I protest.

Surprise, surprise.

Victor has a short piece at his blog Balasubramania's Mania quoting this Washington Post story. The story is about the unsealing yesterday of a hearing transcript in the case of Mohamed Atriss, who was falsely accused of being a terrorist. It seems that the allegations that were "so sensitive that they had to be kept from Atriss despite his constitutional right to confront evidence against him" was based on inaccurate information, that could have been easily rebutted if Atriss and his lawyer had been allowed to see it.

"We are glad to expose these transcripts for what they are -- slanderous, hearsay, double- and triple-hearsay, unsubstantiated allegations," said attorney Miles Feinstein, with Atriss at his side in his law office. "It illustrates the dangers and irreparable harm that comes from secret evidence."

This is the classic problem with this kind of secret evidence. The evidence was garbage, but no one could know that because it was kept secret. And, of course, the claim that this evidence was "sensitive" was simply absurd.

Now, put this situation together with the revolting policy of trying non-citizens in military tribunals. Even worse, the only oversight or review of the results of these tribunals will be by Donald Rumsfeld. And, I assume, George W. Bush, who is certainly a man I would not want reviewing my case.

To say that this situation is vile is insufficient. It shouldn't be happening. Secret allegations and military tribunals are features of a tyranny, of fascism, not of a free democracy.