[xone]

FYI, the page 'Meaning of Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) - The Balance Careers; has been heavily altered ie. dumbed down since it was referenced in the mighty lexicon of Swordmaker. The current page is relatively useless except as a bridge to other docs and pubs. Kinda pisses me off, because in its original form it was a easy to understand explanation of the Law of Armed Conflict.

In post 371 there is a link to a challenge to a section of the NDAA of 2011, signed by the Bummer, relating to the use of military tribunals for USCs. 0 claimed he would never use that section, probably because he put it there for Hitlery. But she lost, it is still in force. Was suspended by a US District court, the suspension overturned by the 2nd Us Court of Appeals (then liberal) SCOTUS declined to hear it. Still operative AFAIK, a tangled web for sure.

[generally]

>> 0 claimed he would never use that section, probably because he put it there for Hitlery

These legislators and executives who pass laws and issue EOs, etc. that they don’t intend to be used.... why? How insane is that? And how insane are we if we believe them?

I won’t use it but someone else might? Gimme a break.