Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
To: rabscuttle385
Make no difference to me, but this will be for ALL suspects, in ALL crimes.
2 posted on
05/06/2010 7:45:22 AM PDT by
Wolfie
To: bamahead
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) wants to allow the government to interrogate U.S. citizens suspected of terrorism without warning them of their right to remain silenta proposal that would dramatically rewrite the rules regarding suspects captured inside the United States.Check this out.
Once the damnable McCain and his lap dog Graham have served their purposes, their leftist "friends" might choose to label conservatives, libertarians, and Tea Partiers as "domestic terrorists" and summarily strip them of their rights as U.S. citizens.
3 posted on
05/06/2010 7:45:51 AM PDT by
rabscuttle385
(Live Free or Die)
To: rabscuttle385
a proposal that would dramatically rewrite the rules regarding suspects captured inside the United StatesThis guy has a college degree (and presumably a television) and has likely heard the term "You have the right to remain silent..." about 1,000,000 in cop shows over the years. I don't imagine it was news to him.
4 posted on
05/06/2010 7:47:24 AM PDT by
Onelifetogive
(Flame away...)
To: rabscuttle385
.
Miranda warnings are counterproductive in my view,
That was the position of some LEOs a few decades ago.
Now, however it just sounds ominous.
5 posted on
05/06/2010 7:47:30 AM PDT by
Touch Not the Cat
(Where is the light? Wonder if it's weeping somewhere...)
To: rabscuttle385
So give terrorists rights but take rights away from Americans.
Hot tar and feathers for these slime.
6 posted on
05/06/2010 7:48:10 AM PDT by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
To: rabscuttle385
I would be more concerned about having specific safeguards written into such a new law.
I don’t trust the likes of Lindsey Graham or future politicans.
Too many times the seemingly innocuous laws they write have devastating unintended consequences.
7 posted on
05/06/2010 7:49:44 AM PDT by
TomGuy
To: upchuck
8 posted on
05/06/2010 7:51:44 AM PDT by
rabscuttle385
(Live Free or Die)
To: rabscuttle385
They aren't "Miranda" rights; they're Constitutional rights.
Miranda just means that a LEO has to give every suspect a lesson on his Constitutional rights before asking him questions.
9 posted on
05/06/2010 7:52:19 AM PDT by
TChris
("Hello", the politician lied.)
To: rabscuttle385
First dig of the spur to take ALL our rights away. Welcome to the New World Order.
10 posted on
05/06/2010 7:52:39 AM PDT by
pray4liberty
(dare I say it?)
To: rabscuttle385
Another candidate for the "How stupid is" list.
If terrorists are held as illegal combatants at Gitmo, Miranda is unnecessary.
If they are held as criminals in any US justice facility, Miranda is absolutely necessary for conviction.
An exception for "terrorism" will never pass Constitutional test. SCOTUS must reverse Miranda universally.
Ghramnesty is a maroon.
12 posted on
05/06/2010 7:58:01 AM PDT by
Navy Patriot
(Sarah and the Conservatives will rock your world.)
To: rabscuttle385
The Miranda decision was another one of the leftists/libertarian big victories during the 60s from the libertarian hero, Earl Warren’s radical court.
13 posted on
05/06/2010 7:58:45 AM PDT by
ansel12
(Romney-"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there")
To: rabscuttle385
It’s just a short hop to now everybody who hates big government is a terrorist.
14 posted on
05/06/2010 7:59:06 AM PDT by
Tarpon
( ...Rude crude socialist Obama depends on ignorance to force his will on people)
To: rabscuttle385
This is unrelated, but anybody else have a problem with this term “homeland”. When and why did that come into common use? So if this is the homeland, what other lands are there? I think the use of this term sets expectation that this country is the property of the world, and, therefore, the people of the world should be allowed to come and go and do whatever business they please here without the consent of the citizens. The idea that this is a integral nation with citizens is now obsolete.
15 posted on
05/06/2010 7:59:52 AM PDT by
throwback
( The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid)
To: rabscuttle385
I don’t trust this red herring. When the person is an American citizen, they get their rights, and should be chaarged with treason. If found guilty, then it’s firing squad time...
21 posted on
05/06/2010 8:13:47 AM PDT by
LRS
(Just contracts; just laws; just a constitution...)
To: rabscuttle385
"From 1953 to 1969, Earl Warren presided as chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Under Warren's leadership, the Court actively used Judicial Review to strictly scrutinize and over-turn state and federal statutes, to apply many provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states, and to provide opportunities for those groups in society that had been excluded from the political process. During Warren's tenure, the Court became increasingly liberal and activist, drawing the fire of political and judicial conservatives who believed that the Warren Court had over-stepped its constitutional role and had become a legislative body. The Warren Court itself became a catalyst for change, initiating reforms rather than responding to pressures applied by other branches of government.
The Warren Court was committed to the promotion of a libertarian and egalitarian society."
"But on the big legal questions, the war was over, and the liberals had won. And their victories went beyond the judgments of the Supreme Court. The Warren Court transformed virtually the entire legal culture, especially law schools.
"It was not surprising, then, that on the day after Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter in 1980, Yale Law School went into mourning."
22 posted on
05/06/2010 8:15:10 AM PDT by
ansel12
(Romney-"I longed in many respects to actually be in Vietnam and be representing our country there")
To: rabscuttle385
McCain’s poodle has become quite the little fascist.
23 posted on
05/06/2010 8:15:59 AM PDT by
dforest
To: rabscuttle385
Still running interference for McCain I see.
24 posted on
05/06/2010 8:17:54 AM PDT by
Buckeye Battle Cry
(Enjoy nature - eat meat, wear fur and drive your car!)
To: rabscuttle385
McCain, Graham, Lieberman want to take away our Constitutional rights.
29 posted on
05/06/2010 8:43:48 AM PDT by
NeoCaveman
(we now live in a post-Obamapacolyptic world)
To: rabscuttle385
The spin that the Progressive Facists at Politico put on this is not accurate based on what Graham said. As the quote in the story shows, he was not talking about US Citzens.
The homeland is part of the battlefield. So this idea that you get to America, the rules dramatically change, to the benefit of the suspect the terrorist makes no sense, he said.
35 posted on
05/06/2010 8:51:15 AM PDT by
MNJohnnie
(The problem with Socialism is eventually you run our of other peoples money. Lady Thatcher)
To: rabscuttle385
(All of the senior GOP Senators leaders must go) they have stop the conservative movement for years
45 posted on
05/06/2010 10:05:02 AM PDT by
day21221
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson