Obama seeks to restrict Miranda rights for terror suspects
 

Attorney General Backs Miranda Limit for Terror Suspects - NYTimes.com

whoops, I must have accidentally checked "Bush" on my ballot

since when do terrorists deserve respect

I'm pretty ambivalent on how they try them. as long as we don't take them to cells in Sweden or wherever and start torturing them

Anyone arrested by US authorities should be offered full miranda rights.

even muslims?

Especially muslims.

I think US citizens, terrorists or not, should be fully mirandized.

Everybody else should be treated on a case by case basis.

Do you consider terrorists enemy combatants? And if so do you think enemy combatants should be mirandized?

There is a GARGANTUAN difference between suspected terrorists and terrorists.

Obama is no better than this guy

lol @ redbreegull finally realizing Obama isn't the messiah

miranda is a bitch. god, i hate her.

The times square bomber is a "suspected terrorist". Do you honestly believe the difference between him and a "terrorist" is gargantuan?

And plus this story is basically from something David gregory weaseled from holder. leaving it at OBAMA IZ BUSH is pretty daft.

Yes.

Until he is convicted in a court and legally proven to be responsible for what happened then he isn't a criminal and should not be treated like one. The state doesn't have the right (yet) to simply make accusations and punish people based on those accusations alone. We live in a civilised society where we believe people are innocent until they are proven guilty in a civilised way - namely a court and under laws which apply equally to all people regardless of the accusation.

Now, when this guy is convicted, he should be punished as far as the law will allow. But if we do not provide due process, we are just pursuing vigilante justice.

I don't disagree. But months ago the admin gets thrown under the bus for 'treating terrorists like citizens!' so it seens like people are throwing bricks for the sake of it.

Like I said I'm pretty ambivalent about it. I'd rather them be tried in civilian courts and be mirandized but I don't have a problem with treating them as enemy combatants either, since that's essentially wht they are

I don't think enemy combatants should be mirandized, but I also don't think we should bend over backwards to fit suspects into the enemy combatant classification just to avoid mirandizing them. I don't think mere suspicion of involvement in a terrorist act alone is enough to deem someone an enemy combatant, especially if the suspect is an American citizen.

I agree that there should be a distinction between enemy combatants and criminal suspects. The way that looks like is (crudely) this:

If a terrorist is the midst of a terrorist act (not plotting, not speaking, not planing - but actually carrying out an attack) then he should be stopped obviously in the same way any criminal in the midst of a crime is stopped. If he is not in the act, then he is yet another criminal. If he's on foreign soil, he is treated as a foreign criminal / enemy of the state. If he is on US soil, then he needs to be treated under the same laws an any other non-citizen criminal.

theres a thread for this stuff

there may be hope yet

The 3-Dimensional chess game continues. If you've been keeping score, a decade ago the word terrorist evoked images of men in robes living in caves. Today, it's becoming domesticated and the big gun that is the Patriot Act is now being pointed back on American citizens, by design!



When the definition of terrorism starts to ******* citizens who merely speak out against their government. Our government is moving so fast in this direction right now it's frightening.

point taken. but that basically implies that underoo bomber and time square loser arent enemy combatants. and that clashes with the 'obamer is treating terrorists like citizens!' line conservatives were towing five minutes ago. unless youre one didn't, and if so good for you

This is not the first time I have criticized him, but I'm not surprised you two missed it while you were busy hopping on the Obama is a failure bandwagon. Gotta stay up to date with the latest trends, right?

Also there was not a single thread for everything we didn't like about George Bush so why should I post this in the other thread?

Cause I like that thread title more.

Pretty harsh, I dont know how I missed that.

I'm sure your search was exhaustive.

That'll do pig.

ouch

If I skip the threads were you get into stupid arguments with Omega/Trots it doenst leave many more posts to browse over. Half of those are you calling someone/thing stupid.

The second most critical post you've made...







It's a scorcher....









Wait for it...

well I guess you can lay down on your laurels now.

just shut the fuck up redbull

Then comes communism in a baby carriage

This is not likely to be a popular position anywhere, but I'm not even sure I agree with mirandizing citizens. If you blab on about what you did without knowing your rights, that's the People's problem...why, exactly?

are you retarded

No, I'm not. I just concur with the dissenting opinion in that particular Supreme Court case, unless there is some outstanding reason that may cause me to change my mind.

that outstanding reason would be called "rights." We used to be real big on them in this country.

I don't see where the specific rights as enumerated are violated by not being told you have the rights. If one doesn't educate himself of his rights, I don't have an issue that the People should benefit from a guilty person's open-and-shut case.

If that is your attitude, you basically admittedly surrender all power in the system to the upper class and the well-educated.

Edit: you are also making the ridiculous assumption that law enforcement always acts with everyone's best interests in mind, and does not abuse the power given to them

Related reading:

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_A...s_Constitution

You make the assumption that the lower class is dumb, but be that as it may, I have to agree with the White dissent on this one for now.

Every time I am feeling down on America, people always remind me it could be worse.

Well, I don't think Miranda is going anywhere, whatever I may think about it, as precedent.

I'm a little confused as to whether our people believe these are derived from natural human rights, in which case they should be afforded to literally everyone, or whether they are merely the rights we enjoy as American citizens - exclusive to our people.