According to politico obama signed the NDAA

[bigrebnc1775]

With no regard to the rights of American citizen he just took your 4th and 5th amendment rights away from us. He mentions 1032 and 1039 but no mention of the section that directly would affect citizens 1031. It's a sad day.

WHITEBOARD
GITMO DEBATE LOOMS: President Obama has signed the defense authorization bill that funds Pentagon operations, though he said in a statement that he'll seek the repeal of measures in the act that prohibit transfers of Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Those "restrictions," he said, "interfere with the authority of the executive branch to make important and consequential foreign policy and national security determinations regarding whether and under what circumstances such transfers should occur in the context of an ongoing armed conflict."

"We must have the ability to act swiftly and to have broad flexibility in conducting our negotiations with foreign countries," Obama said. "Requiring the executive branch to certify to additional conditions would hinder the conduct of delicate negotiations with foreign countries and therefore the effort to conclude detainee transfers in accord with our national security."

He concluded that he will "seek repeal of these restrictions, will seek to mitigate their effects, and will oppose any attempt to extend or expand them in the future."



Obama Signs NDAA | POLITICO 44

 

[bigrebnc1775]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW-e7z7S6VI]Obama Signs NDAA Martial Law - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ladyliberal]

As a commentator on the Politico article to which you linked pointed out:

"This article is from 01-11, January 2011, and refers to the bill signed at the beginning of this year. This does not pertain to the controversial 2012 NDAA bill being passed by congress in December of 2011."

The full Politico article (Obama signs defense bill that could cripple his Guantanamo policy - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com) makes this quite clear.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As a commentator on the Politico article to which you linked pointed out:

"This article is from 01-11, January 2011, and refers to the bill signed at the beginning of this year. This does not pertain to the controversial 2012 NDAA bill being passed by congress in December of 2011."

The full Politico article (Obama signs defense bill that could cripple his Guantanamo policy - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com) makes this quite clear.

You may be right it was and is confusing because obama used the same words old similar objects then as now.

"Despite my strong objection to these provisions, which my Administration has consistently opposed, I have signed this Act because of the importance of authorizing appropriations for, among other things, our military activities in 2011.

 

[Mad Scientist]

You see how that works? OP was informed of a mistake on his post which he then owned up to. Simple and easy.

I wish the rest of USMB could do the same.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You see how that works? OP was informed of a mistake on his post which he then owned up to. Simple and easy.

I wish the rest of USMB could do the same.

I always do. I don't understand why some think I don't.

 

[paulitician]

Big Brother still milking 911. What a tragedy. Ten years later and their still stealing our rights in the name of 911. What a nightmare.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Big Brother still milking 911. What a tragedy. Ten years later and their still stealing our rights in the name of 911. What a nightmare.

That's whats so pulling about the whole thing. al qaeda is supposed to be low in numbers and according to obama and his supporters they have lost a large portion of their forces. When this extra need to arrest American citizens without having charges brought up against them?