Naomi Wolf's Notes On NDAA Detention Rules

As Naomi Wolf says (on Facebook): I will keep reposting this all day long because it is one of the most important exchanges ever in US history: “Government lawyers in New York court tell Judge they can’t directly rule out detaining Chris Hedges for reporting, Occupy London for protesting, or the author of a hypothetical book on politics for expressing an opinion, under NDAA sections 1021 and 1022.

A key excerpt: 
Judge Forrest simplified the example to a hypothetical of a book with only one sentence, and whose only sentence read: “I support the political goals of the Taliban’. She asked the government lawyers if such a book could be read as providing ‘material support’ for ‘associated forces” under the NDAA. They did not rule it out. 
Judge Forrest pushed: 
“You are unable to say that [such a book ] consisting of political speech could not be captured under [NDAA section] 1021?” 
Obama lawyers: “We can’t say that.”
So—just in case you are not clear about this, the government can put a US citizen in permanent detention just for writing the sentence: "I support the political goals of the Taliban."

The First Amendment under Barack Obama is dead as a doornail. And with that—dead Osama certainly won the war.

Comments