methods like?

8/30/2006 2:52:57 PM

trial, arrest, (legal) detention, surveillance (if justified and warranted)

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 2:55 PM. Reason : to name a few]

8/30/2006 2:55:03 PM

dont you have to ask the suspects questions before you can do any of the things you mentioned?

8/30/2006 3:50:22 PM

no, not really.

8/30/2006 3:52:21 PM

so you would rather them arrest the suspects than ask them questions first?

8/30/2006 3:55:13 PM

if they have evidence against them and they refuse to be questioned, then why not arrest them?

8/30/2006 3:59:06 PM

haha....can you imagine the outcry from the lefties if these dudes had been arrested??

^your so full of it....you would be first in line to bush bash if these guys would have just been arrested and detained...

[Edited on August 30, 2006 at 4:06 PM. Reason : asdf]

8/30/2006 4:06:01 PM

if they are charged with crimes i have no issue, assuming they get a trial eventually.

8/30/2006 4:07:27 PM

right...so you would be fine if the government just arrested everybody first and then asked them questions later.....as long as they were allowed on planes.....right

8/30/2006 4:22:51 PM

that's exactly what i said

8/30/2006 4:38:35 PM

Quote :

"if they have evidence against them and they refuse to be questioned, then why not arrest them?"

just earlier this afternoon you were saying they had the right to refuse to answer questions

so which is it?

8/30/2006 4:55:20 PM

haha..for real...make up your mind dude

8/30/2006 4:56:49 PM

^^did you miss the "if they have evidence" part of that statement.

8/30/2006 5:00:46 PM

Quote :

"i agree. but they have not been found to be terrorists. they haven't been charged with anything yet."

That's why the FBI is investigating...to determine whether or not they are terrorists.

Law enforcement can investigate based on reasonable cause (vice probable cause). Probable cause is required for an arrest. Refusal to answer questions cannot, by itself, be used as probable cause -- though it can be a factor.

8/30/2006 5:07:37 PM

^^their relative said they were at camps...i personally dont think thats grounds for arrest...but i sure as hell think its sufficient evidence to make them answer questions, lawyer or not

8/30/2006 5:14:54 PM

but as american citizens, they can't be made to answer questions unless they are issued a subpoena to testify in court.

8/30/2006 6:03:16 PM

this sucks. I think george would like to veto the constitution

8/30/2006 6:15:18 PM

^^ True, hence why they were not compelled to answer questions, just denied the right to board a plane they do not own.

8/30/2006 11:19:57 PM

so it's alright for the gov't to blacklist whoever they want without providing justification for it?

8/31/2006 9:28:17 AM

I think now you're being obtuse. They blacklisted them with the justification that a relative fingered them as being connected to a terrorist organization. It's probably not enough to arrest and detain, but it is enough for an investigation, and certainly a reason to black list someone from a particular thing until you investigate the claims further.

8/31/2006 9:33:50 AM