No Wonder Libs Are Upset - The Surge Is Working

[red states rule]

red states rule sez:

"I have sent my thoughts to my elected officals and to many of the local papers"

bully for you

Dems have done their best to undermine the war, the troops, and the President

thanks for your opinion. I do not agree with it.

My, I answer your question and you act insulted

Your anger is really getting the best of you

 

[red states rule]

citizens who are suspected to be terrorists ARE entitled to US constitutional rights... and my congressman knows how I feel about that.

Have you communicated with YOURS, or do you just confine your bitching to message boards?

Is that why the Dems want to grant those rights to Club GITMO terrorists?

 

[Gunny]

citizens who are suspected to be terrorists ARE entitled to US constitutional rights... and my congressman knows how I feel about that.

Have you communicated with YOURS, or do you just confine your bitching to message boards?

Therein lies the dilemna ... should the Constitution protect those who wish to destroy it?

I believe We, the People have a responsibility to preserve those ideals the Constitution embodies. If that includes determining that those who wish to destroy those ideals are not worthy of its protection, I have no problem with it.

 

[maineman]

Is that why the Dems want to grant those rights to Club GITMO terrorists?

I don't. As I said, I that we should extend basic human rights to all people and constitutional rights to those who they apply to.

 

[red states rule]

Therein lies the dilemna ... should the Constitution protect those who wish to destroy it?

I believe We, the People have a responsibility to preserve those ideals the Constitution embodies. If that includes determining that those who wish to destroy those ideals are not worthy of its protection, I have no problem with it.

Acts of treason should cause you to lose your Constitutional rights

 

[maineman]

Therein lies the dilemna ... should the Constitution protect those who wish to destroy it?

I believe We, the People have a responsibility to preserve those ideals the Constitution embodies. If that includes determining that those who wish to destroy those ideals are not worthy of its protection, I have no problem with it.

are not all citizens innocent until proven guilty?

if suspected terrorists can be summarily stripped of constitutional protections before a finding of guilt in a court of law, why not suspected murderers, or suspected pedophiles, or suspected forgers, or suspected parking ban violators?

 

[maineman]

My, I answer your question and you act insulted

Your anger is really getting the best of you

anger? what anger? I thanked you for your opinion and I stated I didn't agree with it.

Your continual misuse of the word "anger" is matched only by your continual misuse of the word "surrender".

 

[maineman]

Acts of treason should cause you to lose your Constitutional rights

PROVEN acts of treason?

 

[red states rule]

anger? what anger? I thanked you for your opinion and I stated I didn't agree with it.

Your continual misuse of the word "anger" is matched only by your continual misuse of the word "surrender".

I call em as I see em

You are a pissed off liberal because the Dem surrender bill failed (and the Dems poll numbers are going south)

 

[Gunny]

are not all citizens innocent until proven guilty?

if suspected terrorists can be summarily stripped of constitutional protections before a finding of guilt in a court of law, why not suspected murderers, or suspected pedophiles, or suspected forgers, or suspected parking ban violators?

It's not as cut and dried as "stripping then of constituional protections."

When you are suspected of a crime, you can be jailed and searched, and your possessions and property searched while you are still supposedly "innocent until proven guilty."

In the specific instance of terrorism, preemption is crucial; especially, in suicide attacks. These people are not fearing any legal consequence because they don't intent to survive their attack.

As I stated on the previous page and I guess you missed it, I have ZERO problem with law enforcement wiretapping calls of persons/suspected terrorists making calls to suspected terrorists/terrorist organizations. I'm not talking to them.

If I see this being abused, I will of course change my position to suit the events. Until then, I see the possible good for the whole superceding the individual's wants.

 

[Gunny]

Acts of treason should cause you to lose your Constitutional rights

Meeting the charge of treason is a pretty high bar. Even then, I don't think individual's should lose their constitutional rights.

I'm more advocating amending and defining those rights to meet the current threat, and not allowing those rights to be used to destroy themselves.

If the ideals which embody the US Constitution are destroyed, then NOBODY has ANY rights. The US Constitution, IMO, must be preserved even if it inconveniences the individual.

 

[red states rule]

Meeting the charge of treason is a pretty high bar. Even then, I don't think individual's should lose their constitutional rights.

I'm more advocating amending and defining those rights to meet the current threat, and not allowing those rights to be used to destroy themselves.

If the ideals which embody the US Constitution are destroyed, then NOBODY has ANY rights. The US Constitution, IMO, must be preserved even if it inconveniences the individual.

If you commit an act of treason - I feel you should lose those rights

 

[Gunny]

If you commit an act of treason - I feel you should lose those rights

If you commit a proven act of treason, you have ALREADY used all of the rights you will actually need since the penalty for treason is death. In order for it to be proven, you have to go through the trial process.

I don't agree at all that anyone suspected of treason should lose their rights, as your statements imply.

 

[maineman]

I call em as I see em

glad you admit that you are only voicing your opinion.

 

[red states rule]

glad you admit that you are only voicing your opinion.

Based on what Dems say and do

I understand why you consider that an unfair debate tactic - but get over it

 

[maineman]

It's not as cut and dried as "stripping then of constituional protections."

When you are suspected of a crime, you can be jailed and searched, and your possessions and property searched while you are still supposedly "innocent until proven guilty."
no problem with that

In the specific instance of terrorism, preemption is crucial; especially, in suicide attacks. These people are not fearing any legal consequence because they don't intent to survive their attack.terrorists and people suspected of terrorism are not synonymous. Again...if you suggest that people suspected of terrorism can be denied their constitutional rights, why not people suspected of any other crime.... like, say, conspiracy to commit arson. It is a slippery slope.

As I stated on the previous page and I guess you missed it, I have ZERO problem with law enforcement wiretapping calls of persons/suspected terrorists making calls to suspected terrorists/terrorist organizations. I'm not talking to them.

If I see this being abused, I will of course change my position to suit the events. Until then, I see the possible good for the whole superceding the individual's wants.

"he who would sacrifice liberty for security deserves neither"

 

[red states rule]

"he who would sacrifice liberty for security deserves neither"

I am sure the terrorists agree with you

 

[maineman]

I am sure the terrorists agree with you

that is your opinion. I KNOW Ben Franklin would.

 

[red states rule]

that is your opinion. I KNOW Ben Franklin would.

Terrorists were giddy over the Dems win in November, and they openly hoped their surrender bill would be passed

Nice to see the REAL Dem base showing their support

 

[maineman]

Terrorists were giddy over the Dems win in November, and they openly hoped their surrender bill would be passed

Nice to see the REAL Dem base showing their support

so...do you disagree with Ben Franklin? Do you think that the guy so important we put his picture on money would be a terrorist coddler?