Posted on 09/13/2002 8:21:33 PM PDT by bootless
Edited on 04/29/2004 2:01:15 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
NAPLES, Florida (CNN) --The Georgia woman who prompted Friday's terror scare was "flat-out lying" when she told authorities she overheard three Muslim men at a restaurant laughing about September 11 and making suspicious comments, one of the men said late Friday.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Right out of the Clinton Playbook.
Not true. Authorities may not file formal charges, but, if Eunice Stone is telling the truth, then it's a hoax.
Let's put these young men in front of a jury, and put Eunice Stone in front of a jury.
Just who do you think those 12 people are going to believe?
Based on the comments on this thread, the three men would be lynched before they ever got to a jury.
I hope these guys get watched, and i hope they get looked at close enough to clear them or nail them.
He provided a link in post #47.
This is another odd detail about this developing case...
When these men are in jail then I'll agree that it worked. Without grass roots support for Eunice, I am not as optimistic as you. I think our voices can make a difference as to the final outcome of Homeland Security.
If these men are not arrested, people are going to think twice about reporting an incident.
One guy called up Fox News with support for Eunice. He said he made a call to report an incident himself. The incident was that a Midlle Eastern man wanted directions to the nuclear power plant. This is not as cut and dry as what happened to Eunice, and if she is defamed, what happens to reporting other incidents that may be completely innocent? After all he could have been looking for a job.
I prefer this type of incident to be called in. I don't want the political correct crowd to stop us from reporting suspicious behavior. If they win in this incident, they will neutralize homeland security.
I have had to turn off the television. I can't stand to see these men and their families plastered all over the news as some sort of victims. This is the tip of the iceburg if we let them get away with terroristic tactics for the sake of political correctness.
You don't make jokes about blowing up stuff these days. If the authorities had followed up James Wood's tip the way they followed up Eunice's, 9-11 would have been prevented. If your gut tells you something is out of line, it is!
Nah. But they pulled a stupid stunt and can't admit it, so they play the race card and accuse the woman of lying.
That's a normal reaction, but these men are simply not believeable.
I have been, in a small town in North Carolina, many years ago. I remember it well.
That's the day I learned there is a reason some LEOs are jailers, out of the public view . . .
1. It was reported that the three men blew through a tollbooth. (turns out to be false).
4. It was reported that they were uncooperative. (nor the authorities say they were cooperative.
I'm glad you have such a good handle on the facts, since you have no better access to information than anyone else here. I hope you don't mind if, I dispute your claim to be the arbiter of facts.
According to the three guys, the second car paid for the first. I've been through 100's of tolls and each car pays its own toll. The first car did blow past the toll as reported.
They refused consent for the search. Hence they were uncooperative.
What will be the next "fact" to fall by the wayside? Based on the above, isn't at least worth considering that there is even a tiny possibility that a mistake was made?
Very few of the facts are falling by the wayside. No mistake was made. An excellent tip was phoned in and the authorities followed up on it. The three students were stupid for joking about a bomb.
On CNN last night Connie Chung was tripping over her tongue trying to vilify this woman for perpitrating a hoax ("Shouldn't she be punished?" and "What about the ethnic profiling?" assertions). The LEO she was interviewing was continually correcting her regarding the leaps of logic she was making, and that the hoax and/or prank assertion was way too premature. It was a nauseating display . . .
I have my own personal tin foil theory why they were suddenly let go . . .
Or internet nutcases. Might be friends of yours!
This was the one aspect of the story that bothered me.
Earlier in the day, they traced the plates to an hispanic man in Illinois. His name was Mr. Munoz or something like that. He and his house were shown on TV. A reporter asked him how the plates ended up on the white car and I heard him say, "Maybe they were stolen." He was very vague.
He voluntarily spoke with the police and he apparantly told them that he owned the car with his brother, his brother drove that car, and that his brother "was off on Fridays" and he couldn't be found. Mr. Munoz (sp?) was not a suspect.
At the end of the day, it was just a DMV transferring snafu? Since plates go with the owner when they transfer them to a subsequent car, I still can't understand how they ended up on the white car which obviously didn't belong to the brother.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.