It's extremely important, as you understand, that a commander (in this case, the President and/or Secretary of Defense) not display any form of prejudgement of the guilt/innocence of the defendants. Should they do so, it would be grounds for a mistrial and dropping of charges.
Hawk, surely you don't believe that's their motivation. If it is they sure got religion awfully suddenly. For pete's sake, we've had PRESS RELEASES from our ATTORNEY GENERAL proclaiming the GUILT of various "terrorists." Many of them were later released.
As far as the Pentagon, what policy of careful silence did they pursue when they charged the Muslim Army Chaplain with spying and aiding Al Qaeda with plans of our detention center in Cuba? How many times has Rumsfeld been on the tube proclaiming that these prisoners are "dead enders, Saddam remnants, terrorists ...and that they place no value on human life?"
But when the information is politically damaging instead of helpful, that's when you see a sudden overwhelming concern for the rights of the ACCUSED?????
I respect your ability to present arguments, I respect the passion reflected in your posts, and I respect your store of knowledge, but when you accept such a transparently inconsistent and self-serving rationale for covering up these abuses, it's clear that objectivity is not high on your list of attributes. |
