Letter: No protection for terrorists
It is improper to use something for gain or protection that one was previously trying to destroy. Yet this is what foreign terrorists do. The terrorists have come for the avowed purpose to harm our country in a significant way, destroy it, and ultimately replace the Constitution with some new form of government.
In the process, some have been caught and put in confinement. Now these same terrorists want the rights and privileges under the Constitution that they sought to destroy. The Preamble of the Constitution says in part, "We the People of the United States... establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense... establish this Constitution for the United States." The rights and privileges of the Constitution are limited to the people of the United States. Civilian "justice" was established for citizens, not for enemies seeking to destroy the Constitution. There cannot be "domestic tranquility" if there are acts of terror. The "common defense" is to protect our citizens from foreign terrorists, not to protect terrorists.
Terrorists should be given a military trial as has been done in the past. However, some argue this is not adequate for terrorists. It is proposed that terrorists should be given the same rights reserved for citizens. These rights would include all the defenses and court-provided lawyers afforded to civilians. Although military courts are deemed good enough for those serving in the military and dying to protect the Constitution, it is stated that military courts are inadequate for avowed enemies seeking to destroy it.
The spirit of the Constitution is in the Preamble. The intent of the Constitution is to provide protection, rights, privileges and responsibilities of United States citizens. It is unconstitutional to take the rights and privileges contained therein and afford them to the avowed enemies of the country in the same manner offered to the citizens.