Obama Expresses Objections to Indefinite Detention of US Citizens While Signing Defense Bill …(But It Was His Administration That Insisted the Language Was Included in Bill)

President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act on Saturday, but not without expressing his objections to the funding bill’s provisions on the treatment of suspected terrorists, including U.S. citizens.

Obama expressed “serious reservations” about the bill but argued in a signing statement released Saturday that it does not fundamentally change executive power.

The administration does not intend to interpret one provision as granting the military authority to detain Americans indefinitely, Obama said in the statement. It also opposes sections of the bill that block the transfer of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to U.S. soil for any purpose and that restrict the government’s ability to transfer detainees to other countries.

But… It was his administration that insisted that the language be included in the bill.

From the video: Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) told Congress recently that under the original wording of the National Defense Authorization Act, American citizens were excluded from the provision that allowed for detention. Once Obama’s officials saw the text though, says Levin, “the administration asked us to remove the language which says that US citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

Specifically, the section that Obama asked to be reworded was Section 1031 of the NDAA FY2012, which says that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” could be held indefinitely.
Hat Tip Maria

#1 January 2, 2012 at 1:29 am
Craig commented:

My God! I thought you would never talk about that. It’s been all over the Net for so long now.
#3 January 2, 2012 at 3:24 am
Molon Labe commented:

Craig’s dream realized. The junior fascists are so happy that their fuhrer has signed this into law!

Resist by any and all means possible.
#4 January 2, 2012 at 3:24 am
jhump commented:

Craigstain, you never answered my question regarding the ice cream flavor which best represented Ron Paul’s Middle East foreign policy position.
#5 January 2, 2012 at 3:31 am
nader paul kucinich gravel mckinney baldwin ventura sheehan perot carter commented:

Willard Mitt Romney and Ricky Santorum will save you !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa89gmjUTyk
#6 January 2, 2012 at 3:36 am
jhump commented:

It’s been all over the Net for so long now.

All the kewl kidz r talking bout it! CSPAN, ever heard of it, twink! Tell ur mom she’s out of condoms(look at what happened last time she neglected that inventory).
#7 January 2, 2012 at 3:56 am
dunce commented:

The legal definition of a belligerent act is a country or group that is recognized as making war. George Bush said we are not at war with islam but were at war with terror. Terror is not a group or a country. This administration said the taliban is not our enemy per se, what ever that means. What is the legal status of al queda? If you ask them they are allahs soldiers. If you ask janet napolitano who is our enemy she would likely say sheriff Joe Arpaio and his arrests of illegal aliens are belligerent acts. Can our govt. please identify the enemy, is it children and blue haired grandmothers at our airports?
#8 January 2, 2012 at 5:12 am
squeaky commented:

probably just setting the stage so that whatever outcome he’ll be right – being the egotist that he is…egotist: Definition, Synonyms from Answers.com
n. A conceited, boastful person. A selfish, self-centered person. egotistic e ‘ go·tis ‘ tic or e ‘ go·tis ‘ ti·cal adj. egotistically e ‘ go·tis ‘ ti·cal·ly adv.
he approved the remainder of the 2009 budget [rejected by Bush] while claiming objections. he could have rejected the 2nd half of tarp. he can’t just vote present anymore so he just has to angle a vote in such a way that allows him to declare victory no matter the outcome. as he signs it, he’s on record for objections. he referred to the 2009 spending budget as “Bush’s budget” while ignoring his own complicity. labeling “Bush’s budget” got him off the hook.
#9 January 2, 2012 at 5:27 am
tennismom commented:

A ‘belligerent act’ might be holding up a sign that says ‘Impeach Obama!’ or saying to a TSA agent doing a random search, ‘You are violating my Constitutional Rights’ or making an internet post such as this one. The application of the law is open to interprretation & Obummer’s promise not to use it to detain citizens is meaningless . . . as is most of what He says.

The law legalizing indefinite detainment of American citizens should be repealed.

Obama should be impeached.
#10 January 2, 2012 at 5:56 am
dba...vagabond trader commented:

Calculated dissembling so whatever or whomever he applies it to will fit. Not a peep out of the go along to get along crowd. Traitors all.
#11 January 2, 2012 at 6:30 am
joeyc commented:

Does this mean that we can hold Obama and his illegal family members in Gitmo for an indefinite period of time also? Obama is “Jihad in the white house”!!!!
#12 January 2, 2012 at 6:45 am
RedBeard commented:

I really hate to rely on Levin for anything, but if he is correct, then Obama has much for which he must answer.

As for congressional complicity, I wonder how many members of Congress voted for the revised language without even knowing about the change, and how many understood the change and knowingly went along. Ignorance is no excuse at all, but I suppose it’s better than willfully aiding and abetting this stuff.
#13 January 2, 2012 at 7:14 am
jhump commented:

As for congressional complicity, I wonder how many members of Congress voted for the revised language without even knowing about the change, and how many understood the change and knowingly went along. Ignorance is no excuse at all, but I suppose it’s better than willfully aiding and abetting this stuff.

If congressidiots can disavow their vote for Iraq, why can’t they do it for this? There are any number of excuses any congressperson can claim, first and foremost, ignorance. I’d call it feigning stupidty, but look at craigie-poo. He drinks his in big gulps while bathing in it.
#14 January 2, 2012 at 7:17 am
clarityrising commented:

Just putting in place the tools for tyrrany when they might need it later to shut people like us up.
#16 January 2, 2012 at 7:42 am
The All Real Numbers Symbol commented:

“Ignorance is no excuse at all, but I suppose it’s better than willfully aiding and abetting this stuff.”

In this case #12, I have to disagree. It is the job of our elected officials to know exactly what they’re passing in the bills they vote for. Especially in this freedom-destroying bill, ignorance is not an excuse.

Obama and his cabinet must be impeached.

Every member of congress who voted ‘yes’ to this abomination must be impeached.

If this country survives the dictatorship of Obama it will be a miracle.
#17 January 2, 2012 at 8:33 am
Kissmygrits commented:

Our elected leaders who voted for this monstrosity will claim that they didn’t like that part but overall it is a good bill because it has funding for the military, and it was the best they could do. The constitution was thrown under the bus, again, by the very people who took an oath to uphold it.
#18 January 2, 2012 at 8:48 am
chris commented:

This is what happens when we vote idiots into office that have no interest in following the Constitution. It’s scary and pathetic.

Our republic government is in exile. Those in office now should, by and large, be at the least thrown out if not impeached and thrown in jail for what amounts to treason.

Half the population have no interest in doing anything about our demise. The other half, that are true liberty loving patriots, will eventually have to take back our country as the Founders envisioned would be necessary one day.
#20 January 2, 2012 at 8:48 am
Sasja commented:

Craig is right about one thing. This has been “out there” for quite a while. Everyone must have been focused on the OWS nonsense and posting on blogs to communicate with their elected officials in Washington. I’m not saying it would have done any good, but if you don’t raise a stink about these issues, and often, then it’s definite nothing will change.

If you have a problem with your elected officials, I suggest you do the research in your state to see what can be done to get them removed. And good luck with that.
#21 January 2, 2012 at 9:42 am
smmtheory commented:

I’m wondering when Jim is going to be arrested for not contributing to Obama’s campaign.
#23 January 2, 2012 at 10:20 am
truth teller commented:

The morons in DC can pass any “law” they want…doesn’t mean any of us have to follow it or allow it to operate.
#24 January 2, 2012 at 10:46 am
randyinrocklin commented:

you can thank McConnell and Boehner for this one too. what an abject failure of our leadership!
#25 January 2, 2012 at 10:59 am
aprilnovember811 commented:

He’s doing the same thing with guns. This man is a textbook psychopath. He’s no different than all of the other tyrants throughout history, including Hitler. Shame on this bunch of 25W bulbs in Congress, who continue to appease this man. They’re behaving just as Hitler’s people did with him.

One bright point though, Hitler was eventually taken down, as were his collaborators. So much damage done before it happened though.
#26 January 2, 2012 at 11:03 am
aprilnovember811 commented:

truth teller,
You’re right. D.C. is not a legitimate government. It’s now the District of Criminals.

Those that outright commit the crimes, and those like Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, and others with let it happen, or aid in it, by meeting the crime half way.

I spit on them! This is an exempt from the Declaration of Independence. I urge all of you to read it, if you haven’t. They could be speaking about today. By the way, shame on all of those who should have exposed Zero’s origins. His father is not Obama Sr. It’s Malcolm X. He was also born in Kenya, because his mother probably told Obama Sr. Zero was his, initially.

“In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.”
#27 January 2, 2012 at 11:06 am
aprilnovember811 commented:

I’m sorry, I didn’t proofread. I meant to say excerpt, not exempt.
#28 January 2, 2012 at 11:46 am
NorthernX commented:

This will come in handy when the Liberals steal the next election…
#29 January 2, 2012 at 12:12 pm
Karla B. commented:

I saw a transcript of a speech Obama gave regarding his signing the NDAA. He went on and on using “The Constitution” in his speech as if he even embraces our Constitution. Give me a break! I guess when he said it was antiquated and needed to be changed, he succeeded. He threw in rhetoric about certain parts of the Act (like 1022) to make people feel all warm and cozy, but neglected to touch on 1021 which is the truly scary part of the Act that has to do with American citizens being detained indefinitely. This really is a sad moment in American history. Good bye Bill of Rights. (
#30 January 2, 2012 at 12:35 pm
GotFreedom commented:

“Specifically, the section that Obama asked to be reworded was Section 1031 of the NDAA FY2012, which says that “any person who has committed a belligerent act” could be held indefinitely.”

So this would/should cover everyone in the administration/Dem party/even RINOs who have been acting “belligerent” right?

Ooops, did I just act belligerent?
#33 January 2, 2012 at 1:26 pm
S. Wolf commented:

And Hussein pretends to have reservations when he wanted detention of Americans, the people he hates.
#34 January 2, 2012 at 1:33 pm
Craig commented:

Only 15 congressmen voted against this law, including Ron and Ran Paul.
#35 January 2, 2012 at 1:57 pm
valerie commented:

Section 1031 is a background section that recites the scope of an underlying public law, that is, “Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40)” , and states that the present NDAA does not alter the underlying law. The following section includes the language that the present law does not apply to US citizens.

It is really disturbing to see that there are so many people unwilling or unable to look up a piece of legislation, when they ought to know better.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112s1867es/pdf/BILLS-112s1867es.pdf
Section 1032 ….
“(b) APPLICABILITY TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—
(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The require- ment to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States….”

It doesn’t get much clearer than that. If somebody has a beef about PL 107-40, then let them propose and debate an amendment to that law.
#36 January 2, 2012 at 2:27 pm
FurryGuy commented:

Another irony hidden in this bill is the continued funding for keeping Gitmo open. Barry made it a major campaign issue that he would close down the detention center as soon as he was inaugurated.

I find his assurances he will never use indefinite detention against American citizens to be just as hollow.
#37 January 2, 2012 at 2:36 pm
gee! commented:

#9 bing………………dangerous ………………dangerous ……………..this law could some day work against them…………..just sayin
#38 January 2, 2012 at 3:12 pm
Molon Labe commented:

#34
Craig as usual you are wrong again. You are so dull you can’t even understand the difference between the offices Ron and Ran Paul occupy.

When this first came up you also demonstrated your ignorance of this bill and stated you doubted it would pass although you were ignorant of the fact that the Senate had all ready passed.

Worse of all this is both parties are working hand in hand.

Resist by any and all means possible.
#39 January 2, 2012 at 3:20 pm
Patty commented:

what is this? Correct the bill or sign the bill, read the bill, or don’t sign. Was signed, now changed or not.

Does Washington or Obama have their heads screwed on tight?
OMG
#40 January 2, 2012 at 3:30 pm
aprilnovember811 commented:

#33,
I watched a documentary on Nazi Collaborators on the Military Channel. It was about Hitler invading Russia. The people there were giving the Nazi’s flowers, and kisses when they came in, because they thought Hitler was a great liberator of Stalin.

All Hitler and the Nazi’s were thinking was how are we going to control or eliminate 44 million people. They did this as they smiled and waved at the people. Pretty soon, people started turning on their own fellow citizens, and aiding in their murders. It was eerily similar to what people are doing here.

To those who get bent out of shape when you compare Zero to Hitler, don’t. Hitler murdered 6 million Jews, and that was his most horrific and well known crime, but he’s about more than that. He’s about all of the things, Zero is about. Nationalized Health Care is one of them. Hitler was also made up. He was nothing but a bum, just like Bari’. He was a drifter, and a media creation.

Zero and Hitler are both textbook psychopaths. Either members of congress are suffering some type of cult like brainwashing now, or they’re as evil as he is. Some are. History will reveal many we thought were good people, aren’t.
#41 January 2, 2012 at 4:42 pm
Gerald Pechenuk commented:

Now Playing on LaRouche PAC:

“The Annals of Nerobama,” http://www.larouchepac.com/node/21044

Barack Obama is A Carbon Copy of Emperor Nero

Grounds for Urgent Removal of Obama by Impeachment or Use of 25th Amendment.

http://www.larouchepac.com/node /20069
http://www.larouchepac.com/node/20307

Two Interviews With Professor Francis Boyle, Univ of Illinois Law School, Champaign, Illinois on the Immediate and Urgent Grounds to Remove Barack Obama Before He Starts World War III.
#46 January 5, 2012 at 12:46 pm
Johnie commented:

Hey! think positively. Maybe one day we will find out that the COMMIE FASCISTS in congress that wrote the thing and signed it were GITMOed
That would be just the kind of bureaucratic tricks a Republican shill lieyer like Obama would pull. But hey, maybe it will work out for the best. Right? LMFAO