Flight Pundit

Checks and balances at work:

The US Congress is ready to craft legislation to prosecute Guantanamo war-on-terror prisoners after the government’s plan for military trials was rejected by the Supreme Court, top senators said.

Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told the Fox News Sunday television program that Congress could conceivably pass a new law allowing the government to try the prisoners by military commissions by September.

Congress can’t afford to mess this up and I don’t think they will. I think they’ll act quickly on this.

Some interesting thoughts about the Hamden ruling and the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court’s decision in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, invalidating for now the use of military commissions to try al Qaeda and associated detainees, may be a setback for U.S. policy in the war on terror. But it is a setback with a sterling silver lining. All eight of the justices participating in this case agreed that military commissions are a legitimate part of the American legal tradition that can, in appropriate circumstances, be used to try and punish individuals captured in the war on terror. Moreover, nothing in the decision suggests that the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay must, or should, be closed.

You wouldn’t go away with this opinion after reading some of the reactions from the left.

Amid all of the antiwar cheering, we should also point out what Hamdan does not do. It does not shut down the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, or question the President’s right to hold unlawful combatants for the duration of hostilities. It also does not apply to most of the prisoners there–only 10 of the roughly 450 Guantanamo detainees are immediately affected by the ruling. And it does not reclassify enemy combatants as ordinary prisoners of war, as many in the European left and ACLU would prefer.

Uh oh. Europe and the ACLU will be speaking a different tune, you can bank on that. The central issue for these leftards - they want the detainees- AKA terrorists- to be treated not only as POW, but as American citizens. It speaks to a mindset that is very warped and in a way, very sick. A terrorist hates life. Americans love life.

Moreover, Hamdan affirms that military commissions are Constitutional and an appropriate part of American law. This would have been hard even for the liberal Justices to deny, given that commissions have been used in some form by strong Presidents in the past, including Washington, Lincoln and FDR.

Presidents past, current and in the future will use military commissions despite the temper tantrums from the left. We hear it all the time- checks and balance. Congress will step up to the plate on this and act in the President’s favor, I predict.

So instead the Court declared that the Pentagon’s current version of military commissions violates Article 36 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which provides guidelines for the rules to be followed by both military commissions and courts martial. The language of Article 36 happens to be broad and deferential to Presidential prerogatives. (Its very title is, “President May Prescribe Rules.”) Yet the Justices found that the Pentagon’s current rules allowed too much hearsay evidence and denied a combatant-defendant’s appearance at some moments at trial.

It’s all about petty little issues. These people, detainees, do not have the rights Americans have. If you think they should have this, you’re dumb and blind and probably a far leftard for sure.

More from Senator Graham (who isn’t one of my favorites BTW):

“The court is telling the administration go back to the Congress, work with the Congress,” Graham said.

“I intend to sit down with the administration … to come up with a process that holds terrorists accountable, to give them a fair trial, but to make sure that if they did do the things that we’re alleging, they’re fairly punished,” he said.

“Every enemy prisoner, terrorist, is entitled to be tried in a military commission format, not civilian format.”

Uncivilized animals, terrorists, don’t deserve a civil trial.

Democratic Senator Jack Reed told Fox News that the minority Democrats are likely to cooperate with Republicans and the White House to pass the legislation enabling detainee trials.

“This has to be a process where we understand and recognize that we have to have a legitimate procedure — legitimate in the eyes of the court, legitimate in the eyes of the American people, that we can move quickly to try these individuals and do justice,” Reed said.

We’ll see…I can’t imagine the Democrats doing anything less that what is right here. But then again…look who is holding those offices (Harry Reid, John Kerry…Murtha)

…Graham said he disagreed with the court’s “breathtaking” ruling that Guantanamo prisoners had to be treated fairly based on Article III of the Geneva Conventions, holding that stateless fighters like members of Al-Qaeda don’t deserve Geneva protections.

“The question for this country is, should Al-Qaeda members who do not sign up to the Geneva Convention, who show disdain for it, who butcher our troops, be given the protections of a treaty they’re not part of?” he said.

“My opinion, no. They should be humanely treated, but the Geneva Convention cannot be used in the war on terrorists to give the terrorists an opportunity to basically come at us hard without any restrictions on how we interrogate and prosecute,” Graham argued.

Exactly. This is what it is. Can we afford to keep these terrorists in legal limbo for years- yes- if that’s what it takes to keep them away from our streets and away from the battlefields. Far left voices will scream about this because they see the detainees as human beings who have rights. I see the detainees as terrorists who should be shot. Congress, the President and the courts will come to a position somewhere in between. THAT’s checks and balances.

Cross Posted @ ARS

1 Comment »