Ndaa

hershey said:
Did you know that the 13 version of the NDAA gives appropriations for the facilitation of storage and examination of all of that? Im sure thats no big deal either.
Click to expand...

And the NSA data center has been funded since at least 2009.
 
sturd said:
And here I thought it was people that didn't understand the law before it was passed. And then
whine and wail that Obama (or Bush or Clinton or whoever) should be held responsible in spite of the
fact that they only sign off on the law. Congress passed it. They same guy you can call on the phone
and get a meeting with passed it. Yes, you can do that, I have.

And to top it off, aren't willing to research, read, and understand the laws they didn't know about
before hand so that they can call their congresscritter and bitch. Instead they listen to talk radio
and make decisions based on some fat drug addict's emissions.




Another well reasoned insight.
Click to expand...


IF you read my posts you will see that I specifically blamed the lawmakers and not the president. Although I belief he is to blame as well. I read that he promised to veto the NDAA if passed in its form presented to vote. As usual he didnt keep his word. For that I do blame him.

And to clear this up we are talking about the 14 version not the 13. The 12 version introduced the holding of US citizens that I am against

"Left in place was the extremely controversial 2012 provision authorizing the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap and detain without trial, and hold indefinitely, American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.” Simply stated, it defied habeas corpus (your constitutional right not to disappear at the hand of government), the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (preventing the military from having a law enforcement function in the United States) and essentially gutted large portions of the Bill of Rights, especially amendments 4, 5 and 6 with secondary damage to 1, 2 and possibly 8. It is the single most dangerous law passed by Congress in U.S. history."

Maybe you can explain to me what isnt unconstitutional and scary about this?


Just for the record I never listen to talk radio.....and I have come to my conclusion about you by your posts on here with your willingness to constantly defend what I see as the governments taking of our constitutional rights. Right or wrong it is solely my opinion.
 
sturd said:
And the NSA data center has been funded since at least 2009.
Click to expand...

New and well defined ‘Conflict Records Research Center' NOT part of the NSA data center.


"Unfortunately, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014 is still unconstitutional, still unacceptable and even more dangerous than its predecessor. Newly added is Section 1071(a), which authorizes the Secretary of Defense to “establish a center to be known as the ‘Conflict Records Research Center,’ ” authorized to compile a “digital research database including translations and to facilitate research and analysis of records captured from countries, organizations and individuals, now or once hostile to the United States.” Section 1071 (g) is more explicit, defining a captured record as “a document, audio file, video file or other material.” This effectively expands the surveillance of the George W. Bush’s Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), defining as neverending the War on Terrorism and his resultant Patriot Act, requiring citizens to report certain activities of other citizens. Factor in the government’s several expensive NSA facilities, especially those of Oak Ridge, Tenn., and Bluffdale, Utah, the latter of which is designed to accommodate a yottabyte of information. Factor in also the known collection by NSA of every email, telephone conversation, social media post and text message of every U.S. citizen for the past eight years and it is easy to see why the federal government now wants a Conflict Records Research Center."


Did you read about the 14 NDAA or just spout out of your waste hole?
 
Never mind hershy. Waste of time. Sturd has professed his disdain for MX junping (I can relate) but his logical leaps have no rivals.
 
hershey said:
IF you read my posts you will see that I specifically blamed the lawmakers and not the president.
Click to expand...

Yes, I note that. I wasn't specifically talking to your posts but I understand how that could be
confused. Others here are less informed.


hershey said:
"Left in place was the extremely controversial 2012 provision authorizing the military, under presidential authority, to arrest, kidnap and detain without trial, and hold indefinitely, American citizens thought to “represent an enduring security threat to the United States.” Simply stated, it defied habeas corpus (your constitutional right not to disappear at the hand of government), the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 (preventing the military from having a law enforcement function in the United States) and essentially gutted large portions of the Bill of Rights, especially amendments 4, 5 and 6 with secondary damage to 1, 2 and possibly 8. It is the single most dangerous law passed by Congress in U.S. history."

Maybe you can explain to me what isnt unconstitutional and scary about this?
Click to expand...

What is the citation above in quotes?

Absolutely nothing is, to my mind, constitutional about it. But my point was that a well
informed citizen would already know that the Supreme Court has already ruled on this and they,
in part, agree. As I already mentioned.

I would note that the law enforcement function, at least in my domicile, looks just like the
military. Pretty neat move.


hershey said:
Just for the record I never listen to talk radio.....and I have come to my conclusion about you by your posts on here with your willingness to constantly defend what I see as the governments taking of our constitutional rights. Right or wrong it is solely my opinion.
Click to expand...

I haven't defended any such thing. I may have a different view of the constitution, just as
some of the members of the Supreme Court have different views, but I believe that the
government cannot take our constitutional rights for any reason. I prefer to base this on
facts and the law. Not internet memes and inuendo.
 
hershey said:
New and well defined ‘Conflict Records Research Center' NOT part of the NSA data center.
Click to expand...

No, this was announced (the NSA data center funding) when I was there (Utah)
riding in 2009. I'm tired of doing your research for you, find the citation. Probably
the Salt Lake City Tribune.
 
sturd said:
I didn't remember who he was until just now - Edwin Meese's chief of
staff? You have read them????
Click to expand...

Did the old internet maven's perspective cause the need to Google that name? All of his books are good reads.
 
k01 said:
Did the old internet maven's perspective cause the need to Google that name? All of his books are good reads.
Click to expand...

I'll look at them sometime soon. I've been concentrating on supreme court themes
lately. Toobin's "The Oath" about the Roberts court and Obama is great. Shesol's
"Supreme Power" about the supremes during FDR's reign is a bit dense but
full of cool facts, I loved it. I have Totenberg's transcripts of the Clarence Thomas
hearings and Rehnquist's history of the court but haven't found the time to get to
them yet. Toobin's "The Nine" I need to get yet, on my list.
 
I try to call in to the rush limbaugh show once in a while just to pretend gawk at him and tell him how nervous I am to talk to him. Because then he gives that person a new iPad or something sweet!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top