Article Image
News Link • Criminal Justice System

Obama pledges to exempt Americans from indefinite detention law

• The

President Barack Obama signed on New Year’s Eve a bill that gives the military authority to detain American citizens indefinitely and without criminal charge, breaking with the stroke of a pen one of his many campaign promises, even as he pledged that the new powers the bill grants will not be applied to U.S. citizens.

The provision was just one part of a massive $662 billion defense spending authorization that funds the military, penalizes Iran’s central bank and freezes military aid to Pakistan, among other things.

The president’s opponents in Congress, including some Democrats, attached the indefinite detention provision to force the administration to either accept a much heavier load of terrorism suspects, many who would be heading to the Guantanamo Bay military prison, or veto the bill and stand accused of opposing funds for the troops.

5 Comments in Response to

Comment by James Eldridge
Entered on:

One of the most extraordinary documents in human history -- the Bill of Rights -- has come to an end under President Barack Obama. Derived from sacred principles of natural law, the Bill of Rights has come to a sudden and catastrophic end with the President's signing of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a law that grants the U.S. military the "legal" right to conduct secret kidnappings of U.S. citizens, followed by indefinite detention, interrogation, torture and even murder. This is all conducted completely outside the protection of law, with no jury, no trial, no legal representation and not even any requirement that the government produce evidence against the accused. It is a system of outright government tyranny against the American people, and it effectively nullifies the Bill of Rights.

In what will be remembered as the most traitorous executive signing ever committed against the American people, President Obama signed the bill on New Year's Eve, a time when most Americans were engaged in the consumption of alcohol. It seems appropriate, of course, since no intelligent American could accept the tyranny of this bill if they were sober.

This is the law that will cement Obama's legacy in the history books as the traitor who nullified the Bill of Rights and paved America's pathway down a road of tyranny that will make Nazi Germany's war crimes look like child's play. If Bush had signed a law like this, liberals would have been screaming "impeachment!"

Why the Bill of Rights matters

While the U.S. Constitution already limits the power of federal government, the Bill of Rights is the document that enumerates even more limits of federal government power. In its inception, many argued that a Bill of Rights was completely unnecessary because, they explained, the federal government only has the powers specifically enumerated to it under the U.S. Constitution. There was no need to have a "First Amendment" to protect Free Speech, for example, because there was no power granted to government to diminish Free Speech.

This seems silly today, of course, given the natural tendency of all governments to concentrate power in the hands of the few while destroying the rights and freedoms of their own people. But in the 1780's, whether government could ever become a threat to future freedoms was hotly debated. By 1789, enough revolutionary leaders had agreed on the fundamental principles of a Bill of Rights to sign it into law. Its purpose was to provide additional clarifications on the limitation of government power so that there could be absolutely no question that government could NEVER, under any circumstances, violate these key principles of freedom: Freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom from illegal searches, the right to remain silent, the right to due process under law, and so on.

Of course, today's runaway federal government utterly ignores the limitations placed on it by the founding fathers. It aggressively and criminally seeks to expand its power at all costs, completely ignoring the Bill of Rights and openly violating the limitations of power placed upon it by the United States Constitution. The TSA's illegal searching of air travelers, for example, is a blatant violation of Fourth Amendment rights. The government's hijacking of websites it claims are linking to "copyright infringement" hubs is a blatant violation of First Amendment rights. The government's demand that all Americans be forced to buy private health insurance is a blatant violation of Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution -- the "commerce clause."

Now, with the passage of the NDAA, the federal government has torpedoed the entire Bill of Rights, dismissing it completely and effectively promising to violate those rights at will. As of January 1, 2012, we have all been designated enemies of the state. America is the new battleground, and your "right" to due process is null and void.

Remember, this was all done by the very President who promised to close Guantanamo Bay and end secret military prisons. Not only did Obama break that campaign promise (as he has done with nearly ALL his campaign promises), he did exactly the opposite and has now subjected all Americans to the possibility of government-sponsored kidnapping, detainment and torture, all under the very system of secret military prisons he claimed he would close!

"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," said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Obama's signing statement means nothing

Even while committing an act of pure treason in signing the bill, the unindicted criminal President Obama issued a signing statement that reads, in part, "Moving forward, my administration will interpret and implement the provisions described below in a manner that best preserves the flexibility on which our safety depends and upholds the values on which this country was founded..."

Anyone who reads between the lines here realizes the "the flexibility on which our safety depends" means they can interpret the law in any way they want if there is a sufficient amount of fear being created through false flag terror attacks. Astute readers will also notice that Obama's signing statement has no legal binding whatsoever and only refers to Obama's momentary intentions on how he "wishes" to interpret the law. It does not place any limits whatsoever on how a future President might use the law as written.

"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," says the ACLU (

What this means is that the next President could use this law to engage in the most horrific holocaust-scale mass round-up of people the world has ever seen. The NDAA legalizes the crimes of Nazi Germany in America, setting the stage for the mass murder of citizens by a rogue government.

United States of America becomes a rogue nation, operating in violation of international law

Furthermore, the NDAA law as written and signed, is a violation of international law as it does not even adhere to the fundamental agreements of how nations treat prisoners of war:

"...the breadth of the NDAA’s detention authority violates international law because it is not limited to people captured in the context of an actual armed conflict as required by the laws of war" says the ACLU (

In 1789, today's NDAA law would have been called "treasonous," and those who voted for it would have been shot dead as traitors. This is not a call for violence, but rather an attempt to provide historical context of just how destructive this law really is. Men and women fought and died for the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. People sacrificed their lives, their safety and risked everything to achieve the freedoms that made America such a great nation. For one President to so callously throw away 222 years of liberty, betraying those great Americans who painstakingly created an extraordinary document limiting the power of government, is equivalent to driving a stake through the heart of the Republic.

In signing this, Obama has proven himself to be the most criminal of all U.S. Presidents, far worse than George W. Bush and a total traitor to the nation and its People. Remember, Obama swore upon a Bible that he would "protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic," and yet he himself has become the enemy of the Constitution by signing a law that overtly and callously nullifies the Bill of Rights.

This is nothing less than an act of war declared on the American people by the executive and legislative branches of government. It remains to be seen whether the judicial branch will go along with it (US Supreme Court).

Origins of the Bill of Rights

The Bill of Rights, signed in 1789 by many of the founding fathers of our nation, was based on the Virginia Declaration of Rights, drafted in 1776 and authored largely by George Mason, one of the least-recognized revolutionaries who gave rise to a nation of freedom and liberty.

Mason was a strong advocate of not just states' rights, but of individual rights, and without his influence in 1789, we might not even have a Bill of Rights today (and our nation would have slipped into total government tyranny all the sooner). In fact, he openly opposed ratification of the U.S. Constitution unless it contained a series of amendments now known as the Bill of Rights (

SECTION ONE of this Virginia declaration of rights states:

"That all men are by nature equally free and independent and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." (

Section Three of the declaration speaks to the duty of the Citizens to abolish abusive government:

"That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration; and that, when any government shall be found inadequate or contrary to these purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, inalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal."

By any honest measure, today's U.S. government, of course, has overstepped the bounds of its original intent. As Mason wrote over 200 years ago, the People of America now have not merely a right but a duty to "reform, alter or abolish it," to bring government back into alignment with its original purpose -- to protect the rights of the People.

Obama violates his Presidential Oath, sworn before God

Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution spells out the oath of office that every President must take during their swearing in:

"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."

In signing the NDAA law into office, Obama has blatantly and unambiguously violated this sacred oath, meaning that his betrayal is not merely against the American people, but also against the Divine Creator.

Given that the Bill of Rights is an extension of Natural Law which establishes a direct heritage of sovereign power from the Creator to the People, a blatant attack upon the Bill of Rights is, by any account, an attack against the Creator and a violation of universal spiritual principles. Those who attempt to undermine the Bill of Rights are attempting to invalidate the relationship between God and Man, and in doing so, they are identifying themselves as enemies of God and agents of Evil.

Today, as 2012 begins, we are now a nation led by evil, and threatened with total destruction by those who would seek to rule as tyrants. This is America's final hour. We either defend the Republic starting right now, or we lose it forever.

Read the language analysis of WHY and HOW the NDAA applies to American citizens

Many people have been fooled by the obfuscated language of the bill, and they wrongfully believe the NDAA does not apply to American citizens. They have been hoodwinked!

In this follow-up article, I parse the language of the NDAA and explain, in plain language, how and why the NDAA does apply to American citizens:

Also, read this explanation by Rep. Justin Amash, who voted against the bill:

Make no mistake, folks: The U.S. government has just declared all Americans to be "enemy combatants," and that the USA is now a "battleground" over which the military has total control. We are now a nation living under military dictatorship, whether you realize it or not.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

4409 will probably put this up on FP, if he hasn't done it somewhere already.

4409 -- New Years Eve Truth 2012 "LIVE" (INSANE MUST SEE)

Comment by Temper Bay
Entered on:

 This law is TYRANNY!  It is the same tyranny that we took up arms against over two hundred years ago. 

The scum in Congress who wrote and passed this law, including that fraud in the White House, are traitors to the Constitution and the American people.  

Those who would enforce this law are no less criminals than common murders and should be treated as such.

Comment by Ed Price
Entered on:

This is just an election tactic.

When Obama took office, he was sworn in. "Sworn in" means he promised to uphold the Constitution. What does it mean to uphold the Constitution?

Does it have something to do with protecting the glass case that houses the parchment whereon the words of the Constitution are written so that nobody can get in there and break the glass and steal the parchment?

Does it mean that he sees to it that the Constitution paper is held high enough (upheld) above the floor so that someone won't walk on it by accident?

Does it mean that now he has a viable dictatorship just as long as he makes sure that the Constitution is parchment is safe and protected?

Doesn't it rather mean that he is promising to follow the tenets, the ideals, the spirit, the laws of the words written in the Constitution and the Amendments... words in plain English that anyone can see and read?

Hasn't Obama - just like "W" and all the rest of the Presidents for at least the last 50 years - already broken his Oath of Office that he took on inauguration day, by using the United States military for war-like purposes, without the formal authorization of Congress as required by the Constitution? And didn't he do it, and doesn't he continue to do it, not only in opposition to the Constitution, but also in a direct reversal of the election platform he was running on when he was elected.

Why do you even trust him at all? Why would you trust anything that he says? In everything that he says, doesn't he twist and turn the meaning so that he does anything he please, just like a dictator rather than the President of a Constitutional Republic?

You answer these questions for yourself! I can't answer them for you! But don't complain about him when he doesn't do the things you thought you were voting for at the time you voted for him. Why not? Because you knew exactly the kind of guy he was when you voted for him - an oath and trust breaker.

Furthermore, if Obama wanted to prove that he was not a liar, if he wanted to uphold the Constitution, he would see to it that central banking was outlawed. The Constitution requires, NO CENTRAL BANKING - i.e., the Federal Reserve Bank. Sure, the Fed isn't formally part of the government. But it is treated as though it were, and even upheld with greater position and authority than a central bank would be. Remove it as the money handler for the United States, put the money back under the Treasury as it is supposed to be, and allow the states and the people to start personal, private banks if they want.

The biggest result of this would be the elimination of income taxes - a thing required by the Constitution, as well. This would serve to support the Government and the people far better, since it is the Fed that gets the income tax money, and not the Government. And the Fed uses the money for whatever purposes they want, all around the world, in any way they want.

If Obama were sincere, he would have done this long ago. Check it all out yourself! Is this the kind of President you really want? One that you can't trust? One that, if he happens to do something that you like, it was only because the something accidentally and incidentally happened to coincide with both, your plans, and those of Obama's administration? Is this really the kind of President you want?

Comment by Powell Gammill
Entered on:

Well, that's mighty white of him!

Join us on our Social Networks:


Share this page with your friends on your favorite social network: