#0
A Miranda Rights controversy revolving around whether suspected terrorists should be read their rights has erupted months after it originated with the Christmas Day bomber. Soon after Faisal Shahzad was arrested Tuesday within the Times Square bomb investigation politicians and pundits raised a chatter about whether police force officials should have read Shahzad his rights. As a naturalized American citizen from Pakistan, Faisal Shahzad is entitled to be read his Miranda rights.
Miranda rights and also the Christmas day bomber
The Miranda rights controversy erupted last year after Christmas Day bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was read his Miranda rights following his arrest. Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab intended to blow up an Northwest Airlines flight on its approach to Detroit from Amsterdam but only succeeded in lighting his pants on fire like a sfgate.com, were mad at the administration for not consulting the heads of U.S. intelligence agencies before FBI agents decided to read the 23-year-old Abdulmutallab his Miranda rights. They say valuable intelligence was lost due to the decision.
Miranda rights: Times Square bomber
When Faisal Shahzad was arrested in connection with theTime Square bomb on Tuesday, MSNBC reported that Republican politicians used the occasion to start again the Miranda rights controversy. Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in a speech on the senate floor "Hopefully, the right officials are using this chance to exploit as much intelligence as he might have about his overseas connections and any plots against Americans either here or abroad."
Miranda rights controversy and debate
Arguments circulating within the media whirlpool Tuesday about the Miranda rights controversy produced some strange bedfellows on both sides. On the Caucus Blog at the New York Times, Maria Newman reports that John McCain said on the “Imus within the Morning” program that it would be a “serious mistake’’ to let Mr. Shahzad know, under the 1966 decision in Miranda v. Arizona, that he had a right to an attorney before answering any questions, “at least until we find out as much data we have.”
Absurdities within the Miranda rights controversy
Commenting about the Miranda rights controversy, Glen Beck suggested that "This is no time to shred the constitution," on Fox News. Amanda Terkel at Think Progress explained her disbelief on Beck's comments, writing: Believe it or not, Fox News analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano and host Glenn Beck are condemning the type of fearmongering that King and McCain are doing. Adam Serwer at Tapped on americanprospect.com had a lot to say about these comments from Senator Joe Lieberman:
"I think it’s time for us to look at whether we want to amend that law to apply it to American citizens who choose to become affiliated with foreign terrorist organizations, whether they should not also be deprived automatically of their citizenship, and therefore be deprived of rights that come with that citizenship when they are apprehended and charged with a terrorist act."
Serwer called Lieberman's comments "really absurd." If Lieberman listened to himself, he would definitely realize that he advocates stripping people of American citizenship depending on mere suspicion of a crime, “There’s no benefit to denying Shahzad due process, Serwer said, "but doing so might create significant troubles down the road. So put away the pitchforks already.”
Resources for the article
sfgate.com
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-02-14/news/17875926_1_miranda-rights-suspects-member-of-al-qaeda
Caucus Blog at the New York Times
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/04/blogtalk-miranda-rights-for-terrorists/
