It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


A Slick Trick on the NDAA and Indefinite Detention; Don't Be Fooled!

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 22 2012 @ 02:00 AM
it looks like the ANTI NDAA talk al over the internetz is making the politiicians a bit jumpy
to combat the internets hatred of this incidious bill some politicians are trying to pull a fast one,

They are hoping you will fall for their trick and waste all your time and energy on something meaningless — and not fight for legislation that actually protects people from indefinite detention without charge or trial.

They are hoping you will ignore the bills that actually are first steps towards fixing the NDAA. Congressman Adam Smith and Sen. Mark Udall introduced H.R. 4192/S. 2175, which codifies a ban on the military imprisoning civilians without charge or trial or trying persons before military commissions within the United States, as well as repeals section 1022 of last year's NDAA. Also, Congressman Ron Paul has sponsored H.R. 3785, which repeals section 1021 of the NDAA. Both are meaningful first steps towards fixing a problem.

so it goes like this,
the politicians who PASSED NDAA are trying to placate voters by making it look like they are adressing the public outrage and concern over the indefinate detension without trail of american and world wide citizens,

but trying to pass an act made to sound like a fix that wont help anyone,

That's right. The plan in the House of Representatives seems to be to try to fool Americans into thinking that they are fixing the indefinite detention problems with the NDAA and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, when in fact, they are doing nothing good.

so it looks and sounds like a repeal but does not go so far as to protect anyone american or world wide,
this is in direct responce to legislation put forward by RON PAUL and OTHER politiicans,

The question with the NDAA was never whether habeas rights are lost. Instead, the question is whether and when any president can order the military to imprison a person without charge or trial. The NDAA did not take away habeas rights from anyone, but it did codify a dangerous indefinite detention without charge or trial scheme. And nothing in the proposed bill by Rigell would change it. The Rigell bill won't stop any president from ordering the military lockup of civilians without charge or trial.

so by trying to use suggestive wording in the TILTTLE,
but having usless wording in the legislation they are trying to FAKE OUT,
anyone trying to repeal the NDAA

you have been warned,

if you want the NDAA repealed you will HAVE TO READ CAREFULLY THE WORDING IN THE BILL.

because the intention is to deceive.

Here's how they hope their trick will work. H.R. 4388, which was sneakily mistitled as the "Right to Habeas Corpus Act," states that no one in the United States will lose their habeas rights under the NDAA. That might sound like something good, but it's meaningless.

ACLU website


well this FIX does not FIX the problem,

i suggest your read RON PAULS BILL as this acually looks to ADRESS the REAL problem

dont be fooled into a debate, read the bills before you support them !!!!!
a disinfo campain is about head our way


posted on Apr, 22 2012 @ 02:17 AM
That is a dirty trick. Sometimes I feel like we've all been betrayed and nobody cares. Let me visualize that--yeah, something like this:

edit on 4/22/2012 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)

new topics

log in