 | |  |  | | | | | | | | | | | | |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
| |
| Author |
Message |
Computer_Guy
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Sep 28, 2001
Posts: 7897
Location: US
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 1:53 am Post subject: Obama planning US trials for Guantanamo detainees |
 |
|
| |
Obama planning US trials for Guantanamo detainees
By MATT APUZZO and LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writers Matt Apuzzo And Lara Jakes Jordan, Associated Press Writers – Mon Nov 10, 4:02 am ET
WASHINGTON – President-elect Obama's advisers are quietly crafting a proposal to ship dozens, if not hundreds, of imprisoned terrorism suspects to the United States to face criminal trials, a plan that would make good on his promise to close the Guantanamo Bay prison but could require creation of a controversial new system of justice.
During his campaign, Obama described Guantanamo as a "sad chapter in American history" and has said generally that the U.S. legal system is equipped to handle the detainees. But he has offered few details on what he planned to do once the facility is closed.
Under plans being put together in Obama's camp, some detainees would be released and many others would be prosecuted in U.S. criminal courts.
A third group of detainees — the ones whose cases are most entangled in highly classified information — might have to go before a new court designed especially to handle sensitive national security cases, according to advisers and Democrats involved in the talks. Advisers participating directly in the planning spoke on condition of anonymity because the plans aren't final.
The move would be a sharp deviation from the Bush administration, which established military tribunals to prosecute detainees at the Navy base in Cuba and strongly opposes bringing prisoners to the United States. Obama's Republican challenger, John McCain, had also pledged to close Guantanamo. But McCain opposed criminal trials, saying the Bush administration's tribunals should continue on U.S. soil.
The plan being developed by Obama's team has been championed by legal scholars from both political parties. But it is almost certain to face opposition from Republicans who oppose bringing terrorism suspects to the U.S. and from Democrats who oppose creating a new court system with fewer rights for detainees.
Laurence Tribe, a Harvard law professor and Obama legal adviser, said discussions about plans for Guantanamo had been "theoretical" before the election but would quickly become very focused because closing the prison is a top priority. Bringing the detainees to the United States will be controversial, he said, but could be accomplished.
"I think the answer is going to be, they can be as securely guarded on U.S. soil as anywhere else," Tribe said. "We can't put people in a dungeon forever without processing whether they deserve to be there."
The tougher challenge will be allaying fears by Democrats who believe the Bush administration's military commissions were a farce and dislike the idea of giving detainees anything less than the full constitutional rights normally enjoyed by everyone on U.S. soil.
"There would be concern about establishing a completely new system," said Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., a member of the House Judiciary Committee and former federal prosecutor who is aware of the discussions in the Obama camp. "And in the sense that establishing a regimen of detention that includes American citizens and foreign nationals that takes place on U.S. soil and departs from the criminal justice system — trying to establish that would be very difficult."
Obama has said the civilian and military court-martial systems provide "a framework for dealing with the terrorists," and Tribe said the administration would look to those venues before creating a new legal system. But discussions of what a new system would look like have already started.
"It would have to be some sort of hybrid that involves military commissions that actually administer justice rather than just serve as kangaroo courts," Tribe said. "It will have to both be and appear to be fundamentally fair in light of the circumstances. I think people are going to give an Obama administration the benefit of the doubt in that regard."
Though a hybrid court may be unpopular, other advisers and Democrats involved in the Guantanamo Bay discussions say Obama has few other options.
Prosecuting all detainees in federal courts raises a host of problems. Evidence gathered through military interrogation or from intelligence sources might be thrown out. Defendants would have the right to confront witnesses, meaning undercover CIA officers or terrorist turncoats might have to take the stand, jeopardizing their cover and revealing classified intelligence tactics.
In theory, Obama could try to transplant the Bush administration's military commission system from Guantanamo Bay to a U.S. prison. But Tribe said, and other advisers agreed, that was "a nonstarter." With lax evidence rules and intense secrecy, the military commissions have been criticized by human rights groups, defense attorneys and even some military prosecutors who quit the process in protest.
"I don't think we need to completely reinvent the wheel, but we need a better tribunal process that is more transparent," Schiff said.
That means something different would need to be done if detainees couldn't be released or prosecuted in traditional courts. Exactly what that something would look like remains unclear.
According to three advisers participating in the process, Obama is expected to propose a new court system, appointing a committee to decide how such a court would operate. Some detainees likely would be returned to the countries where they were first captured for further detention or rehabilitation. The rest could probably be prosecuted in U.S. criminal courts, one adviser said. All spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the ongoing talks, which have been private.
Whatever form it takes, Tribe said he expects Obama to move quickly.
"In reality and symbolically, the idea that we have people in legal black holes is an extremely serious black mark," Tribe said. "It has to be dealt with."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081110/ap_on_el_pr/obama_guantanamo
I don't like the sound of this new legal system at all, it smells of globalism for one.
And secondly it sounds like they are changing the rules to suit thier own game. Our own legal system has served the US very well through numerous wars. I suspect they need to write in a few good loopholes so they can avoid prosecuting the current administration for war crimes. |
|
_________________
Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to mankind.
JFK |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| Author |
Message |
Aquarian
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
Posts: 9844
Location: Miami, Florida 305!
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| All this anonymity crap is bogus too. "Anonymous sources", "classified information", "national security", etc, all of this sounds very Bush-istic to me. While I do agree that detainees should be tried in U.S. courts, I don't think that plans to create a whole new system altogether is the answer because the system will be designed to create more loopholes to ensure that detainees do not get a fair trial. Just how exactly does an Obama administration plan to form this committee and who will decide to appoint members of the committee? |
|
_________________
I think the environment should be put in the category of our national security. Defense of our resources is just as important as defense abroad. Otherwise what is there to defend? ~Robert Redford, Yosemite National Park dedication, 1985 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Aquatank
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Sep 27, 2001
Posts: 3906
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| This so called security matter stuff is 8 years outdated with regards to codes and operations what it comes down to HUMINT operatives being put on the stand and trying to keep their identity secret. All the rest of the broohahah is bogus. If we bailed on the ICC we could prosecute them there under what the world would see as a fair trial. But until we can make the trial open to public scrutiny and protect the operatives from being exposed we are going to have problems with "Kangaroo court" accustaions. Probably the most significant problem is that the accused have already seen or know who the operatives are, and release of the prisoners threatens ongoing operations. This is in addition to revelations in court of exactly how they were tortured. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
BloodStone
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: 1942
Location: Poconos, USSA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Great so we are already reverting back to the Clinton days, when terrorism was considered a law enforcement issue,not an act of war which it actually is.
This should be worth a few dead Americans right ? I mean what happens when they are found not guilty? Do we let them out on our streets ,and give them the same rights we already give the illegal aliens?
This is not good at all. We will never learn from our past.
BloodStone... |
|
_________________
If it were raining hookers, I'd get hit by a fag. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
SRO
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Jul 25, 2004
Posts: 4867
Location: BC, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Nice new avatar Bloodstone, and I like the updated "Location:" status too. 
I think this could have the potential to improve upon the system, but I don't see it going that way. |
|
_________________
"Victis honor"
"I'm not arrogant, I'm just the **it."
~Brother. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Aquarian
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
Posts: 9844
Location: Miami, Florida 305!
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| I hope BS realizes that many detainees, if not most, detainees in Guantanamo Bay and black sites around the world are victims of "wrong place wrong time" or are just fighting back against the occupation forces, which are the U.S. There are a few legitimate cases and that should go to either U.S. federal courts or the ICC/World Court. |
|
_________________
I think the environment should be put in the category of our national security. Defense of our resources is just as important as defense abroad. Otherwise what is there to defend? ~Robert Redford, Yosemite National Park dedication, 1985 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
theking
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Aug 19, 2008
Posts: 690
Location: Washington, D.C.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 7:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Why, oh WHY, are we shipping these people INTO the United States? |
|
_________________
"I fear not for the banning of the book. I fear for the hunger to read the book. Why should one ban a book no one cares to read?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Aquarian
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
Posts: 9844
Location: Miami, Florida 305!
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| theking wrote: |
| Why, oh WHY, are we shipping these people INTO the United States? |
Why not? |
|
_________________
I think the environment should be put in the category of our national security. Defense of our resources is just as important as defense abroad. Otherwise what is there to defend? ~Robert Redford, Yosemite National Park dedication, 1985 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
BloodStone
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: 1942
Location: Poconos, USSA
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Quote: |
| I hope BS realizes that many detainees, if not most, detainees in Guantanamo Bay and black sites around the world are victims of "wrong place wrong time" |
Wrong again Aquarian, We went from holding around 600 to about 300. They have already weeded out the ones who are not much of a threat. The ones who are left are not so innocent. The problem we have is most of them will not be charged in our civilian courts due to lack of evidence or some loophole in our civilian system..
They need to have military tribunals not civilian courts. Clinton made the same mistake Obama is about to make. He wants to treat them as criminals,not an act of war. What these thugs are being held for is getting caught fighting on the battlefield against our troops.
Sending them here to face criminal courts is the wrong way to do this. Not to mention we the tax payers will be paying for all this crap! again !
BloodStone... |
|
_________________
If it were raining hookers, I'd get hit by a fag. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Aquarian
B.V. Info-a-holic
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
Posts: 9844
Location: Miami, Florida 305!
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| So if they want to have military tribunals for our troops fighting against them, you would be ok with that too, right? You see, this concept is hypocritical and convoluted. Who is a true patriot? American soldiers or foreign-fighters/resisters? |
|
_________________
I think the environment should be put in the category of our national security. Defense of our resources is just as important as defense abroad. Otherwise what is there to defend? ~Robert Redford, Yosemite National Park dedication, 1985 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
BloodStone
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: 1942
Location: Poconos, USSA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Quote: |
| So if they want to have military tribunals for our troops fighting against them, you would be ok with that too, right? |
Sure would be better then getting their heads sawed off ! 
Really sometimes you just make no sense
BloodStone... |
|
_________________
If it were raining hookers, I'd get hit by a fag. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
screamzero
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Feb 08, 2008
Posts: 2433
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Aquarian wrote: |
| So if they want to have military tribunals for our troops fighting against them, you would be ok with that too, right? You see, this concept is hypocritical and convoluted. Who is a true patriot? American soldiers or foreign-fighters/resisters? |
God your a spaz, pay attention nut. They don't even think of having military tribunals for our guys. Why don't you tear your ass over there where these good people run a muck and find out?
omm-m-m-m-m-m-m-m-m....there are no enemies....don't be paranoid...there are no enemies...they do not kill...they will love us....they will love us....they will love us....they will love us....they will love us....they will love us....we will give them our mercies and freedoms...they will not harm...they will not harm...they will not harm....we are s-o-o-o-o t-o-g-e-t-h-e-r.
Snort another popper whack job. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
martiandrifter01
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Mar 28, 2008
Posts: 784
Location: Xanthe Terra, Sol IV/Mars
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Wow, C_G, I could have SWORN I posted that same exact article in the War On Terror thread last night. Nice originality, dude.
Screamzero, they DO have military tribunals for our military. It's called courts martial (not 'court-martial) and happens regularly.
I see no reason why REAL war criminals (terrorists, etc.), suspected or otherwise, should face civilian prosecution. Want some truth? If they're innocent, a US military tribunal is the BEST place they could be tried, and a civilian court the worst. If they're guilty, it's the other way around, as military penalties are (usually) much more severe.
Interesting to note that our Government seems to believe that non-Citizens on our soil should still receive full Constitutional rights. It explains a lot to me.
IF it works the way it's proposed in this article, the Gitmo detainees would have more rights than a US citizen whose civil rights have been revoked. |
|
_________________
Just for fun, and maybe a chance to learn a little solar system astronomy...
martiandrifter.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
BloodStone
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: 1942
Location: Poconos, USSA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 2:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
| Quote: |
| IF it works the way it's proposed in this article, the Gitmo detainees would have more rights than a US citizen whose civil rights have been revoked |
.
Exactly !
Thanks , MD
BloodStone... |
|
_________________
If it were raining hookers, I'd get hit by a fag. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Author |
Message |
screamzero
B.V. Info Seeker
Joined: Feb 08, 2008
Posts: 2433
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| |
Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace
"He who fights that Islam should be superior fights in Allah's cause"
Muhammad, Prophet of Islam
11/10/2008 (Narathiwat, Thailand) - Islamists kill a local soldier with a roadside bomb.
11/9/2008 (Jijel, Algeria) - Islamic fundamentalists murder a 52-year-old civilian.
11/9/2008 (Matta, Pakistan) - A woman is pumped full of bullets after being found guilty of adultery by a Sharia court.
11/9/2008 (Fallujah, Iraq) - Two woman and a 10-year-old girl are blown to bits by a Fedayeen suicide bomber.
11/9/2008 (Pikit, Philippines) - A 12-year-old boy and 10-year-old girl are brutally gunned down by Islamic extremists.
11/9/2008 (Maguindanao, Philippines) - Two locals are abduted and shot to death by Moro Islamists. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Goto page 1, 2, 3 Next |
| Page 1 of 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | | | | | |
| |
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
blocks-left.jpg
|  |
Online Stats: 
