27 Feb 2012

People Against the National Defense Act

Author: Mykel Lindsay | Filed under: Bowling Green City Council, Spring 2012

By: Mykel Lindsay

Members of People Against the National Defense Act, led by BGSU freshman Daniel Johnson, met Feb. 21, 2012 to take a stand against the National Defense Authorization Act.

On Tuesday at 7 p.m., PANDA came to the city council meeting to bring more awareness to the NDAA.

The National Defense Act is passed every year in congress to fund the military. According to Zachary Shock, member of PANDA, Two anti-terrorism provisions were added; one section covers non-Americans and the other covering Americans.

According to Shock, the provision reads “…Can indefinitely detain anyone who’s a suspect terrorist without due process, warrant or cause.”

In hopes of nullifying the law in Bowling Green, Ohio, PANDA gave a resolution to the city council, and it was denied prior to Tuesday’s meeting.

When PANDA gave their proposal to council, it was read and revised, noting a change was needed in their clause before approval will be met. Nullifying the NDAA wasn’t possible, according to Sandy Rowland. Therefore, there needed to be numerous statements re-worded in PANDA’s proposal.

Ian Zulick, sophomore member of PANDA, questioned what’s valued by those in favor of the National Defense Act. “Liberties are promised to us by the constitution and they’re being challenged by the NDAA.”

Members of PANDA spoke against the act during the “lobby visitations” portion of the meeting.

After each member spoke their position to the council, PANDA also mentioned that a group has 500 signatures agreeing to passing ordinance or to get city council to look at the resolution again.

City council members Greg Robinette, Sandy Rowland, and Robert McOmber responded to the PANDA members.

“I believe in rule of law obligations to support or appeal actions.” Robinette said. “Thank you PANDA for engaging in the meeting, but I’m offended by the way you’re going about taking action.”

Sandy Rowland agreed. “I appreciate PANDA expressing their concerns on the provisions; however I don’t agree with how you all are going about it.”

Johnson and the other members of PANDA walked out of the meeting at the end of the lobby visitation to make a statement.

“We are not discouraged from the opinions and outcome of today’s meeting because it was expected.” Johnson said after the discussion. “The most important thing to remember is that we have four constitutional lawyers supporting us.”

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments are closed.