Ron Paul NYT Editorial on Unconstitutional Killing

[chizzle]

I added a poll to the thread.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

What exactly do you think due process means?

 

[teddy12b]

What exactly do you think due process means?

I think the general idea is some sort or trial at a minimum.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I think the general idea is some sort or trial at a minimum.

Due process does not mean nor does it require a trial of some sort.

 

[rambone]

Due process does not mean nor does it require a trial of some sort.

All it requires is a secretive 'death panel' to decide who lives and who dies.
Secret panel can put Americans on kill list' | Reuters

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

All it requires is a secretive 'death panel' to decide who lives and who dies.
Secret panel can put Americans on kill list' | Reuters

OK, how do you define due process?

 

[teddy12b]

Due process does not mean nor does it require a trial of some sort.

Then how you define due process? Is it just at the whim of an elected official? Should they even have to report it?

If there is no trial then it's just going to be decided by politically appointed bureacrats who were never elected. Sounds great to me. Why even bother pretending that we have anything that even resembles the rule of law at that point?

 

[teddy12b]

OK, how do you define due process?

I like the idea of a jury made up of our peers who actually get to decide our fate. Otherwise there isn't much point.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Then how you define due process? Is it just at the whim of an elected official? Should they even have to report it?

If there is no trial then it's just going to be decided by politically appointed bureacrats who were never elected. Sounds great to me. Why even bother pretending that we have anything that even resembles the rule of law at that point?

So are you conceding you don't know what it means?

I like the idea of a jury made up of our peers who actually get to decide our fate. Otherwise there isn't much point.

OK, but that's not what due process means.

 

[teddy12b]

OK, but that's not what due process means.

If a jury of our peers listening to the facts presented by the two parties of a case and making the best informed decision on the fate of the defendent isn't due process then what is? What exactly do you define as due process? What would be your answer to an ideal perfect due process?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

If a jury of our peers listening to the facts presented by the two parties of a case and making the best informed decision on the fate of the defendent isn't due process then what is? What exactly do you define as due process? What would be your answer to an ideal perfect due process?

You described a trial. Not due process.

 

[teddy12b]

You described a trial. Not due process.

Then enlighten me professor. Seriously, it's one thing to keep saying everyone is wrong, but what's right then? Define due process as you see fit please, maybe we'll agree.

 

[bigg cheese]

Then enlighten me professor. Seriously, it's one thing to keep saying everyone is wrong, but what's right then? Define due process as you see fit please, maybe we'll agree.

Best I can find:

A fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious.

Due Process of Law legal definition of Due Process of Law. Due Process of Law synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

I hardly find a blindside by a drone missile to be "notice of proceedings." Neither is having his name published on a hit list.

 

[chizzle]

Best I can find:

A fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious.

Due Process of Law legal definition of Due Process of Law. Due Process of Law synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

I hardly find a blindside by a drone missile to be "notice of proceedings." Neither is having his name published on a hit list.

This line of discussion reminds me of this scene from Anger Management with Adam Sandler and Jack Nicholson:

http://youtu.be/M-GV46SUcWs

 

[Bitter Clinger]

This just proves my point - Ron Paul is NOT the person I want receiving that 3am phone call in the White House.

Muslim terrorists need killing, not an attorney.

 

[chizzle]

This just proves my point - Ron Paul is NOT the person I want receiving that 3am phone call in the White House.

Muslim terrorists need killing, not an attorney.

Would your president have the same policy towards terrorists that were raised Roman Catholic?

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Bitter Clinger]

Would your president have the same policy towards terrorists that were raised Roman Catholic?

Timothy McVeigh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't see Christians crashing airliners into skyscrapers.

BTW - Timothy McVeigh is NOT a Christian.

 

[rambone]

I don't see Christians crashing airliners into skyscrapers.

BTW - Timothy McVeigh is NOT a Christian.

So no trial then?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Best I can find:

A fundamental, constitutional guarantee that all legal proceedings will be fair and that one will be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before the government acts to take away one's life, liberty, or property. Also, a constitutional guarantee that a law shall not be unreasonable, Arbitrary, or capricious.

Due Process of Law legal definition of Due Process of Law. Due Process of Law synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

I hardly find a blindside by a drone missile to be "notice of proceedings." Neither is having his name published on a hit list.

Very good. We're starting on the right path here. We have a definition. Notice that is says nothing about trials.

The questions - were there proper proceedings, did Al Awlaki know of the proceedings, did he have the opportunity to be heard before the government took action, and was the law under which the actions were ordered and taken arbitrary.

1, Were there proper proceedings?

Yes

Contrary to assertions to the contrary, there was no "secret commission". At all times between January 2010 and September 2011 Al awalaki knew or should have known that an order for his capture or death was put out by the United States government. This determination was made based upon credible intelligence gathered by multiple intelligence agiencies from multiple states.

2. Did Al Awlaki know of the proceedings?

Yes

In January 2010 the government announced they would kill or capture Al Awlaki. This was an open air announcement. In April 2010 his father sued the United States trying to have the kill order recinded. In May 2010 his father's case was dismissed.

3. Did he have the opportunity to be heard before the government took action?

Yes

Al Awlaki knew of the determination made agianst him. At any time he could have turned himself in and submitted to the US justice system, facing the allegations against him. Instead he chose to evade American jurisdiction and continue to perpetuate war against the United States.

4. Was the law under which the actions were ordered and taken arbitrary?

No.

The law under which Al Awlaki was passed by Congress as a result of the attacks on 9/11. It authorized action against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks as well as any and all combatants engaged in combat with the United States.

There. Due process.

 

[chizzle]

How about this guy? He's an atheist, so it takes religion completely out of the question:

Ted Kaczynski