Justice vs. Bush

As the New York Times reports, a Federal Judge has just ruled that 17 Chinese Muslims being held at Guantanamo should be immediately released in America because of their innocence. Guantanamo of course has been the symbol of the illegal, immoral, and otherwise counterproductive policies that have been utilized by the Bush Administration in the ‘War on Terror’. But the following excerpt from the article really does shock the conscience:

The Uighurs, who were detained in Afghanistan in 2002, say they have never been enemies of the United States. They were cleared of suspicion in 2004, but they have remained in detention because of controversy over where they could go. They say they would be persecuted or killed if they were returned to China, but efforts to find a home for them have been complicated by fears in many countries of diplomatic reprisals from China.

My emphasis added. That an Administration would knowingly hold innocent people against their will, unconstitutionally, because its own policies had rendered them a potential risk if released, is unconscionable. That italicized sentence alone far surpasses any crimes committed by William Jefferson Clinton. Some day people will come after Bush, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, etc., for violating international and domestic laws. They will be called war criminals. On what grounds, I wonder, could they possibly be defended against such a charge?