Surprise! Obama may revive Military Tribunals at Gitmo
Rick Moran
There are times when politicians acknowledge reality and switch their positions on the issues. There are times that politicians, when exposed to new information on an issue, sincerely change their minds. There are also times that a politician will "trim their sails" and simply blow with the political winds.
And then there are liars like President Obama.
News from the New York Times that the president will adopt another Bush era program in the War on Terror and revive the Military Tribunals he so bitterly denounced during the campaign. Talk of trying the terrorists in America courts will disappear - for exactly the same reasons that President Bush decided to set up the tribunals in the first place as this piece by William Glaberson makes crystal clear:
Officials who work on the Guantánamo issue say administration lawyers have become concerned that they would face significant obstacles to trying some terrorism suspects in federal courts. Judges might make it difficult to prosecute detainees who were subjected to brutal treatment or for prosecutors to use hearsay evidence gathered by intelligence agencies.
Obama administration officials - and Mr. Obama himself - have said in the past that they were not ruling out prosecutions in the military commission system. But senior officials have emphasized that they prefer to prosecute terrorism suspects in existing American courts. When President Obama suspended Guantánamo cases after his inauguration on Jan. 20, many participants said the military commission system appeared dead.
To highlight the cynicism employed by the Administration, we have this quote from an unamed "official:"
"The more they look at it," said one official, "the more commissions don't look as bad as they did on Jan. 20."
Nor do most other Bush era programs to fight terror and protect the homeland. The president doesn't want a terrorist attack to occur on American soil anymore than Bush did nor does he want the terrorists in American courts where their lawyers will tie up the legal system with one gambit after another. There is also the fact that most of the testimony against the terrorists was given in top secret interrogations and the problem of revealing those sources in an American court means the tipsters would be left helpless against the terrorists.
The more the administration examines the previous administration's efforts to combat terrorism, the more they are seeking to adopt their methods. The rank dishonesty of a president who spent an entire campaign lambasting his predecessor for these policies and then having the gall to take office proclaiming that "the rule of law" had been restored is apparent in every action they take.
Somewhere, Bush is smiling and feeling a great deal of satisfaction.
americanthinker.com
What exactly is the current status of the war on terror?
(1) Obama has so demonized the Bush administration (despite 8 years of successful homeland security and freedom from 9/11-like attack), and so rejected its very protocols, that he even has changed the very nomenclature of the fight: terrorism is now “man-caused disasters”, enemy combatants at Guantanamo are “detainees”, “Overseas Contingency Operations” mean the “war on terror”;
OR (2) Nothing has changed: renditions, wiretaps, email intercepts, Predator attacks, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq continue and Guantanamo is still open; he’s simply Bush III, pacifying his leftwing base with apologies abroad and euphemism at home;
OR (3) He has no idea of what he’s doing, and sort of makes it up as he goes, screaming “Bush did it” now, and then ordering “Follow what Bush did”. He simply assumes that whatever he does and whoever dies in the ongoing conflict, the media most certainly is not going to scream, as it did the last eight years, “murder” and “shredding the Constitution.”<b/> The days of movies, plays, and novels slurring the President are over.
pajamasmedia.com |
