MagiK, the problem is we do not KNOW the veracity of your statement that these people are intimately connected to terror. We do not know that they are intimately connected to anything, as we do not know their names, what they are linked to, or what they have done. They can't prove they're not intimately connected because they have no lawyer and no charges to dispute.
Sorry, but I don't trust the administration's word THAT much. "Yeah, trust us, but we can't tell you why."
They were so trustworthy with the WoMD determination.
Aren't we all lucky they substituted their knowledge in place of the UN's and its 160 or so countries and saved us from all those horrible weapons.
It is the crack in the egg. It is the beginning of the long road to tyranny. It is a baby step now, but the path is clear.
Besides, under the often lauded FIRST AMENDMENT's freedom of association, (touted by Rhenquist and other constitutional scholars as one of the primary defining American-specific freedoms setting us apart - and central in the Boy Scouts case) you cannot be prosecuted for being a friend of a terrorist. Or knowing them. Or even belonging to Al Queda. Like the KKK, you have a right to associate with like-minded individuals and be as stupid as you like -- so long as you commit no crimes.
And, that is as it should be. Limiting association is tantamount to legislating thought and belief.
But then non-citizens don't enjoy the protection of the First Amendment now, do they? (Of course, that judge-made law in and of itself derrogates from the plain language of the First Amendment which does not mention rights of citizens but rather says "Congress shall make no law....")
[ 06-18-2003, 07:13 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]