Archive for December 2nd, 2011
The Israel Lobby and the Creation of US Dictatorship
Obama can still indefinitely detain with NDAA [VIDEO]
Chris Hedges Responds to NDAA Defeat, Says It’s a ‘Black Day’ for Liberty
US support for Israel primary motivation for 9/11 (and earlier World Trade Center attack in 1993) and resulted in Patriot Act which has shredded Bill of Rights ever since!: http://tinyurl.com/motivation911
Obama signs NDAA 2013 without objecting to indefinite detention of Americans:
Exclusive NDAA Coverage: Call to Action with Chris Hedges
‘US government is not protecting its citizens’ civil liberties’
Kucinich on NDAA: Indefinite detention part of push to shred Constitution:
Why You Should Be Outraged About The Ruling To Keep The NDAA Indefinite Detention Clause In Effect
According to This Report, The Newest Version Of NDAA Makes It EASIER To Detain Citizens Indefinitely: http://j.mp/UewSAF
Hedges: “No Outcry Within Media” on NDAA:
NDAA Authorizes War Against Iran (for Israel):
Americans already detained under NDAA?
Due process under duress: Detaining citizens under NDAA
Activists retaliate against the US government by suing them for signing a bill they say goes against the Constitution
Court blocks NDAA indefinite detention provision; Obama appeals: http://owl.li/dJad5
White House demands military prisons for Americans under NDAA: http://on.rt.com/xsdzk7
The Battle Over NDAA’s Police-State Provisions Continues in Court:
US Army Preparing for Martial Law Scenario in US? Civil Disturbance and Mock Riot Drills In Washington?
Obama rules as a dictator, says Ron Paul — RT
Carl Levin on NDAA ‘Obama Admin insisted on the contents’
Ron Paul furious over indefinite detention act:
‘Ron Paul challenges US establishment’ http://www.presstv.ir/detail/219525.html
Indefinite detention Act voids US Constitution
US Senate passes ‘indefinite detention’ bill
US president expected to sign law allowing so-called terror suspects to be detained indefinitely, without trial:
Anonymous attacking creators of indefinite detention bill — RT
US support for Israel was primary motivation for 911 and earlier attack on World Trade Center in 1993 so US is losing its Bill of Rights because of support for Israel:
Battlefield US: Americans face arrest as war criminals under Army state law
Obama insists on indefinite detention of Americans
Glenn Greenwald: Obama Had Indefinite Detention Inserted Into Defense Authorization Act
Indefinite Military Detention Of U.S. Citizens Is A Win For Terrorists, Former Admiral Says
House-Senate Revise Indefinite Detention Bill in Bid to Avoid White House Veto, But Fears Remain
Glenn Greenwald: Obama Had Indefinite Detention Inserted Into Defense Authorization Act
US: Refusal to Veto Detainee Bill A Historic Tragedy for Rights | Human Rights Watch
Larry Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to Colin Powell, calls the National Defense Authorization Act a draconian violation of our civil rights. See seven minute video interview on Real News:
National Defense Authorization Act: Battlefield USA
Zionist Senators Push Military Detention for US
US Senate To Vote On Bill That Will Allow The Military To Arrest Americans On American Soil And Hold Them Indefinitely
”In short, the US Senate and the House of Representatives—are in the process of establishing a military dictatorship. Any senators or congressman supporting this or merely remaining silent are as guilty as Levin, McCain, Graham and McKeon. As Dr. King explained, there comes a time when silence equals betrayal.” Please share this excellent description of the NDAA!” Coleen Rowley
Op-Ed: Does US Senate Commit Treason with NDAA Bill?
Indefinite military detention for U.S. citizens now in the hands of a secretive conference committee
Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? In the Senate’s dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can:
Senate Bill Allows Arrest of Americans by Military Anywhere
Sens. Paul, McCain clash over terrorist detainee amendment
Sen. Rand Paul Defends American Citizens Against Indefinite Detainment
Senator Rand Paul on New Federal Powers:
Yesterday the Senate voted 60-38 to give Obama and every future president a controversial new power. It says the United States is part of the battlefield in the “War on Terrorism.” The military could arrest US citizens on US soil, suspend their constitutional rights, and detain them
Setting the Trap
Levin-McCain bill would create a presidential dictatorship. Where is the outrage?
McCain says American Citizens Can Be Sent to Guantanamo
Congress on the Move to Legalize Torture:
Impeach All Senators for Voted for the McCain/Levin Bill they committed Treason directly against the Constitution and American people! (5546 signatures on petition)
5 Things to Know About Detention in the Defense Bill
What the defense bill does and doesn’t do.
By Adam Serwer | Wed Dec. 7, 2011 12:25 PM PST
Given the sheer volume of changes to the National Defense Authorization Act (which passed the Senate last week), I figured I’d do a quick post explaining where some of the most important issues stand as the bill heads into conference, facing the threat of a presidential veto.
The bill no longer authorizes the indefinite military detention of Americans captured in the US . That authority was removed from the Senate bill by a compromise amendment  that stated nothing in the bill was intended to change existing authority on detention. While Senators such as Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) argue that the president already has the authority  to do so based on the 2004 Supreme Court decision Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, that case involved an American captured in Afghanistan. The Supreme Court has not yet weighed in on the constitutionality of indefinite military detention of Americans suspected of terrorism who are apprehended in the US .
The bill does mandate military detention for non-citizens. A bipartisan group of Senators approved provisions  mandating military detention for non-citizens who are apprehended in the US and are suspected of “substantial” ties to Al Qaeda or affiliated groups, absent a waiver from the department of defense. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, the Director of National Intelligence, the head of the FBI, and even former Bush officials have all said the provision would hamper counterterrorism efforts. Civil liberties groups, meanwhile, charge that it would violate longstanding prohibitions on the military enforcing domestic law. The administration has threatened to veto the bill  over this provision.
The bill “affirms” the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force. Both the Senate and House versions of the NDAA “reaffirm” the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force against al-Qaeda. Since the original AUMF was tied to the 9/11 attacks and therefore had an implied endpoint, civil liberties groups and some Democrats have charged  that these provisions are essentially approval of an endless global war on terrorism. (Lawfare‘s Ben Wittes, who thinks a new AUMF is appropriate, writes  that the Senate version differs slightly in that it states it is “not intended either to limit or expand the authority to wage war under the AUMF.”)
Despite its flaws, the Senate version could provide some key oversight over executive authority. Marcy Wheeler has argued  that the administration is concerned about provisions in the Senate version of the bill that would force the administration to clarify to Congress exactly who the US is at war with at any given time. Wheeler writes that this would be a “huge improvement over the secret unilateral decisions the Executive has been allowed to make for a decade.” That’s Congress though; the public would still be in the dark. Marty Lederman, formerly of Obama’s Office of Legal Counsel, has said that the US is secretly at war  with groups and inviduals they don’t actually know they’re at war with. Freedom!
Obama wouldn’t be the first to veto a defense bill. According to the Congressional Research Service, if Obama makes good on his veto threat he wouldn’t be the first president to hate the troops—I mean excercize executive prerogative. All of Obama’s predecessors since President Jimmy Carter, with the exception of George H.W. Bush, have vetoed an NDAA. That of course, includes notable liberals George W. Bush and Ronald Reagan. That said, vetoing the bill wouldn’t change the current paradigm, in which American citizens suspected of terrorism abroad can be killed without trial and the Obama administration’s approach to counterterrorism differs little from the post-2006 Bush administration. Vetoing this bill won’t close Gitmo, end the use of military commissions, or make the administration more judicious with its deadly flying robots .