- Recorder Online - http://www.berthoudrecorder.com -

US Senate, the NDAA and Treason

Numerous writers have expressed an opinion about the action of the U.S. Senate in passing the National Defense Authorization bill with the indefinite detention clause. Here is a link to one of the most provocative and a look at the crackdown on protests.


Does US Senate Commit Treason with NDAA Bill?

from United Progressives

by Jeanine Molloff  (about the author [1])

December 1st, 2011, the US Senate accomplished the unthinkable–with the nearly unanimous passage of the National Defense Authorization Bill of 2012–they committed treason. Written and planned in secret by the Senate Armed Services Committee, the newly minted NDAA contains three sections which collectively sanctions indefinite detention of alleged terrorists or ‘terrorist sympathizers’–anywhere in the world including the US– and designates the military the duty to arrest, imprison and interrogate without benefit of counsel,’ accused civilians here on Main Street. Ironically, the abuse of civilian Iraqis by our military and by military contractors is coming to a locale near you. Theoretically, armed squads of US soldiers might be knocking on your door in the dead of night to take away Auntie Mame for her alleged ‘terrorist’ activities—at the ACLU. This bill potentially allows for the blatant political prosecutions of any dissenter using the military as a bully club to instill deep fear in any who dare to question our government’s motives.

No proof of wrongdoing is required and those accused are denied the due process right of trial by their peers, or the services of an attorney– and are subsequently relegated to the ‘military commissions justice system.’ As a result–the accused are reduced to the status of ‘unlawful enemy combatant,’ and are subject to the following actions: ‘extroardinary rendition’, ‘enhanced interrogation’ procedures, ‘indefinite detention to possibly a life sentence, and ‘presidential assigned extermination of target’ . These powers are then ‘given’ to the President to use at will, fully codified in law,while requiring in reality no proof other than presidential whim.

It is at this juncture that I find the timing of this bill suspicious–coinciding with the exponential growth of the Occupy Wall Street Movement, the recent implosion of both EU and US economies, the emerging body of proof documenting Wall Street’s enormous crimes, and the Super Committee threat to cut military funding. It almost looks like the robber barons of Wall Street ‘circling the wagons’ in a fit of legislative revenge against the rabble, namely you and I.

History of NDAA 2012 Sections 1031, 1032, and 1033-35…another AUMF


Will the NDAA be used against Occupy. Perhaps it is already happening

Occupiers Arrested Protesting NDAA, Denver Camp Burns
from In These Times
By Allison Kilkenny
 Eight Occupy Iowa protesters were arrested Monday at the Iowa Democratic Party headquarters in Des Moines where they protested what the Washington Post vaguely terms “defense spending.”
 Specifically, the group demanded President Obama veto the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA,) which gives the president the authority to indefinitely detain persons (including U.S. citizens) without trial and to expand the scope of the War on Terror.
 Unlike the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, which implies the president has the power to indefinitely detain individuals, NDAA explicitly expresses the president has the power of indefinite detention.
 President Obama had threatened early on to veto the entire NDAA, but subsequently, and entirely predictably, reversed that decision.
 In their early coverage, the Washington Post [3] and the Des Moines Register [4] only make passing reference to defense spending and NDAA without explaining the specific nefarious aspects of the act, though the Register does burn some column space emphasizing the Democratic headquarters is private property and then listing the full names, ages, and hometowns of protesters at the end of the article.