Late on Saturday, New Year's Eve, 2010 President Barack Obama signed into law a bill sent to him by John Boehner and Harry Reid. It was innocuously called the "National Defense Appropriation Act" and, contrary to the title's tone, constitutes one of the most broad reaching and egregious abrogations of the Natural Rights of Americans protected until this year by the United States Constitution.
Section 1020 (c-1) of the act provides for the "detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities" of any person, regardless of citizenship, accused (interestingly it is not "charged" or "convicted") of terrorism or supporting terrorism against the United States or any person who has "substantially supported" any "associated forces" of terrorist organizations.
The act further allows the military, at the discretion of the president, to detain Americans without arraignment or filing charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities.
Disturbingly, President George W. Bush outlined exactly how long that will be. On 20 Sep 2001 he said, "Our 'war on terror' begins with Al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."
Now, I'll be the first to say that terrorism is evil and that there is no place on the face of the earth for a terrorist or someone who supports terrorism in any way.
And I'll also be the first to say that Americans are exceptional in part because we are protected in the exercise of our unalienable rights by the most remarkable document ever penned by man. We call it the Constitution.
Our rights as citizens do not derive from the Constitution, as many think. Rather, our rights - all Natural Rights, and not only those listed in the Bill of Rights - derive from "the God of Nature". He grants them to all mankind, and they are guaranteed to Americans by the Constitution in that the Constitution prohibits the government of the United States, or any agent thereof, from abridging or restricting them.
And so we see a continuation of the unchecked infringement of our Natural Rights by a government - a "bi-partisan" government - in the "National Defense Appropriation Act" of 2011.
The Fourth Amendment secures all Americans in their persons, papers, property and effects from search or seizure without a duly sworn search warrant that is specific in defining the location and the nature of the items to be found and seized.
The Sixth Amendment ensures that the government will not hold a person without notifying them of the nature of the crime they are accused of, will allow them to confront their accusers, will allow them to present witnesses on their behalf, and will provide for a speedy and public trial by jury.
There is some contradiction between the wording of the act and the wording of the amendments.
I know some of you whose names start with "K" don't always read the articles I link to. In this case, please take the time to visit:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/01/03/the-ndaa-a-dangerous-precedent-even-with-the-signing-statement/
It's a short-ish article that does a great job of getting to the meat of the detention issue. I will say that they gloss over the fact that there appears to be an out in that the act does not "require" the military to detain a US citizen indefinitely.
But "not requiring" and "forbidding" are not the same thing.
Call me a cynic, but my head wants to explode when I think that the act does not prohibit the indefinite detention of US citizens.
Section 1020 (c-1) of the act provides for the "detention under the law of war without trial until the end of hostilities" of any person, regardless of citizenship, accused (interestingly it is not "charged" or "convicted") of terrorism or supporting terrorism against the United States or any person who has "substantially supported" any "associated forces" of terrorist organizations.
The act further allows the military, at the discretion of the president, to detain Americans without arraignment or filing charges and without trial for the duration of hostilities.
Disturbingly, President George W. Bush outlined exactly how long that will be. On 20 Sep 2001 he said, "Our 'war on terror' begins with Al-Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."
Now, I'll be the first to say that terrorism is evil and that there is no place on the face of the earth for a terrorist or someone who supports terrorism in any way.
And I'll also be the first to say that Americans are exceptional in part because we are protected in the exercise of our unalienable rights by the most remarkable document ever penned by man. We call it the Constitution.
Our rights as citizens do not derive from the Constitution, as many think. Rather, our rights - all Natural Rights, and not only those listed in the Bill of Rights - derive from "the God of Nature". He grants them to all mankind, and they are guaranteed to Americans by the Constitution in that the Constitution prohibits the government of the United States, or any agent thereof, from abridging or restricting them.
And so we see a continuation of the unchecked infringement of our Natural Rights by a government - a "bi-partisan" government - in the "National Defense Appropriation Act" of 2011.
The Fourth Amendment secures all Americans in their persons, papers, property and effects from search or seizure without a duly sworn search warrant that is specific in defining the location and the nature of the items to be found and seized.
The Sixth Amendment ensures that the government will not hold a person without notifying them of the nature of the crime they are accused of, will allow them to confront their accusers, will allow them to present witnesses on their behalf, and will provide for a speedy and public trial by jury.
There is some contradiction between the wording of the act and the wording of the amendments.
I know some of you whose names start with "K" don't always read the articles I link to. In this case, please take the time to visit:
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/01/03/the-ndaa-a-dangerous-precedent-even-with-the-signing-statement/
It's a short-ish article that does a great job of getting to the meat of the detention issue. I will say that they gloss over the fact that there appears to be an out in that the act does not "require" the military to detain a US citizen indefinitely.
But "not requiring" and "forbidding" are not the same thing.
Call me a cynic, but my head wants to explode when I think that the act does not prohibit the indefinite detention of US citizens.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment