Azrael wrote:Ixtellor wrote:I would prosecute all the inmates who
B) We have a 100% knockout full proof case.
So you're proposing that the requirements for their indictment be *more strict* than otherwise required under US law? People go to trial when prosecutors convince either a grand jury or a judge to indict them. Not just in cases where the proof is incontrovertible.
If I were the fed gov, I would not take ANY chances that we would could lose the case. Because then you get in the situation of A) Freeing what could be a dangerous criminal and B) Might have to pay restitution and C) The political nightmare of world headlines reading "US jails innocent man for 5 years".
Therefore, I would not take any case into court that wasn't full proof. I use alternative methods to deal with the others. (I advocate just setting them free)
Iv wrote:Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is presented as the architect of the 9/11 attacks. Probably true but too many of the proofs hold against him result from torture.
KSM, pled Guilty so I think we can "legitimatly" throw him in a hole somewhere.
And again, I doubt we have any criminal masterminds at Gitmo, and it is not as if there are 40,000 Al Qaeda members saying "If we only had Akmed from Gitmo, we could really pull something off"
I don't think there is any reason to believe that we would be in MORE danger, if we just released them. There are already thousands of crazies out there who wish our deaths.