We think you're near Los Angeles

Generals confront Obama's NDAA, say it's a 'victory for bin Laden'

NDAA would 'expand the battlefield to include United States and hand Osama bin Laden an unearned victory long after his well-earned demise'

In last moment opposition to the nation's leaders' greatest assault on basic huan rights, the National Defense Authorization bill that President Barack Obama insisted include Americans on U.S. soil for military arrest without charge and indefinite detention, retired military leaders Tuesday resorted to publicly confronting the president in the New York Times in their continued speaking out against provisions in the bill as released Monday night from the congressional conference committee.

"In his inaugural address, President Obama called on us to 'reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.' We agree," stated the retired military leaders in their New York Times piece Tuesday.

Advertisement

"Now, to protect both, he must veto the National Defense Authorization Act that Congress is expected to pass this week."

President Obama could sign the bill enacting martial law as early as Wednesday.

Retired four-star Marine generals Charles C. Krulak and Joseph P. Hoar have warned against provisions in the bill that would serious impact U.S. counterterrorism policy in today’s New York Times.

Congresspersons undermine American ideals in the name of 'terrorism'

In their piece “Guantanamo Forever?” the former military leaders urged President Obama to veto the bill that contains a provision that "would authorize the military to indefinitely detain without charge people suspected of involvement with terrorism, including United States citizens apprehended on American soil.”
 
Krulak and Hoar argue that if this bill becomes a law, “due process would be a thing of the past."
 
"Some claim that this provision would merely codify existing practice. Current law empowers the military to detain people caught on the battlefield, but this provision would expand the battlefield to include the United States…”
 
In a written statement released Tuesday, the military leaders say that the bill "also threatens to foist additional duties on an already stressed U.S. military."
 
Hoar and Krulak warn that forcing the military to assume responsibilities now handled by law enforcement, “would violate not only the spirit of the post-Reconstruction act limiting the use of the armed forces for domestic law enforcement, but also our trust with service members, who enlist believing that they will never be asked to turn their weapons on fellow Americans.” 
 
Hoar and Krulak are part of a group of retired military leaders who have been outspoken on issues of detention of terrorist suspects, including Guantanamo Bay, and interrogation techniques.
 
"Having served various administrations, we know that politicians of both parties love this country and want to keep it safe," they wrote.

Referring to the 60 senators who voted in favor of the bill, what rights defenders say is treason for which each of them should be impeached, Hoar and Krulak stated that "right now, some in Congress are all too willing to undermine our ideals in the name of fighting terrorism.
 
"They should remember that American ideals are assets, not liabilities."

, Human Rights Examiner

Deborah Dupre' holds American and Australian science and education graduate degrees plus thirty years human rights, environmental and peace activism; led Aboriginal Pacific Islander and Australian research; holds pivotal role in FUEL; co-founded America's Green Team, FUEL; lectures on Ancient...

Don't miss...