It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman secrecy law

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman secrecy law


www.salon.com

The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- called The Detainee Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009 -- that literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any "photograph taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States." As long as the Defense Secretary certifies -- with no review possible -- that disclosu
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   
Oh boy...

On the surface, I can see why they would want to try and pass this, and why they would want to hide this heinousness.

But what REALLY gives me an uneasy feeling about this is the potential to EXPAND upon this quite easily through retroactive amendments and broadening terminology to ALL facets of FOIA. This erases accountability and oversight of "questionable" activities to quite some degree IMHO...

The "transparent" admin, eh?

www.salon.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
When I saw this, the first thing that came to mind was; "Damn, there must be some really nasty things they don't want us to see"

I think we do need to see it but at the same time get to the absolute truth. If things were done by individuals in the military then those individuals need to be dealt with. It sounds like they are afraid of the entire military being bunched together and all blamed equally when that is clearly not the case.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:25 AM
link   
2001 to 2009 horrors = "A few bad apples"
8 Years of knowingly allowing such horrific acts equals a "a few bad apples".

Images so disturbing that the govt. is freaking out, those images must be demonic, but 8 years of allowing this equals to "a few bad apples".



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:28 AM
link   
Change we can't believe in?

Obama seems to be even more secretive than Bush. At least equal.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:32 AM
link   
I don't know what else to say to the author of this article because every salient, pertinent, and damning point that could possibly be made against the reasoning for this secrecy law has already been made! Killer article. Highly recommended!

"We're going to break the law, and then make laws to cover our ass." I mean that's what this is really boiling down to. "And our supreme excuse is going to be that anything that endangers our troops will be used retroactively to justify our actions."

Yeah well if that's the case, WE SHOULD NOT BE IN THE WAR IN THE FIRST PLACE.
Man! It's stuff like this that just really gets my goat, my sheep, and hogs too. But what do you expect from the NWO? Two party system, yeah right. It's really one party global elite watch my back and I'll watch yours. Sickening- but I'm out of vomit.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Change we can't believe in?

Obama seems to be even more secretive than Bush. At least equal.


it is bizzarre that people think it would be any other way- Democrats and liberals in general have an almost unquenchable totalitarian nature



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by Donnie Darko
Change we can't believe in?

Obama seems to be even more secretive than Bush. At least equal.


it is bizzarre that people think it would be any other way- Democrats and liberals in general have an almost unquenchable totalitarian nature



Hmmmmm ... elaborate?



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Donnie Darko

Hmmmmm ... elaborate?


nothing is outside the state, everything must be included in the Great Society, from the environment, to diversity, etc- organisations, charities, media must all show their inclusion of the great liberal causes of the day

Factor in the desire for regulation and govt interference and you have the "soft" totalitarian nature of American modern liberals



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by Donnie Darko

Hmmmmm ... elaborate?


nothing is outside the state, everything must be included in the Great Society, from the environment, to diversity, etc- organisations, charities, media must all show their inclusion of the great liberal causes of the day

Factor in the desire for regulation and govt interference and you have the "soft" totalitarian nature of American modern liberals


I'm not a huge fan of American liberalism, no. I'm an environmentalist, but I don't share the misanthropic views of many environmentalists.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I think its great that they are doing this. It stops liberals talking crap about the war and muslims from using the photos to recruit.
Or maybe shiek Obama just got bored seeing his muslim brothers posed in fun and amusing ways, it's the closest the muslim world has ever come to performance art.



posted on Jun, 3 2009 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I am ok with Obama's public support of this just as long as behind the scenes he is also making sure that everybody knows this is not to happen again.

It's not like this is a free get out of jail card for those who were involved. Those involved has most likely already been punished. Releasing the photos at this point would only put kindling on a bed of warm coals.




top topics



 
1

log in

join