Obama's National Security Fraud.

[unregistered]

 

[Sean]

Yeah, fuck that whole constitution thing. It doesn't apply to people that aren't Christian, amiright?

 

[JohnnySavage]

Yeah, fuck that whole constitution thing. It doesn't apply to people that aren't Christian, amiright?

If he had bought the bomb from Smith & Wesson instead of making it himself, people like vette would be calling him a great American exercising his 2nd Amendment rights.

 

[LiFeNdEaTh]

interesting..

 

[Sean]

If he had bought the bomb from Smith & Wesson instead of making it himself, people like vette would be calling him a great American exercising his 2nd Amendment rights.

I've never seen someone scream so much about Constitutional abuses while trying to deny Constitutional protections to people he doesn't like. It's a depth of doublethink that I just can't wrap my head around. How can someone be so unaware of their own hypocrisy?

 

[Squibbs]

If he had bought the bomb from Smith & Wesson instead of making it himself, people like vette would be calling him a great American exercising his 2nd Amendment rights.

No, everyone would still call him a whiny little bitch.

 

[unregistered]

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Damn all but one on my Iggy list. Doesn't matter, I know their thoughts before they make them known. If they want to elect a leader to formulate their collective view, I might consider taking that person off Iggy.

 

[cjh]

Never mind the fact that the Fourth Amendment has been interpreted to require arraignment within 72 hours and that the DOJ was already dancing with the possibility of having evidence excluded from trial.

http://fourthamendment.com/blog/ind...ay_in_arraignment_was_presump&more=1&c=1&pb=1

 

[mercury14]

Damn all but one on my Iggy list. Doesn't matter, I know their thoughts before they make them known. If they want to elect a leader to formulate their collective view, I might consider taking that person off Iggy.

People have the right to remain silent regardless as to whether or not they're read their Miranda rights. It's not up to the administration to give them this right. Once you obtain some sort of basic awareness of what the Constitution is you'll be a lot better off.

 

[phrodeau]

Damn all but one on my Iggy list. Doesn't matter, I know their thoughts before they make them known. If they want to elect a leader to formulate their collective view, I might consider taking that person off Iggy.

Sux to have a popular thread that you miss out on.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Obama continues to conspire to give illegal combatants who commit acts of war against the United States the right to remain silent:

"...the Obama administration is executing a massive national-security fraud: the farce that the jihad against America can be judicialized, that civilian-court processes are a better answer to enemy warfare than are combat protocols."

Well? The GWOT is really more of a policing problem than a military problem anyway. It always was. That is rather in the nature of terrorism, that terrorists are not governments* and do not have regular armies, usually not even irregular/guerrilla armies, to field.

* Nowadays. Originally -- during the French Revolution -- the word "terrorism" referred to state-terror specifically; rebels using terror-tacticts were known as "incendiaries."

 

[unregistered]

 

[Colonel Hogan]

As I noted at the end of a post several days ago, the specific language of Section 202 of the Military Commissions Act of 2009 unambiguously excludes American citizens from its jurisdiction.

Neither the administration nor the Justice Department has any prosecutorial discretion between a civilian criminal trial or trial by military commission with regard to defendant Dzhohkar Tsarnaev. Period.

http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=44378119&postcount=178

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[zipman]

Yes this is true, but it would be kind of nice if the left hand and the right hand of the FBI knew what each was doing. They could have designated him an enemy combatant and still held the trial in Federal Court. They could have extended the interrogation under the public safety exemption further, if the other aspect of the FBI hadn't been so eager to file charges and make him an instant defendant which immediately places him under the protection of the court.

So let me get this straight, you're afraid that the government is going to go against your 2nd amendment rights and take you guns, but you have no problem with the government designating an American citizen located on American soil as an enemy combatant and denying them their constitutional rights.

 

[Sean]

So let me get this straight, you're afraid that the government is going to go against your 2nd amendment rights and take you guns, but you have no problem with the government designating an American citizen located on American soil as an enemy combatant and denying them their constitutional rights.

Vettebigot's understanding of who the Constitution applies to is somewhat limited.

 

[miles]

The words "fraud" and "Obama" go together like PB&J.

 

[KingOrfeo]

You don't understand Fourth Generation Warfare.

Does it come with Fourth Generation Ethics?

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Yes this is true, but it would be kind of nice if the left hand and the right hand of the FBI knew what each was doing. They could have designated him an enemy combatant and still held the trial in Federal Court. They could have extended the interrogation under the public safety exemption further, if the other aspect of the FBI hadn't been so eager to file charges and make him an instant defendant which immediately places him under the protection of the court.

So what are the legal ramifications of designating someone as an "enemy combatant" if he is going to be tried under standard rules of criminal procedure? I don't believe the public safety exemption is in any way expanded for those charged with terrorism. It's the same for all defendants.

So what does the "enemy combatant" designation accomplish or affect with respect to criminal prosecutions outside the jurisdiction of the UCMJ?

I'm thinking zilch.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

The actions of the Boston bombers define the ethics of Fourth Generation Warfare.

Demonstrating that you have no idea what ethics are.

I doubt anyone is surprised.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The actions of the Boston bombers define the ethics of Fourth Generation Warfare.

That's as much as to say we should've fought WWII the Nazi way. (Sometimes we did, e.g. the Dresden bombing, but war crimes on the Allied side were comparatively anomalous -- for which all honorable American soldiers should be thankful.)