E.I.R. GmbH

National Defense Authorization Act:
Obama's Rush into Totalitarianism

On Dec. 31, 2011, President Obama signed into law the infamous National Defense Authorization Act. Sections of that Act provide for the indefinite detention of U.S. citizens, by the military, without trial or due process, simply on the grounds that a person is "part of or substantially" supporting any group deemed to be at war with the U.S. or "associated forces."

And since the so-called "war on terrorism" has no geographical limitations, the battlefield is everywhere, including the territory of the United States.

President Obama issued a signing statement with the NDAA, claiming that he has "serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists." Referring to Section 1021, Obama said that, "the bill may not be construed to affect any existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are arrested in the United States." The text, however, explicitly says the contrary.

Moreover, it was Barack Obama himself who insisted that this language be incorporated in the bill, at the point where Senator Carl Levin and others had removed all such language. Sen. Levin has said so explicitly. Now, Obama claims he will never implement those provisions of the Act, but his words are about as believable as Hitler's promise to the German Catholic Party, when he enacted the original Ermächtigungsgesetz on March 23, 1933, that he would never use provisions of that law to arrest political opponents.

Obama also states that "some in Congress continue to insist upon restricting the options available to our counterterrorism specialists and interfering with the very operations that have kept us safe." Therefore, "to combat terrorism," he said he would willfully disregard other sections of the NDAA that Congressmen specifically wrote in to provide minimal safeguards, i.e., in the tradition of Carl Schmitt.

There are three examples:

1) Section 1024 of the NDAA was inserted by Congress to specify that the Secretary of Defense, within 90 days of the enactment of the NDAA, would submit a report setting forth the procedures for "determining the status of persons detained pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force" public law, which is the original 2001 law that the Bush-Cheney duo pushed through. According to www.emptywheel.net, Republican Senator Lindsay Graham had insisted on this provision, stating to Congress:

"I want to be able to tell anybody who is interested that no person in an American prison - civilian or military - held as a suspected member of al-Qaida will be held without independent judicial review. We are not allowing the executive branch to make that decision unchecked. For the first time in the history of American warfare, every American combatant held by the executive branch will have their day in Federal Court, and the government has to prove by a preponderance of the evidence you are in fact part of the enemy force."

But Nerobama, in his signing statement, gives himself the right to override that provision, stating he will "grant the Secretary of Defense broad discretion to determine what detainee status determinations ... are subject to the requirement of this section." That is, the Defense Department will not issue the report on detainee status which Graham insisted upon.

2) Section 1028 of the NDAA limits the White House's ability to "transfer detainees to a foreign country," which is reported to be President Bush's infamous policy of renditions, whereby detainees are farmed out to prisons in other countries where they are, among other things, tortured. Saying this limitation "hinders" the "executive branch's ... ability to act swiftly in conducting negotiations with foreign countries," Obama states explicitly that his Administration will not be bound by Section 1028.

3) Section 1029 of the NDAA requires that "the Attorney General consult with the Director of National Intelligence and Secretary of Defense prior to filing criminal charges against or seeking an indictment of certain individuals." In his signing statement, Obama ludicrously says that this would diminish the "integrity and independence of the Department of Justice," and therefore he will contemptuously disregard it.

In section after section, President Obama makes clear that he intends to away impediments to a virtual dictatorship in the U.S. Please recall that this is the same person who, when running for President, strongly criticized Bush's use of signing statements.

Weitere Meldungen

Top

Schiller-Institut e.V.

Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität

LaRouche Political Action Committe

EIR Online

Impressum