This is My Rifle: The Death of Free Speech Pt. 2 - The NDAA (For FY 2012)

When I first started reading the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 four weeks ago, I had no idea what I was getting myself into. For the most part the NDAA is the same bill that the President signs every year in regards to the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. A few billion here, a few billion there and the people of the United States of America can take a deep breath and feel confident that crazy Muslim Jihadists will once again be held at bay for another year. But once you get past the stupefyingly boring first few thousand pages of the bill, you come across some provisions that were conveniently tucked away underneath it all and suspiciously placed in an area where the dramatically shortened attention span of the average American will not reach. A set of laws and amendments locked away in an otherwise painfully predictable blur of bureaucratic nonsense that I'm sure not even George Washington himself could fully comprehend.

Upon reading the provisions it becomes apparent that they were included in the NDAA for a reason; because nobody outside of the political process was supposed to know they were there.

While much has been said about President Obama’s threat to veto and subsequent signing of the bill (with a loose promise to not invoke his newfound ability to legally detain American citizens without any criminal charges), the primary concern has little to do with the President’s political posturing (or lack there of) and everything to do with the future of freedom within the USA. Certainly in the years since 9/11 the world has had to re-adjust it’s idea of what freedom is, who is defending it and how much of it we are willing to trade for our health and safety, but never before has a single piece of legislation challenged us to truly define it’s meaning. The pages of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 are the walls that are closing in on what at one time was considered the greatest Democratic Republic on Earth and opening the door to a new authoritarian era in the country’s history.

Most of the debate surrounding the bill is in regards to Sections 1021 and 1022 under Title X, Subtitle D, which states the following:

(Click the heading to read the entire section)

“SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE

(a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition under the law of war.

(b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is any person as follows:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

(c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include the following:

(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title XVIII of Public Law 111-84)).

(3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent tribunal having lawful jurisdiction.

(4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person’s country of origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity.

(d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force.

(e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect existing law or authorities relating to the detention of United States citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or any other persons who are captured or arrested in the United States.

SEC. 1022. MILITARY CUSTODY FOR FOREIGN AL-QAEDA TERRORISTS.

(a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the Armed Forces of the United States shall hold a person described in paragraph (2) who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military custody pending disposition under the law of war.

(2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall apply to any person whose detention is authorized under section 1021 who is determined--

(A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated force that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the direction of al-Qaeda; and

(B) to have participated in the course of planning or carrying out an attack or attempted attack against the United States or its coalition partners.

(3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this subsection, the disposition of a person under the law of war has the meaning given in section 1021(c), except that no transfer otherwise described in paragraph (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with the requirements of section 1028.

(4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The President may waive the requirement of paragraph (1) if the President submits to Congress a certification in writing that such a waiver is in the national security interests of the United States.

(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident Aliens-

(1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States.

(2) LAWFUL RESIDENT ALIENS- The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to a lawful resident alien of the United States on the basis of conduct taking place within the United States, except to the extent permitted by the Constitution of the United States.”

The problem with both of these sections is that they’re even debatable in the first place. At a glance these provisions look like a re-affirmation of the AUMF and Military Commissions Act but upon further inspection you find that, once again, the language is so vague it could really apply to anybody. And because the terms “terrorist” and “terrorism” are so loosely defined by the American government, federal law and the Laws of War aren’t necessarily applicable since terrorism itself is a strategy and not a particular nation or group. While the section does specifically name al Qaeda and the Taliban as its targets, it also goes on to include “any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces” and as George W. Bush said in a White House memo issued on February 7th, 2002, “Geneva (Convention) does not apply to our conflict with al Qaeda, al Qaeda detainees also do not qualify as prisoners of war”. What this means for American citizens is that although both sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA state that these provisions do not extend to them or lawful resident aliens, once determined to be “hostile” or “belligerent” they can be detained indefinitely and without trial until the end of such hostilities. Once you clarify the word “hostilities” and come to understand that this is in reference to the war on terror, it’s evident that there is no end in sight and anybody found to be guilty of being either “hostile” or “belligerent” towards the American government could spend the rest of their natural life in prison. Also, keep in mind that these sections exempt American citizens from military custody but say nothing about being held in a federal correctional facility.

And just in case sections 1021 and 1022 fail to incarcerate future “belligerents”, Senator Joe Lieberman and friends are also pushing the Enemy Expatriation Act through Congress, which would amend Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act and give the US government the ability to forcibly strip American citizens of their nationality at will. So even if sections 1021 and 1022 of the NDAA for FY 2012 are amended to definitively exclude American citizens, the EEA would provide the US government the ability to revoke your citizenship, at which point you would once again be subject to indefinite detention in a military prison should they perceive your actions as being “hostile”.

The next section in the bill that we should pay attention to is Section 1245 under Title XII, Subtitle C, which states:

(Because of the overwhelming length of this section, I have shortened it to include mainly the talking points. Click the heading to read the entire section)

“SEC. 1245. IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE FINANCIAL SECTOR OF IRAN

(c) FREEZING OF ASSETS OF IRANIAN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS- The President shall, pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), block and prohibit all transactions in all property and interests in property of an Iranian financial institution if such property and interests in property are in the United States, come within the United States, or are or come within the possession or control of a United States person.

(d) IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE CENTRAL BANK OF IRAN AND OTHER IRANIAN FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

(1) IN GENERAL- Except as specifically provided in this subsection, beginning on the date that is 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President

(A) shall prohibit the opening, and prohibit or impose strict conditions on the maintaining, in the United States of a correspondent account or a payable-through account by a foreign financial institution that the President deter- mines has knowingly conducted or facilitated any significant financial transaction with the Central Bank of Iran or another Iranian financial institution designated by the Secretary of the Treasury for the imposition of sanctions pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.); and

(B) may impose sanctions pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.) with respect to the Central Bank of Iran.

(3) APPLICABILITY OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO FOREIGN CENTRAL BANKS

Except as provided in paragraph (4), sanctions imposed under paragraph

(1)(A) shall apply with respect to a foreign financial institution owned or controlled by the government of a foreign country, including a central bank of a foreign country, only insofar as it engages in a financial transaction for the sale or purchase of petroleum or petroleum products to or from Iran conducted or facilitated on or after that date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.

(4) APPLICABILITY OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO PETROLEUM TRANSACTIONS.

(B) DETERMINATION REQUIRED- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and every 180 days thereafter, the President shall make a determination, based on the reports required by subparagraph (A), of whether the price and supply of petroleum and petroleum products produced in countries other than Iran is sufficient to permit purchasers of petroleum and petroleum products from Iran to reduce significantly in volume their purchases from Iran.

(C) APPLICATION OF SANCTIONS- Except as provided in subparagraph (D), sanctions imposed under paragraph (1)(A) shall apply with respect to a financial transaction conducted or facilitated by a foreign financial institution on or after the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act for the purchase of petroleum or petroleum products from Iran if the President determines pursuant to subparagraph (B) that there is a sufficient supply of petroleum and petroleum products from countries other than Iran to permit a significant reduction in the volume of petroleum and petroleum products purchased from Iran by or through foreign financial institutions.

(D) EXCEPTION- Sanctions imposed pursuant to paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to a foreign financial institution if the President determines and reports to Congress, not later than 90 days after the date on which the President makes the determination required by subparagraph (B), and every 180 days thereafter, that the country with primary jurisdiction over the foreign financial institution has significantly reduced its volume of crude oil purchases from Iran during the period beginning on the date on which the President submitted the last report with respect to the country under this subparagraph.

(5) WAIVER- The President may waive the imposition of sanctions under paragraph

(1) for a period of not more than 120 days, and may renew that waiver for additional periods of not more than 120 days, if the President—

(A) determines that such a waiver is in the national security interest of the United States; and

(B) submits to Congress a report

(i) providing a justification for the waiver; and

(ii) that includes any concrete cooperation the President has received or expects to receive as a result of the waiver.”

This section provides a clear outline of the United States’ intent to enter into conflict with Iran. By placing sanctions against Iran the US government is figuratively, and literally, banging the war drum. In case you’re unfamiliar with what sanctions are and how they work, I will explain it for you. The United States now reserves the right to block all financial transactions between the Central Bank of Iran or privately owned Iranian financial institutions and properties located within United States jurisdiction or owned by a US citizen. Additionally, the American government will sanction other foreign countries that purchase oil from Iran without a waiver provided by OFAC. In doing this, the US government could completely shatter Iran’s economy since it’s heavily reliant on oil exports and sanctioning this industry would at the very least cripple the country in every aspect imaginable.

It’s also important to note that this provision only exists because Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz in response to the US’ threat to expand on sanctions already imposed against them in the first place.

The next provision in the bill has a bit of a confusing history. When the House version of the NDAA was released for public viewing, the outcry of American people disgusted by the attempt to include this amendment was so overwhelming that it was removed. While sections 913-920 are mysteriously missing from the version posted on govtrack.us, many writers and journalists with sources in both the military and government maintain that this provision was added back to the bill that passed through Senate and was ultimately signed by President Obama. This provision states:

“Sec. 920c. Art. 120c. Other sexual misconduct

(d) Repeal of Sodomy Article- Section 925 of such title (article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) is repealed.”

UCMJ Article 125 states: 


“(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.

(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

To put it simply, SODOMY + ANIMALS = MORE TORTURE.

As much as it angers me to watch the United States of America take it's first giant leap toward totalitarian rule, I'm also saddened by it. As I read through the provisions within the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 it became strikingly clear that the years following September 11th, 2001 were a carefully managed series of steps designed to slowly revoke the rights of the American people, culminating in the signing of a bill that will destroy very fabric of freedom as we know it. From the Patriot Act to the NDAA, it's shocking to see just how quickly this new age of American policy has developed. In hindsight, the war in Iraq appears to have been not only a scam concocted by the Bush Administration worth trillions of dollars, but also a testing ground for the future possibilities of authoritarianism in America. In the years leading up to the signing of the NDAA, the American government engaged in the practice of indefinite detention and torture of Islamic citizens from every corner of the world, and now that they've given us a glimpse into what the future may hold, the past takes on a much more personal sentiment.

As a Canadian citizen I have always admired the United States. In the years that I lived in the country, I came to love the American people for their passion, loyalty and unwillingness to compromise (for better or worse). When my own country ignored me and turned a blind eye to me, it was the American people (and Europeans) who embraced my music and gave me a platform to stand on. No matter how big or small, I will always be thankful that I had the American people to read my words or listen to my music and provide me with that all too familiar, brutally honest, American brand of feedback.

So I'm writing this last paragraph to you. I want you to go out and do your own research. Not because I told you to, but because your life may depend on it. These are not conspiracies, these are actual facts. Right now it's easy to ignore the warning signs of impending danger but look back at the past 10 years and observe how your life has incrementally changed during this period of time. Now look forward, past the fog of media, religion and politics and you can see in plain view what's in store. Whether passively or aggressively you have to fight it.

There is really no other option.

(Jason James is an artist, freelance columnist and writer for RefinedHype.com. You can listen/download his most recent album, "Marvelous World Of Color", here and you can contact him here and here.)

See Also: This Is My Rifle: The Death of Free Speech - Pt. 1 SOPA