Posted on 04/20/2013 12:55:08 PM PDT by yoe
Several Republican lawmakers are calling for the surviving suspect in the Boston Marathon bombings to be tried as an enemy combatant, rather than as an ordinary criminal.
“It is clear the events we have seen over the past few days in Boston were an attempt to kill American citizens and terrorize a major American city,” read a Saturday statement from Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) and Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.). “The accused perpetrators of these acts were not common criminals attempting to profit from a criminal enterprise, but terrorists trying to injure, maim, and kill innocent Americans. The suspect, based upon his actions, clearly is a good candidate for enemy combatant status. We do not want this suspect to remain silent.”
Their statement came after Dzhokar Tsarnaev was taken into custody and sent to the hospital Friday night.
[snip] “America is part of the battleground,” he said. “If you capture someone on the battleground, they should not be given the privilege of a civilian trial where they are given different rights...
[snip] “We continue to face threats from radical Islamists in small cells and large groups throughout the world,” they said. “They have, as their primary focus, killing as many Americans as possible, preferably within the United States. We must never lose sight of this fact and act appropriately within our laws and values.”
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Mc Amnesty and his buttboy Linda Gay-hams, have absolutely no credibility, regardless of the issue argued.
Frankly, those in office that would attack our 2A and Bill of Rights are, they themselves, within the thickness of a single hair of being “enemy combatants”.
As for the argument itself, I could go either way, so I need to think about it for a bit.
Obama is going to use a federal statute under a DA who persecuted and killed Aaron Swartz.
I guess she’s looking forward to killing another young man,
“Sure there are grounds. What is the point of the oath he just swore last year if he cannot be held accountable to it? He got citizenship under false pretenses, that would be my “grounds” for stripping him of it, and its cloak of protections.”
Let me put this in anther way. I could just as quickly assume that you got citizenship under false pretenses, or deny in absence of evidence(that I block or ignore) that you have citizenship.
Then your entire system of due process comes crashing down simply because of 1 claim I made and imposed in isolation.
Whether or not the man is a citizen he is indisputably in one of theses united States, where he also committed the crime. He was NOT found on any battle field, but a Massachusetts Neighborhood. No matter how many smoke Grenadas or shots were fired in his capture.
The demands of due process as well as all other limited on government are in fact limits upon the government not ‘civil rights’ granted at our discression. We cannot simply abandon theses limits because we had made a particular judgement surrounding the nature of his offence.
If foreign nationals were involved, and capable of further attacks against us then yes. We must go overseas to stop the attacks at their source either diplomatically or military if nessary.
But as far as this boy is concerned he is technically a Citizen of Massachusetts who has committed a crime against the people of Massachusetts. He must be tried accordingly until such time that we have reason to believe that he is part of a foreign based organization capable of further acts against us.
Even then there is no harm in letting Massachusetts try the man as if he is not.
It is of course true that theses limits do not exist overseas in a war zone, but Massachusetts sadly is not overseas nor is it currently a separate nation at war with us.
“Just like the NBP at the polling place, um, never mind.”
HMMMMM, I wonder where that would lead to....
Somebody doesn’t want us to know.
If the federal government did not have the death penalty, but the state did, would your opinion be different?
Really, that is exactly what the Constitution spells out as the responsibilities of the legislative branch.
He will then become a cult figure, a female magnet, and will receive thousands of marriage proposals, not to mention, the best medical care money can buy, bar none.
I am not sure of your point. I am no more willing to violate the Constitutional protections of Americans born here, then I am to extend them to those swearing false oaths to that Constitution in order to be in this country to carry out attacks against it.
The legislative branch does not have unlimited power it is limited to things enumerated by the constitution.
Which they dont follow.
Unless you think Congress should be able to pass crap like the Affordable Healthcare Act?
That’s unconstitutional just as much as RICO and all the rest.
If your path prevails, then I hope that he is allowed to join the general prison population and suffers a very cruel death at the hands of his fellow inmates.
Why let Obama violate anyone’s rights?
He’ll come after us next.
Thanks for posting that. There’s a lot of “Strip it!” talk lately, and unless someone can prove he committed a fraud before he swore his oath, then it’s not going to happen. One can make the case his *did* commit a fraud by declaring himself free of other jurisdictions when he was, in fact, a member of a terror cell, but only after he’s convicted of the bombing.
Also, the Feds would have to admit to the existence of a terror cell and that’s another whole ball of tar.
Bad news Rob: The constitution protects against “cruel and unusual punishment”
We are dealing with terrorists that just became a citizen and not a citizen here in good faith. Now I see the reason these sleeper cells become citizens and all by design - besides them having types like you protecting them with your inability not to see their intentions.
I am sure he needs to die before he can say anything about who else was behind this.
I see no reason to strip his citizenship to kill him. But of course Massachusetts won’t kill him. Still it’s their matter so I don’t much care what they do.
All I want is to know who the guy is working for if its Al-Qaedaor any other foreign group I want to retaliate to help stop further attacks.
“He’ll be someones bitch for the rest of his life”
I’ve never understood that very popular view of criminal punishment. The non-bitch involved gets his jollies while in prison on our dime? Why does the non-bitch get a sex vacation in prison? I don’t get it.
He’s an alleged terrorist.
What stops them labeling you one and taking away your rights?
For the sake of the rule of law lets follow the constitution.
I don’t support it, I simply acknowledge that it exists.
He may know very little. All we have is a 30 second FBI tape.
They should present their evidence and let him have due process...
And in my opinion MA’s prosecutors not the feds should be bringing the case.
But this wont happen because Obama does not follow the law like most of the politicians.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.