Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire An open letter to the Attorney General from a real prosecutor

Hardly. I've been 100% consistent.

While it's true that, given the right circumstances, I'd torture someone, I also say that the someone whom I'd torture has a right to a government that protects him from my intended action. I would also rob and steal, given the right circumstances. This, however, is a confession of human frailty (we all have it), not a recommendation as a model for government. It is precisely because of human frailty that we establish governments which operate by the rule of law rather than by the rule of a man, or of several men, or even of the majority of men.

Although I'm not an attorney, IMO this concept is incorrect. You are confusing US Constitutional constraints on the rights of the US government with respect to US citizens with its rights to wage war to defend the Nation.

The terrorists seized as illegal combatants on foreign battlefields have no rights under the US Constitution - despite the malevolent inventions of the Obama-Holder nomenklatura - and certainly none under international conventions. They are not combatants representing any signatory nation.

Summary execution under military law and ROEs would be legal. It is only our American sense of 'fair play - an oxymoron in any military context - that confers on these beings (can't quite see obsessed murderers of civilians as humans) any so-called rights.

If I follow the reasoning you propose correctly, we are in a better position in future, to avoid the need to interrogate illegal non-combatants, rendering military justice forthwith, where captured. Probably a good idea to redefine ROEs more realistically.

Maybe he has a right to have some government protect him, but it's not ours when he's trying to kill us.

More important than being a nation of laws is being a nation of justice based on laws.

BTW I can't believe you put Isaac on ignore. That says more about you than it does about him.

Seems like we've had a dance before on a different topic and you were just as hung up there as you are in this one.

Best wishes

I resisted placing Isaac on ignore for years, but when he proved beyond doubt that all he was capable of was mud slinging I turn him off. I gave him another chance recently, but he went right back to that pattern so off he went again. I don't mind arguing an issue till kingdom come, but I will not suffer the consistently uncouth. Life's too short to give folks like that the time of day.

That's not even close to analogous, and I suspect you already know that. It's an enormous stretch trying to make your point and, it does not work.


No such claim was made and the comment was TIC, and I suspect you already know that. It's an enormous stretch trying to make your point and, it does not work.

And with that, I'm likely done with this thread.

As usual on the mark, Bush and everyone in his cabinet associated with this should be charged first with violating the Constitution and leading America down into a black hole-torture as a policy of the government is clearly un-American, as were all the other lies and shenanigans associated with the last 8 years, it strikes me as cowardly to attempt to prosecute this from the bottom up

you strike me as an idiot....so that figures.


"as usual" on the mark? you mean as usual for the eleven days you've been reading Hawk's posts?

Up yours jackass, this is a forum and every user has a right to their opinion-even a dumbass like yourself

It takes you a while to respond to those calling you out, sport.

Are you having to wait until grandmom steps away from your homework study desk?

That goes for you too, scum-sucking lawyer

What's the difference between a Catfish and a lawyer?
One is a scum sucking bottom dweller, and the other is a fish.

ZeN has shown himself again and again, to be one of those folks that are not worthy of conducting discourse with.
Lefty weenies are beneath contempt, and are too stupid to hold a conversation.
on the one hand, ZeN says , but then he also feels that there SHOULD be controls on speech HE does not like.

Well first of all I am simply defending myself from rude small minded [bleep] (like yourself, you pathetic hypocrite) who do not know how to participate in a forum discussion with views other than their own, nowhere does it say in the membership rules that the only acceptable opinion is that of neocons, or supporters of the bush regieme, or for law enforcement, etc,
I stand by everything I have said, I am not a lefty, I am a Libertarian, I support Ron Paul and I challenge you to show a post where I have expressed leftists views, freakin' moron

aye, theres the rub Zen.

You are not mentally equipped to engage in forum discussions, no matter the views involved.

To me, 'lefty' is not only a term to describe a person that leans to the left politically, but also as a pejorative. Capiche?

I will say though, you are damn near as loony as most of the other Libertarians around these parts.

He can defend himself, but I'd only respond that what you dislike about zen is precisely that he is politically a good bit to the right of yourself, not the left. Just for one example, between the two of you, which one has the least trust in consolidated central government power?

I would also add that the bad mouthing wasn't started by him. He merely responded in kind.

zen/dpml doesn't have a philosophy...he parrots stuff.....and if you think there's anything right wing about him you're not paying attention. It's all straight out of DU, with a touch of prison planet. this is that punk dpml or whatever his name was that Rick bounced a while back.....new name, same stupid.

How could a stupid person be so consistently right? Seems unlikely.

you're not reading carefully.....unless you think the idea that police shouldn't violate citizen's rights is some brilliant insight on the punk's part.