Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution

[Indofred]

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

How does that sit with US drone attacks that invade a sovereign country's airspace to attack "Suspected militants"?
No trial, no evidence produced and no sign of a witness anywhere; just summery execution.

Would you guys like to see summery execution without trial in New York?

 

[Oddball]

The Constitution is a dead letter, dude.

 

[Si modo]

The Constitution doesn't matter to Obama nor does it matter to his Bots.

 

[Artevelde]

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

How does that sit with US drone attacks that invade a sovereign country's airspace to attack "Suspected militants"?
No trial, no evidence produced and no sign of a witness anywhere; just summery execution.

Would you guys like to see summery execution without trial in New York?

The sixth amendment deals with criminal prosecution, not with overseas warfare.

 

[Si modo]

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

How does that sit with US drone attacks that invade a sovereign country's airspace to attack "Suspected militants"?
No trial, no evidence produced and no sign of a witness anywhere; just summery execution.

Would you guys like to see summery execution without trial in New York?

The sixth amendment deals with criminal prosecution, not with overseas warfare.

It applies to American citizens.

 

[Artevelde]

How does that sit with US drone attacks that invade a sovereign country's airspace to attack "Suspected militants"?
No trial, no evidence produced and no sign of a witness anywhere; just summery execution.

Would you guys like to see summery execution without trial in New York?

The sixth amendment deals with criminal prosecution, not with overseas warfare.

It applies to American citizens.

Not if that American citizen is engaged in combat operations against the US during an ongoing conflict. If you're going to join a foreign foe and engage in warfare against the US you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot at.

 

[Si modo]

The sixth amendment deals with criminal prosecution, not with overseas warfare.

It applies to American citizens.

Not if that American citizen is engaged in combat operations against the US during an ongoing conflict. If you're going to join a foreign foe and engage in warfare against the US you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot at.

What combat operations? He wasn't shooting at us. It was an extrajudicial trial and execution.

 

[Artevelde]

It applies to American citizens.

Not if that American citizen is engaged in combat operations against the US during an ongoing conflict. If you're going to join a foreign foe and engage in warfare against the US you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot at.

What combat operations? He wasn't shooting at us. It was an extrajudicial trial and execution.

So the jihadi war against the US isn't really happening? The person involved was just sipping a pina colada on the beach?

 

[Si modo]

Not if that American citizen is engaged in combat operations against the US during an ongoing conflict. If you're going to join a foreign foe and engage in warfare against the US you shouldn't be surprised if you get shot at.

What combat operations? He wasn't shooting at us. It was an extrajudicial trial and execution.

So the jihadi war against the US isn't really happening? The person involved was just sipping a pina colada on the beach?

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

 

[Artevelde]

What combat operations? He wasn't shooting at us. It was an extrajudicial trial and execution.

So the jihadi war against the US isn't really happening? The person involved was just sipping a pina colada on the beach?

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

 

[Si modo]

So the jihadi war against the US isn't really happening? The person involved was just sipping a pina colada on the beach?

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

We were at war with Germany, though.

 

[Artevelde]

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

We were at war with Germany, though.

OK, change Germany in WWII with North Korea during the Korean War.

 

[Si modo]

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

We were at war with Germany, though.

OK, change Germany in WWII with North Korea during the Korean War.

You keep bringing up combat operations. Sure, take him out.

Again, what combat was this guy and the two other Americans engaged in? What combat ops were we engaged in there?

And, why is the Obama admin not releasing dick about this?

I do not trust, nor will I ever trust (as out Founding Fathers already knew) a single branch taking such powers upon themselves alone to kill US Citizens. So they say he was a bad guy. OK. Maybe he was. But, we have another branch to figure that part out.

This is an example of absolute power, something I never thought I would see from the USA in my lifetime.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

So the jihadi war against the US isn't really happening? The person involved was just sipping a pina colada on the beach?

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

The fact is that there were people who were American citizens who left the United States and joined the German military in World War II. They DID NOT renounce their citizenship. When D-Day occurred a number of them were outright killed by US servicemen and a number were captured. Those that were captured were placed into Prisoner of War camps and held there until AFTER the end of the war. They were NOT tried but were treated as enemy combatants. After the war, their citizenship was REVOKED and they were deported back to Germany.

This "outrage" at the use of drone attacks to kill terrorists outside the US who happen to be citizens does NOT have either the rule of law or history behind it. The point here is that these people took POSITIVE steps to leave this country and provide this assistance or aid for the violent destruction of the United States OR the death of one of it's citizens.

President Obama has gotten one or two things right in his time in office... this is one of them.

 

[Si modo]

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

The fact is that there were people who were American citizens who left the United States and joined the German military in World War II. They DID NOT renounce their citizenship. When D-Day occurred a number of them were outright killed by US servicemen and a number were captured. Those that were captured were placed into Prisoner of War camps and held there until AFTER the end of the war. They were NOT tried but were treated as enemy combatants. After the war, their citizenship was REVOKED and they were deported back to Germany.

This "outrage" at the use of drone attacks to kill terrorists outside the US who happen to be citizens does NOT have either the rule of law or history behind it. The point here is that these people took POSITIVE steps to leave this country and provide this assistance or aid for the violent destruction of the United States OR the death of one of it's citizens.

President Obama has gotten one or two things right in his time in office... this is one of them.

So, all Obama has to do is declare a citizen a terrorist and all that citizen's rights are suspended.

That is absolute power in a nutshell.

 

[Artevelde]

We were at war with Germany, though.

OK, change Germany in WWII with North Korea during the Korean War.

You keep bringing up combat operations. Sure, take him out.

Again, what combat was this guy and the two other Americans engaged in? What combat ops were we engaged in there?

And, why is the Obama admin not releasing dick about this?

I do not trust, nor will I ever trust (as out Founding Fathers already knew) a single branch taking such powers upon themselves alone to kill US Citizens. So they say he was a bad guy. OK. Maybe he was. But, we have another branch to figure that part out.

This is an example of absolute power, something I never thought I would see from the USA in my lifetime.

So you believe operations against jihadi terrorists are not combat operations?
What combat was Osama bin Laden involved in when he was killed (rightly so)?

 

[MuadDib]

As much as I detest and deplore the actions of Obama, I don't see where Amendment VI applies. These actions are being committed in an undeclared war on foreign soil, not within the United States. However, that country can perceive it as an act of war against that country.

 

[Artevelde]

I don't know what he was sipping at the time. But I do know he was not engaged in combat. I have little doubt he was a piece of shit assisting terrorism against the USA. However, the ONLY thing we had on him was he was using words. First Amendment.

And, he had a right to jurisprudence and habeus corpus.

It's the Constitution.

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

The fact is that there were people who were American citizens who left the United States and joined the German military in World War II. They DID NOT renounce their citizenship. When D-Day occurred a number of them were outright killed by US servicemen and a number were captured. Those that were captured were placed into Prisoner of War camps and held there until AFTER the end of the war. They were NOT tried but were treated as enemy combatants. After the war, their citizenship was REVOKED and they were deported back to Germany.

This "outrage" at the use of drone attacks to kill terrorists outside the US who happen to be citizens does NOT have either the rule of law or history behind it. The point here is that these people took POSITIVE steps to leave this country and provide this assistance or aid for the violent destruction of the United States OR the death of one of it's citizens.

President Obama has gotten one or two things right in his time in office... this is one of them.

I agree.

 

[Artevelde]

So if in WWII a US citizen had joined the German propaganda Ministry and US bombers had bombed that propaganda Ministry and thereby killed him, that would have been a crime against the constitution?

The fact is that there were people who were American citizens who left the United States and joined the German military in World War II. They DID NOT renounce their citizenship. When D-Day occurred a number of them were outright killed by US servicemen and a number were captured. Those that were captured were placed into Prisoner of War camps and held there until AFTER the end of the war. They were NOT tried but were treated as enemy combatants. After the war, their citizenship was REVOKED and they were deported back to Germany.

This "outrage" at the use of drone attacks to kill terrorists outside the US who happen to be citizens does NOT have either the rule of law or history behind it. The point here is that these people took POSITIVE steps to leave this country and provide this assistance or aid for the violent destruction of the United States OR the death of one of it's citizens.

President Obama has gotten one or two things right in his time in office... this is one of them.

So, all Obama has to do is declare a citizen a terrorist and all that citizen's rights are suspended.

That is absolute power in a nutshell.

We are not talking about Obama declaring this person a terrorist. The person himself openly joined the terrorists.

 

[jillian]

The Constitution doesn't matter to Obama nor does it matter to his Bots.

That's really funny