-Caveat Lector-
October 19, 2000
Michael New case still unresolved
Win or lose, 'Army has its tail in a wringer either way'
By Julie Foster
© 2000 WorldNetDaily.com
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces ended its 2000
regular term without rendering an opinion on the case of Army
Specialist Michael New, who was court-martialed and given a
bad-conduct discharge for refusing to wear a U.N. uniform and
submit to the command of a foreign officer.
While serving stationed in Germany in 1995, New was among a few
hundred troops President Clinton sent to Macedonia on a
peacekeeping mission dispatched by the United Nations. The
soldier chose not to obey what he calls an illegal order to
remove his American military uniform patch in favor of the
insignia and blue beret of the United Nations, saying he would
not serve a foreign power. Consequently, New was slapped with a
court-martial charging he had refused to obey a "lawful" order.
Although his defense centered around the lawfulness of the order,
evidence submitted by New's attorney bearing on that issue was
set aside by Army Judge Lt. Col. Gary Jewell, New's court-martial
judge who instructed the jury that the orders were indeed
constitutional.
New appealed to the military's highest tribunal on the grounds
that he was denied an element of his defense. Oral arguments were
heard by the five-member panel of civilian judges on Feb. 4, and
expectations were for a quick decision. However, the court
concluded its 2000 session on Sept. 30 without making a decision
on the case. Two other cases that were given oral hearings were
also "held over," according to the court's clerk, Thomas
Granahan, who said it is not unusual for "one or two" to be
decided after the Sept. 30 deadline. The court operates on a
year-round calendar from Oct. 1 -- Sept. 30, he noted.
One of the "held-over" cases originated in the Air Force and was
heard by the Appeals Court on Apr. 5. The other is a Marine Corps
case that was heard Feb. 29. Granahan said he could not speculate
as to the reason for the lengthy consideration of any of the
three cases.
Retired Army Judge Advocate General Lt. Col. Henry Hamilton, who
represents New in the military courts, said he has heard
speculation that the court is waiting until after the election to
make a decision on New's appeal. Should the appeal be granted,
New's conviction would be re-evaluated in light of his evidence
that the order to obey the U.N. command was unlawful. In other
words, his successful appeal would effectively be putting U.N.
authority on trial.
"Some have speculated, and I decline to speculate, that
substantial disagreement among the five judges or through lengthy
and unusually convoluted legal reasoning, an attempt is being
made to justify the army's constitutional error, which was taking
away from the military jury one of the elements of the defense on
the lawfulness of the order," Hamilton said, adding that he
believes a decision will be rendered in late fall or early
winter.
Dr. Herb Titus represents New in the civilian court system and
serves as lead attorney in the soldier's defense.
"From a civilian perspective, I find it unusual that a court
would not render an opinion when it had been argued during that
particular term of court," Titus said, adding that "people become
suspicious" when such delays occur. "Why is it taking this court
so long to decide this case when the U.S. Supreme Court doesn't
take this long?" he added.
New, a native Texan who has been extremely reserved in his
communications with the news media, gave WorldNetDaily this
statement: "It truly stuns me that a court-martial takes three
days and an appeal 5 years. How is that possible? There is an
amazing number of citizens and soldiers like myself who are
awaiting the court's decision on this. We put the ball in their
court. Aren't they supposed to return it now?"
According to Daniel New, Michael's father and "project manager"
of his son's defense, the case "is becoming a farce. It does not
require eight months to deliberate a simple question. What is
becoming obvious to all sides is that an order to stonewall has
come from on high, and every court seems to be participating in a
collusion of silence. They are deliberately delaying justice.
It's a very shortsighted policy, to protect a lame-duck perjurer
who loathes the military, while the soldier patiently standing on
the law is standing for national sovereignty and for every
American who has ever worn the uniform. There are serious
constitutional questions here, and the courts, in five years,
have been unable to address a single one of them. This is
injustice at its worst."
The question of whether American military personnel should submit
to the United Nations has caused a firestorm among advocates for
a global governing system and supporters of American sovereignty.
But if U.N. Secretary General Kofi A. Annan of Ghana gets his
way, every major country will have a set of troops dedicated to
the United Nations.
In the "Kofi Doctrine," described by Annan in his opening address
and report to the U.N. Millennium Summit, the secretary general
outlines his vision of battalion-sized units of soldiers on
permanent stand-by for peace-keeping purposes. The goal is to
have each unit ready at a moment's notice to be shipped anywhere
in the world to prevent or stop violence in any nation. The
troops are to be trained by the British army, which, according to
a Sept. 9 report by UPI, has already agreed to set up a center
for that purpose.
New's case has direct impact on the United States' participation
in such a military force, as it questions the constitutionality
of U.S. soldiers subjecting themselves to the rule of a foreign
authority -- a direct violation of the oath taken by all U.S.
military personnel.
"Frankly, we don't even care which way they rule, we just want
them to rule, so we can get on with the process," Daniel New
said. "But the irony is that the Army has its tail in a wringer
either way. If we lose, we go straight to the Supreme Court. They
sure don't want that. If we win, then they are embarrassed, and
the Army doesn't want that either."
=================================================================
Kadosh, Kadosh, Kadosh, YHVH, TZEVAOT
FROM THE DESK OF: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*Michael Spitzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
~~~~~~~~~~~ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Best Way To Destroy Enemies Is To Change Them To Friends
=================================================================
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
