White House Threatens Veto Of Indefinite Detention Bill

[IsItJustMe]

Source: The Huffington Post

micromanagement" of national security, the White House Friday stood by its threat to veto a defense bill over controversial military detention provisions.

The National Defense Authorization Act passed Thursday by the Senate contains a section that spells out the military's power to detain Americans indefinitely without trial and mandates military detention for some terrorism suspects.

The White House warned last month that senior advisers would recommend a veto, saying the detainee provisions could restrict the ability of law enforcement to combat terrorism and "make the job of preventing terrorist attacks more difficult."

It also contended that rather than clarifying the rules, the bill was adding uncertainty to the difficult legal landscape around detentions. Civil libertarians and many senators opposed to the detainee section charged that the bill was trampling Americans' basic rights to due process.

......

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/02/white-house-veto-indefinite-detention_n_1126399.html

---

Very scary stuff. And what's worse is that the majority of the Democratic Senetors voted for this. I can't believe that this story is not being covered on DU.

Detaining Americans indefinately. What happened to our constitution of due process and where is the out rage. We are truly turning into a nation of sheep. And Carle Leven was in charge of creating this piece of crap. Certainly no friend of the bill or rights or freedom loving people.

[tritsofme]

1. This is a must pass bill. It received 93 votes. I don't really believe the WH will follow through

with this threat. A signing statement could give him an out.

[TheWraith]

4. It's not really a must-pass bill.

There's nothing here that can't be done in a clean bill.

[alp227]

6. but wouldn't Congress over ride the veto anyway?

[TheWraith]

2. Actually it's been posted on DU many times.

Although arguably for the wrong reasons. The bill actually doesn't allow for indefinite detention of American citizens by the military, the problem is 1) it does mandate military custody for (non-US) terrorism suspects, which is contrary to the entire strategy of the Obama administration and what professionals say works, and 2) it not too subtly supports waterboarding.

[Demit]

10. The bill DOES allow for indefinite detention of American citizens by the military.

In Sec.1032. It "unquestionably permits (but does not mandate) even U.S. citizens on U.S. soil accused of Terrorism be held by the military rather than charged in the civilian court system." This is straight from Glenn Greenwald. He also cites a supporting link: http://www.progressive.org/mccain_says_american_citizens_can_be_sent_to_guantanamo.html

Dianne Feinstein's amendment, which attempted to explicitly exempt Americans, was defeated 45-55.

[Tx4obama]

3. Your OP is old news. It's all over DU in many places.

This issue has been discussed in many OPs in LBN, GD, and GD-P

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Better Believe It]

11. So what? Trying to kill the messenger?

[Tx4obama]

12. If you had taken the time to read the extra commentary the OPer wrote ...

you would have seen where he/she said: "I can't believe that this story is not being covered on DU."

I was responding to that comment ;)

[coalition_unwilling]

16. You and I seldom agree on much of anything lately it seems, but on

this we are in 100% agreement and at odds with the OP: the story has been covered in exhaustive detail in many threads here. In fact, I cited your update about Feinstein 3 in one of my responses on one of aforementioned threads.

:)

[msongs]

7. Bush/Obama desires to imprison anybody it wants for no cause or any cause nt

[JoePhilly]

15. And put them in secret FEMA camps!!!!!

I heard it on Fox News.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

8. Why trust either party ...

[Iliyah]

9. Again misinformed

posters.

[Fire Walk With Me]

13. The same politicians who will NOT speak against police brutality at #OWS

are likely the ones who wrote and voted for this abomination.

Who are they serving? Who are they protecting?

[markpkessinger]

14. Get back to me when the President shows he has the stones to follow through on the threat n/t

[L. Coyote]

17. Constitutional lawyer at the helm

Some senators may have voted for this with the caveat that it would be vetoed.