Hacker group “Anonymous” apparently has a bone to pick with Barack Obama – among others – over his signing of the National Defense Authorization Act. (NDAA) Not satisfied with stealing people’s credit card information or shutting down the ebb and flow of commerce, the high tech geeks have decided to indict the president on charges of … something or other .. in a virtual world court.
…the group issued a message calling President Barack Obama and co-authors of National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA) “terrorists.” Anonymous demands that the president resign because he has no right or authority to implement a bill that violates the Constitution of the American people and the group vowed to remove the corrupt leaders from government and says, “We The People! Veto” the president’s NDAA decision.
“We The People! Veto your decision to implement the National Defense Authorization Act,” states Anonymous in a Jan. 3 written and recorded statement via a Youtube video to perpetrators who voted for the NDAA.
“The National Defense Authorization Act is a direct violation to the United States constitution,” Anonymous states.
Anonymous’ says that President Obama and his “co defendants” Senators John McCain, Joe Leiberman and Linsey Grahma are terrorists.
Oh, and they’d like their hero, accused traitor Bradley Manning, released immediately and recognized for his “heroic” work.
Anonymous also demands immediate release of Private First Class Bradley Manning, commending his proving that the U.S. government is corrupt and condemning U.S. war crime cover ups.
Of course, what Obama’s accusers inconveniently ignore is that fact that Obama issued a signing statement along with the NDAA. The applicable portion reads thusly:
“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation.”
Of course, this was the same president who – as a candidate – had repeatedly trashed his predecessor’s use of signing statements. But pay no attention to that. I believe he also had something to say about Bush’s use of recess appointments, until he found himself on the other end of the stick. Then he had to send out poor Jay Carney to cite Bush as a glowing example of the legality of such actions.
I don’t know what Anonymous is raging against, precisely. The baseline is that political protest is fine when it’s done legally. When you employ high tech hijacking to make your point, you’re nothing more than a terrorist yourself. Pot.. meet kettle.
Here’s the video of Anonymous issuing their charges for your lunchtime entertainment.