Judge Green Lights Gitmo War Crime Trials

(CBS/ AP)  The first war crimes trial at Guantanamo Bay can begin Monday, a federal judge has ruled, saying civilian courts should let the military process play out as Congress intended.

U.S. District Judge James Robertson on Thursday rejected an effort by Osama bin Laden's former driver, Salim Hamdan, to postpone his trial. Hamdan argued he would suffer irreparable harm if his was tried before he could challenge the legality of the process.

Robertson's ruling is a victory for the Bush administration, which plans to use the military commission process to prosecute alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others charged in the 2001 attacks.

The Department of Justice celebrated the win for the administration, noting that Hamdan's trial before the commission would give him the most protection ever received by a defendant in such trials.

"We are pleased with the court's decision allowing Mr. Hamdan to be tried for war crimes before a military commission," DOJ Spokesman Erik Ablin told CBS News. "The government looks forward to presenting its case against Mr. Hamdan to the commission. We note that, under the procedures established by Congress in the Military Commissions Act, Mr. Hamdan will receive greater procedural protections than those ever before provided to defendants in military-commission trials."

"The good news for the government is that it finally gets to try a terror suspect," said CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen. "The bad news for the government is that any conviction that follows the trial can be overturned on appeal thanks to a series of rulings by the Supreme Court. The White House desperately wants to see at least one successful military trial before the end of the Bush Administration and this ruling all but assures that. Except that even if and when Hamdan is convicted the appeals process will take years to resolve."

The American Civil Liberties Union agreed.

"It is unfortunate that this trial will go forward," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU National Security Project. "As Judge Robertson noted, there are serious questions about the constitutionality of the rules under which Mr. Hamdan will be tried. It doesn't make sense to conduct a trial under rules that are likely to be found unconstitutional later on. Proceeding with this trial now will only draw out a legal process that has taken far too long already, and further discredit a system that has been a disgrace from the start."

The administration suffered a setback last month when the Supreme Court ruled the Guantanamo Bay detainees can challenge their detention in federal court. Hamdan's attorneys hoped to use that ruling to delay his trial. But Robertson refused.

"Hamdan is to face a military commission designed by Congress based on guidelines handed down by the Supreme Court," Robertson said.

He said Hamdan can raise any procedural challenges during trial and, if convicted, he can ask military and civilian appeals courts to settle constitutional questions.

Robertson's decision came shortly after a military judge at Guantanamo Bay also denied Hamdan's request for a postponement.

While Robertson stressed that his ruling only affects Hamdan, judges overseeing hundreds of other detainee cases have said they were watching to see how he would handle the case.

The Justice Department argued that prosecuting suspected terrorists is a key part of the war on terrorism, and a necessary step toward closing the Guantanamo Bay prison.

"Putting the military commission proceedings on hold now would be contrary to these interests and hamper the government's war efforts, not to mention constitute a significant intrusion into areas within the province of the executive branch," government attorneys said.

Hamdan's attorneys can appeal the ruling but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit would have to act quickly to keep the trial from going forward. His attorneys said they had yet to decide whether to appeal.

[ioweign]

I''''m so sick and tired of hearing you morons claim that Bush "manufactured" intel about WMD''''s in iraq, to start a war. So here''''s what I''''d like to see from any of you stupid fuuckin libs. Show me one piece of evidence that would stand up in court, that bush "manufactured" lies about the wmd''''s? Problem is, you can''''t, because it isn''''t true. They all had the same info. Clinton and his cronies called for the removal and destruction of the wmd''s in iraq before bush was even in the picture. You libs crack me up tho, you are funny that''''s for sure. As far as the detainees, they should all be shot in the head and dumped at a pig farm so the animals can eat.

Posted by HadEnufff at 04:45 AM : Jul 18, 2008




Just look at "Cheney" - that is proof enough!!!

[frankbowers]

WHEN, O! WHEN, will America be able to charge gw bush and dic cheney and the OTHERS FOR THEIR WAR CRIMES. They have stole and wreck the nation and murdered 4000+ innocent American Service people both women and men and God only knows how many will end up suffering all their life due to bush and his men twisting and turning the truth into lies for their pleasure to watch the service women and men people suffer, and God only knows how many Iraqs'' men, women and children have died and been wounded for this idiot Musolini was dealt a swift act I hope theirs is just as swift when it comes the knife and rope worked on them. They all need a strong rope and a big tree just like Mussolini to end it for them.
Frank Bowers of Austin, TX

[babooph]

The rest of the world gets another laugh at a kangaroo court from a now weak casrated nation.

[impeach__w]

The Bush administration%u2019s contention that the president has the power to detain anyone, including US citizens, indefinitely without charges or trial by declaring them %u201Cenemy combatants%u201D received judicial backing from a sharply divided appellate court in Richmond, Virginia Tuesday.

The 5-to-4 decision by the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit made it nearly certain that this assertion of dictatorial powers by the presidency will be part of the Bush administration%u2019s dark legacy handed on to a future administration.

The ruling by the full appellate court effectively overturned a decision reached by a three-judge panel of the same court issued in June of last year, which held that the Bush administration did not have the legal authority to detain people without charges and compared its assumption of such sweeping powers to military rule and the oppression of the American colonies by King George III.

That panel had itself reversed a lower court%u2019s denial of habeas corpus for Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri. A Qatari national, al-Marri was a legal resident of the US and a graduate student in Peoria, Illinois, before the Bush White House declared him an enemy combatant in 2003 and ordered the military to throw him into a Navy brig in Charleston, South Carolina, where he has been held for the last five years.
The ruling means that al-Marri will remain imprisoned without charges in the Charleston brig.

[vnveteran72]

Under South Carolina''s 4th Circuit 5 to 4 Decision, which will surely be tested in the SCOTUS, the Little Drunken Crackheaded Potentate can now Arrest, Imprison WITHOUT CHARGE or production of ANY Evidence, Hold without benefit of Council, FOREVER, ANY American Citizen, simply by naming them an "Enemy Combatant". You need not have attended ANY Battlefield, Fought in ANY Conflict, or otherwise been active in ANY WAY in Hostilities against the Regime. He only has to DESIGNATE YOU as an "Enemy Combatant". This could be done to you simply for excercising your rights to criticize him or his Treasonous Regime.
Welcome to whatever these Neocon Scumbags have turned us into. It certainly can''t be called America any longer.

[irliberal]

Republicans: The party that wouldn''t even exist at all anymore except for their platform of hating gay people and anyone who doesn''t subscribe to their particular brand of religion. These days, being a "conservative" has nothing to do with being conservative fiscally, it just means you hate minorities, love war, fetuses (until they are born) and have no sense of fiscal responsibility whatsoever. The last eight years have proven that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Over SIX years of war. Civil rights breached by our commander in chief. Internationally recognized torture sanctioned by the White House. Two invaded and currently occupied countries. Hundreds of thousands dead, including OVER 4500 American soldiers. Billions of our tax dollars spent, and yes, are still being spent to this very moment.

Iraq, which had NOTHING to do with 9/11, is now an occupied country which will implode when we get out of it, whether that happens one, two, ten or five hundred years from now. A society that CHOOSES to be ruled by religion cannot become a democracy; it can only be a theocracy with voting cards.

Bin Laden still lives. The mastermind of 9/11 still walks free.

The one, simple word for this is: failure. No amount of deception, indignation or wailing by republicons can change these facts.

Failure of Bush. Failure of Cheney. Failure of the republicans.

Time for a change.

[hadenufff]

I''m so sick and tired of hearing you morons claim that Bush "manufactured" intel about WMD''s in iraq, to start a war. So here''s what I''d like to see from any of you stupid fuuckin libs. Show me one piece of evidence that would stand up in court, that bush "manufactured" lies about the wmd''s? Problem is, you can''t, because it isn''t true. They all had the same info. Clinton and his cronies called for the removal and destruction of the wmd''s in iraq before bush was even in the picture. You libs crack me up tho, you are funny that''s for sure. As far as the detainees, they should all be shot in the head and dumped at a pig farm so the animals can eat.

jossch2 wrote:

"The mistake our military made with these terrorists in Gitmo was not killing everyone of them. We feed them special diets, provide their prayer mats along with a brand new Koran plus much more. On top of that you have these liberals crying the blues about how we are treating these savages. Do you think they would allow bibles if the tables were turned? Do you think there would be people complaining how we were treated?"

So, basically what you''re telling us is that you support murder and have no problem with US civilians being killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

Were you born a *** head or are you just mentally defective?

[rjsparling]

The point nobody seems to remember is that there was no war in Iraq until we started one. It was sold to the American People by using manufactured "evidence" that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The real reason was the hunger of Bush''s oilmen backers to practically steal the oil resources of that nation. This was the first lie. To cover that lie, they needed other lies, and still others.

Everything about Gitmo was an attempt by these corrupted politicians to avoid the inconvenience of laws and international treaties. The term "enemy combatant" was coined by this administration and carried the definition they wanted it to have because nobody was strong enough to stop them immediately, so the courts do it slowly. Accept it, that is the function of the courts in a society of laws and a part of what has kept America great. My fervent hope is that they are strong enough, fast enough to stop a manufactured attack on Iran.

The very fact that the "enemy combatants" were sent to Gitmo was to keep them away from the jusrisdiction of US courts. Why has Bush so little respect for American Law? Well, it turned out that the courst asserted their jusrtisdiction. Of course they did - it was either US courts or Cuban courts that would have to if the military is to stay subordinate to civilian control.

[cdfoxtrot1]

Do you think our POW''''s have been treated
as well as the detainees in Gitmo ? Given Bibles ?
Special food ?
Think they are they treated better than Daniel Perl ?
This is nothing to joke about and sadly those joking
have never served this country.
If you are so smart..join the military and see how funny it is.

Posted by ap32801

I think most/all of the kids at Gitmo don''t want bibles. Maybe a Koran. Who are "our POWs"? And if they''re all being treated so well at Gitmo, why wasn''t the Red Cross and others denied access to view the facilities and treatment of those detained there? If there''s nothing to hide, why not let the international bodies go in and take a look??