Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seems to me some people here are arguing against granting them any rights except the right to be treated like garbage and tortured. I'm trying to understand exactly what rights they'd offer them. Their adamant stance against making them equal to citizens seems to have some ulterior motive. What interests them so much that they wouldn't just bestow those same rights without question?
Yes, you are correct, I stand corrected, wasnt thinking about illegal aliens who cross the border then they automatically get covered.
Your analogy can only be applied if these terrorists snuck into the country if you wish to NOT apply them to illegal immigrants. They were flown over from foreign land.
Quote:
I get all upset when people think its the Constitution covers people who are half way around the globe, or even as close as Cuba..
You can't do the Bill Clinton styled waffling of saying they're on US soil (base) then say they're NOT on US soil (Cuba)
Interrogation methods...sure. But none of this Bill Clinton sleazy ambulance chasing lawyer cr@p saying they're prisoners and yet they're not prisoners. It's just a$$ covering by elitist military commanders and "masters of the universe" CIA types.
No Torture! You condemn our soldiers if you support it, as they are punishable by death just like the Japanese were.
ANY legal contract ONLY deals with the individuals IN that contract.. PERIOD.. This would be like us taking Mexico's Constitution and claiming that it covered US Citizens..
Must have gone to Mexico for law school...
But I digress.
I really don't care about your theories on contract law, what I am looking for is a citation from the Constitution or a Supreme Court rulling that stipulates that "no person," and "In all criminal prosecutions," means something other than what it clearly states particularly in light of the fact that the Framers were very clear to used the term "the people" when enumerating the rights of citizens.
Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Tell me what part of this deals with OUTSIDE of the US
Seems to me some people here are arguing against granting them any rights except the right to be treated like garbage and tortured. I'm trying to understand exactly what rights they'd offer them. Their adamant stance against making them equal to citizens seems to have some ulterior motive. What interests them so much that they wouldn't just bestow those same rights without question?
The SCOTUS claims they are entitled to rights under writ of habeas corpus, sounds reasonable, but the writ of habeas corpus is not the constitution
The SCOTUS claims they are entitled to rights under writ of habeas corpus, sounds reasonable, but the writ of habeas corpus is not the constitution
Of course not! The right is not in the Constitution at all!.....LOL
The United States Constitution specifically included the English common law procedure in the Suspension Clause, located in Article One, Section 9. It states:
“ The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it
I'm waiting for one of the numbskulls to say that rules against torture only apply to prisoners of War....LOL
NUMBSKULLS?? Ok, here we go. You cannot equate terrorists with POW's or terrorism with war.
The US subscribes to the Geneva Convention and does not support the torture of enemy combatants who are captured and in doing so expects the same treatment of our soldiers.
Did the German, Japanese, Korean or Vietnamese governments play by these rules? No but they claimed they did.
Terrorists are not soldiers of a government army. They are murderers' that target innocent people. Their only purpose is to promote their cause and damn those that get in the way. They have no rules, no morals or ethics.
They brainwash their neighbors and use their children as weapons to kill other innocents. They deserve no special treatment or protection from any government.
F**k'em, and shame on the Obama administration and all the talking heads on TV for making an issue of this.
How soon we forget 9/11. It's only been a few years.
America is not perfect but we are a damn sight better than these animals that thirst for the blood of innocents in the name of their God.
HELL YES they should be tortured and treated as harshly as needed to protect us.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
