Yep, the whole process is self defeating and it presents us with a strategic dilemma. We either follow our laws and suffer the consequences or we break the laws and suffer the consequences. I agree with the President that terrorists don't deserve legal protection, but there must be some degree of legal protection (presumed innocence) until they are proven to be a terrorist, and that appears to crux of the matter. Locking up a suspect for potentially years on faulty intelligence, and providing him or her no legal protection is definitely going too far. Any of us, or our family members, potentially could be arrested under suspicion of being a terrorist or a facilitator based on a set up, and we wouldn’t want to surrender our legal rights to prove our innocence. However, if proving our innocence somehow equates to Bin Laden and his ilk getting the latest dump of our intelligence products it will obviously encourage administration officials to look for ways to bypass the law. The law makers got us into this mess, and they need to get us out of it. Americans will accept special measures for known terrorists, but for the most part they don’t accept surrendering our legal principles. We have to be careful that the fix doesn’t start us down going down the wrong road where there may not be an opportunity to make a U-turn.