U.S. May Revive Guantánamo Military Courts

[kpete]

Source: New York Times

U.S. May Revive Guantánamo Military Courts

Officials said the first public moves could come as soon as next week, perhaps in filings to military judges at the United States naval base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, outlining an administration plan to amend the Bush administration’s system to provide more legal protections for terrorism suspects.

Continuing the military commissions in any form would probably prompt sharp criticism from human rights groups as well as some of Mr. Obama’s political allies because the troubled system became an emblem of the effort to use Guantánamo to avoid the American legal system.

Officials who work on the Guantánamo issue say administration lawyers have become concerned that they would face significant obstacles to trying some terrorism suspects in federal courts. Judges might make it difficult to prosecute detainees who were subjected to brutal treatment or for prosecutors to use hearsay evidence gathered by intelligence agencies.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/02/us/politics/02gitmo.html

[saigon68]

1. What a crock of Bullshit

Unbelievable.

Use a Barbed whip to extract a confession

That's real Justice

[TacticalPeek]

2. "Officials said . . . Officials ... say"

Why can't people go on the damn record and make themselves clear?

[Downwinder]

3. hearsay --"Officials said . . . Officials ... say"

"for prosecutors to use hearsay evidence gathered by intelligence agencies." Every bit as credible.

[magellan]

4. I don't see no effin "change" here. n/t

[ConcernedCanuk]

5. President OBAMA - the whole World is watching

.
.
.

Close Gitmo

Close all the other illegal jails, detention centres

Treat the "accused" in the normal legal fashion

Charge them, or let them go

Sorta simple methinks

World is watching

Remember that.

We will.

[choie]

6. I'm truly sorry to say this,

but - for me - Obama is becoming a huge disappointment, especially in these matters. How a constitutional "scholar" can continue these sham procedures is beyond me. Does EVERYBODY becoming compromised when they get a little power? or is he so afraid of appearing soft on terror that he'll go against the values that he supposedly holds dear? I'm really disgusted.

[Q3JR4]

7. Better be careful. The rule of thumb is that

when the republicans do it, it's 100% wrong. When a democrat does it and you talk smack about what he's trying to accomplish you're a terrorist.

Q3JR4.
Just wanted to clear things up a bit.
:sarcasm:If I really need to put this.:sarcasm:

[Baby Snooks]

8. The more things have changed...

The more things have changed the more they they have stayed the same.

I was disappointed, then disillusioned, then disgusted. And have been flamed to death for saying it. So nice to see someone else say it. Get ready to get flamed.

I supported him, voted for him, and expected of him. I thought he was my president. My president would not continue this disgrace. He is not my president. He is a disgrace.

[Iowa]

10. Yep...

I voted for him too, but I expected him to sell out when it counted most. And he has. I suspect we'll see far worse before it's over.

This is a guy who adamantly opposed impeachment. Here's what he said in 2007: "I think you reserve impeachment for grave, grave breaches, and intentional breaches of the president's authority". Wow! When I first read that, I couldn't believe it. And then retroactive immunity for crimes committed by corps. So we had plenty of warning about what we were getting - just another sell-out politician.

The new Democratic party motto: Better than the alternative, and not a penny more.

[Solly Mack]

9. K&R

unreal

[ixion]

11. damnit... where's the change?

can we please drop this fascist BS and get on with being a free country again?

[PSPS]

12. President Milquetoast. We still have bush in the whote house.

[Senator]

13. K&R

[BooScout]

14. K&R

I didn't see this earlier.

It incenses me.

[jillan]

15. I'm going to wait until I hear this from Obama's lips - or by someone in his cabinet before

I scream.

[No Elephants]

16. If it is in the NYT and it is about Obama's administration, rest assured he's been briefed on

it. Where is the denial from the administration?

Besides, all the article says is that it is under consideration. Lots of times, people float things to see if the public gives a rap. This is the time for us to let the Department of Justice and the White House know that we really do care.

[jillan]

17. I think I just want this to be wrong.

It was in my paper too :(