Sorry...but they don't get the rights of citizens.
Try them in a military tribunal.
Why should a suicidal non-citizen camel jockey get the same rights as I do?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
From Cuba to Illinois for US prisoners?
- Thread starter FR7 Baptist
- Start date
- Status
Sorry...but they don't get the rights of citizens.
Try them in a military tribunal.
Why should a suicidal non-citizen camel jockey get the same rights as I do?
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
Because the rights are not, and never have been, limited to citizens.
I think that what we have here is the latest incarnation of JustChristian-Freedom-alatide.
Rights as given in our constitution are limited to American Citizens as far legal enforcement goes within the United States. However, send terrorist to tribunals in no way infringes on anyone's rights.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
I already have a brain. And yes, I want to be a lawyer just like my uncle. You should check out the Supreme Court cases Wong Wing v. United States, Plyer v. Doe, and Russian Fleet v. United States for starters.
I'm truly sorry about your uncle.
None of your case citings are even remotely similar to the case at hand, either in the facts or the application of the law.
You have hoisted yourself on your own pitard.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm no expert on terrorism, but when we're trying to keep terrorists out of the nation's interior, isn't this giving them a very easy way to get inside?
If I try to think like a terrorist, it goes through my mind that someone would purposely try to get a number of people into that prison. Since everyone is so eager to prove they are open and tolerant, I'm sure it would be relatively easy to get people who cling to the Religion of Terrorism hired into that prison system working security.
It's so obvious to me that I must have some humongous logic gap going on here. A government trained and learned in defending this country has to know something that's not crossing my mind.
What is it? What am I missing that makes this a smart and safe move for us? What is going to stop a scenario like what I said from unfolding?
If I try to think like a terrorist, it goes through my mind that someone would purposely try to get a number of people into that prison. Since everyone is so eager to prove they are open and tolerant, I'm sure it would be relatively easy to get people who cling to the Religion of Terrorism hired into that prison system working security.
It's so obvious to me that I must have some humongous logic gap going on here. A government trained and learned in defending this country has to know something that's not crossing my mind.
What is it? What am I missing that makes this a smart and safe move for us? What is going to stop a scenario like what I said from unfolding?
Nothing.............
This isn't about being smart or safe.
This is about Obama and his cadre showing the world that he is not George Bush - at whatever cost.
You know - so that the world will love us.
You're not missing anything. Giving illegal combatants, who make war on our country, citizenship rights iscompletely idiotic and not about being safe and smart.
I agree with targus, it's about being different from Bush, even if it kills them.
OK, I'll do that, and you check out the "United States Constitution."
Once again...they are not citizens. They don't get the rights of citizens.
Folks like you that ignore this are endangering our country. Or does that matter to you?
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
For the third time, most of the rights in the Constitution are not limited to citizens. I have "check[ed] out the 'United States Constitution'" as well as relevant case law. I have and still am in the process of studying it quite extensively. Let me ask you this, should the Constitutional rights pertaining to criminal prosecution apply to criminal defendants who are legal permanent residents who are accused of committing crimes in the United States? I want to know how far you're willing to go with this.
Last edited by a moderator:
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
As I've been over before, there is a difference between someone who is picked up on the battlefield and someone like KSM. With KSM, there is no justification for a military commission. You probably still won't get it, but I'm trying to explain it to you.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
Prove it. Show me the case law.
But it is also plain that Congress long ago agreed to the president's power to convene military commissions (under U.S. Code, Title 10, Section 821). In addition, the president has inherent constitutional power as commander-in-chief to convene such tribunals, an argument acknowledged by Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone in a 1942 opinion. (Stone, writing for a unanimous Supreme Court, declined to set aside the military trial and execution of German saboteurs who had entered the U.S. to destroy war plants.) The president is also authorized by statute to write rules of procedure and proof for military commissions, and to decide whether or not it is "practicable" to adopt the ordinary rules of common law and evidence.
http://www.law.yale.edu/news/3297.htm
Last edited by a moderator:
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
You're the one making a claim. The burden of proof is on you. Besides, I've already provided evidence. Maybe one day you'll open your eyes and stop being willfully ignorant.
- Status