Sen. Lindsey Graham, Lying Liar

November 29, 2011 by 15 Comments

One of the traitorous enemies of America in our Senate, Lindsey Graham, lies about the reckless and dangerous bill just passed by the Senate. Out of one side of his mouth he lies:

Several, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), noted that a U.S. citizen suspected of aiding al Qaeda would be given his or her right to trial.

“The idea that an American citizen helping al Qaeda doesn’t get due process is just a lie,” Graham said.

while out of the other he says:

“If you’re an American citizen and you betray your country, you’re going to be held in military custody and you’re going to be questioned about what you know,” he said, “and you’re not going to be given a lawyer if our national security interests dictate that you not be given a lawyer and go into the criminal justice system, because we’re not fighting a crime, we’re fighting a war.”

Translation: if the Ruling Class of the People’s Democratic National Security State of Heaven say so, any American citizen can be labeled a terrorist with no rights and can be arrested and jailed indefinitely.

It goes without saying that since all sorts of crimes can be construed as “betraying your country” with a little imagination, it won’t be terribly hard to expand “National Security” to protect us from everything from suspected murder to shoplifting as the state continues to find “penumbras” of meaning in the tyrannical powers it is granting itself. And since the clever GOP shills who have argued so passionately for torture abroad have done so in the interest of “national security” it doesn’t take a lot of imagination to see that the people pushing for this tyrannical overreach domestically would also find torture a useful tool in “fighting evil” among the American citizenry they are increasingly treating like enemy subjects and not the citizens of a free republic.

That man is a traitor to these United States just as surely as a sworn member of al Quaeda is. So is every Senator who passed this bill. In a more civilized age, they would be defenestrated and put in the stocks to be pelted with mud. The traitors to the Constitution who just voted for this should be impeached and jailed as enemies of the United States of America.

Filed Under: Uncategorized 15 Comments
  • Marco Andrino

    so… how do you really feel?

  • GC161

    I’ve seen progressive atheists refer to Christians as “dangerous” or “Fascist.” Some even go so far as to call us “terrorists.” I debated with an atheist who compared the Catholic Church with the Klan of the 1950s because of the Church’s stance on gay marriage.

    Could the day come when the right mix of rulers in D.C. will declare that a truly devout Catholic is a national security threat? This is a major concern.

    • Will

      And I just saw “Occupy” supporters gibbering about “economic terrorism”.

      • Mark Shea

        Occupy supporters do not control the military and have the power to use it as a weapon against every citizen of the US who steps out of line. Get your priorities straight.

        • GC161

          Of course we do have a leader who says the Occupier types are the reason he became president. So it’s nice to know what they’re saying/demanding since it might give us some insight into what those in power (who associate themselves with them) might say/demand too.

  • Steve P

    It’s been WAY too long since we’ve had a good defenestration– that’s a lost art, that is. Bring in the Czechs– they have a very storied tradition of defenestration in Prague.

    http://www.google.com/#sclient=psy-ab&hl=en&source=hp&q=prague+defenestration&pbx=1&oq=Prague+defenes&aq=0&aqi=g2g-v2&aql=&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=0l0l1l70032l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=6de4e8b0720c48a0&biw=1024&bih=571&surl=1&safe=active

  • Tom

    Mark, I agree with you 100% on Lindsey Graham. The guy has never been straight about anything. The fear and paranoia being used to create a new police state is frightening, and is already being turned against Patriots, Christians, and other groups who hold to values that are not dictated or expressly approved (media generated) by our government.

    • Timbot2000

      “Lindsey Graham. The guy has never been straight about anything. ”

      Funniest thing I read all day! Wonderful double-entender!

  • Carlos Albiniz

    It all depends on how one feels about 9/11. If you think it was an act of war or a criminal act. Lindsey Graham did not write this bill. Levin and McCain did. It does nothing more than what the president did during World War II. An enemy combatant captured in Afganistan can be held indefinitely, but what about people in the US plotting to kill and blow up the rest of us. If we are at war, why should’nt these people be held just like any other enemy combatants?

    • Joe

      Because they’re citizens and therefore have rights under the Constitution.

  • D. Dean

    Not once has any of the people commenting on this article mentioned why they object to American citizens being read their rights, arrested, charged, represented by an attorney, and tried in court by a jury of their peers. Why are Lindsey Graham, John McCain, Carl Levin, and others, afraid of due process?

    • Tominellay

      …because they’re in power and expect to remain in power?

  • Martial Artist

    @Mark Shea,

    You write:

    “…they would be defenestrated and put in the stocks to be pelted with mud.”

    On casual examination that would appear to be an apparently hideous punishment. But further reflection suggests that it would not be as cruel as one might think, particularly if the punishments are performed in the stated order.

    Allow me to explain. Defenestration is normally performed from a fenestra substantially (as in one or more stories) above the ground. There will be some variation in results that will depend upon what terrain and foliage, if any of the latter, occupies that portion of the ground in the area below the fenestra toward which the subject is expelled from the building, but, in general, the subject will be (post defenestration) at least significantly unlikely to be aware of being put in the stocks or of being pelted with mud.

    I do believe that the suggested set of punishments you are proposing, while attractive, must be tempered by the necessity to keep the various parts in the proper order. It reminds me of the advice to be proferred to marauders (Vikings, Huns, etc.) by their leaders, to wit:

    “Rape, pillage, and then burn. If you are to be a success in this line of work, don’t get them out of order!”

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  • Martial Artist

    @Carlos Albiniz,

    You ask:

    …what about people in the US plotting to kill and blow up the rest of us. If we are at war, why should’nt these people be held just like any other enemy combatants?

    The answer is just slightly less direct than that given you by Joe. First of all, you ask about people “plotting” to kill and blow up the rest of us, not about someone who has actually made the physical attempt to do so. That presents a problem. The only way anyone besides the suspected perpetrator can know that the destructive act is actually intended is for the perpetrator to take some number of steps in serious preparation to commit the act. Simply discussing it, or suggesting it, or talking about doing it is not, in and of itself, necessarily criminal. I put that word in bold, because without a substantial amount of corroborating evidence, it is entirely possible that someone you or I think is planning such an act is actually planning an entirely different, and potentially legal action.

    There is an element in the Rule of Law called presumption of innocence to which every person is entitled. What it requires is someone to construct a compelling logical argument, that the suspect actually intended to commit an unlawful act and had taken credible steps to bring that act to completion. The fact that someone else merely suspects that a suspect is considering committing the act is not sufficient. Every person legally in this country is entitled to the presumption that they are innocent until enough facts have been gathered and presented to a judge who determines that there is “probable cause” to believe the suspect may be in the process of preparing to commit a criminal act before it is legal for the authorities to place the suspect under arrest for any significant period of time without benefit of counsel. If you give that up, you are saying that the police (not the courts) have the right to arrest and detain anyone they want for an indefinite period of time without proof that the suspicion is objectively credible.

    This legislation is an outrage.

    Pax et bonum,
    Keith Töpfer

  • J. Mulitsch

    We simply need to de-invade these countries and return our armed forces home. Let then protect the border on the Mexican side so as not to violate ‘posse-comotatus.’

    Who ever is left un-employed can be hired by Ford, GM, and any of the other American car factories to produce rapid transit in “subway systems” with subterranean walmarts that continue to sell cheap chinese goods.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X