Skip to comments.
A clear and present danger: Ashcroft scheme simply chilling
HoustonChronicle.com ^
| Aug. 16, 2002, 7:49PM
| Turley is a professor of constitutional law at George Washington University, in Washington, D.C.
Posted on 08/18/2002 12:31:24 PM PDT by BellStar
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 221 next last
To: Recovering_Democrat
Lincoln's key measure was the suspension of
habeas corpus in September 1862. He wanted to be able to arrest and indefinitely detain individuals suspected of supporting the South.
How is that any different than Ashcroft's desire to arrest and indefinitely detain suspected "terrorists"? It's a de facto suspension of habeas corpus, is it not?
61
posted on
08/18/2002 2:56:49 PM PDT
by
j271
To: pepsi_junkie
Attempt to smear Ashcroft!
62
posted on
08/18/2002 3:00:13 PM PDT
by
BellStar
To: j271
Consider where Padilla came from. Where he had been. His past. It's not like Ahscroft is going to arrest the cast of SNL.
63
posted on
08/18/2002 3:11:16 PM PDT
by
donozark
To: donozark
My $ is on AshcroftDitto!
64
posted on
08/18/2002 3:16:43 PM PDT
by
BellStar
To: BellStar
Ashcroft knows what he is doing. And those who look closely know he is no threat to our Constitutional Rights. Of course he isn't. This is knee jerk, jump on the band wagon.
I knew Ashcroft was no threat to my rights when he came out and said he believed the Second Amendment meant just what it said. People have the right to keep and bear arms and it has nothing to to with the national guard as those who truly want to take our rights to own a gun away from us, keep saying. Of course some people have short term memory.
Anyone who thinks there won't be more terrorist attacks are living in la la land. They will try again and those who will carry out a terrorist threat are not going to come to the USA. They are already here.
To: BellStar
Both Hamdi and Lindh were captured in Afghanistan as foot soldiers in Taliban units This sets him aside from criminal U.S. citizens - those accused for which the trials and proccesses were written for.
66
posted on
08/18/2002 3:21:23 PM PDT
by
lepton
To: donozark
Padilla is a drug-dealing, gang-banging convicted MURDERER! The fact these incidents were adjudicated while a juvenile do not excuse him. If AG Ashcroft wants him locked up? There is a darn good reason for it. I would like to find out what Padilla's connection was to Oklahoma City. That question came up and then was swept under the rug or maybe the Justice Dept hasn't swept it under the rug.
I still think he looks a lot like John Doe.
To: El Sordo
Will you say the same when President H Rodham starts interning gun owners, tax protesters and members of the pro-life movement?...who are captured in combat on the side of foreign armies?
68
posted on
08/18/2002 3:23:02 PM PDT
by
lepton
To: William Terrell
You left out that any powers he establishes in the Justice Dept In the context of the articles, what powers did Ashcroft establish? That Lindh, captured by military action in a foreign country while bearing arms, was given any semblence of a civil trial is extraordinary.
69
posted on
08/18/2002 3:29:00 PM PDT
by
lepton
To: Texas Mom
Much discussion here on FR at the time. Now seems to have fallen by the wayside. Larry Johnson (former State Dept/CIA)has oft times mentioned "John Doe #2" at OKC bombing scene. Yet, he hasn't tied this Padilla character in as JD #2. Not sure if anyone can. Supposedly there exists a video tape of another man exiting the Ryder truck along with McVeigh. But will we ever see such? Assuming of course it exists.
70
posted on
08/18/2002 3:29:46 PM PDT
by
donozark
To: j271
Now you're catching on. Did the Federal government continue this practice after the War? No. Would the citizenry have tolerated such a practice? No. Would the government have been wrong to do so? Yes.
Ditto the rationing in WW2.
Those spreading panic about "Civil Rights" in the current war situation, I'm glad they weren't around in the 40s in any significant number: we all might be marching to the Third Reich if they were successful.
To: donozark
Yep, so long as his right as an American are respected.
72
posted on
08/18/2002 3:32:59 PM PDT
by
sobieski
To: pepsi_junkie
NONE of the Ashcroft accusers can point to a single item where the AG or the President have violated the Constitution. Not one.
To: lepton
Lindh should have been left where he was-in a bombed-out basement of an Afghan prison, up to his neck in water...Instead we all (taxpayers) have the "honor" of feeding, medicating, and housing this slug for the rest of his natural life, at a per annum cost of roughly $37K. Assuming of course he doesn't fall ill, ala John Gotti. Has THAT bill ever been shown to the public?
74
posted on
08/18/2002 3:36:23 PM PDT
by
donozark
To: jodorowsky
What will constitute cessation of hostilities in the War On Terror? THAT is one of the few valid criticisms I see levelled here.
75
posted on
08/18/2002 3:37:42 PM PDT
by
lepton
To: BellStar
..I was born in Japan where my father an Army Lieutenant was stationed along with his Army bride from Texas and son my brother. I was moved back to Texas while I was still a toddler. I am an American! Japan recognizes me as a Japanese citizen also!...Thank your lucky stars Bin Laden isn't Japanese. If he was, you'd be on one of Ashcroft's surveillance lists by now.
To: BellStar
And those who look closely know he is no threat to our Constitutional Rights.He may not be a threat. But those who come after GWB MAY be a major threat.
Better to protest now than to submit to the camps later.
Let's not forget what our grandparents learned in WW2.
FReegards
To: bruoz
...you left out that he is a deeply religious, patriotic American....Yes.
Does that make what he's doing more, or less, despicable?
Comment #79 Removed by Moderator
To: BellStar
After filtering out the Houston Comical's liberal spin, this article makes a great point. It just proves that even a blind pig will find an ear of corn once in a while.Ashcroft is even a surprise to me. I knew that Dubya was going to be a serious threat to the Constitution, but I had thought that Ashcroft would temper Dubya's treacherous ambitions. Instead, we now find that Ashcroft is just as dangerous as Dubya. Unfortunately, we have to wait two more years to get rid of Dubya (and Ashcroft). On the other hand, it gives conservatives and Constitutionalists two years to groom a replacement for Dubya (and his flunkies).
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 221 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson