Can it be true? Obama orders Miranda Rights for Foreign enemies!!!

[Terry]

Can you imagine during any past wars if we had to fight it with our troops having to play lawyers? War is just that War...if you are out there with a gun in your hand, and our troops catch them with that gun...I say shoot to ******* kill.

Our problems was during the Vietnam war when we allowed the MEDIA to be imbedded with our troops during a war.

Racist me? Far ******* from it but let me tell you this...our guys are over in Iraq and Afganistan tell me how many white people there eating pork? It's a matter of fact that our enemy over there are of dark skin and fancy lamb. I suppose I could have worded it better but I like quick short responses.

This isn't a criminal issue, it's a ******* WAR. When our troops are deployed and fighting it's a war PERIOD

Fair is fair. I don't think terrorists should have the same right as POW's. Where's their battle insignia? Are they signatories to the GC? They should be treated as criminals, and given the same rights as criminals. If they are guilty, they go straight to jail.

It's a war, they declared it upon us on 911! Our troops are deployed hunting the bastards down. This war would have been done if congress, Bush, Obama would stop handcuffing our troops and let them do what they are best at doing. TROOPS DEPLOYED IT IS A WAR *rolls eyes*

 

[Gunny]

Your right, you did. I despise racist shitheads like you.

LMFAO! There it is. The race card.

Pathetic.

Really? So you don't consider this statement racist?

I doubt our Service men/woman would mistake a white woman for a brown skinned person that smells of Lamb

Do explain how calling the piece of shit who said that racist is "playing the race card"

Good luck with that, fuckwit.

Nope. What's racist about it? I guess you're one of those weenies that feels that any mention of race is automatically racism?

So when the Borg programmed you to thoughtless blind obedience to instructions, what did they change your name to?

 

[Nik]

LMFAO! There it is. The race card.

Pathetic.

Really? So you don't consider this statement racist?

I doubt our Service men/woman would mistake a white woman for a brown skinned person that smells of Lamb

Do explain how calling the piece of shit who said that racist is "playing the race card"

Good luck with that, fuckwit.

Nope. What's racist about it? I guess you're one of those weenies that feels that any mention of race is automatically racism?

So when the Borg programmed you to thoughtless blind obedience to instructions, what did they change your name to?

Maybe the implication that only "browns who smell like lamb" can be terrorists?

Man, are you a ******* tool. Open your eyes, dickface.

 

[Gunny]

BO swore he would never do this, yet another promise broken.

Once again it's the 1990s and terrorism is a police matter, the mindset that lead to 9/11.

If he doesn't, someone needs to. But you know what the REAL underlying problem is to this whole argument?

That our legal system is so mistrusted and such a joke that everyone knows shyster lawyers will get these guys off the hook for their crimes. Only difference is, the bleeding hearts are hoping for just THAT while people capable of actual thought see our corrupt judiciary for what it is.

Yeah, its so corrupt because it actually tries to follow laws, and the constitution instead of making shit up so it can get the intended result. And you have the nerve to say that anyone else doesn't follow the law? What horseshit.

Sure thing, sightless one. It's based on word games and loopholes and lost sight of the Constitution LONG ago.

The only horseshit in this thread is your every post. A complete waste of bandwidth.

You have no argument. You started slinging the insults and have nothing else to offer. Take your act to the Flame Zone or straighten the **** up.

 

[Gunny]

BO swore he would never do this, yet another promise broken.

Once again it's the 1990s and terrorism is a police matter, the mindset that lead to 9/11.

If he doesn't, someone needs to. But you know what the REAL underlying problem is to this whole argument?

That our legal system is so mistrusted and such a joke that everyone knows shyster lawyers will get these guys off the hook for their crimes. Only difference is, the bleeding hearts are hoping for just THAT while people capable of actual thought see our corrupt judiciary for what it is.

It's rather obvious there is little confidence in the court system, just looking at how it is twisted and abused so often shows it is worthless against terrorism.

Mumia is a perfect example, murdered a cop in front of witnesses and yet there is a huge 'free mumia' campaign saying it's 'racist' to execute a cop killer.

Just imagine the circus when KSM is tried, and the waterboarding matter comes up.

He'll get off. The left HAS TO get him off. They've tied him to their politics. By the time his court date comes up, they'll have no "real" evidence to use against him.

 

[Dr Grump]

It's a war, they declared it upon us on 911! Our troops are deployed hunting the bastards down. This war would have been done if congress, Bush, Obama would stop handcuffing our troops and let them do what they are best at doing. TROOPS DEPLOYED IT IS A WAR *rolls eyes*

A terrorist act is not a war. That aside, if it is to do with 9-11 what are you doing in Iraq? They had nothing to do with 9-11. Afghanistan, sure, I can see the connection. You are not in Iraq to war against terrorists, you were (note the past tense) were at war with another nation. It has now turned into a police action.

 

[Terry]

It's a war, they declared it upon us on 911! Our troops are deployed hunting the bastards down. This war would have been done if congress, Bush, Obama would stop handcuffing our troops and let them do what they are best at doing. TROOPS DEPLOYED IT IS A WAR *rolls eyes*

A terrorist act is not a war. That aside, if it is to do with 9-11 what are you doing in Iraq? They had nothing to do with 9-11. Afghanistan, sure, I can see the connection. You are not in Iraq to war against terrorists, you were (note the past tense) were at war with another nation. It has now turned into a police action.

disagree! Went to Iraq because like cockroaches the terrorist scattered in all directions because they woke the sleeping giant. They thought we would cower in fear after the attack. You view it differently because well you just partake in the koolaid a bit much.

 

[Gunny]

BO swore he would never do this, yet another promise broken.

Once again it's the 1990s and terrorism is a police matter, the mindset that lead to 9/11.

So you don't believe in the law?

Interesting...

And no, that mindset did not lead to 9-11....9-11 was due to Islamic militants wanting the US out of the ME....

Sure. I do. The law states POWs are held for the duration and afforded rights only under the Geneva Convention. The Constitution doesn't afford them any rights, nor does the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The UCMJ deals strictly with US personnel handling POWs which is based on the Geneva Convention, and or conduct should they become prisoners.

The only reason this is an issue at all is because the left used it to sling shit against the wall trying to stick it to Bush.

 

[Nik]

If he doesn't, someone needs to. But you know what the REAL underlying problem is to this whole argument?

That our legal system is so mistrusted and such a joke that everyone knows shyster lawyers will get these guys off the hook for their crimes. Only difference is, the bleeding hearts are hoping for just THAT while people capable of actual thought see our corrupt judiciary for what it is.

Yeah, its so corrupt because it actually tries to follow laws, and the constitution instead of making shit up so it can get the intended result. And you have the nerve to say that anyone else doesn't follow the law? What horseshit.

Sure thing, sightless one. It's based on word games and loopholes and lost sight of the Constitution LONG ago.

Yes, yes. This is the same old tired horseshit you always say. Word games and loopholes, and yet you can't ever explain exactly what are word games and loopholes. Just some vague terms to throw around in a condemnatory fashion, although you have no idea what you are talking about.

The only horseshit in this thread is your every post. A complete waste of bandwidth.

Look in the mirror, genius.

You have no argument. You started slinging the insults and have nothing else to offer. Take your act to the Flame Zone or straighten the **** up.

blah, blah, blah. Yes do try and condemn me for slinging insults while you are doing the exact same thing.

 

[Nik]

BO swore he would never do this, yet another promise broken.

Once again it's the 1990s and terrorism is a police matter, the mindset that lead to 9/11.

So you don't believe in the law?

Interesting...

And no, that mindset did not lead to 9-11....9-11 was due to Islamic militants wanting the US out of the ME....

Sure. I do. The law states POWs are held for the duration and afforded rights only under the Geneva Convention. The Constitution doesn't afford them any rights, nor does the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The UCMJ deals strictly with US personnel handling POWs which is based on the Geneva Convention, and or conduct should they become prisoners.

The only reason this is an issue at all is because the left used it to sling shit against the wall trying to stick it to Bush.

If they are POW's, than we have been breaking the law quite a bit.

 

[Gunny]

Can you imagine during any past wars if we had to fight it with our troops having to play lawyers? War is just that War...if you are out there with a gun in your hand, and our troops catch them with that gun...I say shoot to ******* kill.

Our problems was during the Vietnam war when we allowed the MEDIA to be imbedded with our troops during a war.

Racist me? Far ******* from it but let me tell you this...our guys are over in Iraq and Afganistan tell me how many white people there eating pork? It's a matter of fact that our enemy over there are of dark skin and fancy lamb. I suppose I could have worded it better but I like quick short responses.

This isn't a criminal issue, it's a ******* WAR. When our troops are deployed and fighting it's a war PERIOD

The result will be a lot less prisoners. Troops in the field aren't going to risk taking someone prisoner if they know they'll just walk. Look how many busts our law enforcement DOESN'T make for the very same reason.

 

[Gunny]

So you don't believe in the law?

Interesting...

And no, that mindset did not lead to 9-11....9-11 was due to Islamic militants wanting the US out of the ME....

Sure. I do. The law states POWs are held for the duration and afforded rights only under the Geneva Convention. The Constitution doesn't afford them any rights, nor does the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The UCMJ deals strictly with US personnel handling POWs which is based on the Geneva Convention, and or conduct should they become prisoners.

The only reason this is an issue at all is because the left used it to sling shit against the wall trying to stick it to Bush.

If they are POW's, than we have been breaking the law quite a bit.

No we haven't.

 

[Gunny]

Yeah, its so corrupt because it actually tries to follow laws, and the constitution instead of making shit up so it can get the intended result. And you have the nerve to say that anyone else doesn't follow the law? What horseshit.

Sure thing, sightless one. It's based on word games and loopholes and lost sight of the Constitution LONG ago.

Yes, yes. This is the same old tired horseshit you always say. Word games and loopholes, and yet you can't ever explain exactly what are word games and loopholes. Just some vague terms to throw around in a condemnatory fashion, although you have no idea what you are talking about.

The only horseshit in this thread is your every post. A complete waste of bandwidth.

Look in the mirror, genius.

You have no argument. You started slinging the insults and have nothing else to offer. Take your act to the Flame Zone or straighten the **** up.

blah, blah, blah. Yes do try and condemn me for slinging insults while you are doing the exact same thing.

I'd say the tired horseshit here is you. I bet you think you're THE leftwingnut defender of the oppressed? Keep dreaming. You're a dime-a-dozen and just as uneducated as the rest.

You threw the first insult, and for no reason. End of story.

 

[Dr Grump]

disagree! Went to Iraq because like cockroaches the terrorist scattered in all directions because they woke the sleeping giant. They thought we would cower in fear after the attack. You view it differently because well you just partake in the koolaid a bit much.

As I said, there is no correlation between terrorists and Sadman's regime. I can assure you, they did not think you would cower in fear. I don't partake in koolaid, I just don't take mass hysteria as fact.

 

[Terry]

exactly Gunny, and I'll be waiting for the MEDIA because I'm sure they are eager to put some GI up on the guillotine the next time some terrorist is shot. It makes me think this entire thing is a set up to degrade our Military but that’s a stretch I know but wouldn’t put it past the media and the left for their history has shown a lot of contempt towards our Military.

 

[Article 15]

I don't like the idea of mirandizing terrorists.

But on the other hand I don't like locking suspected terrorists up indefinitely.

I think it's high time we just rewrite the rules or create new ones for these situations.

 

[Dr Grump]

Sure. I do. The law states POWs are held for the duration and afforded rights only under the Geneva Convention. The Constitution doesn't afford them any rights, nor does the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The UCMJ deals strictly with US personnel handling POWs which is based on the Geneva Convention, and or conduct should they become prisoners.

The only reason this is an issue at all is because the left used it to sling shit against the wall trying to stick it to Bush.

So are they POWs or criminal prisoners?

 

[Nik]

Sure. I do. The law states POWs are held for the duration and afforded rights only under the Geneva Convention. The Constitution doesn't afford them any rights, nor does the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The UCMJ deals strictly with US personnel handling POWs which is based on the Geneva Convention, and or conduct should they become prisoners.

The only reason this is an issue at all is because the left used it to sling shit against the wall trying to stick it to Bush.

If they are POW's, than we have been breaking the law quite a bit.

No we haven't.

To this end the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons:

(a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture;

(b) Taking of hostages;

(c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;

Well that was easy.

 

[Nik]

I don't like the idea of mirandizing terrorists.

But on the other hand I don't like locking suspected terrorists up indefinitely.

I think it's high time we just rewrite to rules or create new ones for these situations.

Well the real problem is what to do with all of these people who are sort of in the middle. Some who are definitely innocent, but nobody will take them since the Bush administration spent so many years telling everyone how terrible and evil they all were.

 

[Dr Grump]

I don't like the idea of mirandizing terrorists.

But on the other hand I don't like locking suspected terrorists up indefinitely.

I think it's high time we just rewrite to rules or create new ones for these situations.

It's the suspected aspect that gets me. Are they bona fide terrorists who verbally abuse guards telling them that America is the great Satan, that Allah is great, and that OBL is their master? Throw 'em in a cell and throw away the key. Or are they some goat herder in the wrong place at the wrong time who's locked up on the say so of some neighbour who has had a blood feud going back centuries? Transparency folks...