• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Miranda Rights for Terrorists

Triad

Banned
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
233
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
For, 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 administration has decided to change the focus to law enforcement. Here’s the problem. You have foreign fighters who are targeting US troops today – foreign fighters who go to another country to kill Americans. We capture them…and they’re reading them their rights – Mirandizing these foreign fighters,” says Representative Mike Rogers, who recently met with military, intelligence and law enforcement officials on a fact-finding trip to Afghanistan.

Rogers, a former FBI special agent and U.S. Army officer, says the Obama administration has not briefed Congress on the new policy. “I was a little surprised to find it taking place when I showed up because we hadn’t been briefed on it, I didn’t know about it. We’re still trying to get to the bottom of it, but it is clearly a part of this new global justice initiative.”

That effort, which elevates the FBI and other law enforcement agencies and diminishes the role of intelligence and military officials, was described in a May 28 Los Angeles Times article.

The FBI and Justice Department plan to significantly expand their role in global counter-terrorism operations, part of a U.S. policy shift that will replace a CIA-dominated system of clandestine detentions and interrogations with one built around transparent investigations and prosecutions.

Under the "global justice" initiative, which has been in the works for several months, FBI agents will have a central role in overseas counter-terrorism cases. They will expand their questioning of suspects and evidence-gathering to try to ensure that criminal prosecutions are an option, officials familiar with the effort said.

Thanks in part to the popularity of law and order television shows and movies, many Americans are familiar with the Miranda warning – so named because of the landmark 1966 Supreme Court case Miranda vs. Arizona that required police officers and other law enforcement officials to advise suspected criminals of their rights.

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.

A lawyer who has worked on detainee issues for the U.S. government offers this rationale for the Obama administration’s approach. “If the US is mirandizing certain suspects in Afghanistan, they’re likely doing it to ensure that the treatment of the suspect and the collection of information is done in a manner that will ensure the suspect can be prosecuted in a US court at some point in the future.”
The Weekly Standard

:hitsfan:




Just starting to hit the news cycle..and forums. Breit on FOX reported it 35mins ago or so..panel discussing yada yada...anyway this is the source.


Miranda rights are for Americans in the USA not Jihadist we're fighting a global war with.
With the ongoing gitmo fiasco, the bush bash memo release flop, Pelosi&TheCIA, this will likely cause a crapstorm for Obama.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why on the battlefield we're allowed to shoot at these people at our discresion, but when we capture them they suddenly have the rights of American citizens.
 
Miranda rights are for Americans in the USA not Jihadist we're fighting a global war with.
Wrong, Miranda rights are for anyone we plan to put on trial in an American court of law. All this is doing is making sure we've closed a potential legal loophole.

I've heard cops complain all the time that they wished they didn't have to read a suspect Miranda because it makes them clam up. Bull****. A good interrogator is not worried about Miranda. In fact once you've read it you can rest easy knowing that closed that loophole. This means nothing, in fact it's a good thing.
With the ongoing gitmo fiasco, the bush bash memo release flop, Pelosi&TheCIA, this will likely cause a crapstorm for Obama.
Only if you're ignorant about what Miranda is, have no clue as to what kind of impact this won't have, and buy into this being an actual story.
 
I don't understand why on the battlefield we're allowed to shoot at these people at our discresion, but when we capture them they suddenly have the rights of American citizens.

Because on the battlefield we are engaging an armed combatant who is intent on killing us.

It's not about giving them American citizens rights. It's about addressing a potential legal challenge in advance so that it doesn't come back to haunt us later.
 
U.S. Lawmaker Says Obama Ordered FBI to Read Rights to Detainees

The move is reportedly creating chaos in the field among the CIA, FBI and military personnel, according to Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich.

A senior Republican on the House Intelligence Committee is accusing the Obama administration of quietly ordering the FBI to start reading Miranda rights to suspected terrorists at U.S. military detention facilities in Afghanistan.

The move is reportedly creating chaos in the field among the CIA, FBI and military personnel, according to Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich. The soldiers especially, he says, are frustrated that giving high value detainees "Miranda rights -- the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney -- is impeding their ability to pursue intelligence on the battlefield, according to a story first reported by the Weekly Standard.
U.S. Lawmaker Says Obama Ordered FBI to Read Rights to Detainees - Political News - FOXNews.com
 
The move is reportedly creating chaos in the field among the CIA, FBI and military personnel, according to Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Mich. The soldiers especially, he says, are frustrated that giving high value detainees "Miranda rights -- the right to remain silent, the right to an attorney -- is impeding their ability to pursue intelligence on the battlefield, according to a story first reported by the Weekly Standard.

I'm calling bull****. It takes about twenty seconds to read Miranda. Miranda doesn't stop a subject from talking.

So are they doing it to select high profile targets in the detention facilities or out in the field with everyone? Some clarification would be nice.
 
Last edited:
I'm calling bull****. It takes about twenty seconds to read Miranda. Miranda doesn't stop a subject from talking.

So are they doing it to select high profile targets in the detention facilities or out in the field with everyone? Some clarification would be nice.

Yeah, 1992-2000 legal "fight" against terrorist.

That got us 911. Have some perspective.
 
Yeah, 1992-2000 legal "fight" against terrorist.

That got us 911. Have some perspective.

What are you talking about man? Your comment is absolutely without merit in this situation and completely irrelevant.

And read some new material on 9/11 because you are way off the radar.
 
I'm calling bull****. It takes about twenty seconds to read Miranda. Miranda doesn't stop a subject from talking.

If they're talking before you read Miranda rights, none of that stuff can be used in a court of law.

Which is why I don't see why so many conservatives are getting upset. A terrorist could confess to something before being read his rights, and that evidence would HAVE to be suppressed in court. Miranda usually stops a subject from talking :p
 
The Weekly Standard

:hitsfan:




Just starting to hit the news cycle..and forums. Breit on FOX reported it 35mins ago or so..panel discussing yada yada...anyway this is the source.


Miranda rights are for Americans in the USA not Jihadist we're fighting a global war with.
With the ongoing gitmo fiasco, the bush bash memo release flop, Pelosi&TheCIA, this will likely cause a crapstorm for Obama.

I disagree with you. Miranda rights are interpreted by SCOTUS from the Bill of Rights, and our founding fathers designated those rights as "inalienable", meaning inherent, and given by God, not by any government.
 
Last edited:
If they're talking before you read Miranda rights, none of that stuff can be used in a court of law.

Which is why I don't see why so many conservatives are getting upset. A terrorist could confess to something before being read his rights, and that evidence would HAVE to be suppressed in court. Miranda usually stops a subject from talking :p

Wrong. Miranda is only required when you have a suspect in custody and you are asking guilt seeking questions. Voluntary admissions are not restricted and not considered "fruit of the poisonous tree."

Miranda does not "usually" stop someone from talking. Occasionally it does, not very often though. Good interrogators do not fear or lament Miranda. They deal with it. I've had suspect lawyer up immediately upon Miranda only to turn around two minutes later and say "I wanna talk."

If a suspect doesn't want to talk, Miranda is irrelevant because they won't talk regardless of what you say.
 
I disagree with you. Miranda rights are interpreted by SCOTUS from the Bill of Rights, and our founding fathers designated those rights as "inalienable", meaning inherent, and given by God, not by any government.



Cool! The USA rules the world and all beings on it are our subjects.
:doh
 
Last edited:
If they're talking before you read Miranda rights, none of that stuff can be used in a court of law.

Which is why I don't see why so many conservatives are getting upset. A terrorist could confess to something before being read his rights, and that evidence would HAVE to be suppressed in court. Miranda usually stops a subject from talking :p

Terrorist shouldn't get any constitutional protections.
 
In my opinion these warnings should be extended to anyone in U.S. custody on U.S. controlled soil who will be prosecuted.

Miranda is a set of warnings, not rights by the way. And once they are placed into our legal system, they automatically get the same rights we get.
 
Last edited:
You might want to edit that into your first post, so no one reads just that one and complains it is a blog as a source.

Couldn't. There some timelimit on editing.
 
Terrorist shouldn't get any constitutional protections.

Innocent until proven guilty. In case you haven't noticed, the U.S. doesn't always get it right with regard to who we label "terrorist" and then proceed to put in prison for years on end. Oh, and torture.
 
Miranda is a warning instituted in the 60's as a means to preserve an American defendants 5th Ammendemnt Right under the Constitution of the USA.

'We the People of the United States of America'..is who the warning for the Right applies to ..nobody else.


Otherwise..welcome to the United States of Earth.:roll:
-I never knew the left was so Imperialistic minded that it applies the Laws of the United States over all peoples on the earth. Next thing you know they'll be wearing powdered whigs!
 
Last edited:
Terrorist shouldn't get any constitutional protections.

Who gets to define if they are terrorists?

People who make such absolutist statements generally have no foresight as to dangerous precedents that may occur.

I see no problem with reading them their miranda rights. If you really want to lock these scumbags away, why would you willingly leave open a legal loophole?
 
Miranda is a warning instituted in the 60's as a means to preserve an American defendants 5th Ammendemnt Right under the Constitution of the USA.

'We the People of the United States of America'..is who the warning for the Right applies to ..nobody else.


Otherwise..welcome to the United States of Earth.:roll:
-I never knew the left was so Imperialistic minded that it applies the Laws of the United States over all peoples on the earth. Next thing you know they'll be wearing powdered whigs!

You. Don't. Get. It.

I would like you to show me where civil rights only apply to U.S. citizens and nobody else. Hint, it's a loaded question. I don't want your pissed off opinion, I want legal citation.

Get back with me.
 
The real question is does the person have a right to have an attorney present during questioning.
 
Back
Top Bottom