Who represents the detained? Nobody...

[Luthor Blisset]

At 06:16 PM 10/15/01 -0700, somebody with the password to tcmay at got.net wrote:

>On Monday, October 15, 2001, at 06:07 PM, Luthor Blisset wrote:

>>         Do you seriously think that justifies suspension of due process? 
>> If you don't, why did you bring it up? That aside, I think it's been 
>> sufficiently demonstrated that you shouldn't treat people like 
>> collateral damage unless you wish to receive similar consideration...

>The Constitution applies at _all_ times. It is not something that is only 
>for nice, calm situations.
>
>The Bill of Rights does not say that the various parts of the Bill of 
>Rights are suspendable when someone decides there is some reason to. This 
>means the USA Bill, with its suspension of big chunks of the Fourth 
>Amendment, is ipso facto unconstitutional.

         You won't hear any disagreement from me, man. I was wondering if 
Anonymous was actually attempting to justify suspension of due process.
         Incedentally, I wonder if the USA Bill will get overturned by the 
Supreme Court anytime soon... Naaaa... Gr.

-- Luthor //Remembering is copying and copying is THEFT