NDAA causes controversy

By William R. Toler

You wouldn’t think something as innocent-sounding as the National Defense Authorization Act would pose such a threat to the people of the nation.

On first thought, it sounds like just funding the military….which is just what it is supposed to be. According to Wikipedia it is a “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.”

So, why then, has there been so much opposition among liberty activists?

There’s a dangerous provision that the Huffington Post calls the “worst thing since the Alien and Sedition Acts.” That provision allows for the arrest and indefinate detention of Americans seen as a threat by the military, thereby abolishing the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act which prohibits the military from domestic policing.

The act, which passed through the Senate 93-7, was signed by President Obama on New Years Eve…despite orignally saying he would veto the bill with that provision. However, he did include a signing statement saying:” I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”

Most of our state’s servants in Washington voted for the act including both Senators Richard Burr and Kay Hagan. NC Congressmen Mel Watt and Walter Jones were among the opposition in the House of Represenatives. If Jones, a staunch advocate for the miltary, is against it…there must be something wrong.

Late night radio talk show Coast to Coast A.M. produced a 3-hour special Wednesday night stocked with guests to give their insight on the provision.

Constitutional lawyer Jonathan Emord said the provision is clearly unconstitutional, violating protections outlined in the Sixth Amendment regarding due process. Emord added that the act would also suspend habeas corpus for those detained. When this happens, he said, “that is the end of liberty.”

Independent journalist David Seaman said that what should be the biggest headline has been seemingly ignored by the mainstream media. Working in the industry, I can testify that it has.

Seaman said the provision has been decryed by the ACLU and members of both the Occupy Movement and the Tea Party. He added that if civil unrest continues in the country, the act could be used against members of those movements if seen as a threat.

Several members of Congress have also spoken out against it, including presidential candidate Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX.) Wednesday, Paul returned to the house floor to introduce a repeal of the act:

This is precisely the kind of egregious distortion of justice that Americans have always ridiculed in so many dictatorships overseas. A great man named Solzhenitsyn became the hero of so many of us when he exposed the Soviet Union’s extensive gulag system. Is this really the kind of United States we want to create in the name of fighting terrorism?

Some have argued that nothing in Section 1021 explicitly mandates holding Americans without trial, but it employs vague language radically expanding the detention authority to include anyone who has “substantially supported” certain terrorist groups or “associated forces.” No one has defined what those two terms mean. What is an “associated force”?

In Monday night’s debate in South Carolina, candidate Mitt Romney said that he would’ve also signed the NDAA with the indefinite detention provision, but he recovered by saying he would not abuse the policy.

However, Paul (who insisted he answer that question after an attempt to switch the subject) disagreed. “I think we’re going in the wrong direction for the protection of our liberties here at home…This is major.”

Also on Coast to Coast was Tyrel Ventura, son of former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura. “The military is not designed as a police force,” he said, whether it be foreign or domestically. Ventura said he believes the law was put into place to quell potential rebellion and could be used against anti-war activists.

Adding to the concern was Gerald Celente, a trends researcher. He said he could see something like this coming…with all the other liberty destroying actions over the past decade including the Patriot Act and the creation of the TSA. He also said he thinks the act is to keep the people in place in case of an economic crisis.

Rounding out the show was radio host and filmmaker (some say fear monger and conspiracy theorist) Alex Jones. His concerns mirrored those of the previous guests. Jones also aluded to his film Police State 2000.

The 2-hour-long documentary contains footage of urban warfare drills. Those drills were a bit alarming. In Maryland, Marines patrolled the streets and perched on rooftops. In California, troops held back and arrested actors who were insisting on their Constitutionally-guaranteed rights. In both drills, the military simulated confiscating guns from citizens.

If we ever get to that point, I pray that our soldiers–unlike our represenatives–will remember the oath that they took to uphold the Constitution.

Hopefully, Congressman Paul can get the provision repealed, for the security of our liberties…or what’s left of them.