Krauthammer: If You Take Up Arms Against The United States You Have Forfeited Your Rights

RCP Video ^ | 2-6-2013

[Sir Napsalot]

CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER: I really don't understand this sort of hysteria over the idea of killing Americans who have taken up arms against the United States. Thousands of Americans, Southerners, died in Antietam without any due process. When we stormed the beaches of Normandy on D-day, and Americans approached German bunkers, I don't think anybody asked if they were any German-Americans here, I want to read you the Miranda rights. If you take up arms against the United States you were a target because it was an act of war and you forfeited those rights.

[TigersEye]

Bolton supports this policy, so does the American public and I agree with it as well.

Hooray for democracy! The majority agree that Constitutional due process is just a PITA.

[American in Israel]

Since the Department of Homland Security is a para-military inside the domestic borders of the US and is not constitutional, and if it were to oppose the people of the United States with force, it would then, by this definition mark all DHS agent and the Congress and President who controls them as no longer American Citizens and subject to execution.

Seems to me to be a stupid can of worms to open. There is plenty enough power to kill on whim for a president with shockingly few checks and balances.

[Navy Patriot]

May Krauthammer reap his reward slowly when his useful idiocy is no longer useful, as useful idiots always do.

[cripplecreek]

Lets not forget that the UN is seeking access to our drones now as well.

[TigersEye]

Are they? Isn’t that cute. I guess they are smart enough to not put UN boots on the ground here. It wouldn’t be as easy as raping and pillaging small African countries.

[IronJack]

First of all, Chuckles, you don’t have bupkus to say about my rights. Secondly, if you try to deprive me of those rights, YOU forfeit the right to life and liberty.

[livius]

Yes, killing your enemies outright is always easier and less messy than this stupid due process stuff.

And think how much more fun it is for Bambi. Almost like “shooting skeet.”

[Sir Napsalot]

“Punish Our Enemies” (Obama to Latinos, Univision interview, Oct 2010)

Oooopsie, Mr. Obama told Baisden that he should have used the word, “opponents,” rather than “enemies” .....

Riiiiight. Everything peachy?

[CynicalBear]

>>When the government finally passes a total firearms ban, will refusal to surrender your guns be considered “taking up arms against the U.S.”?<<

Yep! And it’s rather dismaying to see FReepers so readily agreeing that anyone who opposes this government is an “enemy of the government” and not deserving of due process. The constitution doesn’t say “unless” when it spells out the rights of Americans to due process.

[cripplecreek]

Yep! And it’s rather dismaying to see FReepers so readily agreeing that anyone who opposes this government is an “enemy of the government”

There were a fair number of Germans who didn't buy the nazi version of the reichstag fire but they weren't communists so they went on about their lives. Besides, questioning it too much might get one labeled a communist.

[BitWielder1]

Is the corollary equally valid?

"If You Take Up Arms Against The United States People You Have Forfeited Your Rights"

0bama is giving himself the powers of an absolute ruler, that's not what the American President is supposed to be.
Checks and balances. Congressional review. A court order. Anything other than a despot pointing his finger and say "Off with his head".
Once there is a consensus among reasonable men that we must Capture or Kill a specific dangerous terrorist, then fine.

Can we sentence someone to death in absentia?
Is a court ordered assassination legal?
At least that would provide a legal framework for some kind of due process.
Carrot: If the target turns himself in before the hit, he'll get the full trial.

[mom.mom]

Come on Chuck. DHS equates conservative political ideology with domestic extremism. Remember the study DHS did, leaked last year, that Americans “who are suspicious of centralized federal authority” and “reverent of individual liberty” were “extreme right wing” terrorists? Not the time to go lo-info on us sweetie.

[driftless2]

"Antietam analogy"

No it doesn't. The position of the federal government was that all rebels were still American citizens and not citizens of a foreign government.

[mason-dixon]

If the government has to go through the FISA court to get approval to tap an American citizen’s phone — even when in a foreign country — why can just the executive branch tag you for execution via drone without any similar judicial branch oversight????

[Sir Napsalot]

>>> Checks and balances. Congressional review.

We all know Regulations and Congressional Oversight are worth zip, zilch, nada.

Even if Congress is serious about reign in the unchecked power (ha!), pundits and media turn it into three dog and freak circus show.

[driftless2]

So if we locate an individual who is an American citizen and we know is actively helping terrorists but we cannot send in policemen and lawyers to arrest him and read him his rights, we should let him go?

[Gaffer]

Us. Against a selectively oppressive government as we have now. The foreign terrorist reason will eventually be used against those pesky Americans who won’t conform. Quite simply, I don’t trust this government to act in good faith.

[TigersEye]

Are those the only two choices? That’s a rhetorical question ... obviously.

[WriteOn]

My sentiments as well.