We know that you will recall our earlier comments regarding how information is related; that being understanding the context as to what is being presented; moreover, the content, or the actual words used in the writing. Please see our previous article or just move down the page you are on. In our pursuits to bring a logical understanding of what this Act is and why all of the fuss it is important to see just how cordial our nation has been over its history in matters relative to the NDAA.
President Obama had threatened to veto the bill back in May, when the House passed one version of it, and again in November, when the Senate passed another, somewhat different version of it. But last week, after the House and Senate reconciled their two versions of the bill, the president lifted his veto threat.
His press secretary explained in a written statement that the revised bill was considered acceptable because problematic provisions had been removed, and because “the most recent changes give the President additional discretion in determining how the law will be implemented, consistent with our values and the rule of law.”
This is unequivocal nonsense! The POTUS (President Obama) doesn’t have respect for or does he follow the rule of law in this country. As a matter of fact Obama continually delineates himself from the U.S. Constitution (the actual “rule of law”) on a regular basis when appointing his czars to cabinet positions.
Numerous human rights advocates, civil libertarians, and members of Congress disagree. Human Rights Watch said that President Obama’s decision not to veto the bill “does enormous damage to the rule of law both in the US and abroad.” The ACLU said, “if President Obama signs this bill, it will damage both his legacy and American’s reputation for upholding the rule of law.”
Representative Jerrold Nadler, who voted against the bill, said that it presents a “momentous challenge to one of the founding principles of the United States—that no person may be deprived of his liberty without due process of law.”
We wonder in astonishment if these so-called “problematic provisions” which as you know are different versions of the bill by the House and Senate somehow miraculously combined their efforts, as well as President Obama’s utter disregard for the U.S. Constitution and any concerns about the “rule of law” in this country.