Why Obama Will Not Veto NDAA Military Detention of Americans: He Requested It.

Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) on Senate floor explaining it was Obama who requested the provision for indefinite military detention of American citizens without charge or trial. Senator Diane Feinstein recently confirmed that she was unable to excise Section 1031 in an email:

thedailykos.com[/ url]

Senator Feinsten Confirms President and Military Can Detain US Citizens Without a Trial
From:
Date: Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:05 PM
Subject: U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein responding to your message

Dear Mr. and Mrs. ___:

Thank you for writing to express your concerns about the detention provisions in the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.” I appreciate knowing your views and welcome the opportunity to respond.

This year’s defense authorization bill would, among other things, authorize funding for the U.S. Department of Defense. As you know, section 1031 would authorize the U.S. government to detain suspected terrorists until the end of hostilities, and section 1032 would require that certain suspected terrorists connected to al-Qaeda be automatically detained in military custody when apprehended.

Like you, I oppose these provisions. Section 1031 is problematic because it authorizes the indefinite detention of American citizens without due process. In this democracy, due process is a fundamental right, and it protects us from being locked up by the government without charge. For this reason, I offered an amendment to prohibit the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens without trial or charge. Unfortunately, on December 1, 2011, this amendment failed by a vote of 45-55.

I was, however, able to reach a compromise with the authors of the defense bill to state that no existing law or authorities to detain suspected terrorists are changed by this section of the bill. While I would have preferred to have restricted the government’s ability to detain U.S. citizens without charge, this compromise at least ensures that the bill does not expand the government’s authority in this area.

I also oppose section 1032 of the defense bill, which creates a presumption that individuals associated with al-Qaeda will be held in military custody, as opposed to being processed through the criminal justice system. I disagree with this approach, and believe that the President should be able to hold captured terrorists in the military or the criminal justice systems based on the individual facts and evidence of each case. Accordingly, I offered an amendment to clarify that under section 1032, the presumption of U.S. Armed Forces detention only exists for an individual captured abroad. Unfortunately, on December 1, 2011, this amendment also failed on a vote of 45-55.

Once again, thank you for your letter. Please know that I am committed to ensuring that our nation has the appropriate tools to combat terrorism, and committed to upholding our fundamental constitutional rights. If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841. I hope that you and your family enjoy a happy and healthy holiday season.
May I wish you and your family a happy and healthy holiday season.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

[url=http://www.unions.org/home/union-blog/2011/12/06/senator-feinsten-confirms-president-and-military-can-detain-us-citizens-without-a-trial/]unions. org

There's some videos on the dailykos page that are worth a watch IMO. I really have no words except please do everything you can to fight this.

*edit: not sure what's up with links and text, sorry.

We should have known, its like "oh yeah ill Veto it" then it gets passed and nothing.. sounds like he just wanted to give a little hope in order to keep the majority of America quite until it was passed. Wow, what a great straight forward president.

reply to post by Kali74


Well, its nice to know that there is such bursting interest in this thread!!!


Typical...Americans are going to watch it all burn before their very eyes...Even worse, they're about to make the same silly mistake that they did in 2008. They'll either re-elect the idiot, or they'll grip to Ron Paul who is nothing more than a "bait and switch" candidate. For those who are sick with Obama's garbage, they'll just pull another politician with a "consistent record of voting," to make Americans think that a "Revolution," will occur, and the masses will LAP it up as usual. What's funny to me is, every single election period, Americans' memories seem to be completely wiped, and they simply forget THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY.

Anyway...

Research the Geneva Convention, and you'll see how it benefits them to veto it...

Originally posted by Destiny777
reply to post by Kali74

 

Well, its nice to know that there is such bursting interest in this thread!!!

Typical...Americans are going to watch it all burn before their very eyes...

Understood...

ok. i am tired of all this back and forth about this.

can they detain us or not? i guess there is still no "official" word on this?

Originally posted by ICEKOHLD
ok. i am tired of all this back and forth about this.

can they detain us or not? i guess there is still no "official" word on this?

They sure as hell ain't detaining me.

In my view, this Section 1031 which authorizes the indefinite detention of American citizens
is pure arbitrariness.
They (TPTB), can do whatever they want with the people.
This is unbelievable.

Originally posted by satron

Originally posted by ICEKOHLD
ok. i am tired of all this back and forth about this.

can they detain us or not? i guess there is still no "official" word on this?

They sure as hell ain't detaining me.

I agree, Keep your powder dry


EDITED to add this is bunch loony freakin idiots holly geebus in the end their will be nothing this bunch cant do

reply to post by Kali74


It doesn't matter. To quote MegaMind recently, the provision for indefinite military detention of American citizens is defined in the wording as a REQUIREMENT. Therefore existence of the words "not extended to Americans" in the bill says it's not required, but also not RESTRICTED either..

The Martial Law Act of 2006

Martial law is perhaps the ultimate stomping of freedom. And yet, on September 30, 2006, Congress passed a provision in a 591-page bill that will make it easy for President Bush to impose martial law in response to a terrorist “incident.” It also empowers him to effectively declare martial law in response to what he or other federal officials label a shortfall of “public order” — whatever that means.

The Martial Law Act of 2006

read the whole article.

it refers to old laws also.

has this ever been repealed or changed ?

It took only a few paragraphs in a $500 billion, 591-page bill to raze one of the most important limits on federal power. Congress passed the Insurrection Act in 1807 to severely restrict the president’s ability to deploy the military within the United States. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 tightened those restrictions, imposing a two-year prison sentence on anyone who used the military within the United States without the express permission of Congress. (This act was passed after the depredations of the U.S. military throughout the Southern states during Reconstruction.)

But there is a loophole: Posse Comitatus is waived if the president invokes the Insurrection Act.

The Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus Act aim to deter dictatorship while permitting a narrow window for the president to temporarily use the military at home. But the 2006 reforms basically threw any concern about dictatorial abuses out the window.

Is this related to the S1867 ?

any differences ?

I read over the document and I still dont see anything relating to detention of americans. Just because it DOES NOT say "Excluding Americans" does not mean it includes americans. It's worded quite plainly... It's for terrorists WHO ARE NOT Americans. We fall under a totaly diffrent law, the constitution. Even if related to terrorist, as americans, we would be tried... AS AMERICANS.

Unless I see otherwise, or some clue of any american being detained under anything like this, for there would be way too many lawyers jumping on every chance to battle this should an american be detained under this law, i'm calling it fear mongering by either side. I dont remember ever reading a bill or a law where either side represented the actual law correctly. Both sides have always put their own spin on things.

Hasnt anyone figured it out by now? Doesnt matter what side you follow... A politician is a politician... Most importantly... An elected polititian is one hell of a great lier to be where he/she is today. I cant count on both hands, the names of any polititians that got where there were by being honest and telling the truth without some kind of spin on it.

Well, its nice to know that there is such bursting interest in this thread!!! Typical...Americans are going to watch it all burn before their very eyes...Even worse, they're about to make the same silly mistake that they did in 2008. They'll either re-elect the idiot, or they'll grip to Ron Paul who is nothing more than a "bait and switch" candidate. For those who are sick with Obama's garbage, they'll just pull another politician with a "consistent record of voting," to make Americans think that a "Revolution," will occur, and the masses will LAP it up as usual. What's funny to me is, every single election period, Americans' memories seem to be completely wiped, and they simply forget THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY. Anyway...

reply to post by Destiny777


Yeah I know its just embarrassing isn't it? The majority will prob elect another dumbass official which they can call a leader. If you are wrong about Ron Paul and he is the best choice for the country and lets say he does back up all the claims he make; then it won't be long before he is silenced for the greater good of special interest. Its all a big hoax on the people, not to say that something couldn't change this country, just saying its highly unlikely. The elites have alot of research and money into this not to mention the overall time and experience. Sad, sad, sad.

They don't need NDAA to detain you, just to lengthen the time of your dentention.

The PATRIOT act gives them all the power that anyone needs to detain ANY US citizen without reason. It also gives any agent of the Government the power to search your home, without good cause, without you knowing, or even being home, and without a warrant.

All they have to say is that you're suspected of terrorist activities, and hazzah, they have the green light to do what they like.

USA - Land of The Free.

sounds like with everything going on and all the inquiries

Can we say "Imposed Dictatorship"

Looks to me like they are getting everything they need to facilitate this.........

Originally posted by Destiny777
reply to post by Kali74

 

Well, its nice to know that there is such bursting interest in this thread!!!

Typical...Americans are going to watch it all burn before their very eyes...Even worse, they're about to make the same silly mistake that they did in 2008. They'll either re-elect the idiot, or they'll grip to Ron Paul who is nothing more than a "bait and switch" candidate. For those who are sick with Obama's garbage, they'll just pull another politician with a "consistent record of voting," to make Americans think that a "Revolution," will occur, and the masses will LAP it up as usual. What's funny to me is, every single election period, Americans' memories seem to be completely wiped, and they simply forget THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THIS COUNTRY.

Anyway...

edit on 9-12-2011 by Destiny777 because: to add

Why should this be any different than the insane health care bill? We told Congress what we thought about it. Unfortunatley half of Congress didn't care.


A million people converging in DC did not stop it and so what do you think will happen when a million people opposed this bill?

reply to post by theRhenn


This is one of those rare moments when activists on both the left and the right oppose some Draconian legislation. If OWS wants to protest this I might join them for a day.

Originally posted by ICEKOHLD
ok. i am tired of all this back and forth about this.

can they detain us or not? i guess there is still no "official" word on this?

Well, I am at present taking Judge Napolitano's word for it.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


They did yesterday, in front of the White House.

I have officially lost all hope in the American government. We're doomed.