By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Holder's speech to NW law

byco42

byco42

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
15,753
This does not assuage my overriding belief that government is not reason:

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/03/text-of-the-attorney-generals-national-security-speech/

Especially when reading passages like this one:

"Some have argued that the President is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. ?Due process? and ?judicial process? are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process."

Many different news sources from across the spectrum all agree that what Holder is getting at here is that the Executive Branch has the authority to execute U.S. citizens abroad if it decrees they are terrorists plotting harm on fellow innocent U.S. citizens. We are to take the word of the government that said terrorists were plotting and about to complete said acts.

And I thought that Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution guaranteed a fair and impartial trial.
 
byco42 said:
This does not assuage my overriding belief that government is not reason:

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2012/03/text-of-the-attorney-generals-national-security-speech/

Especially when reading passages like this one:

"Some have argued that the President is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. ?Due process? and ?judicial process? are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process."

Many different news sources from across the spectrum all agree that what Holder is getting at here is that the Executive Branch has the authority to execute U.S. citizens abroad if it decrees they are terrorists plotting harm on fellow innocent U.S. citizens. We are to take the word of the government that said terrorists were plotting and about to complete said acts.

And I thought that Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution guaranteed a fair and impartial trial.
Click to expand...

it does. this policy violates a number of constitutional provisions.

This is now our 2nd president in a row who's administration (and the agencies they oversee) has openly flouted the US constitution in the name of the "War on Terror," with absolutely no consequences.

off hand, I think I can name a half-dozen politicians that actually spoke out against all this, some of whom are now out of office, or will be shortly... Kucinich, Russ Feingold, Pete Stark, Bernie Sanders. On the right, I can only think of one: Ron Paul. These people are often tarred as "unserious" or "extreme civil libertarians."
 
not a whole lot of American citizens give a rats ass about the constitutional rights of terrorists....foreign or domestic.
 
Slick said:
not a whole lot of American citizens give a rats ass about the constitutional rights of terrorists....foreign or domestic.
Click to expand...

The point is this: Someone is executed, and we're supposed to just accept the government's word that the execution was justified, that the person was a terrorist and that we're safer as a result.

The silence of the Democrats on this, in the wake of the secret CIA torture rooms under president Bush and the water boarding of KNOWN terrorists is deafening.
 
byco42 said:
The point is this: Someone is executed, and we're supposed to just accept the government's word that the execution was justified, that the person was a terrorist and that we're safer as a result.

The silence of the Democrats on this, in the wake of the secret CIA torture rooms under president Bush and the water boarding of KNOWN terrorists is deafening.
Click to expand...


write your congressman and voice your displeasure.
 
byco42 said:
The point is this: Someone is executed, and we're supposed to just accept the government's word that the execution was justified, that the person was a terrorist and that we're safer as a result.

The silence of the Democrats on this, in the wake of the secret CIA torture rooms under president Bush and the water boarding of KNOWN terrorists is deafening.
Click to expand...

Dems knew about the water boarding early on too. There was a story specifically on Pelosi being on a committee that had all the details. She denied it at first, but eventually admitted I think.

Looks like it was 2009. She said the Bush admin lied to Congress about it but the CIA had records of her being told in 2002.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
32,899
Messages
1,109,119
Members
942
Latest member
Proud Pheasant

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top