It now appears that, with the building of a new detention facility in Guantanamo, Dubya & Co. don’t plan to ever try the “detainees” in custody for their crimes. The administration won’t call the men in custody prisoners of war, because then they would be legally obliged to send them home after the war in Afghanistan ends (if it ever does).

That’s fine. I think there’s strong reason to believe that these folks are dangerous and would pose a future terrorist threat. After all, they were captured fighting as members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban, right? That seems to be prima facie evidence that each is guilty of criminal conspiracy in the Sept. 11 murders or, at least, obstruction of justice in trying to stop capture of Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders.

If these prisoners are so obviously guilty and so patently dangerous, why would 12 men and women have difficulty in finding them guilty and legitimize the imprisonment they are now suffering without the courtesty of a trial? On the other hand, if the U.S. government fears that 12 men and women would find the evidence of their guilt lacking, how can we in good conscience continue to keep these folks locked up? Is the supposed evidence just the hearsay of the U.S. government? I sure hope not.

This could have far-reaching consequences, setting a precedent for future cases of imprisonment without trial, so long as the U.S. executive declares the country to be at war. Jeez, it doesn’t even require an official declaration by Congress.