It's not only the liberals. I was totally surprised at the large number of posters in this very forum who expressed those views yesterday. They just don't get it - maybe they think September 11 was a bad dream.
From what I saw, it was a relatively small group, but few took the time to seriously debate them so they felt free to plaster their idiocy all over the place.
It's not polite to talk about people without pinging them to the thread.
Furthermore, you folks would strip people of citizenship and hold them indefinately without charging them on no more evidence than the government's say-so.
Anyone have a problem with that scenario??? I know I do.
No, "we people" wouldn't. Yes, I have a problem with that.
On the other hand, YOU people would have these people released just because the government hasn't personally laid all the charges against them, the physical evidence, witnesses and methods just for you.
I have a problem with THAT too.
Under normal circumstances I would most definitely have a problem with that scenario. Not in this case, however. Why can’t you see him for what he is -- a traitor who trained and collaborated with the enemy to commit a horrific act against his own countrymen.
Yes I do, but most people are caught up in the flag waving of war fever. The should read up on the British governments fiasco, where in a fit of panic and outrage for a bombings, these sentenced innocent people to life in prison where one of the died and 15 years later the rest were released as the evidence was made up and policeman and experts lied to get the conviction. (The Birmingham Six and The Guildford Four are the cases I am referring to.
The British were in exactly the same situation as the US. I have no problem locking someone up for ever, but immagine if it was your brother and he was innocent, but unfortunately people are not really interested in this unless it concerns themselves.
I do not know if anyone watched Fox news last night, but a lawyer trying to state the people were to be given legal representation was told he was disgusting and should be ashmed of himself for not supporting the government in a time of war, by the fox new reporter, he was almost verbally thrown of the air.
I think I disagreed with you over something in the last 2-3 days, but don’t recall what. There were a couple of psycos that I touched base with yesterday, and those were who I was referencing.
I’m not informed on all the legal intricacies, but I think that Congress gave the administration all the privileges to wage war without the burden of abiding by the rules of war, which were never envisioned for the WMD carrying, covert operations, terroristic, non-national and barbaric nature of our enemy. And now we have to act faster than we can make up rules.
Padella’s ‘enemy combatant’ status and lack of representation certainly gives one something to think about. I presume that you don’t so much have a problem with a foreign emery combatant of this nature being held on the government’s word in a foreign county, or perhaps even here. I’m guessing that you’re not one of these people who’re claiming that war must be formally declared and that the Geneva convention must be applied. I’m going under the assumption that you’re more concerned with the prospect of a suspension of habeas corpus for a citizen.
I think that Lincoln did this during the civil war, and there were some saboteurs in WWII that had this right overridden. I think that the Constitution gives only Congress the right to suspend habeas corpus, but either Lincoln or Roosevelt suspended it without specific authorization. I don’t know if that would establish any kind of legal president.
Despite being at least uneasy with Padella’s status, I can respect the overwhelming need to hold him in secret, considering our efforts to infiltrate his network and the unprecedented danger it represents. Should this kind treatment be widely institutionalized? Clearly, no. Is the current situation so unique, critical and isolated that I’m happy with bending the rules? Yes. Just like I’d hand down a guilty with no sentence to a man tried for killing someone who raped, tortured and murdered his little girl, I’ll accept a certain level of rule bending to manage a network of al-Queda determined to infiltrate our communities and unleash more WMD. If the rule bending is too great or mistakes are made, we'll do our best to deal with it the same way we would deal with the father on trial who killed the wrong person.
I don't see the appropraite amount of foam running off your chin, you "sickening" un-American. How dare you question our government? Who cares if you have no evidence or facts? All you need to know is that our executive branch would never do anything wrong or incompetent and all our leaders are, always have been and always will be as pure as goldilocks's panties.
BTW, whoever used the term "sickening" to describe someone who questions whether our government is overstepping itself better hope I never become an executive, because I could be a real bastard when I want to. I'll use your own tard-logic standard to whisk your non-thinking ass away for not having enough concern for constitutional issues.
That is after all very un-American in my eyes.