This letter to the editor appeared in The Record of North Jersey on Jan. 28. Joe Attamante is a member of Veterans For Peace Chapter 21, a former Marine and English teacher. He lives in Morristown, NJ.
By Joseph R. Attamante
ON DEC. 15, the 220th anniversary of Bill of Rights Day, the U.S. Senate passed the 2011-12 National Defense Authorization Act, 86-13.
Recently signed into law by President Obama, this act includes sections that codify indefinite military detention without trial of anyone, including American citizens, the president accuses of "supporting" al-Qaida, the Taliban or "associated forces."
As this law permits the president alone to decide whoever fits the broad and elastic categories of "supporting" or "associated," the law effectively abrogates any accused person's rights to due process of law and a speedy public trial guaranteed by our Constitution's Fifth and Sixth amendments.
Although the law makes military detention mandatory only for non-U.S. citizens, it nonetheless leaves the door wide-open to military imprisonment of Americans by saying such detention is not "required" for U.S. citizens.
And Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., dispelled any doubt about the law's applicability to U.S. citizens when, speaking about Section 1031, he said: "The statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as a battlefield, including the homeland."
However, Graham and Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the law's primary sponsors, maintain they had no intention of changing existing law since (they say) the president already has authority to capture anyone, anywhere and incarcerate anyone he designates a suspect indefinitely without trial or due process.
The senators' cited assertion of established presidential powers raises the following questions:
* If the president already has such powers, why did the overwhelming majority of Congress, including New Jersey Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez and Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-Harding, find it necessary to vote to grant these powers by inserting them into a defense authorization bill?
* Why did the Senate strike down amendments that would have exempted American citizens from any detention without trial and limited military detention to those captured abroad?
* Why did Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., affirm on the Senate floor that American suspects should be subject to indefinite military detention without trial?
The answer is that Congress chose to legalize the authority President George W. Bush and President Obama had previously claimed and acted on.
Notably, the law's military detention provision was opposed by FBI Director Robert Mueller, who said it would interfere with the FBI's ability to investigate and interrogate terrorism suspects. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said it could damage national security. Two retired four-star Marine Corps generals concluded it would damage due process and place an undue burden on the military.
James Madison, the father of our Constitution and key author of the Bill of Rights, warned that "loss of liberty at home is to be charged against provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad."
Attempting to fend off and control real or perceived threats, Congress limits our liberty; but in undermining the freedom so many have given their lives to preserve, they can only achieve a temporary and finally false security.
All our elected representatives swear an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution." Members of Congress who voted for the bill, and the president who signed it, violated that oath and in doing so betrayed the Constitution and the people they represent.
By Joseph R. Attamante
ON DEC. 15, the 220th anniversary of Bill of Rights Day, the U.S. Senate passed the 2011-12 National Defense Authorization Act, 86-13.
Recently signed into law by President Obama, this act includes sections that codify indefinite military detention without trial of anyone, including American citizens, the president accuses of "supporting" al-Qaida, the Taliban or "associated forces."
As this law permits the president alone to decide whoever fits the broad and elastic categories of "supporting" or "associated," the law effectively abrogates any accused person's rights to due process of law and a speedy public trial guaranteed by our Constitution's Fifth and Sixth amendments.
Although the law makes military detention mandatory only for non-U.S. citizens, it nonetheless leaves the door wide-open to military imprisonment of Americans by saying such detention is not "required" for U.S. citizens.
And Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., dispelled any doubt about the law's applicability to U.S. citizens when, speaking about Section 1031, he said: "The statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as a battlefield, including the homeland."
However, Graham and Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the law's primary sponsors, maintain they had no intention of changing existing law since (they say) the president already has authority to capture anyone, anywhere and incarcerate anyone he designates a suspect indefinitely without trial or due process.
The senators' cited assertion of established presidential powers raises the following questions:
* If the president already has such powers, why did the overwhelming majority of Congress, including New Jersey Sens. Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez and Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-Harding, find it necessary to vote to grant these powers by inserting them into a defense authorization bill?
* Why did the Senate strike down amendments that would have exempted American citizens from any detention without trial and limited military detention to those captured abroad?
* Why did Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., affirm on the Senate floor that American suspects should be subject to indefinite military detention without trial?
The answer is that Congress chose to legalize the authority President George W. Bush and President Obama had previously claimed and acted on.
Notably, the law's military detention provision was opposed by FBI Director Robert Mueller, who said it would interfere with the FBI's ability to investigate and interrogate terrorism suspects. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said it could damage national security. Two retired four-star Marine Corps generals concluded it would damage due process and place an undue burden on the military.
James Madison, the father of our Constitution and key author of the Bill of Rights, warned that "loss of liberty at home is to be charged against provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad."
Attempting to fend off and control real or perceived threats, Congress limits our liberty; but in undermining the freedom so many have given their lives to preserve, they can only achieve a temporary and finally false security.
All our elected representatives swear an oath to "protect and defend the Constitution." Members of Congress who voted for the bill, and the president who signed it, violated that oath and in doing so betrayed the Constitution and the people they represent.
Posts
