Vigilante Justice?

Two Washington Post articles caught my attention this morning:

Md. Police Put Activists' Names On Terror Lists

Chinese Muslims Ordered Released From Guantanamo

I've always thought that civil liberty fanatics and government conspiracy theorists are wackos that have too rich an imagination and too much time on their hands. But the two stories reported made me wonder whether the worries of these "wackos" are unfounded.

I think the hostility comes down to paranoia on both sides (the government's and the respective groups') often spurred by actions taken by the other. I can understand that, and perhaps possibly even empathize with them.

What I have a problem with about the two cases is the revenge-driven, "just-you-wait-I'll-come-get-you" attitude that the law enforcement guys have in their "acceptance of defeat." (In addition to quotes like

"I don't believe the First Amendment is any guarantee to those who wish to disrupt the government" (said former MD state police superintendent Thomas Hutchins)

or

"Justice Department lawyer John O'Quinn (suggested) that immigration authorities might be compelled to arrest the Uighurs on U.S. soil because of their alleged ties to the terrorist organization. " (after the Uighurs being ruled non-combatants, with no proof that they intend to cause harm to the US, and should be released)

I know it's hard not to take cases personally, because a ruling by the judge saying that you're acting unconstitutionally seems like a ruling on your professionalism and judgment. Often one ends up trying too hard to prove that one is right, not that what is done does the defendant and this country's reputation right.