Miranda - McVeigh Vs. Shahzad

[VaYank5150]

Shahzad was read his Mirand rights.

Miranda.* And no shit..I'm asking why there is such a movement from the right to end the use of miranda now..Not when Reid was read his mr

This is REALLY getting embarassing for you YL. Quit while you are behind....

 

[Cal]

Shahzad was read his Mirand rights.

Miranda.* And no shit..I'm asking why there is such a movement from the right to end the use of miranda now..Not when Reid was read his mr

This is REALLY getting embarassing for you YL. Quit while you are behind....

**** you vaSTANK.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Better Question:

Why do people think its a good idea to allow the Feds to strip people of citizenship in order to deny them their rights under the Constitution?

I'd have thought the libertarian, anti-Fed types would be the first to rail at the idea that we should be handing Washington the ability to strip away a citizen's rights. Maybe fear makes people willing to sacrifice freedomn.

That's sad because I was pretty sure we were a fearless freedom loving people. Seems I was wrong.

 

[Cal]

Shahzad was read his Mirand rights.

Miranda.* And no shit..I'm asking why there is such a movement from the right to end the use of miranda now..Not when Reid was read his mr

Really? Where did you ask that?



Here, you are clearly asking if their race is the reason for the difference in their treatment. The obvious answer to your initial question is simple, McVeigh was pre-9/11, not to mentioned the fact that, prior to that point, it was an unheard of event on U.S. soil.



Now here you have mentioned "certain politicians," but that phrase does nothing to indicate to which politicians you are referring. Again you have mentioned racism. Two mentions of "racism" vs. one mention of "certain politicians." To this point, one can only conclude you think it is racism that made the difference.

You have also mentioned Richard Reid, finally. All I can say is, in my opinion, it was wrong to Mirandize him. the public safety exception should have been invoked, he should have been interrogated, then he should have been Mirandized.

By the way, you do know that it is the Obama administration that is currently considering broadening the public safety exception of Miranda, right? This is the exception that allowed law enforcement to interrogate Shahzad for four hours prior to reading him his rights.



Here again you have asked the question, what is the difference, but no mention of "the right." Are we supposed to read you hormone addled mind?

Oh, and Richard Reid is not a U.S. citizen, just for the record.



Once again, no mention of the "a movement from the right to end the use of miranda now." But we do get the favorite "Bush people" reference. 'Bout time we added "Bush" to Godwin's Law...

For the record, any information learned during questioning under the public safety exception is indeed admissable in court.

Miranda.* And no shit..I'm asking why there is such a movement from the right to end the use of miranda now..Not when Reid was read his mr

It's not until this reply, four pages into your thread, that you have finally come clean with what you really wanted to ask, but everyone else is a moron. Why didn't you just start out by asking, "Why is the right racist?" It would have saved us all a lot of time.

It's something I've seen alot around here..Attack the messanger* instead of talking about the message. Typical Conservative fer' ya.

Really? You've never seen the same type of attacks just as often from those on the left? Liar.

Oh, and it's spelled "messenger." There were more, but I've made my point. At least I make an effort to go back and correct my misspelling...

Finally, a long response. The only thing I could get out of DUD & Co was the 'you're a stupid kid' argument..As if that makes the question a bad one.

First off: I do realize that Eric Holder is proposing expanding the PSE -- I am strongly opposed. I think if Miranda is good for the worst criminals in the entire U.S. (ie; rapists, muderers, child molesters..etc..,) it is good for terror suspects..Both foreign and domestic.

Second off: No, In the opening post, I asked "is it race or is it blatant hypocrisy?" I wasn't saying that is was race..I was asking a question.

Third off: Ok by "certain politicians" I am indicting any person who is attempting to change the law by not giving them their MR. Democrat or Republican. However, we have recently seen a groundswell of right - wing lawmakers (Peter King, Joe Liberman, Scott Brown..Etc..) to strip ones citizenship if they are suspected of being involved with a terror organization.

Fourth off: No, not "just as often." For the most part (even though we are heavily outnumbered) the libs on this board keep the 'tards on the defense. The only time I'm seen ducking a debate is when I'm off doing school or enjoying life..If I start a thread, I try to stick around.

Lastly: If I've read correctly, you can ask questions without mirandizing that immediately effects the security of our nation..But no more. If I am wrong, I stan corrected.

 

[KMAN]

Question: Why didn't we see an effort to keep terrorist suspects from being read their rights when Timothy McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, that we see now with the capturing of Faisal Shahzad? Wasn't McVeigh just as much a threat to us as Shahzad? Could this be the reason?:
He looks like us:

He doesn't:

It's the only reasonable explanation. Either that or certain politicians are just trying to cast doubt on President Obama's handling of Shahzad. Look at the shoe bomber..He was read his rights without any objection from the right. So it's either racism or blatant hypocrisy.

Another lefty... Another mention of race... What is up with liberal's obsession with people's skin color?????

I thought this would be a pretty easy answer and maybe it's a rhetorical question but ... answer: terrorism in our country wasn't as big a concern back then as it is today.

 

[KMAN]

OK......I want to be the first to officially nominate Young Lefty for the USMessageBaords first "Stupidest Boardmember" award!!!!

Now........mind you, this forum has a good share of liberals who are just naive but this guy is just a complete dummy. He'd gladly buy a package of dog doo for $1,000.00 if you packaged it up just right!!!


s0n.......like Ive said before.........you are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay out of your league over here. Its kinda like a double A baseball player being brought up to the show. They pwn themselves real quick.

Again.........I highly suggest going over and spending a couple of years posting up some of the adolescent viewpoints over at People.com first!!!










repost do to some necessary editorializing..............

Ah give the kid a break... He's obviously a high school or college kid who only knows what his teachers tell him. It's not his fault he is getting brain washed. All we can do is explain to him how things work in the real world.

He'll grow up one day...

 

[Cal]

Question: Why didn't we see an effort to keep terrorist suspects from being read their rights when Timothy McVeigh blew up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, that we see now with the capturing of Faisal Shahzad? Wasn't McVeigh just as much a threat to us as Shahzad? Could this be the reason?:
He looks like us:

He doesn't:

It's the only reasonable explanation. Either that or certain politicians are just trying to cast doubt on President Obama's handling of Shahzad. Look at the shoe bomber..He was read his rights without any objection from the right. So it's either racism or blatant hypocrisy.

Another lefty... Another mention of race... What is up with liberal's obsession with people's skin color?????

I thought this would be a pretty easy answer and maybe it's a rhetorical question but ... answer: terrorism in our country wasn't as big a concern back then as it is today.

Huh?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(shoe_bomber)
On December 22, 2001, passengers on Flight 63 complained of a smoke smell in the cabin shortly after a meal service.

Wait..Wasn't the twin towers attack before this? Are you saying that after 9/11 that there wasn't a big concern about terrorism?

 

[ihopehefails]

That was because Timothy McVeigh wasn't a part of a foriegn fighting force with the goal of killing Americans. It was sufficient to arrest him and treat him like a criminal. It actually kind of a different situation when dealing with a foreign organization that has declared war on America. Do you execute them on the field of battle or do you treat them like a criminal?

 

[theDoctorisIn]

That was because Timothy McVeigh wasn't a part of a foriegn fighting force with the goal of killing Americans. It was sufficient to arrest him and treat him like a criminal. It actually kind of a different situation when dealing with a foreign organization that has declared war on America. Do you execute them on the field of battle or do you treat them like a criminal?

Shahzad was not a "member" of any "foreign fighting force".

 

[Cal]

That was because Timothy McVeigh wasn't a part of a foriegn fighting force with the goal of killing Americans. It was sufficient to arrest him and treat him like a criminal. It actually kind of a different situation when dealing with a foreign organization that has declared war on America. Do you execute them on the field of battle or do you treat them like a criminal?

Shoe Bomber?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Reid_(shoe_bomber)

Richard Colvin Reid, born August 12, 1973, commonly known as the "shoe bomber", is a self-admitted member of Al Qaeda who pled guilty in 2003 in U.S. federal court to eight criminal counts of terrorism related to his attempt to destroy a commercial aircraft in-flight

No foreign ties? I guess he lied.