In a letter published in Foreign Affairs, the official journal of the Council on Foreign Relations, Senator Carl Levin claims that the NDAA only reaffirms existing law and that America is safer since its enactment.
The partisan squabbling over the killing of Osama bin Laden is a typical election-year distraction, effectively squelching discussion of more important matters one year after the execution of the al-Qaeda chief executive. While the commentators are engaged in trivialities, big foreign-policy questions are ignored.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted qualified immunity to John Yoo, shielding him from liability for torture carried out using guidelines set by him while working in the George W. Bush Justice Department.
White House senior counterterrorism adviser John Brennan has tried to justify proliferating drone strikes in Islamic countries this week as a legitimate reaction to the threat posed by the September 11 attacks more than a decade ago.
In typical fashion, the Federal Bureau of Investigation revealed that five self-styled left-wing anarchists arrested late Monday for allegedly trying to blow up a bridge near Cleveland were actually shepherded through every step of the supposed plot by government agents. The FBI later claimed nobody was ever in real danger because the federal government gave the alleged “terrorists” fake bombs.
President Obama last week gave an interview in the Situation Room at the White House to discuss the decision he made one year ago to send Navy SEALs on the mission that resulted in killing of al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden. And less that three years after Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, he is winning praise as the "Warrior in Chief" carrying on a "militarily aggressive" foreign policy.
Padilla (left) is a citizen of the United States and a convicted terrorist. On Monday, he filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court requesting that the nation's highest court review the decision of an appeals court to dismiss his suit alleging torture at the hands of U.S. government officials.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond, Virginia upheld a lower court's dismissal of the complaint. In his suit, Padilla claimed that, as an American citizen captured within the United States, he was unconstitutionally designated as an "enemy combatant," and alleged a range of other constitutional violations arising from his detention at a military prison in South Carolina.
Additionally, Padilla said that he was denied access to legal counsel in contravention of his civil rights as guaranteed by the First, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Padilla also asserted that he was denied access to the courts in violation of his constitutional rights as set out in Article III, the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and that the government of the United States refused to permit his writ of habeas corpus in violation of the the Habeas Corpus Suspension Clause of Article I.