Marie, I think that you are correct.
Nevertheless, a prosecutor at Guantanamo taught President Obama a painful lesson, all the more painful because Mr. Obama is touted to be a brilliant lawyer. A president has no business ordering courts to begin or to end prosecutions. Mr. Obama overreached himself and the dumbest thing he did is to overreach publicly.
The man talks too much publicly and often he talks nonsense.
A wise President would have quietly asked the prosecutor: “Sir, is it important that this case proceeds now and if so, why”?
More and more I see a wild grand stander.

Gitmo sent exactly the wrong message to everyone.  It said that we are no longer a nation of laws, of accountability, of peace, of basic human decency.  Perhaps some of the people there are guilty of crimes, but that is for a jury to decide, not Bush or Obama or anyone else other than the jury.  Closing it 8 years ago (or sooner) would have been the genuinely right thing to do, but closing it now is better than closing it later.

“In the interest of justice” a “third system should be created—because” one is desperately needed. “Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the incessant refrain has been that some of those swept up and imprisoned during the so-called war on terror are so dangerous, their plots so potentially devastating, that they” can “be tried in civilian courts or in the U.S. military legal system. But this isn’t a legal statement; it’s a political one.”  In fact, it will be nearly impossible for anyone accused of a ‘terrorist’ crime to receive a fair trial in any kind of court in the emotionally-charged atmosphere of the U.S. The pre-trial publicity has already been so enormous as to prejudice any kind of American court or jury. As with any criminal case on a lesser scale where this occurs, thought must be given to moving the location of any such trial to a more neutral location. “The outcome of cases brought against 257 individuals charged in U.S. courts with a wide range of terrorism offenses was clear: They were convicted and put away, many of them for life… ”  “In many of these cases, the very issues now argued as being too difficult to surmount were overcome. Evidence gathered through intelligence was used. Controversies over the way suspects were transported to the United States from abroad were resolved, as were questions about incriminating statements made to law enforcement personnel during these trips” – all of which can indicate that these processes lend themselves to ‘show trials’ where the verdict is virtually pre-ordained. As with any criminal case on a lesser scale where this occurs, consideration must be given to moving the location of any such trial to a more neutral location. This could be accomplished through special international tribunals such as those more recently for Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Or it could be done by expanding the scope and membership of the International Criminal Court. The Rome Statute of ’98 led to the establishment of the ICC in 2002. Later this year a review conference will be convened to decide on any further suitable amendments to the Rome Statute. The Statute currently covers genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression (as yet undefined). It could also be amended to include ‘terrorism’ if, the not-at-all easy task of agreeing a definition could be completed. The ICC offers great potential for prosecuting in a fairer, more impartial atmosphere, crimes of ‘terrorism’ – by both private and state actors – than national courts of any jurisdiction.  America, is of course, conspicuous by its absence on the ICC but it’s high time that changed. “Having now called for a more rational, humane and transparent way for the United States to treat those who would harm it, Obama must” now urge American ratification of the ICC and be prepared to cede some aspects of national sovereignty to international bodies of adjudication.

At this point W set up the scenario perfectly - for himself, that is. Obama and all of Congress can’t put this Humpty Dumpty together:  No matter what they do or neglect doing, O will be blamed - it’s political barbed wire. He might as well close Gitmo, say a prayer, and hope to garner a bit of global political capital; he won’t get ANY credit at home.
  Maybe they can load the remaining 245 on a discarded empty oil tanker and get old Joe Hazelwood liquored up enough to chauffeur them around the Gulf of Aden for a while until he either runs aground or gets hijacked by the pirates from Mogadishu. 
  This is a lose-lose-lose situation for the US.

Folktruther nails it!

If we are going to use civilian courts to try terrorist’s, in all fairness, we should start with Bush and company.

The purpose of Gitmo was to legitimate to the American people abduction, arbitrary imprisonment, and torture as being essential to the War on Terrorism.  Which it is, since this War is being conducted against Muslim populations. 

Consequently Gitmo was intended to be VISIBLE, a barbaric public relaitons stunt.  It didn’t matter if the inmates were guility of anything so long as they served their pobulic relations purpose, including children.  There is a children’s wing at Gitmo.

Gitmo was a Bushite innovation.  The American power system has routinely abducted and tortured prisoners historically at least since the Vietnam war.  But since that time this was done INVISIBLY by training the brutal agents of American client-states to do it for the US.  And of course it was sanitized out of the American meida to allow the president to say that America didn’t torture.

Obama is now attempting to go back to invisible torture, but has to continue pretend that the two hundred prisoners or so are highly dangerous.

In reality he could just let them go, close the prison and continue to torture in US and client-state prisons around the world. But this cannot be done politically without destroying the mainstream story essential to the War on Terrorism. It’s fraudulence can only be maintained by the delusive fear of the population, that these men are so dangerous that they can threaten the US.

So Marie is right objectively, there is no need for new legal systems, but wrong politically, since the delusive fear must be maintained, as Obama continues the Bushite War on Terrorism.

That’s the idea, Big B—create new enemies for the USA and perpetuate the System of fear-related politics, idiotic foreign wars, exorbitant “defense” spending, etc. But how long can this continue? We may be seeing the System in its death-throes at this time, now that the economic chickens are coming home to roost.

We might as well load these poor bastards into the space shuttle and stuff them out the airlock, for there is no longer any place we can safely drop off a bunch of now angry, bitter, soldiers of Islam where they will not be a future danger to US interests thoughout the world. All I know is that, if someone kept me in prison, without charge, for six or seven years, the first thing I would want upon my release is a little payback. But maybe that was part of the plan all along. After all, here in the post cold war era our military industrial complex needed an enemy, and since none seemed to be forthcoming, they went out and created one. And it serves so many purposes. It gives us a reason to inflate military spending. Israel has a reason to continue to oppress it’s neihbors. Saudi Arabia can continue to oppress it’s people. And we can create new tin pot dictators in the middle east, giving us a reason to build and maintain a military force in the oil rich region.

The hundreds, nay thousands, of illegally imprisoned muslims around the world, will now be a ready made foe, armed with a heart full of hate for their captors and abusers. They will be able to occasionaly rise up and cause a small fracus, perhaps some casualties, and once again, give the US military and industrial interests a reason to spend more money, drop more bombs, and maintain the balance of fear. This game has been played by US for over fifty years now, and as long as the oil is flowing, the policy will not change, not under Barry or anyone else. The Gears of war will continue to be greased with the guts and sinew of the poor and ineffectual, no matter what nation they are from.

Those poor shmucks from Guantanamo, and all our other secret prisons, are literally men without a country. Yet they will leave those prisons with the knowledge that they did indeed cause the downfall of the US, by causing us to compromise our values, and live in fear, and gut our nation of the trappings of freedom. They showed us what we can become without the rule of law, and the respect for our fellow man.

Well, Hippy Pam, as I see it, Gitmo was chosen as the venue simply because “out of sight, out of mind”—or at least that’s what the Bush-ites thought when they created their concentration-camp-away-from-home. They also considered that almost no one in Congress (both houses) wanted these people incarcerated in their states or districts—the NIMBY factor (Not In My BackYard).

I’ve read that some Repubs are calling for Alcatraz to be reopened and used as a Gitmo substitute—and that Nancy Pelosi is not exactly enthused over the idea.

I-as an AMERICAN CITIZEN-am quite capable of sitting on a JURY….I would do my best to look at all the FACTS in order to come to a decision about a “SUPPOSED TERRORIST” being innocent /guilty….In the words of “that guy”.....LET’S GET-r-DONE!!!!!!

an afterthought…Isn’t GITMO in/on CUBA????WHY?????