It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New DoD Manual: Execution of terrorists on hearsay evidence is ok

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 05:51 PM

The Associated Press
Published: January 18, 2007

WASHINGTON: The Defense Department's rules for upcoming detainee trials would allow terrorism suspects to be convicted and perhaps executed using hearsay evidence and some coerced testimony.

According to the 238-page manual, a detainee's lawyer could not reveal classified evidence in the person's defense until the government had a chance to review it. Suspects would be allowed to view summaries of classified evidence, not the material itself.

Rep. Ike Skelton, a Democrat and chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he planned to scrutinize the manual to ensure that it does not "run afoul" of the U.S. Constitution.

"I have not yet seen evidence that the process by which these rules were built or their substance addresses all the questions left open by the legislation," Skelton said.

Officials think that with the evidence they have now, they could eventually charge 60 to 80 detainees, said Brig. Gen. Thomas Hemingway, legal adviser to the Pentagon's office on commissions.

Oh cool. So they classify the evidence, summarize it however they want, and only allow the defense to see the summary. Nice. That kinda like, err, locks down the case doesn't it? And they can execute them over it, too. Real nice.

With their ability to call anyone they want a terrorist via the Patriot Act, and be able to execute them over this "hearsay evidence," would someone please explain to me why this is any different than Nazi Germany? No really. I wanna hear it.

You think you deserve this power, Mr. President? After you lied like hell to us about Iraq?

I get the feeling some people here peg me as having some agenda to go out of my way to discredit this administration. Well, I don't. Scouts honor. But dammit, if the Dems were pulling crap like this and seeking the powers that this President has, I'd be just as livid. As an example, I am very unhappy about the way the Dems fight for illegal immigrants and their benefits.

What I wanna know is what party is against the war, against illegal immigration, against the FED, against the patriot act, and most of all against sheer lunacy?

posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 05:54 PM
Ive said it before and I will say it again. If we so casualy cast aside the fundamental pricipals that the nation was founded on we become no better than the terrorists we so decry

posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 06:04 PM
Just wrote a nice reply to those but it was of course erased.

All I will say is slowly but surely this administration is abusing its power and taking away from congressional ability and from the people. It is time to take a stand and end this type of conduct no matter what the means are.

posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:58 AM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Oh cool. So they classify the evidence, summarize it however they want, and only allow the defense to see the summary. Nice. That kinda like, err, locks down the case doesn't it? And they can execute them over it, too. Real nice.

You're right, that sucks, it's almost as bad as Sharia law! but not quite.

Sharia goes something like; "You may kill members of your wive's family without going to prison for it if she was proven to be adulterous and having an affair. With stones. God is great!"

posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 05:54 AM
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that ALL men have been endowed by their Creater with certain in alienable rights, these being LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PERSUIT OF HAPPINESS.

or however it's written...

but anyways, it the cornerstone of our way of governing...our constitution...all the rest is written just to insure that we do not unjustly deny these rights to our fellow human beings. it says that these rights were not given to men by us, and thus it is not us who should have the right to take them away...unless of course, it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the person has grossly abused these rights and inflicted pain and suffering on another.

the constitution will not stand if this foundation is stripped from underneath it.

but of course, all this is to protect our freedom, our way of life, to protect our nation from those who would like to strip these freedoms from us, right??

I find it kind of Ironic really, if you get into a debate about how "God needs to be in our Government" they will refer to the above quote and tell ya that without the acknowledgement of God there are no inalienable rights...but it seems to me the same group of people are the ones not acknowledging these God given rights! you'd think that the people who believe it, would be the ones trying to preserve it, not tearing it down to the ground!

if these rights- life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness, were given to all men by God, then man is taking power that is not his when he indiscrimately takes them away, you'd think that one would be very, very carefull to make sure that he only meddled in such things when it is truly warrented and not do it on the basis of hearsay!!

just pointing out, some don't truly believe what they claim to believe.

posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 06:04 AM
tabloid newspaper world, enough said.

hearsay means more than any truths these days, you would have to be naive to think hearsay does not do this already.

top topics

log in