quote:

ORIGINAL: lockedaway

You are boring. You know that? Different crime, different jurisdication, different venue, different tribunal, etc. You want suspected terrorists to be treated as American citizens. That says a great many horrible things about you.

quote:

extra-jurisdictional

quote:

YUou seem to be quite fixated on your constitutional argument. You are aware that the US Supreme Court doesn't agree with you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Eric15237

This has been fun, but gratis education of the immature, naive and unread really isn't my chore. Best of luck. PLease do review the meaning of troglodyte. I'm quite sure you'll find your picture there beside it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lockedaway
The exclusionary language or, if you prefer, the language that is specific to U.S. citizens

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Looks like all that legislation rubber stamped by the Loyal Bushies is going to just get un-done.

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

Anyone who doesn't have a political agenda to continue the torture of people who are likely innocent ( without a Habeas Corpus hearing, they get the benefit of the doubt ), understands that since the Amendment makes the act of depriving due process Unconstitutional, it applies to the ENTIRE NATION.

In simpler terms, under the Law, the United States is a State, also.

Remember, it's:

THE PEOPLE

THE GREAT STATE OF NEW YORK

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

The idea that the Federal Government can enjoy a privilege prohibited to a SUPERIOR ENTITY is laughable.

HA HA!

Again, we run into the basic Hamiltonian Flaw. They just aren't able to clearly read the words carefully selected for their exact meaning.

There IS NO INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION NECESSARY. It says EXACTLY what it means.

( in other words, "What part of 'Shall Not Be Infringed' is unclear to your kind of people" )

Let me try another tack....

WHERE IS THE AUTHORITY TO TORTURE PEOPLE DELEGATED BY THE PEOPLE TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN ANY CONSTITUTIONAL CLAUSE OR AMENDMENT?

If you cannot point to it, then the privilege does not exist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

Whatever happened to killing all al qeada on site?
You can't ever let them go!
[/quote]

   Don't happen to have an extra M-60, do you?

                                                           'hawk 

(in reply to popeye1250)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Farg, "any state" no state is trying Suspected terrorists in Gitmo. It is interesting, so you now alledge that any time the word "state" is used in the constitution it can mean federal Government. That brings an interesting meaning to the 10th amendment doesn't it.

Lets make that substitution, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the Federal Government respectively, or to the people. Is that what you are saying it acutally means?

quote:

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.

quote:


Let's apply that same 'no interpretation of the Constituation (and amendments thereto) necessary' to the 2nd Amendment...as well as the 14th Amendment.

'hawk

quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

the fact that these detainees were captured by the military and since it was during a military action they are not "under arrest" and thus have only the right to plea their case of not being a combatant to a military court.

I would suggest that that privilege isn't extended to the Government UNLESS we are really At War, and without a Congressional Declaration, we just aren't there.

You would have a point, perhaps, IF Bush didn't try to do this on the d/l, and skimp.

IF he had gone before Congress, ASKED for a Declaration of War, and got it, he could have drafted a million troops to go in a do Iraq correctly, AND then they would have the extra-judicial authority.

But Bush tried to get away without crossing all the ts and dotting the is.

And I'm not necessarily against a Military Court, if it affords the usual raft of guarantees. Habeas, Counsel, Due Process, etc...

quote:



we have been told by the news and gov that we are at war so many times that we actually think we are at war and that war rules apply when i do not remember there ever being a formal declaration of war does anyone else remember one?