Haditha the new My Lai?

[pegwinn]

Well I am not an American, so to argue that only Americans can get it is not quite fair. Wanna Bet?


If court martial is more fair or more political. Frankly I do not know, what do you think ? A court martial is more stern than a civilian criminal court. A court martial only requires 2/3 to convict. A court martial has a panel (jury) made up of educated people who actually understand the defendants way of life and how it may/may not effect what they are alleged to do. The Judge will not put up with the BS you get in a civilian court.

By how I and even Kathianne judges the press and public statements it seems
something bad went down. You pretend nothing happend till someone is convicted is your stand. Try it on Dafur. Do you always deliberatly misinterpret things or is today a special occasion? Post where I said "nothing happend" and I will buy you a beer. Otherwize get your head out of your ass.

You convict Murtha on being anti Marines. Again oh wise one, please link to where I said that. I said "I am horrified at the idea of a fellow Marine running off at the suck to score political cool points". What if he tells the truth. Then a properly convened General Court Martial will sentence someone properly. Finding someone guilty and using it for soundbyte purposes is strickly low class.
Is he still a traitor in your eyes. If it is the trues he is a hero, if it is false
he is a traitor. Thats my approach. Do you understand the legal definition of traitor? Perhaps it is that you are translating English to German to English again. I told you, It's an American thing.......

:usa:

 

[Annie]

Just found this, perhaps it will clarify my position:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/27/AR2006052700846.html?sub=AR

Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgment

Sunday, May 28, 2006; Page B06

A year ago I was charged with two counts of premeditated murder and with other war crimes related to my service in Iraq. My wife and mother sat in a Camp Lejeune courtroom for five days while prosecutors painted me as a monster; then autopsy evidence blew their case out of the water, and the Marine Corps dropped all charges against me ["Marine Officer Cleared in Killing of Two Iraqis," news story, May 27, 2005].

So I know something about rushing to judgment, which is why I am so disturbed by the remarks of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) regarding the Haditha incident ["Death Toll Rises in Haditha Attack, GOP Leader Says," news story, May 20]. Mr. Murtha said, "Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."

In the United States, we have a civil and military court system that relies on an investigatory and judicial process to make determinations based on evidence. The system is not served by such grand pronouncements of horror and guilt without the accuser even having read the investigative report.

Mr. Murtha's position is particularly suspect when he is quoted by news services as saying that the strain of deployment "has caused them [the Marines] to crack in situations like this." Not only is he certain of the Marines' guilt but he claims to know the cause, which he conveniently attributes to a policy he opposes.

Members of the U.S. military serving in Iraq need more than Mr. Murtha's pseudo-sympathy. They need leaders to stand with them even in the hardest of times. Let the courts decide if these Marines are guilty. They haven't even been charged with a crime yet, so it is premature to presume their guilt -- unless that presumption is tied to a political motive.

ILARIO PANTANO

Jacksonville, N.C.

 

[Dr Grump]

Do you understand the legal definition of traitor?

It doesn't help when you get Hobbit starting threads calling senators traitors. Now, I don't agree with what the senators did re the immigration vote, but when you overuse a word, and use it incorrectly (IMO) how is a person whose first language is not English supposed to sift the wheat from the chafe...

 

[Annie]

It doesn't help when you get Hobbit starting threads calling senators traitors. Now, I don't agree with what the senators did re the immigration vote, but when you overuse a word, and use it incorrectly (IMO) how is a person whose first language is not English supposed to sift the wheat from the chafe...

Why are you ignoring my hours old post? Other than for political reasons?

 

[Gunny]

Well I am not an American, so to argue that only Americans can get it
is not quite fair.


If court martial is more fair or more political. Frankly I do not know, what do you think ?

By how I and even Kathianne judges the press and public statements it seems
something bad went down. You pretend nothing happend till someone is convicted is your stand. Try it on Dafur.

You convict Murtha on being anti Marines. What if he tells the truth.
Is he still a traitor in your eyes. If it is the trues he is a hero, if it is false
he is a traitor. Thats my approach.

Kathianne's argument is quite fair, AND relevant in that the accused are US military personnel and citizens of the United States. They are subject to the laws as stated in the US Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Your ignorance of the law in either case makes her no less correct.

Darfur is irrelevant tot his topic in that PROVEN crimes have been committed.

Murtha is a a political hack, and the Dems are attempting to use his past servie to legitimize his anti-administration/anti-Bush/anti-war stance. His past service is unquestionable, and is what the record states. His CURRENT behavior discredits his past service only because the left attempts to use his past service as soem sort of sledge hammer; when, his past military service and current service as a politician are two. separate things.

If there is any dishonesty going on, it is by the left and Murtha, attempting to use his prior service to lend credibility to his current left wingnut ranting.

Bottom line: In accordance with the Unifrom Code of Military Justice (military law) and the Constitution of the United States, the accused are innocent until proven guilty. Beginning, middle and end of story.

And I agree with the MSgt .... IF they are guilty and convicted, they need to fry. BUT, until that judgement is rendered, convicting them before the fact is just bullshit.

 

[Gunny]

It doesn't help when you get Hobbit starting threads calling senators traitors. Now, I don't agree with what the senators did re the immigration vote, but when you overuse a word, and use it incorrectly (IMO) how is a person whose first language is not English supposed to sift the wheat from the chafe...

Perhaps in Hobbit's eyes Murtha IS a traitor?

I find the left's attempted use of Murtha's prior military service to lend credibility to his anti-Republican ranting NOW to be just so much bullshit.

If he served in the Marines with distinction, power to him. Irrelevant to the fact he is a tool, in every sense of the word, for lefty Bush-bashers and anti-war knucklehead ostriches who won't get it until an ICBM flies right up their collective and individual a-holes.

 

[Annie]

Kathianne's argument is quite fair, AND relevant in that the accused are US military personnel and citizens of the United States. They are subject to the laws as stated in the US Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Your ignorance of the law in either case makes her no less correct.

Darfur is irrelevant tot his topic in that PROVEN crimes have been committed.

Murtha is a a political hack, and the Dems are attempting to use his past servie to legitimize his anti-administration/anti-Bush/anti-war stance. His past service is unquestionable, and is what the record states. His CURRENT behavior discredits his past service only because the left attempts to use his past service as soem sort of sledge hammer; when, his past military service and current service as a politician are two. separate things.

If there is any dishonesty going on, it is by the left and Murtha, attempting to use his prior service to lend credibility to his current left wingnut ranting.

Bottom line: In accordance with the Unifrom Code of Military Justice (military law) and the Constitution of the United States, the accused are innocent until proven guilty. Beginning, middle and end of story.

And I agree with the MSgt .... IF they are guilty and convicted, they need to fry. BUT, until that judgement is rendered, convicting them before the fact is just bullshit.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to GunnyL again.

 

[shepherdboy]

At least they're not in Guantanamo without the encumberance of a trial.

Yea those guys at Gitmo are such angels.

 

[jillian]

Yea those guys at Gitmo are such angels.

How would you know? None of them have been charged or tried.

 

[Gunny]

How would you know? None of them have been charged or tried.

POWs aren't charged with crimes unless they violate the Law of War. They are held for the duration of the war, then released, uncharged at the end of the war.

 

[shepherdboy]

POWs aren't charged with crimes unless they violate the Law of War. They are held for the duration of the war, then released, uncharged at the end of the war.

Ditto!

 

[jillian]

POWs aren't charged with crimes unless they violate the Law of War. They are held for the duration of the war, then released, uncharged at the end of the war.

If they're POW's then the Geneva Convention applies to them, no?

 

[Hobbit]

If they're POW's then the Geneva Convention applies to them, no?

Nope. They're prisoners of war, but as ununiformed soldiers, they do not enjoy the protections of the Geneva Convention. All the nicities we've given them are purely a courtesy.

 

[Hobbit]

Oh, and I do think the propagators of that sham of a bill truly are traitors. We have an enemy to the south. This enemy has actively subverted our laws, trained its citizens to enter this country without our permission, and has announced plans to lay claim to our territory. They are our enemies, plain and simply. By attempting to grant legality and legitimacy to enemy invaders, rewarding their behavior, offering them tax money, and tying the hands of law enforcement to a leash held by the enemy government, they have offered a huge amount of aid and comfort to an enemy. Worse yet, they commit these atrocities while telling the American people that they're trying to stop the very thing they're endorsing. They are traitors, and while they deserve to have a death befitting traitors (firing squad or keel hauling), I'll be satisfied if they're tossed out of Washington on their asses this fall.

 

[Rico]

Oh, and I do think the propagators of that sham of a bill truly are traitors. We have an enemy to the south. This enemy has actively subverted our laws, trained its citizens to enter this country without our permission, and has announced plans to lay claim to our territory. They are our enemies, plain and simply. By attempting to grant legality and legitimacy to enemy invaders, rewarding their behavior, offering them tax money, and tying the hands of law enforcement to a leash held by the enemy government, they have offered a huge amount of aid and comfort to an enemy. Worse yet, they commit these atrocities while telling the American people that they're trying to stop the very thing they're endorsing. They are traitors, and while they deserve to have a death befitting traitors (firing squad or keel hauling), I'll be satisfied if they're tossed out of Washington on their asses this fall.

.

 

[Annie]

Lots of links. I agree with most of her analysis, with the exception that if wrongdoing is found, it should not condemn 'the Marines', but rather 'the Marines that took part in it...':

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005284.htm

INCIDENT AT HADITHA, PT. II
By Michelle Malkin · May 30, 2006 11:02 AM

On May 18th, I was one of many bloggers on the Right to condemn Democrat Rep. John Murtha for blabbing about the still-not-complete investigation of alleged war atrocities by Marines at Haditha. (Formal findings are not expected for several weeks.) Since Murtha's widely broadcast accusations of Marines killing civilians "in cold blood," at least one other congressional rep--GOP Rep. John Kline of Minnesota--has jumped the gun and gone on record issuing conclusions about what happened at Haditha before reports are finalized and hearings are convened. Bad. There are also anonymous military sources leaking like crazy. And now the families of two Marines in the unit at issue have come forward with details.

I have been as outspoken as anyone about the anti-war, cut-and-run agenda, and the MSM's abetting of it. But as military officials acknowledge the existence of not one, but two, investigations into the incident at Haditha--one into the happenings on that fateful Nov. 19 day and the other into an alleged cover-up--it's time to move past the easy bashing of the motives of Rep. Murtha and his ilk. (Matt at Blackfive has good advice for Murtha about what to say about Haditha that should be used by every pol in Washington.)

The investigations are still ongoing. That's not an excuse to ignore or dismiss the extensive reporting on the story. Yes, it's mostly one-sided at this point. But if, if, even a fraction of it is true, it deserves the most vehement condemnation and most severe punishment. Toddlers are dead.

Our Marines do not deserve to be hung in the court of public opinion before an investigation is complete, before hearings are convened, or before any military court proceedings are launched. But there are knees jerking on both sides. I just can't agree with sentiments like this one:

Jerry Alexander, the owner of G.I. Joe's and a Navy man who served with the Marines for a dozen years, had much the same perspective, saying, "If I saw my buddy laying there dead, there is no such thing as too much retaliation."​

What? That is not the way to "win the hearts and minds" of Iraq. Or anywhere else. This is not the attitude we celebrate on Memorial Day.

Sen. John Warner struck the right tone--refusing to render a verdict before trial and avoiding Bush Derangement Syndrome, but also taking the allegations very seriously.

Dan Riehl reminds us of some important context about Haditha and countless stories of Marines doing the right thing. He provides dozens of links to stories and images involving operations of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines in and around Haditha both before and after the incident (do take the time to read them all), and writes:

None of them are meant to explain away any wrong doing. But there is a Marine history and a legacy in Haditha that's far from negative when viewed in its totality.

Along with showing how dangerous the environment was, the stories below also depict Marines, Iraqi's and Iraqi Security Forces working in concert to improve security and the quality of life in the city of Haditha both before and after the dates of the alleged incident.

While nothing can ever excuse a potential atrocity, it shouldn't be viewed as the beginning and the end of the story of Haditha and the US Marines. However tragic and deserving of punishment one day's events may prove to be, they should not erase years of dangerous, difficult and truly noble work by an overwhelming majority of good Marines.
​

Allah's got links to more context-setting reportage from Haditha, an insurgent-choked snakepit, and points to this WaPo story on drone video radio traffic audio that may aid the Marine inquiry. Some of it may be exculpatory, some not:

In addition to video from the drone, investigators have records of radio message traffic between the Marines and a command center, said military defense lawyers who have discussed the investigation with Marines who were at Haditha but who have not yet been formally retained by them.

"There's a ton of information that isn't out there yet," said one lawyer, who, like the others, would speak only on the condition of anonymity because a potential client has not been charged. The radio message traffic, he said, will provide a different view of the incident than has been presented by Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) and other members of Congress. For example, he said, contrary to Murtha's account, it will show that the Marines came under small-arms fire after the roadside explosion.

Two of the lawyers said the message traffic will show officers in higher headquarters knew early on that a large number of civilians had been killed and that they did not raise alarms.

"The chain of command knew about it," said one, and "the number of deaths was reported" by the commander of the company involved, Capt. Lucas M. McConnell of Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion of the 1st Regiment of the 1st Marine Division.

Lt. Col. Scott Fazekas, a Marine spokesman, said yesterday he could not comment on the reports of drone-aircraft video or other aspects of the case because "the investigation isn't complete." Last month, the Marines relieved of command the battalion commander, Lt. Jeffrey R. Chessani, as well as McConnell and another company commander, citing a lack of confidence in their leadership.

The presence of the drone is potentially significant because such surveillance craft are in high demand in Iraq and their use is supervised by senior officers -- which could indicate there was interest among higher officers about what was occurring in Haditha.

One of the military lawyers said Nov. 19 was the 3rd Battalion's "hottest day" in Iraq, and was unusually violent even for al Anbar Province, which is where the insurgency began and where it remains extremely active.

In addition to drone surveillance that day, AV-8 Harriers were dropping bombs, helicopters were evacuating wounded, and a large firefight occurred about one-third of a mile from the site of the civilian shootings, said several people familiar with the investigation...​

One last bit of reporting worth quoting for now comes from Time magazine, which initially broke the story that led to the Marine probes. From a web exclusive:

Belated as the investigation was, the residents of Hay al-Sinnani say they were gratified by its thoroughness. That there have been three separate enquiries suggests the U.S. military “want to get at the truth,” says Walid Abdel Khaliq, the doctor of the Haditha morgue where the victims' bodies were taken.

They were especially impressed by the NCIS investigators. “They must have visited the houses 15 times,” says Khalid Raseef, a spokesman for the victims' kin and uncle of Emaan and Abdel Rahman Waleed, the children who lost almost their entire immediate family in the massacre. The investigators “asked detailed questions, examined each bullet hole and burn mark, and took all sorts of measurements. In the end, they brought all the survivors to the homes and did a mock-up of the Marines' movements. It was a very professional investigation.”

... If the families are skeptical of U.S. military justice, they have even fewer expectations of their own government. Thabet, Raseef and Khaliq all say they have not received a single enquiry from the Iraqi government in Baghdad. “In their eyes, we are nobodies,” says Raseef, bitterly.

Curiously, no political group has sought to make capital out of the Haditha massacre. It says a great deal of the huge gap between Iraq's politicians (who tend to restrict themselves within the safe confines of Baghdad's highly protected Green Zone) and its people that not a single politician has bothered to visit Haditha, or even sent condolences to the bereaved families.
​

Stay tuned.

***

Alexandra at All Things Beautiful weighs in on "Pride and Prejudice."

Reader feedback...

Bill P:

"My biggest concern now is, even if evidence is found that totally exonerates the group of Marines in anyone's fair judgment, most in the media and elsewhere now already are conditioned to see them as guilty, and will have "The Fix is In" as their only reaction, no matter what.

This may be true in any case, but Murtha has just guaranteed it."

James E.:

I do not profess to know any of the facts of the case, but I wonder how long it will take before the enemy kidnaps an innocent contractor in Iraq and executes them under the guise of revenge for Haditha like they did for Abu Ghraib. Regardless of the facts, Murtha is giving the enemy exactly what they need to feed the insurgency. Al Jazeera will take this and run with it over and over and over again feeding the frenzy and hatred of our enemies. At the same time, atrocities like Hallabjah, where Saddam killed 5,000 kurds with chemical weapons (proof of WMD's), or overlooked and downplayed. Saddam has now been charged for the Hallabjah atrocitiy and the press hardly said a word about it. But you can bet Haditha will be overplayed to ad nauseum by the US media and Al Jazeera.

***

 

[Gunny]

If they're POW's then the Geneva Convention applies to them, no?

The rules of the Geneva Convention apply to two Nations at war, with armies of legitimate governments. They were not written with religious fruitcake warlords declaring "war" from their own little murderous fiefdoms.

IF the rules of the Geneva Convention applied, they could all be shot as spies for conducting war out of uniform. While I am quite sure THAT is not the Article you wish to try and sell, it DOES exist.

One thing is for certain .... anyone who advocates turning loose militant, religious fanatics to take up where they left off terrorizing and murdering the the noncombatant population of a Nation is either a partisan political hack, or a screwball.

 

[pegwinn]

One of Kathi's responses said it all. If the Marines are exonerated, everyone will simply holler that the fix is in. Same as with Abu. The courts martial that took place were not enough. They want to see a suit get hung by its' tie.

As to Gitmo. Instead of worrying about conditions there, send letters of praise to the guards who had the self discipline to not frag the lot of them when they rioted a lil while back.

As previously noted, in past wars we'd have sucked their brains dry then shot them as spies and been 100% legal. So don't worry, be happy.

 

[Dr Grump]

As previously noted, in past wars we'd have sucked their brains dry then shot them as spies and been 100% legal.

Well, you could hardly call them spies as they were taken from their own country. As for shooting them if they are terrorists, you'll get no argument from me....as long as they are terrorists....a little transparency would be nice...

 

[pegwinn]

Well, you could hardly call them spies as they were taken from their own country. Wanna bet? The fact that they were taken sans uniform is all we need.

As for shooting them if they are terrorists, you'll get no argument from me....as long as they are terrorists....a little transparency would be nice...

With respect, do you mean to say we should allow civilian (non-chain of command types) to run the war? What precedent do you base this on?

I submit that in spite of the constant 2nd guessing and continuous ABB rhetoric, the USA has fought this war in virtually a "gentlemanly" manner. If we subscribed to the do unto them as they do unto us IRT to prisoner handling, there'd be no oversight or argument. Just intell value and a video tape of them being beheaded.