blueridge71
Outlasted two companies
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2003
- Posts
- 2,261
sweptback said:The point is if Congress wanted a shiny new law to go after the Sopranos, they should not have billed it as a law used to fight Osama. They used people's fear to gather support for something that would not have passed 5 or 10 years before that.
Perhaps. But there is nothing new about using a law in a different way than it was intended. RICO was intended to be used against the mafia, but the Clintonistas used it to prosecute Pro-Life protesters.
The fundamental problem with anti-terrorism is that you can't wait until the crime has been committed. The vast majority of the 9-11 hijackers committed no crime until they hijacked those airplanes. (Unless that is, you consider minor immigration violations to be a crime. The Democrats and the media don't. The were just "undocumented terrorists.")
Secondly, if they havn't committed a crime, how do you arrest and prosecute them. If you are lucky, you catch them with written plans and a truck full of explosives. The only problem is that if you wait that long, an attack is imminent, and if you miss them, then you have to deal with the aftermath of a terrorist attack. Your suspects are likely dead by their own hand. The families of victims and the media are screaming at you because you didn't act in time to stop the attack.
The hypocrisy is that those same people and media groups would have yelled equally loud if you had violated the terrorist's civil rights by breaking up the cell and arresting them before they committed a crime. After all, don't they have a freedom of speech and a freedom of religion that allows them to plot a violent attack?
Unless the terrorists are stupid enough to put something in writing that is incriminating, they are very hard to prosecute. Just look at the difficulty that the DOJ has had getting any convictions in terrorism cases.
But does that mean that prosecuting was a waste of time? No. Simply by prosecuting and detaining for a short while, the plotters were disrupted. And keep in mind that "not guilty" and "innocent" are two entirely different concepts.