Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

mellowyellow

Vice Admiral
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
5,327
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

at least p-woody has an opinion. instead of flaming<br />him, why not post your opinion on the subject???
 

boatingfool

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Nov 30, 2002
Messages
610
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

My opinion is this:<br /><br />Anyone who takes up arms against the U.S. is an enemy combatant.<br /><br />If the person is a U.S. citizen they forfeit all rights that are Afforded American citizen.<br /><br />The constitution is a great document but it is not perfect.Thats why we allow Ammendments.<br /><br />Times change and our country is in a very dangerous situation. human nature has evolved into something that are forefathers could not have possibly fathomed.<br /><br />Under plywoodys reasoning as long as they are in the Planning stages they are just having "Bad Thoughts" and that is O.K. with him.<br /><br />They havent broken the law until they act.<br /><br />That is such a F%#ked up way of thinking in this day of age I am glad we do not have people with that thought process in office. Unfortunately we do have some sitting on the bench.<br />I just wonder where these judges are going to go after they Destroy America???<br /><br />I cant believe they cant see what they are doing to the security of honest hardworking Americans??<br /><br />Or yet, Do they even care???
 

mellowyellow

Vice Admiral
Joined
Jun 8, 2002
Messages
5,327
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

well stated boatingfool. much more enjoyable to<br />read than a quote being recycled.<br />regards,<br />M.Y.
 

Skinnywater

Commander
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,065
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

The problem with trying people like him is he gets the right to confront his accussers. That is, CIA and other intellegence agents and people who have infultrated Al Qaeda. The Gov can't do that w/o getting people killed
Alright Ralph, who says?<br />Following your arguement, the government would be able to label anyone, at anytime, without proof, an enemy/terrorist and lock them up without due process.<br />Sure it's nice to be able to trust the government with its accusations but in reality, they can't.<br />Here is a perfect example of The Constitutional checks and balances being used. Finally a judge takes the Constitutional stand and we start crying foul.<br />Plywoody's 100% correct here.<br />You and many others are making your arguement completely on hearsay and are willing to argue against The Constitution. <br /><br />It is due process that truth, guilt and innocence is determined.<br /><br />[/quote] Bush wants to prosecute them in special courts and the Judiciary says he can't because there is no declaration of war. That is the issue. [/quote]<br /><br />Here is another area that the government wants it both ways. The Constitution is very clear who makes war.<br />There hasn't been any ammendment made to legally deviate against what is written.<br />This is a Constitutional check and balance that continues to be ignored!<br />It gets even more sick.<br />Since the legislative branch never has the guts to legally declare war. It's been able to give the executive branch a nod to action. Then when we're commited they now go back and undercut that agreement. <br /><br />What congress is doing now is a perfect example!<br />The executive branch in thier quest for power is happy to go to war without a legal declaration.<br />The legislative branch is perfectly fine with going to war without a legal declaration because it lets then off the hook when things go wrong!<br />In the mean time honest congressional debate goes out the window. Honest consensis from the people goes out the window!<br /><br />Many here are fine with the fact that due process can be ignored by our Attorney General. Yet not hear a word from him about the Executive branch illegally declaring war.<br /><br />There are tag lines, signatures and all kinds of crys quoteing the Constitution.<br />Here's one used many times here.<br />"Those who would give up freedom for security, deserve neither."<br />Yet those that have used this are perfectly willing to do just that. :( <br /><br />Yeah, there were a lot of people that were willing to let many children die in Waco, because someone called them "cultists", without due process. Yet when due process came around every last one of them were aquitted!<br /><br />The last Attorney General was a joke and this one is trying to out do that one.<br /> <br />IMO
 

bubbakat

Captain
Joined
Oct 29, 2002
Messages
3,110
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

The Democrats are complaining on how long the war is taking but consider this ... <br /> <br />It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound. That was a 51-day operation.<br /> <br /><br />It took less time to find Saddam's sons in Iraq than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.<br /><br />It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sunk at Chappaquid****.<br /><br />It took less time to take Iraq than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!!!<br /><br />Man, our military is GREAT
 

Skinnywater

Commander
Joined
Mar 7, 2002
Messages
2,065
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

Your absolutely correct on that one bubbakat.<br /><br />The most effective, professional military that can perform its mission while taking great care in not harming innocent civilians. <br />This is most difficult and a great testiment in not taking the easiest route to victory.
 

plywoody

Senior Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Aug 11, 2002
Messages
685
Re: Bush takes another hit in the War Against Terrorism

Ok, if there is evidence he was planning to make a "dirty bomb" and detonate it, that is a crime.<br /><br />Charge him.<br /><br />Unfortunately, no one, other than the justice department, knows what the actual evidence is--not even Padilla, who has not been allowed to even access a lawyer. That fact alone would give the impression the evidence is pretty weak.<br /><br />As far as revealing CIA secrets, that sure didn't stop them from exposing Joe Wilson's wife as a CIA operative after Wilson contradicted some of the information coming out of the White House.<br /><br />Apparently, this administration has a selective view of which CIA secrets are important to keep secret--I think a second, independent judicial review is in order.
 
Top