Obama Planning to Do Away With Guantanamo
And, so it begins. Not that McCain would have been any different on this issue. I don’t know about you, but I really don’t want a bunch of Islamonazis shipped into the U.S. to be released en masse into the public when Libtard Judges set them free…
Obama planning US trials for Guantanamo prisoners
By MATT APUZZO and LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writers
Via – Yahoo News
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.
The plan drew criticism from some detainee lawyers shortly after it surfaced Monday.
“I think that creating a new alternative court system in response to the abject failure of Guantanamo would be a profound mistake,” said Jonathan Hafetz, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who represents detainees. “We do not need a new court system. The last eight years are a testament to the problems of trying to create new systems.”
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.”
10 November, 2008 at 11:04 am
Are we forgetting the lessons we learned in 9/11????
10 November, 2008 at 11:30 am
Guantanamo is one hundred times better than being thrown in a Mexican prison there is no comparison in the treatment of their inmates. Democrats are against constitutional rights for Americans they are fighting and threatening to take the first and second amendment away from us. The democrats are only concerned about islamists and their constitutional rights which can only mean one thing, they are pro islamists. Well it’s not a surprise many of our People have been killed or injured in Iraq because of their turning on the pres and stabbing the American people in the back. This is yet another reason I will not serve on a jury in America. It was obvious to se the shady connections, the seemingly compassion of all things anti American but the media hid all of it. Now we are seeing it surface, no surprise. I hope someday these media people are put against the wall and shot as the traitors that they are. Congratulations 52%ers once again your feelings will lead to the death of more Americans. I think its safe to just start calling them what they are the last best hope for al kayda types throughout the world. They could not have done more without pulling the trigger on our people themselves, they have given them hope that the change they desire will materialize, alkaydacrats. Take a good look at the demographics of the vote and you will know who is a threat to your loved ones. Hint, it isn’t foreign terrorists.
10 November, 2008 at 11:43 am
Here is Concentration camp Chuck Schumer advocating for the return of another unconstitutional law. Click here, the fairness doctrine was part of the long march away from the constitution a march that Americans of the past signed off on out of ignorance. While we are at it lets reinstate the Jim Crow laws, why not, lets bring it all back. Schumer and his ilk need to be brought up on charges they took an oath to honor the constitution. But they wont, NY city can recall 9-11, as a matter of fact they must have enjoyed it as they are advocating for 9-11 2.0. Some people will never learn not in ten thousand years.
10 November, 2008 at 11:57 am
I wonder how long it’ll be before The Great Leader gives Gitmo back to Cuba as a token of his love for Fidel and his wonderful revolution.
10 November, 2008 at 11:59 am
The islamists say they are planning another attack one that will change the face of global economics and politics. So what could they be referring to, the only thing that I can figure that would freeze global trade would be a bio attack. How long do you think it will take to overwhelm NY city, finishing off the Schumer types among others that reside there? You will excuse me if when that day arrives and we hear the panic in their voices and see the fear in their eyes that I tune them out. These people think we are playing cold war era games and many Americans will pay the price for it and not only in NY city either. I am beyond the point of worrying about my own butt, its amazing how clear you can think when you finally come to this conclusion.
10 November, 2008 at 4:28 pm
“might have to go before a new court designed especially to handle sensitive national security cases “…hmmm. And who would design this new court? And what would be its foundation? This is unsettling, in that it implies an unbalance of power. ‘And so it begins” is right!
11 November, 2008 at 2:51 am
I have a perfect solution to the inmates at Gitmo, and yep, it involves bullets. End of trial, far less taxpayer money expended.