Military Commissions Must Obey President’s Directive, Official Says

Source: American Forces Press Services

Military Commissions Must Obey President’s Directive, Official Says
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Jan. 29, 2009 – The military commissions system created in 2006 to try accused terrorists held at the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, must comply with President Barack Obama’s directive to suspend all legal proceedings there, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said at a news conference today.

A reporter asked for Morrell’s reaction concerning news reports that say a military judge at Guantanamo today ordered that legal proceedings be continued against accused al-Qaida terrorist Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri.

Nashiri is charged with planning the Oct. 12, 2000, bombing of the U.S. Navy destroyer USS Cole that was berthed in Aden, Yemen. Seventeen U.S. sailors died as a result of the attack.

All legal proceedings at Guantanamo are “on hold,” Morrell said. A series of assessments and reviews of detainee operations at Guantanamo are now being conducted as part of Obama’s Jan. 22 executive order to shut down the detention facility within the year.

Read more: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=52880

Fucking hang the MF

Off with his head!

I would think that a judge in the military would know something so basic...

How would we feel if Bush ordered military judges to deliver only guilty verdicts?

They will be shutdown, but it will be done properly not by illegal directives a la Bush

in which the rule of law does not apply and the President can do anything he goddamn pleases, although...

1. We chose to make war on Iraq, for no good reason.

2. We chose to make war on Afghanistan, similarly for no good reason. (The Taliban offered to give us OBL--the Bushwhacks refused.)

And 3. The "war on terror" is a misnomer. Terrorist acts are a police problem, that has been turned into a "war" so that the President can do anything he goddamn pleases.

We are not going to be out of this permanent state of war and lawlessness any time soon. So, the President can order you detained without charges, on his own whim. You can remain in that state indefinitely. If you ever get freed from that state, you can try suing the President or others, and spend the rest of your life in more than likely fruitless legal battle with the government, or just try to forget it and get on with your life as best you can. And that's the best scenario. You could be "rendered" to another country. You could be 'disappeared.' All in the name of the "war on terror." Your librarian can be ordered to turn yours and everyone else's reading lists over to some agent of the federal government, and the librarian put under a 'gag order' that forbids her or him to say one word about it to co-workers, union reps, attorneys, spouses or anyone else, including judges, under pain of imprisonment. Further, although this President has disavowed torture, the President can nevertheless order "eyes only" torture, kept as a deep dark secret by members of our secret government--a secret "security" establishment that is completely unaccountable to you and me. These and other assaults on liberty--such as pervasive domestic spying--spying without even a FISA (secret court) warrant--can be conducted by the President or anyone else in government, or by private corporations, who will then be immunized against prosecution. These and many more violations of the Constitution are all now established by precedent, or by executive orders (both known and unknown) or by Congress in the Patriot Act or other 'laws.'

It may be that President Obama--a constitutional scholar, and in my opinion a good guy (as emperors go)--doesn't like all of this, and is genuinely trying to undo some of it, but, a) he may need to exercise extralegal powers (as with this tribunal judge) to restore the rule of law, which has been so grievously broken--extralegal powers in the sense of what would be acceptable in the Old Republic, and b) he may have limited power to undo his illegal powers, that is, the war profiteers and multinationals that rule over us want options of torture, unjust war, genocide, illegal detention, and illegal covert activities of many kinds, to continue, in order to pressure Obama to use them, when something comes up that is in their interest for the President to do, to continue an atmosphere of terror and uncertainty in the U.S. (and elsewhere), and to smash up our democracy forever more.

The tide of imperial power has been forced way, way over to the right, and off the cliff of nazism, and is only being pulled back a little bit. We should remain acutely aware of this, even if we can't do anything about it, at the moment. We should also be aware that Diebold & brethren can easily--EASILY!--deny Obama re-election in 2012, and the corpo/fascist media would go right along with it and cover it up, if Obama goes too far into trying to restore the rule of law. What we can do, to help the situation, is work hard at the state/local level to get rid of 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting, so that we can guarantee our elections to those who actually win them. As for dismantling the national security state, and dismantling the empire and the "military-industrial complex," and creating a more reasonable country and a real democracy, we have a long way to go.

As to the immediate issue--this tribunal judge who apparently intended to disobey the emperor...ahem, the President, and your response to it--the tribunals are a highly illegal and unconstitutional program, based on Bush's invention of the term "enemy combatant," under color of false legality, and they don't really fall under prior rules of what the President can order or not order. The program is outside the bounds of the Constitution, the Geneva Conventions and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. You are asking Obama to adhere to prior forms that Bush rendered irrelevant. So he must issue an unusual order to stop military legal proceedings that are outside the bounds of the law.

your ability to verbalize it never cease to amaze me.

Thank you once more.

Wat

That sort of thing is more a Bushism.

devised to fit the ad hoc detentions

When Bushco set up them, there was no established law or procedure

How do they suddenly become untouchable by the Executive?

These are a bastardized form of summary tribunals more akin to those found in military dictatorships.

of the president they will obey.

One, it is probably a good bet this colonel will have a helluva time getting his star any time soon; and

Two, is is also probably a good bet his next posting will not be in a tropical location.

It is indeed gratifying that the Pentagon acted so quickly on this. Hats off to Gates.

I'm sensing that there are some in the military who fail to grasp that.

Then post them in Alaska.... where they can see Russia.

2)really believe that the tortured out confessions are actually truthful

3)right wing fear mongering racists.

Of course, there has to be some autonomy for a judge; but if it's a matter of suspending operations, is that true? And if it's a matter of complying with the law regarding operations, it would seem to be the CiC's call.

And his argument for doing it is bullshit too. This is all showbiz, they are trying to spin the Mighty Wurlitzer up on Obama, but it ain't going to work this time.

The military judge is effectively outside the chain of command on judicial matters. He can be reassigned, retired, transferred, but the President or anyone else in the chain of command can not order what a judgment or ruling will be.

He tries to make it that, but he cannot. Watch and see.

The rest of the process can pretty well be stopped, but one in progress is more problematic.

The constitution and jurisdiction of the court is what is in question. If the court is found to be properly constituted and to have jurisdiction, then he would of course be allowed to proceed.

It is a hot topic with the rest of us

The military is part of the executive branch not the judicial branch. The military has very limited authority to act as judiciary and can be over ruled by all three branches of the government. The military, like Cheney is not a seperate branch of government.

The constitution specifically state that the President is Commander and Chief of all armed forces. He can not be usurped by any member of the military play acting as another branch of government.

Nice try skippy, no cigar. ;)

some people may not like the representative government of our republic, the separation of powers but, thats the system we have.

The executive branch can obey court orders at their discretion.

but with the military courts established under Bush, the President can do whatever he pleases. After all, there is nothing in the Constitution about enemy combatants, is there?