You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.

Latest

Greatest

Lobby

Journals

Options

Help

Reply #25: It seems to be purposely ambiguous [View All]

Printer-friendly format

Email this thread to a friend

Bookmark this thread

This topic is archived.

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles

stfrequency

(9 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jul-25-07 05:46 AM
Response to Reply #18

25. It seems to be purposely ambiguous

As for the "violence" clause, the crucial loophole is glaring:

"any person determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense to have committed, or to pose a significant risk of committing, an act or acts of violence..."

We know how these directives are designed by now. My feeling is this will be used after the next attack, to quell dissent when Continuity of Government set up in HSPD-51 kicks in.

Watch this C-Span clip for a good shiver:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ug3sjs6OwgI

-st

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate

About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.