SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Broken_Clock who wrote (70601)9/28/2006 10:28:56 PM
From: CalculatedRisk  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 110194
 
OT: My guess is the Bush Administration has several concerns:
1) they don't want secret data to be released.
2) they don't want to have witnesses testify, since they don't want their identities disclosed.
3) they don't have good evidence against some of the detainees, but they "think" they are bad people.
4) they don't want to expose how confessions were obtained.
5) they don't want to expose how detainees have been treated.
6) they want these new rules to be retroactive (they are) so members of the Bush Administration won't face war crime trials.

Numbers 1 and 2 are real concerns and need to be addressed. But I think there are already guidelines on this for both military tribunals and U.S. courts, so I don't think it's a problem.

Number 3 is an issue, but if there is no evidence who gets to play God?

Numbers 4 through 6 are real problems for the Bush Administration, but not America. Who cares about the Bushies? If they did the crime (war crimes), let them serve the time.

The number of detainees is not a problem. If it was, the U.S. could appoint some new federal judges to handle the cases. No big deal for a country of 300 million people. Besides if we treated them as POWs, the whole thing would be handled by the military - and the U.S. courts wouldn't be bothered except for guys arrested in the U.S.