And they said Palin was too naive

[John Carson]

Rob Graham wrote:

The question of whether to keep prisoners there and the question of how to try them are separate issues. Bush had not problem with the first, Obama has problems with both, having rushed to the decision to close the prison before having worked out where to move the prisoners.

They are only separate if you adopt the (in my view morally indefensible) position that it is OK to hold people indefinitely without trial. Once that view is rejected (and it would seem that even the Bush Administration wasn't totally comfortable with it), then the issue of how to try people is central to how to deal with the prisoners. Obama's executive order said Guantanomo was to be closed within a year. That should be adequate time to figure out what to do with the prisoners (if all else fails, some may end up in a prison facility of some sort in the US). I don't see any "rushed" decision, but I do see a rush to declare a policy failure when the Administration is only a very short distance into that 1 year period. Read the executive order in full here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Closure_Of_Guantanamo_Detention_Facilities/[^]

John Carson

modified on Friday, April 24, 2009 10:16 AM

[Mike Gaskey]

Le Centriste wrote:

What good would it do?

they couldn't participate in jihadist activity.

Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

[Oakman]

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

In a civil trial the concept of "reasonable doubt" is well understood

Not Necessarily: Consider France, for instance Having no direct experience with anything worse than an article 13 (non-judicial punishment) I cannot testify from first hand experience, but all the movies and TV I've watched (The Truth? You can't handle the Truth!) suggest that in the U.S. the burden of proof is on the prosecution. However. military courts do not have juries, they have judges. It is my understand that it simply requires a majority of judges to find a defendant guilty, not a unanimous verdict.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin

[Lost User]

Oakman wrote:

Not Necessarily: Consider France, for instance

Yes, but are the French civilized :) "The Truth? You can't handle the Truth!" (Jack Nicholson to Tom Cruise?) wasn't that film set in Guantanomo?

[Oakman]

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

Yes, but are the French civilized

Mais oui, mon ami. Without them we wouldn't know how to make French Fries, how to French Kiss, or how to Surrender.

Richard A. Abbott wrote:

wasn't that film set in Guantanomo?

Yep - though at the Naval Base, not the prison.

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface Both democrats and republicans are playing for the same team and it's not us. - Chris Austin