Black Agenda Report
Black Agenda Report
News, commentary and analysis from the black left.

  • Home
  • Africa
  • African America
  • Education
  • Environment
  • International
  • Media and Culture
  • Political Economy
  • Radio
  • US Politics
  • War and Empire
  • omnibus

Barack Obama vs. Farrakhan, Hedges and the Bill of Rights
18 Jan 2012
🖨️ Print Article

 

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford

By signing the preventive detention law that his operatives in Congress helped to craft, President Obama has nullified the pillars of the Bill of Rights: due process of law and freedom of speech. Journalist Chris Hedges is suing the would-be King Obama, while Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan dares the president to charge him with “sedition and treason.” Every potential political dissenter can now be “locked up for the rest of their lives without charge or trial – essentially, on the president’s say-so.”

 

Barack Obama vs. Farrakhan, Hedges and the Bill of Rights

A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford

“That act signed into law by our president is an act that is destined to stop those of us who speak truth to power.”

When it comes to preventive detention, journalist Chris Hedges and Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan agree: President Obama has signed and codified into law a measure that would abolish free speech and due process of law in the United States.

Chris Hedges, the author and former New York Times correspondent, suspects that “the real purpose of this bill is to thwart internal, domestic movements that threaten the corporate state.” He has sued President Obama in the Southern District Court in New York City, challenging the National Defense Authorization Act that Obama signed when most people were celebrating New Years Eve. Hedges is especially troubled, and with good reason, by the language in the law that describes who can be locked up for the rest of their lives without charge or trial – essentially, on the president’s say-so.

The people that may be deprived of their fundamental rights are those that “substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.” The key words are “substantially supported” and “associated forces.” In legal terms, “substantial” support, as opposed to “material” support, could easily be applied to speech that the government decides gives “aid and comfort” to al Qaeda or the Taliban. And “associated forces” could be anybody that the president’s men claim have some kind of association with terrorists – and that, too, could be in the form of speech.

This is a dungeon big enough to throw all kinds of people into, including reporters and citizens simply expressing their political opinions. “Dissent,” says Hedges, “is increasingly equated in this country with treason.”

“The real purpose of this bill is to thwart internal, domestic movements that threaten the corporate state.”

Minister Farrakhan told a Chicago radio host, “That act signed into law by our president is an act that is destined to stop those of us who speak truth to power.” The Nation of Islam’s lawyer said the law might be interpreted as a “justifiable basis to detain [Farrakhan] in military custody without benefit of his constitutional right to trial” if he dissents with official U.S. policy. Farrakhan noted that the late Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad was imprisoned during World War Two for advocating resistance to the draft. “If America goes to war,” he said, President Obama may be forced “to take Farrakhan off the streets; and charge him with ‘sedition’ and ‘treason.’”

The point here, of course, is not that Louis Farrakhan or Chris Hedges is in imminent danger of preventive detention in perpetuity, but that everyone is, because the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which provides for due process of law, and the First Amendment’s guarantees of free speech, no longer exist if a president finds them inconvenient.

Black America has always championed civil liberties, and could not possibly support preventive detention. But too many African Americans have failed to pay attention to Obama’s actual policies. They have treated him like an icon, or worse, a king. Now, with preventive detention the law of the land, he has become King Obama, a monarch with no constitutional bounds. Next year, it could be King Mitt, or King Newt – and it really doesn't matter which.

For Black Agenda Radio, I’m Glen Ford. On the web, go to BlackAgendaReport.com.

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.



Your browser does not support the audio element.

listen
http://traffic.libsyn.com/blackagendareport/20120118_gf_Detention.mp3

More Stories


  • Arsenic and Agrarian Racial Capitalism
    Black Agenda Radio with Margaret Kimberley and Glen Ford
    Arsenic and Agrarian Racial Capitalism
    07 Sep 2020
    The highly toxic herbicide and multi-purpose poison arsenic was key to the production of cotton in the United States and Mexico, and in the process sickened and killed a multitude of Black and brow
  • Asa Hilliard’s Concept of “Africanized” Education
    Black Agenda Radio with Margaret Kimberley and Glen Ford
    Asa Hilliard’s Concept of “Africanized” Education
    07 Sep 2020
    Although famed educator Asa Hilliard died in 2007, his advocacy of “Africanized” teaching and thinking continues to gain adherents.
  • Black “Maternals” Yoked to the Wheel of Group Survival
    Black Agenda Radio with Margaret Kimberley and Glen Ford
    Black “Maternals” Yoked to the Wheel of Group Survival
    07 Sep 2020
    Joy James, a professor of political, feminist and critical race theory at Williams College, believes the burden of day to day survival politics in Black American communities is bor
  • Freedom Rider: The U.S. Is a Racist Militia
    Margaret Kimberley, BAR senior columnist
    Freedom Rider: The U.S. Is a Racist Militia
    02 Sep 2020
    U.S. cops are already racist and brutal, and any militia “infiltrators” would feel right at home.
  • The Difference between the CPC and the DNC? A Study of Politics Versus Personalities
    Danny Haiphong, BAR Contributing Editor
    The Difference between the CPC and the DNC? A Study of Politics Versus Personalities
    02 Sep 2020
    Unlike Joe Biden, Xi Jinping’s report is centered, not on personality but on the actually-existing socialist system in China.
  • Load More
Subscribe
connect with us
about us
contact us