C J Campbell wrote:


"Frank" wrote in message ...
Larry Dighera wrote:

And now this from CNN:
http://tinyurl.com/497uv

Of course I'm glad they caught this guy but this part is troubling:



So they don't have anything else about interfering with air traffic
besides
the "Patriot" Act?

No. But they are going to throw the book at him and charge him with every
crime that he has violated. Are you suggesting that this dope should not
be prosecuted?

Not at all. Wherever did you get that impression? Since they didn't
(couldn't?) charge him for the helicopter incident I'm left with the
impression that the only thing they had was the "Patriot" act. Seems like
interfering with airplanes, trains, buses, freeways etc would be covered
under laws that precede Sept. 11.

And I do find it troubling that in one breath they say there is no evidence
of terrorist activity and in the next they, in effect, charge him with that
very thing. Considering all the rhetoric attempting to allay fears about
potential abuses of power inherent in the "Patriot" act this doesn't do
much for their credibility.


--
Frank....H