Reader Responses

While the U.S. Constitution and Bill of (Individual) Rights should be considered a successful model for governing all free people, at present it applies only to citizens of the United States. I feel the Supreme Court was wrong in its decision to grant prisoners of war its protection and is an indication of how fragile our system is when subjected to liberal "modern" interpretation. (As You See It: Does Narrow High Court Terrorism Ruling Suit You?)

I don't think the Constitution should apply even to citizens if they are captured in the war against terrorism: they have always been treated as prisoners of war and should be dealt with as traitors, not citizens.

Obviously, proof should be presented at a military trial before passing judgment, but friends and supporters of our enemies are no longer citizens: they are traitors.

If the Supreme Court can grant citizens' rights to prisoners of war, the next step is to embrace the United Nations' effort to further weaken the foundation of our way of life and government by ruling the Second Amendment is an individual right.

... Should read: Not an individual right.

I feel strongly Congress should immediately clarify that only legal citizens are protected by the Constitution.

And these protections do not apply to prisoners of war or traitorous citizens giving aid and support to our enemies. To do otherwise is the beginning of the end of our survival as a nation, with or without a god.

Norm Beavers
Tyler