If you are a prisoner of war, you'll probably get shot. You won't see a court, most likely, because "war criminal" is different that dui, thief, etc.
JH -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 2:12 PM To: ProFox Email List Subject: Re: [OT] Nazi police in Minneapolis John wrote: > Never, in our history, has the protection of our constitution been given to > non US citizens, until this year. > > If I go to another country and commit a crime, I will go before that country's court, Judge, Jury, etc. Even if I commit a crime in another country and make it back to the USA, I could be extradited back to the foreign court to stand trial. Otherwise, how would it work? I commit a crime in Spain, and so Spain send me back to the USA to stand trial; because, I'm an American citizen. What about people with dual citizenship. LOL. I don't think so. By the way, If I were an American or otherwise, I wouldn't commit any crimes in China. I hear the criminal justice system there is very harsh. Regards, LelandJ > JH > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA > Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 11:57 AM > To: ProFox Email List > Subject: Re: [OT] Nazi police in Minneapolis > > John wrote: > >> Non citizens should not be afforded rights granted to our CITIZENS. No >> > other > >> country does that either. >> >> JH >> >> >> > > Anyone under USA jurisdiction, or in USA custody, should be afforded the > same Constitutional rights. There should not be a separate courts or > set of rules based on the crimes committed, race, religion, nationality, > enemy combatant/terrorist status, or any other defining denominator. > The USA Constitution should apply evenly to all under jurisdiction or > under USA custody, or it should not apply to anyone; otherwise, there > can be no justice. > > During war, the USA Uniform Code of Military Justice should applies as > agreed by all nation under the Geneva Conventions. > > I noticed last night that Governor Sarah Palin was wearing her hair > something like Condi Rice with hair drapped down to just below the > eyebrow. Sarah would look so much more open and attractive, if she > would were her hair a little higher. > > Regards, > > LelandJ > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of Leland F. Jackson, CPA >> Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:35 AM >> To: ProFox Email List >> Subject: Re: [OT] Nazi police in Minneapolis >> >> Vince Teachout wrote: >> >> >>> Michael Madigan wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> No, not nice guys like Leland and I think Vince may be a Republican. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Hey! Now dammit, I've been being NICE to you lately! >>> >>> Ok, I did used to be a Republican, up until Reagan, then I switched to >>> Libertarian, because I thought it meant I could vote for whoever I >>> thought was best. >>> >>> When I found out it meant you could only vote for whoever was wacky >>> enough to run as Libertarian, I switched to Independent, thinking THAT >>> meant I could vote for whoever I thought was best. >>> >>> When I got turned away from the polls and couldn't vote, because it >>> turns out that in NY at least, it means you can only vote for whoever is >>> wacky enough to to run for Independent,* I switched to Democrat, so I >>> could at least get to vote in a way that hopefully would make some >>> difference. >>> >>> If I could truly vote an independent cross ticket, I'd vote >>> Obama-Palin. (She had me at "moose-munching mama") >>> >>> But lest you fear I'm not a left-wing liberal maniac, I DID join the >>> ACLU. (And I was totally blown away when I found out they really do >>> give you a card!) >>> And I joined because I truly do believe Bush is the worst threat the >>> U.S. Constitution has ever faced, and they were our best hope. >>> rights. >>> >>> >>> >> Sarah Palin made a condescending remark about the constitution last >> night. Perhaps you didn't catch it, but it was in regards to "our >> opponents", (eg the opposition party which I took to mean the >> Democrats") reading Terrorists their rights. The remark leads me to >> believe she might not apply constitution guarantees of freedom, due >> process, and privacy evenly across the board, so she might also be a >> threat to the USA constitution democracy. >> >> Regards, >> >> LelandJ >> >> >> >>> Oh, and I got to hear Rush, finally. And he's an igmo-maniac. >>> >>> * My uncle in Maryland informs me that in MD, Independent *does* mean >>> you get to vote for whoever you think is best. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]@shelbynet.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
