Posted on 12/02/2001 8:50:01 AM PST by H.Akston
That's the rational for war tribunals. Al Qaeda members would be considered prisoners of war. As prisoners of war, they wouldn't be brought back to the United States to be tried in our court system.
They declared war against us. Evidence of this is they have attacked the United States and their training manual refers to them as being at war with us.
The acts of 9/11 are in violation of the conventions of war because civilians were targeted and they may be appropriately punished.
To: Luis Gonzalez
"We, as citizens of a sovereign state, have graciously extended certain rights to our visitors. However, we have NOT extend the right of freedom of political speech (1st Amendment). Political speech regarding elections is strictly prohibited for non-citizens. That is why I say the that the Bill of Rights does not extend to non-citizens. Only those privileges that the government has chosen to extend have been granted.
# 210 by afraidfortherepublic
************
We do not "extend certain rights" to anyone, afraidfortherepublic.
We refrain from infringing upon those rights.
1) To infringe upon a visitor's right to speak is a violation of the Constitution.
2) To infringe upon a visitor's right to bear arms is a violation of the Constitution.
3) To infringe upon a visitor's home is a violation of the Constitution.
4) To search or seizure the property of a visitor without reason is a violation of the Constitution.
5) To hold a visitor for a capital crime without an indictment of a Grand Jury would violate the Constitution.
6) To deny a visitor a trial when accused of a crime would vioate the Constitution.
7) To require excessive bail, or allow excessive punishment of visitors would violate the Constitution.
"All other rights"?
A resident of the United States in 1943 had a perfect right to walk the streets of America in wing-tip shoes, a business suit and a fedora.
If the German saboteurs had worn Kriegsmarine uniforms, they would have spent the rest of the war in P.O.W. camps and probably would have been given a grudging amount of respect for their daring by the American newspapers.
For exercising the right of any American resident to dress as he pleases, they were executed.
When you are a combatant, your "rights" are not the same as "all the other rights" of the residents of the country you are at war with.
This has been a good thread for people learning what the Constitution and the law say. I'll definitely say that I'M learning.
There CAN be differences of opinion on what the words of the Constitution mean though... even though you may think they are completely clear. Even something so clear as four words on the ten commandments can be open to discussion and interpretation: "Thou shalt not kill". If you're a strict constructionist, you'd have to say that the peacefreaks opposed to the war are the only ones in the right.
I see absolutely no problem with that.
Senator Leahy and the rest of the Democratic Senators and Congresscritters will step up and volunteer to serve on those juries. ;-)
Here is one Indian who is ready to tell you that anybody who tried to deny ME my rights is not going to end up being a happy camper.
As to the rest of your post,of course foreigners visiting or living in the US have the same obligations as US citizens. They have to obey our laws,and if they work here,they have to pay our taxes. Just the same as if you went to live in a foreign country. What's wrong with that in general,and more specifically,what is wrong with other people living free just like we do?
To: Iwo Jima; All
"...So, my question to you, and to everyone, is - would everyone be more comfortable if the Bush Executive Order explicitly stated that tribunals applied only to non-resident non-citizens (e.g., aliens outside the territories and protectorates of the United States)?..."
# 144 by general_re
************
A military tribunal (trial) is only justified during time of war or national emergency.
What we have doesn't qualifies on either count.
The answer to questions like this are simple if you think about them for a minute. As I stated in my other post,along with having the same rights as US citizens have while they are here,they also have the same obligations. One of these obligations (and a BIGGIE!) is that they obey our laws. What the INS is SUPPOSED to be doing is making raids to arrest and deport people here ILLEGALLY. If they are here illegally,they are not obeying our laws by definition,and they do NOT have a right to be here.
Notice how the INS can't deport somebody who is here legally?
Just look at the posts on this and other threads in support of President Bush's tribunals, especially the mantra that "non-citizens do not have any rights under the Constitution." Even Freepers who are denizens of a website dedicated to the support of our Constitution do not understand the Constitution. What's worse, I have seen more than a few who admit that they don't know and don't care what the Constitution says.
Oops, I have to be careful about that showing my age thing. Believe it or not, I'm only in my mid-thirties, and I did attend a public school. I guess I "just made it". A couple years younger, and OMG, I might be posting to DU instead of FR.
I am getting sick of all the people refering to the current unconstitutional state of our government to OK the even further unconstitutional expansion of government powers. One poster even quoted the BATF as an authority on gun rights, rather than quoting the 2nd amendment. I want to scream, "Go to the source, people."
I am conflicted regarding secret military tribunals. I understand the drawbacks of trials by jury, but I worry even more about the dangerous precedent we're setting. Congress hasn't even formally declared war as per the Constitution. We did when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. Congress has no political liability in formally declaring war; Americans would be solidly behind it. So why aren't they?
A war officially begun would officially have to end. There would be parameters. This "war on terrorism" is vague and on-going. The enemy is so loosely defined that it could describe almost anyone. I just read an article which stated that the Patriot Act is already being used to track other catagories of crime, not just terrorism.
I have apprehensions about this undeclared war utilizing secret tribunals to sentence a loosely defined group of enemies. What if Hillary becomes President in '08 with the power to determine who gets hauled into a secret military tribunal for sentencing under officials she appointed? And what would Little Miss VastRightWingConspiracy's idea of a terrorist be?
According to accounts by my grandparents, we used to encourage immigrants to take the oath of citizenship. We also had them assimulate more than they do now.
People come here because they believe that they deserve better.
Agreed!
Gumption Even as non citizens, while they're within the jurisdiction of the United States, they're entitled to "equal protection of the laws"(14th amendment).
Just as if we were arrested in France, for example. We would receive treatment according to their laws as applied to their citizens, not according to the laws of the US.
I won't get into the 14th ammendment being used in discussions of the Bill of Rights, again.
The question becomes, "Are combatants waging war against the United States on U.S. soil covered by the Bill of Rights.?"
Anyone who decides the 9/11 attacks were acts of war cannot argue for civil trial of the combatants, whether citizen or alien.
Unless you think we should invade every place that doesn't follow it's form?
He has such rights as we give him, or have agreed to by treaty...same way as we have limited rights if we go to France (Just ask the French).
An inalienable right to justice is not the same as a right to the various mechanisms, else there is an inherent contradiction between various countries attempts to secure the basic rights simply by virtue of differing methods or even differing wording.
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.