This is getting old. At every turn, it seems, the Obama administration has chosen to keep in place some noxious policy from his predecessor. The latest — following his decision earlier this week not to release photos of detainee abuse — is his decision to keep in place a version of President Bush’s military commissions.
Administration officials said they were making changes in the system to grant detainees expanded legal rights, but critics said the move was a sharp departure from the direction President Obama had suggested during the campaign, when he characterized the commissions as an unnecessary compromise of American values.
In a statement, Mr. Obama noted that the country had a long tradition of using military commissions, and said the changes would make the tribunals, to be used along with federal courts, a fairer avenue for prosecution. “This is the best way to protect our country, while upholding our deeply held values,” Mr. Obama said.
The commissions are run by the Pentagon under a 2006 law passed specifically for terrorism suspects, in part to make it easier to win convictions than in federal courts. The Obama administration suspended the military commission system in its first week in office.
The commissions, however, do not uphold our values so much as create a system that allows us to pretend we remain committed to a system of justice that puts the burden on the prosecution to prove its case while, all the while, ignoring that basic tenet.
Obama should have realized that he was driving down the wrong street on this one when he was praised by Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, of Kentucky,
who has issued daily criticisms of the president’s plan to close Guantánamo, called the move to revive the tribunals “an encouraging development.”
Then there is this even more troubling reaction from David B. Rivkin Jr., a former Reagan official, who
said the decision suggested that the Obama administration was coming to accept the Bush administration’s thesis that terror suspects should be viewed as enemy fighters, not as criminal defendants with all the rights accorded by American courts.
“I give them great credit for coming to their senses after looking at the dossiers” of the detainees, Mr. Rivkin said.
Accepting the Bush thesis? Is this the change for which Americans voted?
Hank Kalet 
No, this is NOT the change so many people voted for. I would add in one more campaign promise that is being broken as I type this — the promise to repeal the \”don\’t ask, don\’t tell\” policy. A Jon Stewart story hit the nail right on the head. While on the one hand officials claim we must use every available technique, i.e. torture to protect our national security, (something with which I totally disagree) since 1993 the military has ended the careers of 53 Arabic translators because they are homosexual (something else with which I totally disagree). President Obama refuses to intervene in the case of a Lieutenant Choi — recently informed by the military that he is fired because he is gay. This is not change. This is maintenance of bad policy. Where have you gone, a principled America? We must express our opposition loudly and consistently — regardless of who is in office!
I agree with the previous comments. I too, have been disappointed with some of Obama\’s decisions but the man has been in office for only 4 months, he inherited multiple massive problems including 2 wars and an economic Armageddon. The only other option was voting for McCain/Palin? That\’s no option at all. So I tend to want to cut Obama some slack. He\’s dealing with a horribly devious, sleazy, obstructionist GOP and a massive right wingnut faction that jump on every little thing that Obama does such as using mustard or shaking hands with Hugo Chavez. There are even crazies and loons who are promoting the story that Obama is not a citizen and was actually born in Kenya. Lots of sick puppies in this country. But we must complain loudly to our legislators and the Obama administration and hope they listen.
Hi Hank,2 shockers in about as many days. First the refusal to release the terror photos and now this.Extreme individuals need to be brought to justice by any means necessary. The freedom which is afforded to all law-abiding citizens is a product of doing what might not be popular but what is right for the U.S. and its interests. If the ACLU attorneys always had their way we would live in anarchy. A nation of people with their own individually-decreed laws.I may disagree with this political viewpoint but I am also a NJ resident who is a life-long Knicks fan 🙂 Thanks for sharing a great blog.Ryan
Speaking for the community of loons!\”promoting the story that Obama is not a citizen and was actually born in Kenya\”.Before you dismiss the assertion out of hand, perhaps you might ask TWO questions.Why not allow the State of Hawaii to release the original document?What is being hidden?Sorry, but politicians are not to be trusted. Either party. Ever! What\’s the Russian proverb? \”Trust, but verify.\” \”Lots of sick puppies in this country.\”No, I don\’t feel sick. Nor m I a puppy. I just think we are not being serious about holding folks accountable.In all likelyhood, I won\’t be here in forty or fifty years when the truth finally leaks out. I point to the FDR Pear Harbor truth that came out fifty years later. Just cause it sounds implausible, doesn\’t mean it\’s not true.Just ask yourself, why isn\’t the document public?
What truth about Pearl Harbor? Just more conspiracy theories and speculation. Hey, I have proof, I have documents that libertarians regularly beat their wives. Jaysus H. Christus, the Japanese were aggressive, militaristic, war making, war glorifying imperialists intent on ruling all of Asia. They were utterly ruthless, merciless and capable of horrible atrocities. People forget the Japanese invasion and rape (literally) of Nanking (1936-37) in which the Japanese brutally tortured and slaughtered about 300,000 Chinese. The Japanese engaged in mind boggling sadism and cruelty against innocent unarmed civilians. But that evil FDR forced the nice Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, they really didn\’t want to but FDR forced them to attack, it\’s all his fault and the Japanese were innocent victims of a devious plot.I\’ll grant that serious lapses and errors were made at Pearl Harbor prior to the attack but there are also historians who do not buy the conspiracy theory so the debate goes on.Germany declared war on us 4 or 5 days after the attack on P.H. Obama was born in Hawaii, the birth certificate was seen and photographed by factcheck.org and certified by Hawaiian officials. You don\’t think the GOP would have used this against Obama if there was an ounce of truth to it?
Point#1 The editors of Simon & Schuster/The Free Press published Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1999.FDR knew!Point#2FACTCHECKdotORG is a Democratic house organ. Hawaii has decline to release whatever documentation it has without Obama's approval. That approval has not been given. (Speculation is that it is not a birth certificate of a Hawaiian birth, but a \”record of live birth\” that was permissible at that time. It would NOT be evidence of being born IN Hawaii.) Two manipulated images were posted successively before being removed when they were pronounced as \”manipulated\”. No image was put up after the second one. (You could as of a month ago still see the images in the Internet Archive.)The Republicans had their own problems with McCain's birthplace. The legal basis of a Canal Zone birth was still open to challenge. Lot's of opinions, but no definitive court rulings. (IMHO they both just agreed to ignore the issue.)Sorry, but you're just not on firm ground. It could, of course, be put to rest in minutes, by Obama waiving privacy on the birth certificate. IF that's what it is?Again, the question is why?Why is it NOT being released?And, it ain't going to change. It's a legitimate question. The refusal to release the document asks and answers its own question!
cualva\”Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor\”by Robert B. Stinnett has been debunked. It is full of lies, distortions and plain old poor scholarship and lousy investigative practices.Why am I not surprised that a libertarian who hates government and who especially probably hates FDR would buy into the revisionist theories purporting that FDR provoked the attack on Pearl Harbor to get us into the war. Why didn\’t he provoke Germany into attacking the US? The Germans were easily provoked. Their submarines were off the NJ coast.It\’s mostly the FDR hating right wingers who want to destroy FDR\’s reputation who have promoted the FDR knew meme. A couple of liberals have bought into these revisionist conspiracy theories, namely Alexander Cockburn and Gore Vidal.There have been numerous commissions to study the Pearl Harbor debacle, one by Strom Thurmond (no fan of FDR) in 1995 and they came to the same conclusion, that it was a big screw up not a conspiracy.One factor that played into our lack of preparedness was racism. At that time, America was a very different country and we had very racist notions about the Japanese. There was a widespread attitude that the Japanese were incapable of such an attack. Most Americans felt that the Japanese were inferior and did not have the expertise to plan and execute such an attack.Paul Miles, Tomlinson Fellow in the History of War and Society at Princeton, has called the Pearl Harbor revisionist conspiracy theories a \”cottage industry.\” Factcheck.org is not liberal or Democratic. It has exposed some myths that are not favorable to Democrats or liberals.
Richard E. Young, RADM, USNR (Ret) on Stinnet\’s book, \”Day of Deceit\” :\”The remaining two major allegations, one being that the Japanese task force actually sent radio messages while on the way to Pearl, the other that many Japanese secret messages about the planned attack on Pearl Harbor were not only intercepted but were deciphered and translated before the attack, have already been discredited by experts in cryptology and radio communications, as well as by noted historians of Pearl Harbor, such as Gordon W. Prange and John Prados. An analysis of much of the research done by Stinnett and his quotes raise serious questions about the accuracy and relevance of many of his claims. Any serious student of Pearl Harbor needs to look carefully at Stinnett\’s research before concluding that he has really uncovered any thing new.\”