Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A freeper's observation: The Al-Queda and their loyalists in the Senate
E.G.C.

Posted on 12/08/2001 6:19:20 AM PST by E.G.C.

HOWDY FREEPERS

Well, I think we've finally figured out where the Democrats stand on this issue and it sure isn't on our side.

Attorney General John Ashcroft rightfully and unapologetically put them in their place with those infamous remarks at the hearing when he said that those who were complaining about the terroists being put on trial were in fact giving aid and confort to them.

And he's right, folks. It's quite obvious the Democrats by what they're saying and responding to Mr. Ashcroft are giving aid and confort to the enemies, the terrorists. He gave them a good talking to on Thursday during those hearings. The media knew that their Democrat buddies were being exposed for what they are and that's why they cut away from the hearing after Mr. Ashcroft spoke.

This is the same party that wants to do away with our consitutional rights. Apparently, they seem to be far more concerned with the civil liberties of these terrorists than they are with the safety and secuurity of our country. They don't seem to have a problem with violating the constitutional rights of their detractors but let our side put these terrorists on trial and all of a sudden they have a cow.

I think I know why the Democrats and their pals in the Republican party are acting this way. These are obviously criminal elements that have done wrong and got away with it in the past by buying influence and they know that there are criminal elements like this who knowing that this party is soft on crime but tough on their detractors are taking sides with them and representing them in Congress. It's very clear that we have criminal elements like this working togheter to try to undermine the rule of law and turn this nation into a mobcracy run by criminals which punishes detractors and dissenters.

I'm sure you're going to hear Attorney General Ashcroft portrayed in a negative light by the established media if anything is said about him because they know full well that the truth is out about the Democrats and the people they take sides with. Clearly, something is very rotten to the core about Daschele, Leahy, Kennedy and the like. They are not as angelic as the press would like us to think.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
Attorney General John Ashcorft was indeed correct in his assessment of those on the other side who are crying wolf about putting the terrorists on trial. over 3000 people lost their lives in the attacks of September 11th. IMHO, a trip back to ground zero and a visit with the families of those who were killed in these atacks is in order for Leahy, Daschele, Kennedy and all others griping about the treatment of those resoponsible for these attacks is in order.
Regards
1 posted on 12/08/2001 6:19:20 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
Wouldn't it be quicker,more efficient and more satisfying just to kill anyone we suspect of terrorist involvement out of hand?

Anyone who disagrees with this suggestion, incidentally, is giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

2 posted on 12/08/2001 6:48:14 AM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grut
Howdy, Grut.

What we're talking about is going after those who are suspected of terrorist activities and putting them on trial. If we don't do this, we're gonna end up haing a lot more of these attacks taking place.

The rule of law needs to prevail in this. We've got to stop concerning ourselves with the civil liberties of those who murder innocent people and give them their just due. So many people lost their lives on 9/11. It's time to bring the perpatrators to trial.
Regards.

3 posted on 12/08/2001 6:57:47 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
a trip back to ground zero and a visit with the families of those who were killed in these atacks is in order for Leahy, Daschele, Kennedy

What, and take Kennedy away from his Johnny Walker, and I don't mean the American turncoat.

4 posted on 12/08/2001 7:07:55 AM PST by yikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yikes
(LOL)Good point
5 posted on 12/08/2001 7:20:26 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
The rule of law needs to prevail in this.

Keep saying it to yourself, that will surely defend the constituion. Talk is cheap, and people who speak up about possible Constitutional violations of MY rights are not aiding the enemy, but doing their duty. We should all support the President, but that does not mean we all need to be lock step in our opinions.

6 posted on 12/08/2001 7:23:44 AM PST by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
It's quite obvious the Democrats by what they're saying and responding to Mr. Ashcroft are giving aid and confort to the enemies, the terrorists. He gave them a good talking to on Thursday during those hearings.

Yes Ascroft blew them away, however, you are threading on shaky ground when you start ASSUMING that that the Democrats are not patriotic and that they are Al-Queda loyalists. Just like ANY other politician, they are most loyal to themselves. If they think they can make some points with the public or at least churn up some $$ from their partisans, they will. This is true, left or right. Face it.

This is the same party that wants to do away with our consitutional rights. Apparently, they seem to be far more concerned with the civil liberties of these terrorists than they are with the safety and secuurity of our country. They don't seem to have a problem with violating the constitutional rights of their detractors but let our side put these terrorists on trial and all of a sudden they have a cow.

Gee, the Dems want to take away our right to own a gun, to say a prayer in school, or to have a religious symbol on public property. The Republicans want to take away the Dems rights to have an abortion, the Libertarians rights to smoke their dope, and the Reform Party's right to be a party. Im shocked. Seems like poltical parties are more concerned about the rights of their voters than the oppositions voters. Again, Im shocked.

Who in this country has had more problems in the past with their civil liberties being infringed? Might we guess that Jewish voters having gone thru the Holocaust might be more concerned about civil liberties? The extreme left is likely to have a knee jerk reaction to this as after all they were the targets of McCarthyism, not Republicans. Also those most likely to be incarcerated are poor and black. While this is to a large extent true hecause they are more likely to commit crimes, its also true that they are less likely to have a decent lawyer. So add together jews, extreme leftists, the poor and blacks and what do you have? About half of the Democratic party. Any clearer now on why they may raise this as an issue other than they are just a bunch of commie pinkos?

7 posted on 12/08/2001 7:24:24 AM PST by Dave S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
We've got to stop concerning ourselves with the civil liberties of those who murder innocent people and give them their just due.

Some of just want to make sure we do concern ourselves with civil liberties of Americans. Maybe you forgot but one is not guilty and thus denied their right before a trial in this Country. Questions about whether Americans would be subjected to less than constitutional conditions, are valid and proper to be asked.

I guess you think Bob Barr is an Al-Queda loyalist too?

8 posted on 12/08/2001 7:26:54 AM PST by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TheOtherOne
"...people who speak up about possible Constitutional violations of MY rights are not aiding the enemy, but doing their duty."

I agree. Ashcroft's ease at calling questions of his policies treason is frightening. I can't reconcile his support for the 2nd amendment and his trampling of the 4th.

9 posted on 12/08/2001 7:35:40 AM PST by etcetera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Grut
"Wouldn't it be quicker,more efficient and more satisfying just to kill anyone we suspect of terrorist involvement out of hand? "

yeah, but, where would we get a lawyer if we ever needed one?

10 posted on 12/08/2001 7:38:19 AM PST by hoot2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
In my opinion,Ted Kennedy on the judiciary committee is the biggest hypocrisy in government.Vehicular manslaughter is ok with him,why not terrorism?
11 posted on 12/08/2001 7:47:00 AM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
My thoughts exactly.

As to post #6, I do agree that we don't have to agree with our president on everything but, I'm with him and Ashcroft on this one. We're talking about over 3000 people murdered on 9/11. These terrorists aren't like you and me. They meant to do harm by their actions and they need to answer for it.
Regards.

12 posted on 12/08/2001 7:54:51 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
Absolutley.I was flamed this morning along those same lines.Now is not the time for bi-partisan bickering.I always pictured Ted Kennedy as a mascot more than anything else.It kills me to see him on the committee.I refuse to blame America and I refuse to explain my feelings to people who dont want to accept the fact that 9/11 changed a lot things we take for granted.The worlds is unsafe,its problems have come to America,and civil liberties and how we view them have changed,this will never be 1984,so dont claim it will because there are people who will fight Republicans just because they dont know any better.Read T.Kennedy,Hillary,et al.
13 posted on 12/08/2001 9:41:08 AM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cardinal4
Those are good points. I just think that now is not the time to go and try to undermine the efforts by President Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft to administer justice. That, I'm afriad is what some are trying to do by griping about these things.

And I might add it's not just Democrats but also some Republicans who I think are a little misinformed on the issue.
Regards.

14 posted on 12/08/2001 10:29:34 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
Hi E.G.C.

I think we all want a fair trial for all persons charged with crimes whether it is civilian or military.
Apparently what Daschele and his gang are protesting is a trial by a military tribunal.
I believe--and correct me if I am wrong-- that our servicemen go before a military tribunal when they are charged with crimes. Should our enemies be treated differently?
Perhaps Arlen Specter using Scottish Law should defend them.

15 posted on 12/08/2001 10:47:09 AM PST by Temple Owl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Temple Owl
Good point. Yes, all military service people go before tribunals. This clearly was a National Security situation and I think as such that's why a tribunal is warranted.
Regards.
16 posted on 12/08/2001 10:55:45 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Grut
Wouldn't it be quicker,more efficient and more satisfying just to kill anyone we suspect of terrorist involvement out of hand?

The Geneva Conventions require that any such person be afforded due process. Due process in such instance is defined, by the common law of nations and by U.S. common law, statute, and case law as a military tribunal.

17 posted on 12/08/2001 10:56:53 AM PST by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: E.G.C.
Good point. Yes, all military service people go before tribunals.

This is dead wrong.

18 posted on 12/08/2001 11:00:03 AM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dave S
Any clearer now on why they [the Demonrats] may raise this as an issue other than they are just a bunch of commie pinkos?

Give me a break. Bush's executive order doesn't get anywhere near close to applying to Demonrat voters, except for any al Qaeda members in this country illegally who managed to cast an illegal vote.

19 posted on 12/08/2001 11:02:31 AM PST by PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PeoplesRepublicOfWashington
The Geneva Conventions require that any such person be afforded due process.

Well, if you have any experience with the Executive Branch, you'll know that 'due process' is any official process: obviously, in this case, the due process is to be shot out of hand.

Actually, I'm not so much in favor of shooting them as I am of tying them to stakes, heaping rolled copies of the Constitution around their feet and setting fire to the whole sheebang.

20 posted on 12/08/2001 11:10:00 AM PST by Grut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson