From Facebook: Thus the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA could be critical to the Obama administration for justifying not only its detention policy, but also its use of drones for extrajudicial killings.
As NDAA plaintiff Tangerine Bolen told BI, the government may have argued that a block of the NDAA would cause "irreparable harm" to the U.S. because it would possibly be "exposing illegal activities for the last decade. It could have a set of ripple consequences: we could see people in the Bush administration, Obama administration and security agencies be investigated for how they have applied the AUMF."
It appears that the NDAA is being used as cover for illegal actions taken by the Bush and Obama administrations.
Story here: http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-...#ixzz2F0b4O7Ng
- CuteOldGuy
- 12-14-2012, 01:47 PM
- CJ7
- 12-14-2012, 01:50 PM
it appears you are a sheep crying wolf 24/7
- CuteOldGuy
- 12-14-2012, 02:00 PM
Don't address the issue, just call names. That's what you do when you can't address the issue, isn't it, CBJ7?
- i'va biggen
- 12-14-2012, 02:31 PM
speaking of drones thanks for post # 15,375...
- timpage
- 12-14-2012, 02:51 PM
Don't address the issue, just call names. That's what you do when you can't address the issue, isn't it, CBJ7? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
I've addressed the issue over and over. You don't get it. What's the point of addressing it again? You seem to be suffering from some sort of paranoid delusions....and you envision yourself (as many paranoids who lack a grip on reality do) as some sort of seer and protector of those, who in your viewpoint, are simply not as enlightened as you about these imaginary threats.
We get it. We understand what you think about this issue. How many times are you going to post the same shit up and then complain when you don't get what you deem to be an acceptable substantive response?
- CJ7
- 12-14-2012, 02:52 PM
