Quote:
Originally posted by Mike F@Jun 25 2005, 05:36 AM
A number of possible conclusions:
1. The story's not accurate,
2. The story's accurate, but Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al are all unaware that adequate due process is available, or
3. The story's accurate, and Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et al are aware that adequate due process is available, but they just enjoy being beat up in the media and public opinion so they don't bring it up.
Which do you think is the true case HOZ?
|
You didn't even read the article. Just the bolded quote I provided. Had you read the article you would have run across this little tidbit.
The few critics who acknowledge the existence of the tribunals argue they aren't sufficient. They "provided due process in form, but not in substance," as Newsday put it. That view is shared by a Carter-appointed liberal judge, but an earlier decision by a Bush-appointed judge upheld the tribunals. In the end, courts will almost certainly affirm the legality of the Gitmo tribunals, which as noted, were modeled after the due process standards described in the Hamdi decision.
Now if it is before the courts.....
I will leave it to you to prove it isn't before the courts and prove this article is inaccurate.