If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Info Wars)   Obama's NDAA Signing Statement: I have the power to detain Americans...but I won't   (infowars.com) divider line 288
    More: Spiffy, signing statements, Executive Office of the President of the United States, ndaa, Americans, security interests, hostilities, terrorist threats, Director of National Intelligence  
•       •       •

3184 clicks; posted to Politics » on 01 Jan 2012 at 6:28 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



288 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-01-01 07:09:11 PM

GaryPDX: And how many people actually believe that? He took what Bush did with the Patriot Act and pushed it way beyond. But hey, now he has the power but he won't use it, yea riight.


Gary, we should cherish this moment. I'll get the whiskey. After all this time.........we agree on something.
 
2012-01-01 07:10:48 PM

DarnoKonrad: Ned Stark: so hes fine with assassinating americans but not with detaining them?

Well yea, you have an explicit right to challenge your detention. You don't have a right to be a terrorist in Yemen. It's not hard to understand.


and we know the dudes a terrorist because the government that killed him said he was. even though there was no evidence or anything that was presented, in fact, they wont even describe the process by which it was decided that he should be killed. if the government can be trusted to make the decision in secret through a secret process that someone should die, why not that they should be imprisoned? or are you insinuating that you do have a right to be a terrorist in america?
 
2012-01-01 07:11:31 PM

DarnoKonrad: Amos Quito: DarnoKonrad: "My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution."


This clearly one of the stupidest thing congress has done in a long time, but just passing a law doesn't make it Constitutional. I wish he'd vetoed the farking thing, but at least they're admitting it's a steaming pile.


There are plenty of unconstitutional steaming piles that have been effective and in force for decades.

The US Government has declared war on the Citizens of the United States.


You're being hyperbolic.



Am I?

This is the kind of shiat that governments do when they feel threatened - not by outside forces, but by the people they are sworn to govern.

My guess is that they know that shiat is going to hit the fan economically in the near future, and things will start falling apart quickly. These farkers have been screwing the American People over for many decades - and we have remained complacent because we are easily distracted, and our bellies have been full.

If you don't see this for the totalitarian power-grab that it is, I suspect that you will soon.
 
2012-01-01 07:11:57 PM

Zombie Butler: muck4doo: They really expect the shiat to hit the fan in 2012. This is part of preparations.

/Watched Jesse Ventura this morning

Just curious, what did he have to say? (unless yer riffing on the whole conspiracy thing, then never mind)


They talked a lot about the Denver airport.
 
2012-01-01 07:15:15 PM
Oh yeah.

Just like the seat belt law will only be used when pulled over for another offense. The law will never say that you can be pulled over just for not wearing a seatbelt.

Oh yeah.

Just like the national 55 mph speed limit will only be in place during the 1973 gasoline shortage.
 
2012-01-01 07:15:22 PM
I'm going to stop voting altogether. Both parties are jokes.
 
2012-01-01 07:16:40 PM

Giltric: Its not like we are sentencing people to death here and theres a risk of killing an innocent person.

two people wiped out by a predator drone would disagree with you

These will be people guilty of something.

of course. once they are actually determined to be guilty. you know, that pesky jury of your peers technicality.

 
2012-01-01 07:16:40 PM

Ned Stark: and we know the dudes a terrorist because the government that killed him said he was. even though there was no evidence or anything that was presented, in fact, they wont even describe the process by which it was decided that he should be killed. if the government can be trusted to make the decision in secret through a secret process that someone should die, why not that they should be imprisoned? or are you insinuating that you do have a right to be a terrorist in america?



You can't hide from the law and be expected to be protected by it. He was a wanted man hanging out with America's enemies. It doesn't matter if they're terrorists or Nazis, if you want to extricate yourself from that dangerous position, you give yourself up and get a lawyer. You DON'T continue to hide with America's enemies who congress has authorized to be killed by our military.
 
2012-01-01 07:16:49 PM

DarnoKonrad: FredaDeStilleto: It's been a pretty quick slide into the fascist state we have become.

What is so galling is that you can argue all presidents need advisers to educate them on the intricacies of a particular subject because no person is an expert in everything. And in that respect, bad advice can be given and taken. In this case, Obama has held himself out to be a Constitutional scholar. He KNOWS what the NDAA is. He knows that martial law can be declared at any time, for any reason. He knows that the military has been given unprecedented power to act against civilians.

If nothing else, his signing of the law made it perfectly clear that he is just a dancing puppet. As have been most, if not all, presidents in modern history.



We haven't slid anywhere. Which will be attested to when the *vast* majority of the senators and representatives that legislated this thing will be reelected or replaced with even worse alternatives. It ain't Obama, it's your farking neighbors.


I honestly don't know how old you are, but there was a time when people actually decided who the candidate for office would be. Now, especially in the presidential elections, we have very little choice on who is on the ballot.

As a further aside, as an Independent in PA, I have no voting privileges for candidates in primary elections - only in general.
 
2012-01-01 07:17:05 PM

DarnoKonrad: Ned Stark: so hes fine with assassinating americans but not with detaining them?

Well yea, you have an explicit right to challenge your detention. You don't have a right to be a terrorist in Yemen. It's not hard to understand.



The cool thing about the NDAA is that you don't have to *be* a "terrorist", they just have to say that they *suspect* you of being a "terrorist", and you're "disappeared" quicker than an abandoned laptop on a New York subway.

No trial, no burden of proof, no jury, nothing.
 
2012-01-01 07:17:34 PM

NicoFinn: I'm going to stop voting altogether. Both parties are jokes.


We need to detain you for your apathetic attitude, citizen
 
2012-01-01 07:18:09 PM
Obama: I can lock you up forever without a trail. But I won't.
Implicit message: But the next guy might.

/Gets reelected like magic.
//Poof! See how fear works, kids?
 
2012-01-01 07:21:19 PM
because Obama would never back out of one of his promises, right? right?
 
2012-01-01 07:23:24 PM
If your not going to use it Mr President, and you don't believe it should be used...why the hell would you sign it into law?
Something smells.
 
2012-01-01 07:23:32 PM
It's farking Infowars! It's more Alex Jones psycho bullshiat.

If he said water was wet i'd stick a toe in to verify.

The ONLY part of the "article" i'm willing to believe is what can be externally verified from trustworthy sources.

Anyone that trusts a word out of that lunatic's mouth (or website) should be pointed at and laughed off the planet.
 
2012-01-01 07:24:12 PM

Amos Quito: Am I?

This is the kind of shiat that governments do when they feel threatened - not by outside forces, but by the people they are sworn to govern.

My guess is that they know that shiat is going to hit the fan economically in the near future, and things will start falling apart quickly. These farkers have been screwing the American People over for many decades - and we have remained complacent because we are easily distracted, and our bellies have been full.

If you don't see this for the totalitarian power-grab that it is, I suspect that you will soon.




Hyperbolic and paranoid. When we get to specific abuses, and not legal hypothetical -- then I'll join in your doom-saying.
 
2012-01-01 07:24:21 PM
It's ok, we can trust Obama. Really. He's never lied.
 
2012-01-01 07:24:53 PM

DarnoKonrad: Ned Stark: and we know the dudes a terrorist because the government that killed him said he was. even though there was no evidence or anything that was presented, in fact, they wont even describe the process by which it was decided that he should be killed. if the government can be trusted to make the decision in secret through a secret process that someone should die, why not that they should be imprisoned? or are you insinuating that you do have a right to be a terrorist in america?


You can't hide from the law and be expected to be protected by it. He was a wanted man hanging out with America's enemies. It doesn't matter if they're terrorists or Nazis, if you want to extricate yourself from that dangerous position, you give yourself up and get a lawyer. You DON'T continue to hide with America's enemies who congress has authorized to be killed by our military.



The wonderful part about the War On TerrorTM is its flexibility. There are no defined enemies or target areas, there are no defined milestones or endgame goals - it can be used to attack whoever you want to attack and for whatever reason you want to attack them. The rules of the game change on a whim. One day you're cool, the next you're an "Enemy of America".

Stalin would be proud.
 
2012-01-01 07:25:27 PM
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.


I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God
 
2012-01-01 07:27:11 PM
I am now counting down the days (hours, minutes) until one of my friends from OS gets "indefinitely detained".
 
2012-01-01 07:27:22 PM

FredaDeStilleto: I honestly don't know how old you are, but there was a time when people actually decided who the candidate for office would be. Now, especially in the presidential elections, we have very little choice on who is on the ballot.

As a further aside, as an Independent in PA, I have no voting privileges for candidates in primary elections - only in general.



I don't know how old you are, but parties used to pick candidates in closed door conventions with ZERO public input. The primary system changed that. For the worse IMHO as it introduced the "marketing" of candidates, but what you're saying makes no sense and is ignorant of basic history.
 
2012-01-01 07:27:49 PM

farkin_Gary: NicoFinn: I'm going to stop voting altogether. Both parties are jokes.

We need to detain you for your terroristically apathetic attitude, citizen



FTFY.
 
2012-01-01 07:28:58 PM

simrobert2001: I can already hear the ACLU gassing up thier Lawyermobile.


The primary mission of the ACLU is to defend the Bill of Rights. If this doesn't call for gassing up the Lawyermobile, what does?
 
2012-01-01 07:30:11 PM

Tyee: If your not going to use it Mr President, and you don't believe it should be used...why the hell would you sign it into law?
Something smells.


Because it was attached to the bill that funds our military for the next year. Think like a politician; at the beginning of an election year, do you *really* want to veto the bill that would allow our military to function and pay the people working for it?

Adding the detention bullshiat to the bill was, as I said, a purely political move; indefinite detention was already allowed by the AUMF (or a similar law, I may be getting names mixed up).
 
2012-01-01 07:30:57 PM

Amos Quito: DarnoKonrad: Ned Stark: and we know the dudes a terrorist because the government that killed him said he was. even though there was no evidence or anything that was presented, in fact, they wont even describe the process by which it was decided that he should be killed. if the government can be trusted to make the decision in secret through a secret process that someone should die, why not that they should be imprisoned? or are you insinuating that you do have a right to be a terrorist in america?


You can't hide from the law and be expected to be protected by it. He was a wanted man hanging out with America's enemies. It doesn't matter if they're terrorists or Nazis, if you want to extricate yourself from that dangerous position, you give yourself up and get a lawyer. You DON'T continue to hide with America's enemies who congress has authorized to be killed by our military.


The wonderful part about the War On TerrorTM is its flexibility. There are no defined enemies or target areas, there are no defined milestones or endgame goals - it can be used to attack whoever you want to attack and for whatever reason you want to attack them. The rules of the game change on a whim. One day you're cool, the next you're an "Enemy of America".

Stalin would be proud.




Obama kills a guy who is aiding al-Qaeda in Yemen and that makes him Stalin? It's this shiat that makes me really wonder where we're headed as a nation with such a warped view of reality.
 
2012-01-01 07:32:56 PM
Maybe he will, and maybe he won't, but it doesn't change the fact that a US President shouldn't HAVE that power.
 
2012-01-01 07:35:54 PM

Party Boy: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.


I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God


You forgot "Unless somebody from the Shadow Government hands me down orders from on high to some other effect."
 
2012-01-01 07:38:07 PM

Ambivalence: Maybe he will, and maybe he won't, but it doesn't change the fact that a US President shouldn't HAVE that power.


He doesn't. Bush actually *tied* to indefinitely detain people on American soil without due process and SCOTUS stepped in and said "no, you can't farking do that." This law doesn't change anything -- it just shows how farked up the people in congress are.
 
2012-01-01 07:38:47 PM
Another law to remedy the distress of the people and empire (new window).

Time to go, folks.
 
2012-01-01 07:39:30 PM

whidbey: You forgot "Unless somebody from the Shadow Government hands me down orders from on high to some other effect."


Do you believe this?

[notsureifserious.jpg]
 
2012-01-01 07:39:53 PM
Welcome to America. We're all indefinite detainees now.
 
2012-01-01 07:39:54 PM

Party Boy: I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.


I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God



Yeah, I posted those earlier.

These elected officials have violated their oaths to protect and defend the Constitution.

Should all be tried for high treason.
 
2012-01-01 07:41:06 PM

Party Boy: whidbey: You forgot "Unless somebody from the Shadow Government hands me down orders from on high to some other effect."

Do you believe this?

[notsureifserious.jpg]


Bilderbergers.
 
2012-01-01 07:41:18 PM
So the signing statement is both completely meaningless/powerless and at the same time totally subverts the legal system?

This confirms that Obama is a do-nothing empty suit who is single-handedly destroying America.
 
2012-01-01 07:41:47 PM
Here's the next little game they want to play. Enemy Expatriation Act (new window)
 
2012-01-01 07:43:14 PM
Damn George Bush and his unconstitutional signing statements!
 
2012-01-01 07:43:42 PM

DarnoKonrad: FredaDeStilleto: I honestly don't know how old you are, but there was a time when people actually decided who the candidate for office would be. Now, especially in the presidential elections, we have very little choice on who is on the ballot.

As a further aside, as an Independent in PA, I have no voting privileges for candidates in primary elections - only in general.


I don't know how old you are, but parties used to pick candidates in closed door conventions with ZERO public input. The primary system changed that. For the worse IMHO as it introduced the "marketing" of candidates, but what you're saying makes no sense and is ignorant of basic history.


So you honestly believe that there is a more democratic method in place for candidate selection than there has been in the past? That is ignorant.
 
2012-01-01 07:44:01 PM

Le Grand Inquisitor: ...aggregious...


Hint for ya, Le Grand - when your spell-checker doesn't seem to like a word, it's probably not because your language is too high-toned.
 
2012-01-01 07:44:24 PM

DarnoKonrad: Amos Quito: DarnoKonrad: Ned Stark: and we know the dudes a terrorist because the government that killed him said he was. even though there was no evidence or anything that was presented, in fact, they wont even describe the process by which it was decided that he should be killed. if the government can be trusted to make the decision in secret through a secret process that someone should die, why not that they should be imprisoned? or are you insinuating that you do have a right to be a terrorist in america?


You can't hide from the law and be expected to be protected by it. He was a wanted man hanging out with America's enemies. It doesn't matter if they're terrorists or Nazis, if you want to extricate yourself from that dangerous position, you give yourself up and get a lawyer. You DON'T continue to hide with America's enemies who congress has authorized to be killed by our military.


The wonderful part about the War On TerrorTM is its flexibility. There are no defined enemies or target areas, there are no defined milestones or endgame goals - it can be used to attack whoever you want to attack and for whatever reason you want to attack them. The rules of the game change on a whim. One day you're cool, the next you're an "Enemy of America".

Stalin would be proud.



Obama kills a guy who is aiding al-Qaeda in Yemen and that makes him Stalin? It's this shiat that makes me really wonder where we're headed as a nation with such a warped view of reality.


If Obama said he needed killing, he needed killing, damnit.

DarnoKonrad: Ambivalence: Maybe he will, and maybe he won't, but it doesn't change the fact that a US President shouldn't HAVE that power.

He doesn't. Bush actually *tied* to indefinitely detain people on American soil without due process and SCOTUS stepped in and said "no, you can't farking do that." This law doesn't change anything -- it just shows how farked up the people in congress are.


So everyone else's fault but Obama, but nothing has changed?
 
2012-01-01 07:45:22 PM

DarnoKonrad: Obama kills a guy who is aiding al-Qaeda in Yemen and that makes him Stalin?



It is the destruction of the Constitution - the basic doctrine of the Rule of Law in the United States - and the protections and limitations set down therein.

THAT is what makes Obama and the treasonous traitors of Congress Stalinesque.
 
2012-01-01 07:45:47 PM

muck4doo: Zombie Butler: muck4doo: They really expect the shiat to hit the fan in 2012. This is part of preparations.

/Watched Jesse Ventura this morning

Just curious, what did he have to say? (unless yer riffing on the whole conspiracy thing, then never mind)

They talked a lot about the Denver airport.


diaconspiracyfiles.com

do go on. . .
 
2012-01-01 07:48:07 PM

FredaDeStilleto: DarnoKonrad: FredaDeStilleto: I honestly don't know how old you are, but there was a time when people actually decided who the candidate for office would be. Now, especially in the presidential elections, we have very little choice on who is on the ballot.

As a further aside, as an Independent in PA, I have no voting privileges for candidates in primary elections - only in general.


I don't know how old you are, but parties used to pick candidates in closed door conventions with ZERO public input. The primary system changed that. For the worse IMHO as it introduced the "marketing" of candidates, but what you're saying makes no sense and is ignorant of basic history.

So you honestly believe that there is a more democratic method in place for candidate selection than there has been in the past? That is ignorant.



YES, that's just a plain fact. Before the primary system the general public and ZERO input on candidate selections. Party officials picked candidates at conventions. Today conventions are just pep-rallies to showcase who the voting public chose. Pick up a history book.
 
2012-01-01 07:48:35 PM
I remember when congress granted authority to Bush to invade Iraq, but they didn't think he'd actually do it.
 
2012-01-01 07:52:17 PM

Amos Quito: DarnoKonrad: Obama kills a guy who is aiding al-Qaeda in Yemen and that makes him Stalin?


It is the destruction of the Constitution - the basic doctrine of the Rule of Law in the United States - and the protections and limitations set down therein.

THAT is what makes Obama and the treasonous traitors of Congress Stalinesque.




The Constitution? The Constitution allows Congress to make war on our enemies, and the President is charged with commanding the military against those enemies. In this case, congress has made al Quada enemies. That's about as legal as it gets.
 
2012-01-01 07:52:23 PM
So he waits until the day when the whole country gets drunk and then he signs it. That's pretty sleazy.
 
2012-01-01 07:52:40 PM
That's cool that you wouldn't use this power.

That doesn't mean any other president wouldn't.
 
2012-01-01 07:53:32 PM
I voted for Obama. Never again. I made a mistake.
 
2012-01-01 08:00:56 PM

PlasticMoby: It's farking Infowars! It's more Alex Jones psycho bullshiat.

If he said water was wet i'd stick a toe in to verify.

The ONLY part of the "article" i'm willing to believe is what can be externally verified from trustworthy sources.

Anyone that trusts a word out of that lunatic's mouth (or website) should be pointed at and laughed off the planet.


Ditto. We had a thread last night - about this topic - where some dude was posting conspiracy videos which compared America to Nazi Germany and had a 4chan/Anonymous symbol in the corner of the screen. I'm betting the same guy is the submitter of this crap.
 
2012-01-01 08:01:03 PM

tenpoundsofcheese: You got to feel sorry for Dick Cheney.

He must be looking at this wondering how he could have gotten this done for him and Bush.


Oh my god Cheese said something I agree with?! Quick, has hell frozen over? I can't tell, it was already snowing here..
 
2012-01-01 08:02:55 PM

Party Boy: whidbey: You forgot "Unless somebody from the Shadow Government hands me down orders from on high to some other effect."

Do you believe this?

[notsureifserious.jpg]


Well yeah "shadow government" is a bit tinfoil in cheek, but I do believe that the same elements who insisted on Iraq and PATRIOT and the War on Terror are the ones calling the shots in terms of foreign policy, something which voters have no say in.

And yes, the policy in NDAA was handed down as opposed to something the Obama Presidency crafted. The sponsors of the bill were McCain and a conservative Democrat. The military driven right-wing still has a hold on this country's governing powers no matter who's elected.
 
Displayed 50 of 288 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report