Its a bit frustrating for me too. I would like to know where the CIA gets off believing that the constitution does not constrain their activities.These discussions are frustrating. The argument is clearly in the premeses, not the conclusions, but the initiators of these arguments always resist defining their premeses. This allows them to shift their argument around on the surface, often with an air of their superior righteousness in their adherence to whatever principles they are adhering to, without ever really defining those principles except by implication in the negative.
Where does the constitution stop restricting the U.S. Government? Overseas? In regards to non-citizens? When a loosely-defined "Global War of Terror" is taking place? When the target is labeled an enemy combatant?
These aren't easy questions with simple answers, I admit. But lets try to talk through some premises and draw a conclusion.
P1. The U.S. constitution is not the source of human rights.
P2. Maintaining U.S. citizenship is not the source of human rights.
P3. Living on U.S. soil is not the source of human rights.
P4. Suspicion of a crime does not invalidate human rights.
P5. The U.S. government has a responsibility to observe human rights.
P6. It is within the purview of the U.S. government to seek justice.
P7. The initiation of force is always wrong.
C1: The U.S. government has a responsibility to apprehend suspects and place them on trial. Force should only be used if the suspect resists lawful apprehension.
P8. Suspect is hiding in a foreign country.
P9. The U.S. government has the duty to respect the sovereignty of other countries.
P10. Violating another country's sovereignty is in and of itself wrong.
C2: The U.S. government should either obtain permission to operate within the sovereign country, or get the country to act as a proxy of the U.S.
Are ya with me so far? Now the fun part.
P11. Global War on Terror.
C3. The U.S. government may operate in countries without permission, kill nonviolent suspects (in their homes) without trial, torture people for information, and hold suspects indefinitely without a trial. Additionally, U.S. civilian agencies may become paramilitary "killing machines." As far as anyone can tell, all semblances of the constitution are irrelevant. And that's ignoring what is happening domestically.
My malfunction lies in the jump from P11. to C3.
I think trials are quite legitimate.The real truth of Rambone and several other is they don't recognize the legitimacy of ANYTHING the U.S. does.