Originally posted by Amaterasu
I am still reading, but found this:

Sec. 3 (a) (5) The detainee and rep can have evidence against the detainee withheld: "In exceptional circumstances where it is necessary to protect national security, including intelligence sources and methods, the PRB may determine that the representative must receive a sufficient substitute or summary, rather than the underlying information."

Heh. There's that "national security" thing again. Who determines what is "sufficient?" Can this be used to deny the detainee information relative to what (s)he is accused of?

Ah. Here...

Sec. 3 (a) (7) "The PRB shall make a prompt determination, by consensus and in writing, as to whether the detainee's continued detention is warranted under the standard in section 2 of this order."

Section 2: "Continued law of war detention is warranted for a detainee subject to the periodic review in section 3 of this order if it is necessary to protect against a significant threat to the security of the United States."

Hoe-kay. Who gets to determine what is "a significant threat to the security of the United States?" The President? If so, this may be the "smoking gun."

edit on 3/9/2011 by Amaterasu because: typo