EMERGENCY ALERT! NDAA still allows indefinite detention of U.S. citzens without trials!

The time to complain is NOW! After you lose protection of your rights - it will be too late!

I know you must be skeptical that we can lose our Bill of Rights this week if we allow this act to get passed, but don't take my word for it!

This video contains up-to-date timelined coverage with expert testimonies, and warnings to you from your very own representatives!!

ADDITIONAL PROOF

1) Here's what a constitutional lawyer has determined:

NDAA allows for the indefinite detention of US citizens without trial.

To relieve all doubts: this leads you through THE ACTUAL NDAA CODE step by step.

The NDAA detention bill step by step
http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/singleton/

2) As further proof - FIFTY congressman have now signed 2 letters as of yesterday protesting NDAA's current indefinite detention of american citzens without charges or trial. You can download the full pdf letter with signatures from the article below.

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/10190-lawmakers-submit-letter-o...

http://amash.house.gov/press-release/amash-stop-indefinite-detention-americans

3) The latest version of NDAA still has the egregious provisions, and as of yesterday the White House announced the administration is no longer vetoing the act!

4) FALSE CLAIMS: as revealed by Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI), members of Congress in favor of NDAA will make two false claims.

(A) They will say that you have nothing to worry about because Sec. 1021 asserts that it does not "affect existing law or authorities, relating to the detention of United States citizens."

RESPONSE: Pres. Obama and many Members of Congress believe the President ALREADY has the authority the bill grants him. Legally, of course, he does not. This language was inserted to keep proponents and opponents of the bill appeased, while permitting the President to assert that the improper power he has claimed all along is now in statute.

(B) They will say that American citizens are specifically exempted under the following language in Sec. 1022: "The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of the United States."

RESPONSE: Don't be fooled. All this says is that the President is not REQUIRED to indefinitely detain American citizens without charge or trial. It still PERMITS him to do so.


STEPS TO TAKE
-----------------------
1) Contact Congress immediately at: 202-224-3121 and tell them to vote NO on NDAA!

2) Call your representative's numbers found inside these 2 links!
http://house.gov/representatives/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

3) You can also additionally complain about the recent action on this in the senate by sending an already preformed letter using this: https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=...

4) Sign petition to white house
https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/%21/petition/veto-national-defense-auth...


[FAIR USE NOTICE: This work is an educational custom version narrative based on events unfolding and collectively indicates an overall message to viewers. This narrative contains material of factual nature. All use of material here helps the purpose of spreading the news sharing similar goals and interests as the material. Furthermore the material included raises value to these utilized sources as providing significant contribution to the spreading of important news that other news sources may not have covered. Only small highly edited portions were utilized.
This video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.]

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• NDAA
• Rights
• Liberty
• Veto
• Obama
• Defense
• Stop
• Government
• national
• defense
• authorization
• act
• 1031
• 1032
• Constitution
• unalienable
• America
• United States Constitution
• mccain
• carl levin
• police state
• unconstitutional