Lindsey Graham: Prosecute Antiwar Protesters Who Impede War Effort

NewsMax.com ^ | 3/10/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

[kattracks]

Antiwar protesters who act as human shields or who try to blockade U.S. military facilities should be prosecuted, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said Monday.

"I think if you go to Iraq to act as a human shield you're impeding the U.S. war effort," Graham told "Radio Factor" host Bill O'Reilly. "I've written to Attorney General Ashcroft (to ask), would they, in fact, be in violation of the Constitution or federal laws that prevent aiding a hostile nation to the United States in a time of war."

Criminal sanctions may also be applied to peace protesters who stay stateside, Graham said.

"If you do something domestically, if you're at an arsenal or a defense contractor designing to impede the flow of technology in support of the war, you may be in violation of those same statutes," he explained.

The South Carolina Republican was reacting to a report in Monday's USA Today, which detailed plans by the San Francisco-based peace group Direct Action to Stop the War.

In St. Louis, for instance, antiwar protesters intend to block the entrance to a Boeing factory that makes satellite-guided bombs for the military, the paper said.

Peace protesters also plan to blockade the gates at Kentucky's Bluegrass Army Depot, which supplies small munitions to the military.

In Detroit antiwar activists are trying to organize 72-hours of disruptions at government installations after the war starts.

Some of the plans by U.S. peace groups mirror actions already underway by their European brethren. Dutch protesters, for instance, have already chained themselves to the gate of one U.S. military facility in the Netherlands. In Ireland, demonstrators recently damaged a U.S. Navy plane at Shannon International Airport.

Graham warned that if similar attacks take place in the U.S., the peaceniks may be held criminally liable.

"I think we need to let folks know that the Constitution.... ensures your ability to express yourself and protest and dissent," he told O'Reilly. "But it also has an obligation placed upon you as an American, not to basically undermine America when it's engaged in hostilities."

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

Bush Administration
Saddam Hussein/Iraq

[nopardons]

Then you don't REALLY mean that we should just " ignore them ", as you first stated, do you. LOL

[cicero's_son]

No...as I said in my reply to Old Cracker, I was really referring to the "human shields." To ignore them is to allow them to make the "ultimate sacrifice" they so crave.

[nopardons]

Many of the " human shield s" have already left; gone home. They aren't of any consequence at all. The others, however, might be; unfortunately.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

People are entitled to their opinions, and I'd hate to see freedom loving conservatives start endorsing government censorship of protests. Remember the Law of Unintended Consequences...how will we feel when anti-abortion protestors, for instance, are termed "terrorists" and imprisoned by some future Democrat attorney general?

Did I say anything about government censorship of protests? I was talking about us. You and me, and people that share similar beliefs, a love for this great land and a deep respect for our warriors. Here's a cut&paste of my response to Consort on the same subject:

Those of us who say we support our military's efforts need to do more than just pay lip service. You'll do as you please, but I will not be silent and inactive when other citizens are risking their life's blood for me. Once this war heats up, hammering on a keyboard may need to be replaced by hammering the face of a protester.

[noutopia]

Can we get the Hollywood group to go to Iraq next week?

[cicero's_son]

The post of mine you quoted wasn't even directed at you. It was a response to another poster about a completely different issue.

You seem rather intent on picking a fight, and I must say I'm mystified as to why.

[cicero's_son]

Oops. My mistake. I misread your post and thought it had been posted by someone else. I apologize.

[cicero's_son]

It would be nice, wouldn't it?

I'm not a big one for government subsidies, but I'd gladly spend some of my tax dollars on buying one way tickets to Baghdad for Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, and some of their buddies...

[nopardons]

Anyone can and often does, respond to a psot directed to another. Frankly, it is YOU who seem mystified about the topic at hand; not just a normal kind of FR post.

Since you directed the reply to me, which another answered and I concur with what he wriote to you, stop whinging about it.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

You seem rather intent on picking a fight, and I must say I'm mystified as to why.

I'm as gentle as a lamb, but please accept my apology for any confusion I may have caused.

[JoJo Gunn]

If that ever happens again, if ever with my own eyes see someone spit on one of my Protectors, I will do my best to kill it.

[cicero's_son]

No apologies necessary from you, sir. As I said, I thought your post was from another person on this thread who appeared to be a bit fixated on me.

My only point to you--aside from suggesting that the legal system is too good for those who want to be "human shields"--is that we conservatives had better be prepared to vigorously defend others peoples' right to peaceful protest. Otherwise, we're going to be the ones left holding the bag long after this war is over.

Regards.

[johnb838]

If you block our military from doing its job,you should be locked away.

Without the benefit of Habeas Corpus. You can't be getting out to go out and disrupt again. This isn't Free Republic we're talking about where you can get zotted and come back under another name. I say, you impede the war effort, you stay locked up for the duration. These... bags of feces have already made war certain by encouraging the not-so-intelligent Saddam that they can help him skate again.

[stryker]

You are exactly right. We do not want to repeat the errors of the sixties and create another underground anti-war movement that resorts to violent demonstration such as the Weathermen. Let them protest, and if they do something illegal, pick them up and handle them as peaceably as if CNN were filming every second of the arrest. This war could be a long affair if we have to nation build, and the last thing we want is another 1968 Chicago when we had tanks and machine gun nests protecting a national party convention. Many protesters want to be arrested and violently attacked as it proves the point they want to make about the administration they protest against.

[O.C. - Old Cracker]

I'll defend the rights of these anti-war protesters up to the point where we are at war. Once our warriors have been declared by the president to be officially engaged in combat, then all bets are off. At that point, a night stick across their temple is the best prescription.

[Happy2BMe]

What Every FReeper Needs to Know - The Enemy Within - (A.N.S.W.E.R.) Plans Mass Sabotage

[Tamzee]

Thanks :-)

[Happy2BMe]

America's Finest - The SpearTip of Freedom. (Photos of our deploying troops - share yours)

If you love America, then click HERE - NOW!

[Happy2BMe]

ping