Skip to comments.
Bush Insisted Only He Should Decide Who Should Stand Trial Before Military Court
www.prnewswire.com (Thanks to Drudge) ^
| Nov. 18, 2001
| PRNewswire
Posted on 11/18/2001 1:30:37 PM PST by It'salmosttolate
Bush Insisted Only He Should Decide Who Should Stand Trial Before Military Court
Secret Legal Document Gave Bush Wartime Powers,
Including Holding Secret Tribunals
NEW YORK, Nov. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- After he signed an order allowing the use of military tribunals in terrorist cases, President George W. Bush insisted he alone should decide who goes before such a military court, his aides tell Newsweek. The tribunal document gives the government the power to try, sentence -- and even execute -- suspected foreign terrorists in secrecy, under special rules that would deny them constitutional rights and allow no chance to appeal.
(Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20011118/HSSA005 ) Bush's powers to form a military court came from a secret legal memorandum, which the U.S. Justice Department began drafting in the days after Sept. 11, Newsweek has learned. The memo allows Bush to invoke his broad wartime powers, since the U.S., they concluded, was in a state of "armed conflict." Bush used the memo as the legal basis for his order to bomb Afghanistan. Weeks later, the lawyers concluded that Bush would use his expanded powers to form a military court for captured terrorists. Officials envision holding the trials on aircraft carriers or desert islands, report Investigative Correspondent Michael Isikoff and Contributing Editor Stuart Taylor Jr. in the November 26 issue of Newsweek (on newsstands Monday, November 19).
The idea for a secret military tribunal was first presented by William Barr, a Justice Department lawyer -- and later attorney general -- under the first President Bush, as a way to handle the terrorists responsible for the 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. The idea didn't take back then. But Barr floated it to top White House officials in the days after Sept. 11 and this time he found allies, Newsweek reports. Barr's inspiration came when he walked by a plaque outside his office commemorating the trial of Nazi saboteurs captured during World War II. The men were tried and most were executed in secret by a special military tribunal.
TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: eo; gwot; militarytribunal; september12era
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 361-376 next last
To: rdavis84; madrussian; malarski; Askel5; GROUCHOTWO; Zviadist; kristinn; Free the USA...
#6
hehe! I remember that statement.
To: amundsen
We should have been under martial law from 9/11. Because of PC, the administration had to take a stealth approach. I'm glad at least that we are moving in the right direction. I think we can consider ourselves fortunate, if that is the right word, that it is most likely Saddam who controls the anthrax, and not OBL: he would not have had much motivation to hold back. That does at least give us some time to get our ducks in a row.
To: It'salmosttolate
Nice picture
To: Looking for Diogenes
If it were so easily and concisely defined, why wasn't a better job of same done in recent legislation, executive orders and general proclamations?
24
posted on
11/18/2001 2:10:01 PM PST
by
another1
To: Cultural Jihad
WTG, Bravo!
25
posted on
11/18/2001 2:11:04 PM PST
by
onyx
Comment #26 Removed by Moderator
To: Cultural Jihad
This thread demonstrates how dangerous it would be to have Libertarians in charge. On some issues, their naiveity is equal to that of liberals.
27
posted on
11/18/2001 2:16:32 PM PST
by
Azzurri
To: Looking for Diogenes
I would like to add that I'm not against military courts, in fact I think would be the best area to have one. The jurors are professionals that aren't going to be swayed like the ones at the OJ case, for example.
What I do have a problem with is if they are held in secret, which it sounds like they would like to do. That goes against what the US stands for: open and free justice for all.
28
posted on
11/18/2001 2:18:03 PM PST
by
lelio
To: Tabitha Soren
No, you're absolutely wrong. Anytime anyone in government uses powers no specifically granted them in the Constitution, it's a very big deal. Either the Constitution is the supreme law of the land or it's not. Bush just showed himself to be a Constitutional illiterate or a corrupt President. Take your pick.
29
posted on
11/18/2001 2:18:25 PM PST
by
Twodees
Comment #30 Removed by Moderator
Comment #31 Removed by Moderator
Comment #32 Removed by Moderator
To: Twodees
"Bush just showed himself to be a Constitutional illiterate or a corrupt President." How does using military tribunals for non-U.S. Citizen terrorists violate our Constitution, specifically?
Methinks thou dost protest too much...
33
posted on
11/18/2001 2:26:12 PM PST
by
Southack
Comment #34 Removed by Moderator
To: Tabitha Soren
How about going back a little further with your references to history, and read the Constitution and Bill of Rights?
To: lelio
They need to be held in secret because you don't want to have to tell, in open court, Ahmed that Usef turned him in along with the next three guys you're planning to attack next week.
These courts are for foreign agents trying to kill American citizens. These "defendants" have no rights as Americans, they are not Americans, they are armed enemies of Americans.
If you care about your "rights" as an American citizen, you should support the military that is protecting your most basic ones: life and freedom.
36
posted on
11/18/2001 2:26:37 PM PST
by
D-fendr
To: D-fendr
I do support the Military, so why is it that they are not protecting our borders right now?
Comment #38 Removed by Moderator
To: rdavis84
GWB is President is he not, and it will be a military court will it not? So who else should decide, daschle, clinton, the rats?
To: amundsen
What specifically are you asserting the Libertarians are wrong on? Blanket insults don't say much.
The fact that they are wringing their hands about the Bill of Rights and Constitution, which do not apply to foreign subversives. Our very survival is at stake.
40
posted on
11/18/2001 2:31:41 PM PST
by
Azzurri
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 361-376 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson