Wednesday, February 3, 2010

You Have The Right To Remain Silent. WHY?

 Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (below) says he sewed powerful powder explosive PETN into the crotch of his underwear (above) in attempts of blowing up Flight 253.
Nigerian terrorist Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (below) says he sewed powerful powder explosive PETN into the crotch of his underwear (above) in attempts of blowing up Flight 253.
Police generally read these rights to individuals about to be questioned in custody. "You have the right to remain silent. If you give up 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 an attorney. If you desire an attorney and cannot afford one, an attorney will be obtained for you before police questioning."
The Miranda rule was developed to protect the individual's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The Miranda warning ensures that people in custody realize they do not have to talk to the police and that they have the right to the presence of an attorney.
If the Miranda warning is not given before questioning, or if police continue to question a suspect after he or she indicates in any manner a desire to consult with an attorney before speaking, statements by the suspect generally are inadmissible at trial—they cannot be used against the suspect.                                              Why in the world would we ever think of giving a foreign terrorist the right to not answer our questions?  Is asking a question of a terrorist considered torture? What is wrong with interigations and demanding an answer. Are the lives of Americans not worth questioning a terrorist that was trying to blow up hundreds of Americans? Is it no suprise that Iran is feeling more imboldened? Was it worth it? And if it isn't then why hasn't the Obama admin. said so? If you want to get mugged then walk weak with your head down low.
The terrorist organization is deploying operatives to the United States to carry out new attacks from inside the country, including "clean" recruits with a negligible trail of terrorist contacts, CIA Director Leon Panetta said. The chilling warning comes as Christmas Day airline attack suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutullab is cooperating with federal investigators, a federal law enforcement official said Tuesday.
Al-Qaida is also inspiring homegrown extremists to trigger violence on their own, Panetta said.
The annual assessment of the nation's terror threats provided no startling new terror trends, but amplified growing concerns since the Christmas Day airline attack in Detroit that militants are growing harder to detect and moving more quickly in their plots.
"The biggest threat is not so much that we face an attack like 9/11. It is that al-Qaida is adapting its methods in ways that oftentimes make it difficult to detect," Panetta told the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Several senators tangled over whether suspected terrorists should be tried in civilian or military court. At the same time, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced legislation that would force the Obama administration to backtrack on its plans to try Sept. 11 defendants in federal court in New York and use military tribunals instead.
As al-Qaida presses new terror plots, it is increasingly relying on new recruits with minimal training and simple devices to carry out attacks, Panetta said as part of the terror assessment to Congress.
Panetta also warned of the danger of extremists acting alone: "It's the lone-wolf strategy that I think we have to pay attention to as the main threat to this country," he said.
The hearing comes just over a month since a failed attempt to bring down an airliner in Detroit, allegedly by Abdulmutullab, a Nigerian. And the assessment comes only a few months after U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Hassan was accused of single-handedly attacking his fellow soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13.
National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair said with changes made since the Dec. 25 attack, U.S. intelligence would he able to identify and stop someone like the Detroit bomber before he got on the plane. But he warned a more careful and skilled would-be terrorist might not be detected.
FBI Director Robert Mueller defended the FBI's handling of the Detroit attempted bombing attack, disputing assertions that agents short-circuited more intelligence insights from the Nigerian suspect by quickly providing him with his Miranda rights to remain silent.
Mueller was asked by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., whether the interrogation of Abdulmutullab continues despite the fact that the suspect had already been read his legal right to remain silent. Mueller replied: "Yes."
Mueller said that in "case after case," terrorists have provided actionable intelligence even after they were given their rights and charged with crimes. Mueller said they know such cooperation can result in shorter sentences or other consideration from the government.
Mueller also said that a new FBI-CIA interrogation team created in August to replace controversial CIA interrogations had been used several times already.
That seemed to contradict what Blair told Congress in January. He said at a hearing on Abdulmutallab that he thought the interrogation team should have been used to question the suspect but later clarified his remarks to say that the teams were not used because they were not yet fully operational.
Intelligence officials confirmed Tuesday the High-Value Interrogation Group is not yet fully formed but said joint interrogation teams are available for use.
Panetta confirmed that the agency participates on the team, though not in a lead role.
"They're backup, but they are doing some of the interviewing," he said.
Hundreds of terror suspects have already been convicted in civilian federal courts, including convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid.
But Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., offered a bill Tuesday that would prohibit the government from using Justice Department funds to prosecute suspects charged in the Sept. 11 attack in civilian courts.
The move comes on the heels of the Obama administration's decision to rethink whether it would try self-proclaimed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad in a New York City courtroom.
The proposed law would cover people who legally could be prosecuted by a military commission, applying to terror suspects who are not U.S. citizens. By Tuesday evening, the bill had support from 18 senators, mostly Republicans.
During the terror assessment hearing, Blair also warned of the growing cyberthreat, saying computer-related attacks have become dynamic and malicious.
Obama has promised to make cybersecurity a priority in his administration, but the president's new budget asks for a decrease in funds for the Homeland Security Department's cybersecurity division.
The government's first quadrennial homeland security review states that high consequence and large-scale cyberattacks could massively disable or hurt international financial, commercial and physical infrastructure.
The report, obtained by The Associated Press, said these types of cyberattacks could cripple the movement of people and goods around the world and bring vital social and economic programs to a halt.

 These are the videos Bruce is talking about. If the Republicans are giving false information then we conservatives need to hold them to the same flames we hold Democrats. We are not like the progressives as we should lie to get what we want. If Maddow and Olbermann are right about this then we need to stand by the truth no matter who is saying the truth. But if they are lieing we need to point out their lies. They have been cought in may untruths in the past and that is why their numbers are so low. There is a reason why CNN,ABC and MSNBC are by far less trusted then Fox News and the polls prove it. But that doesn't mean they are always wrong. Even a blind squirel finds a nut once in a while.


  1. Chris, this is our judicial system that is the envy of the world, that makes America different than most other countries in the world.

    Fact is, Chris, this guy has given the interrogators from the FBI actionable intelligence without torture and giving him a lawyer and mirandizing him. Imagine that. Following the principles of American law and protecting its citizens.

    Sounds like a failure of the Republican theories of law enforcement to me.

  2. Bruce Info this Terrorist Gave was about 6 weeks Old and How Do You Confirm it! Before you Once Again get Your Panty hose in a Knot Even if true DO You think Terrorist are where this Guy said they were or NOW Knowing he Is in Custody they do not SIMPLY go Away and a NEW Cell is Called into Action! You think these Terrorist are Idiots! 6 Week Old Info, Unconfirmable means ZIP but it FITS your Politics BUT means ONCE Again ZIP!
    No Failure Bruce Except Your Beleive that Terrorist Can BE Talked out of there HATE,They Cannot and Will Try Again KNOWING there Miranda Warnings will Delay INTELL,Terroist are in there CAVES Laughing at Citizens with Your OPINIONS! Your a SHEEP EMBRACING the WOLF!

  3. Fact is Bruce he gave up the information BEFORE he was Mirandized and then lawyered up. 50 whole minutes worth. Then he shut up. Then the Obummer administration said they had got all the information possible out of him. Then they went to Yemen to bring his family back to talk him into giving even more information. So the Obummer administration lied about "getting all the information out of him". And they EPIC FAILED when they read a NON-CITIZEN his "rights". Lame-assed lieberal policies is the failure here, not law-enforcement. Where is the law-enforcement failure here FAILk, other than the FAILURE of the Obummer administration to heed the crotch-bomber's father's concerns about his own son and get this gu on a no-fly list?!?! More EPIC FAIL from the Obummer administration.

    So our judicial system, that lets the likes of OJ Simpson off, is the envy of the world!??! BWAAAAHAHAHAHA ... yeah, Al Qaeda is REALLY going to be envious when this guy slips through the criminal courts. Dummy.

  4. Bruce his crotch was on fire. He needed an operation to fix it. But instead he talked to the FBI. Think what you want but that was torture. I'm not saying that that was wrong. I'm saying get off your high horse and see reality for a change. Why do we have to give this man the right to not say anything? They already did the equivalent of torture in you eyes. I've been burned almost that bad and it hurts. Would withholding pain medicine so we can find out that there are more terrorist coming in the next 6 month worth it? Why give him the right to stay quite? Was it just a dumb stunt to give the progressives a fake bone? They got that man to talk all right and it wasn't fun watching the guy scream for his medicine and medical care. I'm sure he was afraid the whole time. I bet he would have rather been waterboarded then what he went through. If that is the case Bruce will you back him being let go because of a coherst confesion do to "torture"? Would you be OK with that man be set free because of the politics being played by the left?

  5. Obama Impresses 'Educated Class' But Not Terrorists

    Just whom are we trying to impress?

    That's a question that occurred to me when, on his second full day in the presidency, Barack Obama announced we would close the Guantanamo detainee facility within one year.

    It's a question that has kept occurring to me over the last year and nine days, even though Obama and his administration have proven unable to keep that promise.

    Whom are we trying to impress by ruling out enhanced interrogation techniques on unlawful combatants, techniques that produced valuable intelligence that saved American lives? Whom are we trying to impress by limiting questioning to the Army Field Manual?

    That's a good guide for handling prisoners of war and other lawful combatants covered by international law. But whom are we trying to impress by extending those protections to those who are not covered by the Geneva Conventions or other treaties we have signed?
    Whom are we trying to impress by trying Khalid Sheik Mohammed in civilian courts after he already pled guilty to a military tribunal? And trying him in New York City, where the trial will cost something like $1 billion and tie up Lower Manhattan for years?

    Would these people we are trying to impress be that much less impressed if the administration belatedly follows the advice of Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Kirsten Gillibrand and stages that trial on a military base or elsewhere outside of New York City?

    And whom are we trying to impress by treating the failed Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab not as a military combatant but as a common civilian criminal, even though he launched an attack on the United States from outside the country? Whom are we trying to impress by administering Miranda warnings and telling him that he has a right to a lawyer and the right to remain silent?

    If the answer to these questions is that we are trying to impress Islamist terrorists, we have clearly failed.

    It is a matter of simple fact that the announcement that we would close Guantanamo and other policy changes did not prevent Abdulhakim Muhammad from killing U.S. soldiers at the Little Rock recruiting station last June. It did not prevent Nidal Hasan from killing U.S. soldiers at Fort Hood in November. It did not prevent Abdulmutallab from attempting to blow up Northwest flight 253 over U.S. or Canadian airspace on Christmas Day.

    Public opinion polls in the Arab and Muslim world have shown only slight upticks in opinion about America in the months after Barack Obama's speeches in Cairo and Turkey and after these administration policy changes. Terrorists did not say, "Gosh, now that Obama is closing Guantanamo and terrorists are being given Miranda rights, I've got to change my mind and decide that the United States is a really nifty country and that freedom and democracy are good things after all."

  6. Michael Barone, continued03 February, 2010 21:42

    But perhaps our goal was to convince not terrorists but "world opinion." Are the government and the billion people of India going to think better of the United States if we treat terrorists more gently? Not likely -- they're the targets of terrorists themselves.

    How about the government and the billion people of China? My guess is that they see this as weakness, which they would never indulge.

    The governments and peoples of Europe? Well, certainly some governments would be pleased, as would the readers of left-wing newspapers and those who attend international conferences. But polling shows that Europeans tend to take a tougher stand on these matters than the elites who dominate the international dialogue.
    So whom are we trying to impress? The answer seems to be left-wing intellectuals, academics, voters -- "the educated class," in David Brooks' term -- who decried George W. Bush's policies as reeking of fascism and dictatorship. We are making policies to please those who hang out in law school faculty lounges.

    Their numbers turn out to be less formidable than the amount of coverage they have received in sympathetic media suggests. For that we have evidence from the commonwealth of Massachusetts, where Republican Senate candidate Scott Brown called for handing over KSM and the Christmas bomber to military tribunals. His Democratic opponent disagreed. She carried "the educated class," blacks and Hispanics. Brown carried just about everyone else and, even in Massachusetts, won.

    Which leads me to ask, again: Just whom are we trying to impress?

  7. Chris, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann had really excellent coverage on this tonight and I will post the links in the morning.

    Bottom line, you and your fellow radical Republicans are WRONG about everything concerning this case.


  8. I just added to the post. They are saying we will get hit within the next 3 to 6 months. Can't you see that all this pussy footing around has just made our enemy stronger and more imbolden? How will you lefties talk your way out of another terrorist attack? Will that be Bush's fault? Or will it be the Republicans fault for holding up healthcare and that is why the terrorists are coming full force again?

  9. Is that the same Olbertmann and Maddcow that no one but the far left potheads listen too? Enjoy your time with them because one of your heros will be call high school football on cable local.

  10. Olbermann and Maddow have more integrity than everyone at Fox combined.

    Fox has no shame in reporting lies and protecting the GOP at all costs. They are propaganda, pure and simple.

  11. BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA ... Olbermann has integrity .... BWAAAHAHAHAHA ... and then this classic from FAILk "You're wrong, and I'll let Olberman tell you why in the morning" LOL

    Chris, that was hilarious what you just wrote at 21:54. Too funny. Especially because it's true, Olbermann is heading for the exit, and MadCow isn't too far behind. Worst. Ratings. Evah. ROFLMAO

    Olbermann, he's not propaganda?!?! Suuuuure FAILk. He's a straight-up journalist with no slant to his "news", like when he made all those statements about ... oh ... everybody on the right. Him and that other racist Matthews are a couple of real unbiased journalists. BWAAAHAHAHAHA

  12. Here is FAILk's hero. Did you know he got fired from Fox?!!? BWAAAAHAHAHAHA ... no wonder he has such a bug up his butt about Fox!! ROFLMAO ... interesting that he didn't want to do the story on Clinton and Lewinsky! Boy, Fox pulls away from Obummer's lecturing and it's a real tragedy. But Olbuttman doesn't want to report on philandering Hypocrats and it's just another day at the beach! HYPOCRITES.


    Olbermann was glad enough to be leaving the grind of full-time sportscasting behind. His new job brought him out of the toy department and into the news side of broadcasting, with a show on NBC’s new cable-news channel, MSNBC. The producer of the broadcast, called “The Big Show,” was Phil Griffin, who was delighted to be working with Olbermann again. But in 1998, when the news cycle was hijacked by the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Olbermann found himself the anchor of a nightly newscast called “White House in Crisis.” He grew so weary of the story that getting him on the air every day became a battle. “Keith just didn’t want to go there,” Griffin recalls. “He didn’t want to do the story, and it evolved into the hottest story of the time. It made my life miserable. It was bad. And it did not end pretty.”

    Once again, Olbermann left a job unhappily, returning to sportscasting at Fox Sports. He was subsequently fired, and the remainder of his contract was paid off. (“I fired him,” Rupert Murdoch said recently. “He’s crazy.”)

    Read more:


  14. More on the ANGRY HYPOCRAT. Okay, Angry Hypocrat is redundant, they are all angry. But you get the point:

    Asked about the prospect of an Olbermann reign at “CBS Evening News,” Sandy Socolow, Walter Cronkite’s final executive producer, responded emphatically. “Oh, no, no, no, he’s not a newsman,” Socolow said. “He’s not a reporter. I’ve never seen anything that he’s done that was original, in terms of the information. It’s all derivative. I like him, I agree with his perspective, and I think he’s very, very good on television. But he’s not a newsman.” Socolow added, “Ten years ago, if he had done at CBS what he does every day on the air at MSNBC, he would have been fired by the end of the day.”

    (I like this part, where they call Oldbuttman out for being sexist. And when they call him a jerk):

    But, just as Obama must work to win Clinton supporters for the fall campaign, Phil Griffin has to repair a fractured audience base, a portion of which saw sexism in his network’s Clinton coverage and vowed to boycott MSNBC. Griffin knows that some of that anger is aimed at his star anchor. “It was, like, you meet a guy and you fall in love with him, and he’s funny and he’s clever and he’s witty, and he’s all these great things,” Griffin said of the relationship between Olbermann and the Clinton supporters among his viewers. “And then you commit yourself to him, and he turns out to be a jerk and difficult and brutal. And that is how the Hillary viewers see him. It’s true. But I do think they’re going to come back. There’s nowhere else to go.”

    Read more:

  15. Not a newsman. Derivative (aka, stealing). Crazy. Sexist. Jerk. Difficult. Brutal. Not a reporter. Angry. Didn't want to do his job because it made his party look bad. Yes, FAILk, Olbuttman is the most fair and balanced news out there. Enjoy your echo chamber while you can! BWAAAAAHAHAHAHA

  16. Fox News most trusted. 'Nuff said.

    Fox the most trusted name in news?

    Raleigh, N.C. – A new poll asking Americans whether they trust each of the major television news operations in the country finds that the only one getting a positive review is Fox News. CNN does next best followed by NBC News, then CBS News, and finally ABC News.

    49% of Americans say they trust Fox News to 37% who disagree. Predictably there is a large party split on this with 74% of Republicans but only 30% of Democrats saying they trust the right leaning network.

    CNN does next best because it is the second most trusted of Democrats, Republicans, and independents. 39% say they trust it compared to 41% who do not, with 59% of Democrats, 33% of independents and 23% of Republicans saying it carries credibility
    with them.

    The major networks all have the majority trust of Democrats but less than 20% from Republicans. NBC, perhaps because of the ideological bent of MSNBC, does the best among Democrats at 62%. Overall 35% of voters trust it to 44% who do not. CBS does the worst among Republicans, with 69% distrusting it. A plurality of independents
    express distrust of all five outlets we tested.

  17. Make sure you watch this one Brucie.

  18. John, I saw that exchange with Roger Ailes, head of the Fox Propaganda network. He's a complete tool of the Republican party and he knows he's lying about everything.

    He has NO credibility.

  19. Bruce so they pointed out that Obama is just another Bush. Why aren't you upset that Obama is making the same dumb mistakes? And they only have half truths in their coverage of it. The difference between Bush and Obama is that Bush learned from his mistakes. Obama want to make the same mistakes Bush made and you on the left where up in arms about it. Why aren't you as upset with Obama as you were with Bush? The Republicans did get made at Bush don't forget.

  20. Thanks Bruce for cutting out the middle man and letting us hear what you think through Maddow and Olbortmann. I know you just take their word for what they say but they don't have a good reputation. I would like to know what anyone else has to say about the accusations that it's all Bush's fault that the undiebomber attacked. And it is the Republicans fault and the Democrats were just helpless victoms.

  21. Bruce Truth is Defendable! I Understand that If Daddy had not Convinced Underware Bomber to talk he would have Remained Silent! Dont Know Why that was not tried With the Five that will be Featured in Holders Circus Trials!
    It Does Show the Weakness in OUR Justice System Money,Cause NOW theres Going to Probablly be a PLEA and Maybe Some Day You Can SIT Next to this Guy the NEXT Time HE Flies and YOU Can Discuss JUSTICE System with HIM!

    Bruce You DO Have a SENSE of Humor MadCow and Overbite as Your SOURCE! Bruce COMMON SENSE, Stop Look and Listen and the Truth Shall Come to You and it WILL Bounce of YOU!

  22. I put up the video's that Bruce was talking about. I am not afraid of the truth unlike the liberals. If the Republicans are giving false information then we conservatives need to hold them to the same flames we hold Democrats. We are not like the progressives as we should lie to get what we want. If Maddow and Olbermann are right about this then we need to stand by the truth no matter who is saying the truth. But if they are lieing we need to point out their lies. They have been cought in may untruths in the past and that is why their numbers are so low. There is a reason why CNN,ABC and MSNBC are by far less trusted then Fox News and the polls prove it. But that doesn't mean they are always wrong. Even a blind squirel finds a nut once in a while.

  23. Bruce No Transparentsy IN Congress and NOW Nothing BUT Transparentsy Regarding Info Obtained From Under Ware Bomber! I Guess ALL this Info Being PUT Out By Administration will HELP Some Body,The Terrorist!

    Politics Involved in National Security! Thought thats What Libs BLAMED Bush About!

    Presidents Advise Yesterday DONT Watch TV for Information! How Many TIMES has This President Used TV to Advance HIS Agenda!

  24. Bruce why has Eric Houlder said he screwed up with this one if it isn't true? That just doesn't make sense.

  25. AL Great point. They only want to be transparent with military and national security issues. Not with the things that they are enginering behind out backs.

  26. Chris, treating the alledged terrorist as a criminal is the leagl way to do things and the same way that the Bush Justice Dept. did things with foreign citizen Richard Reid (shoebomber). Richard reaid was read his Miranda rights atleast four times.

    Here's a thoughtful articulate piece on why the constitutional rights of our country apply.

  27. JoeC When Reid was Charged with trying to BLOW up AIRCRAFT in 2001, Dont Believe they had in PLACE Any other Remedy other than Civilan Court!


    Once Again ASK Relatives of Military and Civilians Captured by TERRORIST and then FOUND DEAD in Shallow GRAVES or BEHEADED on VIDEO and SHOWED Around the WORLD as a RECRUITMENT TOOL!

  28. Holy Batman. I think we've had a breakthrough, Chris. I have to give you some credit for posting the videos from Countdown and Rachel Maddow.

    I think you will find, also, that Rachel and Keith, even though they may not align with you philosophically, as I've said many times, do have on credible guests that speak to the lies of the Republican party and how people like you, Chris, and the other readers of this blog, are having the wool pulled over your eyes.

    Fox may be the "most trusted" news organization, but that trust is misplaced. On numerous occasions, in fact on a daily basis, it is demonstrably provable, that they lie to the American people. If a story doesn't fit their narrative, then they don't air it. That's why they cut away from the President's meeting with the House Republican caucus last week.

    President Obama was appearing reasonable and measured, not the wild-eyed communist Fox News makes him out to be on a daily basis.

  29. Chris, where did Eric Holder say he screwed up? I haven't seen that anywhere. I think Holder did exactly the right thing by holding the KSM trial in New York.

    Maybe there are some practical reasons, such as security, for holding the trial elsewhere, but it does belong in a civil trial court.

    Your point of view, is exactly wrong. As you saw in the videos, the reason why Mutalab's parents cooperated in getting their son to talk is they knew he'd be treated fairly by the Americans. Why did they think that? Because they know America is a place where everyone gets justice, innocent until proven guilty, you know, all those things you were taught in school about what makes America a great country.

    I hope your eyes are opening to the lies that have been pushed down your throat, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

    I'm sure you'll be back to calling me a liar and all manner of other names later today.

  30. he saw a thing on the rightwing media darling James O Keefe. Guess he likes to hangout at white supremist conventions.

  31. JoeC why are you being a racist? You neo-cons are all the same. I think what they did to that black boy was wrong. They withheld medical care so he would talk. That is no different then torture. The only reaso you people aren't saying anything about that is because he is black. The FBI is a bunch of racist that love to torture people of color. I have brought up this point to many and it is getting looked into. Chris you seem to be an upstanding man for posting those videos.

  32. I sure hope we never capture an enemy combatant who doesn't have any family. Then we will never get any information out of him.

  33. FAILk espousing Olbuttman and MadCow as fair and balanced ... HAR HAR HAR!! LOL

    What is FAILk going to watch for his Obummer Propaganda when Olbuttman and MadCow are cancelled just like AirAmerica?!! LOL

  34. John, are you upset that the carrot worked? Does that ruin things for you that we didn't use multiple waterboardings or repeated slamming into walls?

    The fact is the methods worked. the FBI used them, they worked and he is providing information without harsh interrogations.

  35. JoeC As John said DADDY Made him DO it and I Would Imagine Somewhere Along the Line WE will Hear the TERM "PLEA BARGIN"! If You Call Daddy Getting Involved "Method" and ALSO Use the Term "ALLEDGED" than I Know You FEEL GOOD! I Guess all Those Citizens on the Airplane Over Reacted When This Guys Under Ware Started on Fire! Happens All the Time on Aircraft!

    How Do We Fight Terrorism JoeC Make Nice? If Water Boarding and Slamming Terrorist Into WALLS is Neeeded to Save Citizens Lifes, You Gotta DO Whats Needed! Making NICE with Terrorist WHOs Daddys AINT There WILL KILL Citizens,To Prove what Point JoeC?

    Cemeteries Are Full of People With GOOD Intentsions NUMBER!JoeC SO Why ADD to the NUMBER!

    Nobama Administration Has Finally Found Something to BE Transparent About, Unfortunately its OUR Security!

  36. Al, So your upset that we didn't torture him then i take it?

    Yes, i consider using a suspects family as a wedge or as a voice of reason as a method. Only a fool wouldn't. Its part of larger set of tactics.

    I use the word alleged because until he's found guilty of something, whether by US court or even a military tribunal he's still technically only accused of a crime. He's not been convicted.

    yeah Al the road is paved to hell with good intentions. Only i see the willful violation of the constitution for the purpose of security as the last bridge to the devils door. So you finish blacktopping the last little bit and i'll join ya there soon.

  37. JoeC Just Couple Little Thingys U.S. Constitution Protects a Foregn TERRORIST,Im Still Reading, If You Can Point OUT What Article thats in PLEASE Let Me KNOW!

    Technically If Your AMERICAN CITIZEN You are Considered Innocent Until Proven Guilty Problem Being What State in THIS Country Was He Born IN? OH Hes Not Citizen OOPs

    If Interrogation Involved Enhanced Methods I have NO Problem with it to PROTECT OUR Citizens and After ALL if PELOSI Was Advised BY CIA of Methods and Gave her APPROVAL How COULD I Disapprove!

    Hey JoeC Another Thing. You Might be on to Something! We Can Send OUR Military into the CAVES and Find the TERRORIST Parents, Wonder if THATS Been Tried YET! Hell By Your Standards Parents Would NOT be Able to Even SPANK Them OUCH!

  38. Al, its already in the thread....

    "JoeC said...
    Chris, treating the alledged terrorist as a criminal is the leagl way to do things and the same way that the Bush Justice Dept. did things with foreign citizen Richard Reid (shoebomber). Richard reaid was read his Miranda rights atleast four times.

    Here's a thoughtful articulate piece on why the constitutional rights of our country apply.
    04 February, 2010 08:32"

    Technically Your completely wrong. Well, your just plain wrong. Nice to see you don't know the constitution or Scotus decisions concerning it.

    By my standards what???? whats this BS your suggesting? Stop making stuff up. By my standards parents aren't allowed to do harsh interrogations including but not limited to sleep deprevation, waterboarding, stress positions, wall slamming, use of canines as threats. I mean all stuff we know that works well with our kids.

  39. JoeC If It Makes OUR Country Safe and There trying to KILL Us Whats Your Point!

    Just For MY Own info These Circus Trials For Terrorist According to You will Show the World How Great OUR System is! What If these TERRORIST are Found "Not Guilty"! Holder Already as Said WE Will NOT Release Them! That would Show the World What? Shows these TRIAL are for One Purpose " Political Payback" Period!

    JoeC You Gotta Calm Down a Bit I was Using Example with Families of Terrorist BUT as Usual YOU DONT GET IT!
    If Those Methods were GOOD Enough for Pelosi there GOOD Enough For ME!

  40. Al,

    I'm plenty calm.

    I'm not happy about trying the Gitmo prisoners in America just like you, but for different reasons. One the possibility exists that due to the morally repugnant actions of the Bush admin and its agenda in Gitmo, we face the threat of offering up evidence that violates our constitutional views on coercion. Could that lead to the possibility of a "Not Guilty" verdict? yes. Would that be good? No.

    The fact remains that we used questionable techniques on prisoners that we shouldn't and placed ourselves in a spot. And now you and others like you would further our immoral actions by using a deficient tribunal system which offers little if no real justice in its ways.

    We are left with the lousy situation of trying these people with forced evidence in a system that is supposed to protect us from that.

    As for the XMAS day bomber i give you the Constitution
    Article 3 - The Judicial Branch
    Section 2 - Trial by Jury, Original Jurisdiction, Jury Trials

    The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.)......

    ....The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

    It specifically offers Citizens of Foreign states the right to trial by jury.

    Is that good enough for you?

  41. JoeC Still Beleive TERRORIST Should Be at GITMO at Mercy of Interrogators PERIOD! I Guess I Just Beileve TERRORIST Deserves What HE Hands OUT, TERROR and on that WE will NEVER Agree!


Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.