Fruit and Poisoned Trees
Has President Bush immunized the men he calls the “worst of the worst” from being held accountable for their wrongdoing? Law Professor DAVID COLE of Slate Magazine, thinks so.
“It seems highly unlikely that these men—who include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of 9/11, as well as several other high-level al-Qaida leaders—can actually be brought to justice, precisely because of the way the CIA treated them….” writes Cole.
In other words, because they were tortured. Or sort of tortured. (It depends on whom you ask.) And the Supreme Court has long ruled that using “coerced testimony” to convict a defendant is a bigtime No No. The way out, of course, is to circumvent the the Supremes and the Constitution by making up brand new rules for trying these “worst of the worst” folks---plus anyone else who happens to have the bad fortune to be thought an “enemy combatant.”
There are, however, downsides to this strategy too, reports RENEE MONTAGNE for NPR’s Morning Edition, who found that the Pentagon’s lawyers think key parts of the Bush administration bill to create military tribunals for trying terror suspects is a dreadful idea---mainly because it violates international law.
The fact that the bill "explicitly states that no one can sue to enforce the protections of the Geneva Conventions or any other international protocol" might be the first clue that the legislation may be viewed as problematic by the rest of the world, writes EMILY BAZELON, also for Slate.