It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Waives Indefinite Detention for U.S. citizens from NDAA

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
All the hysteria
All the madness
All the hype
All for not

As you can see Obama signed a PPD waiving U.S. citizens from indefinite detention.

www.whitehouse.gov...

B. Covered Persons. For purposes of this Directive, the phrase "Covered Person" applies only to a person who is not a citizen of the United States and:

Don't even try to spin this. Section B above is the law -----


edit on 2-5-2012 by CigaretteMan because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   
So how does this make holding people with out trial till the end of time okay?

Citizen or not.



We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed


Unalienable rights, as in all men women and children are born with them...

NDAA is against the very spirit of America.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
That doesn't mean the next President won't use it.
Obama's not opening that door (yet), but he's not locking it back up, either.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Obama said he didn't agree with everything in the bill but he was going to sign it anyways, which he did.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by subject x
 


It means that he removed it from the NDAA>

Bye the way for Republicons that dont understand what NDAA stands for.

NDAA bills are signed every year.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Obama kept his promise by waiving the "Indefinite Detention" section from the bill

He had 60 days to waive parts of the bill he wanted removed.

He waived the controversial part all of you folks are whining about.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 


He shouldn't have to waive #, there shouldn't be laws on the books allowing for it in the first place, it should never of come up.

And he should of veto it.

This does not make any of it okay...



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by CALGARIAN
Obama said he didn't agree with everything in the bill but he was going to sign it anyways, which he did.


How does that justify anything?
If one doesn't agree with EVERYTHING in a bill, one does NOT sign it.

Its a pretty simple concept.
Rewrite the damn thing.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by CigaretteMan
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 


Obama kept his promise by waiving the "Indefinite Detention" section from the bill

He had 60 days to waive parts of the bill he wanted removed.

He waived the controversial part all of you folks are whining about.


Oh boy oh boy
Why was it there to begin with.
Nothing but a re-election ploy.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   
Delete
edit on 2-5-2012 by mytheroy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
Actually Obama promised to veto the whole bill, not just part of it.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by CigaretteMan
 


That Presidential directive can disappear at the wave of an autopen. This should never have been put into law.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 





And he should of veto it.


The only thing Obama wants to Veto is the extension of student loans...Out of all things Obama wants to veto something that he used to get through college...



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:03 PM
link   
I'll bite.


So, what makes a PPD binding on the next President? Just because President Obama puts out this 'policy,' what is to say the next President will not write a new PPD countering this one.

M.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
One this is not breaking.
Two all he says essentially is that HIS administration will never use it. It's on the table after he's out of office.
How bout you don't spin it.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I would not be satisfied unless Sections 1021 and 1022 (to my knowledge the sections dealing with indefinite detention) of the NDAA were repealed. Many don't know that there's a bill sitting in Congress RIGHT NOW--H.R. 3166, the Enemy Expatriation Act, which if passed could be utilized to 'get around that pesky U.S. citizen' clause...

digitaljournal.com...
edit on 2-5-2012 by Habit4ming because: Forgot link



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Ah, it was an agenda point then.

Figures. Re election year let's stir up some madness, let the people speak then remove the controversial part.

Point being he said he'd never sign the whole thing. He did. He's just using it for advantage.
What did we expect? Let's see if he will do this with CISPA. HAH!

Well, if he's not in office next year Romney can change it.



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 


for all the conspiracies here why not take it a step further and say like an event like the tv show "event" happened. would it be right to detain a hostile alien even if they were from another planet but looked human within america. im sure if some of the things people say are true and the government does now about side civilizations or extra terrestrial civilizations that if one was on american territory would they now have the authority vested by legal precedent to detain indefinitely?



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Kali74
 





Two all he says essentially is that HIS administration will never use it. It's on the table after he's out of office. How bout you don't spin it.


All the more reason to vote for Mittens!

I'm sure he will completely repeal all of it!



posted on May, 2 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MiddleClassWarrior
 


No thanks!
They're all psychopaths...



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join