OBAMA

[GrizinWashington]

You have a serious problem if you are comparing the GITMO detaines to the Holocost victims.

Only you could be so far off base in terms of understanding a reasoned argument.

I'm comparing the loss of civil rights within a county and a country's citizens abandoning their responsibility to control their government's power to take away those rights in the name of "defending" that country.

[cats2506]

You have a serious problem if you are comparing the GITMO detaines to the Holocost victims.

Only you could be so far off base in terms of understanding a reasoned argument.

I'm comparing the loss of civil rights within a county and a country's citizens abandoning their responsibility to control their government's power to take away those rights in the name of "defending" that country.

So who has lost their civil rights, oh yeah they are not American Citizens, so they dont have American Civil Rights.

How can they lose somthing that they have never had?

[GrizinWashington]

To begin with, I challenge you to find anything in Articles 1-10 of the Bill of Rights that limits the guaranteed rights to U.S. citizens. Second, the Bill of Rights was written to protect the limits to which our government may go. Third, you have again failed to see the primary point of my argument: that blindly allowing our government to strip away protections guaranteed to us is a slippery slope. Today it's someone at GTMO. What if tomorrow it's your brother they suspect of being a terrorist? Well, by God, if it's for the defense of our country, then go into his house, seize him immediately, and lock him up and torture him without any due process. Our country's well-being is at stake, after all!!!

Call it a stretch if you wish. But history is filled with examples just like it. It's not worth the risk.

[cats2506]

To begin with, I challenge you to find anything in Articles 1-10 of the Bill of Rights that limits the guaranteed rights to U.S. citizens. Second, the Bill of Rights was written to protect the limits to which our government may go. Third, you have again failed to see the primary point of my argument: that blindly allowing our government to strip away protections guaranteed to us is a slippery slope. Today it's someone at GTMO. What if tomorrow it's your brother they suspect of being a terrorist? Well, by God, if it's for the defense of our country, then go into his house, seize him immediately, and lock him up and torture him without any due process. Our country's well-being is at stake, after all!!!

Call it a stretch if you wish. But history is filled with examples just like it. It's not worth the risk.

You gottan be kidding, What kind of arrogance do you have, to think that the way of the world is that forigen nationals are picked up doing bad things on a regular basis and brought back to America and given their American Civil Rights. Show me the precedent for that happening.

[GrizinWashington]

Siiiiigh.

[AlphaGriz1]

To begin with, I challenge you to find anything in Articles 1-10 of the Bill of Rights that limits the guaranteed rights to U.S. citizens. Second, the Bill of Rights was written to protect the limits to which our government may go. Third, you have again failed to see the primary point of my argument: that blindly allowing our government to strip away protections guaranteed to us is a slippery slope. Today it's someone at GTMO. What if tomorrow it's your brother they suspect of being a terrorist? Well, by God, if it's for the defense of our country, then go into his house, seize him immediately, and lock him up and torture him without any due process. Our country's well-being is at stake, after all!!!

Call it a stretch if you wish. But history is filled with examples just like it. It's not worth the risk.

The reason you can't find anything in the Bill of Rights that limits guaranteed rights to Americans is simple.

Our forefathers made the mistake of thinking that common sense would be used in interpretation of the Bill of Rights.

It's funny how these terrorists don't play by our rules during war or other actions but snap to when they get caught and then want to use our weakness against us in the court of public opinion. They can't wait to conform to the ideals off the American justice system and be just like the "Westerners" they hate to the death.

[SonomaCat]

To begin with, I challenge you to find anything in Articles 1-10 of the Bill of Rights that limits the guaranteed rights to U.S. citizens. Second, the Bill of Rights was written to protect the limits to which our government may go. Third, you have again failed to see the primary point of my argument: that blindly allowing our government to strip away protections guaranteed to us is a slippery slope. Today it's someone at GTMO. What if tomorrow it's your brother they suspect of being a terrorist? Well, by God, if it's for the defense of our country, then go into his house, seize him immediately, and lock him up and torture him without any due process. Our country's well-being is at stake, after all!!!

Call it a stretch if you wish. But history is filled with examples just like it. It's not worth the risk.

You gottan be kidding, What kind of arrogance do you have, to think that the way of the world is that forigen nationals are picked up doing bad things on a regular basis and brought back to America and given their American Civil Rights. Show me the precedent for that happening.

Your post is kind of ironic.

Maybe you can show us a precedent for non-POW foreign nationals being captured overseas and hauled to the United States and held indefinitely without any formal charges being made against them?

You know damn well if, say, Pakistan showed up in the United States, grabbed a bunch of Americans they claimed were "doing bad things," hauled them back to Pakistan and then refused to grant them any rights to fair trials, habeus corpus, etc., you might just be a little miffed.

The rules and treatment shouldn't change just because we're Americans ... we're not quite that "arrogant," are we?

[cats2506]

To begin with, I challenge you to find anything in Articles 1-10 of the Bill of Rights that limits the guaranteed rights to U.S. citizens. Second, the Bill of Rights was written to protect the limits to which our government may go. Third, you have again failed to see the primary point of my argument: that blindly allowing our government to strip away protections guaranteed to us is a slippery slope. Today it's someone at GTMO. What if tomorrow it's your brother they suspect of being a terrorist? Well, by God, if it's for the defense of our country, then go into his house, seize him immediately, and lock him up and torture him without any due process. Our country's well-being is at stake, after all!!!

Call it a stretch if you wish. But history is filled with examples just like it. It's not worth the risk.

You gottan be kidding, What kind of arrogance do you have, to think that the way of the world is that forigen nationals are picked up doing bad things on a regular basis and brought back to America and given their American Civil Rights. Show me the precedent for that happening.

Your post is kind of ironic.

Maybe you can show us a precedent for non-POW foreign nationals being captured overseas and hauled to the United States and held indefinitely without any formal charges being made against them?

You know damn well if, say, Pakistan showed up in the United States, grabbed a bunch of Americans they claimed were "doing bad things," hauled them back to Pakistan and then refused to grant them any rights to fair trials, habeus corpus, etc., you might just be a little miffed.

The rules and treatment shouldn't change just because we're Americans ... we're not quite that "arrogant," are we?

Thats why they are in GITMO,

hint - its not in the United States

[GrizinWashington]

Hint: You may want to research US Naval Bases and see if they qualify as US sovereign territory (e.g. as much US as Alabama, and therefore the Constitution applies in those places). Isn't that what was ultimately decided in Rasoul v. Bush?

[cats2506]

Hint: You may want to research US Naval Bases and see if they qualify as US sovereign territory (e.g. as much US as Alabama, and therefore the Constitution applies in those places). Isn't that what was ultimately decided in Rasoul v. Bush?

GITMO is special, that is why they used it.
it is one of the few bases that is NOT considered American Soil.
Has somthing to to with somthing Teddy Rosevelt set up, if I remember correctly.

[GrizinWashington]

I don't have time (or care enough, really) to look this up, so I could be mistaken. But as I recall, the treaty signed with Cuba in the early 1900s was vague about whether it qualified or not. But that it was ruled that it was US territory in the Rasoul v. Bush case.

[Griznationalist]

Three detainees at Gitmo have been convicted of anything. The other 700+ detinees are just being warehoused over there, not because U.S. personnel captured them or witnessed them committing hostile acts, but rather, because Arab "allies" funneled them our way and said they were "bad guys." There's a fine kettle of fish. Our nation is looking pretty darn stupid over this Gitmo fiasco.