so long habeus corpus.

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by john9001
so Chairboy, please tell us how you would fight the terrorists that will kill women and childern, (maybe you or your neighbors), and call themselves heros.

tell us please, or maybe more important , tell the president and congress.

save us Chairboy, save us.


Chairboy has no answers, he can only criticize, he wants to give the protections of the constitution to those that willingly kill women and childern.


appeaser.

Can you be civil when talking about this?  Name calling is inappropriate, if you feel strongly about something you should communicate it with words, not insults.

John, do you feel that normal criminals (from burglars to murderers) are entitled to certain rights under the constitution?  What makes them different from other US citizens who have had the label "enemy combatent" applied to them?  If the criteria for removing constitutional protection from someone is a label, then we're in worse shape than I thought.

My answer is clear: Our constitution and our country is strong enough to weather everything from the Redcoats to the Nazis to the commies and even terrorists.  If you have any faith in the legal structure that makes us the land of the free and the home of the brave, then hand wringing over the threat-of-the-day is unnecessary.

Joe American stabs a lady in the face: Right to Habeous corpus.
Joe American writes "allahu ackbar" on a building: Habeous corpus suspended, zero constitutional protection.

Timothy McVeigh was an american terrorist who was tracked, arrested, prosecuted, and executed without the requirement that HC be suspended.  What has changed?

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by Hawco
Just wondering how long it is till the goons start knocking on doors delcaring us to be 'enemy combatants"

As soon as you disagree with anything having to do with the current administration's policies?

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by Yeager
whatever happened to H.R. Pufnstuf?  We could sure use some of that flute action around here

The way manyof these posters oogle over Chuck Norris, it's clear to me there are far too many "flute enthusiasts" on the BBs as it is.

Thank you, no.

[Debonair]

you probably aren't interested in smoking a Harry J either

[JB88]

Originally posted by Debonair
you probably aren't interested in smoking a Harry J either [/QUOTE

heh

[lazs2]

actually... the goons that come knocking on peoples doors in masks and ninja outfits and machine guns and grenades are allways knocking on so called "right wing" houses like Ruby Ridge and Waco and gun owners but....  

I think that every U.S. citizen has constitutional rights.

lazs

[Chairboy]

Originally posted by lazs2
I think that every U.S. citizen has constitutional rights.

lazs

When I said that, John9001 called me an appeaser and suggested circumspectly that I supported terrorism, so heads up.

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Chairboy
Lincoln's actions had a tremendous long term effect on our liberties.  I'm no fan of the South and the politics that it espoused, but I believe Lincoln's actions were unconstitutional as well.  Armed rebellion is almost encouraged in the documents that establish our country, and changing the rules mid-stream the way he did set a dangerous precedent.  Today's signing is another brick in that road that leads away from the image our founding fathers had.  I don't know where this road is going, but I suspect it is not Oz.

excerpt from the act
(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.

excerpt from the act
(3) ALIEN- The term `alien' means a person who is not a citizen of the United States.

excerpt from the act
(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- (A) The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means--
(i) a person who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces); or
(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.

Looks like as a citizen, I still have HC rights.

[x0847Marine]

Originally posted by john9001
so Chairboy, please tell us how you would fight the terrorists that will kill women and childern, (maybe you or your neighbors), and call themselves heros.

tell us please, or maybe more important , tell the president and congress.

save us Chairboy, save us.


Chairboy has no answers, he can only criticize, he wants to give the protections of the constitution to those that willingly kill women and childern.


appeaser.

#1 - Long before suspending OUR rights, every possible proactive measure should be taken, like sealing the Mexican border. Suspending our rights is reactive, lazy & knee jerk. Whats easier than signing a document?

#3 - Vote Independent, dem/rebublicloces have proven to be nothing but inept, corrupt drunken liars too partisan to accomplish anything.

This war on terror is a huge joke, I hope you can see that.

US citizens have been SLAUGHTERED and victimized by south of the border criminals for decades, long before a handful of nut jobs leveled the Trade Center. The # killed on 9/11 is a drop in the bucket compared to the damage that's being done by illegal alien criminals.

The idea that, suddenly, Bush needs to suspend our rights to protect us is a farce.. try seriously protecting us first.

When an Arab talks about wanting to damage our way of life its "terrorism", when the Mexican activists talk about taking over California and returning it to Mexican people, which they are doing , wheres Bush? underfunding a fence that's way too short?

Wake up and smell the burrito people.

[RedTop]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Looks like as a citizen, I still have HC rights.

Yep...Thats the way I read it.


This is just another thing that liberals are getting all up in arms about , while this lil ole conservative just keeps on abiding by the law and not worrying about it. Seems to me this won't affect me in any way.

[JB88]

holden said that it was an [SIZE=9]"[/SIZE]excerpt[SIZE=9]"[/SIZE]

is that all it said holden?

[Eagler]

but I just can't give a rats arse about our "detained enemy combatants "

[RedTop]

Originally posted by JB88
holden said that it was an [SIZE=9]"[/SIZE]excerpt[SIZE=9]"[/SIZE]

is that all it said holden?

Im eating some BBQ and Green Bean casserole. I'll try to find the link again where I read what this new stuff said...but reading it I took that same out of it.

but 1st .........to the BBQ:)

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Looks like as a citizen, I still have HC rights.

Did you not see this part....


(1) UNLAWFUL ENEMY COMBATANT- (A) The term `unlawful enemy combatant' means--
...

(ii) a person who, before, on, or after the date of the enactment of the Military Commissions Act of 2006, has been determined to be an unlawful enemy combatant by a Combatant Status Review Tribunal or another competent tribunal established under the authority of the President or the Secretary of Defense.


You no longer have habeus corpus rights.  You have habeus corpus privileges at the sufferance of the Executive branch.  

Not only that, but due to the nature of the law, there can be no test case brought before the Judiciary because the "trials" are never held in court.

[Bluefish]

OK, here's the language from the bill, (S.3930, Military Commissions Act of 2006 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate; )http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c109:3:./temp/~c109Yafr7D:e116721:

Regarding Habeas Corpus:  Section 7, amending USC 2241(e):

`(e)(1) No court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the United States who has been determined by the United States to have been properly detained as an enemy combatant or is awaiting such determination.

Regading Military Tribunals: Section 948(c):

Any alien unlawful enemy combatant is subject to trial by military commission under this chapter.

So Holden is right, you have to be an alien before either of those provisions apply to you.

It really DOES pay to read the squealing statute!