5
   

MIRANDA RIGHTS FOR TERRORISTS?

 
 
H2O MAN
 
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 06:19 am


It turns out that it is true .. the Obama administration has been reading Miranda rights to detainees that are captured and held abroad.
If the world is so sure that these Islamic goons have Geneva rights, let's give them those rights.

Under the Geneva Convention enemy combatants dressed in civilian clothes can be summarily executed. - No Miranda rights necessary.
"You have the right to stand up against this wall. We have the right to put a slug in you. Stand by for your rights."
 
Yankee
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 06:22 am
@H2O MAN,
This is quite troubling. It is a sign of confusion within our Govt and puts our soldiers at risk.

Once we read them those "rights", they are in possession of those rights.

They are not American Citizens. They are not a soldier of a sovereign Nation.

I do not understand the purpose of this.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  3  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 08:23 am
Apparently it is to some, in certain cases and it is not new as the Bush administration did it in some certain cases as well. Maybe those in question are citizens of the US and later would be able to say there were not read their rights. Or they could have been arrested for criminal acts instead of related terror acts or detained in war situations.

Quote:
The Obama administration announced this week that some detainees captured and held abroad have been read Miranda rights to preserve evidence for a potential prosecution.

Administration officials say the Bush administration did this as well in some instances relating to certain criminal cases.

They would not offer specifics in any of the cases, whether under President Obama or President Bush.

The question of detainees being Mirandized was raised by the Weekly Standard's Steven Hayes who wrote that "the Obama Justice Department has quietly ordered FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high value detainees captured and held at U.S. detention facilities in Afghanistan, according a senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee."

The Obama administration took issue with the notion that this was a blanket policy change, one ordered by the Justice Department.

"There has been no policy change and no blanket instruction issued for FBI agents to Mirandize detainees overseas," Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller said. "While there have been specific cases in which FBI agents have Mirandized suspects overseas, at both Bagram and in other situations, in order to preserve the quality of evidence obtained, there has been no overall policy change with respect to detainees."


H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 09:18 am
@revel,
revel wrote:

Apparently it is to some, in certain cases and it is not new as the Bush administration did it in some certain cases as well.




A few certain cases is very different than the Obama administration's standing orders to read Myranda rights to every Islamic terrorist captured.

Obama and his administration have just put our troops, our allies and our country in even more danger than before.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 09:38 am
It almost seems like our War Against Terrorism is turning into an old rerun of Kojak. And perhaps, soldiers should have lollipops, like Kojak, and tell the enemy combatants, "Who loves ya, baby?" I say this all in jest, since a war against terrorists is not a police action, in my opinion.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 12:15 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
A few certain cases is very different than the Obama administration's standing orders to read Myranda rights to every Islamic terrorist captured.


No he does not have those standing orders. The article which started this thread said he has some in certain cases just like the previous administration, not a blanket Miranda order for all captured detainees.
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 12:19 pm
@revel,



I believe it is a standing order.
ebrown p
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 02:00 pm
I would rather they read Miranda rights to Dick Cheney.
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 02:13 pm
@ebrown p,


For what reason(s)?
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  3  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 02:50 pm
@H2O MAN,
So you think Obama lied when he said it wasn't a standing order?
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 02:54 pm
@revel,


Yes.
revel
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 04:17 pm
@H2O MAN,
Proof?
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 04:27 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
I believe it is a standing order.


But you, no doubt, also believe in the Easter bunny and Santa Claus. This thread didn't seem to be about our individual, personal beliefs but about the facts. All the source materials provided here (including the ones you yourself provided) use the words some and certain in referring to cases where a prisoner's rights might be read.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 05:55 pm
@H2O MAN,
Read what you link before you comment on it eh.
Intrepid
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 08:20 pm
@ehBeth,
It becomes increasingly harder to take H2O MAN seriously.
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 10:16 pm
@Intrepid,
Quote:
It becomes increasingly harder to take H2O MAN seriously.


Was that ever a serious possibility?
0 Replies
 
genoves
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 10:57 pm
What you do not know, Merry Andrew, is that, according to the report below, the esteemed Barack Hussein Obama is a liar.

Note:

Republicans and the Obama Administration are at odds over giving Miranda rights to terrorists caught in combat zones, reported ABC News on Thursday.

The Obama Administration announced this week that in order to preserve evidence for possible prosecution against some terrorist suspects captured on the battlefield, they will be read the Miranda rights by arresting U.S. troops.

While the Bush Administration has done this in the past, many Republicans feel that if terrorist suspects use their right to remain silent, that they will not give up plans for future attacks.

“It would seem the last thing we want is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (who admitted to orchestrating the 9/11 attacks) or any other al-Qaeda terrorist to remain silent,” representative Pete Hoekstra, a member on the House Intelligence Committee told the Weekly Standard, which first broke the story. “Our focus should be on preventing the next attack, not giving radical jihadists a new tactic to resist interrogation -- lawyering up.”

In fact, former CIA director George Tenet wrote that in his memoirs. He wrote that if Mohammad had been read the Miranda rights and was given a lawyer and remained silent, that the CIA would not have gathered information from his interrogation that resulted in stopping terrorist attacks and saving lives, reported the Weekly Standard.

Although many on Capitol Hill are concerned that this is a new policy change in handling suspected terrorist detainees, the Justice Department assured that it was not.

“While there have been specific cases in which FBI agents have Mirandized suspects overseas, at both Bagram and in other situations, in order to preserve the quality of evidence obtained, there has been no overall policy change with respect to detainees,” department spokesman Matthew Miller told ABC News.

Even though the Obama Administration said that some suspected terrorist detainees have been read the Miranda rights, it comes as a stark contrast to what President Obama said in a March interview with 60 Minutes, where he stated that detainees would not be given Miranda rights.

***************************************************************
IT COMES AS A STARK CONTRAST TO WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMA SAID IN A MARCH INTERVIEW WITH 60 MINUTES , WHERE HE STATED THAT DETAINEES WOULD N O T BE GIVEN MIRANDA RIGHTS.

Does anybody believe the doubletalking president any more?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 11:52 pm
Timothy McVeigh (who bombed the Federal building in Oklahoma)
Michael Griffin (the killer of Dr. Gunn)
Scott P. Roeder (the killer of Dr. Tiller)
James Von Brunn (the shooter at the Holocaust Museum)

... all received Miranda rights.
genoves
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Jun, 2009 11:58 pm
@ebrown p,
Very true! but you are not responding to what I wrote>

I will tell you again>

What you do not know, Merry Andrew, is that, according to the report below, the esteemed Barack Hussein Obama is a liar.

Note:

Republicans and the Obama Administration are at odds over giving Miranda rights to terrorists caught in combat zones, reported ABC News on Thursday.

The Obama Administration announced this week that in order to preserve evidence for possible prosecution against some terrorist suspects captured on the battlefield, they will be read the Miranda rights by arresting U.S. troops.

While the Bush Administration has done this in the past, many Republicans feel that if terrorist suspects use their right to remain silent, that they will not give up plans for future attacks.

“It would seem the last thing we want is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (who admitted to orchestrating the 9/11 attacks) or any other al-Qaeda terrorist to remain silent,” representative Pete Hoekstra, a member on the House Intelligence Committee told the Weekly Standard, which first broke the story. “Our focus should be on preventing the next attack, not giving radical jihadists a new tactic to resist interrogation -- lawyering up.”

In fact, former CIA director George Tenet wrote that in his memoirs. He wrote that if Mohammad had been read the Miranda rights and was given a lawyer and remained silent, that the CIA would not have gathered information from his interrogation that resulted in stopping terrorist attacks and saving lives, reported the Weekly Standard.

Although many on Capitol Hill are concerned that this is a new policy change in handling suspected terrorist detainees, the Justice Department assured that it was not.

“While there have been specific cases in which FBI agents have Mirandized suspects overseas, at both Bagram and in other situations, in order to preserve the quality of evidence obtained, there has been no overall policy change with respect to detainees,” department spokesman Matthew Miller told ABC News.

Even though the Obama Administration said that some suspected terrorist detainees have been read the Miranda rights, it comes as a stark contrast to what President Obama said in a March interview with 60 Minutes, where he stated that detainees would not be given Miranda rights.

***************************************************************
IT COMES AS A STARK CONTRAST TO WHAT PRESIDENT OBAMA SAID IN A MARCH INTERVIEW WITH 60 MINUTES , WHERE HE STATED THAT DETAINEES WOULD N O T BE GIVEN MIRANDA RIGHTS.

Does anybody believe the doubletalking president any more?
revel
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Jun, 2009 06:50 am
@genoves,
It is true that Obama has not been sticking to some of his previous statements. However, I think in this case, you are taking the sixty miniute interview slightly out of context.

There is a difference in having miranda rights as a standing order to all captured detainees and giving miranda rights in some certain cases as had already been the case.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » MIRANDA RIGHTS FOR TERRORISTS?
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/29/2022 at 03:59:57