Clearly you have an agenda of your own.
First off This is an administrative order AO in 2007 that formed a committee to study and make recommendations regarding addressing climate change now and this caveat was at the end:
“Nothing in this Order is intended to limit or otherwise modify any existing or future statutory or regulatory authority of any state agency”
Just completed the youtube snippet of O’Reily’s interview and I don’t know how clear she has to be but she is very adamant that she is against amnesty. Seems to discount your assertion. I’ll get to the rest later but I’ve seen enough to see that you, like many others, want to take things out of context. Nothing I’ve seen to this point proves anything and certainly doesn’t dissuade me.
“Nothing in this Order is intended to limit or otherwise modify any existing or future statutory or regulatory authority of any state agency”
I just finished reading the EO, and while it's lead-in "Background and Findings" paragraph was a bit barf inducing, it reads like a typical Staff generated paragraph that was based upon the (now discredited) Global Warming "experts" who were being constantly quoted and re-quoted by the Presstitutes.
Overall, the EO looks more like a product generated for the Governor's signature that could be expected based on the times, and on the fact that Alaska would be heavily impacted by the whole Global Warming/Cap and Trade frenzy.
Additionally, this paragraph would seem to be a significant driving force behind the EO:
[The Climate Change Sub-Cabinet shall serve as the executive branch contact to, and a resource for, the Alaska Climate Impact Assessment Commission established by Legislative Resolve 49 (2006).]
If I understand that paragraph correctly, the Legislative Branch was already moving on the issue, and the Governor decided to use this Panel as Her info gathering/policy creating/legislative liaison solution to Executive Branch participation and/or leadership on the issue.
Just completed the youtube snippet of O’Reily’s interview and I don’t know how clear she has to be but she is very adamant that she is against amnesty. Seems to discount your assertion. I’ll get to the rest later but I’ve seen enough to see that you, like many others, want to take things out of context. Nothing I’ve seen to this point proves anything and certainly doesn’t dissuade me.
I also watched the YouTube at the link, and basically came to the same conclusion as you did, i.e., it is not really definitive enough "evidence". I do hope Gov. Palin will "clarify" fully her position on Illegal Immigration in the coming days/months.
I am however, concerned about her position on the LOST treaty issue, and will be interested in seeing any additional information on that issue (perhaps she has seen the light on this issue now). Any treaty that gives power over the sea beds to the UN is not a good thing (giving any power to the UN, on any issue, is not a good thing).