Miranda Rights for Terrorists

Terrorism Detainees: Geneva Convention Common Article 3

Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 prohibits violence to life and person, such as murder, mutilation, torture and cruel treatment etc.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s June 29, 2006, decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld applied Common Article 3 to a global conflict with a non-state actor, al-Qaeda, taking place within the territory of a country that is a party to the Geneva Conventions, Afghanistan. Its implications are that Common Article 3 applies to the global conflict with terrorists anywhere on earth involving the territory of a party to the Geneva Conventions. As cited below, this reality has influenced recent developments within Department of Defense (DOD) detainee policies, including DOD Directive 2310.01E on DOD’s detainee program and the new Army Field Manual on Human Intelligence Collector Operations, both released Sept. 6, 2006. (Note that clicking on the link for the Army Field Manual opens an 11MB, 384-page PDF).

www.cdi.org...

They are apparently protected by the Geneva Conventions Article 3, and by the Constitution of the USA - what more do you guys need?

Lawyers?!


[edit on 11-6-2009 by Chevalerous]

Giving foreign fighters United States of America constitutional rights.

It is a stupid thing to do.

No one will care about this issue.

Some will defend it, and it hardly matters.

Take you current dose of mainstream media news and go back to sleep America.

You haven't seen anything yet!

You will likely not see it until it is far too late.

Goodnight, Allah be praised.

The worst part of this decision is the right to a lawyer before they speak. This will definitely hamper battlefield operations. Combatants captured in the heat of battle have valuable information that can save American and civilian lives. Not being able to gather and act on this info immediately is going to cost many lives.

POW's do not have the right to an attorney. This is the latest in a series of blunders by Obama.

reply to post by jsobecky


POW`s might not have the `right to an attorney` but they have rights under the geneva conventions

reply to post by Harlequin


I'm not debating that. But Miranda gives them additional rights over and above Geneva. That's the crux of the issue here.

I posted this in another thread, but i'll stick it here as the other one will probably get closed soon as it's a replica thread...

I'm not so sure this is a bad thing.

Whenever i hear the term "Enemy combatant", do you know what the first thing that goes through my mind is? Terrorists? Nope. al quaeda? Nope.

ATS members. Thats what i think of first. Conspiracy theorists, anyone who speaks out against the administration or their actions.

Of course i do not believe that i, or any member of ATS is an enemy combatant, but that is what i think TPTB will come up with next.

So when they begin using the enemy combatant term to describe us...and they will, i'd like to think i had at least some rights until proven guilty.

We here people shouting all the time that suspected terrorists are detained, interrogated or worse without rights.

Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

If Obama's crime is to flip flop and give suspects rights now, i say thats a good thing, considering how many balls ups the intelligence agencies make these days.

Or am i reading this all wrong?

CX.

This does not surprise me because Obama is a muslim.I use to think people that said such things were crazy untill I heard his speach to the muslims.He is looking out for his brethern.I am a Republican but Obama makes me miss the Clintons and I cannot believe that!hehe

Originally posted by jsobecky
I'm not debating that. But Miranda gives them additional rights over and above Geneva.

You make it sound like they are getting that much...last time I read, torture was against Geneva, and the US saw Japanese executed for waterboarding post ww2. Pictures of the prisoners lashed into cargo holds was also a violation and that's just off the top of my head.

You wanted them...you got them, time to be American about it, not all slithery and expedient. That, my friend, is why the US was reviled under Bush, and why the world had hope for Obama. Make it right, and move along.

THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION......might as well be changed to THE WORLD WIDE CONSTITUTION! Anyone these days from ANYWHERE when caught doing something claims to have or demands rights from this peice of paper. And the worst part is we have retards who live in this country who believe this is acceptable and are NOT smart enough to see that when you forward OUR rights to all, you might as well dissolve AMERICA itself, because what benefits do we have that protects us???? NOTHING...we are no different then some scumbag who blows up 1000 people and dances in the streets about it.

We have thousands of soldiers 6 feet deep who fought for the rights of the constitution. From the revolution up to today we have people willing to sacrifice it all to make sure their families and friends are protected and have THEIR RIGHTS in place to enjoy as much freedom as they can....NOT FIGHT AND DIE SO SOME SCUMBAG WHO IS NOT A CITIZEN..gets the EXACT same rights! It's pathetic....and if you don't see or get that you cannot be very smart and you definitly don't live in the reality this world is.

With that, so now my tax dollars are going to go to paying for the trials of these aholes, then what...oh I get to work my job, work overtime, bust my ass so I can give MY money to feeding, medicating, clothing, these POS... Some of you need to get of your couches, get of your asses, and go see the world and see REALITY...instead of THINKING you know what actually goes on out there. Its SOOOOOO obvious that MANY of you have never dealt with the realities this world has, but you will spew crap about stuff because you have nothing in the way of experiance...instead all of your words come from watching the news or from your bleeding hearts....again..get off your butts and go see the TRUTH...then come back and respond to these posts...trust me, your demeanor and thought process will have changed!!!

PS: To the members who really aren't up to speed on common sense...the people our military detain aren't just picked up because they looked at someone wrong....there are THOUSANDS of terrorists, and combatants, and we took a few hundred into custody...why because they are people of interest...god you people are just...

Originally posted by rcwj75... we took a few hundred into custody...why because they are people of interest...god you people are just...

So, then, rather than treat them like POWs, you are treating them like criminals. You say they are 'people of interest' and they have not actually been convicted of anything, so they are innocent until proven guilty.

And to gather self-incriminating evidence on them, you subcontract out torture to countries like Romania and Syria whose methods you used to decry...until they became useful. Google "Hypocrite"

or what's your term? Duh?

Right.



[edit on 11-6-2009 by JohnnyCanuck]

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


See you confuse your definition of "criminal" with these combatants. They are not shoplifters, or drunk drivers. As I said, those of you without ANY true experiance in this can't see the difference. Once you can, you can EASILY see they should be treated differently.

Imagine catching a guy you KNOW is helping plot a bombing...he has all the info you need to stop the murder of 100 people. You catch him and he says..I WANT A LAWYER..so now he doesnt have to talk, you can't make him talk, and 100 people get blown up and killed while this guy laughs in the face of OUR WAY of doing things...sits in a jail cell...gets fed, medical attention,. then gets his day in court...is tried, and convicted of????? NOT MURDER of 100 people...WAY TO GO!!!!!

You just don't get it....

reply to post by rcwj75


You do raise the single-most important issue of offering Miranda rights--the "right to remain silent."

But, in order for them to be prosecuted under the U.S. Court System, this is required by law.

We must be EXTREMELY, EXTREMELY careful to not void a "terrorist" of the Miranda Rights. I don't want to keep drumming up panic, but it will not be long before "domestic terrorists" are sought after with the same ferocity as "international terrorists."

We have to be very, very cautious what we as Americans are advocating for.

Stick to the tenets of the United States Consitution everybody. It is the Supreme Law of our land. Not our emotions and intutions.

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Unbelievable!!

This is outrageous, dangerous and totally unacceptable.

What's outrageous is the thought that the inalienable rights are somehow considered alienable by folks who think the same as you.

We formed this country, not to be exclusive, but to be create a better way of approaching the world.

The only thing that is dangerous is for the US to have a double standard when it comes to Justice...

reply to post by MOFreemason


Thanks MOF, I couldn't agree more!



Terrorist != foreigner as the OP would like us to believe...

Originally posted by rcwj75
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

 

See you confuse your definition of "criminal" with these combatants. They are not shoplifters, or drunk drivers.

It's war. If you don't want to play by those rules, then you play by the rules of the criminal justice system. Either way there are rules, and quite frankly, those rules are the sum total of the difference between 'us' and 'them'.

You seem like a bright enough lad...you do the math.

Wow, its amazing how many savage barbarians have posted on this thread.

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Foreign Nationalist != American Citizen.

If you are an American Citizen then you will have the right afforded under the Constitution.

It amazes me the people that say we shouldn't police world and this and that, but yet want to give American rights to people of other nationalities.

The logic just isn't there. Our forefathers died fighting to start this country, and if other people of other nationalities want those same rights as American citizens then they need to fight for their own freedom in their own countries.

Seriously can you not see this is all part of Globalization?

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth
Wow, its amazing how many savage barbarians have posted on this thread.

Oh so we are barbarians for wanting to punish those for doing violent acts, and do whats needed to NOT become victims of their actions??? wow

.
You are acting like a typical liberal. You react and make decisions based on emotion instead of logic and the law. This is not a good trait.

What's the point of having a U.S. Constitution for Americans if we are going to apply it to everyone? Might as well rip it up.

What does miranda rights have to do with Guantanamo and your wrong opinion of having wrongfully accused innocent terrorists? Answer: Nothing!


What??!! Ifwe do NOT apply it to everyone, then it is worthless! How can someone not see this? it astounds me that anyone could see the protections we must have for a fair system denied to anyone. If the USA arrests someone , then the USA must afford them a fair trial. And nothing is fair about NOT warning a defendant about his rights.

Where in the Constitution does it say: " Only for those who have a green card or were born here".? No where. Of COURSE we must give the required legal warnings to someone we are about to charge and try in a court...if we do not then that says a lot about us not trusting our own system.

I cannot believe that so many people would object to telling someone that what they say can be sued against them. How does that undermine us? It does NOT! It cannot. It only shows the world that we are NOT the rouge element that tortures and denies basic human rights, as was done under Bush the Scum and Darth Cheney.

"Terrorists' are nothing more than people snatched up in a foreign land, dragged under inhumane conditions to cages to sit for years while the USA pretends it has a case against them. If there IS a case, then surely it can be tried normally ina court. If there is NO case, then why on earth would any civilized human being want another human being to suffer forever in a cage because the USA was too embarrassed to admit it is wrong?

No person can be deprived of their liberty or life without DUE PROCESS, which includes Miranda...THAT is what the Constitution says. Either throw the Constitution out or follow it...but do not weep and wail because some probable innocent vicitm of CIA nonsense gets a fair trial.

MOST, about 85%, of all detainees were brought there because of some accusation that had NO MERIT. People were sold out for cash....falsely accused by others or were just in the wrong place at the wrong time. How can anyone with a shred of decency deny anyone a fair trial and all the protections that we enjoy? it is madness to suggest that we can be seen as decent and fair when we deny basic rights.

Try them in open court or let them go home. Anything else is a sickening example of a fascist system with zero fairness. Now that Bush and his sick cabal are gone maybe we can heal the wounds that they caused both in this nation and worldwide.

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by HunkaHunka

 

Foreign Nationalist != American Citizen.

The phrase "Terrorists are now being read miranda rights" presumes that all terrorists are foreign nationals...

And our rights, are "INALIENABLE" which means they don't have a border... they are given to us by the creator... that's it.

If you are an American Citizen then you will have the right afforded under the Constitution.

No... the constitution does not simply apply to it's citizens... it applies to mankind...

How does that go again..

"We hold these truths to be self evident, that ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL AND ENDOWED WITH CERTAIN INALIENABLE RIGHTS"

READ READ READ... We are not a primitive bunch of Cherokee who believe their rules only apply to the "REAL PEOPLE" (meaning themselves). We are a CIVILIZED nation.

It amazes me the people that say we shouldn't police world and this and that, but yet want to give American rights to people of other nationalities.

Because those rights are considered INALIENABLE... now I don't have a beef with us using force in the world where we feel human rights are being violated.

In fact I think we should be in Darfur right now...

The logic just isn't there. Our forefathers died fighting to start this country, and if other people of other nationalities want those same rights as American citizens then they need to fight for their own freedom in their own countries.

The founding fathers first argued to the Crown that these rights were given to them and all men regardless of country affiliation...

It was only when that argument was said to be bunk, like you are saying now, that the founding fathers took up arms...

Seriously can you not see this is all part of Globalization?

And what is wrong with that?

[edit on 11-6-2009 by HunkaHunka]