Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 74

Thread: Lindsey Graham: Obama Should Hold Bombing Suspect as ‘Enemy Combatant’

Hybrid View

  1. -1
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,138
    vCash:
    7423
    Thanks / No Thanks

    Lindsey Graham: Obama Should Hold Bombing Suspect as ‘Enemy Combatant’

    With the manhunt for Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev still underway, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Friday called for him to be held as an "enemy combatant"- a term President Barack Obama abandoned shortly after taking office in 2009.

    The "enemy combatant" designation was a major part of the Bush administration's approach to dealing with terrorism suspects; while Obama did away with the specific term, he maintained the right to detain people who provided "substantial" support to Al-Qaeda or the Taliban.
    http://news.yahoo.com/lindsey-graham...14624844.htmle


    Here we go.......





    "Politics is the Art of Looking for Trouble, Finding it Everywhere, Diagnosing it Incorrectly, and Applying the Wrong Remedies"
    Quote Quote  

  2. -2
    flynryan15's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2009
    Posts:
    12,573
    vCash:
    222
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Cam Wake 912013 Dolphins LogoMike Wallace 11
    He is a enemy combatant and he should be held as such which gives us more latitude to interrogate him. Oh never mind you are more concerned with his rights!
    The above post is not subject to penalty under the TOS I declare the Hayden Fox defense. " It is impossible for the staff to know my context therefore I cannot be penalized"

    Quote Quote  

  3. -3
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,138
    vCash:
    7423
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by flynryan15 View Post
    He is a enemy combatant and he should be held as such which gives us more latitude to interrogate him. Oh never mind you are more concerned with his rights!
    No....the rule of law.....and the truth.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -4
    finomenal's Avatar
    Perennial All-Pro

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2009
    Posts:
    2,815
    vCash:
    3415
    Loc:
    Fort Lauderdale, FL
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Interesting
    Quote Quote  

  5. -5
    flynryan15's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2009
    Posts:
    12,573
    vCash:
    222
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Cam Wake 912013 Dolphins LogoMike Wallace 11
    Enemy Combatant is a rule of law and can be used it never should have been abandon. Sorry not trying to attack you I'm just seeing red watching this.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -6
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,138
    vCash:
    7423
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by flynryan15 View Post
    Enemy Combatant is a rule of law and can be used it never should have been abandon. Sorry not trying to attack you I'm just seeing red watching this.
    Sorry but the Bill of Rights and the Constitution should "in theory" override all attempts to infringe and curtail those rights according to our founders...."GIVEN TO US FROM MOTHERF"N GOD". Seriously...hasn't this story been filled with so much mis-information than ever?? I for one hope that he surrenders so we could get the full story. The rule of law and the basic principles of Habaes Corpus and the Bill of Rights is set up just for that.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -7
    flynryan15's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2009
    Posts:
    12,573
    vCash:
    222
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Cam Wake 912013 Dolphins LogoMike Wallace 11
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphins9954 View Post
    Sorry but the Bill of Rights and the Constitution should "in theory" override all attempts to infringe and curtail those rights according to our founders...."GIVEN TO US FROM MOTHERF"N GOD". Seriously...hasn't this story been filled with so much mis-information than ever?? I for one hope that he surrenders so we could get the full story. The rule of law and the basic principles of Habaes Corpus and the Bill of Rights is set up just for that.
    So then Johnny Taliban the white Muslim Al Queda/Tailiban convert that lead a prison uprising I'm Afghanistan that lead to the death of a Green Beret and a CIA Operative does the Constitution protect him? These idiots made a decision to bring war to the streets of America they made the decision they should get no protection.

    ---------- Post added at 07:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry_Bagpipe View Post
    So who arbitrarily decides who is acting on jihad and who is not?
    The terrorist when they decide to become one
    Quote Quote  

  8. -8
    Harry_Bagpipe's Avatar
    Archibald Meatpants

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    4,998
    vCash:
    7055
    Loc:
    Fort lauderdale
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Snakes!Dolphins HomerDolphin
    Quote Originally Posted by flynryan15 View Post

    The terrorist when they decide to become one
    Political answer with no substantive value
    Quote Quote  

  9. -9
    flynryan15's Avatar
    FinHeaven VIP

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jan 2009
    Posts:
    12,573
    vCash:
    222
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Cam Wake 912013 Dolphins LogoMike Wallace 11
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry_Bagpipe View Post
    Political answer with no substantive value
    What value do you want? They made a decision to wage war on innocent civilians. Why are you so concerned with protecting them? Maybe you should join a mission to Afghanistan and try and rehabilitate them?
    Quote Quote  

  10. -10
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Online
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,138
    vCash:
    7423
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by flynryan15 View Post
    So then Johnny Taliban the white Muslim Al Queda/Tailiban convert that lead a prison uprising I'm Afghanistan that lead to the death of a Green Beret and a CIA Operative does the Constitution protect him? These idiots made a decision to bring war to the streets of America they made the decision they should get no protection.

    ---------- Post added at 07:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------



    The terrorist when they decide to become one
    5th amendment.....

    No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.[1]

    6th amendment....

    In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence

    8th amendment....

    Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted

    Habeas Corpus...

    A writ of Habeas corpus (English pronunciation: /ˌheɪbiəs ˈkɔrpəs/; Latin: "may you have the body") is a writ (legal action) that requires a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court.[1][2] The principle of Habeas Corpus ensures that a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention—that is, detention lacking sufficient cause or evidence. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to the prisoner's aid. This right originated in the English legal system, and is now available in many nations. It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action.

    Now forgive me if I'm being sterotypical when I ask this. Are you a supporter of the 2nd amendment??? If so then why do you fail in supporting the rest of the amendments???
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. No Miranda rights for Boston Bombing suspect
    By DisturbedShifty in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-25-2013, 02:37 PM
  2. Lindsey Graham Quote on Demographics
    By trojanma in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-06-2012, 03:45 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-22-2009, 12:01 AM
  4. Obama admin. to end use of term 'enemy combatant'
    By Dolphan7 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-15-2009, 01:10 AM
  5. Pentagon formally charges 15 year old 'enemy combatant'
    By spydertl79 in forum Political | War Forum
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 04-28-2007, 08:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •