“Army Major (Hasan) Played Role in Presidential (Obama) Transition”
Hasan and his protectors are with al Qaeda.
Hasan's protectors helped him rise, "educate", have seminars,
murder, commit treason and support jihad. (The new DADT?)
Posted on 10/15/2010 9:35:23 AM PDT by My Favorite Headache
FORT HOOD, Texas – A soldier who recorded the terror of last year's deadly shooting rampage in Fort Hood using his cell phone was ordered by an officer to delete both videos, a military court heard Friday.
Under cross examination, Pfc. Lance Aviles told an Article 32 hearing that his noncommissioned officer ordered him to destroy the two videos on Nov. 5, the same day that a gunman unleashed a volley of bullets inside a processing center at the Texas Army post.
The footage could have been vital evidence at the military hearing to decide if Maj. Nidal Hasan should stand trial in the shootings. The 40-year-old American-born Muslim has been charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted premeditated murder.
Prosecutors have not said whether they'll seek the death penalty if the case goes to trial.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
High up the food chain did this order go?
We can’t have him screaming “Allah Akbar” being captured on film, can we?
Accomplice, or just an idiot?
Are videos allowed of military bases in general?
I know an illegal order when I hear one, and I would have told the NCO absolutely no way am I ‘deleting this’.
But thats just me.
Are videos allowed????
Every cell phone is now a video camera. How could they prohibit videos?
Post it to youtube, send it to friendly media sources, back it up to flash drive, put it in a safe deposit box.....then delete it.
Besides, what the worst that can happen? An Article 15?
Why did he comply? Was it a Army-issued cell phone? 1st Amendment applies here, imho. He should have refused the “order”, which should never have been given. the officer should be disciplined.
Surely there was a follow-up question. Tell me that the witness was asked “Did Sgt X say why you were to erase the video? And if so, what did he say?” Either this question was asked and not reported, in which case the reporter is a blockhead, or it wasn’t, in which case the lawyer is.
BTW, I believe that was an illegal order. Officers and NCOs have no charge over privately held property of enlisted soldiers. Just sayin.
Since when can noncomms issue legal orders?
It seems to me that tampering with or destroying evidence of a crime is usually considered a crime in itself.
An order to commit a crime would seem to be an unlawful order.
IANAL
“Army Major (Hasan) Played Role in Presidential (Obama) Transition”
Hasan and his protectors are with al Qaeda.
Hasan's protectors helped him rise, "educate", have seminars,
murder, commit treason and support jihad. (The new DADT?)
was ordered by an officer to delete both videos, a military court heard Friday.
Odd wording. I know the official term for ranks E-4 and above is "non-commissioned officer", but usually officer by itself refers only to commissioned officers of rank O-1 and above.
Which is exactly the reason the non com gave the order. But...from whom did he receive his orders from?
That’s what I am thinking too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.