Happy New Year: Obama Signs NDAA, Indefinite Detention Now Law of the Land

[Gotholic]

Happy New Year: Obama Signs NDAA, Indefinite Detention Now Law of the Land

President signs authorization to indefinitely detain, torture and deny trial to Americans; grants power to all future presidents.

Aaron Dykes & Alex Jones
Infowars.com
January 1, 2012

Indeed it is a new day. Ushering in the New Year, President Obama signed legislation that helps to further destroy the principles the nation was founded upon.

President Obama, who pledged to veto the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), has now signed it. Of course, his promise was only for public consumption. After all, lying to your enemy is what invading corporate takeover armies do. It was the Obama administration all along that demanded the indefinite detention provisions be added while at the same time telling the American people he was fighting to protect their rights. This is treason on parade, in your face all out despotism– that is, for those paying any attention!

In this video is Alex Jones’ reaction to the bill and Obama’s accompanying signing statement: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdxXhn3We7U

As the Associated Press reports, the President signed the bill on Saturday “despite having ‘serious reservations’ about provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”

However, those reservations have nothing to do with the rights of the people under the Constitution and Bill of Rights that he swore to protect– rather, his reservations dealt with changes that “challenged the president’s terrorism-fighting ability.” He reportedly accepted the legislation only after such impedance was removed.

Instead, it was a deceptive maneuver to appear wary of such powers when the White House demanded it all along. In fact, Obama’s veto threat was always about that issue– the language over Section 1022 and NOT the authorization for the indefinite detention of Americans in Section 1021. Rather, it was a debate over “requiring” military protocol on detention rather than leaving the discretion over whether to detain to the executive branch, under the power of the Presidency.

Yesterday, with a friendly note, Obama issued a signing statement that read:

“Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded.”​

Despite positioning himself in the signing statement as cautious towards the rights of the individuals in the nation, the President has just signed into law a provision that threatens the right of every American to due process, and a public trial with a jury. Instead, he has handed over grotesque authority to himself and EVERY President that comes after him, whatever their intentions might be.

Obama’s signing statement later states:

Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation.​

Even if Obama’s stated intention here is true, it is no guarantee of the attitudes and interpretations of future presidents, or of the intent of their power advisors, many of whom operate the national security shadow network. Instead, it is yet another Constitution-destroying, power-grabbing so-called law.

The ACLU, too, warns about this deception:

President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law today. The statute contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision. While President Obama issued a signing statement saying he had “serious reservations” about the provisions, the statement only applies to how his administration would use the authorities granted by the NDAA, and would not affect how the law is interpreted by subsequent administrations.

[...] ACLU executive director Anthony D. Romero stated: “The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”​

Obviously, this is a dangerous precedent and a dark day for America.

Source

Obama’s Signing Statement on NDAA: I have the power to detain Americans… but I won’t

Aaron Dykes
Infowars.com
January 1, 2012

As Americans look upon the treacherous legislation passed under NDAA 2012, it it should first be remembered that the very bill President Obama threatened to veto was controversial due to the language the Obama White House itself pressured Congress to add to the bill, according to Sen. Carl Levin.

Second, signing statements are not law, and are not a Constitutional power granted to the executive branch; any reassuring (or troubling) language within has no binding status– though it may shed light on the intent/character of the chief executive. However, the statement itself does not indicate any deviation of intent from the law as written and signed.

From Wikipedia: The Constitution does not authorize the President to use signing statements to circumvent any validly enacted Congressional Laws, nor does it authorize him to declare he will disobey such laws (or parts thereof). When a bill is presented to the President, the Constitution (Art. II) allows him only three choices: do nothing, sign the bill, or (if he disapproves of the bill) veto it in its entirety.[emphasis added]

Obama’s use of signing statements has clearly shown his willingness to continue the George W. Bush legacy– not only of torture and illegal detainment, but in the dangerous trend of de facto rule by “executive fiat.” Worse, such signing statements put in place a precedent for future presidents to follow– or expand upon.

Further, Barack Obama has continued to backslide on his campaign promise not to use signing statements and executive orders to circumnavigate legislation signed into law. RELATED (Feb. 2010): Obama Breaks Yet Another Key Campaign Promise on Executive Orders, Signing Statements

After the legislation cleared Congress, the ACLU commented that signing the bill “will damage both his legacy and American’s reputation for upholding the rule of law,” while executive director of the Human Rights Watch blasted the President for being ‘on the wrong side of history,’ noting that “Obama will go down in history as the president who enshrined indefinite detention without trial in US law.”

Presidential candidate Ron Paul went even further, declaring that the NDAA bill begins the official establishment of martial law in the United States (see video).

Below is the signing statement issued by the White House in full:

Source - check out the source to see the signing statement

 

[Gotholic]

Ron Paul Calls National Defense Authorization Act “Slip Into Tyranny”

JOE WOLVERTON, II
New American
January 1, 2012

“A dictator enjoys unrestrained power over the people. The legislative and judicial branches voluntarily cede this power or it’s taken by force. Most of the time, it’s given up easily, out of fear in time of war and civil disturbances, and with support from the people, although the dictator will also accumulate more power with the use of force.” Those prescient words of Republican presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) are taken from his book Liberty Defined: 50 Essential Issues That Affect Our Freedom. The tyrannical assumption of power by the President and the cession of unheralded power to him by the Congress has taken place precisely as Dr. Paul warned.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is an unprecedented, unconstitutional, and unchecked grant of dictatorial power to the President in the name of protecting the security of “the homeland.” Ron Paul described the bill (soon to be signed into law by the President) as a “slip into tyranny,” one that will almost certainly accelerate “our descent into totalitarianism.”

What of the NDAA? Are there indeed provisions contained therein that so ferociously tear at the constitutional fabric of our Republic?

In a word — yes.

This liberty-extinguishing legislation converts America into a war zone and turns Americans into potential suspected terrorists, complete with the full roster of rights typically afforded to terrorists — none.

A key component of this reconciled bill mandates a frightening grant of immense and unconstitutional power to the executive branch. Under the provisions of Section 1021, the President is afforded the absolute power to arrest and detain citizens of the United States without their being informed of any criminal charges, without a trial on the merits of those charges, and without a scintilla of the due process safeguards protected by the Constitution of the United States.

Full article here

Source

 

[Gotholic]

R.I.P. Bill of Rights 1789 – 2011

Mike Adams
Natural News
January 1, 2012

(NaturalNews) One of the most extraordinary documents in human history — the Bill of Rights — has come to an end under President Barack Obama. Derived from sacred principles of natural law, the Bill of Rights has come to a sudden and catastrophic end with the President’s signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a law that grants the U.S. military the “legal” right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder. This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused. It is a system of outright government tyranny against the American people, and it effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights.

In what will be remembered as the most traitorous executive signing ever committed against the American people, President Obama signed the bill on New Year’s Eve, a time when most Americans were engaged in the consumption of alcohol. It seems appropriate, of course, since no intelligent American could accept the tyranny of this bill if they were sober.

This is the law that will cement Obama’s legacy in the history books as the traitor who nullified the Bill of Rights and paved America’s pathway down a road of tyranny that will make Nazi Germany’s war crimes look like child’s play. If Bush had signed a law like this, liberals would have been screaming “impeachment!”

Why the Bill of Rights matters

While the U.S. Constitution already limits the power of federal government, the Bill of Rights is the document that enumerates even more limits of federal government power. In its inception, many argued that a Bill of Rights was completely unnecessary because, they explained, the federal government only has the powers specifically enumerated to it under the U.S. Constitution. There was no need to have a “First Amendment” to protect Free Speech, for example, because there was no power granted to government to diminish Free Speech.

This seems silly today, of course, given the natural tendency of all governments to concentrate power in the hands of the few while destroying the rights and freedoms of their own people. But in the 1780′s, whether government could ever become a threat to future freedoms was hotly debated. By 1789, enough revolutionary leaders had agreed on the fundamental principles of a Bill of Rights to sign it into law. Its purpose was to provide additional clarifications on the limitation of government power so that there could be absolutely no question that government could NEVER, under any circumstances, violate these key principles of freedom: Freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom from illegal searches, the right to remain silent, the right to due process under law, and so on.

Of course, today’s runaway federal government utterly ignores the limitations placed on it by the founding fathers. It aggressively and criminally seeks to expand its power at all costs, completely ignoring the Bill of Rights and openly violating the limitations of power placed upon it by the United States Constitution. The TSA’s illegal searching of air travelers, for example, is a blatant violation of Fourth Amendment rights. The government’s hijacking of websites it claims are linking to “copyright infringement” hubs is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights. The government’s demand that all Americans be forced to buy private health insurance is a blatant violation of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution — the “commerce clause.”

Now, with the passage of the NDAA, the federal government has torpedoed the entire Bill of Rights, dismissing it completely and effectively promising to violate those rights at will. As of January 1, 2012, we have all been designated enemies of the state. America is the new battleground, and your “right” to due process is null and void.

Remember, this was all done by the very President who promised to close Guantanamo Bay and end secret military prisons. Not only did Obama break that campaign promise (as he has done with nearly ALL his campaign promises), he did exactly the opposite and has now subjected all Americans to the possibility of government-sponsored kidnapping, detainment and torture, all under the very system of secret military prisons he claimed he would close!

“President Obama’s action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law,” said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Obama’s signing statement means nothing

Even while committing an act of pure treason in signing the bill, the unindicted criminal President Obama issued a signing statement that reads, in part, “Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded…”

Anyone who reads between the lines here realizes the “the flexibility on which our safety depends” means they can interpret the law in any way they want if there is a sufficient amount of fear being created through false flag terror attacks. Astute readers will also notice that Obama’s signing statement has no legal binding whatsoever and only refers to Obama’s momentary intentions on how he “wishes” to interpret the law. It does not place any limits whatsoever on how a future President might use the law as written.

“The statute is particularly dangerous because it has no temporal or geographic limitations, and can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield,” says the ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/president-obama-signs-indefinite-detention-law).

What this means is that the next President could use this law to engage in the most horrific holocaust-scale mass round-up of people the world has ever seen. The NDAA legalizes the crimes of Nazi Germany in America, setting the stage for the mass murder of citizens by a rogue government.

United States of America becomes a rogue nation, operating in violation of international law

Furthermore, the NDAA law as written and signed, is a violation of international law as it does not even adhere to the fundamental agreements of how nations treat prisoners of war:

“…the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war” says the ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/president-obama-signs-indefinite-detention-law).

In 1789, today’s NDAA law would have been called “treasonous,” and those who voted for it would have been shot dead as traitors. This is not a call for violence, but rather an attempt to provide historical context of just how destructive this law really is. Men and women fought and died for the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. People sacrificed their lives, their safety and risked everything to achieve the freedoms that made America such a great nation. For one President to so callously throw away 222 years of liberty, betraying those great Americans who painstakingly created an extraordinary document limiting the power of government, is equivalent to driving a stake through the heart of the Republic.

In signing this, Obama has proven himself to be the most criminal of all U.S. Presidents, far worse than George W. Bush and a total traitor to the nation and its People. Remember, Obama swore upon a Bible that he would “protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” and yet he himself has become the enemy of the Constitution by signing a law that overtly and callously nullifies the Bill of Rights.

This is nothing less than an act of war declared on the American people by the executive and legislative branches of government. It remains to be seen whether the judicial branch will go along with it (US Supreme Court).

Origins of the Bill of Rights

The Bill of Rights, signed in 1789 by many of the founding fathers of our nation, was based on the Virginia Declaration of Rights, drafted in 1776 and authored largely by George Mason, one of the least-recognized revolutionaries who gave rise to a nation of freedom and liberty.

Mason was a strong advocate of not just states’ rights, but of individual rights, and without his influence in 1789, we might not even have a Bill of Rights today (and our nation would have slipped into total government tyranny all the sooner). In fact, he openly opposed ratification of the U.S. Constitution unless it contained a series of amendments now known as the Bill of Rights (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Mason)

SECTION ONE of this Virginia declaration of rights states:

“That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.” (http://www.constitution.org/bcp/virg_dor.htm)

Section Three of the declaration speaks to the duty of the Citizens to abolish abusive government:

“That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal.”

By any honest measure, today’s U.S. government, of course, has overstepped the bounds of its original intent. As Mason wrote over 200 years ago, the People of America now have not merely a right but a duty to “reform, alter or abolish it,” to bring government back into alignment with its original purpose — to protect the rights of the People.

Obama violates his Presidential Oath, sworn before God

Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution spells out the oath of office that every President must take during their swearing in:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

In signing the NDAA law into office, Obama has blatantly and unambiguously violated this sacred oath, meaning that his betrayal is not merely against the American people, but also against the Divine Creator.

Given that the Bill of Rights is an extension of Natural Law which establishes a direct heritage of sovereign power from the Creator to the People, a blatant attack upon the Bill of Rights is, by any account, an attack against the Creator and a violation of universal spiritual principles. Those who attempt to undermine the Bill of Rights are attempting to invalidate the relationship between God and Man, and in doing so, they are identifying themselves as enemies of God and agents of Evil.

Today, as 2012 begins, we are now a nation led by evil, and threatened with total destruction by those who would seek to rule as tyrants. This is America’s final hour. We either defend the Republic starting right now, or we lose it forever.

Read the language analysis of WHY and HOW the NDAA applies to American citizens

Many people have been fooled by the obfuscated language of the bill, and they wrongfully believe the NDAA does not apply to American citizens. They have been hoodwinked!

In this follow-up article, I parse the language of the NDAA and explain, in plain language, how and why the NDAA does apply to American citizens: http://www.naturalnews.com/034538_NDAA_American_citizens_indefinite_detainment.html

Also, read this explanation by Rep. Justin Amash, who voted against the bill: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=296584837047596

Make no mistake, folks: The U.S. government has just declared all Americans to be “enemy combatants,” and that the USA is now a “battleground” over which the military has total control. We are now a nation living under military dictatorship, whether you realize it or not.

Source

 

[2minkey]

wow! another bunch of third-party opinions!

any comment on all that stuff gotholic? or are you just pleasing daddy?

 

[Gonz]

(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL
RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain
a person in military custody under this section does not extend
to citizens of the United States.

There are two places that specifically exclude US Citizens, on American soil,, from any threat under this law. US Citizens, caught in the enemy's camp, need to be executed as traitors. Battlefield rules apply.

 

[Gotholic]

There are two places that specifically exclude US Citizens, on American soil,, from any threat under this law. US Citizens, caught in the enemy's camp, need to be executed as traitors. Battlefield rules apply.

I already addressed this in the other thread. This is also already addressed here as well. You don't get it do you? Look at the wording. Look at "requirement". Now, to put it in perspective, if someone calls your phone then are you required to answer it?

I shall hereby decree that Gonz shall not be required to answer his phone. Now, Gonz, did I prohibit you from answering your phone?

Also, you do know that Obama acknowledges he can detain American citizens on U.S. soil without trial with this bill, right? It is in his signing statement linked to in this thread.

 

[2minkey]

he's right about "required" gonz. it says they don't have to. it doesn't say they can't.

 

[Gonz]

The requirement to detain

That says they are required to do so...

I'm not defending this POS legislation, but I'm not sure it's the boogeyman
it's being made out to be. I'd be happy with it going away though.

 

[2minkey]

The requirement to detain

That says they are required to do so...

I'm not defending this POS legislation, but I'm not sure it's the boogeyman
it's being made out to be. I'd be happy with it going away though.

um, sure it does when you - as you just did - lop off the rest of the sentence.

(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL
RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

don't think you're going to get very far with word play here.

 

[Winky]

It can't happen here.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Lets just get this fight over with.

 

[Winky]

Obama Signs NDAA, saves us from the Evil Tea Party activists!

There will never be a fight.
Why would there be?
With the National socialists taking care of us
from cradle to grave why wold anyone be upset?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Re: Obama Signs NDAA, saves us from the Evil Tea Party activists!

There will never be a fight.
Why would there be?
With the National socialists taking care of us
from cradle to grave why wold anyone be upset?

 

[Winky]

That was a movie you Monkey

heh yeah them greatest generation types are long gone
this is more like what you'll find these days

 

[2minkey]

and the inevitable appeal to a time when men were men, and nothing bad ever happened. 'cept the nazis of course.

 

[Gonz]

um, sure it does when you - as you just did - lop off the rest of the sentence.

(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS AND LAWFUL
RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

don't think you're going to get very far with word play here.

That's how the law works. Precise wording.

The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

Your highlights also say they are specifically denied the ability to hold US Citizens

 

[2minkey]

keep shoveling sparky. everyone else knows what it means.

 

[jimpeel]

It looks like the fears of indefinite detention were unfounded; but why waste a good panic?

It seems that there are still a few judges out there who still believe in the Supreme Law of the Land.

SOURCE

Judge Gives Obama Administration Well-Deserved Slap

Written on Saturday, June 2, 2012 by Tad Cronn

In a key ruling defending the freedoms of Americans, a federal judge on Wednesday granted a preliminary injunction blocking the president from gaining the power to detain citizens indefinitely without charge.

Judge Kathleen Forrest ruled that Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act “failed to pass constitutional muster.”

The act, signed into law on New Year’s Eve, grants the U.S. military the authority to exercise police powers on U.S. soil, including the ability to detain “until the end of hostilities” anybody the president feels has supported al Qaida, the Taliban or related groups.

Forrest said the section was unconstitutional because it could be used to block political dissent. In her statement, she pointed out that the provision could have been made constitutional with changes and clarifications in the definitions of the crimes it seeks to cover.

After the NDAA was signed into law, Democrat Sen. Carl Levin pointed out that the law originally had the legal language to limit the president’s ability to hold people indefinitely, but it was President Obama himself who demanded that American citizens be included under the detention law and that the president himself have exclusive authority to invoke the law.

But in his signing statement, Obama posed as the defender of citizens’ rights, claiming he had forced Congress to add language to protect “the safety, security and liberty of the American people.”

He wrote: I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.

Considering it was Obama himself who demanded the exclusive power to detain U.S. citizens, I’m not inclined to believe his protestations of innocence.

Also in light of the recent executive orders authorizing his Cabinet to take control of resources in “preparation” for national defense, and authorizing his czars and other appointees to meddle in local communities, it points to a definite trend for this administration.

Though Obama and his pawns would like you to believe his executive orders are just business as usual, this administration has an unhealthy interest in assembling an array of authoritarian powers over its citizens — “just in case.”

 

[Gonz]

but it was President Obama himself who demanded that American citizens be included under the detention law

Hope & change

 

[2minkey]

j edgar was more ambitious.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/23/washington/23habeas.html

but hey whattya expect from a radical conservative??? gotta fight them homos and commies and foreigners at every step!