John Stein: Staggering Unconstitutionality of National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Against US Citizens

John Steiner

Surrendering 2011: Rendition and Methane

Jim Garrison

Huffington Post, 28 December 2011

In the fine print of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, passed just before the holidays, it turns out that in addition to being now legally able to seize without charge and hold indefinitely without trial any U.S. citizen, the government and the military also have the authority to use rendition on U.S. citizens. This was a policy originally enunciated by the Bush Administration to enable the CIA and the military to take suspects from one country to another for interrogation and torture, thus enabling U.S. officials to sidestep any human rights restrictions. Rendition was initially conceived as an extra-legal instrument in the war on terror. Now it is the law of the land and potentially applies to any and all U.S. citizens deemed “suspects.”

Ironically, the Act was passed on the 220th anniversary of the passage of the Bill of Rights. It was signed into law by a president who went to Harvard to study the Constitution. All that remains is to activate the FEMA camps, some 600 nationwide, and 2012 becomes 1984.

This level of cynicism by our national leaders about our constitutionally guaranteed “inalienable rights” and the ability of a free people to determine their own future is staggering in its implications. One particular note concerns the media, which was largely silent until right at the very end, essentially after the Act had already passed both the House and the Senate. The United States just officially transitioned into a totalitarian democracy and the fact was barely noticed. I would guess that less that 15% of the public even knew it happened.

Read full article.

Opt in for free daily update from this free blog. Separately The Steele Report ($11/mo) offers weekly text report and live webinar exclusive to paid subscribers, who can also ask questions of Robert. Or donate to ask questions directly of Robert.