In a recent New York Times article, reporters discovered that, surprise, many of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay really are dangerous terrorists! They reviewed "thousands of pages" of evidence that the government has so far made public and concluded that perhaps the reality is more complicated than critics claim:
• Detainees are implicated in such terror attacks as the 1998 embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania and the 2000 attack on the USS Cole.
• Those with "serious terrorism credentials" include al Qaeda operatives Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and the so-called "Dirty 30," Osama bin Laden's cadre of bodyguards.
• The Times didn't mention Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the architect of 9/11, though he's awaiting a war-crimes tribunal at Gitmo too.
Even though both Barack Obama and John McCain have pledged to put Guantanamo out of business, "the review of the government's public files underscores the challenges of fulfilling that promise. The next president will have to contend with sobering intelligence claims against many of the remaining detainees," says the Times.
For example:
• At least 60 detainees have been cleared for release or transfer but no other countries will accept them.
• If Gitmo is no longer a prison, some U.S. facility would have to house the remaining men while they await habeas hearings and trials.
• Yet no politician has offered up his state or district as an alternative -- and none will.
Further, if military commissions are cashiered altogether, how will prosecutors protect classified information and intelligence sources and methods in open civilian criminal court?
Hopefully, after a few harrowing threat briefings, maybe the new Commander in Chief won't rush to undo Bush's programs, says the Wall Street Journal.
Source: Editorial, "Guantanamo Revelation," Wall Street Journal, November 4, 2008; bases upon: William Glaberson and Margot Williams, "Next President Will Face Test on Detainees," New York Times, November 2, 2008.
For text: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122575933265095405.html
For New York Times text: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/03/us/03gitmo.html
Originally posted by CliffLandinYou mean there are bags of cocaine and ecstasy, fast food chefs and spelling bee drop-outs being held and tortured at Gitmo?
Wow, where have you been? We are at war with drugs, illiteracy, obesity, terror and numerous other things. We aren't doing very well in any of them. 🙁
THE HORROR!
Originally posted by MrHandDon't you think their victims are owed due process of some kind? Why are you in denial? Even the New York Times, the most respected liberal rag in the country, says they are terrorists.
Regardless of whether or not they are so called "enemy combatants," they are owed due process of some kind. The fact that one person names them an enemy combatant does not make this allegation true.
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterDon't believe everything you read...
Don't you think their victims are owed due process of some kind? Why are you in denial? Even the New York Times, the most respected liberal rag in the country, says they are terrorists.
Tell me, how were these "enemy combatants" identified? By their uniforms perhaps? OOPS!
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterIf they are terrorists and it is clear, it should be shown in some sort of tribunal with reasonable rules. They should be punished appropriately.
Don't you think their victims are owed due process of some kind? Why are you in denial? Even the New York Times, the most respected liberal rag in the country, says they are terrorists.
If we allow a single person to sentence and hold people indefinitely, how is our system any better than that of the terrorists we are fighting. We need to stay on the high road in order to win the war of wills.
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritterthey are either enemy combatants or they are terrorists...which is it? If they are terrorists then they should be afforded there due process and given a trial. If they are enemy combatants, then their governments need to be informed, so some arrangement might be made about their disposition. Either way its illegal to hold them without due process...no matter how frightened you were while crapping your pants on 9-11
Don't you think their victims are owed due process of some kind? Why are you in denial? Even the New York Times, the most respected liberal rag in the country, says they are terrorists.