terrorist attack in Oregon!

[PreachersWife2004]

The point is plenty of people on this forum have either called for, or justified after the fact, gunning down of other people in similar circumstances.

Wrong.

 

[Armoured]

Wrong.

*snort* uh-huh.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

ALF:

PETA (Wilson):

LOL, I thought this up and was about to go searching for the photos but went on in the thread and I now see you beat me to it! Good job!

 

[cow451]

LOL, I thought this up and was about to go searching for the photos but went on in the thread and I now see you beat me to it! Good job!

I live to serve.

 

[Hank77]

The point is plenty of people on this forum have either called for, or justified after the fact, gunning down of other people in similar circumstances.

I am not saying that you are wrong, but could you give one example of a similar circumstance? Thanks

 

[Armoured]

I am not saying that you are wrong, but could you give one example of a similar circumstance? Thanks

Protests in Ferguson spring to mind, the many, many instances of post hoc justifications of police brutality are another. The blatant mistrust and demonising of, and calls for restriction and repression of, Muslims would have to be a third. You've been here a while, you've seen the sort of claims people make. Not to mention in the wider community.

 

[jenny1972]

question to liberals : what defines this group as "terrorists" who should not have a right to a trial of their peers ?

 

[Armoured]

question to liberals : what defines this group as "terrorists" who should not have a right to a trial of their peers ?

Not a liberal, but if you'll allow me to answer...

Again, it's about the double standard. At least, it is for me.

 

[TLK Valentine]

question to liberals : what defines this group as "terrorists" who should not have a right to a trial of their peers ?

Ask the nice folks at GITMO.

 

[jenny1972]

Not a liberal, but if you'll allow me to answer...

Again, it's about the double standard. At least, it is for me.

i agree there should be no double standard . what right does the federal government have to label any group of Americans as a terrorist and take away their right to due process ?

 

[Armoured]

i agree there should be no double standard . what right does the federal government have to label any group of Americans as a terrorist and take away their right to due process ?

Indeed.

However, my issue is more with peoples' double standards, rather than the government's, per se.

 

[jenny1972]

Indeed.

However, my issue is more with peoples' double standards, rather than the government's, per se.

do you agree that every American has a right to due process ?

 

[Armoured]

do you agree that every American has a right to due process ?

Um, yes? What makes you think I'd think otherwise?

 

[jenny1972]

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution each contain a due process clause. Due process deals with the administration of justice and thus the due process clause acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the Government outside the sanction of law.[1] The Supreme Court of the United States interprets the clauses more broadly because these clauses provide four protections: procedural due process (in civil and criminal proceedings), substantive due process, a prohibition against vague laws, and as the vehicle for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. Due process ensures the rights and equality of all citizens.

 

[Armoured]

The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution each contain a due process clause. Due process deals with the administration of justice and thus the due process clause acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the Government outside the sanction of law.[1] The Supreme Court of the United States interprets the clauses more broadly because these clauses provide four protections: procedural due process (in civil and criminal proceedings), substantive due process, a prohibition against vague laws, and as the vehicle for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. Due process ensures the rights and equality of all citizens.

Good?

 

[jenny1972]

Um, yes? What makes you think I'd think otherwise?

im just asking your opinion on what rights Americans should have who have been labeled terrorists

 

[smaneck]

Give 'em a week without heat, electricity, or phone service, and they'll either surrender or start dropping from hunger and/or hypothermia.

Yep and the FEDS will wait them out and not do anything stupid this time. I heard Cliven Bundy jr. just got sentenced to 2-8 years in prison. Three more of his boys are up in Oregon. Looks like all of them will be locked up pretty soon.

 

[JGG]

question to liberals : what defines this group as "terrorists" who should not have a right to a trial of their peers ?

Who said they should not have a right to trial of any kind?

 

[smaneck]

This can't be any clearer:

Under current United States law, set forth in the USA PATRIOT Act, acts of domestic terrorism are those which: "(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended— (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States."[2]​

(B) (i) and (ii) seem fairly clear in what the intent of the Bundy boys are. I mean, they HAVE made their demands.

I see ii but not one, and the way you are interpreting ii would make virtually any sit-in an act of terrorism. The fact they are armed certainly puts a wringle into what their doing but until they actually threaten or hurt a civilian it doesn't rise to the level of terrorism.

 

[smaneck]

question to liberals : what defines this group as "terrorists" who should not have a right to a trial of their peers ?

Even if they were terrorists they would still have a right to a trial by their peers. We've only denied that to foreign terrorists. No, al-Awalki doesn't count because he was acting as an enemy combatant when he was killed. Likewise if any of these guys get killed during the standoff, that likewise does not constitute being deprived of due process. If you are told to disarm by an officer of the peace and you fail to do so, he can shoot you if he fears for his safety or the safety of others.