I know in the climate of fear and anger produced by the magic box in your living room, it's hard to think these days... but try this one:
Any time someone accuses you of a crime, and the police can find no evidence, you are supposed to pay for your own detention and the manpower used in investigating you? Even if totally innocent??
Do I have your view point correct, komrade?
We have a woman who seems calm collected and credible, three "swarthy guys" who played some part in a alledged terrorist threat and mindless blither being reported by a clueless media (go figure!)
At any rate about half of what I heard being presented as "facts" yesterday seem to be refuted in this thread. At this point all I can say is this is becomming a hell of a lot more interesting.
If Eunice did hear what she said, then she 100% did the right thing. If I were pulled over by the police, I doubt I'd be inclined to submit to an unreasonable search myself. Still, the fact of the matter is that cultural traits and the current environment tend to make me believe Eunice. It's just the way it is today and anyone with a marginal sense of survival would probably be inclined to agree. The whole situation bear more scrutiny before we arrive at any further conclusions.
I'm sorry about the civil liberties of these men. At the same time, however marginal, the fit the profile of an enemy combatant. Right now that profile equates "Any Muslim male between 10-60." It's just the facts of life since 9/11. I might sound harsh but then yes, I'd round up half the Democratic Party as enemy combatants if I could. If you lived down here during the Election Recount of 2000, you'd probably feel the same way.