 9 now claims the power to freeze all bank accounts and stop any related financial transactions that a “sanctioned person” may own or try to perform — all in the name of “Iran Sanctions.”
Titled an “Executive Order from the President regarding Authorizing the Implementation of Certain Sanctions…” the order says that if an individual is declared by the president, the secretary of state, or the secretary of the treasury to be a “sanctioned person,” he (or she) will be unable to obtain access to his accounts, will be unable to process any loans (or make them), or move them to any other financial institution inside or outside the United States. In other words, his financial resources will have successfully been completely frozen. The EO expands its authority by making him unable to use any third party such as “a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, subgroup or other organization” that might wish to help him or allow him to obtain access to his funds.
And if the individual so “sanctioned” decides that the ruling is unfair, he isn’t allowed to sue. In two words, the individual has successfully been robbed blind. 

But it’s all very legal. The EO says the president has his “vested authority” to issue it, and then references endless previous EOs, including one dating back to 1995 which declared a “state of emergency” (which hasn’t been lifted): Executive Order 12957.
EO 12957 was issued by President Bill Clinton on March 15, 1995, which was also obliquely related to the Iran “problem”:
I, William J. Clinton, President of the United States of America, find that the actions and policies of the Government of Iran to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, and hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.
Clinton’s EO further delegated such powers as were necessary to enforce the EO to the secretaries of the treasury and state “to employ all powers … as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this order. The Secretary of the Treasury may redelegate any of these functions to other officers and agencies of the United States Government.”
Such EOs are the perfect embodiment of what the Founders feared the most: the combining of the legislative, executive, and judicial functions into one body.
  Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution says: “All legislative powers herein shall be vested in a Congress of the United States.” As Thomas Eddlem, writing for The New American, expressed it, “then it stands to reason [that] none is left for the president....