Evidence Faulted in Detainee Case - NYTimes.com:

With some derision for the Bush administration's arguments, a three-judge panel said the government contended that its accusations against the detainee should be accepted as true because they had been repeated in at least three secret documents.

The court compared that to the absurd declaration of a character in the Lewis Carroll poem "The Hunting of the Snark": "I have said it thrice: What I tell you three times is true."

And the response defending the earlier military decisions?

"This case displays the inadequacies of having civilian courts inject themselves into military decision-making," said Glenn M. Sulmasy, a law professor at the Coast Guard Academy and a national security fellow at Harvard.

You mean civilian courts expect there to be evidence?