Should Obama & Congress Be Arrested Under The NDAA?

Let's ask the question here: Should Barack Obama and the Congress be arrested and sent to Gitmo for violating the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). After all the Congress passed it and Barack Obama signed it. I'm sure much of you believe that more than that should happen and it wouldn't just be dependent upon the NDAA, but does what happened last week indicate that such persons as Barack Obama, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain should be wearing and orange jump suit an some leg irons soon?

Understand something, Congress passes some 55,000 pages a year in new laws! Yet, for the most part they never read one page of them. They passed the NDAA into law. What's worse is that GOP presumptive nominee Mitt Romney said that he supported NDAA as written, thus withholding the rights of citizens to due process, under the Constitution, because he says so.

The NDAA text affirms the President's authority to detain, via the Armed Forces, any person,

"who was 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," and anyone who commits a "belligerent act" against the U.S. or its coalition allies, under the law of war, "without trial, until the end of the hostilities authorized by the [AUMF]."

The text also authorizes trial by military tribunal, or

"transfer to the custody or control of the person's country of origin," or transfer to "any other foreign country, or any other foreign entity."

An amendment to the Act that would have explicitly forbidden the indefinite detention without trial of American citizens was rejected by the Senate.

According to a Reuters story from Wednesday, August 1, 2012, Barack Obama and the Congress authorized support, specifically $25 million of taxpayer money, to help Syrian rebels,

President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, sources familiar with the matter said.

Obama's order, approved earlier this year and known as an intelligence "finding," broadly permits the CIA and other U.S. agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust Assad.

This and other developments signal a shift toward growing, albeit still circumscribed, support for Assad's armed opponents - a shift that intensified following last month's failure of the U.N. Security Council to agree on tougher sanctions against the Damascus government.

The White House is for now apparently stopping short of giving the rebels lethal weapons, even as some U.S. allies do just that.

What most people aren't asking is, just who are these rebels? Well the answer lies buried at the bottom of the article:

Recent news reports from the region have suggested that the influence and numbers of Islamist militants, some of them connected to al Qaeda or its affiliates, have been growing among Assad's opponents.

U.S. and European officials say that, so far, intelligence agencies do not believe the militants' role in the anti-Assad opposition is dominant.

While U.S. and allied government experts believe that the Syrian rebels have been making some progress against Assad's forces lately, most believe the conflict is nowhere near resolution, and could go on for years.

Does anyone else sense an Eurasia, Eastasia flavor to any of this? For those no familiar, those are the alleged allies, then enemies of Oceania in George Orwell's 1984. The people never know if they are at war with one or if they are its allies.

Well America has courted Al-Qaeda in Libya to overthrow Gaddafi and now they are doing it in Syria to remove Assad!

John Aziz rightly asks,

If providing material assistance to al-Qaeda is illegal under the National Defence Authorization Act (2012), and Obama and Congress are sending $25 million of aid to al-Qaeda-affiliated Syrian opposition, aren’t Congress and President Obama violating their own law? Should Obama (or at least the Justice Department) not be using “all necessary and appropriate force” including “the power to indefinitely detain” to prevent Obama and Congress from assisting al-Qaeda? Did anyone in Congress or the Obama administration even bother to read the law that they were signing? Do Federal laws no longer apply to lawmakers?

John is not the only one asking such a question. Fox News' Ben Swann is also asking simliar questions as to whether Al-Qaeda is an enemy or not? I think those are good questions for sure, but even more pressing and the more dangerous question is have our elected representatives and the current occupant of the White House become domestic enemies against our Constitution? I would say that a majority of them, with very few exceptions have become just that.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

603 thoughts on “Should Obama & Congress Be Arrested Under The NDAA?

  1. Yes Hillary, Romney, Bernanke, Pelosi, Holder, Bush, Cheney, McCain - just to name a few. They are all part of the Bildebergers. European Money controlling our capital. They are the puppets of the NWO known as the UN.

  2. Yes, they sure as hell should! However, John Boehner is keeping anything from being introduced onto the floor that has anything to do with Obama. Obama either has him scared for his life, or he's getting paid off to watch Obama's back. Sheriff Arpaio's Congressman told him flat out that Mr. Boehner he wouldn't have any of the filings introduced while he was the Speaker of the House. I'm thinking he should be included as obstruction of justice and aiding and abetting a known felon.

  3. ali bama and his 40 thieves should all be arrested. bama should get the death penalty for treason. he is no american born period. this is a national security issue

  4. Put all of them in jail. Over the years, they have all ignored what the constitution is and says, and accepted far less than they should. All of them are responsible, with Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Holder should be in jail immediately. Show the rest of congress and senate what we can do. We'll see an immediate improvement or a worsening because we dared defy them. If that happens, send all of them to jail and we can elect new leaders.

  5. Well I'm not sure, I'm gonna go against the grain here and opine that if you have taken up arms against the US with al-Q or the Taliban or some other group which is effectively waging war against us, you have already forfeited your citizenship and should be considered and treated as an enemy combatant. I'm not sure how that very narrow situation fits into the NDAA, though.

  6. Life sentences in Gitmo, the whole crooked crew.

  7. Some one do a citizens' arrest ASAP. It's totally acceptable uinder the Constitution as to an arrest if it is seen that the person arrested is/has commited a crime. OB has done many treasonous crimes and should have been gone long ago.

  8. In addition to the violation of NDAA they have violated their oath of office and the constitution...The better question is who would arrest them...we the sheeple !

  9. This is the absolute easiest question that has been asked since 1776.

  10. I know people from Syria that approve of The Assad Regime. The reason they came to the USA in the first place was to escape religous persecution as they were Christians. It has been under his regime that they have been able to go back and visit relatives in Syria. Obama has 100% supported and provided US troops to further the cause of the anti American Muslim Brotherhood. Time to put him and his treasonous cohorts on trial.

  11. Even without the NDAA, they should ALL be shot at dawn. And God would be pleased. Ps. 139:22

  12. Harry Truman and Dwight Eisenhower did not stand for such nonsense and or those who thumbed their nose at our Federal Immigration Laws...These two President's of fortitude rounded up all Illegal's and sent them packing back across the border from wench they came.