Treatment of terror suspects as enemy combatants...

The courts however are design to deal with US citizens who break our laws on US soil and had been dealing with mass murders and bombers for the whole history of the nation.

So calling it a war does not tell us how we gain anything by short circuiting our laws and our constitution.

 

And when a Leftwing President declares that militia groups and their supporters have declared war on America?

You'd be cool with that president stripping those Americans of their constitutional rights too?

 

"(*)(*)(*)(*) my Liberty! Give me security" -Patrick Henry

...wait no...that's not the right quote, is it?

 

We are not at war with "terrorism". You should go back and look at the AUMF and who exactly it says we are at war with.

Unless you can prove someone has ties to Al Qaeda (or its off shoots like ISIS) or the Taliban, then we are not at war with them.

 

You have not read through this whole thread yet. We put this to bed.

 

Get rid of whom? All Muslims including citizens or how about all far right wing and arm groups members as they had have members doing acts of terror on a very large scale indeed.

Hell how about anyone who had purchase and or read the Turner Diary such as Ted McVeigh.

Interesting road you wish to travel.

 

Depends on the miltia. Are we talking about the National Guard? Or about the likes of Sovereign Citizens? In the case of the Sovereigns, I wouldn't go so far as to say they've "declared war" on America, but they obviously committed crimes(if they haven't paid taxes) and I view that as more of a law enforcement issue.

You think(and you want to) extrapolate this into something bigger, but it's really not. Just like putting down Shay's rebellion had its consequences, but ultimately their civilian rights were kept intact.

 

Yes in a few decades we might come out of the police state or we might not do so.

Hell one producer was sentence to many years behind bars for daring to put out a movie that show the Brits in a bad light during our revolution.

The theory behind this is that he was interfering with the WW1 war efforts by doing so at the time.

Like a ship in rough waters we might come back to a stable upright position or we might turn turtle and sink.

To me going toward a police state is far far greater concern then a few bombings and shootings over decades.

 

We have law enforcement officers in our country, every day. We have laws governing this country and by logical extension, restricting people from doing "things"(the difference between Anarchy and a governed country. We don't actually want to have the unilateral right for everything) like, say murder. A murderer would want murder to be legal, but there's no reason for the greater society to accept such a premise.

The only thing this is DISCUSSING is giving our law enforcement officials the ability to enforce the law, in such a just manner to save lives. If we do not give our leo's the authority to deal with terrorism, we might as well not label terrorism a crime at all. The fact is, these are the kind of things we need to protect our country in the future.

Because a mass shooting or a bombing is utterly unacceptable, and would be unacceptable to those esteemed founders.

 

How many people was killed in the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building?

A 168 men women and children. The children thanks to an onsite daycare.

Next how many was killed in the Centennial Olympic Park bombing?

Let see only 3 but 111 wounded.

Of course the far right are harmless.

 

How long before we declare all Democrats as terrorists. You say that's hyperbole and will "never happen" and I say once you start this kind of (*)(*)(*)(*) what's to stop it?.

I know for a fact there are LOTS of conservatives who think concentration camps for Dems and Blacks and Muslims and Gays and just about everyone would be a good idea. My (*)(*)(*)(*)ing UNCLE was one fer Crissake and no, he wasn't "basically a good guy" basically he was a ****** Nazi (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)bag mental case.. I grew up in the era of Joe McCarrthy and the John Birchers, don't tell ME that RWNJ's aren't dangerous to our freedom.

There may be leftists who are like that. Maybe, but I am a leftist and have never met one. I HAVE met some very scary RWNJ's and I definitely don't run in their circles

I never thought the Republicans, the Party of Eisenhower, Reagan and William Buckley would run a clone of Adolf Hitler either, but strange things happen.

 

LOL law enforcement is indeed addressing the problem with the success that more plots are stop then are carry out by far.

We do not need to removed such crimes from our normal court system and turn it over to some parallel military court system or disregard the constitution for that matter.

 

To me the man is far more similar to Mussolini then Hitler even to the body language.

 

That is so, especially for the almost childlike posturing, but Trump is appealing to an almost atavistic racism, just like Hitler and he is following the Nazi playbook where he sets up a totalitarian state right at the outset.

Compared to Hilter Mussolini was a cool and considered intellectual, that is probably why Hitler admired him

 

It's clear you mean well, but it's also clear there is considerable naivety in regards to this issue. The very reason so many want to come to America, is because they know they can (*)(*)(*)(*) with you guys and nothing will happen. It's your progressive zeal to treat all equally under law which is the reason you're a target. They literally use that to carry out their 'mission'. If you think this isn't true, or an exaggeration, you're in fairyland. I have sat in on many a conversation where the idiocy and naivety of white (liberals), and the ease with which they're fooled, was laughed at long and hard. And it wasn't radicals doing it, it was ordinary migrants from a variety of different non-white cultures.

 

Well Mussolini was supposed to had gotten the trains to run on time so if Trump get into power we might see some improvements at the airports.

 

We don't know that, that's just Obama parroting that out. And given the actual facts of what HAS happened in these numerous attacks over the past 8 years, I very highly doubt that we have the kind of security infrastructure in place needed. You just heard them literally say "We need evidence to conduct an INVESTIGATION" When the whole point of an investigation is to find evidence.

You can put your head in the sand if you'd like, but it's clear that Federal Agencies aren't given the tools or the directions needed to do their jobs.

 

Last I heard, we are still officially at war with "Terrorism" and are actively combatting them all over the world. Did this nutjob pledge allegiance to isis or al Kayda? If so, he pledged allegiance to our enemy and thereby denounced his citizenship. Let him deal with the consequences. The same goes for anybody else who renounces their citizenship to avoid taxes, secede, or whatever. If you are going to renounce your citizenship, you'd better be ready to deal with the consequences.

 

So we are rewriting our laws when it come to renouncing citizenship and beside it does not matter as anyone on american soil is protected by the constitution and always had been to the same degree.

 

Ah this is a tough one. I approve of this proven terrorist with what appears to be ties overseas being given enemy combatant status. We need the Intel to potentially make us safer. Not him hiding behind lawyers. Common sense

I do not approve and must not happen that a law be passed ever allowing our countries government agencies to have the power to just pop folks out of their homes and lose their constitutional rights before crimes are committed

I propose all consideration of this type of action be considered by congress via OPEN committee on a case by case basis so we can see.

 

Hmm anyone who had reach out to others to aid them in terrorist acts had for the most part been stop cold and unless we are going into mind reading or perhaps demanding that everyone in the US have a yearly lied detector test there is no way without luck to detect lone wolfs who are not fools.

Nor is there any good ways to censor the net to keep the terrorists from trying to recruit people.

 

I know a fair deal about computers and already made the suggestion: Track the ISP's, claim the damn servers and arrest the people for soliciting terrorist propaganda. It would be very simple and easy to do. I bet the NSA already has the information, they just don't ACT ON IT.

 

So you can refer to studies that show that civil criminal investigators are less likely to get results then military investigators?

Or are you referring to using torture? Something that is ban by not only US military laws but international laws and agreements and have been shown not to work too well in any case.

 

Let see you know about such things as the Tor network I would assume or using tor at an open wifi hotspot to be extra safe.

footnote set both the enter node and the exit node in nations that are not friendly with the US or the UK.

Oh I forgot the bad guys servers should also be located in unfriendly nations and should be a tor hidden service.

 

By the way what part of the first Amendment allowed criminal charges for daring to read say insprite magazine?

Next my guess would be most of the readers or at least a large percent of the readers of such material are doing it out of curiosity with no plan of becoming terrorists.

But I assume the government have the manpower to waste most of it.

Hell I remember decades before the internet the government decided to check the materials that people are taking out of the libraries looking for evil doers and ended up with students doing papers of one kind or another.

Too bad I do not remember the details.