TheIntolerableActs.org. T HE I NTOLERABLE A CTS ACTION CENTER 2012 NDAA PRESENTATION S OLUTIONS @T HE I NTOLERABLE A CTS.ORG.

TheIntolerableActs.org

THE INTOLERABLE ACTSACTION CENTER

2012 NDAA PRESENTATION

[email protected]

National Defense

Authorization Act

For Fiscal Year 2012

(NDAA)

Is the NDAA Bad?

Does the NDAA

simply affirm existing national defense policy,

or does it create new

national defense policy?

Was it the intent of Congress to establish that America should be treated as part of “the battlefield?”

Does the NDAA authorize waging war on Americans in the United States?

Does the NDAAApply to U.S. Citizens?

Does the NDAAUndermine

YourConstitutional Rights?

If the NDAAApplies to U.S. Citizens

&Undermines Your

Constitutional Rights...

What can and should you do about it?

National Defense

Authorization Act

For Fiscal Year 2012

(NDAA)

Is the NDAA Bad?

NO!

The NDAA is supposed to fund our troops

andnational defense policies.

AND THAT IS GOOD!

Does the NDAA

create new

national defense policy?

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.

NDAA

Subtitle D – Counterterrorism

Section 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

(AUMF)

AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES (AUMF), SECTION 2.

(a) IN GENERAL. — That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

The AUMF set up a national defense policy to seek retribution against those involved in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The authority granted in the AUMF was retrospective, and tied solely to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

AUMF TARGETING PROFILE

Nations, organizations, or persons who:

planned,

authorized,

committed,

aided, or

harbored

the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001.

Does the NDAA

simply affirm existing national defense policy,

or does it create new

national defense policy?

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.

(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.

AUMF vs. NDAATARGETING PROFILE (retribution for 9/11/2001)

AUMF

Nations, organizations, or persons who:

planned,

authorized,

committed,

aided, or

harbored

the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001.

1021(b)(1)

Any person who:

planned,

authorized,

committed,

aided, or

harbored

the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001.

=

1021(b)(1) affirms the national defense policy of the AUMF

targeting profile.

BUT... Whereas the AUMF has only one

targeting profile

The NDAA's 1021(b) has two targeting profiles.

What does 1021(b)'s second profile do?

NDAA: 1021(b) [Second Targeting Profile]

(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.

1021(b)(1) = (AUMF)

Any person who:

planned,

authorized,

committed,

aided, or

harbored

the terrorists who attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001.

1021(b)(2)

Any person who was part of or supported:

Al-Qaeda, Taliban, or

associated forces,

that are engaged in hostilities against:

United States, or coalition partners, who:

committed a belligerent act, or

directly supported hostilities in aid of Al-Qaeda or Taliban

* Involvement in attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 not required

1021(b)(2) creates new national defense policy in that it expands:

targeting profile (beyond AUMF)

countries being protected ( adds coalition partners)

time frame for which hostilities are authorized beyond retribution for attacks of 9/11/2001.

from policy of retribution to a policy for “war on terrorism”

Also...

DEFINITION OF TERRORISM:

1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.

3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

Dictionary.com

Terrorism is not a nation, organization, or person.

Terrorism is a “method or technique.”

“War on Terror” is a war against a method of achieving an objective.

Declaring war on a technique is an expansion of an specific AUMF purpose to an open-ended war.

Was it the intent of Congress to establish that America should be treated as part of “the battlefield?”

Does the NDAA authorize waging war on Americans in the United States.

America is the “battlefield”

“The statement of authority to detain does apply to American citizens,

and it designates the world as the

battlefield, including the homeland.”-Senator Lindsey Graham, discussing NDAA in a U.S. Senate floor debate.

Watch video here:

http://patriotcoalition.com/VIDEO/NDAA/YOU ARE the Terrorist!!!!!.avi

The “law of war” applies to the “battlefield.”

The fictitious designation of the United States as the “battlefield” allows for the application of the “law of war,” which applies to all battlefields, to the United States.

This puts the President in absolute charge of the “battlefield” as Commander-in-Chief, rather than as the Chief Executive of the civilian government.

Does the NDAAApply to U.S. Citizens?

NDAA

Subtitle D – Counterterrorism

Section 1022

Military Custody

For

Foreign Al-Qaeda Terrorists

NDAA Section 1022 (a)(1)

(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OFWAR.

(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.

NDAA Section 1022 (a)(2)

(2) COVERED PERSONS.

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

WHAT IS “THE REQUIREMENT?”

NDAA Section 1022 (a)(1)

(a) CUSTODY PENDING DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OFWAR.

(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.

“The requirement”is

“shall hold.”

“Shall hold”

means

“Must hold”

NDAA Section 1022 (b)(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.

Removing the requirement “shall hold” means the U.S. Military may hold U.S. Citizens.

It does not “prohibit” U.S. Citizens from being detained by the U.S. Military under Section 1022.

NDAA Section 1022 (a)(2)

(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.

NDAA Section 1022

NON-CITIZENS(shall hold)

(a)(1)

US CITIZENS(may hold)

(b)(1)

The “indefinite detention” provisions of sections 1021 and

1022 definitely apply to U.S. Citizens.

Senators McCain, Graham, and Levin stated as much on the floor of the U.S. Senate in Dec. 2011.

President Obama acknowledged the authority to detain U.S. Citizens in his

signing statement.

In fact, he insisted that the detention of U.S. Citizens

was in the NDAA.

President demands authority to indefinitely detain U.S. Citizens.

Obama Administration asked that language be removed from NDAA that

said “U.S. Citizens and lawful residents would not be subject to this section.”

-Senator Carl Levin, Chairman, Senate Armed Services Committee

Watch video here:

http://patriotcoalition.com/VIDEO/NDAA/Levin-Obama-1031.avi

Section 1022 (b) limitation regarding citizens does not apply to Section 1021.

UNITED STATES CITIZENS.—The requirement to detain a person in military custody under this section [i.e.1022] does not extend to citizens of the United States.

1021(b)(1) = (AUMF)

Any person who: planned, authorized, committed, aided, or harbored

the terrorists who attackedthe U.S. on September 11, 2001.

NON-CITIZENS(shall hold)1022(a)(1)

US CITIZENS

(may hold)(b)(1)

Al-Qaeda, Taliban, or

associated forces,

that are engaged in hostilities against:

United States, or coalition partners, who:

committed a belligerent

act,

or directly supported hostilities in aid of Al-

Qaeda or Taliban

1021(b)(2)

Any person who was part of or supported:

* Involvement in attacks of 9/11/2001 not required

Does the NDAAUndermine

YourConstitutional Rights?

Congress established the principle that America is the “battlefield” whilst arguing over how to apply the “law of war” to citizens.

Opponents and proponents in Congressional debates agreed sections 1021 and 1022 make America part of the battlefield.

NDAA makes America the “battlefield” and authorizes detention and disposition under the “law of war” instead of under the Constitution.

The NDAA authorizes the capture in the United States without an

arrest warrant.

“Shut up. You don't get a lawyer. You're an “enemy combatant.”

-Senator Lindsey Graham, during debate of NDAA section 1031 on U.S. Senate floor.

Watch video here:

http://patriotcoalition.com/VIDEO/NDAA/Shut-Up

Section 1021(e) states that nothing in [1021] affects any existing law or authority relating to detention of any person who is captured or arrested in the United States.

Section 1022(a)(1) states that the U.S. Military shall hold any person who is captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the AUMF.

NDAA Section 1021(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 [AUMF].

Parts of Constitution and Bill of Rights affected by NDAA

Article I, Section 9 – suspension clauseArticle III, Section 2 – grand jury indictmentArticle III, Section 3 - treasonArticle IV, Section 4 – republican government4th Amendment – secure in person & papers5th Amendment – due process6th Amendment – speedy trial8th Amendment – cruel & unusual punishment 9th Amendment – rights of the people10th Amendment – state's rights14th Amendment, Section 1 – equal protection

SUMMARY

2012 NDAA PRESENTATION

Is the NDAA Bad?

YES AND NO

Funding the military is good.

Destroying Bill of Rights

Is BAD!

Does the NDAA

simply affirm existing national defense policy,

or does it create new

national defense policy?

It does both.

Was it the intent of Congress to establish that America should be treated as part of “the battlefield?”

YES

Does the NDAA authorize waging war on Americans in the United States?

YES

Does the NDAAApply to U.S. Citizens?

YES

Does the NDAAUndermine

YourConstitutional Rights?

YES

If the NDAAApplies to U.S. Citizens

&Undermines Your

Constitutional Rights...

What can and should you do about it?

TheIntolerableActs.org

LOCAL GRASSROOTSORGANIZATIONS

PATRIOT COALITION & OATH KEEPERS(AND OTHER NATIONAL PARTNERS)

STATE COORDINATINGORGANIZATIONS

WE THE PEOPLE

NOVEMBERPATRIOTS

(KANSAS)

PATRIOTWATCHDOG(NORTH CAROLINA)

PATRIOT FREEDOMALLIANCE

BEAUFORT PATRIOT

TEA PARTY

Empowerment of State & Local Groups

PATRIOT COALITION & OATH KEEPERS(AND OTHER NATIONAL PARTNERS)

Research and analysis of NDAAand other 'intolerable acts'

Research and analysis of remedial legislationfederal, state, and local

Development of custom resolutions & legislation federal, state, and local

Provide educational and informational support to state and local groups, media outreach / availability for interviews, talk radio, workshops, seminars, etc...

THE INTOLERABLE ACTS ACTION CENTERTheIntolerableActs.org

We the People

GOVERNOR

CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATIONS

PRESIDENT

LEGISLATURE NDAA RESOLUTION

SHERIFF RESOLUTION

LOCAL GOVERNMENTNDAA RESOLUTION

POLITICALPARTIES NGO's: VFW, LEGION,

YOUR CHURCH

Educate yourself, your family & neighbors, and your community about the problems with the NDAA.

Watch the videos on theintolerableacts.org

Write letters to the editor of your local papers.

Reach out to grassroots patriot groups in your community. Encourage their involvement.

What should you do?

What should you do next?

Contact your Congressman & U.S. Senators

If they voted for the NDAA, find out why.

Regardless of how they voted, ask them what are their plans to repeal the unconstitutional provisions.

Contact your state legislators, county commissioners, sheriff, and city council.

Encourage them to interpose themselves between “We the People” and a rogue federal government.

PATRIOTCOALITION.COM

REJOINORDIE.COM

OATHKEEPERS.ORG

THEINTOLERABLEACTS.ORG

[email protected]