.jpg)
September 11th 2001
In a story by Stephen F. Hayes in the Weekly Standard, The Obama Administration has ordered the FBI and CIA to give terrorists anywhere in the world the Rights of an American Citizen, they must be read their Miranda 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.
1) They have no Rights under American Law. They are not American. 2) This means that the FBI and CIA in Afghanistan are now fighting a law enforcement action, not a war under Combat Conditions.
To say that this literally hamstrings US. Intelligence operations worldwide is an understatement.
Quoting directly from Hayes article:
“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.”
This is a paradigm shift in US Policy. The rights you enjoy as a citizen of this Nation will now be applied to those who wish to deprive you of your life. No longer does the United States consider itself at war with those planning to murder our citizens.
It is now a law enforcement action.
The people we are talking about are the same type that used box cutters to slit the throats of Aircraft Crew on 9-11 in order to take over those flights. Does anyone seriously expect that people like this will not be absolutely emboldened to know that they will now have all the rights of an American citizen? Including the right to remain silent? It didn’t work to save lives after the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. Because the Clinton Administration took the exact same path the short sighted Obama Administration is now, terrorists know they can act with impunity. All they have to do is to look at what happened to those responsible for the first World Trade Center Bombing. Worst case scenario, they will end up in an American jail with better food, housing and “rights” then they enjoyed while planning their murder. Such a deterrent is certain to cost American lives. This is foolhardy, nay stupid. This is guaranteed to cost the lives of American Citizens.
People will die because of this policy change. Just as Clinton’s policies cost the lives of 3000 Americans on September 11th 2001.
Comments
What happens when an American soldier or civilian is captured by the other side? Will they be read their 'rights' just before being decapitated for youtube audiences?
Generally they are tortured. Real torture that is along the lines of ripping out fingernails and teeth, followed by beheading and other forms of dismemberment by Islamic Fascists out to convert the world to Islam.
Those that commit these acts know only one thing, death. Oops, I almost forgot, they also know Allah.
The only right you have at the hands of a terrorist is death.
The value system is very different. My impression is that life here is valued less than in the western world.
Please tell me this isn't true! My world is falling apart ever since about a few years ago when I first started paying attention to what was going on. It just keeps getting worse. Our prisons are already too full to hold anyone here. Inmates escape all the time, and now with more and more inmates converting to islam they'll have other wanna be martyrs to prepare them before they get out. Also, whats to stop muslims from attacking our country more for holding terrorists here if they have better food, and cable tv, and inmates that believe as they do? They're just going to use our system against us and get set free to blow up somebody else's family. Way to go Obama! If you do as good of a job as you're doing on the economy we'll have nothing to worry about right?
Of course you should give suspected terrorists Miranda rights. It is the right thing to do. We should treat everyone fairly, regardless of nationality.
Who would be so mean and miserable to deny any human beings basic rights?
We are Americans - we are the good guys. We do the right thing, and we don't torture or otherwise abuse people simply because that is how the enemy might behave.
D. Cotter demonstrates an utter lack of integrity - the poor dear is without moral compass. She has no understanding of what this great country stands for.
FAIL
Obama's Admin is really made of COW SH!T. THINK BEFORE YOU ACT, YOU DEMOTARDOS!
This is the most bizzar as is the current government.
Obama has fogotten how many of our men and women have died protecting those rights that he is so willing to give away. He is a constant embarrassment to the United States.
Please I write here with a real concerned question regarding Miranda rights for Prisoners of war ... First question; i truly hope someone answers here. Does a(assuming typical international Geneva Convention doctrine)Prisoner of war have some kind of International civil right to a phone call , and a lawyer and a pre-described right to assert self incrimination?
Next question- If a enemy combatant or prisoner of war gets locked up in an American Federal jail does that person gain additional rights equaling those of an American Citizen?
Please I would love straight answers. My gut tells me that there is no way that there is any historical precedent fighting an enemy in Foreign land of the FBI embarrassingly in the same room as CIA Miranda-izing these prisoners? - Nick L- Boston
Nick, I can try to answer ...
The US is a Constitutional Republic, (see The Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV, Section 4), not a democracy. The majority does not win, the minority is to be protected from the majority by the Rule of Law found in our Constitution, the framers of which were well educated and experienced in law, politics, war, language, contracts, and liberty. The words used in the Constitution were intentional, deliberate, and frankly brilliant.
With regard to Miranda Rights, we need only look to our Constitution to determine the legitimacy of this new policy . It is the Fifth Amendment that delineates the rights outlined in the Miranda vs Arizona case;
(see next post)
First, The Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; …. nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
I left out the double jeopardy part to save charecters in this post, they don’t apply here.
Clearly then, in War we must look to other laws, (except ... in time of war), and also determine who has the authority to make decisions. The President?
Article II, (Presidential Powers), Section 2: The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;
(next ones coming)
by saying "I left out the double jeopardy part to save charecters in this post, they don’t apply here.", you take up a bunch of characters that could have been used to write the rest of the amendment. you could have just put "..." to acknowledge that you left some words out. :D you spelled characters wrong. :P
So not the President, he commands the military, that’s it. Who should be in charge of POW’s? Lets go back to The Constitution.
Article I, Section 8, (Powers of Congress): To constitute Tribunals, (this would be for trying POW’s) …
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations, (so yeah, the Geneva Convention needs to be honored);
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water, Aha!);
Let’s go a little deeper. What laws govern the judiciary and acts of treason?, (terrorism would be a treasonous crime).
Article III, (the Judiciary), Section 3: The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason,
Well now, Congress determines all, not the courts ... (more coming)
Judiciary is who protects the rights of those protected under the Constitution, not State enimies. Who is protected?
The 14th Amendment: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
More on Judiciary duties and authority.
The 11th Amendment: … The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.
They have no authority over aliens, terrorists, or war criminals
(one more)
So no, there is no precedent for such action, and there is no Constitutional Authority for such a proclamation from the POTUS. Our new President picks up right where the old left off; ignoring our Constitution and The Rule of Law.
Change my arse.
Murph
Nick, the United States follows all of the Geneva Conventions. Enemy Combatants have no country, they fight for a religion, not an army or country. The Geneva conventions do not cover them, though the United States is giving them the same considerations. These combatants do not follow any conventions, they torture, murder, and maim at will. They generally refuse to give consistent information let alone accurate information willingly. They rarely give information willingly that would specifically identify them their families or their support network. They are murderers, they are not stupid. Giving them the right to silence will get American people killed.
Today, Glenn Greenwald argues that the Bill of Rights was never exclusively intended for U.S. citizens.
I think he's right.
This is a despicable article, and the idea it posits is absolutely ridiculous.
So I can have slaves again, if I import non-U.S. citizens from Haiti!
"John Kirkland:
The value system is very different. My impression is that life here is valued less than in the western world. "
Lol! One of the oldest demonization-of-the-other tricks in the book. Right up there with "They only understand force/violence."
Dianna, et al, you're forgetting one thing (at least) :
"They will expand their questioning of suspects.."
Suspects!. Repeat : "Suspects" You're assuming suspicion = guilt . So far, they've been 98-99% WRONG (at least) . Why do you trust government so much? ;)
According to the Joint Chiefs' report, it's mostly a Pashtun resistance, against all outsiders, with ~ 10% having religious motivation, and <100 al Qaeda members there. Best estimate, at peak there were 5k-10k actual terrorists, worldwide, of all stripes. We've had 10ks of prisoners. (50k at least) . Doubt/skepticism seems the most logical position, regarding any accusation. Why the GWOT then? Power & profit, through fear.
Oh,your source, WS: :))))
Ms. Cotter, you should take a minute or two to read some of the law on which you've written. Your article tells us more about you than it does about the facts.
U.S. Supreme Court in Yick Wo v. Hopkins (1886):
"The fourteenth amendment to the constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens. It says: "Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." These provisions are universal in their application, to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality; and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws."
If it were left to minds like yours, women would have been forced to wait long beyond 1920 for the right to vote. Please try to step into the light.
It was those god damn Surenoes lol
shut the hell up bob
I have seen Portland police officers, and "Clean and Safe" workers routinly arrest and detaine women in the domestic violence shelters. Without the benefit of Miranda. They, the women, just start talking. Sometimes they are very recent victims of a beating by a male lover, or male street worker.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!