Finally, common sense has won out.
President Barack Obama, once a sharp critic of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility and the use of military tribunals to prosecute detainees, is now planning to do an about-face and proceed with his own military trials. After encountering numerous upsets in fulfilling his campaign promise to close the facility and end military tribunals, this latest acquiescence from the Obama team likely indicates the end to the hope that either will be achieved in the president’s first term. A vindicating development for the Bush administration, this sudden turnaround represents a great victory for the American people, who sustained the opposition to the facility’s closure.
A New York Times story reported on Wednesday that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is expected to clear the way for new cases against about 30 of the 173 prisoners still held in “Gitmo.” (Still more detainees will face trial in the future, while some will be released in other countries.) This legal green light would allow for new charges against detainees for the first time under the Obama administration.
This latest development in Obama’s long-standing hate-hate relationship with Guantanamo has been construed as a response to a bill passed in Congress that banned the transfer of prisoners to the United States for any reason, including trials. Civilian trials for detainees came to a standstill early last year after popular opposition arose over the administration’s attempt to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a high-ranking 9/11 plotter, in New York City.
Obama’s latest action regarding detainee trials stands in stark contrast to his hasty election promise to dismantle the Military Commissions Act. The president had even once termed the military commission system “an enormous failure,” vowing to have the detainees’ cases transferred to civilian courts. To indicate the high priority he assigned Gitmo, on his inauguration day, Obama even signed a 120-day delay of all trials in progress at the facility.
People have also not forgotten Obama’s other ill-considered election promise to close the detention facility within a year of being elected. And again, Obama indicated the urgency of this promise by signing an executive order to close the facility only two days after entering office.
Obama’s failure to keep his word, however, was not the result of cheap electioneering people have become so accustomed to from politicians. Once in office, Obama appeared to rethink the wisdom of his ambitions after getting a glance at the remaining Gitmo terrorists’ files and confronting the great difficulty of dealing with them in a way that would not recklessly endanger the public. Numerous terrorists (many released during the Bush administration) have already gone back to terrorist enclaves since their release into other countries, and the overall rate of recidivism is very high. Extremely dangerous detainees, numbering some several dozen, will likely be detained indefinitely.
Early on, the threat posed by these problematic detainees made it apparent that Guantanamo would not be closed any time soon. House Democrats also signaled to the administration they did not want any al-Qaeda members in the United States, especially in the districts they represented. After years of hypocritically criticizing the Bush administration about the Gunatanamo facility, when they had the chance, congressional Democrats refused to vote the money to close it.
The decision to resume military tribunals will come as a great relief to the intelligence community, which civilian terrorist trials would have seriously jeopardized. In civilian trials, all information regarding the government’s case, including the names of informants and intelligence gathering methods, would have to be revealed. Such important data, normally kept secret or within the confines of a military tribunal, could then find its ways into the wrong hands.
This has already happened once in America in the civilian trial of the “Blind Sheikh,” Omar Abdel Rahman, who was convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. At least one of the documents turned over to Rahman’s lawyers found its way to al-Qaeda, which at that time had its headquarters in the Sudan.
“That document contained a list of people who were on the government’s radar screen – and thus alerted al Qaeda to the possibility of surveillance,” the Strategy Page reported.
But a major reason to rejoice over the tribunal decision is that it rules out the possibility of crucial evidence being thrown for having been obtained by “questionable methods.” People were shocked last year when a Gitmo prisoner, on trial in New York courtroom, had all but one of 285 counts against him dismissed by a civilian jury. The prisoner, Ahmed Ghailani, accused of helping bomb the US embassies in Africa, nearly walked out of the courtroom a free man, which, according to a Wall Street Journal story, caused the plans for more civilian trials to grind to a halt.
According to the New York Times, one of the detainees facing trial under the new initiative, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who is accused of helping plan the USS Cole bombing in 2000, fits into the same category as Ahmed Ghailani. Al-Nashiri was one of the detainees who was subjected to “waterboarding” and claims to have undergone other harsh interrogation methods. According to the Times, Nashiri’s lawyer is planning to “highlight Mr. Nashiri’s treatment in CIA custody.”
Unhappy with White House’s decision to move forward with military trials are Obama’s left wing supporters. The American Civil Liberties Union, which views all detainees as victims of human rights abuses, is already calling Nashiri’s appearance before a military tribunal “a sham trial” and has criticized the Obama administration’s reforms of the military justice system, saying in a statement, “[W]e have seen nothing but mounting evidence that the military commissions are incapable of delivering justice.”
But deep down such leftist critics are probably even angrier and more deeply disappointed by the fact that by retaining the military tribunal system and keeping Guantanamo open, the president they supported is proving right the president they hated, George W. Bush. Fortunately — at least for the time being — the national interest has won the day.
GITMO IS STILL OPEN? Another Obama campaign promise broken? He's realizing Bush and Cheney were right?
The American people were conned by the biggest Con Man in the History of the United States! Only Obama Zombies, brainwashed by this CULT leader and his Circle, still believe in this fraud!
I actually drew up the draw-down plan to pull the Joint Task Force out of GTMO. This was in late 2009. We, [I] got no instruction or feedback from the Obama administration.
We were all laughing about it because we knew it wasn't going to happen. But we [I] still did our [my] duty and created the draw-down plans to be out of GTMO by the Jan 2010 deadline set by President Obama.
Yes you are right. At my work place we still have lovers of obama most are hispanic Leftists Who still are hopeing for mass race and political amnesty many still say its only time before we put our enemies down.
Being here in New Mexico, which is overwhelmingly Democrat, just voted in a Republican Hispanic Female Governor, it's first. Hispanics here are very different than any other Hispanic group in the U.S.. We have been here for centuries not unlike Miami Cubans, NY Puerto Ricans, LA Mexicans. WE DO NOT SUPPORT ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION! WE ARE THE BIGGEST GROUP HERE AGAINST IT! I don't know any NEW MEXICAN Hispanics, except hard-core Democrats, that supports the Dream Act or illegals. Our former Guv, Bill Richardson allowed DRIVERS LICENSES TO ILLEGALS. THE NEW GOV IS ATTEMPTING TO REPEAL THE LAW! Geraldo Rivera was on Fox and he supports illegals and the Dream Act and claims Hispanics do to. HE'S VERY WRONG! But you know who the ones who WANT TO STOP THESE ILLEGALS? THE ILLEGALS FROM A DECADE OR MORE AGO! THE NEW ONES TAKE THE OLD ONES JOBS AWAY!
I am an Anglo born in New Mexico and can verify his remarks. The culture and cuisine of the Land of Enchantment are a mixture of Native American, Hispanic and Anglo elements. 'least we have a decent governor now.
Some of us in the Republic of Tejas do as well.
Next we'll find out if Obama really meant it when he promised an end to the war in Iraq this year.
Reconsidering………..A great place to keep political dissenters under wraps!
P.S. What is pinging?
Look at this ridiculous narrative. Move them to the mainland. Try them in our citizen courts, giving them the same rights as US citizens?????? This is a big joke!!!!! Did we Mirandize these terrorists(suspects) when they were captured?????? How stupid is that!!!!!!! Let's expose the names of informants!!!!!
These are prisoners of war!!! Obama and his buddy, Eric Holder, thought they could score political points with their base. US citizens believe we are engaged in a war on terrorism. They have seen many who were released rejoin the fight. It seems ACLU and the administration are on the side of the terrorists.
Obama didn't do this because he had a change of heart. He did it because he had no choice. It was not wisdom that changed his mind, but the pressures brought on by lower poll numbers and reelection thoughts.
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Thomas Jefferson
They are not prisoners of war. That are not prisoners of war, by several definitions. I don't believe in according them the due process of criminal defendants either, but they are not prisoners of war. We could have just "dobe walled" each and every one of them. I am not necessarily saying we should do so, at least not until we get any information we can from them, but if we certainly could do so.
If they are not prisoners of war what are they? Why then, are they in confinement? They must have some status. Obama and Holder have decided that they will be tried before military tribunals.
Read PAthena's comment below. Under international law they have no protection from anything. It is meant to be this way, so that soldiers do not target civilians. Otherwise, soldiers would just kill the entire population for fear that they were all illegal combatants. Obama and Bush knew this, but they were not going to have mass "dobe" wallings, but they certainly could have done so.
Here is an idea, Let them escape into Cuba, then the Cubans will shoot them on sight and we can blame the Cubans for violating their rights. Maybe they will even kill a few Cubans. Ahhh… two birds with one stone.
You are absolutely correct. There was a time when organizations like the ACLU did some good work, but that was long ago. Now, they spend most of their time, standing up for rights that do not exist. That said, occasionally, they do take on a worthy cause, e.g. they have taken on some second amendment cases recently
So what happened to all the leftist who just 2 two YEARS ago Happened to be jumping up and down about Gitmo and its so called outrage?
So it look to me just to be one more little Red BS DEAL. And face facts the American people have no ideal what is happening and don't really care and Gitmo OR muslim mass murder and JUST DON'R CARE about any thing much until someing happens to that person.
I guess the Obama admin realized the other alternative was to secretly take any new combatants out in the desert and interogate them with any means necassary to get the info. Then when they are no longer useful, cap em in the head, done deal. Whos to know or care if some friggen terrorist spent his last days being water boarded…..ya right, they would be begging to be water boarded. Give me a break with this BS that playing good cop, bad cop gets more info. If you know you are not going to be harmed you can last from now till dooms day without coughing up important info. Leave it to the big boys to figure out how to get info out of these monsters.
Hooray for us!!!
Since they wear no uniforms and engage in combat, they could be viewed as spies. The military tribunals are more than they deserve. The ACLU is out of control. Then again, so is the Radical Left. Loyal to country or the law is beyond them.
The Democrats criticized Bush for the evils of Gitmo and demanded its closure.
The Democrats criticized Bush for the war in Iraq.
The Democrats criticized Bush for not devoting enough attention to the good war in Afghanistan.
The Democrats criticized Bush not finding Osama bin Laden.
The Democrats criticized Bush for his handing of the Katrina disaster.
The Democrats criticized Bush for his tax cuts.
The Democrats criticized Bush for regulations he wanted to keep a better eye on Freddie Mac and Fannie May.
The Democrats criticized Bush for many of the things that Obama is doing now, yet where is their criticism. This man has broken promises, made this country weaker in the eyes of the world and has pursued economic policies that have pushed us closer to bankruptcy. When confronted with a problem, Obama has frequently blamed Bush for his difficulties. In his defense, Bush refuses to judge the policies of Obama or engage in a blame game. Where is the media? Singing the praises of their lord & savior.