Ummm. Even the Judge Adjutant General's dept of the US Army - which
has a superior record to comparable depts of other armies IMO - don't
like the "process" at Gitmo. The "military tribunals" at Gitmo are
jury-rigged for Gitmo, with the dice fully loaded against the
"defendant". It is a mockery of military justice, let alone due
process, designed to obtain a show trial result. Or do you regard
secret evidence as due process?

We are better than they; if we descend to the level of Al Qaeda then
we have lost.

Roger

P.S. It wasn't the Taliban who instituted the twin towers outrage. It
was a bunch of Saudi Arabians. The Taliban may have leant support to
Al Qaeda, but they didn't do the Twin Towers. The fact that that
"allies" trounced all over Afghanistan is another in those long line
of bloody disasters favoured by the Bush Administration. So now we
have the Taliban coming back - probably because the US supports the
Afghan Warlords, the precise reason that the Taliban were so
successful in the first. Abhorrent they maybe - and certainly from
what I\ve read -not universally liked, still, they were less corrupt
than the warlords wrt the average Afghani.

On 3/28/07, King, Darren <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> What military trials have been shonky?  Which ones?  Are you speaking
> from a position of knowledge or did you let "senior jurists" make your
> mind up for you?  Did you research military legal opinions on these
> cases  as well to make sure you saw both sides of these shonky trials?
> I am getting a distinct feeling that people are condemning military
> justice purely  because it isn't civilian justice and NOT because they
> have any knowledge as to how effective or just it is.
>
> Ummmm....losing Habeas Corpus?  I suppose you think that scumbag Abraham
> Lincoln is the 2nd worst president after Bush then eh?  He suspended
> Habeas Corpus during the civil war, another "illegal" war (the states
> had every right to secede according to the constitution).  I look
> forward to your condemning the man who freed the slaves as a dictator
> and a tyrant (witty considering Booth's last words).
>
> I wasn't being patronizing, only ironic (or trying to be).  There are
> two sides to this issue as in all issues.
>
> It's funny, I've been called "young Darren" and "a baby boomer".  My age
> is all over the place today.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Alison Croggon
> Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2007 6:26 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: David Hicks
>
> Don't patronise me, young Darren. It's due process we're talking about,
> known as the Rule of Law in civilised countries. What all those Barons
> demanded from King John, etc. As you should know, David Hicks is
> detained under weasly laws that determine him as an "enemy combatant" so
> his captors don't have to observe the Geneva Conventions, which lay down
> that prisoners of war (which otherwise he would technically be) have to
> be treated humanely. Not to mention the shonkiness of the military
> trials, which have been condemned by senior jurists all over the western
> world.
>
> Now, if David Hicks is suspected of breaking the law, he ought to be
> tried properly and, if found guilty under due process, punished. I have
> no problem with that and, so far as I can see, neither does anyone else.
> But I do have a big problem with the star chamber set up, which is not
> exactly the mark of free and democratic and just societies but rather
> those evil dictatorships that we are supposed to be against.
>
> But maybe you think that losing habeas corpus is cool, in which case you
> might just as well live under Sharia Law anyway.
>
> All best
>
> A
>
>
>
> On 3/27/07, meikamonagmail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Darren must be another Baby Boomer.
> >
> >
> >
> > On 27/03/2007, at 17:00, King, Darren wrote:
> >
> > > I am just wondering what coloured material you would use to make the
>
> > > outfit to cover your entire body, which would be the law if the
> > > Taliban and their soldier Mr. Hicks had gotten their way.  You do
> > > realize that under the government Hicks fought for, you would be
> > > going to jail for the email you typed don't you?
> > >
> > > Darren
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Poetryetc: poetry and poetics
> > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alison Croggon
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 27 March 2007 3:49 PM
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: David Hicks
> > >
> > > So David Hicks has made a guilty plea (after the judge sacked most
> > > of his defence counsel). Well, you can't blame the poor bastard. He
> > > was going to be found guilty no matter what he said.
> > >
> > > Anyway, Getup! has a pretty cool video on "voting David out" - check
>
> > > it out.
> > > Maybe sign the petition.
> > >
> > > http://www.getup.org.au/campaign.asp?campaign_id=74
> > >
> > > All best
> > >
> > > Alison
> > >
> > > --
> > > Editor, Masthead:  http://www.masthead.net.au
> > > Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com Home page:
> > > http://www.alisoncroggon.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Editor, Masthead:  http://www.masthead.net.au
> Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
> Home page: http://www.alisoncroggon.com
>


-- 
My Stuff: http://www.badstep.net/
"Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious." Oscar Wilde