Republican lawmakers issued a statement Saturday urging
President Barack Obama to treat Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the suspect in the Boston
Marathon bombings, as an "enemy combatant."
Historically, the term “enemy combatant” referred to members
of the armed forces of one Country with which another Country is at war.
In the United States the phrase "enemy combatant"
was used after the September 11 attacks by the George W. Bush administration to
include an alleged member of al Qaeda or the Taliban; and, was expanded to
include all of those individuals that the “U.S.” believes it is able to hold
under the laws of war until the war comes to an end (which could be a long time
off in the case of the so-called "war on terror").
So, should 19 year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (who is a
naturalized United States citizen, who is alleged to have committed a crime
within the United States) be treated as an enemy combatant and questioned by
interrogators without any right to due process? Or should the government read
Tsarnaev his Miranda rights, notifying him of his right to remain silent as a
criminal defendant, among other prerogatives? And, PERHAPS MORE IMPORTANTLY,
SHOULD ANY UNITED STATES CITIZEN, WHO IS ALLEGED TO HAVE COMMITTED A CRIME ON
THE SOIL OF THE UNITED STATES, EVER BE DENIED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND BE
TREATED AS AN “ENEMY COMBATANT?
The very core of American history, law and culture condemns
the ideas of punishment before trial, denial of due process and secret
government by fiat. The U.S. Supreme Court has held countless times that all
persons confined by the government are presumed innocent until proven guilty,
must be told the reasons for their confinement and are entitled to challenge
those reasons promptly in a court.
The constitutional guarantee of due process of law, found in
the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, prohibits all
levels of government from arbitrarily or unfairly depriving individuals of
their basic constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property. The due
process clause of the Fifth Amendment, ratified in 1791, asserts that no person
shall "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law." The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in
1868, declares,"[N]or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty,
or property, without due process of law" (§ 1).
The concept of due process originated in English Common Law.
The rule that individuals shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property
without notice and an opportunity to defend themselves predates written
constitutions and was widely accepted in England and, was codified by the Magna
Charta, an agreement signed in 1215.
Another Constitutional question which arises is why should a
US citizen, who is alleged to have committed a crime on US soil, not be treated
under the Constitution as a traitor who has committed Treason?
The Constitution defines treason as specific acts, namely
"levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies,
giving them Aid and Comfort. It was noted by lawyer William J. Olson in an
Amicus curiae in the case of Hedges v. Obama that by defining treason in the
U.S. Constitution and placing it in Article III "the founders intended the
power to be checked by the judiciary, ruling out trial by military commission.
Further Madison noted, the Treason Clause also was designed to limit the power
of the federal government to punish its citizens for “adhering to [the United
States’s] enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is alleged to have committed a horrendous
and brutal act which shocks the conscience; however, should he, OR ANY OTHER
AMERICAN CITIZEN, then be declared an enemy combatant and denied rights
followed under English common law for centuries and followed here in the United
States for over 200 years? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
Abandoning legal protections and provisions fundamental to
the Constitution and which protect each of us from unwarranted Governmental
control and powers is a slippery slope. What is some future President deems
speaking out against the Government or the President deems a U.S. citizen and
enemy combatant? (Ask those in Germany if such things cannot happen.)
Simply because the alleged actions of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are
so heinous, does not mean we should abandon fundamental Constitutional rights
and liberties. Republican lawmakers should watch what they wish for!
Remember, if the Government can deem any one Citizen of the United States an "enemy combatant" and take away their Constitutional rights and liberties, then the Government may take them away from any of us for any reason that the Government may deem appropriate (WITH NO RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW).
Remember, if the Government can deem any one Citizen of the United States an "enemy combatant" and take away their Constitutional rights and liberties, then the Government may take them away from any of us for any reason that the Government may deem appropriate (WITH NO RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW).
Benjamin Franklin summed it up best:
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
It is shocking that Republicans love the "enemy combatant" position but preach their undying faith in the Constitution and our Founding Fathers. Just a bunch of war mongers.
ReplyDeleteCheney and Bush should be tried as War Criminals.
ReplyDeleteI hate the loss of liberties we are watching day after day.
I want our America back, just like those Tea Partiers who talk about founding fathers.
Don't be lame. He is a terrorist and should fry. Torture the bastard.
ReplyDeleteJoe from the Republic of Texas where we don't take this shit.
Your polluted gun-toting disgusting state is an embarrassment to the rest of America. Please do us all a favor and succeed from the union, rename yourselves Stupidstan cease all communication will us silly 'book learners' from he north
DeleteJoe the plumber , i mean from texas: How can you be certain he is a terrorist? I think college educated PHD judges and a full court case should be had before just killing someone. It is the American way! Joe, are you anti-American?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSo Joe, you have tried and convicted him. What do we need judges or judicial process when we have you? You probably have the guns to execute him as well.
ReplyDeletePlease stay in Texas.
Angele
Lindsey Graham and his Republican friends just need enemas so they can get all their crappy positions on civil liberties and gun control out of the way and do something good for America.
ReplyDeleteBart
Love the "Jesus was an Enemy Combatant." How do those god-fearing Republicans feel about that?
ReplyDeleteStupid me, rules don't apply to them, just the poor and disadvantaged.
Very interesting point made. I wonder how all of these strict constitutionalist who wave their second amendment rights FOR GUNS, will show their ignorance and hypocrisy in wanting to stray from the constitution for this case? I see no difference in the horrible acts of the Boston Bombing brothers than any of the recent killing gun psychos AT THE schools and movie cinema.
ReplyDeleteThey are all the same, disturbed young minds that get their hands on destructive weapons too easy to get and then kill innocent people. The younger brother accused of being a Boston bomber is an American Citizen and just because there may be a religious ideology attached to the older brothers sickness, it should not change the way this is prosecuted. He is a US citizens and should go through the same courts as do every other murderer.
On this, I think we need to look at how extreme political movements provide a framework for the unbalanced. These movements give at-risk individuals exactly the wrong kind of feedback. Intentionally or not, the movements use these people as grist for their mill.
ReplyDeleteSort of like guns. Yeah guns and religion for the unbalanced, not good.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should be treated just as Adam Lanza. Both Americans both did unthinkable crimes. Any Muslim affiliation should not determine a different court process. Terror is terror. Sick is sick.
I’m sure some would like this to adjudicated in federal court, primarily for death penalty purposes, however, this case should not be jammed forward as a wartime terrror case. We should resist the temptation to circumvent our perfectly fine regular judicial processes.
ReplyDeleteIf we do then we should amend the second amendment now because terrorist within the country shooting up kids in Sandy Hook are happening much more frequently than muslim extremist. Shouldn't we change the 2nd amendment with all of the mass shootings in mind?
We are a nation of many religions. We should tread very carefully not to group all Muslims as anti-American.
The legal question has been raised of whether the federal government has the power to impose the death penalty for acts committed in states that have abolished the death penalty (like Massachusettes) even if the federal crimes in question allow for it.
ReplyDeleteI "betcha" Sara Palin, Bachmann and all those who want to keep gay marriage a state issue, will see this differently. At least stay consistent with
your ideology.
Would being motivated by religion or a political agenda be sufficient to declare them “enemy combatants”?
ReplyDeleteIf so, does that mean the person who, for religious reasons, attempts to kill the abortion doctor or, for political reasons, tries to assassinate a politician could be treated as an enemy combatant?
One day Senate Republicans consider the US Constitution all powerful on the gun issue and two days later they throw it under the bus to extract information from a U.S. citizen. Our government is a broken system.
ReplyDeleteSenator Graham: What happend to that oath to protect and defend the constitution dealio?
ReplyDeleteI guess when it's other citizens rights it's like "what constitution."
The man is an American citizen. Regardless of the crime he may have committed, he deserves all of the protections of the US Constitution.
ReplyDeleteWhy are republicans so nervous that our courts good enough for the colorado theater shooter but not good enough for a 19 year old US citizen with Muslim links?
If it were atheist brothers blowing up a catholic church because they were raped by priests and therefor have grown to hate catholicism, which court would that be?
In my opinion he lost that right when he blew up a little boy and two women, and maimed hundreds for life. He has no rights. Sarah
ReplyDeleteSara: So with your logic then anyone killing innocent people in the US should lose their rights? Then you agree all these mass killings since columbine should have different courts and rights than other US criminals? What would be left for our judicial system?
ReplyDeleteDecember 11, 2012. On Tuesday, 22-year-old Jacob Tyler Roberts killed 2 people and himself with a stolen rifle in Clackamas Town Center, Oregon.
September 27, 2012. Five were shot to death by 36-year-old Andrew Engeldinger at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, MN. Three others were wounded.
August 5, 2012. Six Sikh temple members were killed when 40-year-old US Army veteran Wade Michael Page opened fire in a gurdwara in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Four others were injured, and Page killed himself.
July 20, 2012. During the midnight premiere of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, CO, 24-year-old James Holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58. Holmes was arrested outside the theater.
May 29, 2012. Ian Stawicki opened fire on Cafe Racer Espresso in Seattle, WA, killing 5 and himself after a citywide manhunt.
April 6, 2012. Jake England, 19, and Alvin Watts, 32, shot 5 black men in Tulsa, Oklahoma, in racially motivated shooting spree. Three died.
April 2, 2012. A former student, 43-year-old One L. Goh killed 7 people at Oikos University, a Korean Christian college in Oakland, CA. The shooting was the sixth-deadliest school massacre in the US and the deadliest attack on a school since the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre.
February 27, 2012. Three students were killed by Thomas “TJ” Lane, another student, in a rampage at Chardon High School in Chardon, OH. Three others were injured.
October 14, 2011. Eight people died in a shooting at Salon Meritage hair salon in Seal Beach, CA. The gunman, 41-year-old Scott Evans Dekraai, killed six women and two men dead, while just one woman survived. It was Orange County’s deadliest mass killing.
September 6, 2011. Eduardo Sencion, 32, entered an IHOP restaurant in Carson City, NV and shot 12 people. Five died, including three National Guard members.
January 8, 2011. Former Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-AZ) was shot in the head when 22-year-old Jared Loughner opened fire on an event she was holding at a Safeway market in Tucson, AZ. Six people died, including Arizona District Court Chief Judge John Roll, one of Giffords’ staffers, and a 9-year-old girl. 19 total were shot. Loughner has been sentenced to seven life terms plus 140 years, without parole.
August 3, 2010. Omar S. Thornton, 34, gunned down Hartford Beer Distributor in Manchester, CT after getting caught stealing beer. Nine were killed, including Thornton, and two were injured.
November 5, 2009. Forty-three people were shot by Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan at the Fort Hood army base in Texas. Hasan reportedly yelled “Allahu Akbar!” before opening fire, killing 13 and wounding 29 others.
April 3, 2009. Jiverly Wong, 41, opened fire at an immigration center in Binghamton, New York before committing suicide. He killed 13 people and wounded 4.
CONTINUED...
continued-March 29, 2009. Eight people died in a shooting at the Pinelake Health and Rehab nursing home in Carthage, NC. The gunman, 45-year-old Robert Stewart, was targeting his estranged wife who worked at the home and survived. Stewart was sentenced to life in prison.
ReplyDeleteFebruary 14, 2008. Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University, killing 6 and wounding 21. The gunman shot and killed himself before police arrived. It was the fifth-deadliest university shooting in US history.
February 7, 2008. Six people died and two were injured in a shooting spree at the City Hall in Kirkwood, Missouri. The gunman, Charles Lee Thornton, opened fire during a public meeting after being denied construction contracts he believed he deserved. Thornton was killed by police.
December 5, 2007. A 19-year-old boy, Robert Hawkins, shot up a department store in the Westroads Mall in Omaha, NE. Hawkins killed 9 people and wounded 4 before killing himself. The semi-automatic rifle he used was stolen from his stepfather’s house.
April 16, 2007. Virginia Tech became the site of the deadliest school shooting in US history when a student, Seung-Hui Choi, gunned down 56 people. Thirty-two people died in the massacre.
February 12, 2007. In Salt Lake City’s Trolley Square Mall, 5 people were shot to death and 4 others were wounded by 18-year-old gunman Sulejman Talović. One of the victims was a 16-year-old boy.
October 2, 2006. An Amish schoolhouse in Lancaster, PA was gunned down by 32-year-old Charles Carl Roberts, Roberts separated the boys from the girls, binding and shooting the girls. 5 young girls died, while 6 were injured. Roberts committed suicide afterward.
March 25, 2006. Seven died and 2 were injured by 28-year-old Kyle Aaron Huff in a shooting spree through Capitol Hill in Seattle, WA. The massacre was the worst killing in Seattle since 1983.
March 21, 2005. Teenager Jeffrey Weise killed his grandfather and his grandfather’s girlfriend before opening fire on Red Lake Senior High School, killing 9 people on campus and injuring 5. Weise killed himself.
March 12, 2005. A Living Church of God meeting was gunned down by 44-year-old church member Terry Michael Ratzmann at a Sheraton hotel in Brookfield, WI. Ratzmann was thought to have had religious motivations, and killed himself after executing the pastor, the pastor’s 16-year-old son, and 7 others. Four were wounded.
July 8, 2003. Doug Williams, a Lockheed Martin employee, shot up his plant in Meridian, MS in a racially-motivated rampage. He shot 14 people, most of them African American, and killed 7 before killing himself.
December 26, 2000. Edgewater Technology employee Michael “Mucko” McDermott shot and killed seven of his coworkers at the office in Wakefield, MA. McDermott claimed he had “traveled back in time and killed Hitler and the last 6 Nazis.” He was sentenced to 7 consecutive life sentences.
September 15, 1999. Larry Gene Ashbrook opened fire on a Christian rock concert and teen prayer rally at Wedgewood Baptist Church in Fort Worth, TX. He killed 7 people and wounded 7 others, almost all teenagers. Ashbrook committed suicide.
July 29, 1999. Mark Orrin Barton, 44, murdered his wife and two children with a hammer before shooting up two Atlanta day trading firms. Barton, a day trader, was believed to be motivated by huge monetary losses. He killed 12 including his family and injured 13 before killing himself.
April 20, 1999. Columbine. They killed 13 people and wounded 21 others. They killed themselves after the massacre.
He may be a citizen but also an enemy combatant and that is the current law. The original constitution has had many amendments over the yrs. When the constitution was written our ancestors could not percieve what is happening today. That is why amendments are necessary to deal with the problems of today. Sara
ReplyDeleteSara: So you want to proceed directly to punishment without a trial? I question your Americanism. Franklin W.
ReplyDeleteThe constitution is a mere convenience for these baggers. Throw it aside when it gets in the way, fight tooth and nail when it suits.
ReplyDeleteThe same folks who were such staunch supporters of one constitutional right just last weak, who swore that we could tolerate no possible "assault in the Constitution", not even to protect the lives of our children, are now the very ones who advocate throwing the entire document out the window, just as they did in 2002.
ReplyDeleteAnd water-boarding -which IS torture and HASN'T produced one bit of credible and actionable intelligence EVER- that ALSO violated every one of the "values" they claim to hold so dear and to be such an essential part of the American fabric they SAY they are trying to preserve is an "admirable tool" to preserve that document. Nevermind that that same document EXPRESSLY forbids it.
Apparently, the ONLY part of the Constitution they consider worth noting, never mind preserving, is the Second Amendment.
Second amendment advocates are so fond of saying "Without the Second Amendment you can't protect the REST of the Constitution.
I have a question for them. If we're not going to even try to abide by anything in the REST of the Constitution anyway, what the heck good is even having a Second Amendment in the first place? Exactly WHAT are we "protecting"? It certainly isn't the US Constitution.
Apparently just your guns are what should be protected. Oh and YOUR definition of marriage.
Lindsey Graham, You are the NRA's right hand man. Stop pretending to care about our safety. You have done nothing to help protect the citizens of the US from a Terrorist attack such as this.
ReplyDeleteWhere did they get the Gun Powder and why can't the US trace where it came from? Well, you guessed it, the NRA has paid off Congress to make it illegal to trace where the gun powder came from. What you think? Yup! It is true!
Graham and McCain can stop pretending to care about our safety. Their relationship with the NRA says it all. They have sold their souls. Shameful old bastards.
The same old reptiles who just days ago voted against a bill that might help prevent some of the 30,000 gun deaths a year because it might infringe on the 2nd amendment, now want to suspend due process because of 4 deaths. What a load of steaming horse shit the GOP drops out of its ass.
ReplyDeleteOne nice thing about the uproar from Repub Senators and House members about declaring the suspect an enemy combatant is that they have no standing on matter. This will all be handled and decisions made by the executive branch in consultation with state and local officials. Tough luck Repubs.
ReplyDeleteThe GOP doesn't want our constitution, they want a church state that will let them make the rules.
ReplyDeleteThis is an un-American piece of shit blog. America is a Christian nation first and foremost. Does "One nation under God" mean anything to you idiot.
ReplyDeleteKind of odd that the founders neglected to mention god or christianity once in the Constitution since, according to you, this is a nation "under god" and a christian one at that. Its even odder that they would go on to write the establishment and free exercise clauses of the first amendment, since this would seem to let all kinds of other crazy religions in without any govt interference. Seems like a kind of crazy way to establish a christian nation. But I guess you would know better than I, since I am apparently amongst the 'idiots' who lack your brilliant understanding of Constitutional law.
DeleteAnd while your at it, please explain to us 'idiots' why it is un-American to question the actions of our government. I was under the impression that we lived in a democracy where the governments actions are always answerable to the people.
DeleteYou of course realize that the phrase "one nation under God" was added and was not part of the original pledge.
DeleteIt was added because the government smartened up because the people of our Christian nation demanded it. DID YOU NOTICE IT SAYS GOD AND NOT ALLAH!!!!!!! This is land of the free, brave and proud Americans, NOT I S L A M I C S, who want to come to our free nation and kill us!!!! This website should be reported to the FBI as an anti-american propaganda machine. Let this stand as evidence that I do not indorse this anti-american danger zone. A website named suspicious packaging? Is this a threat of bombs? I'm going to report this to a hotline.
DeleteAmerica is not a Christian nation. It is a country of countless religions. Do you not remember the words, "Separation of Church and State?" No people should be persecuted for their religious beliefs, including MUSLIMS.
ReplyDeleteThere are a higher percentage of christian priests who rape boys than there are Muslims who blow up people. The group of Islamic extremist who commit anti-American crimes is a tiny percentage. 99.9 % of Muslims condemn such violent acts and have no affiliation with the extremists.
Wow. Lliberal morons wanting to take guns and conservative morons wanting to take rights to due at the end of the day all you morons have no respect for the constitution.
ReplyDeleteJust what do you suggest Henry Einstein? "Conservative morons wanting to take rights to due" I agree with you.
Delete"Liberal morons wanting to take guns" Advocates for gun control and background checks are not disrespecting the constitution. There are very few people who are asking for a total gun ban.
Background checks to attempt to stop guns getting in the wrong hands is hardly disrespecting the constitution. The 2nd Amendment said nothing about about mass killing machines and high capacity magazines. They could not have imagined such weapons in 1776. Your logic would approve of every citizen in America being able to own a nuclear weapons if they want.
You do not see how putting restrictions on the type of weapons and ammo is very different than taking away guns?
To operate a motor vehicle requires registration. The DMV makes one pass tests. The DMV is easily able to suspend driver's privileges if there is a warrant in the system. If a driver's plate tags expire they are pulled over and sited. If drivers do not have proof of insurance their drivers privileges are taken away. If one is drunk while driving a car which can kill people accidentally, the driver is charged and drivers privileges are suspended.
Guns ownership requires nothing! How many drunk domestic abuse murders are a result of drinking and then picking up a gun? If you are a stand up lawful citizen, what possible problem could you have with making it harder and safer for anyone to to own guns? Wouldn't that help everyone except the bad guys? There is nothing "moronic" about this. It does not infringe on owning guns. It is just a security measure added in a world which is so different than it was in 1776. Anyone who CANNOT understand this, IS A MORON. J. Daniels
Even the worst criminals have the constitutional right to a trial and should be read their Miranda rights unless there is an objective imminent danger to society. The FBI has said the imminent danger has passed. The bomber should be read his rights.
ReplyDeleteCarol: Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his dead brother were obviously fraudulent American citizens who were brought or came here to be planted as seeds of terror. This takes away any American rights in my opinion. They were not true Americans. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev should be hung in front of the DC capitol just as Saddam Hussein was executed my way of hanging. The news reports are beginning to say the younger brother was the master mind and it was not his older brother forcing him into this.
DeleteThe FBI also missed stopping these two terrorists so their report saying imminent danger has passed is not a fact. It is only a guess. There may be many more involved ready to kill more innocent Americans. Muslims hate our Christianity. Walsh, is that is your real name, does not sound Islamic, so why are you wanting to give rights to American hating Muslims? Maybe
you are actually middle Eastern and pushing rights for terrorists. No American should question this . It is simple Tsarnaev
is a muslim extremist and should be killed to bring peace to the victims families. God bless you and may prayers help you see what is right.
Mrs Robert Lynch Sonoma, CA
God bless you, too, Mrs. Lynch. I hope He reads you your rights for your un-Christian attitude. This issue here, however, is not about religion. It's about constitutional rights and the rule of law. The bomber is by law a citizen of the United States no matter how he came to be one and he is protected by that law no matter how much it may disappoint us.
DeleteThe law allows for interrogation without reading rights ONLY in the case of imminent danger. Imminent means "likely to happen without delay". Not reading him his rights could result in evidence being thrown out. Think of all those held as enemy combatants who haven't been brought to trial.
" un-Christian attitude," How dare you! What is un-christian about wanting to protect anti- christian muslim extremists who want to kill christians?
ReplyDeleteAre you a christian?
The danger is very imminent! Carol, i pray god leads you to some truth.
Christians don't kill! Muslims do. Are you a muslim?
It's an un-Christian attitude because Christ said 'love your enemies" and 'blessed are the peacemakers".
ReplyDeleteI was brought up a Christian. I'm not a Muslim.
You can't say Christians don't kill, however.
Muslims and Christians sadly have killed each other throughout history. Christians have also had religious wars with other Christians just as Sunnis and Shiites have killed each other.
Zero Hedge had a great article today which agrees with what you wrote. As they said:
ReplyDeleteThe debate over what actions actually constitute “terrorism,” we believe, will become one of the defining ideological battles of our era. Terrorism is not a word often used by common people to describe aberrant behaviors or dastardly deeds; however, it is used by governments around the world to label and marginalize political enemies. That is to say, it is the government that normally decides who is a “terrorist” and who is a mere “criminal,” the assertion being that one is clearly far worse than the other. The more naïve subsections of our society will accept unConstitutional methods against the “radicalized” out of fear and conditioning, without realizing that the machinations of bureaucracy being used against those they hate could just as easily be used against them in the future.