This argument is absurd. The prosecutor will produce what evidence there is against them at trial (military) and they will be judged accordingly.
A laptop with phone numbers picked up in Iraq. A phone number leads to a potential throat slitter in Pakistan who has a record (according to Pakistan) of being part of a terrorist network. Intercepts from NSA indicate this phone was used by “someone” to converse with folks in Iran.
Sufficient evidence - guilty - 10 years at hard labor.
Part of this program is to “send a message” that these
creeps will get the short circuit after 6 years in jail.
You mentioned two key words - trial and evidence. Up until the DTA there was no requirement for either evidence or trial. They could be and were sent off to Guantanamo without anything. Despite DTA, unfortunately the Secretary of the Navy signed enacting regulations that effectively gutted both the trial and the evidence part of this, thus the SC decision. Apparently one of the detainnees claims evidence that would absolve him of Al Qaeda connections, but he has been denied the opportunity to present this, hence the SC decision.
That was dumb, and the rug of DTA got pulled out from under the administration. This same heavy thumb of command influence has been placed on the scales of the Haditha marines, so it should come as a surprise to no one.
PS. The bio of the suit that is filling the SecNav position. Would it shock you to discover we have a Secretary of the Navy who has no military experience? The secretary of the Air Force who was canned for losing 6 nukes had no military experience either. Are you sensing a pattern in this?