Army judge won't stop Guantánamo war court for Obama

Army judge won't stop Guantánamo war court for Obama

www.miamiherald.com

''The public interest in a speedy trial will be harmed by the delay in the arraignment,'' Pohl also wrote.

He noted that unless Congress amended the 2006 Military Commissions Act, ``the commission is bound by the law as it currently exists not as it may change in the future.''

The decision stunned officials at the Department of Defense, which had just begun to grapple with Obama's order to freeze the war court and empty the prison camps within a year.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This is an interesting development. After initially agreeing to honor President Obama’s request for 120 day delay to acquaint himself with the procedures and the situation one of the Military Judges has done an about face and is insisting on moving forward with one of the trials against an accused bomber of the U.S.S. Cole.

There is already some concern evidenced in the article that moving forward with any trials might disrupt the process of closing Guantanamo down within a year.

So is this cover to keep the prison from having to be shut down within the year President Obama has publicly decreed he wants it to be. If so is it because of the Military holding his decision in contempt or is he in collusion after having scored the political moral victory of appearing to keep to his campaign pledge by ordering it closed but preexisting laws regarding speedy trials and due process preempt him, which conversely a prior study of the issue would have revealed they would preempt him, thus making his campaign pledge an empty one.

Or is there some cover up after years of isolation and questionable interrogation techniques that have caused some key detainees to want to plead guilty to charges they might be innocent of, but only have the means to stop their isolated confinement and hostile interrogations by pleading guilty, and now delaying their trials undermines the chance that they will plead guilty once their holding and interrogation methods are changed?

Either way days into office serious doubt is beginning to take form that Guantanamo is something the new President can truly control in his own right.


www.miamiherald.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

I'm sure they are just trying to cover themselves and have the time to cover up what they did.

But this is a horrible catch-22... technically Obama has the power to shut it down by EO thanks to Bush's precedents, I think, but by doing so, he would be misusing his power just the same, albiet for a "good" purpose.

reply to post by asmeone2

But this is a horrible catch-22... technically Obama has the power to shut it down by EO thanks to Bush's precedents, I think, but by doing so, he would be misusing his power just the same, albiet for a "good" purpose.

Excellent point! There certainly is no shortage of traps laid out for the man are there?

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by asmeone2

 

But this is a horrible catch-22... technically Obama has the power to shut it down by EO thanks to Bush's precedents, I think, but by doing so, he would be misusing his power just the same, albiet for a "good" purpose.

Excellent point! There certainly is no shortage of traps laid out for the man are there?

Seems to me like he's been put in a situation where in order to undo the damage Bush has done, he is going to essentially have to become Bush again.

Seems to me like he's been put in a situation where in order to undo the damage Bush has done, he is going to essentially have to become Bush again.

Yes it does appear that way. At what point does the temptation to use such power corrupt a man beyond redemption? I hope President Obama will be equal to the task and above the temptations.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler


Personal temptations aside, the moral dilimma I meant is that in order to help the AMerican people and return to a constitutional government (Assuming for a moment that's what he wants. ) he will have to be very heavy-handed, abusing his own powers, to overturn what Bush has done.

reply to post by asmeone2

Personal temptations aside, the moral dilimma I meant is that in order to help the AMerican people and return to a constitutional government (Assuming for a moment that's what he wants. ) he will have to be very heavy-handed, abusing his own powers, to overturn what Bush has done.

Thanks for the clarification, I understand the point you are trying to make now. It sure is a dilemma in how do you really measure what is heavy handed for a nobler purpose and what is abuse of power.

Existing thread here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion.
Thank you







-thread closed-



for future reference:
Search ATS