Obama extends terrorism ‘national emergency’

While we debate the extent and invasiveness of our surveillance society and the wisdom (or lack thereof) of U.S. military action in Syria, President Barack Obama on Tuesday extended – again – the official national emergency that began a dozen years ago this week with the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Here’s the official notice issued by the president:


Consistent with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. 1622(d), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency previously declared on September 14, 2001, in Proclamation 7463, with respect to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the continuing and immediate threat of further attacks on the United States.

Because the terrorist threat continues, the national emergency declared on September 14, 2001, and the powers and authorities adopted to deal with that emergency must continue in effect beyond September 14, 2013. Therefore, I am continuing in effect for an additional year the national emergency that was declared on September 14, 2001, with respect to the terrorist threat.

This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.


Josh Richman

Josh Richman covers state and national politics for the Bay Area News Group. A New York City native, he earned a bachelor’s degree in journalism from the University of Missouri and reported for the Express-Times of Easton, Pa. for five years before coming to the Oakland Tribune and ANG Newspapers in 1997. He is a frequent guest on KQED Channel 9’s “This Week in Northern California;” a proud father; an Eagle Scout; a somewhat skilled player of low-stakes poker; a rather good cook; a firm believer in the use of semicolons; and an unabashed political junkie who will never, EVER seek elected office.

  • RR Senile Columnist

    2 step process to reply: 1. Stick thumb in mouth. 2. Analyse

  • Elwood

    Who dat twisting slowly in the wind?

    Oh, no!

    It’s our feckless leader, the greatest President since Jimmy Carter.

    What’s the difference between Obama’s second term and Carter’s second term? Carter didn’t have a second term.

  • JohnW

    “What’s the difference between Obama’s second term and Carter’s second term?”

    Mitt Romney and memories of the eight years that preceded Obama’s first term.

  • Elwood

    Twisting, twisting, slowly in the wind.

    Compared to Obama a lame duck will look like an Olympic champion.

  • Rick K.

    Good catch, Mr. Richman. This was the true Sept. 11, 2001-related news story today, yet just about all of the media ignored it. Candidate Barack Obama back in 2007-08 made it seem as if he planned to bring real “Change” to Washington. Instead the military-surveillance-industrial complex fears him as much as they would a toothless chihuahua — one that even has given up barking. Obama is like some benign lecturer on a prestigious university faculty, relegated to the sidelines but kept around only the lessen the teaching load of the real professors, with “engaging lecturer” and “popularity with the students” being his main assets. Oh wait — that’s what Obama was like 10 years ago at the University of Chicago. Has he changed much in the past decade? Or is he still acting like “the adjunct professor” at the White House?

  • Elwood

    Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like a leader.

  • JohnW


    Be patient, Elwood. Maybe the GOP will come up with a great leader for 2016. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul seem to be the hot items these days.

    Ted’s most recent demonstration of what he has to offer is to say that what the Senate needs are more leaders like Jesse Helms. He even bragged that the first campaign contribution he ever made was to the late race-baiter and general hate monger from North Carolina.

    Now as for Rand, he’s an ophthalmologist. So, he could give us that “vision thing” people always look for in a leader.

  • Elwood
  • Elwood

    Buckwheat would have made a better President.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    When B.H. O’Bailout doesn’t have his feet on the desk, his legs are crossed like a woman. “W”. Bushler crossed his legs like a woman too. I can’t cross my legs like the presidents. It hurts my manliness.

  • JohnW

    #9 & 11

    See link for pics of George W. and Gerald Ford with their feet firmly planted on the Oval Office desk. Obama only had one foot on the desk. Bush had both feet on the desk. Does that make W twice as offensive?

    If you are preoccupied with how Obama and Bush 43 cross their legs, you might have issues.


  • Elwood

    The op-ed page in today’s CCTimes was a sheer delight.

    Editorial cartoon of Putin as Lucy holding the ball while Charlie Brown Obama comes running up to kick it.

    Thomas Sowell pointing out what a childish egotistical POS Obama is.

    There is a ground swell of contempt for our feckless leader.

  • JohnW

    “There is a ground swell of contempt for our feckless leader.”

    There is some truth to that statement in connection with Syria because of the red line business, zig zagging etc.

    So, in the case of Syria, Elwood, what exactly should Obama have done that would have changed your opinion from “feckless” to “effective?”

    Why is what is happening now (Assad acknowledging his stockpile of chemical weapons, joining the international convention against use of chemical weapons, greatly reduced chance that he will use chemical weapons again because it would make Putin look bad and at least a chance that Assad will actually place the stockpile under international control) a less desirable outcome than if Obama had not been “feckless?” What action/outcome would you prefer.

    As “feckless” as Obama’s threat of military strikes was (both because of Obama’s own zig zagging and overwhelming public and Congressional opposition), would Putin/Assad have made their move on chemical weapons without Obama’s threats?

  • Elwood

    There was a threat? How many zigzags ago was that?

    Assad will give uup his weapons when tigers become vegans. And Putin will do nothing.

    And Obama will still be a doofus.

  • JohnW


    As red lines and zig zags go, Syria is not exactly unique or that big.

    During the past 20 or so years, how many times have the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations declared with absolute certainty that Iran will not be allowed to get nukes? Honest, Bibi, we’ve got your back!

    Your op-ed buddy, Thomas Sowell’s column was pretty strange. He compared Obama’s Syria red line predicament to Neville Chamberlain issuing the ultimatum that, if Hitler invaded Poland, the Brits would declare war. So, according to Sowell’s version of history, Chamberlain “felt he had to declare war” after Hitler invaded Poland.

    Gosh, you mean if Chamberlain had just kept his mouth shut, the Brits could have stayed on the sidelines while Hitler conquered the rest of Europe and avoided that whole messy World War II thing?

    So, WWED — What would Elwood do?

  • Elwood

    Fortunately, I am neither POTUS nor PMGB.

    I can sit on the sidelines and declare with a high degree of confidence that both Chamberlain and Obama are/were doofuses.

    History will judge Obama as it has judged Chamberlain.

  • JohnW


    PMGB? What’s that?

  • Elwood

    Prime Minister Great Britain

    I made it up.

    The situation seemed to call for an acronym similar to POTUS.

  • Bruce R. Peterson, Lafayette

    I saw a cartoon on facebook today that called a character “King Omaha”. It was a strong resemblance to B. H. O.
    I took me 3 seconds to figure our PMGB. How could anybody be so dense as to have to ask? After El Woody said “Chamberlain”

  • JohnW

    Best online comment today:

    “Congress can’t pass gas after a plate of beens.”

  • JohnW

    Make that “beans.”