> Ok...we're fighting a war. I think we can all
> agree on that. Who are we fighting? A bunch of
> Middle Eastern guys.

"A bunch of Middle Eastern guys?" That's like saying "World War II was fought against a bunch of Europeans and some Asians." It's important in times of war to restrain ourselves in defining who 'the enemy' is, lest we alienate our allies and those who are merely neutral. Someday the war will be over, and if we've started to fear and hate a people, not just an organization that we can attack and dismantle, the next war will be just around the corner.

> Most of the Middle Eastern guys being held by
> our government, if I am not mistaken, are not
> citizens of this country. Therefore, they are not
> protected by our Constiution and the other
> laws we have in place.

They're not entitled to the same Constitutional protections as US citizens, true, but they still do have rights. It's essential in a free world that citizens retain some rights outside of their own country, just as in the United States citizens retain most of their rights from state to state. I don't want to travel to France or Britian only to find out that I can be arrested and detained indefinitely. Now, of course, as a US citizen that probably won't happen to me in most countries since I'm a citizen of the biggest kid on the block. But don't citizens of less powerful nations also deserve some degree of protection from governmental authority?

>
> The writer of this speech wonders about the
> suspension of habeas corpus becoming
> common. I'm sure the same thing was said
> when the greatest president we've ever had,
> Abraham Lincoln, did the same thing during
> the Civil War. The same thing happened
> during World War II when FDR ordered
> Japanese-Americans put into internment
> camps.

And these were both terrible decisions that should not be repeated (I've got a friend in the Navy who is a history buff and refers to Lincoln as a facist). And the effects of these bad decisions would have been worse if Americans had not stood up and told their government that Constitutional protections are especially important when they are inconvenient. It's also worth noting that the majority of people in the internment camps weren't foreign nationals. They were US citizens.


>
> In closing, *your* rights and *my* rights are
> not being infringed upon. It is the "rights" of
> people who aren't even citizens of this country
> that are being "infringed" upon.

Don't be so sure. Not all of the people of Arab descent being questioned (or "harassed" depending on who you talk to) by federal authorities are non-citizens. And there may be some trouble ahead for us white, black, asian, or hispanic folks too. Without very strict vigilance and oversight, many of the new powers given to police and intelligence agencies may very well one day be used beyond the original limited intent to fight terrorism. I include a link at the bottom for anyone who feels like getting good and paraniod.

By the way, when Atty. General John Ashcroft testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he responded to concerns by civil liberties groups by calling those who raised such concerns unpatriotic. Sheesh.
>
> The Other "Step 1: Open mouth. Step 2: Insert
> foot." Matthew

Bal"'give pause to our allies' my eye!"anthalus