It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“Moreover, I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation. My Administration will interpret section 1021 in a manner that ensures that any detention it authorizes complies with the Constitution, the laws of war, and all other applicable law.”
This letter was written to raise awareness of the ominous problems in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012. Because Jim Singleton is a State chapter officer for Ohio Oath Keepers and is Ohio’s Peace Officer Liaison, this letter will be circulated within LE communities around Ohio.
Greetings and Salutations,
It’s unfortunate that I have to write this letter, however in light of current events it is inevitable. Just days ago the United States Congress passed the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) this in itself was necessary. However in this bill was an insidious piece of verbiage that for all intents and purposes destroys the foundation of everything we believe in and took an oath to uphold. To me the possibility of those citizens and others under my protection being spirited off in the middle of the night by agents of the military, then being summarily incarcerated without access to judge or jury are insufferable and intolerable acts.
It will be argued that this only applies to foreign persons or others suspected of terrorism, but there are far too many avenues available to apply this to any group to which any administration may take umbrage with. When growing up and especially during our training in the academy we are instructed that the constitutional rights of all must be upheld at all times, as well as the respect for all people we come in contact with or represent. This section of the NDAA attempts to remove those rights which are enumerated and given to us by our creator, and places them in the hands of the office of the President of the United States to be disregarded at his whim.
I believe that if and when those orders come, I cannot in good faith and in strict observance to my oath, allow myself to be a part of them. I would hope that members of our military in accordance to the articles of the UCMJ, would also refuse them as well. When that time comes I will do exactly as I have sworn to do, I will serve and protect those under my care, so help me God.
Originally posted by piercebitchone
reply to post by seabag
I myself have heard much speculation regarding this bill from local radio host Bob McClain and others calling into his show. To answer Your question, YES ! We have a Sheriff Richard Mack here in S.C. who is actually going to be doing a seminar with local police, sheriffs , troopers etc. I believe it will take place this month. Seats are $10 and I have thought of offering to purchase the tickets for my locals here in Cowpens. It will mainly address their roles as Oathkeepers and just what that oath they swore to entails. Hope this helps
I think for every 1 cop or soldier that would stand up against the NDAA, there's 100 more willing to enforce it. The cops in my town for example are so young and power-hungry, I'm sure enforcing this bill would fill them with glee.
People join the police force for ONE reason: power. Nobody ever joined the police for the paperwork, or to be spit on, or clean up a drunks puke. They all just want power.
I wonder how long it will be before they start losing their jobs like the cops who speak out in LEAP, Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.
These people in law enforcement are looked at the same way mainstream Republicans look at Ron Paul. They're not real.
Originally posted by aboutface
reply to post by seabag
I am not American, but to be honest, if I were, this piece of legislation would give me horrible nightmares. The way it's worded (Don't tell me there aren't capable and better writers than the ones who penned the law)terrorizes the average person imo, regardless of what the Pres says his current intentions are. Good for Oathkeepers who are informing others and keeping watch!
Originally posted by Aqualung2012
Very good timing, the posting of this thread.
I recently had a converstaion about NDAA with a police officer, and he was incredulous. He had never heard of it, and he was actualy shocked when I told him the implications therein.
He had also no idea that under Social Security, the "US citizen" is no longer protected by the Bill of Rights.
This budget bill — which can be vetoed without cutting financing for our troops — is both misguided and unnecessary: the president already has the power and flexibility to effectively fight terrorism.
One provision would authorize the military to indefinitely detain without charge people suspected of involvement with terrorism, including United States citizens apprehended on American soil. 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 — and hand Osama bin Laden an unearned victory long after his well-earned demise.