Michael Baier wrote:


>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53805

>Disgrace or what?
>Giving the drug-dealer full immunity not once but twice.
>Another heck of a job.

I've been inundated with this case when I was in Montreal by that bastion of 
journalistic integrity, Lou Dobbs on CNN. Fortunately, when I'm here in 
Toronto I don't get CNN so I get a break from Lou. This is the first that I 
heard of the particulars of the charges and I have to say that I agree with 
them.

Let's see, you have two guards who fired on a suspect because they thought 
he was armed and then when it turned out that he wasn't gathered up all the 
evidence and didn't file the report. The fact that he was later confirmed to 
be smuggling drugs is irrelevant.

It's kind of like invading a country because you think they have weapons and 
then when it turns out that they didn't you switch positions and say that it 
was all justified because the leader was a bad guy.

The problem isn't really that Bush failed to pardon these guys for their 
actions, but that he expects pardon for his.

Note the following:
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Texas issued a
statement in September arguing "the defendants were prosecuted because
they had fired their weapons at a man who had attempted to surrender by
holding his open hands in the air, at which time Agent Compean attempted to
hit the man with the butt of Compean's shotgun, causing the man to run in
fear of what the agents would do to him next."

The statement said, "Although both agents saw that the man was not armed,
the agents fired at least 15 rounds at him while he was running away from
them, hitting him once."

=======
Bruce

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *