I feel so much better knowing that the federal government lawyers' failure to prosecute wasn't part of any grand scheme to undermine Constitutional rights. They simply weren't competent to prosecute the prisoners.

"They simply weren't competent"

Tidily sums up the past eight years.

Stage is now set: "we simply *can't* close Gitmo because we have to uh, yeah SORT OUT THE FILES! Yes, indeed."

Obama's always known he can't shut the place down, and now the case for shutting it down "slowly" will build.

FTFA He said he once accidentally found "crucial physical evidence" that "had been tossed in a locker located at Guantanamo and promptly forgotten."

I guess the terror wasn't important, it was all about fear and control.

Makh: FTFA He said he once accidentally found "crucial physical evidence" that "had been tossed in a locker located at Guantanamo and promptly forgotten."

I guess the terror wasn't important, it was all about fear and control.

Well, yeah. If stopping actual terrorism was the goal, I'm not sure that creating more terrorists was a great idea. But, if pushing your political agenda through fear is the goal, then the more angry brown people you have, the better.

...the Bush administration's focus on detention and interrogation made preparation of viable prosecutions a far lower priority.


I, for one, am SHOCKED. Chagrined, even.

To those who think that history will judge the last administration kindly, you might have to wait an extra decade or so for people to forget the ineptitude that's going to be exposed in the next few years. What has been filtered through the past 8 years to us is only the tip of the iceberg.

FTFA: Several former Bush administration officials agreed that the files are incomplete and that no single government entity was charged with pulling together all the facts and the range of options for each prisoner.

So.. the only alternative could be that someone deliberately orchestrated destroying/dismantling the files and generating a cover story.

Either route is equally as bad IMO. Your tax dollars at work. I've reserved a lot of my judgment on why people were detained and held until facts started coming out.. I'm pissed off now. Holding people without a trial is already pushing it.. but having no farking clue or comprehensive case justifying their incarceration is unforgivable.

Lovely... first we flaunt our ability to torture people at will. Now we know we did it without any solid evidence.farking lovely.fark the previous administration.

there are some of us know knew Bush and his buddies were a fraud, criminal outfit from the get go, and said so frequently.

Its a damn shame none of you guys felt it worth while to listen.

But by all means, keep waiting for the evidence to come out. The evidence has been out for years, I dont know what else its going to take.

Bush was the single most corrupt, criminal, incompetent, and unsuited to lead commander in chief we've had in at least 100 years.
He was intellectually uncurious. Thats the thing that sticks out to some of us the most. He set the tone of dumbass cronyism and of just doing whatever the F they felt like, regardless of rule of law.

Generation_D: Bush was the single most corrupt, criminal, incompetent, and unsuited to lead commander in chief we've had in at least 100 years.
He was intellectually uncurious. Thats the thing that sticks out to some of us the most. He set the tone of dumbass cronyism and of just doing whatever the F they felt like, regardless of rule of law.

Well stated

Generation_D: there are some of us know knew Bush and his buddies were a fraud, criminal outfit from the get go, and said so frequently.

Its a damn shame none of you guys felt it worth while to listen.

But by all means, keep waiting for the evidence to come out. The evidence has been out for years, I dont know what else its going to take.

Bush was the single most corrupt, criminal, incompetent, and unsuited to lead commander in chief we've had in at least 100 years.
He was intellectually uncurious. Thats the thing that sticks out to some of us the most. He set the tone of dumbass cronyism and of just doing whatever the F they felt like, regardless of rule of law.

2/10.... you can do better....

Generation_D: there are some of us know knew Bush and his buddies were a fraud, criminal outfit from the get go, and said so frequently.

Its a damn shame none of you guys felt it worth while to listen.

But by all means, keep waiting for the evidence to come out. The evidence has been out for years, I dont know what else its going to take.

Bush was the single most corrupt, criminal, incompetent, and unsuited to lead commander in chief we've had in at least 100 years.
He was intellectually uncurious. Thats the thing that sticks out to some of us the most. He set the tone of dumbass cronyism and of just doing whatever the F they felt like, regardless of rule of law.

Generation_D: Its a damn shame none of you guys felt it worth while to listen.

PETA may be technically correct about the things they disagree with. That doesn't change the fact that the most vocal of them communicate in a way that is juvenile, biased and akin to someone throwing a tantrum.

When it comes to passing judgment, I'll wait for the facts, thank you. Conjecture and flapping on about "the rule of law" means nothing without documented facts that stand up in court. I saw very few Bush haters state their arguments in clear, concise, logical messages that stuck to debating the topic. Most of them were tainted with personal attacks and hysteria - and the world is already full of lunatics and crackpots that have that market cornered.

You want the people that might not agree with you to listen? Behave and speak rationally.

So regardless of whomever occupies the White House, BushCo. effectively forced us into two options: indefinite detention or let them go.

Generation_D: Bush was the single most corrupt, criminal, incompetent, and unsuited to lead commander in chief we've had in at least 100 years.

B..b..b..but he kept us safe from the turrists!11!! (Except for that 9/11 thingy, which was clearly not his fault because...uh... Clinton?)

You mean that no one actually cared about who these people were or why they were being detained? Yeah, color me shocked.

Somehow, I am not in the least surprised. Can we try Bush and his cronies now for war crimes?

GAT_00: Somehow, I am not in the least surprised. Can we try Bush and his cronies now for war crimes?

Yes, and we can indict Tim Geithner for tax evasion. Just kidding, let's give Tim a raise and a promotion.

Erebus1954: GAT_00: Somehow, I am not in the least surprised. Can we try Bush and his cronies now for war crimes?

Yes, and we can indict Tim Geithner for tax evasion. Just kidding, let's give Tim a raise and a promotion.

Except he paid back what he owed. But thanks for playing the false equivalence card.

FTFA:

After promising quick solutions, one former senior official said, the Obama administration is now "backpedaling and trying to buy time" by blaming its predecessor. Unless political appointees decide to overrule the recommendations of the career bureaucrats handling the issue under both administrations, he predicted, the new review will reach the same conclusion as the last: that most of the detainees can be neither released nor easily tried in this country.

This bipartisan crap pisses me off. Obama hasnt even announced any changes to his schedule for closing Gitmo. And his false dichotomy that without documentation we cannot try or release detainees is crap. If we do not have sufficient documentation why someone should be tried, the alternative is that we release them not hold them in perpetuity.

notmtwain: They simply weren't competent to prosecute the prisoners.

Other way around. No intent, ergo no need.

The reason why it was located on nominal Cuban soil was to support an unlikely argument that they didn't need to prosecute them in order to detain them indefinitely without access to counsel. The military tribunals were rushed together only because the Supreme Court took issue with that particular objective. (Unsurpisingly, I'd think -- not sure how they expected to get away with immunity from all oversight. Politically, possibly, because few politicians dare seem sympathetic to 'suspect terrorists' when it's easier to grandstand on "more money from other states for my state"; but legally? Somebody must have thought it plausible.)

Hence, such things as preserving evidence or access to witnesses et al would not have seemed as necessary as they should have been.

Non-story. In the Nanny State the RSPCA removed a couple of obese dogs from their owner. Worry about the real human rights abuses.

"Chuck! Chuck this is your brother, Barack..Barack Obama! Yeah, you know those files on Guantanamo Bay detainees that you were looking for? Well listen to this!"

All I can say is it would be a damn shame if, after all this is hashed out, they send the Uygurs back to China.

EZ1923: Makh: FTFA He said he once accidentally found "crucial physical evidence" that "had been tossed in a locker located at Guantanamo and promptly forgotten."

I guess the terror wasn't important, it was all about fear and control.

Well, yeah. If stopping actual terrorism was the goal, I'm not sure that creating more terrorists was a great idea. But, if pushing your political agenda through fear is the goal, then the more angry brown people you have, the better.

Tens of thousands of people have been nabbed and detained in the WOT. If you're one of the very few (245 at the moment) that ended up in Gitmo, odds are extremely high that you were a pissed-off jihadist long before we "made you into a terrorist" by sending you there.

jjorsett: odds are extremely high that you were a pissed-off jihadist long before we "made you into a terrorist" by sending you there.

Its not the lone alleged jihadist you need to be worried about. Its the hundreds of others rallied by his detention.

Erebus1954: Yes, and we can indict Tim Geithner for tax evasion. Just kidding, let's give Tim a raise and a promotion.

Yup, unpaid taxes = war crimes. Thanks Republican scum.

This isn't wholly unexpected considering that there were no real plans to try many of these prisoners to begin with. It's a shame that it went down this way, but obviously people didn't care to much since Bush got his 'mandate' in 2004. We had the government we deserved.

And now you know why Dick Cheney hurt his back "moving boxes"

DarthBrooks: Stage is now set: "we simply *can't* close Gitmo because we have to uh, yeah SORT OUT THE FILES! Yes, indeed."

Obama's always known he can't shut the place down, and now the case for shutting it down "slowly" will build.

It can't be the Bush administration was incompetent.

So put yourself in Obama's place, what do you do?

There isn't enough evidence to try them if you require it to meet the standards of evidence in US Courts.

Even if they weren't dangerous when we detained them, after 6 years of torture they are now.

If you let them go,where do you send them, their own countries do NOT want them and there is always the chance of this showing up in the news;

Guantánamo detainee resurfaces in terrorist group (new window)

Two ex-Guantanamo inmates appear in Al-Qaeda video (new window)

Your only other option would be to close the prison at Guantanamo like you promised and simply transfer the prisoners to other facilities.

Pretty much a no win situation.

jjorsett: Tens of thousands of people have been nabbed and detained in the WOT. If you're one of the very few (245 at the moment) that ended up in Gitmo, odds are extremely high that you were a pissed-off jihadist long before we "made you into a terrorist" by sending you there.

In the earliest days of gwot , they were not so discriminating about who got thrown in gtmo. The Uygurs, for instance.

Lay off, guys. Consider that Bush and republicans caught this guy. Doesn't that count for something? Can't we cut them some slack because of it?



/Oh wait, never mind

Bush ruined everything he ever touched. It all went to farking crap...
The country, human rights, spying on the public (especially journalists), cronyism, idiocy, pandering to the religious right, letting darth cheney rule with an iron fist, and eating babies...

Fart_Machine: Erebus1954: GAT_00: Somehow, I am not in the least surprised. Can we try Bush and his cronies now for war crimes?

Yes, and we can indict Tim Geithner for tax evasion. Just kidding, let's give Tim a raise and a promotion.

Except he paid back what he owed. But thanks for playing the false equivalence card.

Because as we all know, tax evasion is at least just as bad as torture!

xuanzhiyouxuan: All I can say is it would be a damn shame if, after all this is hashed out, they send the Uygurs back to China.

Interesting case, them -- people who aren't particularly enemies of the US, and don't seem to have violated US laws regarding terrorism, but would be in danger of repression if we sent 'em back. I believe a previous batch was received by Albania (!).

Posada Carriles is still in the United States, if memory serves -- trying to avoid extradiction on the grounds that he'd be tortured if sent back.

thatmanfromtexas: There isn't enough evidence to try them if you require it to meet the standards of evidence in US Courts.

Well then let them go. Sorry, if they haven't committed any crime they shouldn't be held. Just because they might have committed a crime once or they maybe were a terrorist is simply not good enough. We're a nation of laws, not hunches.

scseth: FTFA:
After promising quick solutions, one former senior official said, the Obama administration is now "backpedaling and trying to buy time" by blaming its predecessor. Unless political appointees decide to overrule the recommendations of the career bureaucrats handling the issue under both administrations, he predicted, the new review will reach the same conclusion as the last: that most of the detainees can be neither released nor easily tried in this country.

This bipartisan crap pisses me off. Obama hasnt even announced any changes to his schedule for closing Gitmo. And his false dichotomy that without documentation we cannot try or release detainees is crap. If we do not have sufficient documentation why someone should be tried, the alternative is that we release them not hold them in perpetuity.

I think John Stewart said it best, that we will never be safe and that it is more important to hold on to our values than to compromise them for the sake of security. After all, values that we let go of when they don't suit us, are merely "hobbies."

Will we release some terrorists back into the wild? Yes. However, this is the price you pay for freedom. If there isn't enough evidence that the party is guilty, than there is little we can do. I for one would rather see civil liberties upheld than to see potentially innocent people jailed because they "might be terrorists," even if it is done in the name of security.

But other former officials took issue with the criticism and suggested that the new team has begun to appreciate the complexity and dangers of the issue and is looking for excuses.
-- said the former bush administration official, as an excuse.

Undiluted: Lay off, guys. Consider that Bush and republicans caught this guy. Doesn't that count for something? Can't we cut them some slack because of it?



/Oh wait, never mind

And don't forget the terrorist-repelling rocks that they placed all around the country!

Korovyov: Posada Carriles is still in the United States

Yeah, the Luis Posada Carriles case is pretty farked up.

And the 5 or so Uygurs that were sent to Albania are a sad ending to it. They wander around dazed, unable to speak Albanian, farked up from torture, and under constant harassment by Chinese intelligence agents. They should be allowed to settle with the Uygur community near DC.

scseth: false dichotomy that without documentation we cannot try or release detainees is crap. If we do not have sufficient documentation why someone should be tried, the alternative is that we release them not hold them in perpetuity.

I agree with this sentiment. We've had a long enough time to gather information, build a case and try them. That failing, its time to let them go. GWB should have done this but didnt. Obama needs to do this ASAP or face losing credibility. To say "well these might be terrorists, but the previous administration did a crappy job of proving it so let us take a hack at it first and then we'll let them go" is definitely outside of the way we conduct our legal proceedings in the US. By now, either the evidence is there, or its not. I'm willing to give the new administration a short amount of time to see whether or not the evidence is there.. but I'm not willing to give them more time in order for them to build a case from scratch.

jjorsett: EZ1923: Makh: FTFA He said he once accidentally found "crucial physical evidence" that "had been tossed in a locker located at Guantanamo and promptly forgotten."

I guess the terror wasn't important, it was all about fear and control.

Well, yeah. If stopping actual terrorism was the goal, I'm not sure that creating more terrorists was a great idea. But, if pushing your political agenda through fear is the goal, then the more angry brown people you have, the better.

Tens of thousands of people have been nabbed and detained in the WOT. If you're one of the very few (245 at the moment) that ended up in Gitmo, odds are extremely high that you were a pissed-off jihadist long before we "made you into a terrorist" by sending you there.

huh? logic much?

bartink: It can't be the Bush administration was incompetent.

Incompetent doesn't describe the Bush administration - it implies they were bumblers who tried to govern but failed. Cheney et al. were very good at doing what they wanted i.e. pillaging the public treasury by flogging the fear card. I'm absolutely stunned at how competent and effective the Bush administration was at achieving their goals. Unfortunately, their goals were not designed to benefit all Americans, they were to enrich their wealthy friends.

Bush never had any real intention of doing anything with the detainees. The files were irrelevant; he never intended to use them for anything. If he was going to keep the detainees locked up without charge forever, and refuse to even tell the judge or the detainee why they were locked up, there was no need to keep a file because you weren't going to show it to anybody anyway.

This works until the next guy becomes President and starts noticing you're parading starkers down Main Street.

Instead, they found that information on individual prisoners is "scattered throughout the executive branch," a senior administration official said.

If only there were some Centralized Agency to handle all this Intelligence.

DarthBrooks: Stage is now set: "we simply *can't* close Gitmo because we have to uh, yeah SORT OUT THE FILES! Yes, indeed."

Obama's always known he can't shut the place down, and now the case for shutting it down "slowly" will build.

God damn that Obama for making the Bush Administration scatter information across several agencies and destroying the complex system of data management that the crack Bush team had in place, all just to assist him in pulling one over on them stupid libruls. Almost makes you wonder why they'd go to such lengths to help him, but they're just a REALLY great bunch of guys.

/You're an idiot.

Shaggy_C: There isn't enough evidence to try them if you require it to meet the standards of evidence in US Courts.

Well guess what, bud, they ARE required to meet the standards of evidence of US courts.

That's one of the stupidest things about this. Bush wanted to detain them indefinitely, but he farked it up so bad now that people who probably should be in jail will be let go. All because he was too busy torturing them to bother with, you know, building a case against them.

Assuming they could evade the rule of law forever with their offshore shenanigans was a dumb, dumb, dumb move.

And honestly, letting them go is the right thing to do at this point. We messed up so bad. We can't continue breaking our own laws just because we failed to prove they broke any. Let them go if we can't prosecute (and then keep a close, close eye on them if we think necessary).

Anyone who's read Fiasco shouldn't be surprised. The Bush administration politicized things instead of running a government. They didn't even seriously try to find WMDs in Iraq, and they didn'T try to do anything with these detainees.

Their whole shtick was about appearances. They weren't much interested in doing stuff except a few very narrow things and lining their pockets.