Can't have a video circulating of a Muslim shouting "Allahu akbar" and murdering people, now, can we? That would be "Islamophobic"!
"Soldier says ordered to delete Fort Hood videos," by Angela K. Brown and Michael Graczyk for Associated Press, October 15 (thanks to Roland):
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 a gunman unleashed a volley of bullets inside a processing center at the Texas Army post.
The footage could have been used as 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.
Twenty-nine witnesses over three days have appeared either in a courtroom or by video link. Prosecutors have not said whether they'll seek the death penalty if the case goes to trial.
Aviles described how he was waiting for medical tests at the center with his battle buddy, Pfc. Kham Xiong, when he heard someone shout. Then the gunshots began.
He said he saw a tanned, balding man wearing an Army combat uniform and carrying a black pistol.
"I saw smoke coming from the pistol," Aviles told the court.
The pair threw themselves to the floor. Aviles turned to his left to check Xiong and discovered his friend had been shot.
"His head was facing the left and a shard of his skull was sticking up," Aviles said.
Xiong, a 23-year-old father of three from St. Paul, Minn., was among the 13 who died in the attack. Aviles, the 20th person to provide testimony at the hearing, was not hurt.
Addressing the court via video link from Afghanistan, Spc. Megan Martin said she had been waiting to take medical tests when saw a man to her left stand up and shout "Allahu Akbar!" -- "God is great!" in Arabic -- then start firing a weapon....
"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 a gunman unleashed a volley of bullets inside a processing center at the Texas Army post."
By coincidence, was the NCO a Muslim?.....
Pure and simple destruction of evidence. The noncommisioned officer who ordered this should at least be investigatged if not prosecuted.
Yep, and it's interesting that the article says no more about it...Why would he take it upon himself to order its destruction, unless maybe he did not take it on himself to do it...That opens up a larger can of worms...
I guess the military's devotion to diversity doesn't mean standing up for the Latin-American witness or the Asian-American father of three who was murdered, despite the fact that both men were willing to fight and die for this country. It's all about appeasing, promoting and whitewashing the sins of a Muslim who took the military's money to earn his M.D. degree and then betrayed the soldiers he was supposed to be treating.
What? I thought Allahu Akbar meant "God is a deranged mass-murderer!"
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 a gunman unleashed a volley of bullets inside a processing center at the Texas Army post.
..............
*What the Hell*? Not only is this destruction of what is clearly a key piece of evidence, but by all appearances, this was Pfc. Aviles' *own phone*, and hence his own personal property. Very, very disturbing.
I agree with gravenimage. This non-com should be tried on several charges not the least being distruction of evidence.
Also, I suggest translating Allahu Akbar as Allah is Great.
God has nothing to do with the Doctrine of Satan, aka Islam.
One is NOT required to follow an illegal order.
I would have considered this an illegal order.
I would have refused to follow this NCO's order.
For what reason on Earth was such a ridiculous order given?
As a retired Navy 'NCO', I cannot imagine why Pfc. Aviles was ordered to destroy evidence to a crime on a military facility--especially given, as noted above--that the phone was his personal property.
There's something else at play here.
Perhaps the NCO here was attuned to the need to spare the families the sight of their loved-ones' gruesome agony as they were gunned-down by Dirt-bag Hassan. I expect combat leaders are wary of bloody combat footage getting to the media and being shown on the nightly news. Could this be where he was coming from in ordering the video destroyed? Plenty of eye-witness testimony anyway. Just trying to make sense of this strange order.
The more we passively ignore true facts of violent Islam and violent acts of devout soldiers of Allah,known as Muslims,the surer it will become for all non-Muslims of us to be viewed by these muslim guys of the world as lame ducks and greatest cowards who are going to be conquered sooner.There are many Nidal Hassans already preparing to betray their adopted homeland USA and all infidel people who treated them with humanitarian goodwill.Islam itself has no humanitarian attitude toward non-Muslim Kaffirs despite non-Muslim world has so generously accepted Muslims amid them.Multiculturalist and pluralist ideals of non-Mulim societies is already being abused by these Muslim immigrants whose only purpose is to conquer non-Muslim hosts in the long term using every means and methods as required by their Quran and hadiths.WE MUST ALL WAKE UP NOW.OTHERWISE WE ARE GOING TO BE FINISHED BY ISLAM AND ITS DEVOUT SOLDIERS.
Notice they didn't include the non-com's name. This shows the man is being protected and pressure put on the MSM by the DoD not to report it.
BTW it's not like the Army doesn't do it all the time in Afghanistan. Remember how the DoD and all the Army brass had a fit when a reporter snapped pictures of some poor grunt who got his leg blown off and lay dying?
I'm sure there will be a promotion and commendation in that non-com's future. Good bag man material.
"One is NOT required to follow an illegal order.'
Not only that, but it is ILLEGAL to obey an illegal order. The UCMJ (Unified Code of Military Justice) actually defines what constitutes an illegal order, and destruction of records and evidence is one of them.
One issue here may be that, for various security reasons, many military installations have standing orders prohibiting the possession of cell phones on base, especially those with cameras. Given the stress everyone was under, such an order at Ft. Hood could have been a factor. People just might have panicked.
I agree, there is a lot more to this story.
From the article:
"Can't have a video circulating of a Muslim shouting "Allahu akbar" and murdering people, now, can we? That would be "Islamophobic"!"
~~~~~
Islamophobia. Yeah, that’s what it is!
Any and all examination or consideration of what inspires and directs Muslims to commit acts of jihadi terrorism must be denied at all costs, right?
In reality what motivates the Muslims to kill for nearly every and any reason under the sun at the drop of a hat can easily be found within the “authentic” texts themselves. But who really cares about such inconvenient truths, right?
In a larger sense good god forbid we offend the Muslims by quoting the Islamic texts right back to them explaining the behavior of their fellows, right? LOLLLLLLLLLL
I am an ex-Muslim with a website
http://www.considerationsofacanadianex-muslim.org
Uniform Code of Military Justice.
And it was, within the parameters of the UCMJ, an unlawful order, not an illegal one.
Maybe they didn't mention his name because it was Mohammad or somethng similar.
"Can't have a video circulating of a Muslim shouting "Allahu akbar" and murdering people, now, can we? That would be "Islamophobic"!"
The West are now lining in queue to the Islamic Chopping Block, but it seems no one want to acknowledge this inescapable fate until... well, until their necks are right on chopping block!!
A computer forensic analyst could probably restore the "deleted" cellphone videos.
Meanwhile, a serious reporter should be getting to the reason for this criminal destruction of vital evidence.
A shame traitor hasan survived... to continue his stealth legal and economic jihad against us.
Undaunted, you are correct, thank you.
As stated earlier on another post, I am a mulatto man of mixed race.
I am a musician and a self employed business man living in the downtown Toronto area and I would like to share a tune with all of my “middle eastern brothers” out there tonight. LOLLLLLLL
The rapper/player/pimp Kool Moe Dee in the video below had a significant influence on us guys back in the day.
I have met this guy mentioned above once in real life and could hardly contain my laughter knowing what I know as an ex-Muslim…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaA8jehycEI&feature=related
From About.com......."US Military":
http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/militarylaw1/a/obeyingorders.htm
When one enlists in the United States Military, active duty or reserve, they take the following oath:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
National Guard enlisted members take a similar oath, except they also swear to obey the orders of the Governor of their state.
Officers, upon commission, swear to the following:
I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter.
Military discipline and effectiveness is built on the foundation of obedience to orders. Recruits are taught to obey, immediately and without question, orders from their superiors, right from day-one of boot camp.
Military members who fail to obey the lawful orders of their superiors risk serious consequences. Article 90 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) makes it a crime for a military member to WILLFULLY disobey a superior commissioned officer. Article 91 makes it a crime to WILLFULLY disobey a superior Noncommissioned or Warrant Officer. Article 92 makes it a crime to disobey any lawful order (the disobedience does not have to be "willful" under this article).
In fact, under Article 90, during times of war, a military member who willfully disobeys a superior commissioned officer can be sentenced to death.
Seems like pretty good motivation to obey any order you're given, right? Nope. These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed, but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders -- if the order was illegal.
"I was only following orders," has been unsuccessfully used as a legal defense in hundreds of cases (probably most notably by Nazi leaders at the Nuremberg tribunals following World War II). The defense didn't work for them, nor has it worked in hundreds of cases since.
The first recorded case of a United States Military officer using the "I was only following orders" defense dates back to 1799. During the War with France, Congress passed a law making it permissible to seize ships bound to any French Port. However, when President John Adams wrote the order to authorize the U.S. Navy to do so, he wrote that Navy ships were authorized to seize any vessel bound for a French port, or traveling from a French port. Pursuant to the President's instructions, a U.S. Navy captain seized a Danish Ship (the Flying Fish), which was en route from a French Port. The owners of the ship sued the Navy captain in U.S. maritime court for trespass. They won, and the United States Supreme Court upheld the decision. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Navy commanders "act at their own peril" when obeying presidential orders when such orders are illegal.
The Vietnam War presented the United States military courts with more cases of the "I was only following orders" defense than any previous conflict. The decisions during these cases reaffirmed that following manifestly illegal orders is not a viable defense from criminal prosecution. In United States v. Keenan, the accused (Keenan) was found guilty of murder after he obeyed in order to shoot and kill an elderly Vietnamese citizen. The Court of Military Appeals held that "the justification for acts done pursuant to orders does not exist if the order was of such a nature that a man of ordinary sense and understanding would know it to be illegal." (Interestingly, the soldier who gave Keenan the order, Corporal Luczko, was acquitted by reason of insanity).
My comment: Does an order to destroy evidence of a crime committed against service members by another service member seem "lawful"?
Yes, it clearly was an unlawful order,
but a side benefit is its destruction eliminates jihadi trophy film material,
so I hope they let it slide - no way the evidence isn't already overwhelming.
He was probably thinking about the impact on families and had a gut reaction.
I like the side benefit, too. Let's move on.
I think I agree with you. The media would have done an FOIA and showed it on the news.
@ Bingo & Moe Foe
I disagree with you both. I'm sure the families of those slaughtered in this jihad attack would prefer to have the assailant convicted. That means the evidence, no matter how graphic, is a necessary part of that process.
And attributing gooey 'liberal left' type reason for deleting the film evidence is hardly convincing.
Perhaps it is prohibited to take any pictures inside the Fort Hood perimeter, hence the guy suggested to delete them. There are plenty of evidences forwarded by several eyewitnesses.
CNN has a bit more detail on this story at:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/10/15/texas.fort.hood.hearing/
Aviles said he was told by a non-commissioned officer, who Aviles said was acting on the orders of an officer, to delete the video on the same day of the shooting. He did not describe to the court what the video contained.
It was not immediately clear whether the military would look into why the video was ordered deleted.
...
A Fort Hood official, who insisted on anonymity because of the ongoing criminal investigation into the shootings, said, "Since this matter was raised during the Article 32 hearing, it is for the Article 32 hearing officer to decide whether to make further inquiries to the soldier's chain of command for additional information."
...
Yes, it may very well be possible to restore the "deleted" videos on the cell phone, provided they were actually deleted as was ordered. The article didn't say whether Pfc. Aviles actually complied with the order. But either way, the videos could still be available. I imagine there are experts within the Army who are well aware of this.
There is something else going on here, apart from whether the videos substantially add to the prosecution's case or not. Like everyone else here I smell a cover up.
As Wellington and Duh_swami said, the NCO that ordered the destruction of the videos should be investigated and prosecuted. With the Obama administration, there is little chance this will happen.
This is shocking.
How can evidence be destroyed without the trial being over?
As one poster mentioned, maybe some tech-savvy guy can get the images back.
Hassan should be severely punished and till that happens, all evidence must be preserved.
Given that Allah is a proper name and illah is arabic for god, hence there is no illah but Allah. Allahu Ackbar being translated Allah is Great is far more accurate.
Unfortunately the concept of God having a name is alien to most as in a vain attempt to not take his name in vain it was removed from most of the 7000 places it appears in the bible. Thus due to superstitions the abillity of the public to identify God by name and thus reallize other religions may indeed name God is foriegn to many.
Someone, either the military or the press, is withholding information...Even the idea of 'two' video's is suspect...There was only one event, videoed by one soldier...Why would there be two video's? Even the idea that this soldier had the presence of mind to turn on his camera, instead of ducking for cover is suspect. That the non com would order them destroyed for no known reason, is suspect...Suspect+suspect+suspect= Suspicion...There's a rat in there somewhere, I can smell it...
All cases like this everywhere are to be solved by calling it an act of crime or insanity. Any alleged reference to any alleged religion or alleged act of alleged terrorism are to be just that, "alleged", and no longer very high on the list of alleged causes if the powers that be can help it.
In the interest of bridge building, mutual understanding, eternal peace, Interfaith and dialogue I suppose, and to avoid admitting that there are higher loyalties than mere citizenship and patriotism. I fear the Muslims are laughing themselves silly whenever they get away with it: the Infidel walls have crumpled a bit more.
'Unfortunately the concept of God having a name is alien to most as in a vain attempt to not take his name in vain it was removed from most of the 7000 places it appears in the bible'.
Could you explain who issued the authority to remove these 7000 entries from the Bible...and when that was done?
I would agree that 'God' has no name...The word is a title...Allah is a name...All 'things' have names...Allah is a 'thing'...
Since most would agree that 'God' is not a 'thing', and Allah is, Allah cannot be God...
So - he was ordered to delete the videos. Did in fact delete them or not? Why can the press never get it bloody right.
However, my suspicion is that it merely comes down to the military policing itself in a sensitive era. OR: that the issue - possible jihadis in the army - IS the sensitive issue. One or the other.
It's the cell phone that is Islamophobic. It's probably not halal either.
Recall in the early hours after the shooting, there were reports of a second suspect:
Before any of the msm identified the shooter as a muslim, by 6:15PM 11/5/2009 CAIR was already on defensive footing when they posted the following press release:
There is ample reason to believe there is more to this story - - - information that has been or is in the process of being scrubbed to preserve the multi-culti policy currently embraced by the top brass.
From the article:
"Can't have a video circulating of a Muslim shouting "Allahu akbar" and murdering people, now, can we? That would be "Islamophobic"!"
Exactly.
Being ordered to delete the video was an attempt to cover up and hide what surely would have incensed the public. How much would anyone like to bet that if the perp was white and not yelling "allahu akbar" we'd have seen that video all over the news?
A phobia is the irrational fear of something.
After 1400 years of Islamic violence against all other religions with its genocidal agenda against non-Muslims, in particular against Jews, starting with the massacre of hundreds of Jews through mass beheading in the streets of Madina, and the treacherous attack on the Khaybar, according documented Muslim written tradition treasure is repeatedly mentioned, rather than Allah, and the same genocidal agenda against Jews repeated verbatim today in Article Seven of the Hamas "Covenant", never to be denounced by any credible Islamic scholar, it is clear that the fear of Islamic Jihaddist violence is never irrational, as eveidenced in 9/11, Mumbai, and Fort Hood.
So the only real phobia apparent in the politically correct West, especially in Holland, UK, the rest of Eurabia and the US can be simply described as:
Islamophobia-phobia or the fear of being branded an Islamophobe by the Islamo-Fascists and their spineless collaborators!
I agree that there's something being covered up here. Surely Pfc. Aviles didn't say "My non-com ordered me to destroy...." No, he must have said: "Sgt. So-and-so ordered me to destroy ...." If he had said "my non-com" the tribunal would at once have asked the non-com's name.
So the non-com's name must be in the record of the proceedings. The tribunal must have with-held it from the press, or issued a gag order on the press. One reason for doing so is that the military may be preparing proceedings against this non-com, and believe that public knowledge and discussion of him would be prejudicial to the proceedings. Just a suggestion.
I would translate Allahu Akbar as Muhammad is great because that's who Allah is, after all.
I would translate Allahu Akbar as "Muhammad is great"
"Allahu Akbar" used to be translated "God is great" when Islam mostly was something beyond the Ocean, it was and is the version most acceptable for Western consumption.
But the real meaning is that "Allah is greater (than anything else, and I mean you in particular, Infidel dog)", and therefore "Allah is greatest".
"God is great" didn't really matter back then, but now it is definitely correct-speak, vague and inoffensive as such usually is.
My soldier has just returned from Iraq safe and sound. Now he only has 18 months until retirement. Until I watched the head of the US Army voice his concern about their Muslim programs instead of the well being of our SOLDIERS I was proud of my step son's service. Now I just want him the hell out of that freeking run like s**t organization. They are just as PC as the rest of the f**ked up government. Sorry to be so crude, but I am out of adjectives to describe how angry I feel about this.
Kind of makes you wonder why parents are still sending there kids to Sonoran Science Academy on David Monthon Airforce Base. Its kind of like a slap in the face isn't it? To put a charter school with Islamic ties to a criminal cleric like Gulen after Fort Hood? Kinda like a ground zero mosque isn't it?
Why send your kids to any of these gulen charter schools ?
People need to wake up start speading the word about this. It is only a matter of time before these groups become radical and your child is caought in the cross fire.
I've got news for you simple yokels: That N.C.O. that "ordered" the soldier to destroy the important evidence will never be found - all will be swept under the dirty rug, and to keep it there subterranean threats will be made, and blackmail and Oil Money Bribes will finish nailing down that dirty rug forever. And so it will be until the end when the savages finally get to own our rich and geographically well located country lock, stock, and barrel. Until then, go back to sleep.
I'm not as concerned about what Muslims choose to call their invisible friend as I am about how many Muslims choose to follow their god's commandments and what that means for the rest of us.
Has "everyone" drunk the stinking Koolaid?????
This post has absolutely incensed me.
Precisely, every post on Jihad Watch incenses me.
America's creme de la creme soldiers are out there with absolutely no protection from the D.C. weasels. Check out what our government is doing to Army Ranger 1 Lt. Michael Behenna, a true war hero, rotting in prison for 25 years in Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas.
Is this outragous government banking on us forgetting the animal, Nidal Hassan????
Never, we will never forget....
Anyone working for the Army (civilian, contractor and military) received an email, NOT TO GO TO THE WIKI SITE where secret documents are put. What is that all about? When a civilian or contractor is off work, they can do what they want, as long as they don't hurt the Army.
Count on it: someone in the "delete it" chain-of-command is a Muslim.
It seems that one of the big mistakes here goes back to the Clinton era when soldiers were prohibited from "packing heat" on a military base. Yeah, Yeah... PTSD. Well, I feel a lot safer with my buddies suffering from PTSD all strapped, than the idea of one supposedly sane soldier sneaking a piece into the base processing center. Call me old fashion, but I still feel that if one idiot can pack a piece, we all should be allowed to. How many rounds would have left that 5.7 if there were 50 other soldiers itchin on the trigger?
You should be proud, don;t give up on that.
Yet, there is a major problem in the U.S. military in which people often receive unlawful orders. It happened to a friend of mine who was verbally ordered to maintain equipment in a manner that violated standing orders, and the officer who did so later denied it. My friend was lucky. A senior officer understood the situation, managed to direct the disciplinary measures away from a court martial, and sent him to Okinawa for two years. BTW, this happened in the years between the Korean and Vietnam wars, so this is not new.
I know of another similar situation involving a Navy reactor technician - which made the order he was given a VERY BIG DEAL. When he protested that "If I had disobeyed my commanding officer I would have been right here for that" his interrogators answered "That's right, you would have been here anyway.".
The problem is so pervasive that there is a saying for it: "The eagle likes to eat its young". I think that the military can be a great career, and is certainly a needed career, but no one should go into it without being able to think like a lawyer.
Sorry, to take a jog here or derail any stream, but does anyone remember what occured at the FAA/ATC with the events of 911? Some quality manager (Kevin Delaney) ordered the destruction of a cassette tape that contained audio testimonies of the air traffic controllers who were working the 911 pilots and aircraft that day--the tape was produced within hours of the events of that day. Delaney destroyed the tape without advising higher-ups several monthes after the event --he was earlier instructed by higher ups to retain all information related to 911:
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=kevin_delaney_1
I could relate enough anecdotes about how the Marine Corps has mistreated some very good people, but now is not the time for that.
Needless to say, there are some bastards at work all over the place.
It is necessary to eradicate all evidence linked to Islam in this case and all future cases so that the perp in this case is "legalised" as certified looney rather than a jihadist in keeping with our government's official policy of muslim appeasement, after all we spend billions every year on "project muslim appeasement", can't let that go to waste now can we? Also, they think it would "offend" muslim minority serving in the armed forces.
Government knows best!