It's incredible that this NDAA law has passed undetected by most Americans. Happy New Year!

By the time the people realize what's happened this bill may have already taken a toll on a good number of our liberties. Citizens should have already been "up in arms" against it.

All present presidential candidates that voted for, and the one that signed, this bill should be considered INELIGIBLE to be President of the (constitutional) republic of the US of A.

Fortunately, once again, Ron Paul raises his voice —this time on the Congress floor— to condemn the travesty.

His reasoning and protest now stand on the record in the House.



Ron Paul NDAA Floor Speech - Jan 18, 2012

"A voice in the wilderness of DC." — Sovereign Human




Also RP…




Ron Paul: We Must Stop Raising the Debt Ceiling! - Jan 18, 2012


and…




Video: 4 South Carolina Senators Endorse Ron Paul at Press Conference

Perhaps they didn't hear because they were to busy fighting SOPA and PIPA.

A lot more people know than you think.

The problems I have with Ron Paul are that some of his proposals are simply downright dangerous.

I don't like that Obama has signed this. All we can hope for is a repeal like Ron Paul has said or extremely good judgement of the military that would detain citizens.

There are efforts underway to make the indefinite detention part null and void. If Obama had not signed it, the DoD would not have been funded at all. Bad for our troops who are still deployed.

Well I assume the military can detain as far as what military law dictates. We know that POW's say Taliban are detained to the end of the war and simply just re-lease, they get no trails.

Hypo question?
Say an American citizen was caught fighting with the Taliban or even Al-Queada ? He should be tried in a civil court as a traitor and espionage.

And that is the problem, of course: the "war" in which we're currently engaged, as defined, has no end.

One way to effectively nullify the Constitution is to claim extraordinary powers granted during a time of war, then define that war in a way that makes it endless in any practical sense. It constantly amazes me that most who defend these anti-Constitutional power grabs with the justification that "we're at war" and "this is a wartime president" never ever demand a clear specification of under what circumstances this particular war can be determined to have ended.

I think he should be tried in court and let the evidence prevail.

No, no, no! The provision in the NDAA is that US citizens can be indefinitely detained without charges on US soil. Big difference.

.
Obama, after signing it into law made one of those signing statements: from this web page

“Obama’s signing statement seems to suggest he already believe he has the authority to indefinitely detain Americans—he just never intends to use it,” Adam Serwer writes at Mother Jones. “Left unsaid, perhaps deliberately, is the distinction that has dominated the debate over the defense bill: the difference between detaining an American captured domestically or abroad. This is why ACLU Director Anthony Romero released a statement shortly after Obama’s arguing the authority in the defense bill could “be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield.”

.