- WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President
Bush signed an order on Tuesday that would allow the U.S. military to set
up special courts to try foreigners accused in the Sept. 11 attack and
similar assaults, a White House official said.
-
- The military order gives Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld the authority to establish the tribunals, White House counsel
Al Gonzales told Reuters. The order does not name anybody who would be
subject to prosecution in the military courts and does not apply to Americans,
he said.
-
- ``The president would make a separate independent finding
that someone was a member of a terrorist organization like al Qaeda and
that it was in the interests of the United States that the person be prosecuted,''
Gonzales said. ``That person would then be delivered to the secretary of
defense who would take control of the individual.''
-
- Gonzales said the order gave the president an option
and an additional tool other than civilian courts for bringing to justice
those directly responsible for attacks like the Sept. 11 assaults on New
York and Washington.
-
- ``The president thinks it can be a helpful option now
in bringing al Qaeda suspects to justice,'' White House spokesman Ari Fleischer
told reporters.
-
- The United States has blamed Saudi-born militant Osama
bin Laden and his al Qaeda network for the suicide plane assaults that
killed more than 4,500 people.
-
- Gonzales, a former Texas Supreme Court judge who is the
president's top lawyer, said a military commission could have advantages
over a civilian court. He said it was easier to protect sources and methods
of investigation in military proceedings. Also, a military trial could
be held overseas.
-
- Justice Department spokeswoman Mindy Tucker said: ``These
are obviously extraordinary times and the president wants to have as many
options available to him as possible. This particular option does not preclude
any Department of Justice options that might also be available.''
-
- There was precedent for the military tribunals, Gonzales
said, citing the trial of eight German saboteurs during World War Two.
He said the system also had been used in the 19th century in the U.S. Civil
War and the Mexican War.
-
- Bush signed the order before leaving Washington for his
ranch in Crawford, Texas.
-
-
- Comment
-
-
- Drumhead Courts Martial - Part 1
From http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/marketthoughts
11-14-1
-
- Bush Orders Terror Trials By Military Courts
-
- By Ron Fournier
AP White House Correspondent
Tuesday, November 13, 2001
-
- WASHINGTON - President Bush signed an order Tuesday that
would allow for the trial of people accused of terrorism by a special military
commission instead of civilian courts, The Associated Press has learned.
The order, signed by Bush before he left for Crawford, Texas, gives the
Bush administration another avenue to bring the Sept. 11 terrorists to
justice, said White House counsel Albert Gonzales. "This is a new
tool to use against terrorism," Gonzales said in a telephone interview.
The White House was to release the order late Tuesday. ___
-
- Welcome to Drumhead Courts martial. It's a 'new tool'.
Oh goody. The implication that 'new tool' means good, that 'new tool' means
consistent with our Constitutional rights which they SWORE to uphold.
There is ALWAYS an excuse why taking away our rights is 'necessary' for
some reason. In the name of security. In the name of this, in the name
of that. "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin.
-
- Trials for accused in a civilian court is an ESSENTIAL
LIBERTY. In as cut and dried a manner as I can muster, I can truly say
that what is left of 'america' neither DESERVES safety NOR Liberty. Our
'leaders', and I GAG when I call them that, have abandoned our Constitutional
rights in the name of 'security.' "Where liberty dwells, there is
my country." - Benjamin Franklin
-
- This is NOT "MY" country. No liberty dwellin'
here. I have repeatedly written that what we have is a complete bastardization
of the Constitution. Every step of government that does not have the HIGHEST
regard for liberty is to consolidate and wield more power, more force.
Nothing could be MORE evident than the new Drumhead Court Martial law.
-
-
- Drumhead Courts Martial - Part 2
-
- This is one of the darkest days I have ever seen in my
life.
-
- Perhaps you are historically unaware, but in a civilian
court, the presumption of innocence applies. This is NOT true of a military
tribunal. in a military tribunal you are PRESUMED guilty. You must PROVE
your innocence.
-
- In 'military' situations they do not have the time and
the luxury to stop what they were doing an conduct a full scale trial of
the accused with all the amenities. They were in a serious situation. For
the good of the service, discipline and morale, they had to get on with
it and over with it in a hurry. It was considered 'better' that a innocent
man be punished in THAT environment than to allow the effects on the military
of a guilty man going free. In fact, the more punishment meted out, the
better, as far as they were concerned because of the chord it struck with
the troops and the message it sent. Don't even THINK about being accused
of anything much less do something to be accused of. Liberty was NOT as
important as security, discipline or morale. There is no liberty in the
military. You do what you are told when you are told or you are EXECUTED.
-
- And now our liberty is removed from us.
-
- For the chief magistrate of the US to say that any citizen
accused of terrorism is now to be handled in a forum that PRESUMES guilt
is the most basic violation of all our rights.
-
- This is tyranny. NAKED, unvarnished, in-your-face tyranny.
-
- But it was OK for our forefathers to rebel against it
but not us. If we rebel over something FAR more serious we are seditious.
They were HEROES we would be traitors.
-
- Liberty can NOT be preserved by its suspension. When
your liberty is 'suspended' how do you get it back unless they give it
back?
-
- Is our liberty contingent upon when THEY decide we should
have it or is it the GIFT OF GOD?
-
- http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23566-2001Nov13.html
|