This Isn’t What The Supreme Court Had In Mind: Hasty Military Tribunals For Guantanamo Prisoners

A makeshift double-wide trailer is the “court,” and three anonymous military officers constitute the “judge and jury.”
Prisoners are not allowed proper representation by attorneys.
Translators seem to be provided, but they are not doing an adequate job. Prisoners who refuse to attend their tribunal hearing are sentenced in absentia.
But no one’s listening to what the prisoners have to say anyway. They are not allowed to know the names of anyone on the panel or see any of the “evidence” against them, because it’s classified.
The U.S. used to set the bar for humanitarian treatment of P.O.W.’s, now it’s setting the standard for modern day fascism.
This is not what the Supreme Court meant when it declared that “a state of war is not a blank check for the president,” and said that “enemy combatants” must be allowed to challenge their detention before a “judge” or “other neutral decision maker.” (Does anyone have the link to the decision itself?)
The Shrub Administration is arguing that the Supreme Court should reject the numerous petitions filed on behalf of Guantanamo prisoners because these military tribunals satisfy the Supreme Court’s requirements. But this quote from Guantanamo’s Captain Jamison proves beyond a reasonable doubt that these “administrative procedures” do not qualify as criminal courts:

Captain Jamison said the tribunals were administrative procedures and thus did not have to meet standards of regular criminal proceedings.

These are the kinds of conditions you used to hear about happening in third world countries — to Americans. These are the situations that the Geneva Convention was created to address. This is a travesty of Justice, to say the least.

Guant