Some want DUE PROCESS for terrorists on a watchlist. WHY?

What crime did they commit?

If they did commit a crime why are they not charged?

If their not US citizens then they do not have a right to fly into the US or buy guns here.

How many on the list are like Ted Kennedy and the two year old that are on the list?

Do government officials have the authority to take away your rights?

Due process is the fundamental doctrine of fairness in our legal system.  

You are calling people on a watch list "terrorists".  Do you also call people "criminals" before they've been convicted of any crime?  People on watch lists are "suspected" of something, or maybe they know someone who is.  They haven't been convicted, or even charged, and if there was enough evidence to do so, they would have been arrested.

If you were "suspected" of something, or a "person of interest" in an investigation, should your fundamental rights be denied?  

There have been many cases of people mistakenly having been included on watch lists.  Are they not deserving of their rights?  

Because due process is the cornerstone of restraining government abuse of power against the people.

Tyrannies throughout history have jailed or killed people based upon charges that they were "traitors" or "criminals" or "enemies of the state."

While in reality due process is imperfect, it nominally guarantees the government will have to make specific charges against a person, present evidence establishing the truth of those charges, and allow the person to speak and/or call upon evidence in his or her defence.

Of course, people have differning levels of support for the concept of due process. Many people who oppose prohibiting people on the terrorist watch list from purchasing firearms are perfectly happy letting our government assassinate people in other countries, just because the Executive Branch says F***ING HADJI...er, Person X is a terrorist.

Because the Western powers are supposed to represent democracy and the rule of law, and no-one can claim the moral high ground if you let that go to the dogs.

Just in case they goofed?  That might be a nice cushion for the innocent? 

Being on a watch list ≠ being a terrorist.

When we no longer protect human rights, we have become less human ourselves. 

Mahalo for your reply OS and Happy Sunday.

When Due Process is used selectively isn't it a travesty? What about the Gitmo prisoners who are still there? Were they allowed due process? I think I shall ask that question. Thank you for your reply HarryD! :)

Was due process employed at Gitmo? I don't think so. When it is applied selectively it is a travesty. Thank you for your reply Sharonna!  :)

We don't. Due process has been ignored at Gitmo. When you apply due process selectively it becomes a travesty. Thank you for your repy abstraction and Happy Sunday! )

.

Oh, you were being provocative. Peza could me a couple of times before I worked him out. 

No. I am not being provocative at all. I am simply pointing out the hypocrisy of those who sound so noble and holier than thou as they promulgate "due process" for terrorists yet don't bat an eye at those terrorists who have specifically been denied due process in Gitmo. I am not the one being provocative here. It is the hypocrisy/duplicity/ignoring of conflicting treatment that is provocative abs.