TexasCHLforum.com

stroo:

I honestly didnt know what procedural rights the Nazis had during those tribunals. Good information to know.

bdickens:

Troll? Is there a need to resort to name calling? I thought we were all adults sharing ideas. In my book thats called a healthy debate, not an argument. We dont have to agree with each other but we should be able to back up our assertions of fact. If I said something that offended you then I apologize. I tend to get snappy when I am misquoted. I am not trying to start trouble, just trying to get along.

bdickens wrote:bayou_chl:
I don't know about yours, but my copy of the Constitution starts out "We, the people of the United States of America...." [emphasis mine], not "We, the people of the United States of America and anyone else that happens to wander in ...." I'd like for you to cite me a reference for the idea that the Constituion applies to the whole world.

Interesting you mention that. Before I get into citation that support my position, let me start with your lack of understanding. First, I did not state that the US Constitution applies to the whole world. I stated that the US Constitution applies to US soil and territories. If you are suggesting that the world is US territory then we can dedicate a separate thread for that. Support for my position will be provided shortly. Reading comprehension is fundamental.

Second, you cite the Preamble as determing the territorial jurisdiction for the US Constitution. The Preamble is not a legal authority and is rarely if ever cited for support to a legal position.There is this clause in the constitution called the Supremacy Clause. In case you don't remember it states that the US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Im sure I dont need to explain what is considered US land and what isn't.

Third and most importantly, you claim that the US Constitution only applies to US citizens. I think the drafters of the Constitution and the US Supreme Court disagree with you. The 5th and 14th amendments guarantee "persons" not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. If the founders meant only citizens, they would have put it in the constitution the same way they limited the presidency to people who were born citizens.

You now have three citation from the US Constitution that support my position . I would use more but this is where it starts. If you need more examples I will gladly provide a few to help your understanding further. If you still think I am wrong in my initial or subsequent statements, please show me one legal authority that supports your position. I will be patiently waiting on your cites.

bdickens wrote:The US Constitution only applies to US citizens and resident aliens.

The above statement is 100% false. A person has rights under the US Constitution if they are on US soil or territories. Therefore, people who sneak into the US have rights. Lucky for them, it is the law. Now this concept is different for enemy combatants captured during a war. Special exception is made because of the circumstances. Truth be told we dont know how the detainees got to GITMO. They could have been shooting at our troops or some may have been taken due to mistaken identity. We need to find a good way to identify who is a threat and who isn't. I think the real threats will be proud of what they did, spill their guts, and swear to do it again. Some might lie to get out of American control but I think we have experienced interrogators who can call bull and get the real story. I am not in favor of torturing anyone. Torture has the potential to make the tortured do or say whatever the torturer wants them to so they can get out of a very uncomfortable situation. This is one of the reasons confessions coerced by torture are unreliable, unconstitutional, and not admissable in any American court.

The way I see it, we are fighting a war against an unknown enemy. The harsh reality is that we create more terrorists by grabbing the wrong persons. If we make a mistake and kill the wrong guy because we think he is a terrorist, how do you expect his family will react. Do you think they will understand we made a mistake and let bygones be bygones? His family is going to be filled with rage and want to kill Americans because we killed their loved one. Now I understand the same argument can be made for terrorists but at least the real terrorist had it coming. Why not have a tribunal similar to what was done with the Nazis after WW2. If found guilty of acts of terror then be sentenced to death. Seems simple enough to me.

Closing GITMO is the right thing to do. For those who understand the guarantee of due process granted in the US Constitution the decision is simple. Persons who will freely abandon any of their rights for the illusion of safety are opening the door for stripping away rights they do not wish to abandon. The only hard decision is where to send them. I am in no way advocating that the be released to their native countries, that would be plain nuts!!! I am all for natural life sentences after a speedy trial.

We must not let the Terrorists win. They want us to live in a state of fear and paranoia. Judging by the comments I have read so far, they are winning. I will not live in a state of fear because someone who lives across the ocean thinks my life is an abomination and western civilization should be eradicated.

This country has dealt with terrorists since its inception and this situation is no different. Every generation has dealt with a group of people who want to terminate our existence for one reason or another and none have been victorious. Islamic extremist are no different than the past threats. This country will stand strong, defend itself, and conquer the threat.