Comment: It isn't irrational at all.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: That's because the anti Rand (see in situ)

It isn't irrational at all.

What is irrational about it?

Rand said: "Now, if you join al Qaeda, bear arms and attack U.S. forces, no one will argue that you still have a right to a trial"

Who determines what "al Qaeda" is and whether someone joined it?

I have asked a simple question, and am not being irrational.

I am defending the principle to the right to address the accuser in a court. A right given by our Constitution.

I am in tune with how people use newspeak and doublethink, ad hominem, hubris, and all the rest. I've noticed that many of the new users who just joined a few months ago are generally the same ones who employ this kind of mean, biting, insults on people who are just trying to make a point. If they don't have anything further substantive to say on the issue, they'll make sure they change the subject in a vague way by throwing out an insult.

But, the truth remains: we have our Constitutional right to a trial, no matter what the charge.