President Barack Obama rang in the New Year by signing the NDAA law with its provision allowing him to indefinitely detain citizens. It was a symbolic moment to say the least. With Americans distracted with drinking and celebrating, Obama signed one of the greatest rollbacks of civil liberties in the history of our country . . . and citizens partied only blissfully into the New Year.
Ironically, in addition to breaking his promise not to sign the law, Obama broke his promise on signing statements and attached a statement that he really does not want to detain citizens indefinitely.
Obama insisted that he signed the bill simply to keep funding for the troops. It was a continuation of the dishonest treatment of the issue by the White House since the law first came to light. As discussed earlier, the White House told citizens that the President would not sign the NDAA because of the provision. That spin ended after sponsor Sen. Carl Levin (D., Mich.) went to the floor and disclosed that it was the White House that insisted that there be no exception for citizens in the indefinite detention provision.
The latest claim is even more insulting. You do not “support our troops” by denying the principles for which they are fighting. They are not fighting to consolidate authoritarian powers in the President. The “American way of life” is defined by our Constitution and specifically the Bill of Rights. Moreover, the insistence that you do not intend to use authoritarian powers does not alter the fact that you just signed an authoritarian measure. It is not the use but the right to use such powers that defines authoritarian systems.
The almost complete failure of the mainstream media to cover this issue is shocking. Many reporters have bought into the spin of the Obama Administration as they did the spin over torture by the Bush Administration. Even today reporters refuse to call waterboarding torture despite the long line of cases and experts defining waterboarding as torture for decades. On the NDAA, reporters continue to mouth the claim that this law only codifies what is already the law. That is not true. The Administration has fought any challenges to indefinite detention to prevent a true court review. Moreover, most experts agree that such indefinite detention of citizens violates the Constitution.
There are also those who continue the long-standing effort to excuse Obama’s horrific record on civil liberties by either blaming others or the times. One successful myth is that there is an exception for citizens. The White House is saying that changes to the law made it unnecessary to veto the legislation. That spin is facially ridiculous. The changes were the inclusion of some meaningless rhetoric after key amendments protecting citizens were defeated. The provision merely states that nothing in the provisions could be construed to alter Americans’ legal rights. Since the Senate clearly views citizens are not just subject to indefinite detention but even execution without a trial, the change offers nothing but rhetoric to hide the harsh reality. THe Administration and Democratic members are in full spin — using language designed to obscure the authority given to the military. The exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032) is the screening language for the next section, 1031, which offers no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial.
Obama could have refused to sign the bill and the Congress would have rushed to fund the troops. Instead, as confirmed by Sen. Levin, the White House conducted a misinformation campaign to secure this power while portraying Obama as some type of reluctant absolute ruler, or as Obama maintains a reluctant president with dictatorial powers.
Most Democratic members joined their Republican colleagues in voting for this unAmerican measure. Some Montana citizens are moving to force the removal of these members who they insist betrayed their oaths of office and their constituents. Most citizens however are continuing to treat the matter as a distraction from the holiday cheer.
For civil libertarians, the NDAA is our Mayan moment. 2012 is when the nation embraced authoritarian powers with little more than a pause between rounds of drinks.
So here is a resolution better than losing weight this year . . . make 2012 the year you regained your rights.
Here is the signing statement attached to the bill:
————-
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 31, 2011
Statement by the President on H.R. 1540
Today I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.” I have signed the Act chiefly because it authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed. In hundreds of separate sections totaling over 500 pages, the Act also contains critical Administration initiatives to control the spiraling health care costs of the Department of Defense (DoD), to develop counterterrorism initiatives abroad, to build the security capacity of key partners, to modernize the force, and to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of military operations worldwide.
The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists that allows us to maximize both our ability to collect intelligence and to incapacitate dangerous individuals in rapidly developing situations, and the results we have achieved are undeniable. Our success against al-Qa’ida and its affiliates and adherents has derived in significant measure from providing our counterterrorism professionals with the clarity and flexibility they need to adapt to changing circumstances and to utilize whichever authorities best protect the American people, and our accomplishments have respected the values that make our country an example for the world.
Source: ABC
As Josh S. points out you seem just as willing to bend facts and reality to suit a simplistic view of the world as you see it as many of the comments on your site are willing to do. I see little difference between your arguments here and the right’s notion that 2 cells in the womb have more rights to healthcare then 45 million woman, children, the aged, and the disabled.
I suspect you would have also voted with the confederacy instead of Lincoln since he too suspended similar rights. Are there no exceptions in your world or are you as absolute as the rightwing on guns, abortion, and religion?
I think you really said it it all when you described yourself as a “civil liberterian”. Like most so called liberterians they tend to be selective in their liberties and who is entitled to them just as they have a selective view of reality.
I suspect that a gay soldier who now benefits from the end of DODT might disagree with you about what is the worst assault on personal liberty.
Make no mistake, the assault on personal liberty by government, corporations, religion, and many other groups is real and must be challanged. But at the same time the greatest challange to liberty in its full dimension is not Obama, and it is not this bill. If you can’t see we face a larger war and greater threat then perhaps we have already lost the real war.
time for revolution is approaching? .. the old style, mass riots, charing cross king beheadings?
nothing else will attract attention
Is this challengeable in the Supreme Court or do you have to wait until an American citizen is actually thrown into Gitmo?
Careful what you write, Prof. You can now be detained, indefinitely, without trial.
Amnesty slams Obama for signing NDAA into law
http://presstv.com/usdetail/218980.html
Excerpt:
The human rights group Amnesty International blasted President Barack Obama for signing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law on New Year’s Eve.
The $662 billion defense spending bill contained highly controversial provisions regarding the military detention of terrorism suspects. While signing the bill, Obama issued a signing statement – a controversial way for the president to circumvent Congress’ intent – in which he pledged that the new laws would not violate Americans’ constitutional rights.
But Amnesty said the signing statement was not enough.
“Despite expressing serious reservations, the Obama administration has paved the way for legislation that will authorize indefinite detention. The bill places enormous power in the hands of future Presidents, and the only answer the President has is to say ‘trust me,’” the group said in a statement.
“Once any government has the authority to hold people indefinitely, the risk is that it can be almost impossible to rein such power in. President Obama has failed to take the one action – a veto – that would have blocked the dangerous provisions in the NDAA. In so doing, he has allowed human rights to be further undermined and given al-Qaeda a propaganda victory.”
Amnesty has been a long-time critic of the counterterrorism detentions at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, which the group claims are unlawful and a violation of human rights. By signing the NDAA into law, Obama also prevented the closure of the prison facility at Guantanamo.
The American Civil Liberties Union also criticized Obama for singing the act into law. “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,” Anthony D. Romero, ACLU’s executive director explained in a media advisory on Saturday. “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. The ACLU will fight worldwide detention authority wherever we can, be it in court, in Congress, or internationally.” Raw Story
http://opiniojuris.org/2011/12/31/the-ndaa-the-good-the-bad-and-the-laws-of-war-part-ii/ Second part of Lederman’s analysis.
This is another example where his actions speaks louder than words.
The best President money can buy.
Hey Josh, go read it again! This time with your eyes wide open.
http://opiniojuris.org/2011/12/31/the-ndaa-the-good-the-bad-and-the-laws-of-war-part-i/ Lawyer friend referred me to Marty Lederman’s opinion on the final bill. He says that the bill was improved through input from civil and human rights activists, some members of congress and the Obama administration.
Does the executive even have to tell us when this power is being used?
Is this the end of Posse Comitatus?
Low long until this power is used against domestic “terrorist sympathizers”?
Politicians?
Or, as we’ve learned from history, that can never happen here?
….read the content of this provision again. Also, review who pushed for implementation and wording. The reason this “issue” isn’t being covered by the “mainstream media” is because it’s flat-out not true. The author of this blog post is either bissed, misinformed, or neglected to read and understand the policy before running his mouth and riling up a bunch of other people who have no idea about the “act.” It’s truly amazing how people rely on propagandic headlines, not even content, in developing opinions. It’s kind of embarrassing, actually.
The support of “liberals”, “progressives” or whatever they are calling themselves for Obama is proof of several things. First, “left” leaning people like to believe they are too bright, too “in the know” to be taken in by propaganda. Their support of Obama proves that propaganda is very effective on both the right and left side of the population.
I am speaking here to those who support Obama. Being taken in by propaganda is not a function of intelligence or of being right wing. It is a much more sophisticated operation than that. You will know you have bought into propaganda when you are supporting a candidate who implements actions which would normally be an anathema to you. Pick the log out of your eye. Oppose the injustice of your own candidate.
To imprison other people without trial is heinous and it is authoritarian. If you claim you are not an authoritarian, then don’t act like one and support this action or Obama, the man who took it.
For the rest of us we need to understand how deeply censorship of reality goes in our society. It not only takes place in the MSM, it takes place on sites which are dedicated to the pretense that they are “right wing” and “left wing”. The way out of propaganda is awareness and an absolute conviction to stand for justice.
Do not contribute time, money or verbal support for Obama or any other candidate who supports the same things as he does. We have the power to refuse consent. We have the power to speak out. We should use that power.
Authoritarian regimes take root not just because evil people conceive of and support them but because people who consider themselves “good” go right along with the heinous crimes of their “leaders”. But we don’t have to keep going along with these crimes. It will be our refusal as citizens to countenance this cruelty and these crimes that is the only chance we have to prevent them. Be courageous. Be honest. At least try to stop what is wrong. This is wrong. Obama is wrong. Congress is wrong. Speak up. If you are a Democrat, speak up against wrong doing by Democrats and Republicans. If you are a Republican, speak up against wrong doing by Republicans and Democrats. Join with your fellow citizen on behalf of justice. It is our only hope.
Josh S… if Turley’s (and many of our) concerns are unwarranted, why would Obama have added the signing statement: “I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”
I am horrific shock that folks still support this person as being the lesser of two evils….I guess the same can be said about….Adolph….Joe…John…Fidel….they were just interested in the best for the country…and misunderstood…
Weird that you would refer to it “Indefinite Detention of Citizens” when the law specifically states that it is changing no laws of treatment of citizens. And it’s doubly weird that even though Levin was the one pushing for the inclusion of citizens in the language, for some reason you’ve stated that it was the White House. I’m also baffled by the attention this NDAA is getting when it hasn’t changed any policy from previous NDAAs, and no stink was raised about it.
But what do I know? I only read the NDAA and previous ones.
Sickening. I just wonder how he’ll use this new-found power to further his destruction of our country.
Thank you so much for blogging this, and for noting how little it’s been covered by mainstream media. So, so important. I see a continuing erosion of our civil liberties and citizens standing around blinking like livestock in response.
Isn’t this sentence missing a not?
It is [not] the use but the right to use such powers that defines authoritarian systems.
This man has broken the law and should be held accountable.
He has no morality, no compass and no shame. I wonder how he even looks his children in the face after signing this piece of garbage.
Mr. President, you sir, should be ashamed of yourself and your actions.