Skip to main content

Yes the Constitution applies to terrorists…illegal immigrants, and legal citizens of all stripes. It may be a hard thing for conservatives who say they believe in the Constitution to swallow…but either you believe in those ideals or you don’t.

Actually it is kind of backwards to say the Constitution applies to me, you or whoever. The document is designed to protect our freedom by imposing law on those who wield political power. The Constitution doesn’t give us our rights, it protects those rights by restraining government officials…so the rules of the Constitution actually applies to the government. To protect liberty by imposing law, in the form of objective and clear rules, on government officials.


"The Constitution is a document that created the federal government, and in so doing, specified powers granted to and denied that entity. It does not apply to a person or group of people, but rather to the government itself. In saying above that the Constitution applies to terrorists, truck drivers, etc., the idea is conveyed that the Constitution applies to all people who have any dealings with the federal government."


So the Constitution does not apply only to citizens of the United States.


"It seems that protectionist collectivists treat this document like a two-year-old treats his favorite toy – unwilling to share, and incorrectly believing that it is his and his alone. This fallacy has become so propagated throughout the country’s general political mindset that a barbaric jingoism has resulted, leading people to automatically support the denial of constitutional protections of freedom for anybody who is a “terrorist.”


But who is a terrorist? Insurgents fighting against our military in Iraq and Afghanistan?


"Things hit closer to home when the suspected terrorists have white skin. Take, for example, the Missouri Information Analysis Center report which labeled as terrorists supporters of Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin, Bob Barr, and anybody sporting paraphernalia associated with the Constitution Party, Campaign for Liberty, or the Libertarian Party.

The absurdity continues – the government has also considered defenders of the Constitution, home-schoolers, peaceful protestors, and a host of patriotic organizations and individuals as terrorists. Do these “domestic rightwing terrorists” not merit constitutional safeguards of their liberty?

Whether the person be a cotton picker, an “insurgent,” or anybody else, the federal government is bound by the constraints of the Constitution, and in attempting to administer legal punishment to another person, must give due process and protect other basic human rights – rights which the Declaration of Independence makes clear are given by the Creator to every individual.

The constitutional restraints are not specific to an individual who happens to be a citizen, thus (allegedly) preventing the federal government from denying them their rights, but rather are shackles of self-restraint placed around the appendages of the government itself, regardless of who the government deals with. Under the Constitution, all are recognized as enjoying basic rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; the government must follow an established process if it wishes to deny these rights to any individual, whatever his or her nationality.

Americans must resist the tendency to be so selfish with our supposed freedoms. We either believe that our rights came from our Creator – and thus exist for all His children – or we don’t. We either believe that the federal government has power to deal as it pleases with any non-citizen, or we don’t. And we either view so-called “terrorists” as human beings entitled, insofar as is possible, to due process when dealing with our government, or we don’t."



The Constitution Applies to Terrorists

**************************

The Constitution. Every Issue, Every time. No Exceptions, No Excuses.

 

"When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty."---Thomas Jefferson

 

"That's what governments are for... get in a man's way."---Mal Reynolds Capt. of Serenity, "Firefly-Class" spaceship

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by longawaiting:
So many answers to so few questions. Point being, if you can't personally define a terrorist then what's your point?



The point is pretty clear...The Constitution is a document that grants specific powers and denys others to the government. It applies to the government itself, not to a person or group of people. And those constitutional restraints of the US Government are not only just for those who happen to be citizens...but anyone who comes in contact with the US Government.

Why? Because rights come from our Creator...or humanity...depending on your perspective. And if it is self-evident that all people have these rights then the US Government is bound by the Constitution to give due process whoever it deals with.

But I'm just repeating what was originally posted...did you read or just skim?
Yes, the constitution applies to terrorists. Article 1, Section 8 to be specific:

The Congress shall have the power

10. To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations:

IAW, to set up courts seperate from those for US citizens and punish these offences outside the borders of the US.

As to the rights of POWs before the US court. In 1946, a German-American in a US POW camp demanded the right to be heard in court. The court ruled in his favor. After the hearing, the judges stated that he had been heard. Now, they told him go back to the camp and shut up.
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
As to the rights of POWs before the US court. In 1946, a German-American in a US POW camp demanded the right to be heard in court. The court ruled in his favor. After the hearing, the judges stated that he had been heard. Now, they told him go back to the camp and shut up.


Well that's nice...but we have no POWs today.
quote:
Originally posted by Renegade Nation:
quote:
Originally posted by elinterventor01:
As to the rights of POWs before the US court. In 1946, a German-American in a US POW camp demanded the right to be heard in court. The court ruled in his favor. After the hearing, the judges stated that he had been heard. Now, they told him go back to the camp and shut up.


Well that's nice...but we have no POWs today.


Agreed, I made that point for those who consider the terrorists legal combatants and due the same rights as POWs. Terrorists caught overseas under arms, or in the US, if not citizens, are illegal combatants. Illegal combatants have fewer rights, although they are to be treated humanely until their execution or other disposition. BY the rules of land warfare, illegal combatants, after verification of their status by a competent authority, may be executed.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×