In response to:

Holder's Premature Mirandization of Suspect

/ Wrote: Feb 08, 2010 8:44 PM

Having said that, I have no particular problem with a suspected terrorist from a foreign country being tried in a military tribunal if he is apprehended outside of the US. As long as he gets an opportunity to review the evidence against him, and refute it to the best of his ability, and as long as the evidence wasn't obtained by use of torture.

**********************

I agree. Further, I am not interested in a suspension of habeas corpus; however, a terrorist/combatant/belligerent/etc has rights under the UCMJ.

My position is that foreigners apprehended outside of the US are not entitled to Constitutional protections. This position has been validated by SCOTUS.

Thanks for the nice debate.

Join the Debate!

Read Full Story

Holder's Premature Mirandization of Suspect

Republicans have been hitting the Obama administration for Attorney General Eric Holder's too-quick decision to Mirandize accused Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab after a mere 50 minutes of what has been described as valuable interrogation. After the Miranda moment, the would-be bomber clammed up.

Critics argue that the FBI did not need to tell the Nigerian citizen that he had a right to remain silent and to an attorney. For one thing, he is not a U.S. citizen, but arguably an "enemy combatant" caught entering the country intent on committing an act of war. And even if he were...

Related Tags: Media and Culture MSNBC