© CTJ71081 (CC-BY)
I was on the 15th floor of the Southern U.S. District Court in New York in the courtroom of Judge Katherine Forrest last Tuesday. It was the final hearing in the lawsuit I brought in January against President Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta. I filed the suit, along with lawyers Carl J. Mayer and Bruce I. Afran, over
Section 1021 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). We were late joined by six co-plaintiffs including Noam Chomsky and Daniel Ellsberg.
This section of the NDAA, signed into law by Obama on Dec. 31, 2011, obliterates some of our most important constitutional protections. It authorizes the executive branch to order the military to seize U.S. citizens deemed to be terrorists or associated with terrorists. Those taken into custody by the military, which becomes under the NDAA a domestic law enforcement agency, can be denied due process and habeas corpus and held indefinitely in military facilities. Any activist or dissident, whose rights were once protected under the First Amendment, can be threatened under this law with indefinite incarceration in military prisons, including our offshore penal colonies. The very name of the law itself - the Homeland Battlefield Bill - suggests the totalitarian credo of endless war waged against enemies within "the homeland" as well as those abroad.
"The essential thrust of the NDAA is to create a system of justice that violates the separation of powers," Mayer told the court. "[The Obama administration has] taken detention out of the judicial branch and put it under the executive branch."
In May, Judge Forrest issued a temporary injunction invalidating Section 1021 as a violation of the First and Fifth amendments. It was a courageous decision. Forrest will decide within a couple of weeks whether she will make the injunction permanent.
In last week's proceeding, the judge, who appeared from her sharp questioning of government attorneys likely to nullify the section, cited the forced internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II as a precedent she did not want to follow. Forrest read to the courtroom a dissenting opinion by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson in
Korematsu v. United States, a ruling that authorized the detention during the war of some 110,00 Japanese-Americans in government "relocation camps."
Comment: Here we see a perfect example of the way in which the global elite are frantically attempting to induce fear and dependency on authority in the population. The idea that Iranian nuclear weapons would ever constitute an existential threat to Israel (or any other nation) is nonsense. Such an idea is only believable to the extent that people buy the lie that Iranian leaders are 'crazy' enough to attack Israel and, in doing so, ensure their own annihilation by way of a massive Israeli nuclear response. Logic suggests that the Iranian leaders very much enjoy their country and the positions of power they hold. The idea that they would throw it all away just to destroy Israel, and leave no Iranians (and not much of Iran) to proclaim 'victory' is utterly bogus.
The real threat here is a threat to the global elite's hold on power by way of impending cometary bombardment, a threat against which they can do nothing to protect the people. If the people were to become aware of this, they would very quickly ditch any allegiance to their truly impotent 'leaders'. And so, bogus threats of the terrestrial kind must be continually marketed to the people to keep them in thrall to, and dependent on, the elite for false protection against phantom enemies.