Posted on 06/06/2009 7:40:12 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The NY Times covers a trial balloon that would provoke outrage from the left if Bush-Cheney had proposed it. However, as the Times tells it, the proposal has no sponsorship at all - apparently it just fell from the sky, or something. Here we go:
The Obama administration is considering a change in the law for the military commissions at the prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, that would clear the way for detainees facing the death penalty to plead guilty without a full trial.
The provision could permit military prosecutors to avoid airing the details of brutal interrogation techniques. It could also allow the five detainees who have been charged with the Sept. 11 attacks to achieve their stated goal of pleading guilty to gain what they have called martyrdom.
The proposal, in a draft of legislation that would be submitted to Congress, has not been publicly disclosed. It was circulated to officials under restrictions requiring secrecy. People who have read or been briefed on it said it had been presented to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates by an administration task force on detention.
Ordinarily I have no qualms about capital punishment but in this case, sending some jihadists off to collect their virgins, or raisins, or whatever without what the world would view as a fair trial can only lead a public relations debacle of the sort I would expect the kinder, humbler (yet God-like!) Obama to avoid.
Apparently this procedure is acceptable in conventional trials but not in the military courts:
The provision would follow a recommendation of military prosecutors to clarify what they view as an oversight in the 2006 law that created the commissions. The law did not make clear if guilty pleas would be permitted in capital cases. Federal civilian courts and courts in most states with capital-punishment laws permit such pleas.
But American military justice law, which is the model for the military commission rules, bars members of the armed services who are facing capital charges from pleading guilty. Partly to assure fairness when execution is possible, court-martial prosecutors are required to prove guilt in a trial even against service members who want to plead guilty.
During a December tribunal proceeding in Guantánamo, the five detainees charged with coordinating the Sept. 11 attacks said they wanted to plead guilty. Military prosecutors argued that they should be permitted to do so. Defense lawyers argued that tribunals should follow American military law and bar the guilty pleas. The military judge has not yet made a decision.
And Obama's position? Who knows?!? The Times is utterly mystified:
The draft legislation includes other changes administration officials disclosed last month when President Obama said he would continue the controversial military commission system with changes that would increase detainees’ rights. It is not known whether the White House has approved the proposed death penalty provision. A White House spokesman declined to comment.
Sure, someone on the administration task force just snuck in that provision without anyone at the White House knowing or caring.
I can see the benefits to the Administration of this trial balloon - lefties will howl and Obama can disavow the idea, reassuring us with something to the effect of 'that was not the task force I knew'.
And when this plan is scrapped it will be just as well.
I’d rather have a dishonest scammer than a tyrant as my president. Clinton is far better than the teleprompter telemoron.
So do I understand this correctly: the proposal is to allow those inmates who are facing the Death Sentence to plead guilty at their military trial, and for sentence to then be carried out forthwith and without delay?
If I’ve understood that correctly, I think it is a brilliant idea. It is the closest thing to summary justice as can be achieved this late in the game.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
Military Commissions are not part of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. That is for American Military.
Military Commissions are part of the Laws of War, which are a separate set of laws.
this comes off the heels of zero’s proposal of “prevention detentions” which never made a ripple on the criminal liberal media...
I’ve had the same thoughts sometimes, that we don’t have adults in charge anymore.
With the horrors of September 11th, one thing I felt grateful for was that Bush had good people such as Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Colin Powell in key positions. In short, I felt that adults were in charge. I just don’t feel the same confidence in the Obama administration. God forbid we won’t be tested as the Bush administration was. I hope Joe Biden is wrong about the tests to come Obama’s way.
My second reaction is - “they are enemy combatants and terrorists”. No law applys to them. Geneva doesn't apply to them. Give them martyrdom without any trial/due process/last meal/last wish/last phonecall/last pee. Just off them.
We doan needs no stink’in laws!
Dittos
Good catch. Lefties would be howling that the Bush administration would be guilty of crimes against human rights, the Geneva Convention, etc., if they had proposed anything of this sort. The fact that Lefties are mum now about this only shows how ultimately ignorant and hypocritical they are.
We should just ignore this and let Obama allow this to happen.
Once as many of these terrorists are dead, then we suddenly notice what’s happening, and get all indignant, and throw it in Obama’s face!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.