Terrorist defended patriotic or treasonous ??

[Xchel]

is it patriotic or treasonous when the left defends the rights of an Al Qaeda leader just because he was a US citizen ??

It is defending who we are as Americans...not sure what you are talking about, which you would give a link of some sort..but if you are talking about the right to a trial by jury..yep he has that right, like it or not...it isn't the left that should be defending that right..but all Americans..after all the Constitution doesn't just apply to those you want it to..it protects all people in the US.....

He could have turned himself in. He had that right didn't he? I don't think the Constitution protects people, even citizens, who join an organization that openly declares and wages war on us.

The Supreme Court disagrees...think about Jose Padilla..a US citizen.

 

[yidnar]

he was in Yemen with other terrorist when he was killed

You didn’t answer the question. Was he found guilty of any crimes before being ‘executed’?

Otherwise:

Logical Fallacy: Guilt by Association

He could have turned himself in. He had that right didn't he? I don't think the Constitution protects people, even citizens, who join an organization that openly declares and wages war on us.

The problem is terrorism is criminal, not military, activity. The ‘declare war’ argument fails because the administration maintains the ‘entire world’ is the ‘battlefield.’ Attacking an enemy soldier on a designated battlefield who is a member of a recognized military of a recognized country comports to the rules of warfare.

Al-Qaeda is not a ‘country,’ it is not a military entity, and it’s members not ‘soldiers’; terrorists are civilian criminals engaged in a criminal conspiracy to kill other civilians and destroy private property. That the United States has responded with conventional military is irrelevant, in addition to being the wrong response.

Consequently, by joining al-Qaeda, alleged US citizen terrorists did not forfeit their citizenship or due process rights.

Clinton treated terrorism as a criminal act and look what happened !!

 

[yidnar]

he was in Yemen with other terrorist when he was killed

You didn’t answer the question. Was he found guilty of any crimes before being ‘executed’?

Otherwise:

Logical Fallacy: Guilt by Association

He could have turned himself in. He had that right didn't he? I don't think the Constitution protects people, even citizens, who join an organization that openly declares and wages war on us.

The problem is terrorism is criminal, not military, activity. The ‘declare war’ argument fails because the administration maintains the ‘entire world’ is the ‘battlefield.’ Attacking an enemy soldier on a designated battlefield who is a member of a recognized military of a recognized country comports to the rules of warfare.

Al-Qaeda is not a ‘country,’ it is not a military entity, and it’s members not ‘soldiers’; terrorists are civilian criminals engaged in a criminal conspiracy to kill other civilians and destroy private property. That the United States has responded with conventional military is irrelevant, in addition to being the wrong response.

Consequently, by joining al-Qaeda, alleged US citizen terrorists did not forfeit their citizenship or due process rights.

well then I guess we should get some search warrants and arrest them !!!!........

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I demand the right to have the military target idiots, can we start with you?

Idiot ????you are the one whining about a no good treasonous terrorist bastard getting made good !!!you are the ******* idiot !!!you couldn't find your own ass if you had another head growing out of your ******* weak ass back !!!

Actually, you are the only person that thinks that is what I am doing. That makes you the idiot. That and the fact that you actually are an idiot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

who is the person you are talking of??? which terrorist? has he been convicted as a terrorist? What rights is he denied or what is it that you want??? After all if we take his rights..what stops them from taking yours as well?

he's an admitted self proclaimed leader of Al Qaeda !!! what more do you want ???

Funny thing, even with a confession he is still supposed to get a chance to have a trial, and they have to indict him before that. Can you show me where either of those happened?

 

[Dragon]

He could have turned himself in. He had that right didn't he? I don't think the Constitution protects people, even citizens, who join an organization that openly declares and wages war on us.

You are mistaken.

Article 3, Section 2: The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Article 3, Section 3: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Amendment 6: 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.

All of these provisions specify the rights of people accused of crimes, including treason, which is very carefully defined. And merely joining an organization that openly wages war on the U.S. is not a crime; one must actually DO something of a material nature for them, or of course wage war on the U.S. oneself.

Of course, treason is a crime that can ONLY be committed by a citizen.

Historically, we have an example of those who waged war on the United States (in the 1860s) but were not denied their rights, including the right to receive a pardon at the discretion of the president, which they did.

I don't really know if any of this applies to the person in question (who hasn't even been named that I noticed!), but if it doesn't it's because he was killed in a war zone, not because being accused of terrorism causes someone to forfeit their rights.

 

[yidnar]

Did Bin Laden deserve a trial ???...and don't give me he wasn't a US citizen crap !!!!he was a terrorist leader and an enemy combatant just like the traitor we made good !!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

is it patriotic or treasonous when the left defends the rights of an Al Qaeda leader just because he was a US citizen ??

It's treasonous not to uphold and defend the Constitution.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Did Bin Laden deserve a trial ???...and don't give me he wasn't a US citizen crap !!!!he was a terrorist leader and an enemy combatant just like the traitor we made good !!

Yes he deserved a trail because he never was wanted by the FBI for the very reason went looking for him.

 

[Xchel]

Saddam was given a trial..had Osama been taken alive he too would have been tried but since he had gun in hand he ws shot.

 

[yidnar]

Saddam was given a trial..had Osama been taken alive he too would have been tried but since he had gun in hand he ws shot.

soooooo ....do you disagree with the use of Predator Drones in making good terrorist ???

 

[Xchel]

I disagree with ordering the execution of US citizens without the benefit of trial.

 

[yidnar]

he renounced his citizenship when he joined the enemy !!

 

[Xchel]

yidnar even enemy combatants that aren't citizens have been given the right to trial...it was decided by the US Supreme Court..and personally I am worried about presidents being able to select who is and is not given the right to trial...think Tea Party and how long ago it was that some were calling them terrorists.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Did Bin Laden deserve a trial ???...and don't give me he wasn't a US citizen crap !!!!he was a terrorist leader and an enemy combatant just like the traitor we made good !!

The SEALs were sent there to bring him back, if possible. I do not know what happened, but I do know he was not by a guy sittin g in the basement on the other side of the world.

 

[Missourian]

I'm not defending the terrorist, I'm opposed to the precedent that's been set.

If they had evidence, they could have indicted and tried him in absentia.

 

[yidnar]

I'm not defending the terrorist, I'm opposed to the precedent that's been set.

If they had evidence, they could have indicted and tried him in absentia.

they still can !!

 

[yidnar]

I want every body that is a true American to listen to how the left defends the rights of known terrorist on this thread !!

 

[yidnar]

Saddam was given a trial..had Osama been taken alive he too would have been tried but since he had gun in hand he ws shot.

soooooo you agree that Saddam was a terrorist ???

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I want every body that is a true American to listen to how the left defends the rights of known terrorist on this thread !!

Actually dumb ass most of the left is defending the killing. It is mostly right wingers complaining about a very dangerous precedent being set where by a President can simply order the murder of US Citizens without presenting a single shred of evidence they are guilty of any crime.