---

What is the point in having a trial if it doesn't matter?

---

It keeps the population believing they have control of the government and are free.  Just like voting.

---

Even the Daily Kos doesn't seem to support this blatant disregard of the law.

---

Acquitted and indefinitely detained on the executive's say-so. That doesn't really sound like the kind of American justice we learned about in civics class, unless that class was taught by John Yoo.

---

---

You sound like you are just now discovering what Guantanamo Bay and executive laws enacted by Bush are about.

Post edited at 12:32 pm on July 14, 2009 by skaterofthefuture

-------
In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies,
but the silence of our friends.

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 5:40 pm on July 9, 2009

---

Even the Daily Kos doesn't seem to support this blatant disregard of the law.

---

Acquitted and indefinitely detained on the executive's say-so. That doesn't really sound like the kind of American justice we learned about in civics class, unless that class was taught by John Yoo.

---

---

FA have you been sleeping under a rock for the past 8 years?

You sound like you are just now discovering what Guantanamo Bay and executive laws enacted by Bush are about.

---

---

The Obama administration is reviewing the cases of 229 detainees remaining in the military prison in Cuba to determine whether individual prisoners will be released, tried in U.S. civilian courts or by special military commissions, or held indefinitely without trial.

---

Please note what is said here. The 3 options are

- released
- tried in civilian court or military commission
- held indefinitely

Currently the only option given to them is the third one.

---

A special task force is due to report to President Obama this month on guidelines for those determinations, although the individual case reviews will not be completed until the fall. Obama has pledged to close the Guantanamo facility, established by the Bush administration in early 2002 to house terrorism suspects, by the end of the year.

Military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try the detainees were rejected by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional. The court also rejected a 2006 attempt by Congress to revise the commissions. Obama said during his presidential campaign that he thought prosecutable cases should be tried in civilian courts, but in May he said he would preserve the commissions in some form.

The Senate Armed Services Committee last month passed new commissions legislation, providing more rights for defendants, as part of the 2010 defense authorization bill

---

All that is said here is how the determinations should be done not to nullify the court decision.

-------
In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies,
but the silence of our friends.

---

Thing is they are not being treated as prisoners of war and have none of the protections of people of that status.

---

Prisoners of war are members of a military, which aren't what the folks in Gitmo are.

-------
whoisabs i'm not sure
Guess who's back?

---

the government can say, "We don't care..."?

---

Guantanamo Bay detainees who are acquitted by civil or military courts may still be imprisoned indefinitely if the government determines that they pose a national security threat, the Defense Department's chief lawyer said yesterday.

"The question of what happens if there's an acquittal is an interesting question -- we talk about that often within the administration," Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson said at a Senate hearing.

"If, for some reason, he's not convicted for a lengthy prison sentence, then, as a matter of legal authority, I think it's our view that we would have the ability to detain that person," he said.

---

Washington Post

Really... wtf???

---

Nothing wrong with that. The courts are a farce. If we cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that people pose and have posed an immediate threat, that doesn't just we "let them go". If we KNOW that were involved, then we lock them up, thereby ENSURING they do NOTHING.

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 5:00 pm on July 9, 2009

---

the government can say, "We don't care..."?  

 

---

Guantanamo Bay detainees who are acquitted by civil or military courts may still be imprisoned indefinitely if the government determines that they pose a national security threat, the Defense Department's chief lawyer said yesterday.  

 "The question of what happens if there's an acquittal is an interesting question -- we talk about that often within the administration," Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson said at a Senate hearing.  

 "If, for some reason, he's not convicted for a lengthy prison sentence, then, as a matter of legal authority, I think it's our view that we would have the ability to detain that person," he said.

---

Washington Post  

 Really... wtf???

---

Nothing wrong with that. The courts are a farce. If we cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that people pose and have posed an immediate threat, that doesn't just we "let them go". If we KNOW that were involved, then we lock them up, thereby ENSURING they do NOTHING.  

---

---

Quote: from Takinam at 6:52 am on July 16, 2009

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 5:00 pm on July 9, 2009

---

the government can say, "We don't care..."?

 

---

Guantanamo Bay detainees who are acquitted by civil or military courts may still be imprisoned indefinitely if the government determines that they pose a national security threat, the Defense Department's chief lawyer said yesterday.

  "The question of what happens if there's an acquittal is an interesting question -- we talk about that often within the administration," Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson said at a Senate hearing.

  "If, for some reason, he's not convicted for a lengthy prison sentence, then, as a matter of legal authority, I think it's our view that we would have the ability to detain that person," he said.

---

Washington Post

  Really... wtf???

---

 

 Nothing wrong with that. The courts are a farce. If we cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that people pose and have posed an immediate threat, that doesn't just we "let them go". If we KNOW that were involved, then we lock them up, thereby ENSURING they do NOTHING.

 

---

presumption of innocence

---

Not for terrorists.

---

My grandfather was an insurgent in France during WW2.Of course he wasn't called an insurgent.He was called a Resistance fighter & was regarded as a hero.The invaders were Nazi Germany who were regarded as bastards.
  Its a good job it wasn't the Americans who were invading because then my hero Grand dad would be just an insurgent.
  Funny that
  The Nazis thought God was on their side too - & motherhood ,justice & apple pie.
  Me ? I can't think why the Americans are in Afghanistan & Iraq.I can't see either country being a threat to the US.& I would have thought that fundamentalist Xtians would have some sympathy for fundamentalist Moslems Thy,re both god-bothering cranks after all

---

And your grandfather wasn't covered under the Geneva conventions either.

---

Quote: from Neodymie at 4:40 pm on July 16, 2009

---

Quote: from Takinam at 6:52 am on July 16, 2009

---

Quote: from Forever Angel at 5:00 pm on July 9, 2009

---

the government can say, "We don't care..."?    

 

---

Guantanamo Bay detainees who are acquitted by civil or military courts may still be imprisoned indefinitely if the government determines that they pose a national security threat, the Defense Department's chief lawyer said yesterday.    

  "The question of what happens if there's an acquittal is an interesting question -- we talk about that often within the administration," Pentagon general counsel Jeh Johnson said at a Senate hearing.    

  "If, for some reason, he's not convicted for a lengthy prison sentence, then, as a matter of legal authority, I think it's our view that we would have the ability to detain that person," he said.

---

Washington Post    

  Really... wtf???

---

  Nothing wrong with that. The courts are a farce. If we cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that people pose and have posed an immediate threat, that doesn't just we "let them go". If we KNOW that were involved, then we lock them up, thereby ENSURING they do NOTHING.    

 

---

 
 presumption of innocence

---

Not for terrorists.

---

---

Terrorist is just a label used to strip someone of their rights.

---