I'll keep my rights

Obviously we need to review the Constitution's Fifth Amendment:\n"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury."\nThis is the same amendment that protects citizens from law enforcement abuses by preventing people from being compelled to testify against themselves, from being tried twice for the same crime, and from being "deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."\nThe amendment forms a crucial part of the core of all Americans' civil liberties. What people may forget is these are individuals' rights, and they are designed for their protection.\nThe eight men from Evansville who were detained by the FBI last week had the right to wave their right to a Grand Jury. That means they would have, most likely, been openly accused of terrorism.\nInstead, they have been allowed to go home with their reputations untarnished. I know they have no problems with their constitutional rights.\nIn this case, the problem lies with journalists. The same journalists who claim that they need information about the case so they can protect these individuals' rights are the same ones who have used speculation to subtly accuse these men of terrorism.\nIn no public government documents have these men been accused of terrorist activity, yet time after time, the newspaper articles used unnamed and indirectly related sources to speculate as to whether these men were involved in terrorist activity.\nThis type of journalism is not an unbiased presentation of the facts, but a skewed array of opinions that is wholly unworthy of a news page.\nI find this extremely disturbing. What I find more disturbing is the argument that in Grand Jury cases, the public's need for information outweighs the rights of the individual. It is just a little too close to communist ideology for me.\nThe constitution was designed to protect us. Maybe now we should question whether or not our journalists should be doing the same thing.