Ahmed Ghailani, Gitmo detainee, acquitted of all but 1 charge in N.Y.

Not really sure how "good" this news is, nor how bad. But personally I feel that any case that has only the strength of torturous interrogations behind it, and relies upon confessions extracted over a 5 year period of incarceration without the benefit of counsel, or habeus corpus, has little to no merit.

Though it goes without saying that I abhor terrorism, it also needs to be said that I do not condone torture in any form. I feel it is against the Constitution. If an enemy combatant is captured in battle, he should be subject to a War Commission trial, carried out with expedience. If a jury trial is opted for, by the powers that be, then it should be carried out much in the way that this past one was conducted.

http://www.washingtonpost.com

"The court has not reached this conclusion lightly," Kaplan wrote, barring the testimony. "It is acutely aware of the perilous nature of the world we live in. But the constitution is the rock upon which our nation rests. We must follow it not only when it is convenient, but when fear and danger beckon in a different direction." The prosecution did not seek to introduce any statements Ghailani made to the CIA