I quote: "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

How is this not clear?

The first amendment is meaningless without the 6th. Ya'll would do well to remember that.

As for you, David Forsmark… you have no business writing this kind of nonsense.
Especially with it being patently obvious that you don't know or don't care about our constitution.

Parting quote: "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The meaning of this quote in this context should be clear… but in case it's not, I'll clarify: "Those who would revoke the 6th amendment rights of others, do not, themselves, deserve those rights."

Jason

I tried to point this out above, but they ate my post.

Those kinds of people– including regular military who go on a mission without their uniform– can be taken out and summarily shot.

To paraphrase Indiana Jones– Didn't any of you people ever see a WWII movie?

Here we have unlawful enemy combatants, terrorists who target civilians, being given protections not given to a 17 year old cook wearing a uniform. Those who are advocates for these terrorist and their apologists are not upholding American ideals or the Constitution. They are advocating an ideology.