DOJ: No Miranda rights

[AmyNation]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

are you sure about that:

An "enemy combatant" is an individual who was part of or supporting Taliban or al Qaeda forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces.

Can The Boston Bombing Suspect Be Deemed An "Enemy Combatant?": Gothamist

Yes, I'm sure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/u...d-boston-suspect-as-enemy-combatant.html?_r=0

Boston Bombing Suspect Not Charged as an Enemy Combatant ? Was the Right Decision Made? [POLL]

The Bush administration decided to use the term for captured terrorists, which wasnt the definition or used in that way before them. It has been heatedly debated since, and the 2 times it has been used on Americans, was used for those fighting on forgein soil, and has been heatedly contested.

 

[Yurt]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

are you sure about that:

An "enemy combatant" is an individual who was part of or supporting Taliban or al Qaeda forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. This includes any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported hostilities in aid of enemy armed forces.

Can The Boston Bombing Suspect Be Deemed An "Enemy Combatant?": Gothamist

Yes, I'm sure.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/22/u...d-boston-suspect-as-enemy-combatant.html?_r=0

Boston Bombing Suspect Not Charged as an Enemy Combatant ? Was the Right Decision Made? [POLL]

The Bush administration decided to use the term for captured terrorists, which wasnt the definition or used in that way before them. It has been heatedly debated since, and the 2 times it has been used on Americans, was used for those fighting on forgein soil, and has been heatedly contested.

so it is still contested...how can you be sure? it has not been settled and using the definition from the court, an american citizen can be charged as an enemy combatant. just because it has not been done, does not mean it can never be done.

 

[AmyNation]

That's true. It has never been tested, which is why i said "im not sure if its constitutional". However, if it were tested, and found unconstitutional it could damage the crimnial case.

 

[PratchettFan]

Govt invoking public safety exception which seems to indicate that the government feels that there must be more terrorist out there since one bomber brother is dead and the other is under guard in the hospital. Why else would they invoke this exception?
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/february2011/legal_digest

Not really. It means they want to find out if anyone else was involved. Which is due diligence.

Now isn't that what I just said?
seems to indicate that the government feels that there must be more terrorist out there

No. You said the government must feel that others are involved. I said the government wants to find out if anyone else was involved. There is a difference between "are" and "if".

 

[hortysir]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

It is if they have ties to the 911 hijackers, and then flee to another country.

THEN Obama can blow him to smithereens
And a few weeks later kill his son when he goes looking for his father

 

[Yurt]

That's true. It has never been tested, which is why i said "im not sure if its constitutional". However, if it were tested, and found unconstitutional it could damage the crimnial case.

i just read where you said "i'm sure"...thanks for clarifying

 

[JakeStarkey]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

It is if they have ties to the 911 hijackers, and then flee to another country.

THEN Obama can blow him to smithereens
And a few weeks later kill his son when he goes looking for his father

All to the good.

 

[Yurt]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

It is if they have ties to the 911 hijackers, and then flee to another country.

THEN Obama can blow him to smithereens
And a few weeks later kill his son when he goes looking for his father

All to the good.

what?

you do not support military tribunals if caught on american soil, but you support killing them without a trial if they leave the country?

wtf?

 

[theHawk]

ABC news just now


ON EDIT: (took me till 9:43 to get link up)

Boston Bomb Suspect Captured Alive in Backyard Boat - ABC News

A senior Justice Department official told ABC News that federal law enforcement officials are invoking the public safety exception to the Miranda rights, so that Tsarnaev will be questioned immediately without having Miranda rights issued to him.

The federal government's high value detainee interrogation group will be responsible for questioning him.

The Miranda exemption exists to protect the public safety from another attack, according to the official.

Sounds like the Hussein wants to leave an opening for his lawyer to get this guy off.

 

[hortysir]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

It is if they have ties to the 911 hijackers, and then flee to another country.

THEN Obama can blow him to smithereens
And a few weeks later kill his son when he goes looking for his father

All to the good.

But we can't torture....




got it

 

[JakeStarkey]

No comparisons. If BHO is approving the use of torture then is as wrong as the Bushies.

 

[hortysir]

No comparisons. If BHO is approving the use of torture then is as wrong as the Bushies.

No comparison?

We can't torture, but we can kill.


You're eat up, son

 

[JakeStarkey]

No comparisons. If BHO is approving the use of torture then is as wrong as the Bushies.

No comparison?

We can't torture, but we can kill.


You're eat up, son

Come close, hortysir. Closer. War is killing. International and American law prohibit torture. Change the law.

 

[Yurt]

for once, jake is right. torture is against the law.

 

[hortysir]

for once, jake is right. torture is against the law.

But violating foreign airspace and bombing civilians is legal?

 

[IlarMeilyr]

No comparisons. If BHO is approving the use of torture then is as wrong as the Bushies.

No comparison?

We can't torture, but we can kill.


You're eat up, son

Come close, hortysir. Closer. War is killing. International and American law prohibit torture. Change the law.

Torture is against the law and it's beneath us, too.

That begs the question of whether "waterboarding" constitutes "torture," of course.

But, yeah. Torture itself is both illegal and rightly so.

 

[Yurt]

for once, jake is right. torture is against the law.

But violating foreign airspace and bombing civilians is legal?

apparently so. violating foreign airspace is not really against any of our laws. any such violation would of course be handled between the two countries. as to bombing civilians, i'm on the fence on that as the guy bombed had clear ties and i believe openly declared war.

where jake is a moron is that he believes it is ok to bomb someone if they are in a foreign country, but, they must be given a proper trial if they are in the US.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

US law prohibits US citizens from being tried in military commissions, and I'm not even sure it's constitutional to label an American who committed a crime against other Americans on American soil as an enemy combatant. If it was attempted, most likely it would end up in front of the Supreme Court.

US law does no such thing.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I've heard that some are looking to have him declared an enemy combatant, which is ridiculous. It's worrying to see how fast our government can circumvent our rights as Americans. While I want the bomber to talk, I don't want to sacrifice our justice system to do so.

if he is working with AQ, under US law, he is an enemy combatant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_combatant#Change_of_meaning_in_the_United_States

I don't think so......

On November 13, 2001 U.S. President George W. Bush issued a Military Order entitled Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism.[1]

The order:

Defines which individuals the President considers subject to the order.
States that the Secretary of Defense will be ultimately responsible for the individuals.
Outlines the conditions under which the Secretary of Defense should detain the individuals.
Specifies that those individuals who were to be tried would be tried before military commissions, and sets out some broad guidelines for how those military commissions should be conducted.
Orders other agencies to assist the Secretary of Defense.
Grants the Secretary of Defense additional powers.
Sets out that the Secretary of Defense has almost unlimited authority over the individuals.
States that the order will be published in the Federal Register.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Doesn't matter. A federal magistrate (note the word, Yurt the ButtHurt) gave the accused his warning today.

Unsubscribe.