"The prison that will never disappear" the editorial in the New York Times sounds like an admission of failure. "The prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, has long been the epitome of arrogance and lawlessness of the Bush era, and Barack Obama has raised the hopes of millions of people around the world when, in 2008 he has campaigned around the promise to shut up.
Monday, this promise has been reduced to dust, victim of congressional cowardice and inability to capture Obama's political support for moral quagmire created by his predecessor. " On Monday, the U.S. president has ordered the lifting effect, after a hiatus of two years, suspension of military trials of detainees suspected of terrorism and supervised by an order of indefinite detention of 47 Guantanamo detainees - the 172 who are still in prison (Article Subscribers edition).
A member of the administration, however, assured that Mr. Obama is determined to close the Guantanamo prison and prosecute terrorism suspects in U.S. federal courts. As argued by the Los Angeles Times, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the alleged mastermind of the attack in 2000 against a U.S. destroyer in Yemen, which killed 17 sailors, might be the first Guantanamo detainee to be tried before a military tribunal under the Obama administration.
"Obama reneging on his promise?" As the Christian Science Monitor. The U.S. press unanimously affirmed. Dana Miliband, the Washington Post, ironically on the "formative moment" in the career of Barack Obama. "He began his presidency with a promise to close Guantanamo within a year. After a few months, he realized that was impossible.
And now he has actually formalized the prison policy of George W. Bush, "he said. "In a sense, Monday's announcement was an acknowledgment that Obama has set expectations unrealistically high during his campaign and early in his tenure," he summarizes. Lapidary, Fox News erects the volte-face political style of Obama: "At Guantanamo, Libya and gas, Obama says one thing and does the opposite." This decision, however, was "inevitable", moderates the New York Times, after the vote by Congress in December of a ban on transfer trials in the U.S..
"A notorious act of cowardice", describes the daily, which states that this prohibition makes it virtually impossible for the release of prisoners to third countries. As long as this prohibition is in force, says Time, inmates remain at "Gitmo" forever. And, if one judges by the composition of Congress, the New York Times adds, "it is likely that the prison remains a scar on the conscience of the nation for years." If the Los Angeles Times regrets in his editorial, a decision which "maintains the status quo at Guantanamo," the editorial in the Washington Post sees him as "both a confession of failure and a step in the right direction ".
The decree signed Monday by Obama to provide detainees at Guantanamo significant legal protections to prevent unwarranted detention. The New York Timessalue and "improvements", like the prisoners followed by an independent panel, access to legal representation and the prohibition of torture and other forms of inhumane treatment.
Some lawyers believe that some detainees could be released as quickly. Daphne Eviatar, associated with the Law and Security Program at Human Rights First, for its part, the Huffington Post, that these procedures were "troubling aspects of the procedure for examination used in Afghanistan." If the military commissions have been significant improvements in 2009, as noted by the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times put this forward.
In its editorial, the Daily Californian feels that "the problem with military commissions is as much symbolic as substantive. As Guantanamo itself, a trial before a military body will be perceived as illegitimate in most of the world." "On the stroke of a pen," said Tom Parker, Amnesty International, "Obama has destroyed any hope that the administration hand over the United States under the rule of law by referring cases of detainees Guantanamo to the federal courts rather than military commissions largely discredited.
" The Washington Post, these advances must be relativized in the sense that they should apply only to Guantanamo detainees and could be challenged by another president. The U.S. newspaper described as the "half-measures" that "endanger both civil liberties and the country's ability to conduct robustly its fight against terrorism." "The country could be much better served by a permanent legal framework authorizing the president to detain some terrorist suspects," the daily argues.
But organizations of human rights they are relieved, "said the New York Times that Obama has not passed a law on the subject, a decree is more easily repealed. Helen Salon 
Monday, this promise has been reduced to dust, victim of congressional cowardice and inability to capture Obama's political support for moral quagmire created by his predecessor. " On Monday, the U.S. president has ordered the lifting effect, after a hiatus of two years, suspension of military trials of detainees suspected of terrorism and supervised by an order of indefinite detention of 47 Guantanamo detainees - the 172 who are still in prison (Article Subscribers edition).
A member of the administration, however, assured that Mr. Obama is determined to close the Guantanamo prison and prosecute terrorism suspects in U.S. federal courts. As argued by the Los Angeles Times, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, the alleged mastermind of the attack in 2000 against a U.S. destroyer in Yemen, which killed 17 sailors, might be the first Guantanamo detainee to be tried before a military tribunal under the Obama administration.
"Obama reneging on his promise?" As the Christian Science Monitor. The U.S. press unanimously affirmed. Dana Miliband, the Washington Post, ironically on the "formative moment" in the career of Barack Obama. "He began his presidency with a promise to close Guantanamo within a year. After a few months, he realized that was impossible.
And now he has actually formalized the prison policy of George W. Bush, "he said. "In a sense, Monday's announcement was an acknowledgment that Obama has set expectations unrealistically high during his campaign and early in his tenure," he summarizes. Lapidary, Fox News erects the volte-face political style of Obama: "At Guantanamo, Libya and gas, Obama says one thing and does the opposite." This decision, however, was "inevitable", moderates the New York Times, after the vote by Congress in December of a ban on transfer trials in the U.S..
"A notorious act of cowardice", describes the daily, which states that this prohibition makes it virtually impossible for the release of prisoners to third countries. As long as this prohibition is in force, says Time, inmates remain at "Gitmo" forever. And, if one judges by the composition of Congress, the New York Times adds, "it is likely that the prison remains a scar on the conscience of the nation for years." If the Los Angeles Times regrets in his editorial, a decision which "maintains the status quo at Guantanamo," the editorial in the Washington Post sees him as "both a confession of failure and a step in the right direction ".
The decree signed Monday by Obama to provide detainees at Guantanamo significant legal protections to prevent unwarranted detention. The New York Timessalue and "improvements", like the prisoners followed by an independent panel, access to legal representation and the prohibition of torture and other forms of inhumane treatment.
Some lawyers believe that some detainees could be released as quickly. Daphne Eviatar, associated with the Law and Security Program at Human Rights First, for its part, the Huffington Post, that these procedures were "troubling aspects of the procedure for examination used in Afghanistan." If the military commissions have been significant improvements in 2009, as noted by the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times put this forward.
In its editorial, the Daily Californian feels that "the problem with military commissions is as much symbolic as substantive. As Guantanamo itself, a trial before a military body will be perceived as illegitimate in most of the world." "On the stroke of a pen," said Tom Parker, Amnesty International, "Obama has destroyed any hope that the administration hand over the United States under the rule of law by referring cases of detainees Guantanamo to the federal courts rather than military commissions largely discredited.
" The Washington Post, these advances must be relativized in the sense that they should apply only to Guantanamo detainees and could be challenged by another president. The U.S. newspaper described as the "half-measures" that "endanger both civil liberties and the country's ability to conduct robustly its fight against terrorism." "The country could be much better served by a permanent legal framework authorizing the president to detain some terrorist suspects," the daily argues.
But organizations of human rights they are relieved, "said the New York Times that Obama has not passed a law on the subject, a decree is more easily repealed. Helen Salon
- A Look Inside Guantanamo Bay (10/03/2011)
- Obama Ends Ban On Military Trials At Guantanamo (08/03/2011)
- Guantánamo Bay: A Rare Peek Inside The Notorious Detention Center (VIDEO) (10/03/2011)
- VIDEO: Rare glimpse inside Guantanamo Bay (08/03/2011)
- Obama signs off on indefinite detention for Guantanamo detainees (08/03/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment