Lawsuit Against the NDAA; "Stop the NDAA" Panel

Lawsuit Against the NDAA; Stop the NDAA Panel

NDAA Panel
The controversial provision 1021(b)(2) of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was back in 2nd Circuit Appeals Court yesterday (Feb 6). On September 12, 2012, the provision was ruled to be vague and unconstitutional by District Judge Katherine B. Forrest who ordered a permanent injunction. Federal prosecutors immediately appealed the decision and were granted an emergency stay. Plaintiffs in the case are Chris Hedges, Daniel Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, Birgitta Jonsdottir, Jennifer Bolen, Kai Wargalla, Alexa O'Brien and Cornel West.

Yesterday, after court hearings, a two part panel was organized to discuss the implications of Section 1021(b)(2) of the NDAA. The participants in the first part of the panel were (top photo), politician David Segal, case coordinator Tangerine Bolen, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Chris Hedges, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Hedges v. Obama case lawyers Bruce Afran and Carl Mayer, and journalist Alexa O'Brien. Filmmaker Michael Moore, whistleblower and attorney Jesselyn Radack, and NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake joined part two of the panel.

The NDAA, as it stands now, is a law written in "dangerously vague" language, that authorizes the worldwide, indefinite military detention of anyone who is deemed to "substantially support", or "directly support" terrorist organizations or their "associated forces". It "violates the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th and 8th Amendments of the US Constitution and most of the Bill of Rights". As Daniel Ellsberg summarized it in last night's panel: "We don't quite live in police state, but we do have infrastructure of one!" With the rising plutocracy, journalists and whistleblowers who speak out against corporate and government wrongdoing are increasingly finding themselves harassed and marginalized by those forces. If we keep in mind that the FBI investigated the Occupy Movement as a potential terrorist threat, it is difficult not to be skeptical of "intentionally" vague laws such as the 2012 NDAA. "Intentional", because, the law could have been simply rewritten to remove the ambiguity, but instead, the 2013 NDAA is just as vague. Take action, Stop the NDAA!

Videos: First Panel and Second Panel.

Song of the Day: Paloma Negra - Chavela Vargas (1961)
<< PreviousNext >>








Feed SubscriptioneMail SubscriptionContact

Copyright © 2010-2017 -