Reply #82

In the discussion thread: Obama will not veto National Defense Authorization Act [View all]

Fri Dec 16, 2011, 05:28 AM

82. Here --

Section 1032

(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.
(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under
this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

91 replies	Author	Time	Post
Obama will not veto National Defense Authorization Act [View all]	Javaman	Dec 2011	OP
Why don't you trust secret panels	noise	Dec 2011	#1
:rofl:	limpyhobbler	Dec 2011	#6
Well, it will be our freedom loving military doing the deciding who is to be kidnapped.	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2011	#21
How did you know that the secret panels are secret?	MannyGoldstein	Dec 2011	#67
I didn't see the not, this is bad news.	sarcasmo	Dec 2011	#2
There is NO reason to veto it, please see comment #11 :) n/t	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#12
Tex 4 Obama, please explain.	Mimosa	Dec 2011	#16
Here is Section 1032 - American citizens in The USA are exempt	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#36
This message was self-deleted by its author	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#37
It's not clear cut	Aerows	Dec 2011	#40
Here is Section 1031 - which includes the Feinstein amendment language (e) 'bolded'	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#41
Read that analysis	Aerows	Dec 2011	#44
it says throwing Americans in jail forever is OPTIONAL.	provis99	Dec 2011	#50
Your link timed out. The problems are with section 1031, not 1032, as I understand it.	JDPriestly	Dec 2011	#66
Obama just totally lost my vote	peacebird	Dec 2011	#3
again?	jefferson_dem	Dec 2011	#5
Hubby says he will not vote for him period. I fluctuate between no and he's better than repukes	peacebird	Dec 2011	#91
Why? n/t	bhikkhu	Dec 2011	#8
Another reason to Primary Obama	RC	Dec 2011	#4
Epic Obama FAIL.	Odin2005	Dec 2011	#7
Why?	bhikkhu	Dec 2011	#9
They are ignoring sections 1031 and 1032 which explicitly excludes	AtomicKitten	Dec 2011	#20
Yes you are correct. See comments #36 and #41 for the text of those two sections. n/t	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#42
There is NOTHING which "explicitly excludes" detaining US Citizens	SaintPete	Dec 2011	#74
Here --	AtomicKitten	Dec 2011	#82
I don't think you read past my subjec line	SaintPete	Dec 2011	#86
I was being ironic.	AtomicKitten	Dec 2011	#88
That's Not Correct!	SaintPete	Dec 2011	#89
No response to post #89?	SaintPete	Dec 2011	#90
it's easier to whiz on Obama than read an article.	spanone	Dec 2011	#45
There is NO reason to veto it, please see comment #11 :) n/t	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#14
there is NO reason to vote for it..nt	xiamiam	Dec 2011	#51
So, you're against 'the whole DoDA bill'? or just sections 1031 and 1032	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#53
Really?	green917	Dec 2011	#76
"Don't buy into the hysteria"	savalez	Dec 2011	#10
He's the only one I've heard that people are discussing	Aerows	Dec 2011	#72
He spent another hour on it today.	savalez	Dec 2011	#79
There is NO reason to veto it.	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#11
You like the idea of the military being able to pick of "suspects" anywhere in the world?	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2011	#19
Oh... so it's ok as long as they aren't US citizens...	SomethingFishy	Dec 2011	#24
That appears to be the defense	noise	Dec 2011	#27
heh, it's very clever wording but still bad	spooked911	Dec 2011	#28
Glad they added (e)	sarcasmo	Dec 2011	#39
Bernie Sanders thinks there is	Aerows	Dec 2011	#73
At least that was fixed.	AverageJoe90	Dec 2011	#83
AP article from today	Aerows	Dec 2011	#13
Yes, apparently the AP is misreporting it. Perhaps they did not read the Feinstein amendment.	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#29
Are you saying it isn't done without this legislation?	bhikkhu	Dec 2011	#30
And Section 1032 exempts/excludes U.S. citizens that live in The USA.	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#35
This is horribly written legislation	Aerows	Dec 2011	#47
ding!	FirstLight	Dec 2011	#48
Probably........	AverageJoe90	Dec 2011	#84
ACLU was recommending against it on Dec. 9th	TBF	Dec 2011	#15
The ACLU just released this tonight.	ForgoTheConsequence	Dec 2011	#22
Thank you -	TBF	Dec 2011	#25
Unless congress declares war on the OWS movement, I think we're ok	bhikkhu	Dec 2011	#31
Congress didn't declare war on Japanese-Americans during WWII.	OnyxCollie	Dec 2011	#54
they sure didn't, and they have been preparing for unrest	TBF	Dec 2011	#60
This bill wouldn't have allowed it.	bhikkhu	Dec 2011	#78
Uh, you do know that second-generation Japanese Americans,	OnyxCollie	Dec 2011	#81
Ah, but you need to think	Berlin Expat	Dec 2011	#70
What I see as more likely is that the fear of indefinite detention modifies people's behaviors	bhikkhu	Dec 2011	#80
bingo..nt	xiamiam	Dec 2011	#52
Here's	ProSense	Dec 2011	#17
Is that a flip-flop? Flop-flip? Or, just a SOP politician's lie?	Tierra_y_Libertad	Dec 2011	#18
This is pissing a lot of people off. nt	DocMac	Dec 2011	#23
yeah, because it's outrageous and terrible and un-American	spooked911	Dec 2011	#33
I think the only reason people are pissed is because they have NOT read the bill	Tx4obama	Dec 2011	#43
There are several people who have copied and pasted parts of the bill	Aerows	Dec 2011	#46
I think you're wrong-- I think people are pissed because they see a system way out of control	spooked911	Dec 2011	#57
We are pissed off because we HAVE read the bill, and we know about KBR's contract to build detention	TBF	Dec 2011	#61
Actually, I'm pissed because I HAVE read the bill	SaintPete	Dec 2011	#75
I agree.	DocMac	Dec 2011	#49
Well, to hell with him and every traitor that voted "aye". There should be consequences for	TheKentuckian	Dec 2011	#26
we're into deep deep corruption levels	spooked911	Dec 2011	#34
lindsey graham 'shut up' video	limpyhobbler	Dec 2011	#32
An analysis	Aerows	Dec 2011	#38
thanks-- that was my impression too	spooked911	Dec 2011	#58
Thanks for the link.	AverageJoe90	Dec 2011	#85
He should veto it based on spending alone... nt	Modern_Matthew	Dec 2011	#55
Not what it seems:	caseymoz	Dec 2011	#56
I feel like it's 2006 and deja vu all over again.	Vinca	Dec 2011	#59
Thank you.	TBF	Dec 2011	#62
This is really, really, really, really...	thescreaminghead	Dec 2011	#63
The assholes have the votes to override a veto.	era veteran	Dec 2011	#64
DC "Democrats" stand for NOTHING:	blkmusclmachine	Dec 2011	#65
Shocked! Not....	blackspade	Dec 2011	#68
Huge surprise there	NorthCarolina	Dec 2011	#69
Is this America anymore?	roamer65	Dec 2011	#71
It's As If Obama Is Going Out Of His Way To Lose My Vote.	Paladin	Dec 2011	#77
With 87 votes in place, it would have been a waste of time to even consider it	tjwash	Dec 2011	#87

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.