The tapes should be admissible in their military tribunal. However, the same rules don't apply to how civilians are tried in civilian courts as do in the military tribunals.
The tribunal should be able to not only look at evidence that the information may have been coerced, they should be able to look at where that evidence led investigators and it they were able to substantiate it.
They are alleging that the evidence is of questionable value because the terrorists had reason to lie. That is in itself a reasonable argument. However, what they want to do is treat it like a civilian court where the suspects rights have been violated and have not only the interrogation thrown out, but all evidence they discovered as a result of that interrogation. That shouldn't be allowed in these tribunals.
All the evidence should be presented. The tribunal should be able to weigh it's value not only based on how it was obtained, but how well it was confirmed after the fact.
Little faith should be placed in the evidence gathered through interrogation alone, but the interrogation and evidence it led to should not be tossed out.
If interrogators broke our laws or regulation, they do need to be held accountable for their actions, but we can't just toss out all of our evidence because it was related to an investigation that didn't follow the normal rules for questioning civilian suspects.
After November we’ll probably be closing Gitmo and moving the terrorists to Kansas, where they’ll be accorded full constitutional protections.
Going into the Civil War, there were numerous people of national stature in the South who were willing to stand up and do what needed to be done in order to “protect” the South’s way of life.
There were abundant numbers of them both in the military and in the Congress.
Note, I DO NOT agree with that way of life, btw, but at least they were there; they recognized the danger and the extraordinary measures that had to be taken to counter that danger.
Today, there appears to be absolutely nobody of comparable stature (and believe me, no one else can do it) who is willing to do the same to save this country. It’s disgusting.
Denbeaux might be shocked to learn that the rules of evidence that apply in , say, any European criminal court , are quite tolerant of police interrogation methods that to us may seem brutal. I say, “might,” because surely he can’t be as naive as he pretends.