1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

surpreme court

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by slide action, Jun 13, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. slide action

    slide action Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,917
    Another example of scum bag liberals in action. Now terrorist and enemy combatants casptured overseas will be awarded the privilage of being tried under U.S. courts! Our forefathers must be rolling over in their graves! In years past there would be cries of TREASON and a called to have the justices hanged if they did something like this! This also opens the can of worms about our military and literally ties their hands behind their back in the capture of these people!FOR THE LOVE OF PETE! These vermon aren't even covered under the Geneva Convention and the Suprerme court liberals are giving them LEGAL BENEFITS! Wait until the low life trial lawyers get involved with this one! The liberal socialist Hussien Obama( and YES I WILL USE his middle name) has stated he will try American senior military officers for "war crimes" if he sees fit. For those fools who say it doesn't MATTER who gets elected take notice! You have a clear example what a liberal Supreme court can do to this country . there are only 4 Justices who lean towards conservatism on ther bench now. If Obama and the liberals take over the white house we are FINISHED!
     
  2. jim brown

    jim brown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,158
    Location:
    Nebraska
    If giving people constitutional rights is a liberal socialist action then I must be a liberal socialist. Boy will my friends be surprised.

    jim brown
     
  3. DJM

    DJM Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    519
    Location:
    Central Minnesota
    Is this not a consequence of entering into armed conflict W/O a formal declaration of war?
     
  4. perazzitms

    perazzitms TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    521
    Load them all on a boat for their court dates in DC - and let it 'disappear' in the Bermuda Triangle.
     
  5. perga1

    perga1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,474
    I always thought the Constitution was written for the People Of The United States.
     
  6. 22hornet

    22hornet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2007
    Messages:
    1,461
    Location:
    Hanford, CA
    perga1, you are correct. These people should have no constitutional rights. They are NOT citizens of the United States. They are terrorists dedicated to the destruction of our Republic...just like the trial lawyers.
     
  7. BigM-Perazzi

    BigM-Perazzi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,542
    Location:
    HELL, MICHIGAN
    Jim Brown, I must agree with you. The thought of any branch of the United States holding anyone 6 years without giving an opportunity for due justice is incomprehensible . We wish to spread democracy throughout the world, yet this is where we show we are no better many times than those we pursue....
     
  8. slide action

    slide action Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,917
    For those of you who (JUST DON"T GET IT) and some on here apparently are among those. These are Terrorist susspects! Amost all of them were apprahended in subversive acts against our government or our troops. They are "NOT" (did you get that part) NOT awarded Geneva convention rights as members of an organized army. They are also "NOT" U.S. citizens. They were taken into custody overseas in violent acts against our military and our Government. Where in HELL do some IDIOTS get off thinking they should be awarded trials in U.S. courts????!!!! I can imagine our past Generation in WW2 being told that suversive spies killing our troops in Europe or boming military bases would have to be brought back to the U.S. to be given lawyers and a criminal trial!!!! Liberalism is a mental disorder and you just can't FIX STUPID!!!!! Constitutional rights are afforded U.S. citizens under the law. Foreign Terrorist have NEVER been given them and anybody who would think they should be is a DAMNED FOOL!
     
  9. bocephus

    bocephus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    527
    Doug, does it matter? When has it ever been wrong to use someone's middle name when refering to them? Did you bash ol Teddy when he called him Osama? Come now
    Do you have a middle name Doug? Sometimes you use it....sometimes you don't.

    Clearly you are just another liberal that feels he needs to protect his savior Barack HUSSEIN Obama from the truth pertaining to him. You will probably see him elected president too, but just remember....you will suffer right along with the rest of us.

    Wake up America!!
     
  10. IM390

    IM390 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    213
    Most if not all these detainees were captured out of uniform. According to the Geneva Convention, out of uniform = spy. Spies are shot. PERIOD!
     
  11. Shooting Coach

    Shooting Coach Banned User Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    8,357
    Location:
    Nashville Tn
    I am not impressed with the less than stellar perfomance of the SCOTUS.

    The Second most ignorant creature is one who does not recognize its enemies.

    The MOST ignorant creature is one who SUPPORTS AND DEFENDS its enemies. This creature is generally EXTINCT.

    Who else wants more liberal judges appointed to the Supreme Court? This treason will, without a doubt, cause more Americans to die at the hand of our (protected) enemies.

    Obama and Hillary will appoint more leftists to the Supreme Court. The powers given to the President are quite limited. SCOTUS can make law, if they are far enough left.

    Think about this when you vote.
     
  12. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Doug,

    Obama's natural father was Muslim as was his stepfather. He was schooled for several years in a muslim school in Indonesia. He has a long history of associating with Louis Farrakan. He only joined his racist, black, "Christian" church when it became politically expedient to do so.

    In all probability, he is more a follower of Islam than Christianity. It is he who should use his middle name as it more truly reflects who he is, a Muslim at heart.
     
  13. birdogs

    birdogs TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,775
    Both Justice Roberts and Scalia made unusual (for them) statements about how bad this ruling is. BUT, let's not listen to the bright guys. Let's listen to Ginsberg, Kennedy, Stevens. etc..

    Also, the Senate voted to give illegal aliens "access" to the Social Security system. As if it were not in enough trouble!
     
  14. Don Steele

    Don Steele Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,539
    Location:
    Florida's beautiful E. Coast
    "People" don't have Constitutional Rights Jim...
    AMERICANS have Constitutional Rights because our fore-fathers fought and died for them. Many of US fought for them, putting our lives on the line so that our fellow AMERICANS would be able to continue to enjoy those rights. I feel absoutely zero compulsion to extend those rights to my country's enemies.
     
  15. bocephus

    bocephus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    527
    Doug I think you have the constitution confused with the BIBLE! And yes you have to belong to the (correct) group, that group is called the CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, get it? If we extend those same rights guaranteed to us CITIZENS to our enemies and anyone else in the world there is no way we will ever survive as a NATION.

    At least we know whose side you are on.....

    Wake up America, our enemy is amongst us!
     
  16. dmarbell

    dmarbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,572
    I tried to read about the Geneva Conventions. If appears that almost all combatants are covered by either the 3rd or 4th Geneva Conventions. Those covered by the 3rd Convention are POWs. Otherwise, they are covered by the 4th Convention, and are to be tried under the domestic laws of the detaining state.

    Excerpts found under Geneva Convention on wikipedia:

    The phrase "unlawful combatant" does not appear in the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII).[1] However, Article 4 of GCIII does describe categories under which a person may be entitled to POW status; and there are other international treaties which deny lawful combatant status for mercenaries and children. In the United States, the Military Commissions Act of 2006 codified the legal definition of this term, and invested the U.S. President with broad discretion to determine whether a person may be designated an unlawful enemy combatant. The assumption that such a category as unlawful combatant exists is not contradicted by the findings by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in the Celebici Judgment. The judgement quoted the 1958 ICRC commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention: Every person in enemy hands must be either a prisoner of war and, as such, be covered by the Third Convention; or a civilian covered by the Fourth Convention. Furthermore, "There is no intermediate status; nobody in enemy hands can be outside the law,"[4] because in the opinion of the ICRC "If civilians directly engage in hostilities, they are considered 'unlawful' or 'unprivileged' combatants or belligerents (the treaties of humanitarian law do not expressly contain these terms). They may be prosecuted under the domestic law of the detaining state for such action".[1][5]

    Danny
     
  17. bocephus

    bocephus Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    527
    Doug, they did count the votes in Florida SEVERAL TIMES, they even went so far as to determine THE INTENT OF THOSE WHO HAD NOT EVEN ATTEMPTED TO PUNCH FOR 1 OR THE OTHER!

    When it came to counting the military vote in Florida in 2000 they were denied, would you mind enlightening us as to why?

    Wake up America!
     
  18. perga1

    perga1 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,474
    Doug, don't you remember? That "C" student beat a "D" student? Also, that "D" student had never done anything in the real world of earning a living. At least the "C" student ran a successful major league team and learned to fly jets, not a simple task I'll bet. JRM
     
  19. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    The votes were counted in Florida several times after the election by several groups and Bush won every time. To say different is just a bald face lie. Further, while not a scholar, Bush did have better grades than Kerry.

    When I see John Roberts and Alito on SCOTUS, I thank God that the obviously mentally unstable Gore did not win.
     
  20. jim brown

    jim brown Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,158
    Location:
    Nebraska
    Does the term "inalienable rights" ring a bell with you? The common definition of inalienable rights is as follow:

    "The term inalienable rights (or unalienable rights) refers to a theoretical set of individual human rights that by their nature cannot be taken away, violated, or transferred from one person to another. They are considered more fundamental than alienable rights, such as rights in a specific piece of property.

    Inalienable (Individual) Rights are: natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They are the most fundamental set of human rights, natural means not-granted nor conditional. They are applicable only to humans, as the basic necessity of their survival."

    IT ISN'T RESERVED FOR CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES ONLY!!

    jim brown
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.