Here we go again.....For the third time, the Supreme Court has ruled that foreign detainees at Guantanamo Bay have the right to challenge their detention in civilian courts in the U.S., and that they have been denied their right to habeas corpus, and all that silly stuff that the Bush administration would have us believe is less important than our "safety."

The 270 men held at Guantanamo as suspected enemy combatants have been in limbo, some for over 6 years, as the lack of due process, evidence, and justification for their imprisonment, has created a smokescreen preventing any realistic procedure or outcome. Many of these men have been tortured, and since the evidence gained by such treatment is not reliable, its been impossible for a full case to be made without the issues becoming bigger than the particular case trying to be heard.. But really, according to first hand accounts of the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo have left many of them in such states as to make it hard to release them to their home countries, much less any other country that might agree to take them. The longer this goes on, the more we look like the bad guys, (too late,) and if there ever was a case to be made, we have lost it completely ethically and morally, and we have lost the ability to punish the guilty in any reasonable way.

The emotional and physical fallout from this sort of imprisonment and torture will leave lasting effects that should not be underestimated. I guess that John McCain could be cited as an example of a POW who emerged seemingly unscathed from his ordeal, but then the stories of his vicious temper and his vile treatment of those around him, as cited by Cliff Schecter in his excellent book, The Real McCain, coupled with his seeming disconnect with reality and always changing beliefs and opinions, leads one to think that he is still deeply effected by PTSD, and driven by some deep anger to wage more and more war and to get some sort of revenge. Surely some of the detainees could walk among us with little sign of where they've been; like McCain, they will be time bombs ready to explode at any time.

Without due process, its been impossible to classify these prisoners as true "illegal enemy combatants." With no clear classification and with the republican led congress blocking the last 2 SCOTUS rulings on this by passing laws and limiting judicial oversight, a ripple effect has caused any cases that have made it to a court or tribunal to be sent back to lower courts to sort out the legalities. So, how can we know if this new decision will amount to anything at all before the next administration takes office? Since the designation of the detainees is decided by the president himself and his top cabinet, and is very confidential, its impossible to know what it is based on. Add to that the fear that hovers around the disinformation and/or PR campaign that has painted these prisoners as criminals, terrorists, and enemy combatants, and it's unlikely that they will ever see the light of day in any meaningful way. Its also unlikely that justice will be done or that any deterrence that might be fostered by America's ability to kick the collective asses of the bad-guys, will be evident at all.

America, as it stands, appears to be run by a bunch of heartless, bungling, idiots, with an administration that doesn't even follow our own laws or the rulings of our own court. If they don't like the rulings of the highest court in the country, they just go about circumventing them. With this kind of leadership and the track record of the last 7 years, we have no way ever again to claim the moral high-ground, or to claim that spreading our brand of freedom or democracy is superior to the individual evolution of any country.

The really troubling part of this mess is that the dissenting members of the court, being the usual suspects, joined Alito's written dissent which assumed the guilt of the prisoners and stated a political opinion about the danger that America is in (with the implication being that these prisoners who have not been charged or tried are the reason,) as noted in the Washington Post:

Justice Antonin Scalia took the unusual step of summarizing his dissent from the bench, calling the court's decision a "self-invited . . . incursion into military affairs," and was even stronger in a written dissent joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr.

"America is at war with radical Islamists," Scalia wrote, adding that the decision "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed."

I thought that the court was in place to ensure the sanctity of American laws and the way that we do things. If the reason why Scalia dissents as he does, (joined by certain of his colleagues,) is that he feels that these prisoners are, in fact, enemy combatants, with no evidence or due process stating such, or even alleging it, then he is stating mere opinion based on gut feelings and stories drawn out of tortured prisoners who have likely not seen the light of day or another human being, except their torturers, for months. Our justice system doesn't work this way and the highest court is not supposed to issue dissents or opinions based on personal feelings about issues that are clearly political, (and unproven, at that!)

I don't believe that the court's job is to tell us that their decision is based on the danger that America is in if certain prisoners happen to be what one or another of them thinks they may be. I believe that they are supposed to comment on whether the information presented and the treatment of those prisoners follows the LAW! isn't the Supreme court the last stop in decision making and a place where the information and evidence is looked at as already revealed and consideration is given to process? If not, then I would like to see where new evidence...real evidence...was introduced that might indicate that these people are combatants of any kind. If not, and if this is purely an oversight of law decisions, then why is the dissent written in terms of political opinion regarding the safety of Americans? The laws of our country are not in place so that we can cringe behind them, but rather so that we can stand boldly and die to protect them...right? This is just more of the Karl Rovian "Be Very Afraid" brand of fear-politics.

We can guess that these prisoners are bad guys. We can know that they are hardened and hateful, and even that some of them have been driven crazy. We can also guess that they come from a place where bad guys hide out, and we can go with the gut feelings of military interrogators that has filtered down through layers and layers of pundits, informers, and gossips, but unless these guys stand before an open court with independent lawyers, we've got nothing.

The fucking Bush Administration, in person as it turns out, have made the world incredibly less safe by not following the law as it stood. If they hadn't had a field trip to Guantanamo to witness actual interrogation techniques and take it upon themselves to shape a policy that has pieces of the TV show 24, and techniques that have been proven to not work within it, then we might have been able to prove if these guys are criminals or not; we wouldn't have to have them walking free among us if they are guilty. But I think that this whole thing really wasn't about combatants, or safety, or the law; it was about being macho and showing the world that they can change and defy American law anytime they want. That probably buys some sorta tough street cred in the higher echelons of power where the real dealing is done, just for the rush of the huge chess game that is Planet Earth.

So, forgive me if I am not counting my prisoners before they get their hearings. An administration that bends the law wherever they see fit, and a senate with Joe Lieberman leaning to the right, and that slim of a majority, will stand in the way of this too. Soon it will Be Obama's problem, and a mark on his record that he had this horrible war and had to house these poor guys forever because they had nowhere to go....I like to see as much of this as possible get on the record, but honestly, unless we impeach Bush and Cheney (and indict Gonzalez and Rumsfeld, and do something to Condi Rice, which I haven't figured out yet,) we've got nothing.

...except other secret prisons around the world, most notably in Afghanistan, that are doing the same thing, but reportedly worse....

c/p RIPCoco

Labels: guantanamo, John McCain, Supreme Court, torture