Michael Moore thinks Osama Bin Laden deserved a trial

RedskinRat

Finally! A really contentious topic. Yay!

'Vanquish' isn't just the best car in the world, it's what should be done to your enemy.

hooskins

Hey Alvin, you are right. I actually disagreed with your position but since you used bold, caps, red text you have definitely swayed my opinion.

__________________
Vacancy

RedskinRat

'The Base' declared war on us, Dar al islam declared war on Dar al Harb even before that. Timeline?

Alvin Walton

Thanks honey.
Glad to know I converted another tree hugger.

__________________
REDSKINS FAN SINCE 1968

CHARTER MEMEBER OF THE DALLAS SWEEPERS CLUB

CRedskinsRule

Lotus,

Typically your arguments are solid, and I don't really have a stance on Bin Laden either way, but I think you are off base on the exception for citizenship. The Pre-amble states:
Here it is pretty definitive that the Constitution was and is designed to primarily to protect US citizens.

Now in Article 3 you might read :
and use this as saying that it doesn't note citizenship, but Amendment 11, which changes an original part of Article 3 reads:
So the Judicial powers do acknowledge the different citizenships of individuals.

Finally, you may solely be looking at Amendment 5:
but the key here is that as an Amendment to the original Constitution, no state, or citizen of any state, could claim it's right without first acknowledging to be subject to the laws and rules laid down in the Constitution itself. I think it is fairly safe to say that Bin Laden did not acknowledge himself to be subject to the US Constitution, thus he could not seek the protection of the Amendments to that document.

(i am sure this can get argued in excess when it comes to illegal immigrants etc, but I am only speaking to whether a non-citizen not on US soil, nor making any claims to US citizenship and law could somehow claim that we must offer them the protection of our Bill of Rights, and the Constitution they amend)

Lotus

1) The Constitution does not apply to every "asshole" on the planet, as indicated by CRed's post. However, it does apply to crimes committed in the USA. 9/11 happened in the USA. So the Constitution applies.

2) Of course bin Laden did not surrender. He was a fugitive from the law and got shot while resisting arrest. Happens all the time. I shed no tears that this happened. But no here has argued against this. The question on the table, the question that Moore raised, was whether bin Laden deserved a trial if he had been brought in alive. And the Constitution says "yes" to this question.

3) I'm not hugging a tree. I'm defending the US Constitution from those who would prefer to ignore it.

__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.

Lotus

On 9/11/01 we had not declared war on al-Qaeda or on Afghanistan. By American standards, we were not at war. Therefore hiding behind "war" arguments to suspend the Constitution, as was argued above, would not be legally justifiable in terms of prosecuting a crime which happened on 9/11/01.

__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.

Lotus

Excellent thoughtful post CRed. I must disagree with your interpretations, though. My understanding of the passage from Amendment 11 which you produced is that it was designed to speak against the idea that the Constitution can be applied in other countries. We can't apply the Constitution in France. But 9/11 was a crime committed in this country so that clause does not apply.

As for bin Laden's assent to governance by the Constitution, things do not work that way. Otherwise any foreigner could come to the USA, break federal law, and claim "You can't try me because I don't assent to your Constitution." Likewise, when I take one of my trips to India, I am subject to Indian law, including the Indian constitution, regardless of my nationality. For bin Laden, his assent was not required since he committed his crime on US soil.

Bin Laden's crime of 9/11 was committed on USA soil. This means that USA law definitely applied, including Constitutional law.

__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.

SmootSmack

The founding fathers created a nice framework for our country with the drafting of the Constitution. However, time and time again our country's leaders have ignored specific elements within the Constitution...and we're better for it.

__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You

Lotus

I can respect this argument because it recognizes Constitutional provisions rather than completely overlooking them.

But it is a dangerous argument, given that the Constitution protects us from all sorts of possible ugliness.

The Nazis killed many more Americans than bin Laden did. Yet Nazi criminals got trials. Have we become so uncivilized since 1945 that we can no longer live up to our Constitutional ideals of justice by trial?

__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.

hooskins

Definitely a slippery slope when you start selectively applying the principles of the Constitution.

__________________
Vacancy

CRedskinsRule

I look at it more like this: if a violation occurs against US laws, the US certainly has the prerogative to take action in accordance with the Constitution, and if the violation is committed by a US citizen, it has a duty to give that citizen their due process rights. However, if the violation occurs in a military or terrorist action, than the US has the option, as long as it is within international agreements, not to accord non-citizens those same rights. I think that, just as we publicly disavow clandestine acts to kill or topple regimes, you can make the argument that the US acted wrongly here. However, in a point of matter of "reality" there was just no way that the US was going to risk any type of lengthy legal maneuverings to take place with Bin Laden at the center.

It really comes down to (and yea this is great foreign policy) all is fair in love and war. Once Bin Laden took aim at the US, he wrote his own obituary rightly or wrongly

RedskinRat

The ones we hired didn't get trials......