Troll Kingdom

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Dems Plan "Al Queda Bill of Rights"

Ogami

New member
Voters voted for change, and they're gonna get it! LOL


Leahy aims at giving habeas corpus
11/14/2006 12:10:00 PM -0500

WASHINGTON, Nov. 11 (UPI) -- A battle is shaping up between Democrats and the White House over the Military Commissions Act, signed into law last month by President George W. Bush.

Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., is expected to take over as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and The (Calif.) Daily Journal reports that Leahy is drafting a bill to undo portions of the new law in an effort to give habeas corpus rights for enemy combatants.

A spokeswoman for Leahy told the newspaper the bill would be intended to repeal portions of the law that prevent some detainees from pursuing federal court challenges to the government's authority to hold them indefinitely.

Spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler told the newspaper the goal is to "try and do something to reverse the damage."

Scott L. Silliman, Director of the Center for Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University School of Law, told the newspaper an attempt to amend the law could set up a partisan showdown in Congress, and possibly a presidential veto.

Civil rights attorneys filed a constitutional challenge to the act after Bush signed it Oct. 17, the Journal said.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20061111-111429-7560r
 
We tried that tactic. Ogami is a fanatical Republican. His type aren't familiar with said document or it's meaning and intent. ;)
 
Rafterman said:
It's call the Constitution of the United States, nice document.

Try reading it sometime.

Since when do foreigners receive the protection of the Bill of Rights?

Aren't you the leftist scum who thinks Americans should be subject to the Hague?

Why don't you move to Cuba, marxist shitbag?
 
Sarek said:
We tried that tactic. Ogami is a fanatical Republican. His type aren't familiar with said document or it's meaning and intent. ;)

So, the parasite who took an oath to protect and defend the Constitution thinks foreign subhuman muslim scum enemies of all mankind should receive constitutional rights?
 
Sarek said:
More so than you should.

Please point out to me where in the Constitution foreign enemies taken prisoner on the battlefield fighting American forces are accorded the rights and privileges of American Citizens?

I'll wait.
 
If you'll recall it was a "fanatical Republican" by the name of Abraham Lincoln who suspended Habeas Corpus during the midst of the Civil War, in reference to American and Rebel soldiers, citizens in either case.

As anyone with the slightest knowledge of the U.S. Constitution knows, it is deliberately written to be vague and undefined so as to allow it to stand the test of time.

In this case, Rafterman, the U.S. Constitution does not specify ANYWHERE what to do with enemy combatants who refuse to wear a combat military uniform, as specified in the Geneva Conventions.

The United States does have a policy dating from (at a minimum) World War II in what to do with enemy combatants who are out of uniform while in combat. They were hanged or shot as spies/saboteurs.

Obviously the islamic terrorists we are fighting today are being taken prisoner by our soldiers, soldiers who are REQUIRED to wear uniforms IDENTIFYING them as American soldiers. Our enemy does not bother with that BULLSEYE, hiding in the general population to strike as assassins.

The sad thing is that is it clear that President Bush has a clearer reading and understanding of the U.S. Constitution and the Geneva Conventions than his critics. (The same critics that for my entire lifetime have sneered that the U.S. Constitution is a 'living document' that they can change on a whim.)

Thanks for the tacit acknowledgement of the absolute truth of my thread title. Al Queda never had better allies than the Democratic party and its adherents.


-Ogami
 
Gurk_MacGuintey said:
Please point out to me where in the Constitution foreign enemies taken prisoner on the battlefield fighting American forces are accorded the rights and privileges of American Citizens?

First of all, it's not proven that they were actual combatants. And as there is no proof and the Bush administration can't or won't provide proof, that changes their status from combatants to kidnapping victims. Persons kidnapped by Americans from foreign countries is a Federal felony. And transferring them to places or locations where they can or would be tortured is also a Federal felony. Of course, this would not apply if the Bush administration provided proof that the accused persons are actually terrorists or had conducted activities related to terrorist activity. But they won't.
 
Sarek said:
First of all, it's not proven that they were actual combatants. And as there is no proof and the Bush administration can't or won't provide proof, that changes their status from combatants to kidnapping victims. Persons kidnapped by Americans from foreign countries is a Federal felony. And transferring them to places or locations where they can or would be tortured is also a Federal felony. Of course, this would not apply if the Bush administration provided proof that the accused persons are actually terrorists or had conducted activities related to terrorist activity. But they won't.


Proof? You think they're all just innocent goat herders? What a useless fucking schmuck you are.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25472

* One detainee, a Kuwaiti national named as an al-Qaeda operative on a seized al-Qaeda hard drive, was captured as he tried to flee from Afghanistan into Iran. He insisted that he had no association with any terrorist organization. What then had brought him to Afghanistan? His answer: He had donated 750 Kuwaiti dinars ("not a lot of money" he added) to an Islamic charity to dig wells in Afghanistan--and had decided to travel from Kuwait to see that his money was properly spent.

* Another detainee, a Yemeni, explained that he had come to Pakistan to study medicine at a university. Unfortunately, the particular university he had selected lacked any medical faculty. He ended up instead studying the Koran in a student guesthouse--and when one of his housemates suggested they take a sightseeing tour of Afghanistan, he agreed to go along. The housemate's name? He had forgotten it.

* A detainee identified by eyewitnesses as a Taliban military judge, who inflicted hideous punishments on hundreds of accused, explained to the tribunal that he was in fact only a humble chicken farmer. The question, "What did you feed your chickens?" baffled this detainee. He answered: "A mixture of foods they sell in the bazaar" (perhaps at the Afghan equivalent of Petco).

* One detainee was apprehended in possession of a military identity card that named him as a member of an especially vicious Taliban militia. He explained that it was not his own card. It belonged to a friend who had asked him to hold it for him.

* A Saudi mechanic said that he had journeyed to Afghanistan because someone had persuaded him that it was the ideal place to complete his religious education. Who was this person? "I don't know."

* An Afghan detainee intercepted at the Pakistan border carrying a satellite phone, thousands of dollars in cash, without identity papers and riding alongside a noted al-Qaeda explosives expert, explained that he had not realized he needed identity papers to cross the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

* A former Egyptian army officer acknowledged that he had undergone training in Afghanistan at a camp run by the Kashmiri group, Lashkar-i-Taibi (LiT). However, he said, he had been listening to the BBC in February 2001 and heard an announcer describe LiT as a terrorist organization. After that, he said, he quit the group and had never had anything to do with them again. How had he supported himself in Afghanistan over the following year? He had, he said, relied on charity from his fellow Muslims.

* A young Tajiki told the tribunal that he had attended a training camp at the suggestion of a man he met on a train. He did not know the man's name. But he had never had any weapons training: He had spent his time carrying firewood.

* A Saudi detainee, confronted with evidence that he had traveled to Bosnia in the mid-1990s, then to Sudan, then to Afghanistan, explained that he had devoted himself exclusively to the construction of mosques. But had his travel not been paid by al Haramain, a well-known front group for al-Qaeda? He knew nothing about that. "If al Haramain is a terrorist organization, why is it my problem? Am I guilty if they are terrorists?"


---

Yeah ... they're all just pure as the driven snow. Innocent peaceful muslims who have been "kidnapped" by the evil crudsader Americans.

And hate-America vermin leftist scum like you would give these subhuman animals "constitutional rights"?

I'm still waiting for that Constitutional citation, fuckwit!
 
Gurk_MacGuintey said:
Proof? You think they're all just innocent goat herders? What a useless fucking schmuck you are.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=25472

* One detainee, a Kuwaiti national named as an al-Qaeda operative on a seized al-Qaeda hard drive, was captured as he tried to flee from Afghanistan into Iran. He insisted that he had no association with any terrorist organization. What then had brought him to Afghanistan? His answer: He had donated 750 Kuwaiti dinars ("not a lot of money" he added) to an Islamic charity to dig wells in Afghanistan--and had decided to travel from Kuwait to see that his money was properly spent.

* Another detainee, a Yemeni, explained that he had come to Pakistan to study medicine at a university. Unfortunately, the particular university he had selected lacked any medical faculty. He ended up instead studying the Koran in a student guesthouse--and when one of his housemates suggested they take a sightseeing tour of Afghanistan, he agreed to go along. The housemate's name? He had forgotten it.

* A detainee identified by eyewitnesses as a Taliban military judge, who inflicted hideous punishments on hundreds of accused, explained to the tribunal that he was in fact only a humble chicken farmer. The question, "What did you feed your chickens?" baffled this detainee. He answered: "A mixture of foods they sell in the bazaar" (perhaps at the Afghan equivalent of Petco).

* One detainee was apprehended in possession of a military identity card that named him as a member of an especially vicious Taliban militia. He explained that it was not his own card. It belonged to a friend who had asked him to hold it for him.

* A Saudi mechanic said that he had journeyed to Afghanistan because someone had persuaded him that it was the ideal place to complete his religious education. Who was this person? "I don't know."

* An Afghan detainee intercepted at the Pakistan border carrying a satellite phone, thousands of dollars in cash, without identity papers and riding alongside a noted al-Qaeda explosives expert, explained that he had not realized he needed identity papers to cross the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

* A former Egyptian army officer acknowledged that he had undergone training in Afghanistan at a camp run by the Kashmiri group, Lashkar-i-Taibi (LiT). However, he said, he had been listening to the BBC in February 2001 and heard an announcer describe LiT as a terrorist organization. After that, he said, he quit the group and had never had anything to do with them again. How had he supported himself in Afghanistan over the following year? He had, he said, relied on charity from his fellow Muslims.

* A young Tajiki told the tribunal that he had attended a training camp at the suggestion of a man he met on a train. He did not know the man's name. But he had never had any weapons training: He had spent his time carrying firewood.

* A Saudi detainee, confronted with evidence that he had traveled to Bosnia in the mid-1990s, then to Sudan, then to Afghanistan, explained that he had devoted himself exclusively to the construction of mosques. But had his travel not been paid by al Haramain, a well-known front group for al-Qaeda? He knew nothing about that. "If al Haramain is a terrorist organization, why is it my problem? Am I guilty if they are terrorists?"


---

Yeah ... they're all just pure as the driven snow. Innocent peaceful muslims who have beeb "kidnapped" by the evil crudsader Americans.

I'm still waiting for that Constitutional citation, fuckwit!

That's 9. Now account for the other 83,000. I'll wait.

Oh,

If they do hit the US again, I hope you're at ground zero. Bigoted, racist, Nazi supremacist trash like you won't be missed. Or acknowledged and accounted for if we're lucky.
 
Sarek said:
That's 9. Now account for the other 83,000. I'll wait.

There's 83.000 subhuman muslim scum dogs at Gitmo? Link please?


If they do hit the US again, I hope you're at ground zero. Bigoted, racist, Nazi supremacist trash like you won't be missed. Or acknowledged and accounted for if we're lucky.

Nice! For being 42 you sure are lacking in basic wisdom. Must be why you like hanging around with the kids here.

"Bigoted" - yes, I have strong opinions. "Nazi" - I am a Nationalist - but I'm not a Socialist. The leftist ideology of the NSDAP is much closer to that which you espouse than anything I have related. "Racist" - you have drunk the kool aid and believe the cultural marxism which holds that brown people can have "ethnic pride", but if white people exhibit pride in their heritage then they are "racist".

You probably could have worked "homophobe" into your stock of invective if you had been thinking.

Now, that Constitutional citiation? And the link?
 
Rafterman said:
It's call the Constitution of the United States, nice document.

Try reading it sometime.

You mean that same document Muslim extremists wipe their asses with whilst they live their everyday lives in the US? Never heard of 'sleeper cells' have you?

Due to the drastic measure taken by the Bush administration regarding confinement, when was the last time the USA suffered a terrorist attack on their home soil? Remember, this is a time for the greatest hatred Muslims the world over have felt for Americans, therefore the country should be in flames from multiple terrorist attacks. Yet, not a peep? Stupid fuck aren't you?
 
Gurk_MacGuintey said:
There's 83.000 subhuman muslim scum dogs at Gitmo? Link please?

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/11/16/D8DTOTT00.html

Over 14 thousand currently remain in US "custody"

Gurk_MacGuintey said:
Nice! For being 42 you sure are lacking in basic wisdom. Must be why you like hanging around with the kids here.

Wisdom isn't a necessary tool when faced with dealing with someone like you. You, and your kind represent everything that is wrong with this country. You blame the masses for the actions of a few, you advocate the extermination of an entire group of people due to fear, intolerance and the inability and unwillingness to accept or understand.

Gurk_MacGuintey said:
Now, that Constitutional citiation? And the link?

Prove to me that every person detained by the US is an enemy combatant or a terrorist. Because they are Muslim or Arab is not proof.
 
Sarek said:
First of all, it's not proven that they were actual combatants. And as there is no proof and the Bush administration can't or won't provide proof, that changes their status from combatants to kidnapping victims.

LOL yes, the Islamic terrorists are kidnapping victims of America's military!

Saddam Hussein was also 'holejacked' by ruthless American troops, he should be freed. (Holejacking soon to be determined a war crime by Europe's International Tribunal, no doubt.)

And let's not forget the Democrats are working hard to ensure that no Al Queda terrorist will ever be MONITORED in any way, because that would be unfair!

Sarek, you keep on working hard to make Al Queda like you, love you, and want to hug you. The rest of us... wait, the voters have chosen this, the rest of us are going to have to hope for Al Queda's good graces. That will be the only thing preventing another 9/11. Certainly not the Democrats.

-Ogami
 
Ogami said:
LOL yes, the Islamic terrorists are kidnapping victims of America's military!

Saddam Hussein was also 'holejacked' by ruthless American troops, he should be freed. (Holejacking soon to be determined a war crime by Europe's International Tribunal, no doubt.)

And let's not forget the Democrats are working hard to ensure that no Al Queda terrorist will ever be MONITORED in any way, because that would be unfair!

Sarek, you keep on working hard to make Al Queda like you, love you, and want to hug you. The rest of us... wait, the voters have chosen this, the rest of us are going to have to hope for Al Queda's good graces. That will be the only thing preventing another 9/11. Certainly not the Democrats.

-Ogami

You really are an idiot aren't you?
 
SaintLucifer said:

Due to the drastic measure taken by the Bush administration regarding confinement, when was the last time the USA suffered a terrorist attack on their home soil?
Have they actually caught any new shoebombers, dirty bombers, etc?
 
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." - George W. Bush - January 20, 2001, January 20, 2005

bushrn2.jpg


“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” - George W. Bush, December 9, 2005
 
And yet Photoshopping photos doesn't make it true, does it?

President Bush takes his oath of office very seriously, certainly more seriously than the previous occupant of the White House. And part of that oath is to do his utmost defend this country.

Leaving Al Queda alone would not be doing his utmost. Leaving Saddam Hussein alone would not be doing his utmost. Leaving North Korea, or Iran, or any other troublemakers alone would not be doing his utmost.

Democrats claim Bush does not respect the Constitution, when in fact every one of Bush's actions is done because he respects the Constitution. To have failed to act, to have left Saddam Hussein or Islamic terrorists to their own devices, that would have been a betrayal of his oath of office.

Democrats have swept into power offering quick fixes and even snake oil promises for sick people. Yet no one expected Truman to have rebuilt Japan and Germany to perfection three years after WWII, yet that is what is expected regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. The Democrats have promised the quick fixes, we'll see how they handle it.

And coming up with an Al Queda Bill of Rights, no hyperbole, is a hilarious start to their looney reign.

-Ogami
 
Top