Next Target Iran.

[red states rule]

what foolishness. How old are you, really?

Truth does cause libs to recoil in fear

Old enough to see through your liberal garbage and the distain you have for anyone who disagrees with you

 

[maineman]

Truth does cause libs to recoil in fear

Old enough to see through your liberal garbage and the distain you have for anyone who disagrees with you

no...ask kathianne...I do not automatically disdain anyone who disagrees with me. She and I have had long and probing and respectful conversations. We talk about issues....all you like to do is hurl bombs. And if you say it often enough, you might make yourself believe that I am somehow "fearful" of you.... but trust me, I really am not. Frustrated? yes. Bored? getting there. Afraid?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA No FUCKING way!

 

[red states rule]

no...ask kathianne...I do not automatically disdain anyone who disagrees with me. She and I have had long and probing and respectful conversations. We talk about issues....all you like to do is hurl bombs. And if you say it often enough, you might make yourself believe that I am somehow "fearful" of you.... but trust me, I really am not. Frustrated? yes. Bored? getting there. Afraid?? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA No FUCKING way!

Hey, you started with the insults not me. You are like most libs, facts to you have the same reaction as Holy Water on the Devil

 

[Hamiltonian]

Hey, you started with the insults not me. You are like most libs, facts to you have the same reaction as Holy Water on the Devil

Why do you seem so fearful about bringing Terrorists to trial? You seem to be convinced that all the people in Gitmo are Terrorists, so then you must be relying on good evidence. Why are you so afraid to have the evidence presented in a court of law? Are you afraid that they might not actually be Terrorists?

 

[Redhots]

Why do you seem so fearful about bringing Terrorists to trial? You seem to be convinced that all the people in Gitmo are Terrorists, so then you must be relying on good evidence. Why are you so afraid to have the evidence presented in a court of law? Are you afraid that they might not actually be Terrorists?

You must be new here.

Red States, like some others here, just doesn't give a shit about things like due process and all that. Unless the topic is a corrupt GOP member or serviceman.

 

[red states rule]

Why do you seem so fearful about bringing Terrorists to trial? You seem to be convinced that all the people in Gitmo are Terrorists, so then you must be relying on good evidence. Why are you so afraid to have the evidence presented in a court of law? Are you afraid that they might not actually be Terrorists?

Terrorists do not have a right to the Federal Courts. They should be tried by a military tribunal

 

[Redhots]

Terrorists do not have a right to the Federal Courts. They should be tried by a military tribunal

Because?

 

[red states rule]

Because?

Foreign terrorists do not have US Constitutional rights when captured on the battlefield

 

[Gurdari]

Foreign terrorists do not have US Constitutional rights when captured on the battlefield

Why were those rights created in the first place? What is the point of having a legal system like this? Don't those reasons remain? Isn't applying and maintaining high standards of justice and law one of the things that makes a nation great?

 

[Annie]

Why were those rights created in the first place? What is the point of having a legal system like this? Don't those reasons remain? Isn't applying and maintaining high standards of justice and law one of the things that makes a nation great?

For US citizens and permanent residents, ie those here legally. Not those picked up on the battlefield, etc.

 

[maineman]

For US citizens and permanent residents, ie those here legally. Not those picked up on the battlefield, etc.

I agree that full US constitutional protections are not afforded to prisoners captured on the battlefield...but there are indeed some protections that are afforded to them by the constitution - those being any protections granted to them by any treaty signed by this government - which, according to the constitution, become the law of the land once signed.

The president has already stated that they deserve the protections of the Geneva Convention, and they clearly deserve the protection of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which was adopted under president Raygun.

 

[Annie]

I agree that full US constitutional protections are not afforded to prisoners captured on the battlefield...but there are indeed some protections that are afforded to them by the constitution - those being any protections granted to them by any treaty signed by this government - which, according to the constitution, become the law of the land once signed.

The president has already stated that they deserve the protections of the Geneva Convention, and they clearly deserve the protection of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which was adopted under president Raygun.

I think GW once again did a disservice to the country, by caving on the GC, as enemy combatants are defined, as are those that qualify as terrorists/insurgents, ie. w/o uniform and hiding within civilian populations.

The Raygun thing is silly.

 

[maineman]

The Raygun thing is silly.

the convention on torture signed by him is anything but.....

 

[Annie]

the convention on torture signed by him is anything but.....

It's still silly to use the name.

 

[maineman]

It's still silly to use the name.

goes back to my woodstock counterculture roots!

(which I had to keep pretty well hidden while at USNA!)

 

[Annie]

goes back to my woodstock counterculture roots!

(which I had to keep pretty well hidden while at USNA!)

Now there you go! Truth will out! Thanks for making me feel younger, I was in like jr. high for Woodstock!

 

[maineman]

Now there you go! Truth will out! Thanks for making me feel younger, I was in like jr. high for Woodstock!

with your use of the word "like", I would have put you as being younger than that! lol

 

[Annie]

with your use of the word "like", I would have put you as being younger than that! lol

 

[Redhots]

Foreign terrorists do not have US Constitutional rights when captured on the battlefield

Why?

 

[maineman]

Foreign terrorists do not have US Constitutional rights when captured on the battlefield

14th Amendment:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Please note that there are certain rights that flow to CITIZENS, and that certain other rights flow to PERSONS.

Like it or not, foreign terrorists who are captured on the battlefiled and then fall under the jurisdiction of the United States are PERSONS is every sense of the word.