Tuesday, September 13, 2005
WHY NO MORE REPORTING ON THIS TOPIC?!
After not hearing anything locally over the last three days regarding the Jose Padilla case I decided to look online to see what the National News companies were saying about it. What did I find? Hard hitting questions about why he has not been given a trial? Commentary on the dangerous aspects of the President having this kind of Power? Anything? No not one damned report on this atrocity. I searched both Google and Yahoo and the newest reporting on the issue I could find was from 2002. What is this? Has the news turned a deaf hear to this outrage. I was wondering why their wasn't a larger public outcry, NOBODY KNOWS ABOUT IT! Because of this I will be starting a full scale campaign to get the word out and make sure that this man gets what the Constitution guarantees him. A TRIAL! I hope you will join me in this fight. Please contact your local, state, and national representatives and let them know that you are outraged by the stripping of this mans freedoms. He has not been proven to have done a damned thing wrong and he has spent the last 3 years in prison. If they can't get enough proof together in that amount of time to charge him then maybe it should be a sign that he should be freed. Otherwise charge him and give him a trial. Period. I will keep you updated on this as more information becomes available.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
He's an unlikely poster boy for the civil rights movement.
Of course defending his civil rights defends all of our civil rights - and that is the principle here.
But it's hard to forget that he would, most likely behead you, or I while calling us infidels.
If he were of another species we'd simply have him put to sleep.
If he wore a swastika he would be much more easily identifiable for what he is, but there's some wiggle room for the bleeding hearts who wish to turn him into a cause celeb.
His mission was to return to America, and kill americans. He is essentially at war with this nation.
He is a prisoner of war, and should be treated as such, which means I guess that as long as his terrorist group exist, and continues to vow our destruction we need to keep him locked up in a P.O.W. camp - and treat him under the rules of the Geneva Convention.
So much for my standing among liberals.
JeromeProphet.
www.jeromeprophet.blogspot.com
If he were of another species we'd simply have him put to sleep.
Maybe, but he is not, he is a human and he is an American Citizen, do not forget that fact.
___________________________________
If he wore a swastika he would be much more easily identifiable for what he is, but there's some wiggle room for the bleeding hearts who wish to turn him into a cause celeb.
Even if he did where a swastika as an American citizen he would be garunteed a trial. That is the buety of our legal system, everyone is garunteed a trial, not just those who fit a certian bill.
_________________________________
His mission was to return to America, and kill americans. He is essentially at war with this nation.
The government has yet to prove this. If they had I would be all for keeping his ass in prison or even giving him the death penalty, but he has not even been charged, let alone given the right to defend himself. Without that right anyone could be arrested for anything with no recourse to protect themselves from wrongful accusations.
___________________________________
He is a prisoner of war, and should be treated as such, which means I guess that as long as his terrorist group exist, and continues to vow our destruction we need to keep him locked up in a P.O.W. camp - and treat him under the rules of the Geneva Convention.
Even if you were to treat him as such, which he should not be as he is an American Citizen who has not been proven to have done anything, he would still be garunteed a trail of some sort. The Geneva Convention Article 5 states that a prisoner of war must be given a Military Tribunal, he has not even recieved this.
Once again I am not saying he should be let go. I am just saying do not destroy our freedoms by not giving him a trial. The standard that that sets is that the President can have anyone arrested without due cause and have them held indefinatly without a trail. That my friend is a dictatorship.
Somehow I agree with everything you say - but still find myself unwilling to allow the administration the option of detaining certain people for long periods before trial.
But yes, he does need a trial. Yet, I don't believe that German POWs were given trials during WWII. They were brought to the U.S., and given jobs of cutting down trees, etc. Many of them said they felt happy that they were out of the thick of battle, and were treated properly during their detention.
But that was another type of war. We had nations at war with one another. There was a war going on - and it was easy to see. There was also a clear end to that war, and when it was over the POWs were returned home.
This war seems vague in many way, and so I myself feel uneasy about locking someone up, and tossing away the key - until some day in the future when terrorism stops.
That day is hardly likely anytime soon, and so it suggest that people can be detained for long periods without trial, and perhaps never released.
That does sound frightening.
JeromeProphet
www.jeromeprophet.blogspot.com
JP said...Somehow I agree with everything you say - but still find myself unwilling to allow the administration the option of detaining certain people for long periods before trial.
I am assuming here that you actually meant to say that you are unwilling to not allow the administration this option.
So were is the line drawn?
You're right that's what I meant.
Not sure where the line is.
But it reminds me of a line on FX's fictional cop series "The Shield".
One character expressed concern over another cop's excessive use of force. The other character responded by saying that in the end people may object to it, but they're willing to look the other way if it means keeping bad guys off the streets, and maybe getting some of their stolen property back.
I suspect that most americans really want a "free" country, yet are willing under certain circumstances to look the other way while those they trust to protect us violate the very laws they are charged to protect - as long as the end result is greater sense of security.
I keep reading,
Those who trade freedom for security will be niether free, or secure, but the basis for any society, free or not is security. Lacking security there can be no freedom.
Post a Comment