Might I recommend, after proper trials (or return to their homes if the 'evidence' has gone missing) for the accused a slow cruise down the “River Styx“?

I'm pretty sure there will be room for ALL the perpetrators of GITMO on this boat.

… it's not enough to say: if we let people go, they might kill Americans. That's what I call “cost analysis”: asking whether some alternative has costs, and if it does, deciding that we can't possibly adopt it, without asking whether it has benefits as well, and whether any proposed alternative is better. Of course requiring that the government be able to make a case against people it throws in jail has costs.

But those costs are exactly the same in the rest of the law. And it would amaze me if the number of Americans who were killed during the last decade as a result of our letting people accused of homicide go free did not exceed the number killed on 9/11. Should we conclude from this fact that we should stop asking the government to prove its case against suspected murderers?

http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2…

Bush's attitude of “I'm above the law, I can lock up anyone I want without evidence and if you don't like it, then tough” is how banana republics are run.