The rule of law, human rights, and the War On Terror

[javafiend]

Sam, I suspect he was using sarcasm to make a point that you and I would agree with. I hope so, anyway.

Yes, irony actually, so I included the although in hindsight I should've included the .

The fact that it would be difficult to tell right away is itself a sad commentary. The totalitarian mentality sees any principled criticism of the Holy State and its omniscient Great Leader as tantamount to treason.

 

[Joejojoba111]

Interesting articles. One of the fundamental problems I see is that our rulebook does not address the situation we face. Existing laws address civilians and enemy soldiers in vastly different ways. But our enemy actively tries to function like soldiers while seeking our system's legal protections for civilians. Our government and society are struggling to deal with this dichotomy.

In fact, we choose to treat the enemy like neither.

What rule book? Last I heard it was ILLEGAL to kill people, ILLEGAL to kidnap people, ILLEGAL to hijack, EVERYTHING being relabeled as 'terrorism' is ALREADY ILLEGAL.

It IS covered in the rule book.

Also, I see no terrorists inside America that are functioning like soldiers. Maybe those North Hollywood robbers. Oh wait, no, they're just Criminals. Why aren't they called terrorists?

Calling things 'terrorist' and telling people that they require new rules, and less freedoms, that's a SCAM. It's a TRICK. It's a LIE. It has ALWAYS been illegal to hijack an airplane.

 

[RealGun]

Yes, irony actually, so I included the although in hindsight I should've included the .

The fact that it would be difficult to tell right away is itself a sad commentary. The totalitarian mentality sees any principled criticism of the Holy State and its omniscient Great Leader as tantamount to treason.

I think the problem is fairness and respect and when there is nothing BUT criticism in spite of many blessings as part of the package. When that is the case, any "principled" position is highly suspect and motives are in question. If one is fashionably anti establishment, nothing good to say, that does not mean the person is smarter than everyone else.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Not to oversimplify it, but I think we just need to be attacked a few more times to have it all sink in. We should be looking more to Israel for what it really takes to defend a country under constant attack or the threat of it. Americans are bitching mostly because they don't want to confront the reality that their neat little utopia has forever been altered to something meaner and more hazardous. It is no longer a question of losing freedom but rather a question of which freedoms and to what extent.

If we must surrender basic, Constitutional rights in the name of "security," it's too late -- the terrorists have won.

Washington is attacking the Constitution because they don't have a clue how to attack the problem. Vastly more stringent immigration policies as well as more intensive screening upon entry into the U.S. would provide far more security than torturing untried suspects in secret prisons, or using the so-called Patriot Act to empower the FBI to find out what books I've checked out of the library. How idiotic can they get? If I know the records can be inspected, I'll just read the bloody book in the library, or steal it.

Sheesh. These people are friggin' morons. (The politicians, not the terrorists.)

 

[Aguila Blanca]

I agree that "unlawful combatants", by treaty definition, don't fall under the scope of the "traditional" justice system, and are a separate case. However, when US citizens (e.g. Padilla) are detained without trial under this classification, I have to disagree. If one is a US citizen, one is entitled to the Constitutional rights and protections inherent in that citizenship. I think it's extremely dangerous to waive these rights and protections by classifying a citizen as an "unlawful combatant". This can (and, I believe, inevitably will) lead to a situation where an "inconvenient person" is classified as an "unlawful combatant" simply because some bureaucrat finds it quicker and easier to do so than to go through the justice system to achieve his ends.

Amen.

Taking it a step further, I'll have to re-read the Conentions but I believe the term "unlawful combatants" applies during times of military conflict, to describe those who take up arms but who do not wear a uniform. In short, guerillas -- the teenagers in "Red Dawn," for example, to the Russian invaders would be "unlawful combatants."

Terrorists operating in the United States are not "combatants<' first because there is no war ongoing here and second, for the fundamental reason that they are not engaged in combat. They are't firing rifles and throwing grenades. They are sneaking around, plotting to blow up hotels and churches and office buildings. In short, they are what they are: "terrorists." The laws dealing with blowing things up and killing people are on the books and can be used, but the government has elected to keep any terrorists it lays its hands on out of court, relying on the "enemy combatant" designation as a smokescreen.

It is wrong, it is repulsive, and it is blatantly illegal. The United States can never, ever, hope for any sort of moral respect on the world stage while we engage in such shenanigans.

 

[TOADMAN]

Enough already.... Politics and war and rules gets us hamstrung every time... Leave politics and rules out of the war stuff...Times have changed!!! Rules are for games!! You want the terrorists to stop - kill-em. Kill-em in the most rude and crude way possible - even their families. Destroy towns and villages that harbor terrorists. Won't be long and they will stop. Its real nasty stuff, that is why they call it war. Most americans don't have the stomach for it. If we were attacked by terrorists as much as Israel - think about it!!

 

[Standing Wolf]

If we must surrender basic, Constitutional rights in the name of "security," it's too late -- the terrorists have won.

Yep. Sacrificing our civil rights is like fighting land wars in Asia: completely wrong, stupid, and counter-productive.

 

[jeanfor]

Bottom line, (I know what I am going to say is not politically correct...but that's the real truth), we are in a battle between two different types of society/cultures. The judeo-christian society and the islamic society. Islam goal is to take over the world. Look at what Islam has done in Africa, killing thousand of Christians, like in Soudan. When I listen to Islamic religious leaders about how respectful and peaceful is Islam, this really makes me laugh!!!. That's the real problem and nobody wants to say it....What is going to take for us to wake up and smell the fire....another 9-11....

 

[TOADMAN]

Bottom line, (I know what I am going to say is not politically correct...but that's the real truth), we are in a battle between two different types of society/cultures. The judeo-christian society and the islamic society. Islam goal is to take over the world. Look at what Islam has done in Africa, killing thousand of Christians, like in Soudan. When I listen to Islamic religious leaders about how respectful and peaceful is Islam, this really makes me laugh!!!. That's the real problem and nobody wants to say it....What is going to take for us to wake up and smell the fire....another 9-11....

Unfortunately yes!!

 

[Derek Zeanah]

Times have changed!!! Rules are for games!! You want the terrorists to stop - kill-em. Kill-em in the most rude and crude way possible - even their families. Destroy towns and villages that harbor terrorists.

Right! Damn right! Because we never make mistakes, or do something silly like not know whether the nation we go to war against actually had hundreds of thousands of tons of weapons of mass desrtuction, or anything. We're American, God Damn It! We're ALWAYS RIGHT.

And GENOCIDE is ALWAYS a good answer, regardless of the question. When in doubt, KILL 'EM ALL, I say!

 

[TOADMAN]

Right! Damn right! Because we never make mistakes, or do something silly like not know whether the nation we go to war against actually had hundreds of thousands of tons of weapons of mass desrtuction, or anything. We're American, God Damn It! We're ALWAYS RIGHT.

And GENOCIDE is ALWAYS a good answer, regardless of the question. When in doubt, KILL 'EM ALL, I say!

Take a lude!! War is full of mistakes!! Plus, you violated one of PREACHERMAN's stickey notes...I guess you were against WWll when we nuked Japan - they had no WMD. Bottom line - it ended the war.

 

[mountainclmbr]

Yes, we must free them! It must be mandatory that they live next door to Teddy (the swimmer) Kennedy, John Corzine or Hillary.

 

[Preacherman]

Mountainclmbr has a good point... perhaps we could nominate our favorite idiots as Ambassadors to Al Q'aeda? They might bore Osama to death!

 

[Joejojoba111]

Bottom line, (I know what I am going to say is not politically correct...but that's the real truth), we are in a battle between two different types of society/cultures. The judeo-christian society and the islamic society. Islam goal is to take over the world. Look at what Islam has done in Africa, killing thousand of Christians, like in Soudan. When I listen to Islamic religious leaders about how respectful and peaceful is Islam, this really makes me laugh!!!. That's the real problem and nobody wants to say it....What is going to take for us to wake up and smell the fire....another 9-11....

I was always partial to the idea of a country where people could come and live, and there would be very few simple rules. The rules would be there simply to ensure that you can stretch your arms as far as you like, as long as they don't hit someone else in the face.

This country are A-religious, it didn't have an official religion. It would even have rules so that the country would never be officially identified as supporting one religion.


BOTTOM LINE - Religious people are ALWAYS going to be killing each other. There is no way around it. If people want to kill each other, let them. But don't drag an entire country into it, the country is all about being left alone to do whatever you want.

 

[Lone_Gunman]

We need someone with some fresh ideas in the White House.

5 years of Bush seems longer than 8 years of Clinton, and I voted for Bush.

 

[Can'thavenuthingood]

The laws are on the books against all crimes terrorists commit. Have the state and local jurisdictions perform trial and punishment, then it's spread out amongst the country. Feds can reimburse costs if necessary.

Problem with Patriot is what crime to charge when individual is detained prior to committing or planning a crime. Suspicion? A bad thought? The thought police have to be robotic, unemotional, unbiased, unprejudiced and in some way not patriotic while at the same time patriotic.

Definitions, its also a problem with defintions of both us and them. Sullivan said "especially in the larger battle of ideas that will ensure ultimate victory or defeat."
Islam is not an idea, its religious fanatics are out to destroy everything that is not islamic. How do you argue an idea with that mentality in opposition? Prior to presenting the idea, the terrorist must first believe you to be his equal. Unless you are allah himself, you are meaningless. So the terrorist believes himself to be a soldier. In what Army? In God's army, a religious army, not a governments army, which is an infidel's army. He is a soldier of his god's army. To think we can buy, intimidate, plead, beg or convince someone whose whole life from birth was spent being indoctrinated into thinking of westerners as infidels is whistling past the graveyard. The muslims that are silent are helping the fanatics through inaction.

One rule for Americans and another for foreigners? Why yes, why would or should it be different? This is America, we are the leader. They might not like it and many Americans don't like it but thats the way it is. The dollar says so, the worlds individual countries economies say so. And who are the economies? The people of those countries. The USofA is the standard of liberty. Once you become an American citizen (a high threshold) you are under our umbrella.
Unless by birthright, your citizenship ought to be revocable for crimes against the citizenship.

I think the appearance of favoritism towards our citizens is a good thing. All others are strangers and suspect until proven otherwise. Its a mindset we had a longtime ago, what made it a bad thing? Why should we degrade ourselves and our standard of living to make the rest of the world feel good about their lack of ambition and industriousness? Let'em outrage and stomp and kick things till their peasants bleed, it's what they do best.

Don't call terrorists military detainees if they were caught in the act of commiting a crime, shoot to kill on the spot. If we catch them planning a crime or get to them before performance of the crime, isn't that Conspiracy? or Attempt?

My perception of the PATRIOT Act is a little nervous about its use. Then again, Al-Queida and company make me a bit nervous. I'm in the position of having to trust my fellow citizens utilizing the PATRIOTs tools, use them in my favor. To call the terrorists soldiers gives them credibility, a legal status they should not enjoy.

Congressional Trust and blank checks in the same sentence? Satire right?

I'll correct szpelings later,

Vick

 

[jeanfor]

I was always partial to the idea of a country where people could come and live, and there would be very few simple rules. The rules would be there simply to ensure that you can stretch your arms as far as you like, as long as they don't hit someone else in the face.

This country are A-religious, it didn't have an official religion. It would even have rules so that the country would never be officially identified as supporting one religion.
.

This is nice in principal, but the fact is the US and Europe are based on judeo-christian principles, and there always going to be a conflict between Islam and the western civilisations. It is very naive to think otherwise. If we are not awake they will take over...

 

[Byron Quick]

I thnk we need to be very careful. As Franklin said,"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." To drive the point just a bit deeper, that's inscribed on a plaque in the stairwell of the Statue of Liberty.

First we need to decide if we are in engaged in a military action or a very large criminal investigation. If a military action then we need to conduct ourselves according to the treaties the US has signed and ratified. Treat them as POW's with all rights pertaining to that status. Tell them,"OK, when we have a cease-fire agreement with your organization, we'll release you. Until then, you're behind barbed wire." Or even,"In accord with the Hague Convention, all unlawful combatants will be executed." Straight up, in the light of day, in front of God and everyone.

U.S. citizens should be afforded the rights of U.S. citizens. Period. Anything else is begging for a police state. That deal about revoking U.S. citizenship is baloney. It's not that far a step from saying,"We can revoke Ali's citizenship and not have to afford him all those messy rights...after all he's not really an American." to "We can revoke Mike Smith's citizenship and not have to afford him all thos messy rights...after all, even though he was born here, he wouldn't have said that if he was really an American."

Some folks have proposed that torture should be legitimate in a case where it could prevent another large attack with a heavy toll of dead. I agree. But I also agree with Professor Dershowski of Harvard, such should be publicly approved,in each instance, by the President or by a Supreme Court Justice.

There's a reason to keep things secret besides operational security. It's because you're ashamed of what you are doing. If you find yourself in that situation; it's a red flag.

 

[Joejojoba111]

Ahmen.



And for the record, I don't think I could find 10 Christians who agree on what Christianity is. Let alone finding 10 mythical JudaeoChristians. What is that religion, anyway? Someone who is Christian but recognizes Christ was Jewish so follows both rules?

I will never sanction a religious war, period. I don't believe that Islam is out to get us all.

And I think the scariest thing is not a war, it's a police state. I read history of this war and that war,for this reason and tha reason, and it's not scary. But reading of police states is always terrifying.

I just hope to god I'm not alone.

 

[jeanfor]

Ahmen.



...I will never sanction a religious war, period. I don't believe that Islam is out to get us all.

And I think the scariest thing is not a war, it's a police state. I read history of this war and that war,for this reason and tha reason, and it's not scary. But reading of police states is always terrifying.

I just hope to god I'm not alone.

Remember 9-11 .....

The fact that you don't believe does not make it less real

 

[shootinstudent]

Destroy towns and villages that harbor terrorists. Won't be long and they will stop. Its real nasty stuff, that is why they call it war. Most americans don't have the stomach for it. If we were attacked by terrorists as much as Israel - think about it!!

Yeah, we should follow the Russian model. That's been proven effective at stopping terrorism....hmmm, wait there just a minute....that's right, it is a proven method of destroying your moral high ground and securing failure and violence for generations to come. Blowing up people who aren't attacking you will only create more attackers. You can pretend that this is a "stomach" issue all you want, but human rights aside, brutality campaigns to stop irregular attacks have failed at every turn in the 20th century.

This is nice in principal, but the fact is the US and Europe are based on judeo-christian principles, and there always going to be a conflict between Islam and the western civilisations. It is very naive to think otherwise. If we are not awake they will take over.

Interesting. I have no doubt that you arrived at this opinion through long hours of studying the history of East-West relations and immersing yourself in Islamic culture, that you would know enough to comment on "Islam as a whole", whatever that might be. I think it's very naive to make pronouncements about what Islam is without having bothered to look into it.

Remember 9-11 .....

The fact that you don't believe does not make it less real

The fact that you believe it's justified doesn't make a police state any less a police state. The reasons you give up your freedom for won't change the fact that it's freedom lost. I'm going to have to agree with this wholeheartedly:

U.S. citizens should be afforded the rights of U.S. citizens. Period. Anything else is begging for a police state.

And on top of that, we should conduct ourselves in our dealings with other human beings like the decent, rights respecting Americans we make ourselves out to be. I'm not willing to turn my nation into a gang of savages for any reason, and as far as I'm concerned, secret prisons, secret torturing, and collective punishment is what savages do.

 

[Sam]

Sorry about that javafiend. A subject I am very touchy about.
Current employment sticks me right smack dab in the middle on this one and I really get too d@mn sensitive when it comes up. Good Ol Touchy Me takes everything personal. I was taught that if you should take ownership of a job, you do better work. If I touch it, it's mine, you criticize it, your @$$ is mine.

I apologize for the overreaction.

I'm very unhappy with our civillian leadership. Put people in a position that is right on the edge and then abandon them when they trip over a rock that they dropped on the sidewalk. I've toasted a lot of times when a subordinate messed up, you take the heat, get your knuckles busted, retrain the kid and get on with life. Don't see our masters doing the same, looking out for the troops. Not exactly people of honor or integrity.

The military side is working very, very, very hard to prevent the abuse of prisoners and every time they are forced to cooperate with the intel agencies they get kicked in the balls and some 19 year old kid from Lower Squegee Handle Indiana goes to jail.

Sam

 

[javafiend]

Or even,"In accord with the Hague Convention, all unlawful combatants will be executed." Straight up, in the light of day, in front of God and everyone.

I agree.

The military side is working very, very, very hard to prevent the abuse of prisoners and every time they are forced to cooperate with the intel agencies they get kicked in the balls and some 19 year old kid from Lower Squegee Handle Indiana goes to jail.

I have no doubt. It's interesting to me that the senators pushing the ban on torture include McCain, Hagel, Warner, and Grant. Men who served in the military. Men who were captured, wounded, or themselves tortured.

The civilian political class in this country stinks.

 

[Major Beer]

We need someone with some fresh ideas in the White House.

5 years of Bush seems longer than 8 years of Clinton, and I voted for Bush.

i voted for W twice but he did do a few things i liked - actually he did nothing as Congress gets credit for these:

Assault weapon's Ban sunsetting

Protection of Gun Manufacturers against petty lawsuits

oh ya, there has not been a Waco or Ruby Ridge type situation either.

Yes the White House usually gets the blame but do not forget about the slackers in Congress that have been there forever and never seem to face any criticism.

 

[Major Beer]

as far as freedom being reduced for security reasons - that is bad enough, but how about the first plank of the Communist Manifesto being applied by the Court (eminent domain) for tax reasons.

one of these days i wished people would wake up and start voting out the eternal incumbents and maybe put the Supreme Court members on the voting block as well.