Daniel Ellsberg and NDAA and detention
Us oldies know about Daniel Ellsberg. In 1971 he risked doing 35 years in prison by leaking the Pentagon Papers, the 7000+ a top-secret Pentagon study of U.S. government decision-making in relation to the Vietnam War (that made clear many of the US government's lies). They went after him, but it backfired for Nixon; Nixon's illegal attempts to nail Ellsberg helped bring Nixon down. Nixon's wiretapping and having the CIA question Ellsberg's doctor and other actions, however, now are legal. Ellsberg has been one my heroes for many years. We were lucky enough to hear him speak in SLC a few years ago. His case is somewhat tragic because he read the documents before the Gulf of Tonkin incident and if he'd release them the escalation of the Vietnam War might never had occurred.
"Everything that Richard Nixon did to me, for which he faced impeachment and prosecution, which led to his resignation, is now legal under the Patriot Act, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)." Daniel Ellsberg.
The Trojan Horse was National Defense Authorization Act for the 2012 fiscal year, or the H.R. 1540. The NDAA is nominally the bill that funds Dept of Defense.
Back in 2001, Bush enacted the Patriot Act. This allowed the government to spy on citizens, monitoring their activities in order to discern whether or not someone is a terrorist. It brought about changes in law enforcement that allowed agencies to search phones, financial records, etc.
One of the most controversial aspects of the law was the authorization of indefinite detention of non-U.S. citizens. Immigrants suspected of being terrorists would be detained without trial until the War on Terrorism finished.
Obama, picking a day when it would not be noticed in the news, New Years Eve, December 31st, 2011, signed the new NDAA. Many, like Daniel Ellsberg, claim that the new NDAA allows indefinite detention of American citizens. In reading and re-reading section 1022 I, and many in congress, find it legally vague. An analysis of the language is found in http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/thre...etention_bill/
excellent essay on Ellsberg, Nixon, Obama and what the **** is going on: http://perpendicularnews.com/home/category/america/war/
further stuff (I haven't watched the videos so don't blame me):
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH
NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD
THE NEW YORK TIMES