Final SEAL Member Cleared in Terrorist Beatdown Case

[heironymouspasparagus]

I'm not condemning the Seals - don't know enough about that particular case.  Don't really care at this point, since they apparently have been acquitted (??).

I AM commenting on the history of the last 9 years and the complete redefinition of reality we have suffered from for so long.  This is 1984 run rampant and rabid!

If it were me, in the "war" zone, and was convinced of the activities, and the zone was active, I likely would have just whacked him, instead of taking prisoner.  But once you take that prisoner, a whole new world of things HAVE to happen that make it all fall under rules that we as an alleged civilized country have promised to adhere to.  And now we are actually moving toward that ideal rather than cover-up lip service.  (HA!  Just realized the possible irony - lip service!!)

[Gaspar]

Gaspar;
But. . .When you do any of these things and openly claim to be a member of a nation, or group that is currently at war with the United States, or if there is probable cause to suspect that you are part of such a group, you are considered an enemy combatant.  At that point it is the duty of federal law enforcement, to extract actionable information related to additional threats.

You are still innocent until proven guilty, however you will not be allowed to idle until it is determined that all threats associated with your actions are neutralized.

Why is that so hard for the bedwetters to get?


Geez...what a mess.  This just shows how very badly you and so many others have been indoctrinated by the magic Kewl-Ade.

First, they say they are at war with us.  We say it is a war on terrorism.  But it isn't.  The Constitution is and was very specific;  war is declared by Congress.  It hasn't done that, so we are not in fact at war.  We are in conflict.

Second, if we were at war, these people would be prisoners of war.  And even if it is an undeclared war, international conventions that WE in fact DID sign state that these people are for all practical purposes and are in fact to be considered prisoners of war for all things judicial.

Third, there is no such thing in either OUR law or international law (you remember that; another part of the Supreme Law of our land??) as an enemy combatant.  That is the "1984" equivalent of bulls***!!

And even if there WERE such a thing, we are required IF we are going to actually obey our law to treat them as prisoners of war.

I guess the '"bedwetters actually understand the term "rule of law".  More than the RWRE Cheney/Rove/Murdoch cabal.
Too bad Oklahoma can't get it!

Yes, I think you will do. 

FOTD's replacement has been made.

[Gaspar]

I'm not condemning the Seals - don't know enough about that particular case.  Don't really care at this point, since they apparently have been acquitted (??).

I AM commenting on the history of the last 9 years and the complete redefinition of reality we have suffered from for so long.  This is 1984 run rampant and rabid!

If it were me, in the "war" zone, and was convinced of the activities, and the zone was active, I likely would have just whacked him, instead of taking prisoner.  But once you take that prisoner, a whole new world of things HAVE to happen that make it all fall under rules that we as an alleged civilized country have promised to adhere to.  And now we are actually moving toward that ideal rather than cover-up lip service.  (HA!  Just realized the possible irony - lip service!!)

AG Holder now gets it. 
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/96825-holder-plans-outreach-to-congress-on-changing-miranda-rules

[Cats Cats Cats]

Woot, then they will be able to hold US Citizens without their rights.  Win!

[Conan71]

Woot, then they will be able to hold US Citizens without their rights.  Win!

Comment FAIL!

[Cats Cats Cats]

Comment FAIL!

sorry, been on paid *edit: pain* meds.  What was the fail?

I am just making the point that just having somebody declare somebody an enemy of the state or a "safety threat" is very open to interpretation and in the future the Government could deem lots of various things "safety threats".  Like speaking out against the government.  The story is talking about a US citizen not a terrorist caught in Iraq or Afghanistan.

[azbadpuppy]

No one has addressed the important issue. . . Was the terrorist read his Miranda rights first?

Why would he have been read Miranda rights. This happened in Iraq, no? That only applies on US soil.

[Cats Cats Cats]

Why would he have been read Miranda rights. This happened in Iraq, no? That only applies on US soil.

he was just trying to be sarcastic.

[heironymouspasparagus]

Ah, finally...Gaspar admits it.  The means justifies the ends.  The rule of law only applies while convenient.
Ok, good to know.

[Gaspar]

Ah, finally...Gaspar admits it.  The means justifies the ends.  The rule of law only applies while convenient.
Ok, good to know.

?? . . .as usual.