By Jueseppi B.
If you ever needed proof that the average American is as dumb as a box of rocks, just pay attention to all the misinformation and lies circulating over bill H.R.1540 or S. 1867, or whats known as the National Defense Authorization Act. The National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 48 years to specify the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. Now lets review….The National Defense Authorization Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 48 years. That means until this year, when the House TeaPubliCANTS attached new amendments to the The National Defense Authorization Act, it was passed and signed into law by every POTUS going back 48 years…….with NO problems!!!
Now lets review the bill section that has all the average Americans looking to the heavens to watch the sky fall…..page 428 says…..
AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
captured or arrested in the United States.
Let me repeat, for the Average American……”Nothing in this section shall be
construed to affect existing law or authorities”….as in whats already in place in our Constitution.
The key point is that the bill excludes U.S. Citizens. I wish it went on to include every country with whom we have diplomatic relations. In short, this bill now is consistent with the interpretation of the 5th Amendment under Hamdi v. Rumsfeld.
This is, by the way, the relevant part of the Fifth Amendment, which you will notice prohibits detention without trial for any citizen unless they are in the military during War or “public danger: ”No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger.”
NOW….is this crystal clear to all you morons who accuse President Of The United States Obama of “caving” to pressure not to veto this important bill?? The U.S. Military must be funded, and it must be funded on time. The TeapubliCANTS know this bill is of major importance to this nation, this administration and this Black POTUS, as well as every American sitting in their homes at this exact moment….enjoying American freedoms and civil liberties. The TeaPubliCANTS know that the POTUS does not have the power of the veto simply because if he vetoed this bill, it would be over ridden…and POTUS Obama does NOT have the support in the Houses Of Congress to defeat the over ride vote, because America needs this bill signed into law, as it has been signed into law the past 48 years. The plan to make President Barack Hussein Obama look bad only succeeds when stupid Americans believe without knowing.
From the White House……”The administration abandoned its long-held veto threat due to changes in the final version of the bill, namely that in its view, the military custody mandate has been “softened.” The bill now gives the President the immediate power to issue a waiver of the military custody requirement, instead of the Defense Secretary, and gives the President discretion in implementing these new provisions.
“We have concluded that the language does not challenge or constrain the President’s ability to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists, and protect the American people, and the President’s senior advisors will not recommend a veto,” the White House statement said.
POTUS Obama does NOT have the votes he needs to sustain a veto of this bill….House Democrats/Republicans will override his veto, and the military in the mean time need funding, so while all you Americans are bitching & moaning over a law signed by the past POTUS, over the past 48 years, read the guts of the bill….unless you are a terrorists, and suspected of terror activities…..did I repeat this enough so that all you “intelligent” Americans understand the bill?
Here’s a suggestion for the future…..read and research and investigate BEFORE you post, comment or debate issues, just so you understand what it is you are arguing and debating about…..make sense? BUT I realize that will never happen in America….because Americans are lazy, and too occupied with Occupying Wall Street, or paying attention to angry birds, or what the Kardashians are doing. Not too busy to jump on any old bandwagon that rolls along though….reading comprehension IS fundamental.
More on this bill from Molly’s Middle America……
“There is so much hysteria about this bill, and most of it is unfounded. Yes, it is confusing, but it clearly talks about “covered people” as: “(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person
13 who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”
No, there is no way that the military could put and OWS supporter in one of those buckets and have it stand up in court.
And there is no law that has been passed in this history of this country that can “outlaw the Constitution” as some claim. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Many provisions of the Patriot Act have been tossed out by various courts over the years.
But this is why I’m much more concerned about the Repubs gaining the Presidency in 2012 than the NDAA. The longest lasting legacy of any President is his Supreme Court appointees, and we may have three new Supreme Court appointees in the next five years. I have yet to hear any complaints from progressives/liberals/Dems on Obama’s two Supreme Court appointees.” She makes a ton of common sense!!!!
Oh By The way…..if you would like to actually read bill H.R.1540 or S. 1867 in it’s entirety, before you go off half cocked about the NDAA Bill…….click on this link. Happy Reading.
“Disagree Intelligently, Use The Facts & Truth”.
Like this:
Filed under: News, Opinion, Politics Tagged: | BarackObama, Law of the United States, National Defense Authorization Act, Obama, United State, United States Armed Forces, United States Department of Defense, White House
What is the latest on this? There are no verifications that he has signed it–so isn’t it soon to be a “pocket veto”? As of 12/28/Wednesday–no news…
Bruce,
Go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/legislation, and you can see all signed legislation.
This controversy is very cleverly crafted by the other side to do exactly what it is doing….getting otherwise decent people all up in arms because they won’t read the bill critically and with comprehension.
They are attempting to play us by manipulating our sense of outrage, to the same degree and in the same way as they manipulate otherwise sane and mainstream people who get sucked into the Tea Party over the Affordable Healthcare Act with phrases like “Death Panels”.
We must not be “fair weather progressives”. This is hard-ass stuff going on here.
Don’t be played.
You have never been more correct in your life Mr. Carttar…you spoke the gospel with this comment.
Reading and re-reading this bill has still given me a headache and I asked my local ACLU membership office about it (Northern California). They referred me to this: http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/behind-closed-doors-congress-trying-force-indefinite-detention-bill-americans
However, National ACLU deputy legal director Jameel Jaffer appeared on The Rachel Maddow Show [Dec. 13th] to talk about the serious problems that remain in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The latest version of the bill now exempts U.S. citizens from the requirement for “terror suspects” to be held in military custody–but this relatively minor adjustment is overshadowed by the fact that the measure permits the indefinite detention without charge or trial of anyone, including U.S. citizens on American soil. “It was an awful bill before, and it is an awful bill now,” Jaffer told Maddow.
This measure further sidelines the Bill of Rights and fundamental liberties, codifying in law a power that the Bush administration merely claimed, under the Authorization for Use of Military Force passed on Sept. 18, 2001.
Something very similar happened when the FISA Amendments Act of 2007 gave legitimacy to warrantless wiretaps, and which, together with the so-called Patriot Act, eviscerates the Fourth Amendment protection against “unreasonable searches and seizures”. The NDAA now undermines the Fifth Amendment right not to be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”, the Sixth Amendment right to “a speedy and public trial”, and the Seventh Amendment right to a trial by jury.
Obama threatened to veto the entire bill because of the original provisions, which he said were “inconsistent with the fundamental American principle that our military does not patrol our streets.”
The latest version of the bill, drafted by the House-Senate conference committee, kept the provisions. But it exempted U.S. citizens from the requirement for terror suspects to be held in military custody and included language stating that the bill did not extend new authority to detain U.S. citizens.
Due to the changes, the White House announced Wednesday (Dec. 14th) it would not veto the bill.
The new bill still mandates military detention without trial for any non-citizen terrorism suspect apprehended in the US who is determined to be a member of al Qaeda or an “affiliated group.” The administration now has several ways to get around that requirement, however. It could issue a national security waiver—a letter from the administration authorizing a trial in civilian court. Alternatively, the FBI could simply detain a suspect up until a determination is made that he can be detained by the military. Even after that, if the administration decides to try the suspect in civilian court, there’s still no need to put him in military custody. Under the latest version of the law, someone like underwear bomber Umar Abdulmutallab could still go from interrogation to trial without ever passing through military hands—and without the need for a national security waiver. (The national security waiver option that has been a part of the Senate bill since the earliest drafts, although the authority to grant the waiver now rests with the president instead of the secretary of defense—a change a Senate aide said was requested by the administration.)
The question is why the detention provisions remain in the bill at all. It looks like Congress, in responding to concerns raised by national security officials, essentially made the “mandatory” military detention optional. The new bill still shifts the presumption towards military custody, and in doing so, sets up a potential controversy every time a non-citizen terror suspect is apprehended in the US. The changes allow members of Congress to claim they’re not hampering counter-terrorism operations while still leaving them room to slam the president should he decide to forgo military detention. Republicans have seized on previous incidents to criticize the president for not being “tougher” on terrorism by extending the military’s role. At least in a symbolic sense, this bill gives them more ammunition in case another underwear bomber type situation occurs, because they would be able to accuse the president of ignoring the law. Perhaps, convinced of the danger of micromanaging the president in advance, Congress has made it easier to do so after the fact.
I have had a headache over this entire issue for three days. I give up and I am moving on to other issues. if I disappear, I have been detained!!
One can easily assess the intellectual span of someone who is incapable of polite debate, who can only resort to insulting those he disagrees with by calling them assholes, morons etc. while deleting comments which threaten their illusion of superiority & their ability to shove down someone else’s throat their narrow-mindedly partisan interpretation of what they clearly understand nothing about.
The NDAA amounts to a further codification & legitimization of the Patriot Act’s most ambiguous & murkiest provisions, since that document was never legally Intelligible to begin with (intentionally), now Obama will actually defuse the danger of anyone ever challenging its unconstitutionality, thus crushing the hope of those who want it amended or reversed. In essence the NDAA provides retroactive immunity for all of the civil liberty violations perpetrated against US citizens under the very convenient pretext of the ‘war on Terror’, violations which Obama promised that he would address once elected, instead he predictably colludes with those who he falsely claimed to oppose, in order to let them off the hook & shield them (& the Patriot Act), from any legal challenge in the future. this is why a lawyer was elected president.
Please do not succumb to Obamacrat apologisms, instead listen to Constitutional lawyers, Human Rights advocates & Senators who oppose NDAA & The Patriot Act, & DEMAND the impeachment of any politician who is against abolishing these.
Damon, try to follow along and comprehend, this is not a forum for debate or discussion on anything I deem unnecessary. This is not a Facebook group where you are welcome to debate, it is NOT an open forum, it IS MY blog, and as such I decide what goes on here. I choose what comments stay and which ones go, I decide who is allowed to comment and who is not. I decide these things, not you. Now if you want a forum to debate, create one. Frankly, i give a rats cock about what you think, want, desire or like. I write MY blog to get MY opinions and facts and truth out to the general public, you brought your dumb ass to MY blog…then bitch and moan because I run MY blog as I see fit. Now that is stupid.
But you keep returning asshole….so what does that make you?
A very lonely moron….you are….watch this…..
If you don’t want this to be a forum for debate, simply remove the comments section. A comments section is, ipso facto, a forum for debate. I haven’t participated much because I don’t really need to. Anyone who takes seriously the tortured and bizarre apologetics,inane name-calling, incoherent outbursts, and shameless shilling that constitute Jueseppi’s contributions to this blog is immune to argument or reason. The rest of us are just along for the ride.
Seeing how this is MY blog, and as such, I get to decide which tortured and bizarre apologetic, inane name-calling, incoherent outbursts, and shameless shilling gets to be posted in this comments section….well you can just continue to come back to My blog, and visit. And enjoy the ride Mr. Sanity. Oh….if I don’t like what you post here, I remove what you post here. I control what you do here. See you again soon I hope.
You may be In overly in Love with Obama for all the Wrong Reasons. I support him because I think he is better then the Alternative. I in general think he is otherwise doing a good Job. But to dismiss people and say your Article stands as Is, Basically End of Story is Stupid on your Part. Many Intelligent people in the Media and on your Site here heavily disagree with you here but your dismissing their discussions to look good on your part. After 10 years from 9-11 and many years from all these Laws against Terrorist these added statements came at the direction of President Obama as was per Sen. Carl Levin. Care to argue with Senator Carl Levin on that one. Saying Words like BS is truly dismissive and it makes me feel that you are more of an entertainment writer then a good factual reporter. You don’t seem to be a Good Entertainment writer either. If you have to Answer quickly with BS and other dismissive inflammatory statements as if one should just give up on your ridiculous statements. Answer the Genuine Question otherwise stop pretending to be a Good Factual Reporter with Insight Quantum to the Rest of Us All. At this Point I am personally Not Impressed. Answer the Questions !!! If you can’t defend your positions then you shouldn’t write stories in attempts to be like a valid blogger/News Source for the rest of us All !!!
My writing skill is exactly why you asshole, like yourself John, are here wasting time commenting. Bottom line is this….you wish you could be me, and you and I both know you are a moron and a fool. that is why you were ignored by myself when you came begging to have me author your material. Now if you are not so impressed with my “writing, why are you here reading what I write? It would seem you have forgotten where you are John. On MY blog.
Maybe you should go to YOUR blog?
Dumber than a box of rocks? Really?
BS on that.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/singleton/
Jueseppi — I think the big question in my eyes is why after 10 years and No major Terroristic activity since 9-11 did the Administration of President Obama attempt to pass such a Hot Topic Item via Levin and Mc.Cain. What is the World has changed for the needs of sections 1031 & 1032 ? Especially at this time just before an election !!! Couldn’t this have been done after November 6, 2012 for the NDAA for 2013, or even there after for 2014. This way they could clearly explain the position on it to the public. The Issue was that the ACLU came out with the Alarm bells. They didn’t accept the Udall attachment and accepted the Feinstein attachment. Please respond to this question as I felt the administration regardless of being right on the Bill was quite stupid on their timing before the Election ? You know the GOP was waiting for something like this to detract the Dem Base away from Obama. After you detract the Base then it is easy to capture Independents as well prior to the Election. I still see this as a stupid thing by the Dems of the Senate, Levin, and the Obama Administration. It was like a trap waiting to happen and they stepped into It. This plus the drone situation is truly an embarrassing situation. We are so sophisticated and our Military for which the President is in charge of the Military hasn’t dealt with the scrutiny to make sure that these High-Tech devices like this drone and the Helicopter that went into Pakistan to go after Bin Laden had explosives and corrohsive elements on board so that when given the signal using a satelite that it would actually destroy the sensitive technology and keep it out of the hands of our enemies. I like Obama but he does need to be more engaged in what is going on with the Military and the inner workings of the Technology and other aspects of the Military. He in large as done a decent job of course we can’t argue such. But the GOP is after him and Hot on his Trail in the Polls. Obama and the Democrats could lose just like they did in 2010. Yes — It could happen even with all the current dissatisfaction over the GOP’s way currently. All the GOP has to do is shine Bad light on President Obama detract his base from him. Capture enough Independents and basically the Dems and Obama lost a Race stupidly as they already prior tightly held this bird well within their hand. Again, Please explain as I don’t get it that the Administration thru Levin decided after 10 years after 9/11 that this was Necessary just prior to the November 6. 2012 Election ?
John, allow me to repeat this for the ten million time….POTUS Obama does NOT draft bills, POTUS Obama does NOT write bills, POTUS Obama signs a bull into law, or veto’s a bill, or sends it back to the Houses Of Congress. This was covered in School House Rock when I was a child….remember the show entitled “How A Bill Becomes A Law”? Obama is not responsible for this garbage that was placed inside the original NDAA….now do you follow me? Ask The TeapubliCANTS, who loaded this NDAA bill with garbage, why THEY added the shit to the original bill John.
Jueseppi
I along with you am a supporter of the Democrats and Obama as well. But I may try at times to be fair to the actuality of things. I understand the “How a Bill becomes a Law thing — School House as you describe.” At many times requests are at the hands from the White House and again I don’t understand as Sen. Levin ( Democrat ) Carl Levin states that this was the desired wording for Section 1031 & 1032. You have a Democrat — Head of the Armed Services Committee (Co-Sponsor to the Bill) saying don’t blame me this is what the Administration ( Obama ) wanted it and how he wanted it worded. Again why the mass confusion ? Why did they do it in such a manner without excellent Explanation to the public prior to it being such an Explosive ordeal. It wasn’t in H.R. 1540 it was in S. 1867 and the Senate is controlled by the Senate. In my eyes it’s a massive political blunder and even though I am a supporter it is their stupidity that could cost them the Election. So please No School of Rock kind of Stuff. As my questions also within that you haven’t answered is “Why after 10 years from 9-11 was it a Necessity ?” Even George W. Bush didn’t go to where ACLU was up in arms about it to the Full degree that they are with this particular !!! My other one that you haven’t answered well is why just before an election did Obama & Levin open this can of Worms prior to the Election ? Again Levin said he was doing it from the direction of the WH. So you are quite wrong to say that the POTUS never directed in U.S. History to direct Legislation. We know it has happened in many — Likely every Presidency. I mean you have to be Real and Not just be Zealot with support. You have to answer such reasonably as this is what you ask for here. Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Eisenhower, LBJ, Reagan, and George W. Bush to name a few easily pushed items for passing in Congress. Some are at the hands from the Direction of the WH. Jueseppi — It’s so Historical that you can’t deny such. George W. Bush Administration pushed for the Presidential Directives for which they got it passed in Congress. Even Obama himself pushed for his Healthcare Bill for which his Democrat congress agreed to It. So going off and giving me the Eric Cantor thing about School House of Rock for Congress thing is Flawed. It’s so Historically true that President’s including Obama make Direct request for passing of Legislation. So I have two unanswered questions above that you still haven’t answered !!! And here is the 3rd one you haven’t answered — Why did President Obama just immediately after S. 1867 was passed on December 1st did he say he was giving a Veto to it and Now as of yesterday on December 15th President Obama says that he will sign It ? It is as if it is a True Flip-Flop. Again the ACLU is still unsatisfied. The President does have to pass NDAA yearly but he could state No unless the Udall Amendment is accepted. He’s not being strong about such. I don’t care if they can over-ride him. He (Obama) for his own Electability reasons needs to show that he Vetoed It !!! Regardless it is likely the Biggest Political SNAFU that I have ever seen in my Lifetime. I am discussing this with you as I am not satisfied to the answers of how the Administration handled this. Oh sorry the 4th question you haven’t answered — “Why didn’t the Administration Explain this well enough prior to saying it is All a Go ?” Again SNAFU !!! Very bad of OFA & the WH, truly very Bad. It’s easy to Lose the Base. Easier to lose them then it is to gain votes from Independents. Again as I mentioned if you start to Lose the Base in droves then how do you expect to have independents go to your side prior to November 6, 2012. I didn’t cause this Media and Political SNAFU. I am trying to understand It !!! You and others are Not explaining It very Well at this Point to me and the Public at Large !!! So you attempted to answer 1 of my 5 questions and I felt that you didn’t answer #1 very well as Sen. Carl Levin stated this was at the direction of the Administration. Your Response is like Newt Gingrich invoking “Ronald Reagan” into his statements when he doesn’t desire to answer a question properly so.
If you think for one moment I am going to answer your questions, when it is covered six ways from Thursday in the article, crystal clearly to me John, you are a fool as well. Fools don’t like to see the clear answer before them, they love to create turmoil, and as witnessed by your post all over FB, you are one who loves to type bull shit.
[...] NDAA Law…Reading Comprehension IS Fundamental !! (theobamacrat.com) [...]
Myth #3: U.S. citizens are exempted from this new bill
This is simply false, at least when expressed so definitively and without caveats. The bill is purposely muddled on this issue which is what is enabling the falsehood.
There are two separate indefinite military detention provisions in this bill. The first, Section 1021, authorizes indefinite detention for the broad definition of “covered persons” discussed above in the prior point. And that section does provide that “Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.” So that section contains a disclaimer regarding an intention to expand detention powers for U.S. citizens, but does so only for the powers vested by that specific section. More important, the exclusion appears to extend only to U.S. citizens “captured or arrested in the United States” — meaning that the powers of indefinite detention vested by that section apply to U.S. citizens captured anywhere abroad (there is some grammatical vagueness on this point, but at the very least, there is a viable argument that the detention power in this section applies to U.S. citizens captured abroad).
But the next section, Section 1022, is a different story. That section specifically deals with a smaller category of people than the broad group covered by 1021: namely, anyone whom the President determines is “a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force” and “participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.” For those persons, section (a) not only authorizes, but requires (absent a Presidential waiver), that they be held “in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.” The section title is “Military Custody for Foreign Al Qaeda Terrorists,” but the definition of who it covers does not exclude U.S. citizens or include any requirement of foreignness.
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/singleton/
Obama, the Senate and House Democrats, and the Senate and House Republicans, are working together to establish a fascist authoritarian state. Obama is following in the footsteps of his predecessor, and you are following in the footsteps of the neoconservative supporters of Bush II. The language was not changed to make nothing in the bill apply to US citizens. You are, willfully or through extreme ignorance, spreading authoritarian propaganda. Maybe you just innocently bought into the propaganda, but judging from the wallpaper on this site, I’m gonna guess no.
Yes, you are correct. Mow move to Iraq. Or run for POTUS and do shit your way….handle your bizness.
That doesn’t make any kind of sense…
What makes no sense is you continuing to comment on this article as if you have no life…it is crystal to me you are a fool, and an unselfishly moronic underachiever…so why are you returning to MY blog to stress your idiocy?
I’m using you on other websites and forums as an example of the obsessive cult-like fanaticism of devoted Obama supporters.
I’m still commenting here because any time I comment on a WordPress blog, I have it set to notify me of follow-up comments. This is because if you say something the blog’s author objects to, they will demand an explanation of your objection, and claim victory if you never say anything. Since, obviously, silence indicates not having a response, instead of a loss of interest.
Because I’ve not wandered off elsewhere, you have to instead take the truly bizarre step of criticizing and attacking me, incoherently, for reading and commenting on your publicly published blog. That’s like a newspaper editor insulting people in an editorial for reading a paper when they disagree with it.
If all you wanted to do was masturbate furiously over your amazingly messianic president-god, existing in an echo chamber where you proudly make incorrect assertions that are never challenged by inconvenient things like words and facts, you could do it in the privacy of your own home. Perhaps in front of your candle-lit shrine to Obama, stacked high with bootleg Obama memorabilia.
I am an Obama supporter, and the mere fact that you are here, on my blog, is a testament to how powerful this man is. POTUS Obama will win re-election by a landslide, mostly on his record of accomplishments for an agenda that helps Americans, like me. The fact that you are here, commenting in my blog proves your fear of this magnificent Black President Of The United States. The fact you are hiding behind fake names proves you are a coward. I adore the time I am spending, while working, making you come here to me to engage in your idea of conversation.
The base fact is you are a fool, and you pretty much prove that by coming to MY blog and doing exactly as I wish…..driving up my numbers. The mans record and achievements stand on their own…and YES I am a Proud and Loud Obama supporter, and Fuck Anyone Who Does NOT Support Barack Hussein Obama, including you, with your fake identity.
PS: As far as POTUS not authoring the bill, this of course is correct… However I viewed a video of Carl Levin stating explicitly that the POTUS insisted that the questionable language be included in the bill.
I believe nothing Mr. Levin says…I would like to see him stating that to POTUS Obama’s face, in a face to face discussion.
You can watch the video. It’s readily available online.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_ysdsxF3eo
Your ignorance at this point indicates either malicious spreading of misinformation, or willful ignorance.
My ignorance is that fools with names such as yours don’t stand a chance in “educating” a man like me who relies on self research and self investigation for information on issues. Read the Jueseppi B, about me tab….might help you….then re-read the article you are commenting on, then read the entire NDAA bill followed by reading the U.S. Constitution specifically the 5th amendment. School is out for the summer.
The 5th amendment protects against self-incrimination and doesn’t have anything to do with this. I realize you’re just a fanatic and a robot, but there’s really no excuse for this kind of ignorance.
The 5th amendment refers to this case dummy…..Hamdi v. Rumsfeld…Google it. The ignorance is that you supposedly read this article you are commenting on….can you read?
I understand your points, yet I still feel concerned about how this bill might be construed. Details in the bill could be interpreted by our militarized law enforcement in their efforts to suppress the rights of free speech, free assembly,(as we’ve seen occur time and time again with pepper spray and massive, brutal force against peaceful protesters) and disregard due process (read the Family Guy writer’s account and others) when dealing with protesters, as has been rampant in the Occupy movement? I understand the historical use of “belligerent acts” – but I also understand that a term such as this could conceivably be interpreted to cover acts of civil disobedience.
I also take issue with the idea that the United States and all of our allies are now literally considered war zones. This kind of mentality strikes me as dangerous.
I understand your concerns Ms. Balekin, and I share them but not because of this bill. I felt the exact same way you feel the day George Dubbya Bush signed the Patriot Act right after 9/11. This bill is not the worry for me because it comes years after the Patriot Act was signed into law….and as I have stated numerous times before now, on this same article comment thread….the Patriot Act is 20 times more dangerous than this bill.
You took language that pertains to one section of the Bill and magically applied it to the entire Bill.
I did….magically too. ain’t I a bitch?
Ok, so, am I to interpret your slander of Americans as morons, as real journalism? You say it yourself by the fourth paragraph- a FUNDING APPROPRIATIONS BILL. Which, in my understanding, has to do with money and money alone, not commentary on holding procedures for the military to follow amendment pursuing “terrorists”. Are we clear? APPROPRIATIONS BILLS ARE FOR THE EXPRESS PURPOSE OF RELEASING FUNDS TO BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. They ARE NOT intended to create any commentary or fuzzy lines as to following any portion of our constitution. JjDespite your rhetoric of the core of the 5th amendment being supported, you realize that by your very word selection, you are delivering a message that we, as citizens, should be okay with less than the entirety of the 5th amendment being intact. I daresay your journalism supports a usurpation of the amendment process as laid out by the constitution. Can’t you go away and edit a yearbook or something more useful than your current
You are a moron, the appropriations bills are just that, funding for whatever the bill is originally written to fund. The POTUS has no involvement in writing these bills asshole. He either signs the bill, vetoes the bill or send it back to Congress. As for my writing, you are here wasting your valuable time reading it are you not? Which makes you what? A genius? Fuckin idiots are a half a penny a dozen.
I hope no one believes this tortured interpretation of the bill. Just in case you do though, take a look at what one of its authors has said
Everyone on the Senate/Representative floor has his/her own personal/private agenda, that is a fact. Also a fact is what has been written in the article that has started this gigantic comment section. We all have our concerns and ideas concerning this one bill, HR 1540/NDAA bill. What amazes me is the Patriot Act, the bill that gives law enforcement, the POTUS, combined with the military, the FBI, CIA and Homeland Security all types of powers of imprisonment, detention and non allowance of due process of law, goes un-protested. The Patriot Act is 12 times more powerful than this tiny ass amendment to this defense spending bill. So somebody among you who oppose this NDAA bill, explain to me why the concern over this bill, when the Patriot Act has been a law since 9/11, when it was signed into law by George Dubbya Bush?? The Patriot Act IS a law designed to do exactly what NDAA is designed to do….only more detail and a wider coverage….please explain….
Just a quick question JB (I myself am a lib), why do we NEED this bill?? There are a lot of people without jobs, but why do we need this NDAA?? Does it STOP what Bush Jr was doing and/or reverse it??? I hope it does, but I don’t think thats is the aim of it. Can you tell us why we NEED it?? Do you think we need more stuff to add to the Patriot Act??
The actual bill is the National Defense Authorization Act, which funds the defense department, to pay soldiers salaries and other military “stuff”. It has been a bill that every POTUS the past 48 years signs as needed. This year, the TeaPubliCANTS decided to add garbage into this bill, as they are doing with the payroll increase bill and the unemployment insurance bill….the TeaPubliCANTS do this as a practice to mess up POTUS Obama’s agenda to get things done to keep America solvent. The need for the added legislation is not clear to me, the Patriot Act covers all that is needed to fight terrorism…BUT this bill needs to pass for it’s military spending features…so it will NOT be vetoed. Besides the POTUS does not have the votes in the Houses of Congress to get his veto past an override vote. Any intelligent person who knows how our government works knows this…but they still want to bitch and moan about the bill. So this bill is really about military spending with bull shit thrown in by Congress….NOT POTUS Obama. Obama does not author bills.
If he doesn’t have the votes to make a veto stand, what does he lose from vetoing it?
He can make a stand against the parts of the bill that negatively impact our civil liberties, and the thing will pass anyway.
Ok Durruti, good question, here is why a veto that is over ridden is looked upon as a failure and not a victory as you suggest….the TeaPubliCANTS have expressed the mission of defeating POTUS Obama and keeping him from re-election by any means necessary. The public perception is how to accomplish that task. If POTUS Obama were to veto this bill, then get his veto over turned by Congress, and he fails to keep his veto by NOT having enough votes to sustain his veto powers, what he looks like to the “average” American voter is a weak President. He did take a positive stand, but he knows it is a false play to impress voters, and the GOPretenders would make that an issue, and they would make his failure to keep his veto an issue, and it is a waste of time to make a public play that everybody who follows politics or knows how politics works will know was a play. This POTUS, if you have noticed, has not made plays that are political based as others have in the past. This bill needs to be passed ASAP…not next year after holiday break, the funding is needed now. Vetoing and voting it down take time. I hope that answers your intelligent question. Wish more would ask questions that make sense.
Two things: 1. Apparently Jueseppi B. or whatever his name is has access to information to which the rest of us haven’t had access. So, having that access, he is enjoying himself immensely characterizing as Morons everyone who hasn’t previously been made privy to what is on page 428 of the NDAA Law and who believed, because we’ve been told it again and again, and because Obama sort of said that he might veto it, that the bill would allow the arrest and indefinite detention of American citizens. 2. If the Fraking Obama Administration would have communicated the changes and why Obama didn’t veto the bill a number of us ‘morons’ would have had the information we needed to believe that Obama didn’t cave on his unpromise to maybe veto the bill. If all that is posted here is correct it is obvious why Democrats voted for the bill and it would make no sense for Obama to veto it. But I don’t appreciate the “gotcha” tone of this whole damn post. Putting out a correction that explains how the bill has been changed and why Obama didn’t veto is would have been a mature response. Instead we have a moron gloating because he has been made privy to some information that the Obama Administration either failed to or did a piss poor job of making public.
Once again reading comprehension is fundamental Mr. Holliday, or whatever your name is….if your dumb ass would have actually read this article, instead of just reading the comment section, you would see the link to the “ENTIRE” bill at the very bottom of the article….placed there so morons such as yourself, could read the bill. The article also contains both versions of this bill, before the revision and after the revisions…..wow….now who is the stupid one?
Not sure why but my icon has been changed. I assure you that is not me. (has something to do with my e-mail address)
The reasons why there is a camp on the right that allegedly said nothing on the Patriot Act while jumping all over NDAA 2012 are as follows.
A. It is a false premise, as alluded to by my use of the word “alleged”. You see, there has always been a Civil Libertarian Right and that Right has always hated the Patriot Act and hated Bush. In the aftermath of 911, that right was drowned out by the Fox News Right, which is a collection of drooling, mentally defective, genocidal jingos. Just because the Fox News Right got more airtime does not mean they were all there is. I don’t believe for one second that the polls indicating their dominance on the Right were legit. However, even if they were legit, the Libertarian Ron Paul Right has exploded as of late, and they would be as aggressive under A Republican as they are under Obama. The Right is no longer dominated by the Fox News War Machine.
B. There remains a Civil Libertarian ACLU Left that hated both this bill and the Patriot Act. Most people of any political affiliation who were paying attention hated BOTH bills, with the sole exception being the mentally defective rank and file of the Fox News Right. The main acquiescence to the Patriot Act was in the vast expanse of Football/American Idol-Watching America that are not paying attention and who would acquiesce gladly to a bill sacrificing their firstborn child to the executive as long as they got to keep their football and ipods.
C. The aforementioned Fox News Right is confused about this bill, and probably see it as one of the few things Obama has done right or complain that it does not trample on Civil Liberties *enough*. I have associated with members of the Fox New Right. They are perpetually confused and high strung, which, when you get down to it is a necessary condition of being a thinking person who submits himself daily to raging tsunami of retarded propaganda. You can’t allow your own brain to work for a second or your worldview in which you have invested so much and sanctioned so much criminality and idiocy and utter evil will collapse. The way they react to anything now is through irrational impulse. They are in full-blown fascism.
D. There also exist partisans who simply go with whatever their party does. That accounts for the relatively small remainder of people who liked the Democratic pissing on civil liberties but hate it when it’s the republicans or vice-versa.
It also accounts for people who create websites shilling for an obvious Clown Prince of the Presidency (Obama distiguishes himself from Bush only by being a better Teleprompter reader) who has sold out the country so outrageously and egregiously that it’s funny and sad that some people bother to defend him.
Please refer to Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT) statement of TODAY, December 15, 2011. IF HE has concerns that the inserted language still does NOT clear up the issue of inderfinite detention fo Americna Citizens, then I have issues. I TRUST him 100%. He does NOT have any ideological agenda: http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=4e84d833-0f2b-480e-a564-36e84f29b729
well I must say not surprisingly Jueseppie that your breakdown was very very clear. When I read your intro I must admit, I got a little hesitant because I thought it was going to be such a complicated read that I was going to have to re-read many times and pull out dictionaries and possibly comeback another day. I do think that some will make it harder on themselves to “get it” if they approach this while they are still emotionally upset about what they think the bill is or because the Pres. didn’t keep the promise to veto.
I’m believing this was a tactic the TeaPubs may have counted on or at least hope for when the revisions where put in place. Well Thank you for the brilliant breakdown and clarity. I feel good, however I don’t think I will be debating this one with too many people. It can be overwhelming and takes way too much energy as I can see just from a few threads I’ve read today. However, I will post the link to this site as my response to anyone. That’s the smart way out, as you’ve already done the hard work and I couldn’t lay it out any better. You and Molly deserve major Kudos and 3 Cheers or a few drinks.. My hat’s off to you both.
I knew you would get it Shelley…intelligence is your strong suit. it is not too complicated. Thank you for following me here to my new home.
I not only voted for this “Potus” i traveled from Massachusettes to Penn to help during the primary..plus worked signing up new voters.
So..am i happy with him…NO!. I expected the Patriot Act to be appealed as no longer needed….i expected an “accounting from Bush as to how and why we got into WAr in the first place..and i expected the war to end..not 3 years later either. I did not expect to have been guilty of assisting elect a President who holds the new record for fighting the most Wars at the same time. I don’t give a rats ### what his color,name,religion is..i wanted a CHANGE i could believe in..i got a Change..but don’t believe in it. Is he still the best choice for President in 2012..yes..but only because greens/indys can’t field a winning choice.
The problem with your comment Mr. Schlegel is this article is not about POTUS Obama, or your disappointment with his Presidency. It is about a specific issue….not your thoughts on how this POTUS did or did not meet your expectations. And to be honest, since you brought it up…your expectations are very incorrect. Change? health care for millions of Americans for the very first time. Change? Reformed student loans for our college graduates. Change? Just today by Executive Order, fixed the home health care worker pay scale, so they get a higher wage and over time pay. Change? Go read the 256 accomplishments this POTUS has achieved over three years against all types of odds. You fair weather voters make my ass sick. Have a nice evening Mr Schlegel.
Where can I read the full text of the bill? Am I missing it in your article?
Bottom of the article it says read the bill here at this link….the word link is the link to click on.
”Don’t be confused by anyone claiming that the indefinite detention legislation does not apply to American citizens. It does. There is an exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032 of the bill), …but no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial (section 1031 of the bill). So, the result is that, under the bill, the military has the power to indefinitely imprison American citizens, but it does not have to use its power unless ordered to do so.” -ACLU on the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012
Don’t be confused by idiots claiming this bill is the end of the world either Ms. Benson. For the last time, go read the Patriot Act, which G. Dubbya Bush signed into law after 9/11….this NDAA bill is NOTHING compared to the Patriot Act….which is a law right now….this garbage included in this NDAA bill by RepubliCANTS is a ruse to get Obama in deep shit when he signs it….with his base of supporters like you. God are you folks dumb.
Hmm! So everything I herd on the Senate floor with my very own to ears must be false then according to you…I don’t think so.. Maybe you should tune in next time and listen for yourself then you might not be so confused as to why so many are not just shrugging this off…I won’t be silent about this because I specifically herd some say an officer that suspects one as a danger in a place such as an air port etc .CAN be detained ,handed over to the Military and held with out Representation until the Supreme Court Takes up the case and decides whether or not they have shown sufficient evidence as to whether the person detained is a threat or not..Again SCOTUS will decide …Now ! What happens to the person detained until SCOTUS takes the case? They sit “Indefinitely” in prison until ..Again! SCOTUS makes a judgement..You won’t have any luck trying to throw your speculated OPINION around with those who herd first hand..What is it going to take for people to understand that our Civil liberties are being stripped away bit by bit ..What is it going to take for people to understand that the majority of our Government no longer cares about our constitutional rights? I guess People getting beat down ,gassed ,pepper sprayed .Shot wit rubber bullets ,Media Being Blacked out during raids on peaceful protesters has taught some nothing ..By the way don’t forget S.O.P.A That is just another step in the process of oppressing us all..Also all this legislation that is attacking our freedoms is and has been highly Bi Partisan ..At least we got Sen. Fienstine that is not just blowing this off..
You folks really need to read and comprehend what it is you read. stop watching CSPAN genius, and read the bill. All hundreds of pages of the bill, the actual legislation you are vastly confused about. Joe….you are a moron if you spend your time listening to those fools in Washington fighting among themselves for hours. Read the bill, then decide for yourself.
I did read and comprehend the bill just fine, you clearly are just spouting off nothing but your own PERSONAL interpretation of the bill the lady bellows post that you liked so much clearly states that U.S citizens are NOT exempt ..UNDER EXISTING LAW
e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect >existing law< or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.
You posted it yourself …
U.S citizens have been detained in the passed one even executed .That is the part people are concerned about ..I am against the patriot act and screamed just as much about that..They did not close that loophole and still leave U.S citizens vulnerable to being falsely profiled..You could be living next door to someone an be friendly with them for years then next thing you know you find out they have a connection that you had no clue about then find yourself being detained just for association…This needs to be written much more clearly to protect U.S citizens and any EXISTING LAW needs to be revised…Hopefully Fienstien will get that worked out ,but if Republicans have their way and win they will for sure abuse this loophole with the current atmosphere of hate towards opposing views…It is not good to Miss the small details..That's how we will end up losing what little civil liberties we have left…If none of the current events is showing you that we are living under extreme authoritarian rule then nothing will open your eye's..Enjoy your militarized police force I am sure they will be happy to serve you a nice dose of pepper spray for voicing your opinion if you ever happen to join in on, what they call an "unlawful" assembly…
You are right. The Patriot Act had very little opposition because it was on the heels of 911. People were nervous and thinking more about what might happen from an act of terrorism than from our own government. Now the attack is fading into a distant memory and once again folks are worrying about losing freedoms. Some of your defense of President Obama is understandable. Some is because you care about him so much that you can’t see what those who are not emotionally involved are seeing. Many people do not believe those of us who say his color has zero influence on how we rate his presidency. I agree he is a very likable person. I think two things have hurt him even with progressives, well honestly I think three have. 1. lack of experience 2. failure to be transparent as he promised 3. being associated with the Islamic religion because of his name. I am not saying all of this is his fault. It has just hurt him. George Bush had things that hurt him that he had no control over.That is just life. As an honest conservative I believe that had he followed conservative principles the economy would have recovered much more quickly and he would be in a much better position for re-election. I already know you disagree with me on that, but that is what I have seen over my lifetime. When the Congress is controlled by conservatives and spending is curtailed, the economy improves. Look at Congress, not the presidents, over time and check to see if there isn’t a pattern. Presidents get the credit or the blame for what Congress does.
I am going to answer this then I am finished, because I get no pleasure over banging my head against a cement wall. I am not here to educate you or show you how to use common sense or logic or critical thinking skills. You incorrectly assume I love POTUS Obama, I do not know him, so I do not love him. Your first mistake. I am a Black man who has dealt with racism all my life, have you? I detest oppression and racism in any form, and what I see from those who oppose this Black President is blatant racism. You dislike his policies but tell me what policies you disagree with? Show me what lack of transparency he has exhibited? His middle name?? Oh please. That in itself is racism…a name. This POTUS has accomplished more in three years, with a hostile Congress, and attacks from every quarter, than any other of the past 43 caucasian POTUS in history.
Do not ever attempt to lecture me on This POTUS, or why you racist Americans take umbrage with his Presidency. You are full of total bull shit. Name me ONE past POTUS who has had experience as a POTUS before taking the oath of office. Lack of experience my ass. Your racist attitude comes through heavily on this issue, especially since this is not about Obama but about Congress who wrote the bill we are discussing, but you have attempted to turn into a debate on POTUS Obama. As explained in my article, he could veto this bill he did not author, but the votes to over ride his veto are there, mainly because this defense bill needs to pass to fund the defense of America.
Now….we are finished Ms. Jlue….because you are a bald faced racist who is attempting to use this non veto of this bill to jump on the opposition to a magnificent President, and seeing how this is an Obamacrat blog…you are now no longer welcome to post comments, until you learn to not be a racist. Racism is a learned character trait, not one new born baby is ever birthed into this world being a racist, it is a taught character flaw, and you have it. Enjoy your holiday season Ms. Jlue.
This will probably not be posted, since I am no longer welcome, but I find your attitude mostly just sad. You are defensive when you are not being attacked and angry when someone attempts to discuss something with you. I am not lecturing you, but rather trying to shed some light on the situation we Americans find ourselves in today. You cannot even hear what is being said. I never mentioned Obama vetoing the bill. It hasn’t occurred to me that he should. I hold Congress fully responsible for this bill, the good and the bad. Wow!
Your entire belittling of this POTUS based on a lack of experience and his middle name is not something one should take exception to? I notice you dispute not the racism accusations. Welcome here is up to you, but know your comments against this President, based on the weak suggestions you offer, makes your opposition not welcome, come with some facts to back up your dislike and non support for his Presidency, not a middle name or experience.
I don’t have to “know you” personally…I love you, because of the amazing person it is obvious that you are! You continuously impress me with your thoughts,opinions, intelligence, fairness and reason! You are a great teacher…whether you accept it or not, I for one have learned a lot from you! I don’t care what any of these dipshits think….you make perfect sense, and they just don’t get it!
I love you too Ms. Buda, and it makes me so sad that these Americans don’t “get it”. I often wonder did they “get it” when George Dubbya Bush was in office? Oh well…maybe one day they will wake up and smell the caca. So good to see you here Shelli….hope you are having a great week. Hug your man for me….he’s a lucky man!
No, when we go to war, the economy improves. Sadly, This has been a tried and true strategy of our military and foreign policy. Unfortunately, our immoral wars (and Paulsen’s criminal 2.5 page memo) have nearly bankrupted us — can’t blame Obama for that, though I wish he would hold the war criminals and the banksters and wall street accountable for all the recklessness in our name, with our money. Call me cynical, but I suspect if Obama wasn’t willing to “turn the page”, he would never have been put forward as a candidate. I thought the good news of our financial crisis was that we had less $$ with which to do harm. But no, Congress just voted for another year of endless war and excessive military spending at the expense of our domestic security. Dem or Repub, too few represent the people or are doing the hard work to rebuild our country and democracy. Too many are in the pocket of corporations, ready to butter their own bread before anything.
In past wars, the U.S. economy improved because we actually manufactured things here. The need for military supplies created jobs in skilled trades. That is no longer the case. Both Presidents Bush were faced with a declining domestic economy, and they both entered wars in hopes that they would be economic heroes. Unfortunately, the bulk of our supplies are being purchased overseas. So this “tried and true strategy” is certainly helping the economy, just not OUR economy.
So Carl Levin was lying when he said this http://youtu.be/MSgZUT8X5tI – right?
Ms. Naomi….I am not interested in reading Mr. Levin….why? Because i have researched this NDAA bill seven ways from Friday night and reached the conclusion written in this article. I have reached the point of fatigue over this one issue. I have listed all the facts about this bill….facts are not debatable, but facts stand on their own merit. Interpretation can be a mutha if we allow ourselves to get mired in BS. I read this bill, and MY common sense and logic coupled with MY critical thinking is reflected in my article.
I have spent some time trying to determine if this bill will or will not allow American citizens to be detained indefinitely. It isn’t easy to determine because of the legal terms AND the many rewritings along with the length of the bill. Here is what I found that seems to make the most sense to me.
If an American citizen is arrested in the USA on a terrorist or threat to the nation charge, the laws already in place will supersede the National Defense Authorization Law. If an American citizen is arrested on foreign soil, he may be retained indefinitely. Here is the source I use and I could be wrong on this. Read it for yourself and make your own judgement.
http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/does-the-ndaa-authorize-detention-of-us-citizens/
This I do know. Americans need to stop fighting Americans. We are in this together. Democrats and Republicans alike are involved in writing many of these bills that seem to be very damaging to our country and our freedoms. One reason for this is we have full time law makers who have nothing better to do than sit around and think up new legislation. They usually have one thing in mind when they do this….”Will it help Me get re-elected and how will it affect MY financial future?” (Not yours, theirs!)
Some have a very strong political agenda but all have their own interests at heart. That is human nature. We need term limits and we MUST take our future out of the hands of career politicians!
Ms. Jlue….it is a complicated bill…bottom line for me is that the already existing Patriot Act removes many more freedoms and civil liberties than this tiny ass bill. BUT it was signed into law by George Dubbya Bush after 9/11…to very little opposition. Why??
Another take of mine. This bill has caused such turmoil. Could it be that was one of it’s intentions? With the help of misinformed/lazy media that do not bother to seek out the truth, nothing could have been more brilliantly constructed to bring down our President as we see his support dwindle for the lack of a veto. With the exception of this blog and a rare comment or two after a media article, I have not read or seen anything questioning in opposition.
Excuse my language Ms. Nancarvis….but you are absofuckinlutely correct!! This bill, has been signed into law for 48 years, by every caucasian POTUS elected. NOW, here comes a Black POTUS, attempting to do normal Presidential duties…but his duties are hijacked by caucasians who will do anything to keep him from re-election. I ask all who oppose the signing of this bill,..why do they not oppose the Patriot Act, which is more dangerous to the 10th power, and was signed into law by George Dubbya Bush, a caucasian POTUS?
And “they’ll” tell you it ain’t about race or POTUS Obama….bull shit, it is always about race, and POTUS Obama. I am so thrilled you get it Ms. Nancarvis. I love you!!!
Thank you, Jueseppi B. for the compliment.
I have read this bill and its revision and followed this media hype. Here is my take on it (as much as I can trust what I read and then research). I read the Administrations’ answer to this bill and one statement stood out. They are against the use of the military policing our streets. As I understand it..law enforcement (FBI, CIA and police) are responsible for conducting investigations, covert operations and intelligence gathering on those suspected of hostile intentions against our country. If that person is arrested under military law they “may” be detained without trial until the end of hostilities, “may” have a trial, and/or “may” be transferred to the country of his origin. (Just as an aside. Congress not only does not fund this transfer but specifically states no appropriation of money funded to the Defense Department can be used for this purpose). Sec 1031 affirms the power of the Armed Forces and the President to detain “covered” persons who is captured in the course of hostilities. Sec 1031(e) states “nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing laws or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens, legal resident aliens or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States. My deduction: they are under civil law with due process protected by the Constitution. Section 1032 REQUIREMENT FOR MILITARY CUSTODY (b) the requirement to detain a person under military custody does not extend to citizens of the United States. Although, I have not completed my research for the truth, so far my deduction is the waiver under the authority of the president (if used) would bring the detainee to the United States under civil law protecting his rights to due process and other protections under the Constitution. This was the language that was changed that eliminated the Presidents threat of a veto.
Personally I’m appalled by this bill as I see that, no person(s) should be able to be held indefinitely without trial. I personally don’t believe in the wars that we’re starting, I don’t believe we’re being led into the right direction and I think revolution will come if this continues.
Government is already trying to remove police and occupy videos from Youtube and seeing as Google refused to take it down, the SOPA bill would enable them to do just that. To restrict our methods of communication.
I really hope he’s removed from office -_-
This is an ObamaCrat web site/blog, so your comments are not going to stay. I am the author and I am disgusted by your last comment. But before I remove your stupid opinion that you “really hope he is removed from office”…explain why you hope such a dumb ass thing? I could give you over 250 accomplishments including an executive order made today, a way around Congress, that helps home health care workers get higher wages and overtime…and this man you want out of office….
The only fundamental problem I see with your hypothesis is this. It claims that no challenge will stand up in court; which presumes the challenge will make it to court. Indefinite detention means no judge required.
I guess the best thing to do is be sure you are not a terrorist, or a drug dealer, or a pedophile, or a murderer, and you won’t have to deal with the law. That is the short answer, the long answer is this bill is child’s play compared to the Patriot Act, which has been a law since 9/11, and i see no concern about that anymore. Everything in this NDAA bill is in the Patriot Act, only more so….it’s really a non issue put into the NDAA bill to cause POTUS Obama some grief.
Or worse, innocent of any of those things but somehow askance of the law and those in power. Your last response just disproved your entire hypothesis. The claim “don’t be criminal and you won’t have any problems” defies your entire thesis.
Are you a moron Akconstant? Thesis? Does this look like a college campus? A thesis is a document submitted in support of candidature for an academic degree or professional qualification presenting the author’s research and findings. This is an article written by me, to show morons like you, that this bill does mot threaten your civil liberties, or freedoms, in any way that the Patriot Act of 9/11 fame, is not already usurping. Understand? Where are all the intelligent people who read this article and understand what it pertains to? It is NOT about POTUS Obama, or anything BUT the NDAA bill he will sign into law sometime this week….man is it this hard to have smart people read an article? And I stand by my statement, if you are not a terrorist and not engaged in terrorist activities….what are you concerned about exactly? especially since this same exact shit is contained in the ALREADY LAW Patriot Act??
If you indeed have a PhD…you got it online you stupid example of a no brain American. I am certain you are used to being talked to that way Mr, Coon…you are after all very unintelligent.
I talk to all asshole in the same manner….you Mr. Coon….should be very used to that.
Jueseppi – Jlue asked if the clause “AUTHORITIES.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities, relating to
the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident
aliens of the United States or any other persons who are
captured or arrested in the United States” was removed? You answered “the bill was revised”, and although you did suggest that
“most need to read the entire bill before going nutz”, would you delight me with a yes or no answer? You know a lot more than I do about this bill and I thank you for this post, I have been trying to get the facts on this for a couple of weeks now.
What it means is the U.S. Constitution’s 5th amendment supersedes this NDAA law, and the 5th amendment prevents unlawful search and seizure and detaining of Americans. The bill and the Patriot Act are designed to assist government agencies in the war on terror…it is not about law abiding American citizens….the word citizens is important in that the terrorist responsible for 9/11 were NOT American citizens….9/11 changed more than just airport security.
People like Mr. Coon, who have no grasp of government or how it works, and threaten POTUS Obama with losing their votes if he signs this bill, are complete fools. This man has balls Mr. Coon would kill for, and has no idea how to be a President of the most powerful nation on the planet. The fact is this bill’s guts are not connected to the detaining citizens garbage. The Patriot Act is something that removes American civil liberties and freedoms in the name of fighting terrorism…not this NDAA.
Mr. Coon must be heavily involved in illegal activities.
I guess my confusion stems from the fact that these provisions are unconstitutional and susceptible to many interpretations. There are plenty of criminal statutes on the books to cover any crime a terrorist commits. Why not just try, convict, and imprison these “terrorists” according to our legal code as it is now? This decree is unnecessary.
For that answer you will have to consult someone in government directly connected to this bill. The bill originally started out as a plain old Defense Act that has been signed the past 48 years. The TeaPubliCANTS attached garbage to the bill.
Thanks for writing about this.. There is so much hysteria about this bill, and most of it is unfounded. Yes, it is confusing, but it clearly talks about “covered people” as: “(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person
13 who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.”
No, there is no way that the military could put and OWS supporter in one of those buckets and have it stand up in court.
And there is no law that has been passed in this history of this country that can “outlaw the Constitution” as some claim. The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Many provisions of the Patriot Act have been tossed out by various courts over the years.
But this is why I’m much more concerned about the Repubs gaining the Presidency in 2012 than the NDAA. The longest lasting legacy of any President is his Supreme Court appointees, and we may have three new Supreme Court appointees in the next five years. I have yet to hear any complaints from progressives/liberals/Dems on Obama’s two Supreme Court appointees.
Ms. Molly…I think I love you!!! You get it….now, can we fix America so they get it too?
I added your comment into the body of my article….it was that good.
Hello, I have been out of commission for a week due to my Mother’s hospitalization, however, is it possible that the clause in the bill to which you refer was removed?
I do not know for sure, just asking because of something I read on another site.
Jlue
Ms. Jlue,
I hope your mother is recovering from her hospital visit. The bill was revised, which is why most need to read the entire bill before going nutz.