[TigersEye]

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under
this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

It's not required meaning it is still on the table.

[bobby.223]

Exactly!!! Why some don’t understand language in this is beyond me. There will come a time soon when this NDAA is gonna be used on American citizens as things spiral downward out of control. To much food stored up? (7 days is considered ‘bad’ by DHS now). Say something bad about the muslim hussein on twitter, facebook or an email? (DHS has a list now of ‘bad’ words that they are looking at as they read our comms.) To many gun shop background checks for gun purchases? (Oh SH$T....we know what that means!!!!).

[Yosemitest]

Read the original article again.

"One successful myth is that there is an exception for citizens.
The White House is saying that changes to the law made it unnecessary to veto the legislation.
That spin is facially ridiculous.
The changes were the inclusion of some meaningless rhetoric after key amendments protecting citizens were defeated.
The provision merely states that nothing in the provisions could be construed to alter Americans’ legal rights.
Since the Senate clearly views citizens are not just subject to indefinite detention but even execution without a trial,
the change offers nothing but rhetoric to hide the harsh reality.
The Administration and Democratic members are in full spin — using language designed to obscure the authority given to the military.
The exemption for American citizens from the mandatory detention requirement (section 1032) is the screening language for the next section, 1031,
which offers no exemption for American citizens from the authorization to use the military to indefinitely detain people without charge or trial."

[Sprite518]

Please watch this video that covers that very point...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSgZUT8X5tI