The Congress Will Move On The Tribunal Issue
Or so wire report says ...
The US Congress is ready to craft legislation to prosecute Guantanamo war-on-terror prisoners after the government's plan for military trials was rejected by the Supreme Court, top senators said.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told the Fox News Sunday television program that Congress could conceivably pass a new law allowing the government to try the prisoners by military commissions by September.
"The court is telling the administration go back to the Congress, work with the Congress," Graham said.
"I intend to sit down with the administration ... to come up with a process that holds terrorists accountable, to give them a fair trial, but to make sure that if they did do the things that we're alleging, they're fairly punished," he said.
"Every enemy prisoner, terrorist, is entitled to be tried in a military commission format, not civilian format."
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the administration of President George W. Bush had no authority under US laws and the Geneva Conventions to set up military tribunals without the backing of Congress to try detainees held at a US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The ruling cast doubt on Bush's robust assertion of presidential power for national security purposes since the September 11, 2001 attacks, and bolstered Congressional claims that they have the power to regulate White House-directed programs from the handling of detainees to conducting secret surveillance on US citizens.
But Democratic Senator Jack Reed told Fox News that the minority Democrats are likely to cooperate with Republicans and the White House to pass the legislation enabling detainee trials.
"This has to be a process where we understand and recognize that we have to have a legitimate procedure -- legitimate in the eyes of the court, legitimate in the eyes of the American people, that we can move quickly to try these individuals and do justice," Reed said.
"And I think that's something that will come together in a bipartisan basis, I hope, in a deliberate and quick fashion, and do that."
Graham, himself a former military prosecutor, said that Congress holds the power to establish military tribunals.
"The court is saying to the president, 'you can have a military commission, but since it comes from the Uniform Code of Military Justice, a congressional statute, you've got to go back to Congress'."
Republican Senator John McCain said on ABC television's "This Week" program that new legislation for Guantanamo trials would likely fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the military legal system.
"I think that it shouldn't be exactly the same as applied to a member of the military, but it's a good framework. And I don't think that the Supreme Court said it had to be exact."
But Graham said he disagreed with the court's "breathtaking" ruling that Guantanamo prisoners had to be treated fairly based on Article III of the Geneva Conventions, holding that stateless fighters like members of Al-Qaeda don't deserve Geneva protections.
"The question for this country is, should Al-Qaeda members who do not sign up to the Geneva Convention, who show disdain for it, who butcher our troops, be given the protections of a treaty they're not part of?" he said.
"My opinion, no. They should be humanely treated, but the Geneva Convention cannot be used in the war on terrorists to give the terrorists an opportunity to basically come at us hard without any restrictions on how we interrogate and prosecute," Graham argued.
This is what is needed. This is the mandate the president has handed daown. To make sure we can prosecute our enemy for the crimes they commit on the battlefield--such as targeting civilians, or their attempted use of old chemical shells, as in the past--we need a way to deal with these people. Now, anyone of sound mind and body (which obviously excludes the five justices involved on the wrong side of this decision) knows that the president did have the right to run these animals through a military tribunal. But, the Supreme Court (in its continued attempt to screw up the Constitution whenever possible) ruled against the executive's powers to do this.
We stated it last week, and we still maintain that this is a separation of powers issue. The power to execute the tribunals falls under Article I and Article II, and the judiciary has absolutely nothing to do with this. The only problem anyone could possibly see is how the Democrats are going to play this game, and whether or not the Republicans have the guts to stand up this time.
This is an issue directly related to the war. And while there is no love loss in this home for Lindsey Graham, he did hammer home a point in that final paragraph: This issue is as much about the war as winning on the battlefield is. It is a war related topic, thereby falling under national security, and therefore being priority number one for this nation. The war comes first. Just like it does in the fifteen word platform, this must be dealt with now.
If the Democrats try to make these anything than what they already should be, the Republicans need to shut them down. Do not worry about the Democrats and how they will vote. ANY Republican who crosses party lines to side with the Democrats in opposing this move should be tossed from office if they are up this year. We do not have time to play partisan games of obstruction on this issue. Deal with it, get it done, and move on.
What will be equally funny is watching the Democrats try to play their game. It has already been shown to the nation for the past five years that more Democrats in Congress is not the answer to problems in Washington, DC. They continue to lose in the face of this war, and it is all due to their petulant, baby-like antics. They throw a tizzy at the drop of a hat, malign the president daily, obstruct or attack this nominee or that nominee, and generally carry on like their mascot would. (Yes, that would be a jackass; kudos to who guessed right.)
Senator Jack Reed claims the Democrats will work on a bipartisan solution to this problem. It is a good thing that this is not the other Reid. If it were, I could not take his word at face vaule. And I would be shaking my head at the members of the Republicans that would have taken his word. The Democrats want to play along, then so be it. Let them, but they need to understand that we are going to accomplish this with or without their help. These animals need to be dealt with. And either way ojne slices it, they cannot be allowed to go through our criminal justice system. I do not care with the Supreme Court says. These people should not be put through that. The average citizen screwed up the Moussaoui sentencing. No, these people need to go through the tribunals, and Congress needs to get on the stick in getting them created.
Marcie
Or so wire report says ...
The US Congress is ready to craft legislation to prosecute Guantanamo war-on-terror prisoners after the government's plan for military trials was rejected by the Supreme Court, top senators said.
Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told the Fox News Sunday television program that Congress could conceivably pass a new law allowing the government to try the prisoners by military commissions by September.
"The court is telling the administration go back to the Congress, work with the Congress," Graham said.
"I intend to sit down with the administration ... to come up with a process that holds terrorists accountable, to give them a fair trial, but to make sure that if they did do the things that we're alleging, they're fairly punished," he said.
"Every enemy prisoner, terrorist, is entitled to be tried in a military commission format, not civilian format."
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the administration of President George W. Bush had no authority under US laws and the Geneva Conventions to set up military tribunals without the backing of Congress to try detainees held at a US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The ruling cast doubt on Bush's robust assertion of presidential power for national security purposes since the September 11, 2001 attacks, and bolstered Congressional claims that they have the power to regulate White House-directed programs from the handling of detainees to conducting secret surveillance on US citizens.
But Democratic Senator Jack Reed told Fox News that the minority Democrats are likely to cooperate with Republicans and the White House to pass the legislation enabling detainee trials.
"This has to be a process where we understand and recognize that we have to have a legitimate procedure -- legitimate in the eyes of the court, legitimate in the eyes of the American people, that we can move quickly to try these individuals and do justice," Reed said.
"And I think that's something that will come together in a bipartisan basis, I hope, in a deliberate and quick fashion, and do that."
Graham, himself a former military prosecutor, said that Congress holds the power to establish military tribunals.
"The court is saying to the president, 'you can have a military commission, but since it comes from the Uniform Code of Military Justice, a congressional statute, you've got to go back to Congress'."
Republican Senator John McCain said on ABC television's "This Week" program that new legislation for Guantanamo trials would likely fall under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the military legal system.
"I think that it shouldn't be exactly the same as applied to a member of the military, but it's a good framework. And I don't think that the Supreme Court said it had to be exact."
But Graham said he disagreed with the court's "breathtaking" ruling that Guantanamo prisoners had to be treated fairly based on Article III of the Geneva Conventions, holding that stateless fighters like members of Al-Qaeda don't deserve Geneva protections.
"The question for this country is, should Al-Qaeda members who do not sign up to the Geneva Convention, who show disdain for it, who butcher our troops, be given the protections of a treaty they're not part of?" he said.
"My opinion, no. They should be humanely treated, but the Geneva Convention cannot be used in the war on terrorists to give the terrorists an opportunity to basically come at us hard without any restrictions on how we interrogate and prosecute," Graham argued.
This is what is needed. This is the mandate the president has handed daown. To make sure we can prosecute our enemy for the crimes they commit on the battlefield--such as targeting civilians, or their attempted use of old chemical shells, as in the past--we need a way to deal with these people. Now, anyone of sound mind and body (which obviously excludes the five justices involved on the wrong side of this decision) knows that the president did have the right to run these animals through a military tribunal. But, the Supreme Court (in its continued attempt to screw up the Constitution whenever possible) ruled against the executive's powers to do this.
We stated it last week, and we still maintain that this is a separation of powers issue. The power to execute the tribunals falls under Article I and Article II, and the judiciary has absolutely nothing to do with this. The only problem anyone could possibly see is how the Democrats are going to play this game, and whether or not the Republicans have the guts to stand up this time.
This is an issue directly related to the war. And while there is no love loss in this home for Lindsey Graham, he did hammer home a point in that final paragraph: This issue is as much about the war as winning on the battlefield is. It is a war related topic, thereby falling under national security, and therefore being priority number one for this nation. The war comes first. Just like it does in the fifteen word platform, this must be dealt with now.
If the Democrats try to make these anything than what they already should be, the Republicans need to shut them down. Do not worry about the Democrats and how they will vote. ANY Republican who crosses party lines to side with the Democrats in opposing this move should be tossed from office if they are up this year. We do not have time to play partisan games of obstruction on this issue. Deal with it, get it done, and move on.
What will be equally funny is watching the Democrats try to play their game. It has already been shown to the nation for the past five years that more Democrats in Congress is not the answer to problems in Washington, DC. They continue to lose in the face of this war, and it is all due to their petulant, baby-like antics. They throw a tizzy at the drop of a hat, malign the president daily, obstruct or attack this nominee or that nominee, and generally carry on like their mascot would. (Yes, that would be a jackass; kudos to who guessed right.)
Senator Jack Reed claims the Democrats will work on a bipartisan solution to this problem. It is a good thing that this is not the other Reid. If it were, I could not take his word at face vaule. And I would be shaking my head at the members of the Republicans that would have taken his word. The Democrats want to play along, then so be it. Let them, but they need to understand that we are going to accomplish this with or without their help. These animals need to be dealt with. And either way ojne slices it, they cannot be allowed to go through our criminal justice system. I do not care with the Supreme Court says. These people should not be put through that. The average citizen screwed up the Moussaoui sentencing. No, these people need to go through the tribunals, and Congress needs to get on the stick in getting them created.
Marcie
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 10:14 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home