The John Adams Project

[WillowTree]

When I think of the terrorist atrocity that happened eight years ago, I feel deeply for people like Vic and Christina Colaio. These two fine Americans lost their sons Stephen and Mark, who both worked in the World Trade Center. Along with their daughter, Jean, the elderly couple suffers their loss on a daily basis. Time does not heal those kinds of wounds.

That is why I am so enraged by the John Adams Project, a group of subversive Americans affiliated with the ACLU who are sneaking around taking pictures of CIA agents who may have interrogated captured al-Qaida guys in the wake of the Sept. 11 attack. This insidious outfit believes the CIA tortured casually and the U.S.A. is a "human rights violator."

After taking the surreptitious photos, the Adams Project then passes them on to lawyers representing incarcerated terrorists, hoping that an accused man will, in turn, accuse a CIA agent of torturing him. This nasty business is now being investigated by the Justice Department, but the Obama administration has kept very quiet about it and, strangely, so have the media











The John Adams Project - HUMAN EVENTS

 

[jillian]

cause we all know how offended you are about CIA agents being outed.

 

[dilloduck]

cause we all know how offended you are about CIA agents being outed.

biggest apple and smallest orange I've ever seen.

 

[xsited1]

More hypocrisy from the Left. This part of the article is another glaring example:

Remember Valerie Plame? She was the CIA operative publicly exposed by columnist Robert Novak in an Iraq weapons-of-mass-destruction controversy. After that happened, the left-wing media went wild with indignation. How could anyone name a CIA person, thereby putting him or her in danger? The New York Times was on fire over the story. But when faced with the facts about the John Adams Project, the Times buried the story on page A-20.

 

[jillian]

i didn't take any positon on this group, did i?

the hypocrites are the loons who thought outing plame was ok.

oh...and X, the opinion piece the loon linked to? i'm afraid that it's opinion isn't dispositive of anything.

 

[WillowTree]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hw1It3AlXmQ]YouTube - Loon calls[/ame]

 

[rightwinger]

So you are saying one crime justifies another?

 

[rightwinger]

John Adams is known for having defended the British Soldiers who were involved in the Boston massacre. Even though he was American, he believed they deserved a fair trial and proper representation. He was despised by Bostonians who wanted to lynch them.

Adams got the soldiers off

 

[SFC Ollie]

"We take this step because we simply cannot stand by and allow the Bush administration's military commissions to make a mockery of our Constitution and our values. We believe in the American justice system – despite its imperfections and distortions by pundits, politicians and ideologues – and we believe we can make the system stronger by engaging it and fighting for what is right, fighting for fair trials and for America's reputation."

This was taken off the ACLU's web page.

Why is it that they are calling a court that our Supreme Court Justified unconstitutional?

They are not fighting for what's right, they are fighting for a fat paycheck, from our pockets for defending our enemies.

Fuck the ACLU, never liked em anyway.

John Adams Project - Statement of Anthony D. Romero | American Civil Liberties Union

 

[dilloduck]

John Adams is known for having defended the British Soldiers who were involved in the Boston massacre. Even though he was American, he believed they deserved a fair trial and proper representation. He was despised by Bostonians who wanted to lynch them.

Adams got the soldiers off

ewwwwww That's gross

 

[WillowTree]

John Adams is known for having defended the British Soldiers who were involved in the Boston massacre. Even though he was American, he believed they deserved a fair trial and proper representation. He was despised by Bostonians who wanted to lynch them.

Adams got the soldiers off

B I N G O Freedom for the terrorist that planned 9-11.. B I N G O

 

[rightwinger]

John Adams is known for having defended the British Soldiers who were involved in the Boston massacre. Even though he was American, he believed they deserved a fair trial and proper representation. He was despised by Bostonians who wanted to lynch them.

Adams got the soldiers off

ewwwwww That's gross

Kangaroo courts anyone???

If they are guilty....prove they are guilty in a court of law. It is how civilized societies behave

 

[WillowTree]

John Adams is known for having defended the British Soldiers who were involved in the Boston massacre. Even though he was American, he believed they deserved a fair trial and proper representation. He was despised by Bostonians who wanted to lynch them.

Adams got the soldiers off

ewwwwww That's gross

Kangaroo courts anyone???

If they are guilty....prove they are guilty in a court of law. It is how civilized societies behave

you should just say it... it won't hurt your slogan really is "FREE THE TERRORIST" we understand you anti american thinking. yes we do and you can poke your thumb in the survivors eyes too.

 

[Navy1960]

"Fear is the foundation of most governments; but it is so sordid and brutal a passion, and renders men in whose breasts it predominates so stupid and miserable, that Americans will not be likely to approve of any political institution which is founded on it." John Adams

While the John Admas Project believes that in terms of defending the rights of otthers that by exposing these agents to the public they are doing a good thing, they are in fact putting these people in harms way and exposing them and their famiies to danger needlessly. If the John Adams Project had wanted to defend these terrorists , then they have every right to do so in a manner that does not put others lives in danger. Someone had mentioned the Plame affair and I fail to understand why there was so much outrage over that , and little over this, are these agents lives worth no less that her's because she happend to have the same political beliefs? In the end these agents like it or not were working for a command structure and operating under order(s), so let's not advocate a group that would choose to expose them and their families needlessly to danger all in the name of defending people who are responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent Americans.

 

[Contessa_Sharra]

Funny how we can do some of everything but aren't brave enough to man up and actually OWN what we do! How CHICKENSHIT IS THAT!!!!!

 

[rightwinger]

ewwwwww That's gross

Kangaroo courts anyone???

If they are guilty....prove they are guilty in a court of law. It is how civilized societies behave

you should just say it... it won't hurt your slogan really is "FREE THE TERRORIST" we understand you anti american thinking. yes we do and you can poke your thumb in the survivors eyes too.

Since when are basic human rights anti-american?
They are what our founding fathers fought for. The right to a fair trial, right to face your accuser, right to a speedy trial, right of habeus corpus..

How Un-American!

 

[Navy1960]

I have a basic question to ask here, do people believe that a person engaged in armed conflict captured on the battlefield in any conflict is subject to American Law? It does seem to boil down to the difference between are people captured on the battlefield by US Military forces or handed over to the US Military a civilian matter, or a military matter. I have another observation, given the fact that many believe this is a civilian matter and people are under the impression that we fight wars with "American Values" , I wonder then if those same values were in play when Harry Truman made the final decision to drop the Atomic bomb(s) on Japan. The bottom line here, war is a brutal, disgusting, and nasty enterprise. If a nation chooses to engage in it , then they do so knowing that. Forgive me, while I understand that some moral value structure is important in the prosecution of war it should not be the guiding factor in the decision making. If the nations morals are so demanded both on it's soldiers and those they are fighting, then in order to keeps it's own people safe it's best not to engage in war in the first place if your not willing to accept that war is going to result in brutality in order to lead to victory. That is a sad fact of war. the only time you win a war really, is when you have averted one.

 

[WillowTree]

Kangaroo courts anyone???

If they are guilty....prove they are guilty in a court of law. It is how civilized societies behave

you should just say it... it won't hurt your slogan really is "FREE THE TERRORIST" we understand you anti american thinking. yes we do and you can poke your thumb in the survivors eyes too.

Since when are basic human rights anti-american?
They are what our founding fathers fought for. The right to a fair trial, right to face your accuser, right to a speedy trial, right of habeus corpus..

How Un-American!

anti american because the SCOTUS already ruled in favor of the military tribunal,, you are trampling all over the rights of AMERICANS by thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS that's what marxists do

 

[rightwinger]

you should just say it... it won't hurt your slogan really is "FREE THE TERRORIST" we understand you anti american thinking. yes we do and you can poke your thumb in the survivors eyes too.

Since when are basic human rights anti-american?
They are what our founding fathers fought for. The right to a fair trial, right to face your accuser, right to a speedy trial, right of habeus corpus..

How Un-American!

anti american because the SCOTUS already ruled in favor of the military tribunal,, you are trampling all over the rights of AMERICANS by thumbing your ass at the SCOTUS that's what marxists do

Did they rule against the validity of American courts to try those who have committed crimes against Americans?

I don't think so.

The American court system has done just fine for over 200 years, it will do fine now

 

[rightwinger]

I have a basic question to ask here, do people believe that a person engaged in armed conflict captured on the battlefield in any conflict is subject to American Law? It does seem to boil down to the difference between are people captured on the battlefield by US Military forces or handed over to the US Military a civilian matter, or a military matter. I have another observation, given the fact that many believe this is a civilian matter and people are under the impression that we fight wars with "American Values" , I wonder then if those same values were in play when Harry Truman made the final decision to drop the Atomic bomb(s) on Japan. The bottom line here, war is a brutal, disgusting, and nasty enterprise. If a nation chooses to engage in it , then they do so knowing that. Forgive me, while I understand that some moral value structure is important in the prosecution of war it should not be the guiding factor in the decision making. If the nations morals are so demanded both on it's soldiers and those they are fighting, then in order to keeps it's own people safe it's best not to engage in war in the first place if your not willing to accept that war is going to result in brutality in order to lead to victory. That is a sad fact of war. the only time you win a war really, is when you have averted one.

Those who were captured on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan and are accused of crimes against those nations will be tried in military tribunals. Their status is fuzzy as to whom has juristiction

Those who are accused of crimes against US citizens on 9-11 on US Soil should be tried in US courts. The juristiction is clear. They did the crime here...they face justice here