http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53151
2006-12-12 13:26:07 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Immigration
2 words, 'gross negligence'?
2006-12-12 13:35:04 · answer #1 · answered by gokart121 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I admit I only did a brief skim of the article, though I've saved it to favorites for later examination in detail.
I don't feel any less safe after reading it. I would also like to check it's sources, I get the impression it might be just a tad slanted.
I certainly welcome differing viewpoints from my own, and appreciate new information. So thank you for the post.
2006-12-12 13:38:46 · answer #2 · answered by last_defender 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This article is a scaremongering tactic prelude to further attempted erosions of our freedoms under the Constitution. And it is working. Notice it also says (by implication) 40,000 are still being held. When do they plan releasing these people?
Read it carefully. It says, "You haven't given us the money & tools necessary to keep these terrorists locked up" That is doublespeak for, "We have been able to find no evidence to bring these people to trial. We imprisoned them wrongly"
These "terrorists" never were a threat to our freedom & safety. If they had been, our leaders would have printed the money to bring them to trial & conviction.. More convictions would have justified their claims. They have only , what, less than 20 convictions over 5 years of terrorists in this country? This claim is a weak, bogus attempt to shift the blame for their lack of success. It is a further attempt to create fear among us to keep us willing to continue giving up OUR rights under the Constitution.
Even the real ones are not strong enough to threaten our freedom, & so far, are still less of a threat than being injured in a car crash. The greatest threat to our freedom is from our own elected people & the power behind them. Think a minute. When they have absolute power, who will be left to protect us from them?
And think quickly for we are about out of time.
2006-12-12 13:57:00 · answer #3 · answered by bob h 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's called WorldNutDaily for a reason.
2016-04-18 12:50:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not interested in opening your link.. world net daily is not a reliable source. I would never barricade my home.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Net_Daily
2006-12-12 13:31:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
i dont click on spams i take well care of my computer
2006-12-12 13:39:23 · answer #6 · answered by Luis 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
what a rag!
2006-12-12 13:35:39 · answer #7 · answered by sqwirlsgirl 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
duh!!!!
2006-12-12 17:17:53 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋