"Errant_Eye" <Errant_Eye@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1e73867.0403311032.67dcbad@posting.google.com...

Shawn Hearn <srhi@comcast.net> wrote in message

news:<srhi-71345E.18144430032004@news-60.giganews.com>...

In article <a5bafd07.0403301149.27ef1a77@posting.google.com>,
gandalf_reposter@yahoo.com (Gandalf the Reposter) wrote:

Questions taken from this article
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/mccarthy200403300858.asp



The atrocities of the past eleven years have demonstrated that there
are thousands of anti-American terrorists in al Qaeda and its
affiliated organizations. In the eight years from 1993 to 2001, when
terrorism was regarded as a law-enforcement issue, we managed to
prosecute about 40 terrorists in trials that generally took six months
or more, and terrorist attacks nevertheless continued apace. On the
other hand, since October 2001, our military has killed or captured
thousands of terrorists and there have been no domestic attacks. Why
are trials better than military operations?

In legal proceedings, foreign terrorists have been given the full
panoply of American constitutional rights, and at least one federal
court has held that they have a Fifth Amendment privilege and should
be given Miranda warnings when they are apprehended overseas. Is this
what you mean when you say terrorism should be handled as a
law-enforcement matter? If not, which rights would you deny to
captured terrorists?

Aside from being a law-enforcement issue, you say terrorism is an
intelligence matter. Yet, although Americans were repeatedly attacked
and killed by terrorists, you have voted to cut funding for
intelligence agencies. Why should anyone believe you are serious about
fighting terrorism if you gut what you say is the key protection
against it?

Kerry has already responded to this issue. He voted for a cut in
intelligence spending that amounts to 1% of the total budget that was
previously allocated. The vote against this was because the money was
being wasted. Quite a few Republicans also voted with Kerry on that
appropriations bill so you should ask them also why they voted for the
cut.

A reasonable reply to the last question. Are there any answers for the

first two?

The first two are bogus questions.