Archive for January 10th, 2012

On the last day of 2011, President Obama signed into law the so-called National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012. The Act is a United States federal law that has been enacted for each of the past 49 years to specify the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. For 2012, the budget amounts to a stunning $622 billion.

But more importantly, this year’s act contains some controversial provisions. In particular, the NDAA text affirms the President’s authority to detain, via armed forces, any person “who was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States” and anyone who commits a “belligerent act” against the U.S.,  under the law of war, “without trial, until the end of the hostilities authorized by the AUMF.”

This implies indefinite detention (i.e. imprisonment) of any suspect without trial. It is hard to believe that (i) this piece of legislation was signed into law, (ii) by Barack Obama, and (iii) not heavily criticized by the media.

In order to wake up some people, let me suggest a few videos dealing with America’s so-called war on terrorism:

First, Judge Andrew Napolitano discusses on Freedom Watch what happens when presidents go bad:

When Presidents violate the Constitution, the supreme and fundamental law of the land, and when they get away with it, that establishes a very dangerous precedence for future presidents to exceed their predecessors’ behavior.

Second, Stephen Colbert talks about the NDAA in his Colbert ReportThe Word – Catch 2012

Third, Napolitano describes why the US Constitution still matters.

And finally, an earlier post about the Patriot Act and how Obama tries to enhance it.


Read Full Post »