due process

Poll: Most Americans want military trial for 9/11 suspects

Considering that only 16% of Americans in 2006 said they believed the Bush Administration was "telling the truth" about "what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States" http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/13469 , the results of this poll are puzzling and disturbing. Why are so many Americans not interested in a public trial, if they're so sure of KSM's guilt? Why are so many Americans willing to tolerate secret evidence and other limitations on the human rights of the accused? The percentages in the polls show that some of the same people supporting military tribunals are also skeptical the Bush Administration has told the truth about 9/11. It seems likely that significant numbers of Americans believe that, whatever responsibility the Bush Administration (and/or others) bear for 9/11, that KSM and the other accused did play a role in the 9/11 attacks. And KSM et al may well have played a role- but let's have the evidence produced, in a public courtroom, where it can be challenged by competent defense counsel, and weighed by a jury and the interested public. - loose nuke

Model for US Trials After the Next Attack? Speak Out!

Snips: A military attorney for one of the Sept. 11 defendants at Guantanamo Bay predicted on Tuesday the Pakistani would at best see only a sliver of classified evidence and would be convicted in what amounts to "a top secret trial."

Mizer said that on four occasions while defending another Guantanamo detainee, he himself was barred from seeing classified documents the government presented to a military judge, even though the Navy lawyer has security clearance. "I cannot rebut evidence that I cannot see, and we can lose legal motions based upon evidence that is not available to defense attorneys with the highest levels of security clearance," Mizer said.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hZXxZ9jWlnYZ5G_1_W_-FG8F2vHwD91C13T00

Attorney seeks clearance for 9/11 defendant - AP

By ANDREW O. SELSKY – 20 hours ago

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — A military attorney for one of the Sept. 11 defendants at Guantanamo Bay predicted on Tuesday the Pakistani would at best see only a sliver of classified evidence and would be convicted in what amounts to "a top secret trial."

Legislating Tyranny By Paul Craig Roberts and Lawrence M. Stratton

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20056.htm

("On May 9, 2007, President Bush signed the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive. If in the president’s opinion a “catastrophic emergency” occurs, the directive places all governmental power in the hands of the president, effectively abolishing the checks and balances in the Constitution." . . . This is what worries me, many of us. Will something in September or October, 2008 happen? So much circumstantial evidence seems to say so . . . , and I hope obviously, I'm wrong. --Betsy)

Legislating Tyranny

By Paul Craig Roberts and Lawrence M. Stratton

07/06/08 "Lew Rockwell" -- -The George W. Bush administration responded to the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon with an assault on U.S. civil liberty that Bush justified in the name of the “war on terror.” The government assured us that the draconian measures apply only to “terrorists.” The word terrorist, however, was not defined. The government claimed the discretionary power to decide who is a terrorist without having to present evidence or charges in a court of law.