On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:50:31 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

John H wrote:

On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 03:59:25 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

Now, get back on track. You made a post. I asked some questions.


HOMELAND SECURITY -- A TERRORIST'S RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS: According to a
congressional investigation by the nonpartisan Government Accountability
Office (GAO), "Dozens of terrorist suspects on federal watch lists were
allowed to buy firearms legally in the United States last year
(http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/nation...1_china08.html) ." Oops!
Turns out the Bush administration, three years after 9/11, simply hasn't
gotten around to making it illegal for suspected terrorists to buy guns.
In fact, until February 2004, civil liberties stalwart John Ashcroft --
who has advocated surveillance and wiretapping on U.S. citizens without
court approval -- actively resisted efforts to increase oversight for
terrorists seeking guns because of "Second Amendment concerns." The GAO
investigation indicated people "with clear links to terrorist groups
(http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/08/na...nt%26position=)
had taken advantage of this gap on a regular basis.... At least 44
times between February and June of 2004, people regarded by the FBI as
known or suspected members of terrorist groups sought permission to buy
or carry guns." In all but nine cases, permission was granted.


What other civil liberties would you like to see taken away from 'suspects'. How
about the liberty to leave Guantanamo? How about the liberty to have an
attorney? How about liberty, period?

You guys are the first to cry at a 'supposed' loss of liberty!

The questions are right there. Don't obfuscate. You get the message!


John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."