Why Losing Indefinite Detention Powers Would Be a Disaster for Obama

0 Posted by - October 24, 2012 - Big Brother, Conspiracies & Scandals, Military, Nanny State, Police State

obama 300x225 Why Losing Indefinite Detention Powers Would Be a Disaster for ObamaThere’s a big story by Greg Smith in the Washington Post on how the Obama administration has expanded its powers in the War on Terror.

Smith notes that the legal foundation for U.S. counterterrorism strategy is partially based on “the Congressional authorization to use military force” (AUMF) that was passed after 9/11.

Specifically it seems to be based on an interpretation of the AUMF that was “reaffirmed” by the indefinite detention clause of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

This explains why Obama is fighting so hard to keep the indefinite detention clause in effect.

In court the government argued that the indefinite detention clause is simply a “reaffirmation” of the Authorization Use Of Military Force (AUMF), which gives the president authority ”to use all necessary and appropriate force against those … [who] aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001 or harbored such organizations or persons.” In the NDAA lawsuit, the government argued that the NDAA §1021 is simply an “affirmation” or “reaffirmation” of the AUMF.

CONTINUED at Business Insider.

No comments