re: #780 iceweasel

That as far as I know is the plan. He’s being tried in criminal court precisely because we can convict him without resorting to evidence or testimony derived as a result of torture— thus sidestepping all those nasty issues about whether we did or did not torture, what constitutes torture, etc.

Ice - I have to disagree with you. The reasons for placing him through the civilian system are not as clear as you seem to imply. Nor were the statements both made at the time of the announcement nor in subsequent testimony so clear.

The evidence is not tainted by torture.

It is tainted by not making counsel available to the accused at the time of questioning and not warning the accused of self incrimination. There is also the question of warrants and search and seizure. Those are pretty much inviolable standards of the US civilian court system.

That taint of not extending the rights of the accused to KSM et al is significant. Perhaps we can assume that there is still enough clean evidence gathered after KSM was mirandized to convict.

OK - then what about Al Nishiri? Are we to assume (as you seem to infer) that there is not enough clean evidence for him? If that is the case, then how can we claim a high moral standard for rule of law if we are sending him to a court that (it is implied by that argument) doesn’t mind such taint?

If you want my opinion on it (none have asked, but what the hell?) the only compelling reason for Al Nashiri going to the Military Commissions is that the evidence collected on him is extremely sensitive regarding ongoing operations. The CIA Inspector General’s Report on Interrogation shows a higher concentration of redactions related to Al Nishiri’s intelligence cascade than to any of the other 2 who were waterboarded. Some have concluded from that fact that Al Nashiri must not have had much intelligence value. If that is the case, and if he is just a minro player then certainly he should get a civilian trial, shouldn’t he? Or could there be more at work? And could it be that both Obama and Holder see that and will maintain and use the Military Commissions system for largely the same reason that Bush did?

That last thought, I think, poses an existential issue for amny on the left that they are unwilling to confront. So they maintain a moralist narrative and then back the facts into it.