| Author | Message | ||
     Gregtonn |
Obama has ordered that some individuals captured in Afghanistan be read this: "You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to speak to an attorney, and to have an attorney present during any questioning. If you cannot afford a lawyer, one will be provided for you at government expense." Is that first sentence appropriate if you are seriously looking for OBL? Isn't our justice system already taxed to it's limits? Do we need additional tax to pay for their lawyers and trail expenses? BO has lost his mind- that is if he ever did have one of his own. G | ||
| P_squared |
From March: Now, do these folks deserve miranda rights? Do they deserve to be treated like a shoplifter down the block? Of course not. Seems that statement had a ~3 month or less expiration date. The 'Global War on Terror' is being morphed into the 'Global Justice Initiative'. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la- na-fbi28-2009may28,0,694540.story When you change tactics from a War to a Law Enforcement activity, the rules change. Looks like 1 of those rules was to ensure we read them their rights. On a foreign battlefield. For crimes committed outside of the U.S.A. Makes perfect sense, doesn't it? | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
I cant wait to see how this plays out. Currently, in Baltimore City, violent hardened criminals routinely walk because of jury intimidation and jury nullification. The "global justice" initiative starts out with the premise that virtually all suspects will end up in a U.S. or foreign court of law. So, are the ones found "not guilty" immediately released onto the streets of America? That would be their right, yes? | ||
| Moxnix |
And since Afghanistan is a replay of the mujahadin "war of attrition" conflict against the Russian occupiers of the 1980s, the usual group of folk from around the fundamentalist world will be there to fight. So, a young Somali (with no constitutional rights in his homeland) in Afghanistan for the show will have non-existent constitutional rights offered by the US, and free coaching from some anti-American NG0 (non-government organization) volunteer with the International Red Cross or Amnesty International, supported by donations from your lefty neighbors back home. Good grief. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
So if the soldier who captured the islamofascist fighter firing on US troops in a war zone is killed before the court date, does the muslim murderer walk? I know if the police officer who wrote my ticket doesn't show up on the court date, I walk away free. The current administration lacks the common sense God gave a screw driver. | ||
| Bill0351 |
Can someone please post a source for the story about Obama ordering Miranda rights to be read in the field? This just reeks of semi-true/untrue email forward. | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/0 6/miranda_rights_for_terrorists.asp | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/ 000/000/016/605iidws.asp | ||
| Ferris_von_bueller |
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la- na-fbi28-2009may28,0,694540.story | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
Jinx, I owe you a coke.  | ||
| Bill0351 |
Funny! It really isn't something done in the field. It's a precaution so that any information obtained is admissible in a US court if it ever comes down to that. It's meant to expand the ability to prosecute, not limit it. I get it now. Much more rounded article on the subject. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la- na-fbi28-2009may28,0,694540.story As usual, there is more to the story than you find on conservative blogs. You may all continue carefully fashioning your tinfoil hats now. Bill | ||
| Court |
If were going to bring this sumbitch to America . . .why can't we hold him in Des Moines, Dallas or Tucson? . . . and it we gave that long lost archipelago of Palau and give (Thanks for the financial prudence Hillary) them $200,000,000 to take 7 prisoners . . . why not a pro rata amount (plus cost of living for NYC) to the low life they brought here. I hope they convict him and put him in Riker's Island . . . waterboarding will look like a day at Disney. | ||
| Moxnix |
Obama's Achilles heel will likely be the economy, not hijacking the constitution or giving away the store to Wall St. Chicago's best. Barry & Rahm, not knowing the difference between goat poop and a poppy flower, never signed a paycheck, never had anything but government breast jobs or non-profit (feeding off the gov. breast) positions. Barry and Rahm are breaking our rice bowls. Trashing the constitution is a symptom. We all know what happened when political ideologues ran the Vietnam war toward the end. When our troops have to get permission to return fire, let's call it Barry & Holder's constitutionally correct war. Our constitutional law professor & attorney/president will meddle, because that is the only thing he knows how to do. | ||
| P_squared |
Bill, I think the issue is that no one knew it was really happening in Afghanistan until Rep. Rogers came across it while there visiting. I'm not really sure I want to be reading someone Miranda rights in a foreign country fresh off of a battlefield. As for doing this in the hopes of being able to prosecute them via our criminal justice system vs. military tribunal, I'd have to say I prefer tribunal. That's just me though. I seem to recall our past record in dealing with terrorists when we handled it as a Law Enforcement activity. I'm not encouraged by those results. I also seem to recall, from a general perspective, that the FBI's jurisdiction is SUPPOSED to be INSIDE the U.S.A.. CIA and Military are OUTSIDE the U.S.A.. Unless the battlefields have been annexed & no one told me, I'd feel better leaving the jurisdiction where it is SUPPOSED to be. As for calling an LAT article "much more rounded", please don't try to kill me by laughter. Did you type that with a straight face?  | ||
| Cowboy |
I have said all my life that taking prisoners in a war was a mistake, as far as I am conserned a man with his hands up is a easy target. If you dont expect to get killed stay home. | ||
| Marksm |
"I have said all my life that taking prisoners in a war was a mistake, as far as I am conserned a man with his hands up is a easy target. If you dont expect to get killed stay home." Amen. One thing I learned from the movies, make sure anyone you leave behind you is dead. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
These folks SHOULD NEVER be tried in US Criminal courts. That right is reserved for CITIZENS. Enemy Combatants should be tried via military tribunal. Reading them Miranda rights is inane. | ||
| Hootowl |
They're prisoners of war without Geneva protections, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions definition of a prisoner of war. The ones that have targeted civilians should be tried as war criminals in military tribunals just as they were in previous conflicts. The ones that have not targeted civilians should be held until the war is over, just like any other POW. I don't understand what all the fuss is about. | ||
| Aesquire |
The terrorists are NOT prisoners of war. They do NOT wear a uniform to distinguish them from civilians. They do NOT treat captives as POW's. They DO hide behind civilians and use them as shields. They DO attack "soft" civilian targets by preference. They DO use children as suicide bombs. They are NOT covered by the Geneva Conventions Of War as signed by the United States. They ARE covered by Geneva Conventions promoted by the Soviet Union to protect their minions, but we did not agree, or sign up for that screwing. ( amazingly smart, that ) Tried as war criminals? I don't think that's right. I believe they should be tried under the laws of Piracy, which definitions they fit like a glove. ( targeting civilians, using human shields, theft, intimidation & murder most foul ) Far simpler to do, as well. Is he a Pirate? Yes? Hang him. Making international mass murderers protected by tyrants & funded by international aid taken by fraud ( usually called "humanitarian aid" ) a U.S. LEGAL problem is exactly what got us the Twin Towers/Pentagon/Penn. field Mass Murder in the first place. Remember 09/11/01? It is without a doubt ..... from Bin Laden's own lips ( before we fried him in a cave, IMO ) that treating Islamofascist Jihad as a law enforcement problem, and the cowardice of U.S. politicians, ( Clinton in particular ) that inspired him to attack us so boldly. No doubt at all. Combine this foolish policy with massive Defense cuts & a planned elimination of a missile defense system, just as Kim ( the worlds best golfer ) tests Nukes & missiles that could reach American cities......... You got bad times a-coming. | ||
| P_squared |
So you're sayin I should probably hold off on fencing in that pasture for the unicorn I'm still waiting for? | ||
| Hootowl |
Aesquire, We're at war, they are prisoners. That makes them prisoners of war. However, they do NOT qualify for Geneva protections, as the Geneva Conventions specifically EXCLUDE terrorists under the definition of who is considered a POW. According to some, we are holding people illegally because we have not charged them with any crime. The point I'm making is, we don't have to charge them with a crime to hold them...they're prisoners of war. Prisoners of war with NO Geneva protections. They don't qualify. Persons conducting warfare that intentionally hide amongst and target civilian populations are war criminals. They should be tried and executed as such, not treated as a car thieves and muggers. | ||
| Hootowl |
P-Squared, If you keep putting out the pixie dust and keebler elf blood, the unicorn will eventually come. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
The are not Prisoners of War, they are not Enemy Combatants, they are terrorists, spies and saboteurs. They should NOT be afforded the courtesy under the Geneva Convention and put down accordingly. Hearts and minds of this enemy is best won through two in the chest and one in the head. | ||
| Hootowl |
They are not prisoners of war according to the Geneva conventions, yes, but they ARE prisoners of war in that we don't have to charge them with shiza in order to legally detain them until the war is over, as you would do with a prisoner of war. There is NO WAY we're going to just "off" them. Hell, we won't even release them to countries that might rough them up a little. Given that, we are stuck detaining them, possibly for the rest of their lives...you know, unless the terrorists give up and the war ends. | ||
| Corporatemonkey |
Today media matters took on this subject. According to their research certain subjects were mirandized as early as July 2008. Obviously the previous administration knew that ultimately these folks would face have to face a US Court (what kind of court is debatable). So this latest news is really not new news... http://mediamatters.org/research/200906110019 | ||
| Blake |
Without specifics that means nothing. My sense is that Pres. Obama is changing strategy against aq, taliclan & other islamist fascists from war to policing/law-enforcement. | ||
| P_squared |
So this latest news is really not new news... That's one way of looking at it. Or you could read the entire page and come up with a different view. There are reports that this was happening on specific bases as going back as early as July 2008. But what Mike Rogers seems to be saying is that this is happening on a more consistent basis, and that the FBI and the Justice Department don't want to talk about it. They are not eager to have this become a public issue, because I think, you know, largely, the American public is not going to be in agreement that detainees, especially detainees overseas, should be read Miranda rights -- you have the right to remain silent, you have the right to a lawyer. The government will provide one for you if you can't afford one, what have you. So, what I think we're seeing now is confusion, as Mike Rogers says. Nobody knows what's going on. The CIA apparently did not know how often this was happening or that it was happening at all. Really very few people know a lot of the details of this. Mike Rogers is somebody who seems to. Public 'news' is a funny thing. If you believe it tells you the entire story, I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. | ||
| Moxnix |
"Perception Management" Feel free to look it up. | ||
| Greenlantern |
I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you. "Ah move over rover. and let jimmy take over. yeah you know what i'm talkin about. yeah! get on with it baby." Paid 99¢ for it on I tunes, They also tossed in three verses, a chorus and guitar solo for my troubles.  | ||
| Gregtonn |
"Perception Management" A hugely profitable business based on manipulating perception; facts be damned. Just ask Al Gore. G |
