General Discussion

xchrom

(108,903 posts) Tue Jan 3, 2012, 02:45 PM Jan 2012

131

He signed it. We’ll fight it. {ACLU} [View all]

https://secure.aclu.org/site/SPageServer?emsrc=Nat_Appeal_AutologinEnabled&s_subsrc=120103_NDAA_GOL&pagename=120103_NDAAGOLAsk&emissue=indefinite_detention&emtype=pledge&JServSessionIdr004=t99wh29qd6.app225a

President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) into law. It contains a sweeping worldwide indefinite detention provision.

The dangerous new law can be used by this and future presidents to militarily detain people captured far from any battlefield. He signed it. Now, we have to fight it wherever we can and for as long as it takes.

Sign the ACLU's pledge to fight worldwide indefinite detention for as long as it takes.

'I’m outraged that the statute President Obama signed into law authorizes worldwide military detention without charge or trial. I pledge to stand with the ACLU in seeking the reversal of indefinite military detention authority for as long as it takes.

And I will support the ACLU as it actively opposes this new law in court, in Congress, and internationally.

Signed,
[your name]'

*** well, the ACLU seems to think there is a problem here.

108 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

He signed it. We’ll fight it. {ACLU} [View all] xchrom Jan 2012 OP

The same ACLU who applauded the Citizens United decision as a big win for free speech. TheWraith Jan 2012 #1

Yeah! The ACLU are the Bad Guys! bvar22 Jan 2012 #2

The ACLU, Greenwald, Taibbi, Olbermann....they're all eeeeevill!!!!111!!! Cali_Democrat Jan 2012 #3

No, you're on confused Libertarian Underground. frazzled Jan 2012 #8

Because only LIBERTARIANS care about social justice, right? EFerrari Jan 2012 #15

+1 Fearless Jan 2012 #93

Ditto! Wind Dancer Jan 2012 #45

Yeah! And if I vote for Obama in a state he has no chance of winning RiffRandell Jan 2012 #12

Today's enemy is the ACLU? n/t myrna minx Jan 2012 #6

Someone disagreeing with their position on something Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #18

It works upthread where they are smeared by association EFerrari Jan 2012 #20

No, it doesn't help anything. Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #26

No quarter is given for a difference of opinion. AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #41

You thought it was ok a2liberal Jan 2012 #70

A search warrant WAS obtained to seize his records. AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #74

Ok but a2liberal Jan 2012 #97

Seems no room for nuance with some, or complex views arely staircase Jan 2012 #83

Wrong. I showed you clearly exactly what you asked for. EFerrari Jan 2012 #63

I don't accept it Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #65

Today's show is brought to you by the letters A, C, L and U. EFerrari Jan 2012 #19

And here you're just reinforcing Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #29

And here you are missing the humor of my post EFerrari Jan 2012 #64

So "humor" Dewey Finn Jan 2012 #67

Heck, I think Obama will even tout this as a way for a repeal of some of it. FarLeftFist Jan 2012 #16

You know what we'll get then? treestar Jan 2012 #79

So you are against the "far left" and support indefinite detention? rhett o rick Jan 2012 #94

For the case to wind its way through the courts treestar Jan 2012 #103

"The far left is not for the rule of law - but for the rule of the far left. " Where do you come up rhett o rick Jan 2012 #104

If you have a problem with the ACLU DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2012 #35

You've been wrong before. RUMMYisFROSTED Jan 2012 #39

Are you clueless why they supported it? Read more. React less. Logical Jan 2012 #75

Well, they'll have to find a case of such detention occurring in order to challenge it frazzled Jan 2012 #4

The problem is that we just may never know who is being held or not Marrah_G Jan 2012 #9

All in the name of American freedom and democracy sad sally Jan 2012 #106

LOL sign the pledge. jaxx Jan 2012 #5

They say nothing about congress passing it tho. Nt DevonRex Jan 2012 #7

Which single member of Congress.. 99Forever Jan 2012 #11

They ran a whole campaign for people to contact Congress EFerrari Jan 2012 #21

Good to know. Nt DevonRex Jan 2012 #23

Yes ProSense Jan 2012 #28

Some of our Congress members listened suffragette Jan 2012 #32

Yes. When President Obama promised to VETO the bill, bvar22 Jan 2012 #84

Pres Obama signed it instead of sending it back. Now some hope that Congress will fix it. rhett o rick Jan 2012 #96

yes, they certainly did. nt arely staircase Jan 2012 #85

Oh, what does the ACLU know, anyway? gratuitous Jan 2012 #10

What would those libertarian repub Congress lovers know, anyway? EFerrari Jan 2012 #13

They ProSense Jan 2012 #14

You are right. The U.S. is not part of the world. Luminous Animal Jan 2012 #27

My bad ProSense Jan 2012 #31

Section 1021 obtains its scope from the 2001 AUMF. AtheistCrusader Jan 2012 #60

Wow, you never disappoint. Logical Jan 2012 #76

It doesn't contain a sweeping new anything treestar Jan 2012 #80

Whose side do you align with on this issue? The "far left" supports the rhett o rick Jan 2012 #95

I support the Constitution treestar Jan 2012 #102

Do you believe the president should be able to arrest and detain Amerian rhett o rick Jan 2012 #105

Do you think the courts would rule in favor of that? treestar Jan 2012 #107

The years it takes to get thru the courts are very damaging to the individual rhett o rick Jan 2012 #108

I hope the ACLU DOES take the specific Section of the bill all the way to... Spazito Jan 2012 #17

And now that Obama signed it despite his promise to veto, so is he. nt EFerrari Jan 2012 #22

No, he is not... Spazito Jan 2012 #30

Yes, he is responsible. theaocp Jan 2012 #36

So it is not the substance of the bill that is the issue... Spazito Jan 2012 #37

Obama should still have vetoed the bill....like he said he would... truebrit71 Jan 2012 #40

Again, nothing but a 'pretty photo-op' which would change nothing... Spazito Jan 2012 #42

I think you are wrong. If he had used his bully pulpit to stand up for civil liberties, knowing... truebrit71 Jan 2012 #43

He did and does use the bully pulpit to stand up for civil liberties... Spazito Jan 2012 #50

So you're saying that a veto is pointless a2liberal Jan 2012 #71

You just have to look at the numbers... Spazito Jan 2012 #86

Obama's threat - NOT promise- to veto had nothing to do with civil liberties. plantwomyn Jan 2012 #98

LOL.. I'd love to see a judge's reaction when someone says in court.... Xicano Jan 2012 #57

wow, using nazi prosecutions as your example... Spazito Jan 2012 #61

Go ahead and go to court and say your signature on a document doesn't make you responsible for.... Xicano Jan 2012 #69

Here is how the U.S. system works.... Spazito Jan 2012 #73

Thanks! Bookmarking. proverbialwisdom Jan 2012 #90

He signed it. That was him, his signature on the document. EFerrari Jan 2012 #62

Okay n/t Spazito Jan 2012 #66

so what if it has to go back to congress if he vetoed it newspeak Jan 2012 #101

It was changed before he signed it. treestar Jan 2012 #82

du rec nt. cthulu2016 Jan 2012 #24

K&R Solly Mack Jan 2012 #25

K&R suffragette Jan 2012 #33

Thank god for the ACLU quinnox Jan 2012 #34

The bus is emptying out...everyone's under it Dreamer Tatum Jan 2012 #38

Although I don't always agree with them, I'm most thankful for the ACLU. Uncle Joe Jan 2012 #44

K&R Wind Dancer Jan 2012 #46

Coming soon to DU3, an onslaught of SPAM posts about the bad, bad ACLU Catherina Jan 2012 #47

New #OWS chant. SammyWinstonJack Jan 2012 #48

Murdoch? Really? WTF. proverbialwisdom Jan 2012 #87

Good. The ACLU can take it to the courts. K&R MineralMan Jan 2012 #49

It would be nice if they didn't ignore the role congress played in this. nt killbotfactory Jan 2012 #51

Congress could take a long walk off a short pier, if theaocp Jan 2012 #54

they had enough support for this bill to override a veto. nt killbotfactory Jan 2012 #55

So? theaocp Jan 2012 #56

Now even the ACLU is immune from attacks on Democratic Underground! What's next? Better Believe It Jan 2012 #52

You probably meant "not immune." But I applaud this move. Robb Jan 2012 #53

You're right. That's what I meant. Better Believe It Jan 2012 #88

No group is immune from being wrong at times. nt killbotfactory Jan 2012 #58

Good point! Of course the ACLU is wrong for defending the Constitution and our democratic rights! Better Believe It Jan 2012 #91

Er, why should they be? treestar Jan 2012 #81

Woot! quinn-the-innuit Jan 2012 #59

K&R I stand with the ACLU (n/t) a2liberal Jan 2012 #68

k&r jannyk Jan 2012 #72

I still like the ACLU. nt BlueIris Jan 2012 #77

Fine, that is a good thing treestar Jan 2012 #78

fight it! independentLiberal Jan 2012 #89

On Detainee Law: A Word, but Not the Last, From Obama............... Historic NY Jan 2012 #92

the ACLU disagrees with the President?? Treason! piratefish08 Jan 2012 #99

Just donated to the ACLU again _ed_ Jan 2012 #100