Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Republican Red; Alex1977; DHC-2; gruntSGT; Peach; SC Swamp Fox; upchuck
I note in fairness that I believe Sen. Graham — who I have criticized in these quarters for his stance on military commissions (see, e.g., here) — has indicated during senate hearings that he does not think al Qaeda should profit from the UCMJ's generous Miranda protections (which are actually better than what criminals get in the civilian justice system).

But that's irrelevant because the horse is already out of the barn.

Oops, Lindsay almost did something right.

Lindsey Ping

Add me to the list. / Remove me from the list.

20 posted on 09/19/2006 9:53:05 AM PDT by upchuck (Q:Why does President Bush support amnesty for illegal aliens? A:Read this: http://tinyurl.com/nyvno)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: upchuck
Maybe I am stupid, but doesn't this mean the whole argument over interrogation techniques and Common Article 3 is moot? Apparently now we can't interrogate terrorists AT ALL unless they are first told they have the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney. What terrorist will submit to any kind of interrogation under those circumstances, and what would any U.S. interrogator do with an attorney present other than to say, "please will you tell me what you and your pals were up to?"

Thanks a freaking lot, McCain.

24 posted on 09/19/2006 10:05:50 AM PDT by Dems_R_Losers (Vote as if your life depends on it -- because it does!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson