|
Saturday, May 25th, 2013 |
|
Home
RSS Feed
Newsletter
Boomark Us
Facebook
Twitter
|
|
Understanding The 2013 NDAA: Part 2- Section 1029
The Daily Sheeple
via Activist Post Delivered by The Daily Sheeple Contributed by The Daily Sheeple of www.TheDailySheeple.com. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.TheDailySheeple.com. Please share: Spread the word to sheeple far and wide
Leave A Comment... |
Break away from the herd and stay up to date with The Daily Sheeple.
           |
Copyright 2009 - 2013 The Daily Sheeple.
v.8
v.8
wrt, ndaa, indef det, pls educate me, seriously, how does ANYTHING EVER trump the constitution? if constitution says u get a trial, how can ‘they’ say u dont? i understand once you are in ‘custody’ its too late but why isnt SOMEONE on the hill losing their mind over this? are they ALL in on it? why would gohmert even bother w an amendment if he knew it’d be picked apart? i’m gettin real nervous real fast. feel free to email some kind of response, anybody, thanks.
Well, just about all of them are in on it. Read http://www.dunwalke.com.
Evidently, Gohlert put the amendment to make it sound (to the incurious, & those not familiar with critical thinking) like they still have rights. However, to anyone at all familiar with the Military Code of Justice, the military does what it is ordered to do, not what the Constitution says to do; so if the military is doing the detaining, why would anyone expect access to a normal court of law?