Navy Seals face court martial after capture of suspected terrorist who claimed he was punched; Navy Seals face court martial even after passing polygraph test (the polygraph test included being asked whether the suspect was punched) and even after lying charges dropped against other Navy Seals.
Ahmed Hashim Abed, is the suspect behind the brutal killing of four Blackwater contractors in Fallujah, Iraq in 2004, and apparently it was several days after his capture that he complained of being punched. Apparently, Al Qaeda’s training manual also instructs its members to claim abuse if captured.
Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe still face courts-martial for allegedly not protecting a reputed terrorist after his capture in Fallujah, Iraq. Huertas faces a second charge of impeding an investigation.
A third SEAL, Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe, will be court-martialed next month in Norfolk. He allegedly punched Abed in the stomach while Keefe and Huertas were in the room.
Are a suspected terrorists claims of being “roughed up” sufficient to court martial our brave men and women who wear America’s uniform in defense of our nation, as in this case, or are we going overboard with the legal rights we are affording them?
What do you think?
Commander, UMAVA
United Mexican-American Veterans Association
sounds like BS to me
Francisco,
These are the charges remaining against the Navy Seals;
“Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas and Petty Officer 2nd Class Jonathan Keefe still face courts-martial for allegedly not protecting a reputed terrorist after his capture in Fallujah, Iraq. Huertas faces a second charge of impeding an investigation.”
“Are a suspected terrorists claims of being “roughed up” sufficient to court martial our brave men and women who wear America’s uniform in defense of our nation, as in this case, or are we going overboard with the legal rights we are affording them?”
All the right-wing hysteria aside, isn’t this case about FOLLOWING THE LAW?
Here’s what their commander had to say about the charges;
“Maj. Gen. Charles Cleveland, commander of the Army’s Special Operations Command Central and the convening authority of the case, responded to the Rep. Burton’s letter on December 15th, stating that he is more concerned with an alleged cover-up than he is with Abed’s “relatively minor” injuries.”
I also found this very RATIONAL take on the case, please read it, I’d be very interested in your opinion about it;
“The Right Needs to Step Back from the Navy SEALs Trial
I’ve been chewing on this story of the three Navy SEALs over the weekend and, for the life of me, I don’t understand the furor (and, believe me, there’s furor). I’ve yet to have anyone explain why I should be outraged beyond “those guys shouldn’t be tried for giving a dirtbag killer a fat lip”.
Here’s how I’m reading the story. Three Navy SEALs captured the man who allegedly masterminded the torture killing of four American civilians in Fallujah. At some point, they remanded the Islamist to Iraqi authorities for a period of time, after which the Iraqis gave him back to the SEALs. At some point in that process, Mr. Islamist Dirtbag (MID) got a bloody lip. We don’t know who fattened his lip nor how it happened.
There was at some point an official inquiry which has now resulted in charges against the soldiers. The soldiers have refused a lower-profile hearing and so they will stand before a court martial.
So far, so mind-numbingly common.
Nevertheless, the right has nearly exploded with indignation over the very notion that they are on trial for what happened to MID. That’s what I don’t get. I thought the right in this country supported the rule of law. I thought we sought to preserve good order and discipline in our military. Neither of those is served if we simply ignore the fact that a detainee, even a scumbag piece of filth like MID, may have been injured in contravention of regulations while in our soldiers’ custody.
Obviously, someone in those soldiers’ chain of command has information that they violated at least three regulations. Indeed, there is some indication that all of them lied about what happened, since all three were charged with some variant of making a false statement.
Now let me be crystal clear. I don’t believe we should shed even the faintest hint of a tear that MID got himself tuned up a bit, either by our soldiers or by the Iraqis. I would have done a little happy dance, I’m sure, had I read that he had resisted apprehension and was shot several times. However, we have rules for how our soldiers must treat those they have in custody and we don’t get to choose which rules the military enforces and which it ignores. That way lies ruin for our armed forces. We expect all our soldiers to obey all the regulations that pertain to them all the time with no exceptions and when they violate those rules, we should expect they will be dealt with as the regulations demand.
That appears to be exactly what is happening in this case.
I’m sure someone could make a very good case for why we shouldn’t care if a detainee gets a fat lip and that’s fine. But it doesn’t change the fact that the rule exists right now and miscreants can’t simply ignore it because we think it’s a bad rule. Right now, all we’re doing is acting like the progressives, who enforce only the rules they like only against the people they dislike. We don’t want to go down that road, do we?
I think we on the right need to step back from this case and let the hearing play out for a while. We may well learn that the case against them is garbage, or that it was politically-motivated, in which case we should find out why and go after the miscreants with pitchforks and torches. Until then, though, I don’t see anything but a simple case of some soldier who are accused of breaking a rule and are being tried for it.”
holder is a pile of dem. has that racist sob ever charged any body that was black or a dem.? or does he just charge white military/ rep.s
“All the right-wing hysteria aside, isn’t this case about FOLLOWING THE LAW?”
MQ says:
You are unbelievable!
You advocate for illegal immigrants who break the law, kill (AZ farmer), bring drugs into the country, ect….
And have a problem when Men who in most cases have had their best friends killed by these bastards and YOU want them to follow the law!
Wise up!
Last night i watch a brilliant and funny show IRA vs Taliban.. Of course the IRA won!
Why did they win??
NO MERCY!
BRILLIANT… I SAY IF OUR BRAVE MEN AND WOMEN OUT THERE GET A HOLED OF ONE OF THESE MURDERING, WOMEN ENSLAVING BASTARDS… BEAT THE CRAP OUT OF THEM IF THEY GIVE YOU ANY SHIT!
OR CALL THE IRA!
THE IRA, WON’T MIND A SLAP ON THE WRIST FROM THE EVER INCREASING LEFT WING ACTIONS OF THE US MILITARY COMMAND.. I suppose what can you expect- the same baby boomers running this country into the ground are also commanding the US military!
With all these poor military guys/girls do every day .. the only thing that should have been said to the fella that give the scumbag a fat lip, “Don’t let the bastards get to you”. Then he should have been given a free vacation!
Anonster ..You need to stick with what you know,” old shit:”)
“And have a problem when Men who in most cases have had their best friends killed by these bastards and YOU want them to follow the law!”
. . . this is classic totalitarian thinking.
The idea that we are a nation of laws is the cornerstone of our democracy – intended to guard against the proclivities of people like you who would seize power in the name of freedom, wreak violence in the name of peace, and deny liberty under the guise of safety.
MQ,
Speaking of “old shit”, you OWE me an answer or are you just going to be a lying weasel?
ww,
Well said.
YEAH MICHELLE! We know that anonster runs an antique shop, and we know that she (and/or her husband) does really well, since she told Larry that she’s making enough money that Obama raised her taxes, which only happened to the top 5% of Americans.
But we’re still waiting to hear what YOU do for a living, busybody who wastes so much time harassing nonprofits!
“The idea that we are a nation of laws is the cornerstone of our democracy – intended to guard against the proclivities of people like you who would seize power in the name of freedom, wreak violence in the name of peace, and deny liberty under the guise of safety.”
MQ Says:
I trust the men/women who have given this nation the gift of freedom.. so should their commanders.. The American Military not only have to fight the taliban, but now they need to fight against political correctness gone mad in this world. The fact that the taliban scumbag had only a fat lip prove’s that the US military men who are facing a court martial are amazing. The amazing US soldiers brought the scumbag in alive even though they knew most likely he would have cut their heads off!
Democracy is freedom – there is no freedom without a strong and able military.
Soliders are only human, they will make mistakes, but they have a right to make a mistake without losing their honor!. Giving the enemy a fat lip should never be a cause to court martial a soldier…They risked their lives to bring the bastard in alive!
If indeed there is a law stating that military soldiers should treat the enemy with kit gloves -then it is a stupid law!
MQ says:
Owe you what answer?? What do i do??
I told you – i own a company that would light up your life!
“busybody who wastes so much time harassing nonprofits!”
MQ says:
You call it harassing – i call it becoming informed about where the hell the money is going.. Non-profits are very profitable – especially if they are buying to sell real estate using federal money!
“YEAH MICHELLE! We know that anonster runs an antique shop, and we know that she (and/or her husband) does really well, since she told Larry that she’s making enough money that Obama raised her taxes, which only happened to the top 5% of Americans.”
MQ says:
When you’re doing well, its so easy to pay the ridiculous taxes – just ask soro’s – he want’s us all to give more.
When you work your ass off like most in this country and are just making it to pay the bills – the thought of paying more taxes to give to people who don’t pay any taxes – kinda makes most people sick!
I am very happy Anonster and her husband are in the top 5%- most people are not!
ALL i can say is thank God your parents where the generation that fought the 2nd world war..
I just hope my generation can get through all the crap you lot has pile on us!
I am determined too!
“I trust the men/women who have given this nation the gift of freedom.. so should their commanders.. The American Military not only have to fight the taliban, but now they need to fight against political correctness gone mad in this world. The fact that the taliban scumbag had only a fat lip prove’s that the US military men who are facing a court martial are amazing. The amazing US soldiers brought the scumbag in alive even though they knew most likely he would have cut their heads off!”
This is despotic thinking at its worst. Democracies do not entrust the military to decide what constitutes law. When militaries make law, democracy dies. Eisenhower said this best:
“Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect. Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.”
In case you missed this in your officious pimping of the “great generation,” Eisenhower was the Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe who oversaw the invasions of France and Germany.
“A general dissolution of the principles and manners will more surely overthrow the liberties of America than the whole force of the common enemy…. While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue, they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader…” S. Adams ~
MQ,
I’m not asking for the name of your company, but just what sort of company you run, a service company or are you selling an actual product and what service you are providing and/or what product you sell? That’s simple and unobtrusive enough, considering YOU offered the bargain.
You need to defend your character, are you a truthful and trustworthy person or are you a LYING WEASEL?
“This is despotic thinking at its worst. Democracies do not entrust the military to decide what constitutes law. When militaries make law, democracy dies. Eisenhower said this best:”
MQ says:
You are thinking wayyyyy too deep!
There is also a little thing called – innocent till proven other wise!
They have not been charged yet – right??
So what law was broken??
““Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.”
MQ says:
Sure tell that to Danny Pearl… Believe it or not some people want to kill you because of what you stand for – freedom… they don’t like it and they will destroy you and who ever stands in their way.
You are not on the USS enterprise .. This is the real world and in this world there are very very evil and focused human beings who will stop at nothing to insure their ideology is followed..
America has always stood up for freedom.. freedom does not come easy.. I really do think people in the world are generally good and virtuous people.. but you can not be good and virtuous when the enemy wants nothing but to destroy your way of life by any means possible – virtue does not win a war – strength and bravery does!
Enemies care nothing for your virtue’s. They will not ask you if your a good person or not before they pull the trigger!
You guys really need to get out of your bubbles!
Anonster- what are you putting me under a big white light?? Its not healthy go give your foe info!
Thats another thing liberals have not learned!
🙂 BACK TO WORK ALL!
MQ,
You are now a known liar and a weasel, typical conservative, one standard for yourself another for everyone else. Thanks for exposing your true character or should I say LACK OF CHARACTER.
If think you know me so much- then why are you wanting to know more about me??
Since i actually put my name to my work – it says more about my character than it does you’re’s, does it not??
I am willing to put my name to my post’s not some undercover name such as Anonster..
I do not know if you are a liar or a weasel – what i do know is that you do not want to post your name – people might know who you are. I guess you don’t want that!
I don’t care if people know who i am or not, though i am not going to give my SS# out – i am what i am, if you want to know more about me ask me over for dinner.. If i feel like wasting a night i just might come!
And what i am is real, honest and unafraid to stand up to left wing elitists such as yourself.
If i don’t trust your intentions..why the hack would i give you all my details.. My name should be enough, because at least i have the guts to give it out!
🙂
So enough about me and more about the topic..
Though i suppose you find ME..More interesting!
Quinn, you are an Irish welcher and a discredit to your race. We all heard you and anonster make that deal, and we know that she runs an antique store.
Let’s see – all Quinn will say is that her work “will light up your life,” and we know that she’s obviously embarrassed to reveal what her work is. I’m at a loss, all we have beyond that is our imaginations. She operates the stage lights at a strip club?
MQ,
I didn’t make the offer, you did, only a lying weasel would make a deal THEY DIDN’T INTEND TO KEEP. You are also the one who has continually accused me of being a “teacher or a union hack” and when I flatly refuted you, you continued on;
“But if i knew what Anonster did for a living, I bet it has something to do with the underserved and the vulnerable and of course the needy!
What do you do for a living Anonster. Tell me what you do and i will tell you what I do!
Unless you have something to hide – do you work for a Non-profit or better yet the OCR???”
You do not even have the grace and integrity to admit you were wrong, I have nothing to be ASHAMED of, unlike you I haven’t accused anyone of being something they’re not and when I have stepped over the line (like with Larry G.) I have had the decency to apologize.
I shall let this drop, as one should never waste time on a lying weasel, but let me finish by saying that it is better to deal in “old shit” than to BE A PIECE OF OLD SHIT, LIKE MICHELLE QUINN!
“I didn’t make the offer, you did, only a lying weasel would make a deal THEY DIDN’T INTEND TO KEEP. You are also the one who has continually accused me of being a “teacher or a union hack” and when I flatly refuted you, you continued on;”
MQ says:
I stated if you want to know me better, ask me to dinner – whether i come or not is based on whether i am in the mood.. I think that is fair enough.
I also stated i do not trust your intentions – you have given me know reason too.. You are – lets just say the poster child of the union!
So that is where i assume you got your attitude from.. But then again most liberals have that “join me or die” , attitude.
“You do not even have the grace and integrity to admit you were wrong, I have nothing to be ASHAMED of, unlike you I haven’t accused anyone of being something they’re not and when I have stepped over the line (like with Larry G.) I have had the decency to apologize.”
MQ says:
OMG.. I thought you where tougher than that – Ok you big girls blouse..
” I am sorry for hurting your feeling”..
You can continue to attack me with.. idiot, illiterate, Lying weasel and my favorite:
“BE A PIECE OF OLD SHIT, LIKE MICHELLE QUINN!”
I most likely am a lot younger than you… old people like old shit!
Sorry old people, no offense!
You anonster (what ever you’re real name is) are good crack, I will give you that!
MQ aka lying weasel,
“I stated if you want to know me better, ask me to dinner – whether i come or not is based on whether i am in the mood.. I think that is fair enough.”
That was NOT the bargain YOU made, face it Michelle, you made a bargain you never intended to keep and now you’re trying to weasel out of it by changing the conditions, GOOD PEOPLE KEEP THEIR WORD.
” I am sorry for hurting your feeling”..
Don’t worry about my “feelings”, worry instead about your total lack of integrity, your inability to ADMIT that you were wrong when you WERE WRONG, says more about a your character than a truckload of your Irish blarney.
“Believe it or not some people want to kill you because of what you stand for”
Gee, your right. I’m sure Eisenhower had not thought of that when he was FIGHTING THE NAZIS.
Damn,
I apologize to everyone who reads this, earlier I made the following statement;
“I shall let this drop, as one should never waste time on a lying weasel, but let me finish by saying that it is better to deal in “old shit” than to BE A PIECE OF OLD SHIT, LIKE MICHELLE QUINN!”
and then I lost ALL self-control and allowed myself to get sucked back into this tedious and fruitless argument with a lying weasel. Hopefully this is really and truly the end, again, I offer my humble apology.
See MQ aka lying weasel, that’s how it’s done.
You love me and you know it!
You old devil:P
“Gee, your right. I’m sure Eisenhower had not thought of that when he was FIGHTING THE NAZIS”.
MQ says:
I know i am right and so was Eisenhower – i guess that is why he won!
GREAT minds think alike:)
Sorry – I must fly I need to go fix my panel:)
Mr. F … Did you add the, Bloody Quinn??
I like it.. 🙂
I am sure a lot of foes say the same thing!
#24: Michelle Q:
I did NOT add the “Bloody” Quinn to your name…I don’t censor people.
Also, you have NOT answered my questions in post #29 in particular d; e; and f.
What was the question again??
Who put in “bloody Quinn”, just curious?
Behold, I, of course. Remember, you accidentally posted that anonymously and then asked me to put your name on it. I had a feeling you wouldn’t mind being called Bloody Quinn. You should change to that permanently!
I had a hunch it was you Mr. Vern 🙂
I can just hear you as you read my post’s, “bloody Quinn”, “God she is good”.
🙂
Vern, off the subject do you know anyone who teaches piano to kid’s??
Email me if you do!
#2 ANONSTER:
I agree that the law should always be followed, unless there was something immoral about the law, in which case a person should be able to speak up or stand against the immoral or unjust law or on which the application of this law would result in an immoral or unjust end, but the person shall also be prepared to pay the consequences for doing so. For example, we believe in “you shall not murder!” However, we do not treat this as an absolute, because if called for we may kill an aggressor in self-defense or in defense of another.
My general question asked whether a suspected terrorists claims of being “roughed up” sufficient to court martial our brave men and women who wear America’s uniform in defense of our nation, even after reasonable inquiries have been made and which resulted on charges of lying being dropped, or are we going overboard with the legal rights we are affording the suspected terrorists, especially given the incentives for the terrorist to lie.
I am guided by several principles:
1) I think Prosecutors/commanding officers have some legal discretionary authority.
2) Terrorists are trained to make claims of abuse especially against US or allied forces.
3) Terrorists know that they can tie up our system, and by doing so can effectively remove the troops from the fight against whom they make claims.
4) The military has two main objectives: First – Mission Accomplishment. Second – Troop Welfare.
5) Strict order and discipline is always required, and our troops must always follow all lawful and legal orders, even at the risk to themselves. They have to be to detach their personal feelings.
6) As a military person, if I suspected a member of my platoon was committing an illegal act, for example violating the laws of warfare as abusing or torturing a prisoner, I would make it my mission to charge them. I’ll explain why.
7) We should also NOT play politics with our troops welfare.
The prosecuting/commanding officer should have made some initial reasonable inquiries. If the prosecuting officer made some reasonable inquiries, then the officer should have used discretionary authority to determine whether to proceed or not. I hope the commanding officer did this considering all the circumstances surrounding this issue, such as the fact that suspected terrorists are trained to make up charges, and that they know that doing so will effectively remove the troops from the fight. So the removed troops will be prosecuted, and will thus not be able to prosecute or conduct the war against terrorists. This is a very effective and efficient tactic for the terrorists to use. It is very similar as to what a sniper may do. ..Injure a soldier rather than killing the soldier, because this injured soldier will need to be cared for and removed from the battlefield by others. Thus rather than removing just one soldier, the sniper has removed several.
So the terrorist by their allegation will have then effectively affected the primary objectives of all troops. Mission Accomplishment and Troop Welfare. The terrorist will have affected the mission of the troops, and will have also affected their well-being.
Military discipline is essential, and so is the necessity of separating our feelings.
And the punishment must fit the crime. Did we know if the suspected terrorist was tortured? No. But it also does not seem that this was alleged.
So how far do you take the prosecution for an alleged MINOR infraction that may NOT have occurred, considering all other circumstances under which this is alleged or the GREATER motivations for making this allegation? (Yes originally there were indications that the Navy Seals lied, but these charges were dropped…so should the whole charges have been dropped?)
I also ask myself what SMALL pleasure would an elite Navy Seal have to gain for punching a suspected terrorist, especially if he knows he might be charged for a crime…and if he knows that doing so might take him away from the GREATER PLEASURE of killing terrorists.
I am concerned if there was a greater infraction…that of a cover-up or of obstructing justice…but I don’t know enough. But I do know that I would hope we would be giving the benefit of the doubt to those who are willing to put their lives at risk over those whose stated mission is to destroy us, destroy our mission or our troops.
As I said before, as a military person, if I suspected a member of my platoon was committing an illegal act, for example violating the laws of warfare as abusing or torturing a prisoner, I would make it my mission to charge them…as difficult or as uncomfortable this would be for me. Why?
The objective is to accomplish the mission and to take care of the troops…but the troops mission is not torture. If to accomplish the mission, it becomes necessary to use deadly force, then that is acceptable and essential. However, if we were to allow our troops to engage in illegal acts i.e. torture, this would be detrimental to our mission and to OUR troops. Because if the enemy knew that US forces would torture them if they surrendered, then they would be more likely to FIGHT TO THE DEATH, which would put OUR MISSION AT RISK or cause greater casualties (deaths or injuries) to OUR TROOPS. So the personal and illegal actions of this member of the platoon would be putting our mission at risk and risking the lives of the other members of the platoon, rather than convincing the typical enemy to surrender.
Our typical enemies are more likely to surrender if they know we will not mistreat or torture them. However, we must keep in mind that extremists/Jihadists are willing to torture, maim, and kill innocent civilians, and it is not a far stretch of the imagination to think that they would thus readily lie against our troops.
I don’t know enough facts in this case. But I know we must let the facts guide us, and I hope we are giving greater credence to our Troops for an alleged minor infraction that may not have happened than to a sworn enemy that lies, and I also hope we are NOT playing politics in the prosecution of these troops to appease our “shaky allies”. And I agree that if we find out that somebody played politics with the well-being of our overall mission and with the well-being of our troops (in this case these Navy Seals), I think then we should definitely hold these people accountable.
Francisco “Paco” Barragan (my opinions only and not those of any group)
#25 & #26 to Michelle Q:
Ooppss..I left out the link…You did not answer my questions in post #29 in particular d; e; and f.
http://orangejuiceblog.com/2010/04/housing-not-for-profit-retains-former-journalist/#more-40780
From Baghdad…A military jury cleared U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas of all charges, a military spokesman said.
The first of three Navy SEALs accused of mishandling a suspect in the high-profile killings of contractors in Iraq was found not guilty at a court-martial today.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/04/22/navy.seal.verdict/index.html?hpt=T2