<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Thursday-Friday talk radio update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/2009/11/15/thursday-friday-talk-radio-update/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/2009/11/15/thursday-friday-talk-radio-update/</link>
	<description>"Our aim, to swat liars and leeches, hypocrites &#38; humbugs, demagogs &#38; dastards"               -- The Yellow Jacket -- Moravian Falls, N.C., 1919</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:45:59 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/2009/11/15/thursday-friday-talk-radio-update/comment-page-1/#comment-329</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:18:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/?p=272#comment-329</guid>
		<description>So, guys, since when does the Constitution limit the right of a fair trial to U.S. citizens? The obligation to give those suspected of crimes a fair trial is an obligation the Constitution imposes on the government, not a right that it grants to citizens and citizens only.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, guys, since when does the Constitution limit the right of a fair trial to U.S. citizens? The obligation to give those suspected of crimes a fair trial is an obligation the Constitution imposes on the government, not a right that it grants to citizens and citizens only.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Coobs</title>
		<link>http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/2009/11/15/thursday-friday-talk-radio-update/comment-page-1/#comment-328</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Coobs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/?p=272#comment-328</guid>
		<description>David, you&#039;re deliberately blurring the lines - 

These terrorists are not US Citizens, and they have no rights here. 

It&#039;s purely political.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David, you&#8217;re deliberately blurring the lines &#8211; </p>
<p>These terrorists are not US Citizens, and they have no rights here. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s purely political.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: frank</title>
		<link>http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/2009/11/15/thursday-friday-talk-radio-update/comment-page-1/#comment-327</link>
		<dc:creator>frank</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:28:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/?p=272#comment-327</guid>
		<description>The Left has used the cowards line a lot lately, even though a new CNN poll shows that two-thirds of Americans think it is a mistake to try these guys in a civilian court in NYC. So do you believe that two-thirds of Americans are cowards?

Or are they just people who have legitimate questions about the wisdom of this move? Like why are terrorists getting the constitutional protections of U.S. citizens? These guys will get to confront their accusers, ask for changes of venues, complain that they weren’t told about their Miranda rights, and so on. 

So what if their attorneys are clever and some of these guys are acquitted?  Will they be released? I’ve heard a number of administration officials like Eric Holder, as well as administration allies, say something like, “Don’t worry. If any of these guys are released, they’ll be quickly rearrested and put back in jail.”

So essentially this is a show trial, not a real exercise of justice. These defendants will be in jail forever no matter what happens because, politically, the Obama administration knows they can’t allow these guys to go free. The chief argument for trying these guys in a civilian court seems to be showing the world that we believe in the “rule of law.” But then the administration assures everyone that these guys won’t go free – an assurance that people around the world are certainly aware of.

Isn’t there something wrong with this picture? 

Maybe the cowards are the Obama administration officials – with an eye on the polls -- who are assuring Americans that they won’t be releasing any of the bad guys even if the courts order them to do so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Left has used the cowards line a lot lately, even though a new CNN poll shows that two-thirds of Americans think it is a mistake to try these guys in a civilian court in NYC. So do you believe that two-thirds of Americans are cowards?</p>
<p>Or are they just people who have legitimate questions about the wisdom of this move? Like why are terrorists getting the constitutional protections of U.S. citizens? These guys will get to confront their accusers, ask for changes of venues, complain that they weren’t told about their Miranda rights, and so on. </p>
<p>So what if their attorneys are clever and some of these guys are acquitted?  Will they be released? I’ve heard a number of administration officials like Eric Holder, as well as administration allies, say something like, “Don’t worry. If any of these guys are released, they’ll be quickly rearrested and put back in jail.”</p>
<p>So essentially this is a show trial, not a real exercise of justice. These defendants will be in jail forever no matter what happens because, politically, the Obama administration knows they can’t allow these guys to go free. The chief argument for trying these guys in a civilian court seems to be showing the world that we believe in the “rule of law.” But then the administration assures everyone that these guys won’t go free – an assurance that people around the world are certainly aware of.</p>
<p>Isn’t there something wrong with this picture? </p>
<p>Maybe the cowards are the Obama administration officials – with an eye on the polls &#8212; who are assuring Americans that they won’t be releasing any of the bad guys even if the courts order them to do so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aaron Flint</title>
		<link>http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/2009/11/15/thursday-friday-talk-radio-update/comment-page-1/#comment-323</link>
		<dc:creator>Aaron Flint</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:26:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://billingsnews.com/davidsblog/?p=272#comment-323</guid>
		<description>Dave, 

Glad you&#039;re able to listen in- will have to have you on the show sometime.  I wouldn&#039;t necessarily argue he&#039;s a coward because he didn&#039;t want to deploy overseas- if he had religious concerns as a Muslim for not wanting to go over there- that&#039;s one thing- and the military should take that into account.  What makes him a coward is that he purposely walked into a building with unarmed victims and began shooting.  My broader point was that this Major Hasan doesn&#039;t even know what is actually happening in Afghanistan.  That&#039;s why I played a clip from a Muslim American (who spent 16 years and was born in Afghanistan) who served as an interpreter on our outpost.  He says he has never been more proud to be an American than when he has seen serving alongside American soldiers.  Maybe Major Hasan should talk to fellow Muslim Americans who have actually been there.  

The broader point is that going after unarmed victims does make him a coward.  If he really had objections to the war- he could have showed more courage: stand up, resign your military commission, and express your opposition to the war.  Instead- he stayed in the service, specifically sought out terrorist organizations to partner with- and then took his wrath on victims unable to defend themselves- for that he is a ccoward.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dave, </p>
<p>Glad you&#8217;re able to listen in- will have to have you on the show sometime.  I wouldn&#8217;t necessarily argue he&#8217;s a coward because he didn&#8217;t want to deploy overseas- if he had religious concerns as a Muslim for not wanting to go over there- that&#8217;s one thing- and the military should take that into account.  What makes him a coward is that he purposely walked into a building with unarmed victims and began shooting.  My broader point was that this Major Hasan doesn&#8217;t even know what is actually happening in Afghanistan.  That&#8217;s why I played a clip from a Muslim American (who spent 16 years and was born in Afghanistan) who served as an interpreter on our outpost.  He says he has never been more proud to be an American than when he has seen serving alongside American soldiers.  Maybe Major Hasan should talk to fellow Muslim Americans who have actually been there.  </p>
<p>The broader point is that going after unarmed victims does make him a coward.  If he really had objections to the war- he could have showed more courage: stand up, resign your military commission, and express your opposition to the war.  Instead- he stayed in the service, specifically sought out terrorist organizations to partner with- and then took his wrath on victims unable to defend themselves- for that he is a ccoward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
