come on in the committee will now consider a jurisdiction to requesting that the president and directing of the senator defense transmit to the house representatives all information in their possession relating to communications regarding and foreign persons suspected of terrorism this resolution deal deals with the miranda rights and detainees on the battlefield in the interest of the actual consideration resolution in the bipartisan subsuming which we have worked with the ranking member detainee is given a miranda warning only with the consent of military commanders and only after the intelligence value of that detainees been fully exploited relating it is my understanding that the administration has no reason to believe that a miranda warning is ever been given on the battlefield or against the wishes of the military commander third miranda warnings to detainees have been given by f b i or the judge other justice department agents exclusively have not been given by our military forces partially as a result of miranda warnings that have been given to individual detaine east africa last the committee over the years in the sense i've been chairman and is deeply committed to ensuring that our men and women in uniform in the civilians of the defense department have all they need to win the fight against terrorists the u s miranda warnings very limited number of cases it's no more weapon in our government's arsenal to bring terrorists to justice and prevent them and their associates from entering from returning to the i'm confident that when the report is produced they will demonstrate that giving miranda warnings to a limited number of detainees overseas promotes our nation's security now turning a good friend their colleague the gentleman from california mr mc that was my high pitch thank you mr chairman for holding today's markup of h raz six o two as a chairman noted in his in his remarks the committee addressed the subject of this resolution of inquiry when we marked up the national defense authorization act h r twenty six forty seven in june section one hundred three six of the house bill asked the secretary of defense to report on how the reading of miranda rights to individuals detained by the united states in afghanistan may affected our strategy operation the rules of engagement interrogations and most importantly the safety and security of our forces i commend chairman skelton for working in a bipartisan artisan fashion to amend h rez six o two to reflect section one  six i intend to support his amendment in the nature of a substitute i would like to discuss the substance of this resolution however some may recall that when this committee held hearings on detainee policy in two thousand and six the previous chairman warned against policies that may result in mirandizing detainees on the battlefield at the time some felt the issue was a red herring now three years after the fact the wall street journal article reports that in two thousand six the pentagon decided not to advise prisoners of their rights during interrogations on the grounds that would prompt the detainees to shut down the issue was real then and it remains so today the question of miranda rights  only affects detainees in guantanamo bay cuba but extends all the way to afghanistan and all future u s military operations earlier this year judge bates of the district court of the district of columbia ruled to certain detainees held in agron say the bottom have a constitutional right to hate corpus some experts have suggested that this ruling has resulted in our forces limiting some of their operations to avoid potential hate us corpus claims from detainees at issue are the dueling interests of securing statements that could be introduced as evidence in a criminal prosecution or a b s proceeding versus conducting interrogations for the purpose of intelligence collection as we learned last week in our committee's hearing with the judge advocate general's or t j a g s a voluntary statement standard does not adequately account for the exigencies of the battlefield in other words reading detainees miranda rights to prosecute detainees in federal courts will often be at odds with the demands of the battlefield where the need to gain real time and teligent said enemy plans will always trump the desire to preserve evidentiary evidence cherry purity and the remote possibility of a later criminal trial though the detainee policy task force interim report released today is little more than a restatement of the president's may two thousand and nine national archives speech i welcome the recommendation that our soldiers should not be required to give miranda rights warnings to enemy forces captured on the battlefield the real question however is whether we will have law enforcement personnel on the battlefield reading miranda rights i'm told that instances where the f b i has advised detainees that their miranda rights are few and far between and that this rare practice does not interfere with battlefield interrogations reports of a global justice initiative that would increase the practice of reading miranda to detainees are disconcerting mr rogers and others in this congress have been gently monitor this proposed policy and remain concerned supporting the chairman substitute will allow this committee to verify that members let me read them that remain the members that any amendment offer must be in writing and then the copies must be available at the desk for distribution for those who submitted amendments by yesterday's deadline the necessary copies have already been made and also have a member has an amendment that involves the jurisdiction of the committees we request that the member before he or she offers him an have a letter from the respective committee chairman indicating a waiver of the right of referral i remind members that this approach is been the practice of the committee for many years and it's done so that we can proceed directly to the house floor i'd like to mentioned two other longstanding committee practices although i don't believe they will be applicable today that would cause the bill refer to other committees the objections sought mr chairman yes consist with house rules i'd like to assert the right of any member to file additional or dissenting views for inclusion in the committee report to the house on the resolution just ordered part of the objection mr chairman it should be clear according to my statement a few moments ago the