Pentagon releases Military Commissions manual.
By on Jan 18th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Pentagon releases Military Commissions manual.
“The Pentagon has drafted a manual for upcoming detainee trials that would allow suspected terrorists to be convicted on hearsay evidence and coerced testimony and imprisoned or put to death,” the AP reports. According to the manual, “a terror suspect’s defence lawyer cannot reveal classified evidence in the person’s defence until the government has a chance to review it.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well, at least they’re discussing “trying” these “enemy combatants”, instead of just shrugging their shoulders. To bad they’ll all get convicted.
Why not just kill them all, since you could if you wanted, Shrubbie?
Why follow due process now?
January 18th, 2007 at 2:09 pmHeh. What due process? Conviction on the basis of hearsay & coerced testimony?
The descent into Hell continues…
January 18th, 2007 at 2:12 pmwtf? When will that be true for offenses committed within the USA? Dangerous precedent
January 18th, 2007 at 2:17 pmPut to death based on hearsay.
Preventing that is the reason why we have a constitution.
January 18th, 2007 at 2:43 pmIt’s especially scary since the presinut has decided that he has the sole power in classifying someone as an “enemy comabtant”………anyone he wants to.
January 18th, 2007 at 3:00 pmWhy not just put a laurel wreath on Bush head and declare him Ceasar? His version of justice is less fair that that of ancient Rome.
Impeachment is not an option, it is manditory.
January 18th, 2007 at 3:23 pmWTF! Did I fall back in time to the Salem witch trials?
January 18th, 2007 at 3:29 pmSo much for honor perhaps the Military can redefine that also. Of course what can be expected when the CIF is a deserter and the mission is to protect the oil so fat greedy CEOs like Exxon/Mobil’s can have a $ 400,000 retirement benefit.
January 18th, 2007 at 3:43 pmWell Bush use the same Shia goons who hanged Saddam to execute those convicted in our military kangaroo courts?
January 18th, 2007 at 4:52 pmIt’s the “if you didn’t do anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about” types that are allowing this to happen. Those type of people never realize the problem until it is WAY too late. This is just getting too scary. The Bush cabal needs to be put on a leash NOW and dealt with in a court of law WITHOUT the possibility of presidential pardon.
January 18th, 2007 at 5:09 pmOh, for the love of all that’s sacred…
If you’re going to accept hearsay evidence as valid at a trial, you almost might as well not bother having a trial at all! The definition of hearsay evidence is that which comes second-hand, something which the witness did not experience directly but which was communicated to them by someone who supposedly did experience it directly. One of the reasons why hearsay is not considered valid evidence in most court trials is the fact that it’s highly unreliable. First and foremost, it depends on the witness’s power of recall. Not only have studies shown that even direct witness recall is not always reliably accurate, hearsay is basically equivalent to playing the game of “Telephone” — the person sitting next to you only tells you what they think they heard or what they remember hearing, not necessarily what the person sitting next to them actually said! Secondly, accepting hearsay testimony as valid in itself means that verification becomes a moot point at best — and this potentially opens the door to perjury and/or falsification of evidence on the part of the prosecution. Accepting hearsay evidence as valid makes it only too easy for a witness with a hidden agenda (whether the government’s or their own) to lie under oath and claim that they heard so-and-so say that they saw or heard such-and-such in relation to the defendant because they know that whatever they say will be accepted as valid and nobody will bother to check whether or not the testimony is true.
I find myself unaccountably reminded of that quote from the Queen of Hearts from “Alice In Wonderland” — “Sentence first, verdict afterwards!” If you’re going to make it potentially feasible for the prosecution to create whatever evidence they feel they need in order to convict someone, why bother holding a trial?
January 18th, 2007 at 5:12 pmWhat goes around…
January 18th, 2007 at 5:54 pmWhen Bush and Cheney are incarcerated as world class terrorists for their crimes against humanity, I’ll be glad to offer some hearsay evidence against them.
I heard several people say they were _____________ (fill in the blank, so I can use this later)…
“a terror suspect’s defence lawyer cannot reveal classified evidence in the person’s defence until the government has a chance to review it.â€
January 18th, 2007 at 6:09 pmThis is pure, unmitigated crap. I am SO SICK of these guys classifying everthing. I wouldn’t be surprised if Cheney’s grandmother’s name is classified.
These guys are beyond evil. Nothing would make me happier than to see them tried in a court of law: “Sorry, you can’t have
information that helps the defendant. It’s classified.”
I wish Darth’s grandmother was still around. Grandmas tend to have a sense of their offspring’s representing the family entire…
January 18th, 2007 at 6:17 pmWhen he showed up for Thanksgiving dinner, she’d grab his ear, give it a big ol twist and kick him in the nuts for us.
See, this is the problem when our leaders have no appreciation for history. Has Pres. Bush ever heard of the Nuremberg trials?
If we could afford the Nazi’s due process – because it was the right thing to do, and because it lent credibility to the U.S. and its allies – surely we can afford due process to some poor schlub who was scooped up on the battlefield in Afghanistan, or whose neighbors ratted him out (maybe honestly; maybe not …), or what have you.
The whole world is watching, George …
January 18th, 2007 at 6:24 pmWhy does Bush&Co hate America? What has happened to America?
The Mad Cowboy Disease has struck in Washington.
My country — this proud American is hanging his head in shame.
January 18th, 2007 at 6:56 pmYou, terrorist! – No, I’m.. (Muhammed the innocent is already shot to death)
January 19th, 2007 at 6:02 amHey, trials à la Stalin. Really, freedom in USA is on the march.
January 19th, 2007 at 6:17 amWhere did the republicans find and then vote for such a “non-thinking” man as Mr. Bush? The sky is falling although Mr. Bush remains strangely unaware of it!
January 19th, 2007 at 9:59 amOnly 730 (approximately) more days until a new, thoughtful president is sworn in. Amen.
#10 — Totally agree with your comment and would add that we should apply the rationale to the Bush Mob: If they have done nothing wrong, then what is it, exactly, that they are hiding from We, the People?
January 19th, 2007 at 10:57 am