The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Details of Lives in an American Limbo,” condenses 700 classified military documents about the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba into just a few poignant vignettes, but it makes its case in a striking way: decisions about who gets released and who doesn’t are arbitrary and often based on factors beyond the prisoners’ control.

The documents, a new trove of classified material from Wiki Leaks, are perhaps even more troubling than some of the diplomatic cables released just a month or two ago. They show some prisoners — with the exact same background as those who have been previously returned to their home country — still imprisoned because they come from Yemen, and the United States does not trust that nation to properly monitor them. They show soldiers who traveled to Afghanistan prior to September 11 swept up nevertheless as Al Qaeda sympathizers. They show shepards arrested based on either false intelligence or revenge by tribal leaders.

Meanwhile, the remaining prisoners in Guantanamo seem to be stuck there for an indefinite time period, with no trial, not even a military tribunal, because the evidence obtained from them was either illicitly procured by unacceptable techniques or is just fragmentary to begin with.

What a mess.

The lead article in today’s New York Times is titled, “U.S. Drops Plan for a 9/11 Trial in New York City.” It describes a reversal by the Obama administration on holding the trial of 9/11 masterminds in criminal court in Manhattan.

The change in decision came after Mayor Bloomberg changed his mind about the event, in turn influenced by the  plans presented by the New York City police commissioner, Raymond Kelly. Kelly had described a plan with multiple checkpoints, snipers on the roofs, etc., at a cost of up to $1 billion.

But, reading between the lines, the real problem came down to another form of money; the real estate agents for downtown had become extremely concerned about the fate of their businesses and the ability to lease downtown during the course of the trial, which could take years. It was their complaints and pressure that seemed to start the anti-trial ball rolling.

Of course, this just represents another form of NIMBY politics — not in my backyard. Many of these people are all for a non-military trial, just so long as they don’t have to deal with any of the repercussions. Trial at a military base may represent a possible alternative instead of the heart of Manhattan.

In any case, these terrorist trials and Guantanamo seem easy to resolve in terms of our values; it’s just the details that are slowing things down.

President Obama’s approach to terrorism is like the triage you see on the battlefield when health facilities are overwhelmed by incoming wounded. Today’s lead story in The New York Times, “Obama Would Move Some Terror Detainees to U.S.,” describes his pragmatic approach to what he referred to as a mess left by the Bush administration. Just like triage, not all of the detainees can be treated alike. Some are eligible, and deserve, full justice in a United States court of law. Others require military commissions to protect sensitive national security information. And a third group can’t be convicted of any crime because of lack of evidence, but to release them would engender their return to a jihad against our nation.

The problem with a triage, pragmatic approach, is that it does not satisfy the noisy voices on both the left and right side of the spectrum. The ACLU, while it has been in the forefront of many noble causes, seems unable to pursue a middle course of moderation on just about any issue. And, of course, most of the country has already rejected the platitudes of the right. Sometimes, it seems they forget that they LOST the last election.

The situation will probably continue to play out in the same manner. Members of Congress may not be happy, but we must hope the American people see the wisdom of the situation.

The recent report about 1 in 7 detainees rejoining the jihad after they were released from Guantanamo has fueled a vigorous debate between civil rights groups and many members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans alike. According to today’s lead story in The New York Times, titled, “1 in 7 Detainees Rejoined Jihad, Pentagon Finds,” the report, still to be officially released by the Pentagon, asserts this statistic based on 534 prisoners already transferred abroad.

To further inflame matters, the Senate voted, 90-6, to cut $80 million requested by President Obama to close the prison. Mr. Obama is scheduled to speak further on the matter today.

So it seems that this prison, that never should have been opened in the first place, because it goes against the very values that made this nation great, and denigrates us in the eyes of the rest of the world, is becoming a little inconvenient to get rid of. Once we transported all these captives from the Arab World to our hemisphere, we are confronted with them remaining in our hemisphere, albeit in a federal penitentiary.

And the NIMBY argument has kicked in with full force. No one wants a terrorist in their backyard, even if he is locked up in maximum security. Unfortunately, the only way we are going to get rid of the blight of Guantanamo, will involve doing just this. It is an ironic form of justice for the way we have treated these human being, yes, even terrorists are human being and need to be treated with a certain amount of dignity, including a fair trial and the right of habeas corpus. Because that’s what we believe, and that’s what separates us from them. Even if it has become a little inconvenient.