To: cnyndwllr who wrote (132302 ) 5/9/2004 11:07:48 AM From: Hawkmoon Respond to of 281500 Hawk, surely you don't believe that's their motivation. If it is they sure got religion awfully suddenly. Maybe you need to refresh yourself with UCMJ and the courts-martial system of jurisprudence. This is not the USC, nor a Federal Civilian court...As far as the Pentagon, what policy of careful silence did they pursue when they charged the Muslim Army Chaplain with spying and aiding Al Qaeda with plans of our detention center in Cuba? It's quite possible that the charges were dropped against Yee on the basis of Unlawful Command Influence, according to this analysis (I also recommend reading this webblog on a regular basis):philcarter.blogspot.com (5) Unlawful command influence will be an issue in this case. Note this quote from the Washington Times story: "The source said the "highest levels" of government made the decision to arrest Capt. Yee, who had been kept under surveillance for some time." That means the decision to arrest Captain Yee came from 1600 Penn. Ave and the E-Ring of the Pentagon, and that prosecutorial decisions will likely have to be vetted in both places as well. Unfortunately, the UCMJ expressly prohibits command influence on the actual trial, and the actual decision to bring charges. The Commander of SouthCom will have to do his best to resist pressure from the President and SecDef here if he wants his verdict to stand. I guarantee that Captain Yee's defense counsel will raise this issue on appeal. The fact that the charges against Yee were dropped might be why Rumsfeld and other commanders were so loath to get involved in future military investigations. But I'm not quite sure what comments Rumsfeld, Bush, or any other individual in Yee's chain of command may have made that prejudiced the case against him. Please provide some examples, if you will.. Hawk