2003.12.30 - PEGC Update ======================== 1) DoD Press Briefing by "Senior Defense Officials" -- December 30, 2003 ANNOUNCEMENTS OF KEY PERSONNEL FOR MILITARY COMMISSIONS; ISSUANCE OF MILITARY COMMISSION INSTRUCTION NO. 9 ON MILITARY COMMISSIONS REVIEW PANEL http://www.dod.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20031230-1081.html DoD Press Release No. 989-03 APPOINTING AUTHORITY DECISION MADE Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld has decided to delegate the position of appointing authority for military commissions to John D. Altenburg, Jr... http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2003/nr20031230-0820.html DoD Press Release No. 988-03 MILITARY COMMISSION LEGAL ADVISOR ANNOUNCED The Department of Defense announced today that Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas L. Hemingway has been named the legal advisor to the appointing authority in the Office of Military Commissions... http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2003/nr20031230-0821.html DoD Press Release No. 990-03 MILITARY COMMISSION REVIEW PANEL MEMBERS TO BE DESIGNATED AND INSTRUCTION ISSUED Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld has decided to designate four individuals to serve as review panel members for military commissions. Additionally, the General Counsel of the Department of Defense William J. Haynes II issued Military Commission Instruction (MCI) No. 9, Review of Military Commission Proceedings... http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/2003/nr20031230-0822.html MCI No. 9 and biographical information can be found at: http://www.defenselink.mil/news/commissions.html See also: Newsday -- December 30, 2003 EX-GENERAL TO OVERSEE GUANTANAMO TRIALS By Robert Burns, AP Military Writer http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-military-trials,0,2613925.story 2) Editorial I think these announcements may be a chance for some positive action... Unless there is some special regulation / loophole in play here, all general officer appointments require approval by the Senate -- and all four of the prospective "Military Commission Review Panel Members" are civilians who are being appointed Major Generals in the US Army. That means: A) They could be given a good roasting by Senate Armed Forces Committee. The commitee could maybe even notice that 18 USC 2441 makes the whole dreary farce illegal. B) These appointments can be fillibustered in the Senate just like some of Bush's judicial appointments have been. Since these folks are being appointed to act as an illegal appeals board for an illegal kangaroo court that is contrary to both the US Constitution and any civilized concept of justice, that's exactly what the Senate should do. Only in this case, it might even be possible to get enough Republicans to vote against them to simply defeat the nominations. I won't be holding my breath, but let me add: as far as I'm concerned, any Senator or Representative who votes to approve these nominations will be aiding and abetting a crime. And there's something else that came to mind here. MCI No. 9 states the basic procedures for the "Military Commission Review Panels" (the illegal kangaroo appeals process they've defined for their illegal kangaroo courts), and it includes an oath of office for the panel members: "Do you (swear) (affirm) that you will faithfully and impartially perform, according to your conscience and the rules applicable to the review of trials by military commission, all the duties incumbent upon you as a member of this Review Panel (so help you God)?" MCI No. 9(4)(B)(4)(a), at 3. That is literally an oath to commit crimes against the laws of the United States, andv hence, a violation of the oath that all military officers take. The other day I was reading an article by Prof. John Yoo, UC Boalt Hall (also a former Ashcroft deputy at DOJ). The article is a fairly insidious exercise in neo-conservative sophistry aimed at rationalizing the Supremacy clause out of existence by a mix of fallacious reasoning and mythology, but it's based on the Appointments clause of the Constitution, Art. II, Sec. 2(2), and I can't help thinking that it might actually apply here... but who knows? If anyone is interested, Yoo's article is at: THE NEW SOVEREIGNTY AND THE OLD CONSTITUTION: THE CHEMICAL WEAPONS CONVENTION AND THE APPOINTMENTS CLAUSE John C. Yoo http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/yooj/courses/forrel/reserve/chemwep.htm While I'm at it, there's also a good article on treaties in the same place: THE STATUS OF TREATIES AS DOMESTIC LAW UNDER THE U.S. CONSTITUTION Carlos Manuel Vázquez http://www.law.berkeley.edu/faculty/yooj/courses/forrel/reserve/vazquez.htm 3) The Mariani Case This is a bit off topic, but given the near total silence regarding 18 USC 2441 and the oh-so-cautious reporting of the now fully obvious facts of the Bush adminstration's on-going war crimes, I can definitely sympathize with these folks... Fourwinds10.com -- December 17, 2003 911 WIDOW'S BUSH TREASON SUIT VANISHES By David Kubiak http://www.fourwinds10.com/news/08-media/B-mainstream/2003/08B-12-17-03-widow- bush-treason-suit-disappears.html MARIANI v. BUSH, USDC Eastern District of Pennsylvania (No. 03-5273) http://www.nancho.net/911/mariani.html Happy New Year, Charly * * * Charles Gittings Oakland, California +1-510-923-1688 cbgittings@sbcglobal.net Project to Enforce the Geneva Conventions (PEGC) http://PEGC.no-ip.info/ PEGC Update http://PEGC.no-ip.info/PEGC_Update.html