So what you're saying is Tucker Carlson should be arrested and tried by military courts and not be protected by the constitution because he's considered an unlawful combatant? AKA traitor.
Where did I read that before ..... oh that's right DoD Law of War Manual page 102
"Unlawful combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which render their belligerency unlawful."
They're right. It's right there.
That's some very interesting language being introduced to the general population.
I think that's a foolish decision.
Perhaps everytime you hear traitor in the next 48 hours you will remember why the legal definition of a traitor is being presented here.
Can you put some sources up here please, then tell me and I'll reinstate the post.
It's standard practice here to source something like this, show examples.
Glen should do
https://youtu.be/EqMO6Ckwgsg?si=3q2vYZh5c-jYhL_L
Thanks fren.
Thank you for being fair.
I was expecting you to act like the mods on reddit for some reason.
Post re-instated.
I listened to that long rambling video by Glenn Greenwald. Throughout he opines about neocons and their insatiable appetite for war but NOWHERE does he source any MSM outlet as saying:
He talks about the Guardian, Adam Kinzinger, Bill Kristol and others and their pro-war views (all good stuff).
I did a quick review of articles on the Guardian and could see NOTHING that made this kind of statement either.
I remain of the opinion, that until there is an explicit link to some MSM outlet specifically saying that Tucker should be arrested and tried by military courts, that this post should be removed.
This is a slippery slope. Either link to an MSM source or remove the unsubstantiated claim. Glenn Greenwald and the attached video does not provide a specific MSM source saying that Tucker should be arrested and tried by military courts.