Civil liberties groups have reacted angrily to US President Barack Obama's decision to revive military trials for some Guantanamo Bay detainees.
Mr Obama has previously denounced the Bush-era judicial system, but in a statement said new safeguards would ensure suspects got a fairer hearing. New rules include rejecting statements obtained from harsh interrogations and limitations on using hearsay evidence.
"It's disappointing that Obama is seeking to revive rather than end this failed experiment," said Jonathan Hafetz, a national security attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union.
Meanwhile, "A former Afghan inmate at the US prison in Guantanamo Bay has joined the Taleban's high command in Pakistan. UK officials say Mullah Abdul Kayum Zakir, who was released last year, is now closely involved in planning attacks on British and other Nato forces in Afghanistan.
Perhaps another fair trial is in order? Cancel the guy's probation, and get him back. If he doesn't come willingly, serve papers on him, delivered by the fair minded folks at ACLU.
It is estimated that at least 10% of those released from Guantanamo have returned to terrorist activity. Over 1000 have been released from Gitmo, with only 240 or so left awaiting trial.
"There is no detainee at Guantanamo who cannot be tried and shouldn't be tried in the regular federal courts system. This is perpetuating the Bush administration's misguided detention policy."
Putting potential terrorists on trial "with a jury of his peers" is impossible in a civilian court. These people were generally captured in military operations, and military minds need to assess the evidence. I can see little benefit in moving this into the public domain.
Seems like Obama is coming around to the responsibilities of his office. The hard left will not forgive him for this traitorous turn of events, and are already attacking him without a fair hearing. They need a strong dose of reality. Serving papers on the 10% of those we now know were very adroit liars, as well as murderous terrorists might help, but I doubt it.
On a slightly related topic, here's a great movie to watch. A few critics have panned it, and their explanations fail to impress. See it.
It does raise an interesting point - is torture effective? Can it reveal information? If you do a Google you'll see the overwhelming opinion coming from the left and the liberal saying it does not. I disagree. Some of the "source information" I've read says torture does work. An annoying thought to the liberal left, no doubt, which is why we get endless commentary about it.
Perhaps a better question is "should we ever allow the state the power of torture, regardless of whether it works or not?" Torture is morally reprehensible, and is a dangerous path to follow, especially in the hands of the state.
Still, in watching this film, I had no problem with the hero resorting to torture. It was a very black and white situation - no moral issue over if the target was innocent, no question that the target was evil, no question the clock was ticking, no question that the hero was under enormous pressure. Life isn't always that clear of course, so the only lesson I could see is that if I were in that exact situation, perhaps I could be that evil. It's a chilling thought.
Oh, by the way, Luc Besson co-wrote the script, and Liam Neeson plays the hero character. If you enjoyed the 5th Element or Transporter, you might want to take a look.
Related Link: From Gitmo to the Pakistan Taleban
3pm: Updated the clip with something more generic.
Mr Obama has previously denounced the Bush-era judicial system, but in a statement said new safeguards would ensure suspects got a fairer hearing. New rules include rejecting statements obtained from harsh interrogations and limitations on using hearsay evidence.
"It's disappointing that Obama is seeking to revive rather than end this failed experiment," said Jonathan Hafetz, a national security attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union.
Meanwhile, "A former Afghan inmate at the US prison in Guantanamo Bay has joined the Taleban's high command in Pakistan. UK officials say Mullah Abdul Kayum Zakir, who was released last year, is now closely involved in planning attacks on British and other Nato forces in Afghanistan.
Perhaps another fair trial is in order? Cancel the guy's probation, and get him back. If he doesn't come willingly, serve papers on him, delivered by the fair minded folks at ACLU.
It is estimated that at least 10% of those released from Guantanamo have returned to terrorist activity. Over 1000 have been released from Gitmo, with only 240 or so left awaiting trial.
"There is no detainee at Guantanamo who cannot be tried and shouldn't be tried in the regular federal courts system. This is perpetuating the Bush administration's misguided detention policy."
Putting potential terrorists on trial "with a jury of his peers" is impossible in a civilian court. These people were generally captured in military operations, and military minds need to assess the evidence. I can see little benefit in moving this into the public domain.
Seems like Obama is coming around to the responsibilities of his office. The hard left will not forgive him for this traitorous turn of events, and are already attacking him without a fair hearing. They need a strong dose of reality. Serving papers on the 10% of those we now know were very adroit liars, as well as murderous terrorists might help, but I doubt it.
On a slightly related topic, here's a great movie to watch. A few critics have panned it, and their explanations fail to impress. See it.
It does raise an interesting point - is torture effective? Can it reveal information? If you do a Google you'll see the overwhelming opinion coming from the left and the liberal saying it does not. I disagree. Some of the "source information" I've read says torture does work. An annoying thought to the liberal left, no doubt, which is why we get endless commentary about it.
Perhaps a better question is "should we ever allow the state the power of torture, regardless of whether it works or not?" Torture is morally reprehensible, and is a dangerous path to follow, especially in the hands of the state.
Still, in watching this film, I had no problem with the hero resorting to torture. It was a very black and white situation - no moral issue over if the target was innocent, no question that the target was evil, no question the clock was ticking, no question that the hero was under enormous pressure. Life isn't always that clear of course, so the only lesson I could see is that if I were in that exact situation, perhaps I could be that evil. It's a chilling thought.
Oh, by the way, Luc Besson co-wrote the script, and Liam Neeson plays the hero character. If you enjoyed the 5th Element or Transporter, you might want to take a look.
Related Link: From Gitmo to the Pakistan Taleban
3pm: Updated the clip with something more generic.
2 shockers in about as many days. First the refusal to release the terror photos and now this.
ReplyDeleteExtreme individuals need to be brought to justice by any means necessary. The freedom which is afforded to all law-abiding citizens is a product of doing what might not be popular but what is right for the U.S. and its interests. If the ACLU attorneys always had their way we would live in anarchy. A nation of people with their own individually-decreed laws.
Congrats Mr. President. You went 2for 2 this week :)
Ryan