Daily Agitator
The right has been standing on the Constitution for decades especially where guns and abortion are concerned….they have used it to fight health reform….or to question the birth of a president….but these people, and I use the term loosely…..only use the Constitution when it is for their case against an issue…otherwise they could care less about the document…..
For instance, the 2nd amendment freaks that are so concerned with gun ownership…anything that remotely sounds like gun control and the yells go out that the Constitution is being violated by those in favor of the control…..
Next, we come to the “tenthers”, those on the Right that use the 10th amendment to oppose anything from health care to ….well pick a topic…..the Constitution is the first thing that they point to and use it for all it is worth…
And then we have those MORONS that use the Constitution, Article 2, section 1, to oppose a duly elected president as Not being a natural born citizen….
All in all…the Right has used the document so many times that it loses some of its effect in any argument….
With all that said…you are wondering just what I am getting to as a conclusion to my bitch, right?
It all boils down to the moving and trials of the suspected “terrorists” in New York City. There are many that are pissing and moaning about the move and the trials…most notably, America’s mayor, Guiliani.
“What the Obama administration is telling us loud and clear is that both in substance and reality, the War on Terror from their point of view is over,” Giuliani said. “(Mohammad) should be tried in a military tribunal. He is a war criminal. This is an act of war.”
His statement is nothing but a political game….he just wants his face kept in front of the cameras….this type of game playing should be a crime……no matter who plays it!
Just about everybody has an opinion on this story….mostly it is in opposition of these people standing trial in the US. Most notable is FOX News, whose “news” people are jumping up and down in opposition….some even look like they are having a stroke….but there is a precedent for these trials!
REALLY! I bet you are on the edge of your chairs to see what that precedent will be, right?
I am looking at this as a pure legal matter…we all know what we, individually, believe about these people….so what is my precedent?
So simple! The same document that is used to oppose issues…THE CONSTITUTION!
Amendment 6 – Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses. Ratified 12/15/1791.
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
See! How tough was that? A lot simpler than you thought, eh? If all reps have a pocket copy of the US Constitution, then maybe they should read it…..before they open their mouths. The scary part for me is that the American people buy into the BS of the Constitutionality of an issue…..why? They have not read it either.
If you read the amendment….it does not stipulate that it applies to natural born citizens….it says ALL CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS……..if the 2nd amendment should be followed as written, then so should the 6th.
I have said this on numerous posts….if you want to stand on the Constitution, then go all in or all out……either the Constitution applies to every issue or none…..there is no in between…..ALL IN OR ALL OUT!
Pretty good assessment there. When it comes to the Constitution it is only used when it supports their world view (interestingly judges are activists when it doesn’t). Of course liberals are not allowed to challenge their views. If they feel that it is wrong to try the 9-11 terrorists then they should have no problem with trying Roeder in a military tribunal. Somehow, I think that they will disagree.
Thanx for that….and I agree with you there…..I am starting to get really irritated with the whole Constitution thing….and I firmly believe it should be ALL IN OR ALL OUT!
“ALL IN OR ALL OUT.” I TOTALLY agree. You just can’t quote things like the constitution and then “cherry pick” what you want from it. Either you stand by it, or you don’t!
That said, since they wouldn’t want the legality of the attack on the Taliban to be challenged too strongly, then I can quite see why they want to regard 9-11 as an act of war!
My personal feelings are that, if that’s so, then he should be tried by a military court – and THEN shot, if he is indeed guilty of the attack.
That, though, poses another problem, because, IF it’s an act of war, then this guy might be considered to be a PRISONER of war – which I believe is covered by the Geneva Convention, even though the Taliban wouldn’t give a damn about that if the boot was on the other foot. They, just like everyone else, want to pick and choose what rules to go by and how and when they apply them.
Interesting, eh? 😈
Hiya….I believe to be labelled a POW there has to be a declared war and an actual enemy…terror is a concept and a tactic…..
I agree, but didn’t Bush – and Blair I think – call it a war? Perhaps it was a “war on terror”? Or am I thinking of one of the other wars they seem to have started between them? 😈
Yes they did and Conservs call it a war….but there was no declaration of war……IMO, you cannot declare a war on a concept……or if you truly do then you are making the concept more attractive to the “bad guys”……Vietnam was called a war also….no declaration there…..Korea was a war….also No declaration…..I guess it is in the eyes of the beholder……
I understand the distinctions and perhaps most of the niceties of the legal points you make. However, if you go into another country with bombs and guns blazing (or even using planes as missiles?) and the opposition fights back, how is that not a war by any normal person’s definition?
The POW thing? Well, that was sort of a joke anyway – just like all recent Brit and US administrations! 😈
I do not disagree with you….anytime someone in a different country is shooting at you in anger….then it is war…….but I do nopt know if I would call the US admin a joke….more like a recurring nightmare….
Yeah. I know what you mean – in the UK too… but you have to laugh because it stops you bursting into tears and cutting your throat – well, with luck it does 😆
So true…at least here in the US the morons that are running the country give me excellent stuff…day after day….I really enjoy the Constitutional stuff…….but I guess it would be similar in the UK….
BTW…..Systematic Change….site has a post on the new head of the EU…I do not know enough about the EU to make a good response….and I am still trying to convince him that it is better to let comments be published…..I think he is a teacher at a university…do not understand why he is so worried about comments….but I keep trying….
Check my latest post – oh, you already did. Well, anyway, it’s at http://quintavoc.wordpress.com/2009/11/20/so-there-you-have-it/ 😈
Like I said I do not know enough about the EU to give my opinion….I may make that my New Year’s resolution….to learn more about the EU….but I see a headache in the making….am I right?