(09-30-2011, 10:58 PM)IMaDick Wrote: Does our Government stand above the law? would it be ok for us then to hunt down and kill terrorists? or would we as citizens end up in jail for violating due process and murder of a suspected terrorist?

Due process, Bill of rights, Constitution, if we as a nation allow our government to violate those rules of law on demand what protection can you expect from them?

acceptance of some things is what allows governments to become tyrannical and oppressive.

So, you're saying that we shouldn't have killed him? You want "due process" for terrorists abroad? We should have let him operate until we could capture him and bring him to trial?

Wow.

(09-30-2011, 11:56 PM)username Wrote:

(09-30-2011, 10:58 PM)IMaDick Wrote: Does our Government stand above the law? would it be ok for us then to hunt down and kill terrorists? or would we as citizens end up in jail for violating due process and murder of a suspected terrorist?

Due process, Bill of rights, Constitution, if we as a nation allow our government to violate those rules of law on demand what protection can you expect from them?

acceptance of some things is what allows governments to become tyrannical and oppressive.

So, you're saying that we shouldn't have killed him? You want "due process" for terrorists abroad? We should have let him operate until we could capture him and bring him to trial?

Wow.

I didn't say any of that, what I said is that US citizens are entitled to the full protection of the law, I don't see how you can disagree with that.

WOW

see this little symbol ?????? it makes what I said into a question, not a statement.

It's quite simple really, Kill the Killer's first! Or be second & killed!

Terror organizations do not abide by the Geneva Conventions and International Humanitarian Law, they are considered anti-government elements and are NOT included in any protections. IEDs kill more civilians than soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines combined. Military necessity is included in IHL and is NOT a war crime. IEDs are made to trigger at the weight of a CHILD.

Terror organizations are not affiliated with governments so their actions are not the actions of protected citizens.

You can't apply the same rules to them. They gave up their protection under humanitarian laws and laws of war when they took up arms against civilians.

Some people tend to forget that civilians are not acceptable targets. Terrorists are.

My point was simple.

My questions were simple, and the YOU in the most valid question was also intentional.

what is it that defines a terrorist?

We,conservatives have already been called terrorists by high ranking government officials.

allow them the room to target a US citizen and watch as their envelope expands.

Don't be stupid emotional, don't be stupid irrational,don't be stupid based on ignorance, we have a government that takes every little piece of freedom it can and shit cans it.

you can't call for limited government, Constitutional protection, and the rights afforded all US citizens by the Bill of Rights , scream to stop supporting illegals and then allow the government to run contrary to all that you bitch about and expect any of the other to happen.

you give your consent to increase Government and decrease yourself.

We don't let felons carry weapons or vote. Why should we allow terrorists, not matter where they were born, to have the protection of citizens they chose to kill?

Enemy combatants don't have the same protections as regular citizens. Did you know you give up your citizenship in the US when you take an oath to be part of another country? That same principal applies when you give your oath to the Taliban. I looked it up, you renounce your citizenship when you fight for a foreign army.

This guy fought for the Taliban. We made him give up his citizenship. You ARE NOT an American the second you side with the enemy. How you live is a better indicator or your citizenship than where you were born.

"Yaser Esam Hamdi (born September 26, 1980) is a now-former American citizen who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. It is claimed by the U.S. government that he was fighting against U.S. and Afghan Northern Alliance forces with the Taliban. He was named by the Bush administration as an "illegal enemy combatant", and detained for almost three years without receiving any charges.

He was initially detained at Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and was later transferred to military jails in Virginia and South Carolina after it became known that he was a U.S. citizen.

Critics of his imprisonment claimed his civil rights were violated and that he was denied due process of law under the U.S. Constitution, including imprisonment without formal charges and denial of legal representation.

On June 28, 2004, in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the United States Supreme Court rejected the U.S. government's attempts to detain Hamdi indefinitely without trial.

On September 23, 2004, the United States Justice Department released Hamdi to Saudi Arabia on the condition that he give up his U.S. citizenship."

Ya, you're the one I was talking about.

bitch moan and groan, and then surrender.

fuck off until you get your shit together.

The parents sued to get his name off the kill list but the courts refused to intervene. "This court recognizes the somewhat unsettling nature of its conclusion -- that there are circumstances in which the executive's unilateral decision to kill a U.S. citizen overseas is 'constitutionally committed to the political branches' and judicially unreviewable," U.S. District Judge John Bates wrote.

(10-01-2011, 12:11 PM)IMaDick Wrote: Ya, you're the one I was talking about.

bitch moan and groan, and then surrender.

fuck off until you get your shit together.

What part of renouncing citizenship don't you get? Dumbass.

This is what the Constitution says:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.


Catch that last part? It SAYS VERBATIM that Congress makes the laws in regards to this. Congress said if you fight for a foreign army, you are renouncing your citizenship.

So fuck off. You are the stupid one today.

(10-01-2011, 12:39 PM)Cracker Wrote:

(10-01-2011, 12:11 PM)IMaDick Wrote: Ya, you're the one I was talking about.

bitch moan and groan, and then surrender.

fuck off until you get your shit together.

What part of renouncing citizenship don't you get? Dumbass.

Did this person do that? show me the document.

Here:


§ 1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions


(a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—
(1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

(3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state if
(A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against the United States, or

(B) such persons serve as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer;


Now fuck off.

re read what you just posted and tell me which countries army this guy belonged to.

Stop digging the hole, Dick.

So you have never heard of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan? You know the Taliban used to rule most of Afghanistan, right, until we went over there in 2001?

Actually, Iran was going to kick their ass for us, but we stopped them. That was among the stupidest things the UN Security Council and US have ever done.

The Taliban has a standing army. They fight against the Northern Alliance, whom we aid. Oh, and they kill us, too.

You can look up the rest of the history of Afghanistan yourself. Since we are at war and all...

The Taliban is Afghanistan's Palestinian Liberation Organization now because they are homeless but they still exist.

So, yeah, kill the fuckers and don't look back.

We don't discuss killing, ever. I know my boy has been on patrol every day he has been over there and I know he carries about 20 mags with him at all times when he's out in the field. That's his job. If someone is shooting at him, or blowing up his friends, he doesn't stop to ask them where they were born. It doesn't matter where you first drew breath if you are trying to kill Americans. You are out of the fold at that point. If you wanted to be with us, under our protection, you would be wearing a different uniform.

Duchess, all I'm doing is trying to point out a simple problem, and that is the definition of a terrorist, what is that exactly?

I have no doubt this guy was a traitor, and that he wished to see Americans dead, but the subject of religion can't be ignored.

also what can't be ignored is the expansion of the governments ability to randomly execute people that they deem to be terrorists with out due process of law, and what user posted shows that the courts are powerless to intervene into the kill lists that the executive branch produces.

our constitution is clear on the power of congress when it comes to this question, cracker posted proof of what I have been saying not what she,he it has been saying.

there are many ways to be separated from the government, but this guy was not a member of a foreign army, He was a member of an extremist religious movement.

could they create such a list for extreme political movements just as easily? any organization that runs an opposing course to the course that the government is on?

does it actually take violence to provoke the Government into a self preservation mode?

while this guy should have more than likely been executed, all we have from our government is charges not proof that the charges were proven.

try and get your head around this a little further than emotionally.

(10-01-2011, 01:20 PM)Cracker Wrote: So you have never heard of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan? You know the Taliban used to rule most of Afghanistan, right, until we went over there in 2001?

Actually, Iran was going to kick their ass for us, but we stopped them. That was among the stupidest things the UN Security Council and US have ever done.

The Taliban has a standing army. They fight against the Northern Alliance, whom we aid. Oh, and they kill us, too.

You can look up the rest of the history of Afghanistan yourself. Since we are at war and all...

The Taliban is Afghanistan's Palestinian Liberation Organization now because they are homeless but they still exist.

Was this person a citizen of Afghanistan?

The headline reads what?

Nevermind, Dick. You go ahead and think the Taliban members born here are your brothers and deserve protection. I posted the Constitution, the applicable law, the history, and an example. If you don't get it, that's your problem. It's a conversation to you, but working knowledge to me.

When they kill someone you love, don't come to me for sympathy.

(10-01-2011, 01:28 PM)IMaDick Wrote: The headline reads what?

You are the media's bitch.

Where is that Glenn Beck picture?