Posted on 06/07/2015 8:34:38 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Tucked into the surveillance bill that became law was a little-noticed section that will let the United States complete ratification of two long-stalled treaties aimed at stopping a frightening scenario: terrorists wielding radioactive bombs.
"Today, nearly 2,000 metric tons of weapons-usable nuclear materials remain spread across hundreds of sites around the globe — some of it poorly secured," said former Sen. Sam Nunn, co-chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, an organization in Washington that works on the issue. "We know that to get the materials needed to build a bomb, terrorists will not necessarily go where there is the most material. They will go where the material is most vulnerable."
When President Barack Obama signed the surveillance law last Tuesday, attention focused on how it ends the National Security Agency's bulk collection of Americans' telephone records. The last drafts of that legislation, however, included 15 paragraphs permitting the U.S. to formally endorse two nuclear terrorism treaties after years of delay.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
bfl
WHERE ARE THE SPINELESS REPUBLICANS ON THIS???
WHERE ARE THE SPINELESS REPUBLICANS ON THIS???
LOUNGING NEXT TO THEIR JELLYFISH DEMOCRAT COUSINS ...
Counting their kickbacks and thanking Baraq for not releasing the dirt he has on them.
There ought to be an over-riding principle in American Law of purity in Statutory Labeling. No big, multi-topic bills. No unrelated riders. The intent of the law should be clearly and unambiguously stated, and anything unrelated to that statement should not be included.
Too much complexity, too large a bill, too much delegation to regulatory agencies—all of these are another way of creating secret legislation. Now, one could argue, “But, secret legislation is something we’re doing right now with TPP!” Yes, unfortunately that’s true, and I think it’s yet another step down that road. I’d like to back up that road to where the laws are clear, both before they’re passed, and afterwards.
So what’s wrong with the nuclear treaties?
Would someone be willing to give us a 10 cent summary of what this issue entails? I am uninformed, and would appreciate it if I could be caught up quickly. Thanks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.