It's not fear you nimrod! It's the certainty that you ACLU types will rush to defend thse scumbags and try to get them off on a technicality. They weren't read their Miranda rights, they were tortured, proper procedure wasn't followed. Holder won't be able to give defense all the evidence because a lot of it could aid the terrorists in the war against us. Therefore in a civilian trial it will be inadmisible. We could have a situation where these guys walk, something that you and your cabal would undoubtably like (until the terrorist show up in your neighborhood and kill you and yours). And something that would completely destroy what little credibility the Obama administration has left, as well as endanger us.

So, just out of curiosity, is it the ACLU's fault they weren't read their Miranda rights, were tortured, and proper procedure wasn't followed? Who's choice is it that evidence can't be presented in court because of security?

And where, from people arguing that all prisoners should get the rights guaranteed by the Constitution and international law, do you get that somehow there are a cabal of people, including Glenn, who want terrorists to go free?

And since when would the Obama administration have any credibility if it didn't follow the law?

Most of all, when did torture become a technicality with you? Would it be a technicality if you were in prison?

With all due respect to those citing how good we are with security to placate the paranoia of people like readerreader, please quit citing the wonderfulness of locking up people in ADX Supermax Prison in Florence, CO. That place isn't the answer to the people who are never satisfied with punishments and security, it's the ultimate expression of those paranoid fears and retributive feelings. It has been cited by the Committee Against Torture for being in violation of the Convention Against Torture, and its lack of sunlight for prisoners there would be in violation of international humanitarian law were the prisoners there war criminals.

And as readerreader and John Boehner and others are showing so forcefully, even when you build them their total security and total vengeance facilities, it is never enough. Because the emotions and manipulations -- the paranoid fear coupled with the desire for concentrating power -- are not rational. They are the collective version of paranoid schizophrenia, and they won't be cured by letting the patient do as they please and wreak havoc on our civil liberties.

It will be a long, drawn out process trying to get fair trials and justice for people like KSM, and a measure of our society at every turn, with every prejudice in the courtroom, with every dismissed juror, with every banned or admitted piece of evidence. A truly fair trial and verdict may seem like a chance some people don't want to take, but it is the best closure possible on those accused. And ADX Florence is as much a disgrace for a free democracy as Guantánamo or Bagram. It isn't proof that we know how to deal with terrorists, it's proof that our fear of them runs much deeper than what we think they'll do to us.

But if I spread the gospel of my plain observations and good common sense, maybe I will liberate the London-believing false-handle op suckers from the cruft of their hoary delusions. -- Amity

You see? It is as has been foretold: There are no Yankees, only the collective illusion of a real baseball team south of Pawtucket.

...as in "there goes a-nanother mite, quick get the razor, the ice pick, and the gasoline!"

Canada Told to Request the Return of a Citizen at Guantánamo

OTTAWA — A court ruled Thursday that the Canadian government must reverse its position and promptly seek the return of the last Western citizen held by the United States at the Guantánamo Bay detention center in Cuba.

In a 42-page decision, the Federal Court of Canada found that under the Canadian Constitution, the rights of the detainee, Omar Khadr, had been violated by the government’s decision not to seek his return. Mr. Khadr, a Canadian, was captured in 2002 by American forces in Afghanistan when he was 15 years old. He was accused of killing an American soldier with a hand grenade during a battle in which he was seriously wounded.

“The ongoing refusal of Canada to request Mr. Khadr’s repatriation to Canada offends a principle of fundamental justice and violates Mr. Khadr’s rights,” Judge James W. O’Reilly wrote.

[...]NYT, April 29, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/world/americas/24canada.html

Good. Glad there's a ruckus. Robin Raphel is a poor choice to work in the area, as she was when she was there under the Clinton Administration. Anyone who can be as ignorant as her even when proper execution of her job depends on it, shouldn't represent the U.S. government in South Asia.

Do you have a link to back up that assertion? Because I believe you'll find that Omar Khadr is almost alone among nationals from European and North American prisoners in that his government ignored him on purpose because of his father.

Why are we having civilian trials for people accused of the 9/11 attacks or crimes in the GWOT? Shouldn't they have military trials and be charged with war crimes?

[...]

I don't think it right for Obama to claim he can hold enemy combatants for the duration of hostilities bc the end of such hostilities is effectively impossible to define when warring with something like al-Qaida.

How can these people be charged with a war crime and then you can't define the supposed war? Don't you see the inherent contradiction in that?