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

To: headsonpikes; KC Burke
I don't think KC makes a clear enough distinction between individuals apprehended abroad and those apprehended within the U.S.

Article III, Section 2

... The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Amendment IV

No person shall be . . .be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. . .

A tribunal is simply a more formal way to make certain that the person being summarily dealt with is the person intended...nothing more, nothing less.

In the right hnds it will "make certain." In the wrong hands it will be only window dressing which serves as an excuse to execute anyone who "they" want dead.

We don't want our laws to allow secret actions which require their operation to be in honorable and trustworthy hands.

28 posted on 11/21/2001 10:45:47 AM PST by LSJohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: LSJohn
I agree.
31 posted on 11/21/2001 10:48:20 AM PST by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: LSJohn
"We don't want our laws to allow secret actions..."

Wrong. I want the state, in its operations against the people's enemy, to be secretive, cunning, and lethal. I do not want lawyers snoopervising.

The state is a killing machine; that's why the citizenry pays the big bucks.

In this case especially, the people want their money's worth. ;^)

33 posted on 11/21/2001 10:58:17 AM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: LSJohn
"No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law."

And to me it is clear that "person" does not here refer to non-citizens against whom the U.S. military is waging war. Applying the 4th Amendment in a military context - extending the Bill of Rights guarantees to our wartime adversaries - would make waging war impossible.
36 posted on 11/21/2001 11:10:34 AM PST by Steve_Seattle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

To: LSJohn
What you cite is certainly something to look at but by that same analysis of what you attempt to apply, acts or events of war on our soil would be "crimes" and that was certainly not the intention. These weren't common law, civil or statute crimes committed but acts of war, war-crimes and acts of terrrorism and sabotauge.

If Osama kills in waging war on our nation do we send the FBI and NY Police after him? No, we wage War.

43 posted on 11/21/2001 11:26:36 AM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

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