Reply With Quote
This sucks. I do not suppor this at all.
Repukes - Patriot Act is necessary, NDAA 1031 is Marxist!
This sucks. I do not suppor this at all.
Well Ron Paul wanted to get rid of this but since he won't get in office let's all move to Canada YEAH.
Fake.....I've already proven this this was another 'creative editing' job by hack wingnuts in another thread..
Unfortunately (and perhaps unsurprisingly), it passed with 93% support in the Senate and 86% support in the House. So vetoing it would merely be symbolic. It would also leave the military unfunded and troops unpaid at least temporarily until Congress overrides the veto.
I believe that would be worth it if it meant keeping that uncons utional and un-American amendment out of the NDAA if the veto actually mattered. It didn't though. Instead, it would be political suicide, giving "proof" to the nutbag right and uninformed middle that Obama simply doesn't care about our military or troops, leaving him vulnerable in 2012 and basically giving the White House, and thus a nutbag judiciary that would uphold that provision, and making the indefinite detention of Americans more likely.
Obama made the smart decision signing it here, giving us at least a year, hopefully five, to pressure Congress to get this provision out of next year's NDAA (if there's no funding for it, it won't happen.)
To many so-called 'independents' are getting caught in the wing-nut spin over NDAA
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobile...n_1177836.html"My administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens," Obama said in the signing statement. "Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a nation.
This ugly bill has to be authorized every year...lets hope that people lean on their representatives to not authorize this provision of the bill next year...
Propaganda Dan...
Spewing other people's lies again.
Tell me this is creatively edited:
C-Span Video Archives: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Which thread was that anyway?
Isn't Obama a lawyer? How can he honestly think this is legal and ethical?
Do you really believe the words of Obama?
Who's the wing nut?
Just makes you wonder when the Radical Left starts to water-board American Citizens for being Pro Life…
sign on, NDAA reversal bill pertaining to indefinite detention:
http://act.demandprogress.org/act/nd...&source=typ-tw
sign on, NDAA reversal bill pertaining to indefinite detention:
http://act.demandprogress.org/act/nd...&source=typ-tw
you first
wishful thinking, tbh.
I'd like to see the source on your suggestion that the detention provision will lapse automatically...
Why sign it if he's never going to use it?
your a wing-nut idiot...here is what Carl Levin, the speaker in your video is saying about NDAA and Obama today...
Sen. Levin Statement on Passage of Defense Authorization Bill
Thursday, December 15, 2011
http://levin.senate.gov/newsroom/pre...orization-billWASHINGTON – Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, D-Mich., today hailed Senate passage of the National Defense Authorization Act for the 2012 fiscal year. The Senate approved the bill by a vote 86-13, and the president has announced that he will sign the bill into law.
“The enactment of this conference report will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform,” Levin said. “It will give them the tools that they need to remain the most effective fighting force in the world. Most important of all, it will send an important message that we, as a nation, stand behind them and deeply appreciate their service.
Levin continued: “Probably the most discussed provision in the conference report is the provision relative to military detention for foreign al Qaeda terrorists. This provision has been written to be doubly sure that there is no interference with civilian interrogations and other law enforcement activities and to ensure that the President has the flexibility he needs to use the most appropriate tools in each case. Those who say that we have written into law a new authority to detain American citizens until the end of hostilities are wrong. Neither the Senate bill nor the conference report establishes new authority to detain American citizens – or anybody else.
“The bill includes important new sanctions against the financial sector of Iran, including the Central Bank of Iran, that will increase pressure on Iran to end its pursuit of nuclear weapons. It includes provisions addressing the problem of counterfeit parts that can undermine the performance of military weapon systems and endanger our men and women in uniform. And it extends the Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) program for an additional six years, continuing a program vital to our small businesses and to national security.”
Like i said, creative editing...
the NDAA does not give the President any new authority to detain American citizens..he's had that all along.....that's how..
Never said it would lapse automatically, just that it would have to be authorized again next year...
Politics....the GOP was going to use this as a political weapon to support the wing-nut talking point that Obama does not support the troops...without an emergency bill from Congress, troops could have gone without pay for weeks...
Plus, Congress had a veto proof majority....so what's the point...
Exposed: A Spammer Fooled MSM & America with Edited NDAA Video
December 20, 2011
By Sarah Jones
http://www.politicususa.com/en/edited-ndaa-videoIt turns out that the edited NDAA video of Carl Levin that was inaccurately cited in the mainstream media as proof that Obama wanted to detain US citizens was originally posted by a spammer. As we know, the President did not ask for language giving him the right to detain US citizens, he asked for the opposite. But that story wouldn’t get very many clicks for a spammer…..
Thanks to the hard work of several writers, we now know the truth behind the tin foil hat insanity trip of the edited Levin NDAA video that went viral. Congratulations, mainstream media – you got PWNED by a spammer.
Matt Osborne of Osborne Ink uncovered that spammers were behind the edited video:
Just last week, “Bon Jovi is dead!” was making the rounds. The spammer’s edited Levin video is on par with that hoax, only it also served the confirmation bias of certain political agendas and hence was used in order to deliberately stoke fires and incite rage.
Alright now I'm just ing confused...is this real life...
Ask those who think that the NDAA gives Obama new provisions to arrest American citizens to show you the proof.....10-1 they can't.....they are just spewing talking points....lies...Alright now I'm just ing confused...is this real life...
How America And The Mainstream Media Got Breitbarted On NDAA
How America And The Mainstream Media Got Breitbarted On NDAA
December 18, 2011
By Jason Easley and Sarah Jones
100digg
Share3047
73
http://www.politicususa.com/en/ndaa-breitbartedAn edited video of Carl Levin claiming that Obama wanted the language in the NDAA caused outrage among many Americans, but the full Levin video reveals the opposite.
The YouTube video claimed to be proof that Obama is going to sign a citizen imprisonment law:
However, in the first 30 minutes of the debate Sen. Levin stated that the NDAA provisions do not apply to US citizens:
Hours prior to the YouTube proof video Sen. Levin stated on the Senate floor that the Obama administration requested that the provision be changed so that it does not apply to American citizens, but he explained the provision wasn’t changed because it already didn’t apply to American citizens, “The administration officials reviewed the draft language for this provision the day before our markup and recommended additional changes. We were able to accommodate those recommendations, except for the administration request that the provision apply only to detainees who are captured overseas. There is a good reason for that. But even here, the difference is relatively modest, because the provision already excludes all U.S. citizens. It also excludes all lawful residents of the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Cons ution. The only covered persons left are those who are illegally in this country or who arrive as tourists or on some other short-term basis, and that is a small remaining category, but an important one, because it includes the terrorists who clandestinely arrive in the United States with the objective of attacking military or other targets here.”
Artful phrasing, more like.
It's not been argued that the NDAA creates any new authority. Indeed, the gist of the complaint against it is that it authorizes certain practices undertaken by Mr. Obama's predecessor, but not blessed by law since the MCA of 2006 was overturned (in part) in Hamdan.
Levin tackles a scarecrow and you try to prop yourself up on it.
Last edited by Winehole23; 01-05-2012 at 03:36 AM.
btw, Levin's interpretation of the law doesn't mean . I don't care what he said on the Senate floor. The president's interpretation is the only one that matters functionally until the Supreme Court intervenes.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
