"Enemy Combatants" at Gitmo aren't

[greenman3610]

DIGGING INTO GUANTANAMO....I'm quite late getting to last week's National Journal cover story about the prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay, but thanks to Jon Henke at QandO I've now figured out how many separate articles there are (four) and how they relate to each other. Taken together, they tell a chilling story.

The basic message from these four pieces is that the evidence against an awful lot of the Guantanamo prisoners isn't just weak, it's known to be flatly false. For example, here's an account of Mohammed al-Tumani, a prisoner who was lucky enough to be assigned a "personal representative" who discovered that his primary accuser was a busy man indeed:
(http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2006/0203nj4.htm)

Tumani's enterprising representative looked at the classified evidence against the Syrian youth and found that just one man — the aforementioned accuser — had placed Tumani at the terrorist training camp. And he had placed Tumani there three months before the teenager had even entered Afghanistan. The curious U.S. officer pulled the classified file of the accuser, saw that he had accused 60 men, and, suddenly skeptical, pulled the files of every detainee the accuser had placed at the one training camp. None of the men had been in Afghanistan at the time the accuser said he saw them at the camp.

The tribunal declared Tumani an enemy combatant anyway.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[Katherine Brengle]

1. How can this keep getting WORSE??????? n/t

[tocqueville]

2. They are worse than the Nazis

at least those kicked out the guy if he wasn't the one they were looking for. Because they were efficient.
You cannot explain the behaviour of those Gitmo officers by anything else than criminal incompetence beside racism. America won't be free again until she sends these criminals to the Hague.