|
Saturday, 13 December 2014
quote [ The objections from Amash and others arose from language in the bill's Section 309, which includes a phrase to allow for "the acquisition, retention, and dissemination" of U.S. phone and Internet data. That passage will give unprecedented statutory authority to allow for the surveillance of private communications that currently exists only under a decades-old presidential decree, known as Executive Order 12333. ]
House bill text: http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20141208/FY%202015%20IAA.PDF
I didn't have an image of a boot stamping on a human face forever in my catalog. So no thumbnail. Edit: added one.
|
Synecdoche said @ 11:56pm GMT on 13th December
Seems plausible and predictable. But it's a long time-honored tradition in many cultures to pardon their leaders that came before. Sure the pardon is generally issued from corrupt elements still somehow enjoying power left over from a previous leadership (eg https://www.opendemocracy.net/arab-awakening/mina-fayek/who-cheered-mubarak%E2%80%99s-acquittal-on). I think in most countries, corrupt leadership expects (and generally receives) absolute forgiveness from their own country's law.
So while Obama may issue last minute orders to strip away powers from his predecessor, he simply doesn't need to because it's guaranteed he'll be safe no matter what. The last Bush in office didn't seem too concerned leaving all new powers he amassed during his term to his predecessor.
Iraq is not an exception because Saddam Hussein was removed and ultimately executed by forces outside his country. North Korea however is a good example of an exception to this rule because many of the members of their leadership are rounded up and summarily executed anyway almost as daily a cultural ritual.
Synecdoche said @ 7:01pm GMT on 13th December
Seems plausible and predictable. But it's a long time-honored tradition in many cultures to pardon their leaders that came before. Sure the pardon is generally issued from corrupt elements still somehow enjoying power left over from a previous leadership (eg what happened in Egypt a few weeks ago). I think in most countries, corrupt leadership expects (and generally receives) absolute forgiveness from their own country's law.
So while Obama may issue last minute orders to strip away powers from his predecessor, he simply doesn't need to because it's guaranteed he'll be safe no matter what. The last Bush in office didn't seem too concerned leaving all new powers he amassed during his term to his predecessor.
Iraq is not an exception because Saddam Hussein was removed and ultimately executed by forces outside his country. North Korea however is a good example of an exception to this rule because many of the members of their leadership are rounded up and summarily executed anyway almost as daily a cultural ritual.
Synecdoche said @ 7:23pm GMT on 13th December
Seems plausible and predictable. But it's a long time-honored tradition in many cultures to pardon their leaders that came before. Sure the pardon is generally issued from corrupt elements still somehow enjoying power left over from a previous leadership (eg what happened in Egypt a few weeks ago). I think in most countries, corrupt leadership expects (and generally receives) absolute forgiveness from their own country's law.
So while Obama may issue last minute orders to strip away powers from his successor, he simply doesn't need to because it's guaranteed he'll be safe no matter what. The last Bush in office didn't seem too concerned leaving all new powers he amassed during his term to his successor.
Iraq is not an exception because Saddam Hussein was removed and ultimately executed by forces outside his country. North Korea however is a good example of an exception to this rule because many of the members of their leadership are rounded up and summarily executed anyway almost as daily a cultural ritual.
Edit: changed "predecessor" to "successor" for correct word usage, though really equates to the same thing when talking about politics.
<-- Entry / Current Comment
Synecdoche said @ 11:56pm GMT on 13th December
Seems plausible and predictable. But it's a long time-honored tradition in many cultures to pardon their leaders that came before. Sure the pardon is generally issued from corrupt elements still somehow enjoying power left over from a previous leadership (eg what happened in Egypt a few weeks ago). I think in most countries, corrupt leadership expects (and generally receives) absolute forgiveness from their own country's law.
So while Obama may issue last minute orders to strip away powers from his successor, he simply doesn't need to because it's guaranteed he'll be safe no matter what. The last Bush in office didn't seem too concerned leaving all new powers he amassed during his term to his successor.
Iraq is not an exception because Saddam Hussein was removed and ultimately executed by forces outside his country. North Korea however is a good example of an exception to this rule because many of the members of their leadership are rounded up and summarily executed anyway almost as daily a cultural ritual.
Edit: changed "predecessor" to "successor" for correct word usage, though really equates to the same thing when talking about politics.
