[Chess]

"Do we go as far as ignoring the Constitution and quietly accepting tyranny? If so, why bother?"

Your reply:

"Looks like you will "quietly" accept coddling terrorism and terrorists."

We can uphold the Constitution withour coddling this terrorist. In our court system, he could be tried, found guilty, and sentenced to death. That is not coddling.

It hasn't been necessay to go outside our Constitution in handling Walker Linde and Moussari. Why is it necessary with Padillo?

[Dane]

It hasn't been necessay to go outside our Constitution in handling Walker Linde and Moussari. Why is it necessary with Padillo?

I don't know, but I will trust Ashcroft, and not listen to the naysayers who want to coddle terrorists.

[Roscoe]

In our court system

The SCOTUS held, "Citizens of the United States who associate themselves with the military arm of an enemy government, and with its aid, guidance and direction enter this country bent on hostile acts, are enemy belligerents within the meaning of the Hague Convention and the law of war."