I am saying that the Washington Post obtained a list of alleged terrorists and tracked the outcome of those cases. That is what I posted. One of you says they weren't ever supposed to be terrorists and that is why the actual convictions were for immigration issues. The other of you says yes but some of them were. Not a real coherent defense to what amounts to proof of more deception.
Here is what I think -- I think that immigration violations are important but that using the Patriot Act to prosecute them is rather like scratching an itch by shooting a bullet at it. I STILL think the current administration is an imminent threat to your constitutional rights. If you choose not to be concerned about that, what can I say? By the time people are disappearing off the street, Robert, it will be legal for them to do so. Hey, it's currently legal to kidnap Arab men and take them to countries where they will be tortured. The fact that you don't see anything wrongwith that leaves me speechless. >A bunch of them ARE terrorists. Another bunch are common criminals. What is >the problem, do you not want our government to catch terrorists? > >On 6/4/06, Dana wrote: >> >> not the same as saying they are innocent, of course... but given that >> these are supposed to be terrorists... >> > >-- >--------------- >Robert Munn >www.funkymojo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:208116 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
