• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CIA: Drones Document Count Would Damage National Security

Jango

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2012
Messages
5,587
Reaction score
2,291
Location
Michigan
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left

CIA: Drones Document Count Would Damage National Security

Another source: CIA refuses to release drone documents - Salon.com


Why even have FOIA when governmental agencies like the C.I.A. can just refuse to hand over the documents (information) even when compelled by a judge. It is beyond ridiculous that the government can stonewall the ACLU (and therefore us) like this. Worse yet, people tolerate it and don't get upset. Funny enough, people actually believe President Obama when he said his administration would be transparent.
 
In regard to the US drone programs on foreign soil, government lawyers usually invoke the state secrets privilege, specifically the State Secrets Protection Act of 2008.
 
Why have top secret information if some schmuck can just sue you for it just because they don't agree with you? :roll:
 
I'm not sure how anybody got the idea that operational details of intelligence and military services were going to be just released willy nilly. Those documents are going to contain more than just "yes, we target people and kill them." Maybe we should just send Al-Qaeda the drone patrol routes and the frequencies they communicate on.
 

Don't be surprised if some people here agree with you; to some there shouldn't be state secrets ..
 
Our government is beneficent, and its only goal is to protect us. I feel so safe when the government keeps secrets and keeps me in the dark.
 
"If you knew how many crimes we were committing, you'd run us out of office, so we're classifying all the evidence."
 
Univ. of Hawaii report on demicide suggests govts have killed 262 million people since 1900. Guess our most transparent admin doesn't want to admit its share?
 
I wouldn't be surprised.
 
This is scary. By these standards Obama can order a secret drone strike on Joe Smoe and then keep it hidden because if the populace found out about it they would revolt. Said revolt would "harm national security" and this gives them blanket permit to just keep doing wrong.
 

Yeah, no one would notice a drone strike.

:roll:
 
ecofarm said:
Yeah, no one would notice a drone strike.

:roll:
Click to expand...

They probably wouldnt if they waited for the right time. I bet they even have special payloads to make a body fully disapear without a trace.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
They probably wouldnt if they waited for the right time. I bet they even have special payloads to make a body fully disapear without a trace.
Click to expand...

Today in Iowa, a man spontaneously combusted resulting in the explosion of the building he was in.

hahaha
 
I wonder why people think items of national security should be published for all the world to see. How does someone even arrive at such a conclusion? It seems so many have made it their default status. So weird.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
I wonder why people think items of national security should be published for all the world to see. How does someone even arrive at such a conclusion? It seems so many have made it their default status. So weird.
Click to expand...

Just a guess, but maybe because some amongst us are paying attention? Some amongst us are familiar with the WaPo story from June 22, 2003 explaining "what really happened" in the 345US1 case known as U.S. v. Reynolds.

That was where the government, way back in the early 1950's lied to everybody, including the USSC, first invoked "national security" in court proceedings, and it was perjury. Maybe that's why people are so mistrusting.
 
Henry David said:
Just a guess, but maybe because some amongst us are paying attention?
Click to expand...

Uhhh..you're not, though.

Some amongst us are familiar with the WaPo story from June 22, 2003 explaining "what really happened" in the 345US1 case known as U.S. v. Reynolds.
Click to expand...

Shhhh.

That was where the government, way back in the early 1950's lied to everybody, including the USSC, first invoked "national security" in court proceedings, and it was perjury. Maybe that's why people are so mistrusting.
Click to expand...

Or they're just retarded?
 
>" President Barack Obama held a press conference promising more transparency..."< :lamo :monkey :2rofll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…