Dreadnaught

The Georgetown Law Center on National Security and the Law has a great compendium on stores related to the Military Commissions and the detainees at Guantanamo Bay:

11/30/2008:  A round-up of today’s opinion pieces on Guantanamo:

• The New York Times features an op-ed by Jonathan Mahler in which he argues that the Obama administration will have to decide on how to define terrorism, perhaps moving beyond the unhelpful binary distinction between war or crime.
• The Boston Globe features an op-ed by Sabin Willet pointing out that of the 22 cases to go to any sort of adjudicatory proceedings, only one has resulted in a conviction.  Some, such as Attorney General Mukasey argue that this means we need new rules to prosecute terrorists.  Others would point out that something went very wrong in the detentions themselves.
• The Washington Times features a commentary by Michelle Malkin in which she expresses her disdain for the government’s attempt to lessen the injustice of continuing to hold the detainees at Guantanamo by pointing out how humane their treatment there is.
• The Washington Post features a second op-ed piece by Jack Cloonan and Sarah Mendelson in which they argue that preventative detentions, like indefinite detentions, have no place in a future legal regime to deal with suspected terrorists.

11/29/2008:  The Washington Post features an op-ed by Jack Cloonan and Sarah Mendelson in which they argue that would be unacceptable for the Obama administration to include in its closing of Guantanamo a continuation of the indefinite detentions, even for those considered too dangerous to release.  They write that our legal system is capable of handling these cases and that it is imperative to base the new legal regime for handling terrorist suspects on the rule of law, without exceptions.

Read more »