Law enforcement returns to America

[dapoes]

Even better!!! :blink:

Miranda Rights for Terrorists

When 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad was captured on March 1, 2003, he was not cooperative. “I’ll talk to you guys after I get to New York and see my lawyer,†he said, according to former CIA Director George Tenet.

Of course, KSM did not get a lawyer until months later, after his interrogation was completed, and Tenet says that the information the CIA obtained from him disrupted plots and saved lives. “I believe none of these successes would have happened if we had had to treat KSM like a white-collar criminal – read him his Miranda rights and get him a lawyer who surely would have insisted that his client simply shut up,†Tenet wrote in his memoirs.

If Tenet is right, it’s a good thing KSM was captured before Barack Obama became president. 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.

Lovely, more Jihadist empathy appeasement! :down:

 

[dapoes]

Personally I think that reading the Miranda Rights to anyone detained is probably a good idea. I can't see how it could hurt unless we get into the whole "Enemy Combatants" definition thing again which has NOT always been upheld by the court.

I'd hate to see us capture a terrorist and have them get loose on some legal manuever.

Except they are not US citizens, they are captives on the battlefield and have no legal rights. Big difference. This stupid belief by Obama and the administration will only undermine the intelligence gathering process and insure another 9/11. What a fricken joke.

Theres your hope and change. :down:

 

[Gilding the Lily]

Doesn't matter, as we are all a group of a whole.

It absolutely does matter. If there are only 1000 people in group X, and all 1000 members of group X are victims of a specific crime, then I think it very much does matter. But at the same time, even though laws may attempt to root out a specific problem, they should be drafted in a way to apply equally to the whole.

 

[dapoes]

It absolutely does matter. If there are only 1000 people in group X, and all 1000 members of group X are victims of a specific crime, then I think it very much does matter. But at the same time, even though laws may attempt to root out a specific problem, they should be drafted in a way to apply equally to the whole.

No, statistically if the problem is "bias", then it is a problem as a whole. The amount of people in group X is not the issue, "bias" as a whole is the problem. There is no distinction between groups. Thats why the data was compiled as such. Your assignment of a percentage against each group would be considered as bias in itself. Plus assignment of a percentage serves no purpose and would only skew the perception.

 

[Gilding the Lily]

No, statistically if the problem is "bias", then it is a problem as a whole. The amount of people in group X is not the issue, "bias" as a whole is the problem. There is no distinction between groups. Thats why the data was compiled as such. Your assignment of a percentage against each group would be considered as bias in itself. Plus assignment of a percentage serves no purpose and would only skew the perception.

You are on a completely different page, bud. No worries.

 

[dapoes]

You are on a completely different page, bud. No worries.

Im worried! JK