MIRANDA RIGHTS FOR TERRORISTS?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I believe it is a standing order.

I would rather they read Miranda rights to Dick Cheney.

For what reason(s)?

So you think Obama lied when he said it wasn't a standing order?

Yes.

Proof?

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.

Read what you link before you comment on it eh.

It becomes increasingly harder to take H2O MAN seriously.

Was that ever a serious possibility?

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?

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.

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?

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.