Here we go again, another thread where Hortlund talks circles again and takes the stance that if the Gov says he did it, well then he did it and end of story.
#1: Does the Gov probably know more than their saying? Yea most likely.
#2: If he is in league with terrorists should he be let go clean w/o evidence? No one is saying that.
Holding a person for a limited time to gain a warrant happens all the time. In my State, police can hold you for 24 hours while they apply for a warrant before actually charging you. Most other states have similar laws.
The problem I have period, is that the Gov will hold this guy for months before ever presenting any evidence against him. Right after 9/11 we had a man in the local jail for 3 1/2 months held on no crime, but the Gov said he was foreign so he had to be held.
3 1/2 months...locked up with no crime, no evidence against him, not even being told why he was locked up. If this Jose is guilty of a crime then they should be presenting the evidence (Closed Grand Jury) not sitting on him for ever till they pin something on him.
There is the problem. Who says, ok this guy rights will be forfeited now. No matter how noble the intentions, leaving your guiding principals to the side, waving them off when you feel it's conveinent is the problem.
Ppl in America have become dumb to what ever the Government says is ok. I've served my military, worked as a Police Officer but frankly I dont' trust my Government fully. That's why their's checks and balances that are suppose to be in place. That's why we have all these dam court rules...etc. Once you start throwing them aside it just opens up the possibility of abuse and the abuse of the US Constitution is far more a threat than a physical attack upon it's borders.
