God, I love freedom

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

Nowhere in the 6th amendment or anywhere else in our constitution does the disclaimer "*but not if the decider decides otherwise" appear. Nowhere in the text do I see the suggestion that the law can be bypassed by substituting the word "detainee" for accused or that any of the rights therein described as natural or inalienable are only things to be granted or denied by a sovereign Commander Guy. None the less that's what the Decider decides in this nation of Republistan Under God.

Lawyers defending Omar Ahmed Khadr have been told he can't have the right to know who is accusing him of war crimes. Khadr, being held at Guantánamo, may be the first of the "detainees" to come to trial, perhaps as soon as May, 2009. Speedy and public may be rather difficult properties to ascribe to this case which has dragged on for years and will be held mostly in secret, but at least he will have some kind of representation, hobbled as it must be by the peremptory decisions of the Decider.

The scary part is not that the the Constitution is only window dressing for George Bush's house of horrors, but that such things have become so routine they hardly grab the public's attention.
Of course we're talking about a military tribunal, the venue of convenience for our defenders of freedom. The concept of the natural rights of Man and uniforms don't blend together well which is why it's good for a Decider to have a war.

“Providing the witnesses’ true identities will add nothing to their testimony,” the prosecutors wrote in a legal filing revealed in the New York Times today. Nothing other than credibility or validity, that is. It's hard to imagine any kind of serious cross examination, but then America's love affair with fascism isn't something I understand either.