Obama Stands Firm: No Homeland Battlefield

By Agency France-Presse

04 December 11

The language being used by the White House here appears politically driven, when they say the so-called 'Homeland Battlefield' provisions in the pending defense bill are unacceptable because they 'would restrict US flexibility in the fight against Al-Qaeda.' The pro-active security-driven logic is a political safe harbor for the administration. In essence, what the administration is saying is, if the provisions remain in the bill the president will veto it. The broader and far more important issue, that the proposed provisions would stand in contradiction to one of the constitution's most fundamental civil liberties mechanisms, Habeas Corpus, is left unaddressed by the White House or Congress. -- MA/RSN

he White House on Friday reaffirmed its threat to veto the Pentagon budget after the Senate passed a funding bill that requires military detention for terrorism suspects and indefinite detention without trial in some cases.

White House spokesman Jay Carney accused the Senate of engaging in "political micromanagement" by including provisions that he said would restrict US flexibility in the fight against Al-Qaeda.

"Any bill that challenges or constrains the president's critical authority to collect intelligence, incapacitate dangerous terrorists and protect the nation will prompt his senior advisors to recommend a veto," Carney said.

The provisions were in a $660 billion 2012 defense bill that passed the Senate on Thursday in a 93-7 vote.

It would require that terrorism suspects be held by the military, and either be tried by US military commissions or in some cases be held indefinitely.

The White House sees the provisions as a constraint on the administration's ability to transfer prisoners from Guantanamo Bay to the United States, try them in civilian court, or even transfer them to foreign countries.

"Counterterrorism officials from the Republican and Democratic administrations as you know have said that the language in this bill would jeopardize the national security by restricting flexibility in our fight against Al-Qaeda," Carney said.

"By ignoring these non-partisan recommendations, including the recommendations of the secretary of defense, the director of the FBI, the director of national intelligence and the attorney general, the Senate has unfortunately engaged in a little political micromanagement at the expense of sensible national security policy," he added.