Miranda wrongs: White House playing politics with terror

NY Post ^ | February 9, 2010 | Ralph Peters

[Scanian]

In a breathtakingly cynical example of playing politics, the White House just accused Republicans of playing politics over its Miranda-rights Christmas gift to the crotch bomber.

With fumbling terrorism czar John Brennan walking point, administration spokesmen attacked those who believe that treating would-be suicide-bomber Umar Abdulmutallab the way we handle shoplifters harms our national security.

The White House position is a PR blend of lies, half-truths and ignorance. Let's strip out the politics and lay out the facts from an intelligence professional's perspective:

[hershey]

Sarah Palin put it succinctly: Our brave soldiers are willing to die for freedoms and rights the administration wants to give to the enemy. That’s the fifth column alive and well in the WH.

[Doogle]

John Brennan, the Jamie Gorelick in pants.

[caww]

What more needs to be said ..that statement says it all.

[PGalt]

Impeach Barack Obama

[Scanian]

He has a knack for abrasively defending the indefensible. A real pain in the arse, that one.

[ricks_place]

Excellent Commentary from Ralph Peters

• The administration claims Abdulmutallab is now cooperating. That's either dishonest or idiotic -- or both.
• Even if he's talking now, Abdulmutallab won't provide actionable intelligence. It's too late: His contacts had time to vacate the premises and alter their modes of operation.
• What plea bargain did we have to grant Abdulmutallab to get him to talk? Why should we ever have to plea-bargain with terrorists? Can any serious lawyer show us where in the laws of land warfare (which include the Geneva Convention) or in the broader sphere of international law it specifies that terrorists must be read their Miranda rights upon capture?