Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Why I’m Suing Barack Obama

Posted 2 years ago on Jan. 17, 2012, 9:01 p.m. EST by Scout (729)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

" Attorneys Carl J. Mayer and Bruce I. Afran filed a complaint Friday in the Southern U.S. District Court in New York City on my behalf as a plaintiff against Barack Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to challenge the legality of the Authorization for Use of Military Force as embedded in the latest version of the National Defense Authorization Act, signed by the president Dec. 31."

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/why_im_suing_barack_obama_20120116/

15 Comments

15 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

The case will get tossed out on summary judgement (it will be considered nonjusticiable). My first reaction to this move by the President was similar to that of most liberal minded Americans, I thought it was terrible. I still think it's terrible, but I also acknowledge a republican President would have done much worse, and the republicans did a good job of putting the President in a corner. Either veto the legislation and look weak on defense (in an election year), or sign it into law (and piss off his base).

Obama made the calculation that pissing off his base won't alienate most of them (what are our options: either refuse to vote, do something like a protest vote, or vote for the republican candidate). I presume his primary concern is independent voters, or swing voters (who yo yo between republicans and democrats).

From a purely utilitarian perspective, probably a sensible calculation. However, I am confident that 1) Obama will not use this law, 2) he will win, and 3) once he wins, this law will be history. I hope I'm right.

[-] 1 points by guru401 (228) 2 years ago

Your post is incredible.

  1. You actually believe in this Republican vs. Democrat bullsh*t.
  2. You do realize that the bill was co-sponsored by Democrat Carl Levin, right?
  3. You actually believe that Obama represents the people.
[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

Time will tell (no use in me quibbling over conjecture).

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 2 years ago

" However, I am confident that 1) Obama will not use this law, 2) he will win, and 3) once he wins, this law will be history. I hope I'm right."

do you also believe in tooth fairies? astonishing

[-] 1 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

I'm an atheist ... I don't believe in fairies.

[-] 2 points by buphiloman (840) 2 years ago

i couldn't love Chris Hedges more if he had given birth to one of my children and then saved them from a terrible housefire!

[-] 1 points by Nordic (390) 2 years ago

Chris Hedges is one of the very very few who actually "get it".

He's an incredible writer.

I believe he could be the Thomas Paine of our day.

[-] 1 points by ShubeLMorgan2 (1088) from New York, NY 2 years ago

It is a good thing to file this lawsuit in order to spread the information. It is not a hope that a court could or would stop the process. An informed and angry public can. Thank you Chris hedges for your act of resistance.

[-] 1 points by Scout (729) 2 years ago

I watched the Republican primary debate yesterday and I noticed not a single person raised concerns about NDAA 2012 or asked any of the contenders whether they would repeal this if they were elected President. I think the public awareness of exactly what is in this legislation must be extremely low.

[-] 1 points by freakyfriday (179) 2 years ago

They didn't ask the question because they knew they wouldn't like the answer. Only Ron Paul voted vs NDAA, and only RP voted vs the Patriot Act. MSM doesn't like to give him a chance to shine.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by TIOUAISE (2526) 2 years ago

Thanks for posting! That is VERY encouraging. Chris Hedges is a Patriot and a hero.

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 2 years ago

agreed! And if the American public vote this guy back into office after this and all the other damage he has done then they deserve the government they will get because compared to what his nutcase Czars have planned for the second four years you ain't seen nothing yet!

[Removed]

[Removed]

[+] -5 points by ZenDog (20489) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

You cannot examine section 1021 of the NDAA signed into law on December 31, 2011 independently of a host of other measures passed by Congress since September 11, 2001.

Section 1021 affirms previous legislative measures and court findings - specifically as they pertain to indefinite detention.

If anyone wants to change this state of affairs, we must begin with the premise that terrorism is an act of war, rather than a criminal act.

An overview of section 1021 and it's specific history this year may be found here.

Also found on the above link is Panetta's letter to Levin with his objections.

[-] 0 points by Scout (729) 2 years ago

shouldn't terrorism be strictly defined? Will it be deemed to be terrorism in the future to criticiseTimothy Geithner and say publicly he is a nitwit?

[+] -5 points by ZenDog (20489) from South Burlington, VT 2 years ago

That is a possibility yes, but one that is unlikely in a nation like ours, with the Constitution that we have, our culture and history.

Still it is possible - and we see surreptitious efforts underway to undermine the Constitution now in various ways.

I don't suggest that we should not highlight this issue - we must - but we must be smart about it.

That means first we must understand it - much much better than we do now.