...or are the Salem witch trials about to begin again in Guantanamo?

Now before you write me off as just another looney liberal (you wouldn't be the first), hear me out.

The front page of The Wall Street Journal today carried the story of a woman in Connecticut who is petitioning to have her maternal ancestor cleared of the witchcraft charges that got her hanged in 1662. It seems that Mary Sanford was charged with "familiarity with Satan". (Don Rumsfeld should be grateful that he didn't live in New England in the 17th century).

There's a whole column here about the Puritans and the delights of living in a theocracy in colonial America but I'll save it for Thanksgiving.

The question before the court today however, is how did our forefathers manage to find enough evidence to try, convict and hang about 40 or so people (mostly women) in the early days of New England's history?

Answer. You were accused by someone else. And why would someone accuse you of a crime that was, even by the standards of the day, fairly specious? Easy. Witnesses were tortured until they "confessed" and gave up someone else.

We now fast forward to 2006. The United States is holding several hundred Muslim prisoners in Guantanamo, Cuba. Many have been in captivity since just after Sept. 11, 2001. (For the benefit of you Republicans, that's five years.) I suspect that the Bush administration was hoping that they would all either die of natural causes or throw a little Jim Jones kool-aid party and save America the trouble of deciding what to do with them.

No such luck. They are all still sitting there, praying to Mecca five times a day and reading old copies of Reader's Digest (I'll take the kool-aid, thank you).

World pressure is forcing George W and the rest of his band of imperialists to do something, anything. Even "Dead-eye" Dick Cheney knows that if we keep citizens of other countries locked-up forever, our allies will feel the need to protest.

The administration is terrified of open trails because then the circumstances of the prisoner's apprehension and incarceration would become public. Stories of men being swept off the streets of Frankfort or Istanbul and flown to Cairo for a little tete-a-tete with a few gentlemen who seem to have misplaced their copy of the Geneva Conventions, would be all over the front page of The New York Times. CIA operatives could be liable for civil or even criminal action. Echoes of "I was just following orders" would be ringing down the halls of courthouses everywhere.

What to do? What to do?

Hey, how about we get Congress to green-light tribunals instead of trials. Defendants don't get to see the evidence against them and all testimony, regardless of who was tortured to get it, is admissible. Oh, and it will all be done in secret. Brilliant!

This is an end-run that would have done Vince Lombardi proud. Skirting both the US Constitution and the Geneva Conventions, the Bush gang has proposed legislation creating a justice system that would make Saddam blush. And as an added bonus, they want a get-out-of-jail-free card for everyone in the CIA who has participated or will participate in any phase of these proceedings. Wow! What's next? The repeal of the fifth commandment?

Unfortunately for old George, his timing is way off. (Where is Karl Rove anyway?) The Congress (actually, it's the Senate) finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. Although the Republicans still have a majority, some of them are fighting for their lives (and their seats) back home. Still others (hold on to your hats, folks) actually have a conscience about condoning this disaster.

Way back in the fall of 2001 this bill would have sailed through Congress without opposition (and without anyone actually reading it). However, this is 2006 and, as the death toll of Americans in Iraq is quickly approaching the death toll in the Towers, attention is being paid. Lawmakers will be forced to run on their records and many of them are desperately trying to create space between themselves and the Executive branch.

Happily, the charge to defeat this bill is being led by a Republican; and no ordinary Republican. John McCain thinks that this legislation is bad business and he has allies, including Sen. Warner of Virginia and Sen. Graham of South Carolina (none of whom are up for reelection in 2006). Colin Powell, who has manfully avoided criticism of the administration in which he served, has written a letter to Congress opposing the Bush cabal. Expect to hear more from Colin soon.

In no danger of being "swift-boated", McCain is making life miserable for George & Co. in the armed services committee. He has an alternate plan which, at least, affords the accused the right to question the evidence used against him and how it was obtained. Although not drafted by the ACLU, the McCain bill at least acknowledges that the Geneva Conventions exist. The full Senate will get the McCain bill and, because the House has approved the Bush plan, the fur will begin to fly shortly.

I guess we should be grateful that the Bush folks at least acknowledged that a little buy-in from the legislative branch would be a good thing. However, based on their experience this week, it's a mistake they are not likely to repeat. Better to ask forgiveness than permission, right George?


What I will never understand is, how Americans can wear out their arms waving the flag and bragging about our constant defense of freedom, but, when the going gets tough, start chipping away at the very freedoms we profess to defend. You don't get to throw the Marquis of Queensbury rules overboard just because you get your nose bloodied.

If the prisoners in Guantanamo are guilty of anything (aside from just being Muslims) then we should have a trial and find out. The government's position that we would compromise our intelligence sources in a public trial is a crock. If our intel was so good, how did we get in this mess in the first place? Quo erat demonstrandum.

Case dismissed.