A Usenet persona calling itself Michael Daly wrote:

On 9-Mar-2005, Scott Weiser wrote:

And yet not one of them can actually cite an incident where enforcement of
the Patriot Act has unlawfully infringed on ANYONE'S civil rights.

Then there should not be any reason for a constitutional guarantee for
a right to bear arms. After all, it doesn't matter what the law is
as long as you aren't affected.

BTW dickhead, there are amerikans that have been held without resort to
legal counsel and without charge for years.

Really? How many? Who are they?

Jose Padilla has been
detained in a military brig in South Carolina for three years. A federal
court judge just ordered the Bush administration to either charge or
release Padilla within 45 days.

There's a fact for you. Choke on it.

That a judge so ordered does not mean that he has been being held
unlawfully, unless and until the judges happen to be the Supreme Court. The
government believes that it is within its legal powers to detain Padilla as
an enemy spy and saboteur indefinitely so long as we are at war and they are
appealing the judge's order. We will find out if they are right once the
case has worked its way through the system and the Supreme Court has ruled.
If the government is eventually proven to be wrong, they will release
Padilla forthwith. Until then, the government has the authority to hold a
suspected enemy spy and saboteur under the war powers act.

So, his civil rights have not been violated because we are at war and he is
not entitled to a writ of habeus corpus.

Next.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser