Unbelievable
In easy to follow bullet points:
- The article says the tribunals are sufficient and fully comparable to the 'Article V' hearings
- You use the article as proof that the Gitmo "myth" is "debunked"
- The US court has ruled the hearings illegal, therefore they aren't sufficient and the "myth" isn't debunked
The fact that the Bush admin has the right to appeal the ruling doesnt make the tribunals legal and sufficient any more than a convicted murderer's right to appeal makes him/her innocent.
And don't try and pull this "all I was saying that the issue is before the court" stance that you're apparently trying to backpeddle to. It's clear from your headline, quote and the article you chose that that wasn't the case.