A DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF TERRORISTS
By Christopher G. Adamo
The foregoing is a quote from “A Declaration on the Rights of Man,” adopted on August 26, 1789, by the National Assembly of France.
Unfortunately, the fledgling French government recognized no higher authority in its operation than the collective opinions of its members. Hence, barely four years after it established this high sounding rhetoric as national policy, it commenced the infamous “Reign of Terror,” which eventually took the lives of between twenty and forty thousand individuals in a social and political purge which, at that time, was unparalleled in human history.
The bitter lesson of that tragic period was that the inherent weaknesses in human nature are such that “rights,” must be understood as granted by God, not government. For when assumed to be the product of governmental benevolence, they can just as easily be revoked as such.
Nor can they be instituted by any official edict where such a statement of guarantees and protections does not belong. The resultant chaos of a misbegotten endeavor of this nature will ultimately jeopardize the rights of all. Such is the grim future facing the U.S.A. in its prosecution of the war on terror, if this week’s abominable and flagrantly unconstitutional decision by the United States Supreme Court is allowed to stand.
As in previous decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in recent years, consideration of inconvenient U.S. constitutional limitations on the Court’s jurisdiction were merely sidestepped. “International law” was, once again, invoked as reason to thwart a historically legitimate procedure by which to deal with enemy combatants of a particularly despicable nature.
The collective wisdom of human history dictates that those who wage war as an outrgrowth of their own religious zeal, and unrestrained by any representative nation-state, cannot simply be rendered harmless by treaty upon the “cessation of hostilities.” Nor can their “superiors” be held accountable for any breaches of such.
Moreover, it is hardly “rocket science” that the detainees at Guantanamo hold no allegiance to any nation that would enter into such a treaty with the United States. So, why is it that five members of the U.S. Supreme Court believe they can simply confer the rights of American citizens on these monsters?
The Associated Press very appropriately described the decision as the Supreme Court’s “rebuke to the [Bush] administration and its aggressive anti-terror policies.” In summary, the AP accuratetly (and exuberantly) characterized the nation’s high Court as being no more immune to complete politicization, at the ultimate expense of the country, than are Liberal Democrats in Congress and their cohorts in the Liberal Leftist media.
Clearly Justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the Supreme Court's majority opinion, and those members of the Court for whom he spoke, betray a willingness to meddle with national affairs, even to the point of undermining the war on terror -- an inclination that bears no connection whatsoever with constitutional law.
Since no national interest or constitutional purpose is served by the decision, some consideration should be given to the motivations and intent of the activist members of the Court. Are Stevens and his Liberal colleagues, instead, more interested in affecting the upcoming mid-term congressional elections, with the hope that a sea change in the U.S. Senate might ensure the appointment of more of their kind to the Court?
The despicable, albeit absolutely predictable, concurring diatribe from other standard Liberal mouthpieces bears a similarity of motivation and intent that is impossible to ignore. U.S. House of Representatives Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Democrat - California) exulted:
It should be noted here that the “all” to whom she referred includes Islamist fanatics, captured on the field of battle, as they attempted to kill American soldiers. Perhaps, Pelosi would likewise deem it appropriate for the American troops to read them their “Miranda rights” before firing back.
Pelosi then tipped her hand by portraying the Supreme Court decision as “a rebuke of the Bush administration’s detainee policies and a reminder of our responsibility to protect both the American people and our constitutional rights.”
Invariably, the possibility of political advantage eclipses any concern by Pelosi and her kind at the possibility that the murderous Islamists might now enjoy the benefit of legal loopholes to regain their “freedom” to aggressively inflict mayhem on the American people.
The terrorists being held at Guantanamo already believe that they are uniquely endowed with the “divine right” to slaughter American infidels. The Liberal majority on the U.S. Supreme Court, along with their co-conspirators on Capitol Hill and in the media, are doing their level best to allow the terrorists to reclaim their ability to do so.
The Constitution of the United States of America
Legal Issues, Lawyers, & America's Judiciary
Islamism & Jihadism -- The Threat of Radical Islam
Page Three Page Two Page One
Middle East -- Arabs, Arab States,
& Their Middle Eastern Neighbors
War & Peace in the Real World
Page Two Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
Counterterrorism & U.S. National Security
U.S. National Security Strategy
Constitutionalism: The First Essential Ingredient
of Modern Constitutional Democracy
Dictatorship: The Opposite of Constitutionalism
Representative Democracy: The Second Essential Ingredient
of Modern Constitutional Democracy
Direct Democracy & Representative Democracy
Political Culture & Modern Constitutional Democracy
Modern Constitutional Democracy:
Summary & Conclusion
Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer who lives in southeastern Wyoming and works in the field of industrial instrumentation.
He is actively involved in Wyoming's political process, serving as a delegate to successive Wyoming State Republican Conventions
and as a member of the Wyoming State Republican Central Committee. He has assisted Republican candidates for local and state
legislatures and for the United States Congress. His articles, which appear regularly in The Progressive Conservative, U.S.A.,
and on a number of other websites, reflect a major concern with the damage being done to Conservatism and Conservative causes by
the Liberal Leftist faction in the Republican Party as well as by the much larger and more powerful Liberal Leftist faction in the
Democratic Party. During the early and middle 1990s, Adamo was Editor of the Wyoming Christian Coalition's official news organ,
The Wyoming Christian.
Africa: Black Africa *
Africa: North Africa *
American Government 1
LINKS TO PARTICULAR ISSUES & SUBJECT MATTER CATEGORIES
TREATED IN THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, U.S.A.:
American Government 2 * American Government 3 * American Government 4
American Government 5 * American Politics * Anglosphere * Arabs
Arms Control & WMD * Aztlan Separatists * Big Government
Black Africa * Bureaucracy * Canada * China * Civil Liberties * Communism
Congress, U.S. * Conservative Groups * Conservative vs. Liberal
Constitutional Law * Counterterrorism * Criminal Justice * Disloyalty * Economy
Education * Elections, U.S. * Eminent Domain * Energy & Environment
English-Speaking World * Ethnicity & Race * Europe * Europe: Jews
Family Values * Far East * Fiscal Policy, U.S. * Foreign Aid, U.S. * France
Hispanic Separatism * Hispanic Treason * Human Health * Immigration
Infrastructure, U.S. * Intelligence, U.S. * Iran * Iraq * Islamic North Africa
Islamic Threat * Islamism * Israeli vs. Arabs * Jews & Anti-Semitism
Jihad & Jihadism * Jihad Manifesto I * Jihad Manifesto II * Judges, U.S. Federal
Judicial Appointments * Judiciary, American * Latin America * Latino Separatism
Latino Treason * Lebanon * Leftists/Liberals * Legal Issues
Local Government, U.S. * Marriage & Family * Media Political Bias
Middle East: Arabs * Middle East: Iran * Middle East: Iraq * Middle East: Israel
Middle East: Lebanon * Middle East: Syria * Middle East: Tunisia
Middle East: Turkey * Militant Islam * Military Defense * Military Justice
Military Weaponry * Modern Welfare State * Morality & Decency
National Identity * National Security * Natural Resources * News Media Bias
North Africa * Patriot Act, USA * Patriotism * Political Culture * Political Ideologies
Political Parties * Political Philosophy * Politics, American * Presidency, U.S.
Private Property * Property Rights * Public Assistance * Radical Islam
Religion & America * Rogue States & WMD * Russia * Science & Ethics
Sedition & Treason * Senate, U.S. * Social Welfare Policy * South Africa
State Government, U.S. * Subsaharan Africa * Subversion * Syria * Terrorism 1
Terrorism 2 * Treason & Sedition * Tunisia * Turkey * Ukraine
UnAmerican Activity * UN & Its Agencies * USA Patriot Act * U.S. Foreign Aid
U.S. Infrastructure * U.S. Intelligence * U.S. Senate * War & Peace
Welfare Policy * WMD & Arms Control
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor