NDAA – Section 1021″Civilian Authority-the US Constitution” vs “Military Authority-Commander In Chief”

T-Room

Abby Martin interviewed Thomas Drake, a Whistleblower who outed NSA’s covert wiretapping program known as Trailblazer, on this weeks “Breaking the Set.

Martin asks Drake how it felt when the government he once worked for filed charges against him using the Espionage Act for blowing the whistle on the illegal wiretapping program, his response “Total betrayal.” He went onto to say “It is important to note I took an Oath four times to support and defend the constitution. That oath was not an oath to the President, it was not an oath to lie, it was not an oath to secrecy, it was not an oath to a national security agency.  It was certainly not an oath to look the other way when the government itself commits massive fraud, waste and abuse and engages itself in wrongdoing and illegality and that’s precisely what the government did after 9/11, on a vast scale.”

Drake then goes onto articulate “You can’t have a government violating the constitution in secret and then forming all of these alliances w/corporations who themselves are ensuring the continuance of their own interests through the government. That’s not in the best interests of the country let alone the constitution.”

As for the National Defense Authorization Act, NDAA, Section 1021 also known as Indefinite Detention, Drake holds nothing back pinpointing precisely the concern every American should have stating “Section 1021 is really a generalized provision under which the government unto itself wants to exercise military authority at anytime, anywhere, basically against anybody in the United States of America.” The key word in that sentence is “military authority” not “civilian authority” which should send chills up your spine.