Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MRV Communications (MRVC) opinions? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dee Jay who wrote (35896)	9/29/2001 11:03:54 AM
From: Sector Investor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42804

<<"First, can a society that prides itself on equality before the law treat terrorists differently than ordinary criminals?>> Absolutely. We just need to work out wartime rules. They are soldiers in a war against us - on our soil. Do you let enemy soldiers roam free on your street just because you didn't see this or that particular one do anything - yet? Or do you wait until one drives a truck filled with biological warfare material into the LA water supply? And if ordinary criminals have a tougher time because of it, too bad for them. I sick of hearing of cases where the murder weapon couldn't get introduced into evidence because the officer who found it didn't follow some procedure properly. Our justice system is a complete joke. Sheesh. Now you guys even have me responding. But that just had to be responded to.

To: Dee Jay who wrote (35896)	9/30/2001 3:52:09 PM
From: Greg h2o	Respond to of 42804

<< ""First, can a society that prides itself on equality before the law treat terrorists differently than ordinary criminals? And where do we draw the line between them? Second, at what point does the cost to civil liberties from legislation designed to prevent terrorism outweigh the added security that that legislation provides?">> if the rest of what she wrote is as ludicrous as the above comment, why in the heck would i want to read it?!??!?!?! i guess we should have hunted down EACH of the surviving japanese bombers on Pearl Harbor and brought them to trial!?!? how fricking assanine! sorry, ranting.... to have posted that particular comment from the article without posting this << Referring to the prospect that military deployments overseas rather than domestic prosecutions will be a principal means of bringing terrorists to justice, she said: "It is possible, if not likely, that we will rely more on international rules of war than on our cherished constitutional standards for criminal prosecutions in responding to threats to our national security.">>, is totally irresponsible and provides a disturbing view which is hopefully only shared by a fringe of the American population!