Quote:
Quote:
In my opinion, at some point, a person committing treasonous acts becomes an actual enemy of the state, and is no longer to be afforded the rights of citizenship(i.e. due process, right to jury, etc). I would think this determination must be made on a case-by-case basis; I would have a hard time articulating a "bright-line test" to be used in every case.
Right, my thoughts exactly -- doesn't the fact that he has committed treasonous acts make him an enemy of the state, and therefore strip him of his citizenship? I need to Google.
|
That all depends on due process. You just cannot simply strip someones citizenship because you or I don't like thier actions. If that was the case Joe McCarthy and his friends would have done so many times over. The right of due process is fundamental to our justice system to give each and every one of us a fair chance to defend ourselves, no matter how hienous the act we might commit.
Richard Nixon had an enemy of the state list...there was a reason that guy resigend and it wasn't to go home to Key Biscayne.
Quote:
|
Are we being manipulated by the 4th estate??
|
JJ? You are asking that.... lol.... One only has to review the news clips from the fall of 2008 it is abundantly clear that the MSM of both sides has ceased to report the news in any vague sense of unbias and stepped it up a notch to manipulate the proletariat to thier own agdenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Green Light
The trial would, unfortunately, be a formality with the verdict never in doubt.
|
True, however, we would have gone through the process. If we remove one citizens right to due process, we run the risk of another's being trampled on. Our sytem of justice dating back what, a thousand yrs, is based on that one principle.
However, this one individual could lay claim that he was not given a 'trial by a jury of his peers' as his peers are all terrorists.
AM
AM