Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What are the Obama rules for killing American Citizens
vanity

Posted on 10/01/2011 2:06:09 PM PDT by airedale

The American government at the direction of the President targeted and killed an American citizen who was an unlawful combatant and a terrorist. This was a good thing in this case, but it also opened the barn door for the President deciding to kill an American citizen acting as prosecutor, judge, jury and in effect executioner without any judicial review or due process (especially interesting considering the President and his administrations instance on treating other terrorists as common criminals and giving them full due process and civilian trials== until that blew up and the Congress told them they couldn't bring them in to the US from Gitmo for a civilian trial)

Without rules and the force of the Constitution and law this power that Obama has used is open to all kinds of abuse as time goes on. Consider what the administration, Democratic members of Congress and the media have called members of the Tea Party: Terrorists, UN-American, Hostage Takers, Racists, Fascist and lots of other things. They have accused the Tea Party of violence and other illegal activities (all untrue). The same applies to people like Rush Limbaugh. What's to stop Obama from taking action against them? It might not be actually killing them rather interning them like Woodrow Wilson and FDR did. For you Democrats who read this remember you won't always hold the Presidency and the Republican who holds the office will now have apparently unlimited power to kill American citizens without due process.

The Obama administration has refused to give it's legal reasoning and justification on how this action complies with US law and the US Constitution. It's also notable that the MSM that would be screaming if a George Bush had done this and they'd even become more incensed if he refused to release the legal justification for the actions, but this is a Democrat and a god to the MSM so they'll blindly accept it.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: alawlaki; assassination; obama; vanity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-96 last
To: ken in texas

I’d agree with you that he’s a traitor, but the US Constitution has a specific definition of that crime and it has to be shown in court per the Constitution. It’s the only crime defined in the Constitution. The President doesn’t get to declare someone a traitor and kill them no matter how much they might deserve it.


51 posted on 10/01/2011 3:54:52 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege
>> American citizens who fight for the enemy in wartime<<

The laws of war right?

52 posted on 10/01/2011 3:54:52 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ken in texas

I’d agree with you that he’s a traitor, but the US Constitution has a specific definition of that crime and it has to be shown in court per the Constitution. It’s the only crime defined in the Constitution. The President doesn’t get to declare someone a traitor and kill them no matter how much they might deserve it.

You got proof he voluntarily relinquished his US Citizenship. There are specific rules and laws the cover that http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html


53 posted on 10/01/2011 3:57:12 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: BfloGuy

That’s the part that has me very worried when you have someone in the Presidency like Obama, Nixon, Wilson, LBJ, or FDR. I probably missed a couple who really abused power but it makes my point. Even if Obama weren’t a threat to our liberties the next President or the one after that one might be.

With the bankruptcy and federal seizure of GM and Chrysler and the subsequent trashing of the bankruptcy laws to rape the senior debit holders in favor of the unions who support him and his party it’s already been shown that this man doesn’t feel bound by laws or morality. There are other examples which I’m sure we’re all aware of.


54 posted on 10/01/2011 4:02:02 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Cyber Liberty

He’s fighting a war against the USA , no trial necessary. He was an enemy. Don’t give me crap about his “rights”. He gave those up fighting against the country. Glad they are dead.


55 posted on 10/01/2011 4:03:20 PM PDT by bfree (The revolution is coming - OBAMI IS THE ENEMY OF FREEDOM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: airedale
Could this action be a precursor of eliminating the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List?
56 posted on 10/01/2011 4:04:17 PM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
>>I don’t consider them as Americans so it doesn’t bother me.<<

First they came for the Jews, but I wasn’t a Jew.

57 posted on 10/01/2011 4:05:01 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Historically you’re right but that’s not spelled out in the Constitution. Our laws allow for capital punishment for treason. The one thing your missing is that the execution requires a trial and due process per our constitution. It wouldn’t be required if you want to toss out the constitution, but there are real problems if you do that. You might be next because The One doesn’t like the name Jeremiah


58 posted on 10/01/2011 4:05:21 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Historically you’re right but that’s not spelled out in the Constitution. Our laws allow for capital punishment for treason. The one thing your missing is that the execution requires a trial and due process per our constitution. It wouldn’t be required if you want to toss out the constitution, but there are real problems if you do that. You might be next because The One doesn’t like the name Jeremiah. If you want to toss out the rule of law for the rule of men anything becomes legal or illegal if those in power want it to be.


59 posted on 10/01/2011 4:06:16 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: airedale; Rockingham
If a US citizen joins the military whether "official with unirorms" or not, as an enemy, then the Constitutional protections no long apply. As said above by Rockingham:

One cannot travel overseas to a theater of military operations, consort with terrorists and enemies of the US, and openly advocate and facilitate terrorism against the US — but then expect that American citizenship offers some sort of legal protection against attack.

60 posted on 10/01/2011 4:12:14 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: matt1234

Possibly: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_780.html

“Although a person’s enlistment in the armed forces of a foreign country may not constitute a violation of U.S. law, it could subject him or her to Section 349(a)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act [8 U.S.C. 1481(a)(3)] which provides for loss of U.S. nationality if an American voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship enters or serves in foreign armed forces engaged in hostilities against the United States or serves in the armed forces of any foreign country as a commissioned or non-commissioned officer. “

If you read 8 USC 1481.(a)(3) http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001481——000-.html There is a key word in there and it’s “state” An organization no matter how big isn’t the same legally as a “state”

In order for Subsection 7 to apply a trial and due process would be required along with a verdict and sentence including the loss of citizenship would be required. “(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384 of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.” One difference is that the decision is based upon the preponderance of the evidence not a “reasonable doubt standard.


61 posted on 10/01/2011 4:14:11 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: muddler
My opinion. If you turn your back on your own country and plan to do it harm, you do it at your own risk.
62 posted on 10/01/2011 4:14:55 PM PDT by ANGGAPO (Layte Gulf Beach Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ANGGAPO

Ditto !


63 posted on 10/01/2011 4:15:55 PM PDT by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: airedale
we can assume that he renounced his US citizenship, because Yemen does not recognize dual citizenship.
64 posted on 10/01/2011 4:17:00 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: NoControllingLegalAuthority
Well said.
65 posted on 10/01/2011 4:17:48 PM PDT by ANGGAPO (Layte Gulf Beach Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC
Agreed.

Don't hang out with the enemy and you won't be targeted.

66 posted on 10/01/2011 5:14:42 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (When the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn (Pr.29:2))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: airedale

Any human being who was doing what this scumwaffle was doing would be a fair target under the rules of war, but you want to call this a FREEDOM BREECH or something just because he is a citizen???

His right to live ended when he took up arms against his country and encouraged others to do so.


67 posted on 10/01/2011 5:37:39 PM PDT by RaceBannon (Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps is to the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

“Nuts!”


68 posted on 10/01/2011 5:48:48 PM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (If you always tell the truth, you won't have to remember what you said.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Eye of Unk

Same rules as killing 3000+ Americans on 9/11. It was ‘’ constitutional’’ don’t ya know.


69 posted on 10/01/2011 6:00:12 PM PDT by Waco (Nominate Palin or forget 2012 you lost)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Chode

But we do sort of and our law has to be followed to renounce or lose your citizenship. He also had Yemani citizenship since birth just like the US citizenship. They wouldn’t recognize his US citizenship because of his father being a citizen of Yemen. Their law says he’s a citizen. Either it has to be stripped by the courts or he has to go in to the embassy in a foreign country and renounce it following procedures.


70 posted on 10/01/2011 6:21:31 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

You’re missing the point. We both agree that he’s a scumwaffle and deserved to be taken off the playing field. My problem is the precedence it sets for the President to decide to kill an American citizen without due process. Things like this start out with a horrible and then gradually or not so gradually move down the scale to lesser and lesser offenses. That’s the nature of bureaucracies and power. That’s why we’re supposed to be a nation of laws not of men. If we don’t have a clear understanding of the legal underpinnings of the decision and the constitutional justification it’s a slippery slope.

Can the President decide to kill an American without due process for speaking in what the President feels is against the national interest? In the past I’d say no, but we no longer can say that with certainty. That’s why we need to see the legal reasoning and the constitutional justification.


71 posted on 10/01/2011 6:31:05 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege
What is all the fuss about killing Al-Awlaki?

The fuss is by the same crazies who where mad the CIA/NSI was listening to phone calls to U.S. "citizens" whose phone numbers were found on the cell phones and computers of terrorists taken from combat zones or raids on safe houses in this country or other locations.

If their phone #'s are on those devices I HOPE no DEMAND that they are listened to! c
72 posted on 10/01/2011 7:09:54 PM PDT by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BwanaNdege
What is all the fuss about killing Al-Awlaki?

The fuss is by the same crazies who where mad the CIA/NSI was listening to phone calls to U.S. "citizens" whose phone numbers were found on the cell phones and computers of terrorists taken from combat zones or raids on safe houses in this country or other locations.

If their phone #'s are on those devices I HOPE no DEMAND that they are listened to! c
73 posted on 10/01/2011 7:10:36 PM PDT by JSteff ((((It was ALL about SCOTUS. Most forget about that and HAVE DOOMED us for a generation or more.))))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: airedale

There are no rules. Omarxist executes any american he wants any where and any time.

Like Hitler’s nationalist socialist policies.


74 posted on 10/01/2011 7:46:48 PM PDT by FlyingEagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: airedale

He went back to Yemen with his parents when y oung and someone said that he came to college here on a student visa?

If so, since Yemen doesn’t have duel citizenship, would that no mean that he gave up his U.S. citizenship at some point?

But hey, don’t expect today’s reporters to do any research...One outfit writes the story and the rest just regurgitate it.


75 posted on 10/01/2011 7:53:20 PM PDT by maine-iac7 (ALWAYS WATCH THE OTHER HAND)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Venturer
Probably the only thing OPbama has done right since he was elected.

that's probably because he had nothing to do with it. He probably found out about it the same time we did. ahahah

This was a CIA op. If they had had to wait for his okay, once they had the target in sight, hey would never have gotten the shot.

obama can't MAKE a decision. He hemmed and hawed for days during the bin L. take down. He kept saying he'd have to consult with Valerie (his commie handler) and she kept saying no.

The Big Boys finally took over - they got valerie our of the WH, grabbed him off the gold course - literally - sat him the corner of the situation room, still in his golf outfit and told him to watch.

AFter it was done, they handed him his speech that allowed him to take the glory - which soothed his narcissist feathers.

But one wonders - do they have the goods on him, did they let him know it and is that why they were able to, essentially, 'commit' a coup.

And then came what many have wondered was a retaliation - the unprecedented take down of whole Seals Team.

That may have sealed the BIG BOYS determination to make decisions when they need making and inform the CICINO after the fact.

This time, no glory speech to take credit as this take down has his sycophants twisted into pretzels.

Below: photo in the situation room during the Bin L take down. Does the little boy cringing in the corner - blocked into the corner - look like he's in charge of anything?

ahaha - and he couldn't get out of the room if he tried.

76 posted on 10/01/2011 8:18:37 PM PDT by maine-iac7 (ALWAYS WATCH THE OTHER HAND)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7

No it doesn’t. He or his parents would have had to have gone into the US Embassy in Yemen and gone through the steps of renouncing American citizenship. What it means when a country doesn’t recognize dual citizenship is simply it doesn’t recognize the other countries citizenship. It does nothing to how the other country treats it. After he got the Yemini passport he came back to the US and got a US passport as an American citizen based upon birth. If he or his parents had renounced his citizenship in an embassy he’d never (or at least with out a screw up) gotten and American passport.


77 posted on 10/01/2011 10:30:33 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: FlyingEagle

That’s the concern of what this could lead to. Today Al Alwaki and tomorrow Rush, Glenn Beck or someone else that’s causing problems for the administration. This decision is potentially a slippery slope unless very well grounded and backed by the constitution and the courts.


78 posted on 10/01/2011 10:33:33 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: FlyingEagle

That’s the concern of what this could lead to. Today Al Alwaki and tomorrow Rush, Glenn Beck or someone else like you or I that’s causing problems for the administration. This decision is potentially a slippery slope unless very well grounded and backed by the constitution and the courts.


79 posted on 10/01/2011 10:33:54 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: airedale

NO NO NO
The point is:

HE WAS ACTIVELY PLOTTING TO KILL AMERICANS AND HE WAS CALLING ON OTHERS TO DO SO AND HE WAS DOING IT WITH A SWORN ENEMY AND HE WAS WITH THEM WHEN HE WAS KILLED

IT WAS AN ACT OF WAR!!

THAT’S WHAT THE POINT IS!


80 posted on 10/02/2011 12:14:42 AM PDT by RaceBannon (Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps is to the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

I agree with what you say about his activities. I have no use for the guy. But in this war there are no defined battlefields; they represent no state unless some how legally Ummah is a state; the enemy wears no uniform or identification badges which creates some legal problems. They’ve never signed the Geneva Accords nor follow them. They are by definition unlawful combatants the equivalent of pirates under the law but out courts have given them the rights of lawful combatants (don’t agree with them but that’s a different story).

But based upon this precedent as President of the United States that’s what I say you’re doing so I have you whacked. That’s the standard now. The President does a finding, signs the classified document with no judicial review and he now has the right to kill any American citizen he wants. Not only that but I can kill you any where in the world including in the United States. Essentially the President now gets to be prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner band put out a kill order on an American citizen. What are the limits and controls? The first one may be a perfect choice but each time it gets easier to put someone on the kill list and the standard slips for what justification you need. That’s precisely why the founding fathers defined treason and the standards required to find someone guilty in the Constitution.

This all from an administration that wants to treat them as criminals and try them in civilian courts. Remember due process as required by the Constitution is for good guys and bad guys as well.


81 posted on 10/02/2011 6:25:53 AM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: airedale
fter he got the Yemini passport he came back to the US and got a US passport as an American citizen based upon birth

for which he later got charged with fraud

82 posted on 10/02/2011 6:39:53 AM PDT by maine-iac7 (ALWAYS WATCH THE OTHER HAND)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: airedale

Whacked my butt, your own comment said that the battlefields are not clearly defined, they SURE ARE!

Where the enemy is? THAT’S a battlefield!


83 posted on 10/02/2011 11:48:47 AM PDT by RaceBannon (Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps is to the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Can the President authorize the killing of a Muslim at a hotel here in the US because the President decided he’s connected to Al Qaeda but isn’t involved in an actual attack on the US? If not why not? If he can what are the limits? Is it limited to only Muslims or can he decide that RaceBannon is a threat to the US and order RaceBannon’s killing as a danger to the US. This all done on the basis of Presidential finding with no judicial review just the decision of 1 man? Without knowing the limits of the power and the legal reasoning the second is just as likely as the first.


84 posted on 10/02/2011 12:47:34 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: maine-iac7

And the charge was dropped and the warrant withdrawn per the Fox show the day he returned to the US. I don’t know enough about the passports from Yemen which he used to get his Social Security Card as a Yemeni citizen to know if it has the birth place on it. I’d guess it does. That would mean that either he committed fraud in Yemen or they have rules that allow people to enter a different birth place.


85 posted on 10/02/2011 12:57:19 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: airedale

is it more dangerous to kill someone here or arrest them?

Is it more dangerous to kill someone OVER THERE or arrest them?

USE YOUR BRAIN HOUSING GROUP AND NOT YOUR RON PAUL SPONSORED MUSH BOWL!


86 posted on 10/02/2011 5:27:50 PM PDT by RaceBannon (Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps is to the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

I have since learned that under US law, if one does those things, then US citizenship is forfeited.


87 posted on 10/02/2011 9:45:51 PM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Rockingham

Thank you for the update. As it should be.


88 posted on 10/03/2011 7:42:18 AM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: airedale
On a visceral level, I'm OK with the killing, but the rules need to be defined.

Now that Obama has opened this can of worms, he needs to clearly dilineate his reasoning, legal arguments, and rules on this sort of action.

He needs to put out his "Obama doctrine" on killing US citizens, assassinations on foreign soil, drone attacks, and extra judicial executions.

The GOP needs to push him hard for this. Plus, it will really make liberals squirm when policies on all those things comes under the "Obama doctrine."

89 posted on 10/03/2011 7:48:51 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Great tagline.


90 posted on 10/03/2011 7:50:14 AM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Not the issue about how dangerous it is to arrest the person. Can the President authorize the killing of a US citizen in the US without due process? That door is now open. Let’s pick a different bad guy rather than a Jahdi. How about a US citizen in the US or anywhere in the world who is the leadership of MS13. That’s as violent a international gang as you can find anywhere and involved in all kinds of nasty stuff. They’ve even been tied to Al Qaeda smuggling Al Qaeda sleeper agents into the US among other things. As a normal police action going out with the sole purpose of killing him would be flat out illegal, but the new Obama doctrine (what ever it is since we don’t know the legal reasoning behind it and this administration is so honest, consistent and transparent) would allow the President to put out a kill order on the guy no matter where he was with no effort to arrest him because the President has determined that it would be too difficult to arrest him. It would be for a senior member of MS13


91 posted on 10/03/2011 6:46:41 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: airedale

You keep building up a strawman argument to try and prove your false case

This clown had foreign tuition waivers, he wasn’t even a citizen to start

second, he was NOT IN THE US

THIRD: HE WAS WITH THE ENEMY when he was killed

All issues your false argument, based on RON PAUL thinking, and that is why it fails and why you are dangerous to my freedom


92 posted on 10/03/2011 7:31:57 PM PDT by RaceBannon (Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps is to the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

He was a citizen. He was born here. My strawman as you called it was also a citizen. MS13 besides being a gang has been accused of aiding Al Qaeda which potentially moves him into enemy territory, but they are still a threat to the US.

Give me a break about Ron Paul. I’m hardly an isolationist. What I’m worried about is what can now come out of that barn now that Obama has left the door wide open. Look what he did with Libya. It wasn’t a war it was a kinetic military action which has resulted in a lot of terrorists getting manpads (man-portable anti-aircraft weapons) in the thousands. Very advanced ones too. It was a war and he went to war without Congressional approval unlike George Bush who did get Congressional approval before he took action.

You keep focusing on killing Alawki I’m concerned with the precedent. No matter how good or bad an action is in the present you have to look down the road and try to see what the potential for mischief or good an act has. The Constitution was created to protect us the citizens from the government and not thinking about actions taken by the President and or Congress and how it affects our fundamental freedoms even to take out a bad guy is folly.

Take a look what Wilson did to people who didn’t agree with him. That was the action of a Progressive who thought government knew best. He formed the American Protective League which worked with the FBI to silence opposition to his policies. They were pretty darn violent. Then there was his Sedition Act of 1918. Can you imagine where we’d be if those things hadn’t been quashed. Like Wilson Obama is a Progressive Democrat with the idea that government knows best and the constitution means very little.


93 posted on 10/03/2011 9:23:51 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: airedale
The Constitution was created to protect us the citizens from the government and not thinking about actions taken by the President and or Congress and how it affects our fundamental freedoms even to take out a bad guy is folly.

In this respect, it's important to note how the Bush/Cheney administration labelled their policies concerning treatment, interrogation and imprisonment of terrorists. They are specifically identified as pertaining only to "non-citizens".

94 posted on 10/03/2011 9:43:56 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance On Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: airedale

And you think his so called citizenship trumps the fact he was with the enemy, actively planning on killing YOU, and that makes all the difference!

My gowd, I hope and pray you are never elected to public office, every one will die waiting for you to dispense justice


95 posted on 10/04/2011 4:22:05 AM PDT by RaceBannon (Ron Paul is to the Constitution what Fred Phelps is to the Bible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon

Due Process is an important part of our freedoms. Without it you wind up with the justice of the French Revolution, Stalin or Mao


96 posted on 10/06/2011 9:24:40 PM PDT by airedale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-96 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson