-Caveat Lector-

WJPBR Email News List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peace at any cost is a Prelude to War!

CONGRESS ACTION: December 2, 2001

=================

TERROR TRIALS: Senate democrats are confirming Bush judicial nominees at a
rate significantly slower than prior administrations, according to the
Congressional Research Service. Despite democrat whining over slow
confirmations during the Clinton years, Clinton-appointed judges dominate the
federal bench, accounting for more active federal judges than Reagan, Bush
senior, and G.W. Bush combined. "The longer they can keep Bush's judges off
the bench, the more mischief those liberal activist judges can make", says
Thomas Jipping of the Free Congress Foundation.

"What Democrats have done..is try to thoroughly politicize the confirmation
process. Thus, in June, and again in early September, they held hearings not
on the nominations but on whether nominees should have to pass an ideological
litmus test, made up by Democrats, before being confirmed. What's the point
of having judges hear cases on abortion, gun control, or affirmative action
if you're going to decide those cases, in effect, during the Senate
confirmation process? To listen to the Democrats, judges should decide cases
not on the facts and the law but on the basis of their ideology. That's the
death of the rule of law." -- Roger Pilon, at the Cato Institute.

But Democrat Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee, has other things to do beside starting to restore the rule of law
and hold hearings on judicial nominees. Many of Bush's judicial nominees
haven't even had a committee hearing yet, let alone a Senate vote on
confirmation. Instead, this week Leahy's committee began hearings to showcase
criticism of the military tribunals established by Bush's Military Order of
November 13, 2001, "Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens
in the War Against Terrorism". Leahy's complaint that Congress wasn't
consulted about the tribunals, or the other law enforcement activities that
he objects to, is completely without merit. Leahy himself approved those
activities, by voting for Senate Joint Resolution 23 -- as did every other
democrat on his committee.

The November 13, 2001, Military Order is explicitly limited to "any
individual who is not a United States citizen", and "that such individual.is
or was a member of the organization known as al Qaida; has engaged in, aided
or abetted, or conspired to commit, acts of international terrorism, or acts
in preparation therefor, that have caused, threaten to cause, or have as
their aim to cause, injury to or adverse effects on the United States.; or
has knowingly harbored one or more individuals" who fit that description. The
trial procedure is set out in the Military Order: they ".may be punished in
accordance with the penalties provided under applicable law, including life
imprisonment or death"; the trials "shall at a minimum provide for.a full and
fair trial, with the military commission sitting as the triers of both fact
and law; admission of such evidence as would.have probative value to a
reasonable person; in a manner consistent with the protection of information
classified or classifiable; conviction only upon the concurrence of
two-thirds of the members of the commission; sentencing only upon the
concurrence of two-thirds of the members of the commission," and the trials
shall be subject "for review and final decision by [the President] or by the
Secretary of Defense."

Conservative columnist William Safire (in a seriously over-wrought editorial)
wrote, ".the President of the United States has just assumed what amounts to
dictatorial power.". And in a startling insult to the military, ".we are
letting George W. Bush get away with the replacement of the American rule of
law with military kangaroo courts." Safire's alternative? ".turn [bin
Laden's] cave into his crypt." So for all of Safire's hysteria about
"kangaroo courts", Safire proposes to dispense with trials altogether! If bin
Laden tries to surrender, Safire says that we should refuse to accept
surrender without what he calls a "policy of universal surrender: all of al
Qaeda or none." The instantaneous and simultaneous surrender of every member
of al Qaeda around the world would clearly be impossible, even if bin Laden
desired it, so Safire's doctrine can thus be simply stated -- no surrender,
no trial, simply have him killed.

The New York Times claims that "American civilian courts have proved
themselves perfectly capable of handling terrorist cases without overriding
defendants' basic rights." Where the Times thinks that a non-citizen
terrorist, caught and brought to trial outside the U.S., gets those "basic
rights", is unstated, and since the Constitution obviously does not apply to
non-citizens captured and dealt with overseas during wartime, it would be
interesting to know exactly what the Times thinks those "basic rights" are.
But the globalists at the Times, and elsewhere, have a (predictable)
solution: Bush "should ask the United Nations Security Council to establish
an international tribunal.". Which would be an even greater mockery of
justice than our own civilian courts have become. The unfortunate reality is
that, in our justice system, justice often takes a back seat to left-wing
victimology, racial demagoguery, and courtroom theatrics.

It is clear that anti-Bush and anti-Ashcroft venom is the key motivation for
many critics of the military tribunals. The Washington Post wrote, "Yet
Ashcroft, a staunch conservative whose views almost cost him the appointment
as attorney general, is unbowed." Left-wing extremists did their best to
defeat Ashcroft's confirmation with ugly innuendo and smears, and they are
still angry that he hasn't learned his lesson to be appropriately servile to
left-wing ideologues. And many of those ideologues aren't about to unite for
the good of a country they obviously hate. At the currently ongoing State of
the Black World Conference in Georgia (one goal of which is to "Intensify the
global movement for reparations for people of African descent"), the
Washington Times reported an exhortation from Jesse Jackson to return control
of Congress to democrats in 2002, so "Maxine Waters becomes a number one
congressional leader.and we can put on trial the Ashcroft contingent." A
trial, Jackson wants, not for terrorists who killed thousands of Americans,
but for John Ashcroft for trying to stop more deadly attacks. Regarding the
new-found patriotism of most Americans, the Washington Times reported
Atlanta's mayor as saying, "we understand we are not part of that." What he
says black Americans "are not part of" is the very Constitutional system that
made him mayor of a major American city. If he rejects that Constitutional
system, what does he propose to replace it with?

President Bush summed up the need for military tribunals best when he said
simply, "I think the president needs to have the powers necessary to conduct
a war." On September 20 Bush addressed Congress, the nation, and the world:
"On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against
our country." But then he failed to demand that the Congress issue a formal
Declaration of War. Had he done so at that time, there is no question that
the Congress would have swiftly obliged. But it was a fleeting opportunity,
and Bush failed to seize it, and so we are waging an undeclared war, with
rising hysteria over military tribunals and the alleged civil rights of
global terrorists.

Military tribunals were widely used during the Revolutionary War. During the
Civil War, Confederate soldiers found behind Union lines in disguise were
tried and convicted as spies by military commissions. During World War Two,
military tribunals were used to try German saboteurs (one of whom was an
American citizen) landed in this country by submarine, which gave rise to the
premier Supreme Court decision in this area, Ex Parte Quirin (317 U.S. 1),
decided October 29, 1942. In Quirin the Court distinguished between lawful
and unlawful combatants: "Lawful combatants are subject to capture and
detention as prisoners of war by opposing military forces. Unlawful
combatants are likewise subject to capture and detention, but in addition
they are subject to trial and punishment by military tribunals for acts which
render their belligerency unlawful. .enemy combatant who without uniform
comes secretly through the lines for the purpose of waging war by destruction
of life or property, are familiar examples of belligerents who are generally
deemed not to be entitled to the status of prisoners of war, but to be
offenders against the law of war subject to trial and punishment by military
tribunals." Going even further than the Bush Military Order, the 1942 Quirin
Supreme Court also applied this rule to U.S. citizens: "Citizenship in the
United States of an enemy belligerent does not relieve him from the
consequences of a belligerency which is unlawful because in violation of the
law of war." Any of the hate-America left who still sympathizes with
terrorists and who act to subvert this nation from within should take note.

The Supreme Court in Quirin noted the formal declaration of war between the
United States and the German Reich, and stated, "The Constitution thus
invests the President as Commander in Chief with the power to wage war which
Congress has declared, and to carry into effect all laws passed by Congress
for the conduct of war.and all laws defining and punishing offences against
the law of nations, including those which pertain to the conduct of war." The
Court observed that President Roosevelt "has undertaken to exercise the
authority conferred upon him by Congress, and also such authority as the
Constitution itself gives the Commander in Chief, to direct the performance
of those functions which may constitutionally be performed by the military
arm of the nation in time of war."

In the present situation there was no formal Declaration of War. But in the
language of Quirin, Bush is in fact carrying "into effect all laws passed by
Congress for the conduct of war"; and there has been "authority conferred
upon him by Congress"; specifically House Joint Resolution 64, passed 420 to
1 on September 14, and Senate Joint Resolution 23, passed 98 to 0 on the same
day, both of which authorize the President "to use all necessary and
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he
determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks
that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or
persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism
against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons." But the
president didn't seek a Declaration of War, he simply declared a state of
national emergency. And that might not be good enough for the Supreme Court
to approve the use of military tribunals, especially a Supreme Court that has
been so roundly lambasted by left-wing extremists in the media, in academia,
and in the legal community, for one of its more recent decisions, a decision
that the left still refuses to accept and still, despite the war, tries in
every way they can to circumvent and undermine -- the case of George W. Bush
v. Albert Gore, Jr, December 12, 2000.

ANTHRAX MYSTERIES: The sources of most of the anthrax attacks remain unknown.
Amidst the real cases of anthrax attack there were quite a few cases that
were hoaxes, and some of those warped pranksters are currently being
prosecuted. But several cases remain very curious. Abortion clinics claimed
to have received over 200 letters containing suspicious white powder (none of
which was anthrax). Ashcroft has named an anti-abortion extremist as the
prime suspect in the hoax (which will make it harder for the radical left to
demonize Ashcroft as a zealot intent on shredding the Constitution, as they
try to claim due to the legal crackdown on terrorists). It was also reported
by Reuters that Bill Clinton received a package containing vials of
salmonella, prompting columnist Ann Coulter to write "Everyone wishes he'd
just go away and stop sending himself botulism out of anthrax envy." One
pathologist, commenting on the bioterror hoaxes, observed that the motives of
people perpetrating such hoaxes include mischief, a desire for attention,
profit, sending a political message, or sometimes, "they're just mentally
ill."

WRITER'S NOTICE: I gladly receive and respond to any comments and criticisms
readers care to make regarding the content of what I write every week in the
CONGRESS ACTION newsletter. But I do not open e-mail with attachments from
unknown senders, and e-mails containing attachments are automatically deleted.



FOR MORE INFORMATION.

========================

Free Congress Foundation: http://www.freecongress.org/

Military Order: "Detention, Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in
the War Against Terrorism": http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/eo/mo-111301.htm

Ex Parte Quirin (317 U.S. 1):
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=317&p

age=1

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Kim Weissman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



*COPYRIGHT NOTICE** In accordance with Title 17 U. S. C. Section 107,
any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use
without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for nonprofit research and educational
purposes only.[Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ]

Want to be on our lists?  Write at [EMAIL PROTECTED] for a menu of our lists!
Write to same address to be off lists!

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to