Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

WP: Top Military Lawyers Oppose Plan for Special Courts

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:30 AM
Original message
WP: Top Military Lawyers Oppose Plan for Special Courts
Top Military Lawyers Oppose Plan for Special Courts
By R. Jeffrey Smith
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 3, 2006; Page A11


"The United States should be an example to the world, sir," testified Maj. Gen. Scott C. Black, judge advocate general of the Army. (By Dennis Cook -- Associated Press)

The military's top uniformed lawyers, appearing at a Senate hearing yesterday, criticized key provisions of a proposed new U.S. plan for special military courts, affirming that they did not see eye to eye with the senior Bush administration political appointees who developed the plan and presented it to them last week.

The lawyers' rare, open disagreement with civilian officials at the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House came during discussions of proposed new rules for the use of evidence derived from hearsay or coercion and the possible exclusion of defendants from the trials in some circumstances....

***

The basis for the lawyers' concerns about administration policy, which they first articulated in private memos in 2002 and 2003 for top Defense Department political appointees, is that weak respect for the rights of U.S.-held prisoners eventually could undermine U.S. demands for fair treatment of captured U.S. service personnel.

"The United States should be an example to the world, sir," Maj. Gen. Scott C. Black, judge advocate general of the Army, told Sen. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) at the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. "Reciprocity is something that weighs heavily in all of the discussions that we are undertaking as we develop the process and rules for the commissions, and that's the exact reason, sir. The treatment of soldiers who will be captured on future battlefields is of paramount concern."...

***

Perhaps the sharpest point of disagreement concerned a provision that would allow a military judge to decide that classified evidence could be used at the trials by providing it to a military defense lawyer but not to defendants. Maj. Gen. Jack L. Rives, the Air Force's judge advocate general, said: "It does not comport with my ideas of due process for . . . defense counsel to have information he cannot share with his client." The other lawyers agreed with Rives....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
maseman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. This is great!
The military brass which usually will try to go along with policy makers in DC and the Pentagon civilians are voicing opposition. Shrub can't say he "listens" to his Generals while at the same time they are telling him to do something else.

These brass need to stick to their guns and do what they think is right. You know you are screwed as a President when your own military is starting to publically diagree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 04:50 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MrCoffee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
2. Dissent is the highest form of patriotism
Black and Rives, the very models of modern major generals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Well said, MrCoffee -- welcome to DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
4. If bush loses the military, it is all over.
We need to make sure people know of the proposed law and the danger it poses to our democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Julius Civitatus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
5. Cheney's mistake: not everyone want to be a fascist thug
The biggest mistake of Cheney and his merry band of chickenhawk neocons is that they believed everyone had their same twisted instincts, that anyone would just say yes to their dismantling of law and order.

Some folks like to follow the rules. Some folks, thankfully, still believe in a sense of law and order.

This development is great news, actually.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Amonester Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 04:49 AM
Response to Original message
6. Let's find a way to make sure Rumsfeld will not be able to force
Maj. Gen. Scott C. Black to retire and then find a another yes man like he always does since 2001.

Is there a way to do that? Alert John Murtha?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madrchsod Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
8. lawyers? we don`t need no stink`n lawyers!
since when did this government care about whether their actions were legal?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Oct 23rd 2014, 01:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC