• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provisions...

Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Its very simply: the government does not have the power nor authority to arrest American citizens or legal aliens (tourists, Green card holders, Permanent Residents, students) in the USA, and hold them indefinitely without charge/trial. 2012's NDAA does not change this, and only an Amendment to the Constitution can change this, as it violates the Bill of Rights.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Do you have a hard news source? Right wing blogs are about as reliable on Obama as Al Jazeera is on Israel...

How about a lefty site?

Daily Kos: Cenk ON FIRE Over Obama Pushing for Military Detention of Americans. "Can't Vote for Him!"!

Why the hell did Obama push for indefinite detention of US citizens?

This is what Obama had to say:

Obama has said many things he never backed up.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Its very simply: the government does not have the power nor authority to arrest American citizens or legal aliens (tourists, Green card holders, Permanent Residents, students) in the USA, and hold them indefinitely without charge/trial. 2012's NDAA does not change this, and only an Amendment to the Constitution can change this, as it violates the Bill of Rights.

I think you're wrong about that, but it doesn't matter as the bill is wrong even if it didn't include citizens. It was wrong for Bush, and it is wrong for Obama. And I agree it violates Constitution.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Its very simply: the government does not have the power nor authority to arrest American citizens or legal aliens (tourists, Green card holders, Permanent Residents, students) in the USA, and hold them indefinitely without charge/trial. 2012's NDAA does not change this, and only an Amendment to the Constitution can change this, as it violates the Bill of Rights.

Most of us agree that they do not have the right. The problem is, it would seem this doesn't bother them any more than it did when they targeted an American citizen for death without due process.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

The bill still allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens on the President's whim.

I don't see proof of that in the quotes you posted. Where is it? I'd like to see the actual language of the law.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Its very simply: the government does not have the power nor authority to arrest American citizens or legal aliens (tourists, Green card holders, Permanent Residents, students) in the USA, and hold them indefinitely without charge/trial. 2012's NDAA does not change this, and only an Amendment to the Constitution can change this, as it violates the Bill of Rights.

Well, it pretty much doesn't have the power to arrest anyone and hold them without charge or trial.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

I don't see proof of that in the quotes you posted. Where is it? I'd like to see the actual language of the law.

Look at the links that were posted.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Look at the links that were posted.

I did. I don't see it. I see one blog saying it's true, but no actual language from the bill itself.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Sure, that's a possibility. But if the risk is a Santorum presidency, I'm not prepared to take that risk. And I haven't seen much from the thrid parties to inspire me.

No offense, but its pretty ignorant to think that Santorum even has a .000000000000000000001% chance of being the Republican presidential nominee much less becoming President.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

I did. I don't see it. I see one blog saying it's true, but no actual language from the bill itself.

The bill itself affirms states the following:


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.​
(From Section 1022, sub-section D)

It doesn't say that indefinite detention itself is allowed in the bill, however, because it doesn't effect existing law, the President can still detain US citizens under the Patriot Act and the 2006 Military Commissions Act.
 
Last edited:
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

The bill itself affirms states the following:


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.​
(From Section 1022, sub-section D)

It doesn't say that indefinite detention itself is allowed in the bill, however, because it doesn't effect existing law, the President can still detain US citizens under the Patriot Act and the 2006 Military Commissions Act.

Then how does this bill expand any power whatsoever?
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

No offense, but its pretty ignorant to think that Santorum even has a .000000000000000000001% chance of being the Republican presidential nominee much less becoming President.

I give him only as an example. Newt wouldn't be much better. Perry just as bad. Romney not so much. Paul better yet.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

Then how does this bill expand any power whatsoever?

It doesn't. Rather it solidifies and codifies those powers into law.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

It doesn't. Rather it solidifies and codifies those powers into law.

How does it do that exactly? Ithought the power already came from a law (the PATRIOT Act) as you stated.

Does it do so for U.S. citizens or on U.S. soil, given the language from the bill you cited? Or are you concerned about it for everyone, not just Americans?

These are all honest questions, not challenges.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

How does it do that exactly? Ithought the power already came from a law (the PATRIOT Act) as you stated.

Does it do so for U.S. citizens or on U.S. soil, given the language from the bill you cited? Or are you concerned about it for everyone, not just Americans?

These are all honest questions, not challenges.

do you honestly believe that the DOD and FBI is going to start arresting Tea Baggers & OccuTards, and holding them forever without charge or trial?

give me a break. This new NDAA (there is one every year), seems to have turned Chicken-Little into a national icon.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

do you honestly believe that the DOD and FBI is going to start arresting Tea Baggers & OccuTards, and holding them forever without charge or trial?

give me a break. This new NDAA (there is one every year), seems to have turned Chicken-Little into a national icon.

The GOP pre-arrested people before the last convention they had during the last presidential election cycle. Is it really unheard of? Oversight into the use of the Patriot Act by the FBI turned up a significant number of instances where the power was abused. You say the government is going to reverse its direction and not abuse new laws? How would you even hear if someone is detained indefinitely?
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

The GOP pre-arrested people before the last convention they had during the last presidential election cycle. Is it really unheard of? Oversight into the use of the Patriot Act by the FBI turned up a significant number of instances where the power was abused. You say the government is going to reverse its direction and not abuse new laws? How would you even hear if someone is detained indefinitely?

I didn't know the "GOP" could arrest people.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

do you honestly believe that the DOD and FBI is going to start arresting Tea Baggers & OccuTards, and holding them forever without charge or trial?

give me a break. This new NDAA (there is one every year), seems to have turned Chicken-Little into a national icon.

I didn't ask you, and I'm not really interested in what you have to say about it anyway.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

I didn't ask you, and I'm not really interested in what you have to say about it anyway.

I have the right to ask questions & shall continue to ask questions, whether you approve or not. :)
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

The GOP pre-arrested people before the last convention they had during the last presidential election cycle. Is it really unheard of? Oversight into the use of the Patriot Act by the FBI turned up a significant number of instances where the power was abused. You say the government is going to reverse its direction and not abuse new laws? How would you even hear if someone is detained indefinitely?

The Republican Party has no police powers.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

The Republican Party has no police powers.

I believe he has this confused with where they forced protestors into "approved" protest areas. Both parties have done this and both need kicked in the nuts for doing so.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

And that it will. There is your hope and change, Democrats, shredding the Constitution of the United States, right where the Bush administration left off. And if that isn't enough, there is yet another piece of hypocrisy embedded in this law...... Obama added a signing statement, saying that his administration will interpret the new law in such a way that American citizens would not be detained without due process guaranteed by the Constitution. I have a LOT of problems with this signing statement:

1) First of all, and most obvious, Obama blasted Bush for using signing statements, and now here he is, using one.

2) An Obama signing statement doesn't mean a thing, once Obama leaves office. A different president could negate it in a New York minute.

3) Just because Democrats in Congress didn't have the backbone to challenge Bush on his signing statements doesn't mean that Congressional Republicans won't have the backbone too. On this, though, I must admit that Republicans will go along with the status quo, but their hatred of Obama does make this option pretty tempting. On that, I am rooting for the Republicans, should they decide to take this road.

Here is the deal, folks. The Obama administration has let loose upon the land a law that is just as Odious as the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were signed into law by John Adams. The law is unconstitutional. Period. But where is the Democratic outcry in Congress..... You know, the kind of outcry we heard almost every day during Bush's reign? I only hear Democratic hypocrisy, cloaked in silence.

Have we now entered the age of the twilight's last gleaming? It depends on the American people. If we are content to replace our interest in the political process with interest in Dancing with the Stars, Justin Bieber, and the rest of the garbage that passes for information these days, then we will get exactly the kind of Government we deserve. And Big Brother will be eternally grateful. Say goodbye to America, folks.

Finally, if a case is ever to be made for a third party, this is it, just as long as they don't sell America down the river too.

Article is here.

I don't know if this has been brought up elsewhere in the thread, but the Obama administration isn't the only one who needs to be slammed - the Democrats and Republicans in the Senate and the House who wrote this legislation needs to be kicked out.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

I believe he has this confused with where they forced protestors into "approved" protest areas. Both parties have done this and both need kicked in the nuts for doing so.

these protest areas are for security purposes. in places like NYC, you need a balance between freedom & safety.

sorry if folks don't like it, but we in NYC think it makes sense.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

No matter how many times it has been posted, it is inconclusive and based upon a somewhat nonspecific verbal claim made by one man (Sen. Levin), which is contradicted by Obama's signing statement. He said, she said.

Furthermore, your own source contradicts Levin's claim:

[John] Wood [of Change.org] also notes that the Obama administration never explicitly took issue with 1031, only Section 1032, which is “unrelated” to the indefinite detention provision.
 
Re: ACLU, Others Slam Obama for Signing Defense Bill That Includes Detainee Provision

[...] The bill still allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens on the President's whim.
I don't see proof of that in the quotes you posted. Where is it? I'd like to see the actual language of the law.
Well, you're being treated to some semantic shiftiness.... the following statement is also true:


The bill allows for the indefinite confiscation of chocolate ice cream on the President's whim.


;)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom