Navy SEALs Face Assault Charges Against a Captured Most-Wanted Charges

[abbydog95]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576646,00.html

 

Discuss the news not the news producer please, thank you

 

 

 

 

Navy SEALs have secretly captured one of the most wanted terrorists in Iraq — the alleged mastermind of the murder and mutilation of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. And three of the SEALs who captured him are now facing criminal charges, sources told FoxNews.com.

 

The three, all members of the Navy's elite commando unit, have refused non-judicial punishment — called an admiral's mast — and have requested a trial by court-martial.

 

Ahmed Hashim Abed, whom the military code-named "Objective Amber," told investigators he was punched by his captors — and he had the bloody lip to prove it.

 

Now, instead of being lauded for bringing to justice a high-value target, three of the SEAL commandos, all enlisted, face assault charges and have retained lawyers.

 

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

 

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

 

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

 

The three SEALs will be arraigned separately on Dec. 7. Another three SEALs — two officers and an enlisted sailor — have been identified by investigators as witnesses but have not been charged.

 

FoxNews.com obtained the official handwritten statement from one of the three witnesses given on Sept. 3, hours after Abed was captured and still being held at the SEAL base at Camp Baharia. He was later taken to a cell in the U.S.-operated Green Zone in Baghdad.

 

The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.

 

"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."

 

Lt. Col. Holly Silkman, spokeswoman for the special operations component of U.S. Central Command, confirmed Tuesday to FoxNews.com that three SEALs have been charged in connection with the capture of a detainee. She said their court martial is scheduled for January.

 

United States Central Command declined to discuss the detainee, but a legal source told FoxNews.com that the detainee was turned over to Iraqi authorities, to whom he made the abuse complaints. He was then returned to American custody. The SEAL leader reported the charge up the chain of command, and an investigation ensued.

 

The source said intelligence briefings provided to the SEALs stated that "Objective Amber" planned the 2004 Fallujah ambush, and "they had been tracking this guy for some time."

 

The Fallujah atrocity came to symbolize the brutality of the enemy in Iraq and the degree to which a homegrown insurgency was extending its grip over Iraq.

 

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

 

Intelligence sources identified Abed as the ringleader, but he had evaded capture until September.

 

The military is sensitive to charges of detainee abuse highlighted in the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. The Navy charged four SEALs with abuse in 2004 in connection with detainee treatment.

 

 

It seems that terriorts have more right then our Navy SEAL heroes do...

[Howlin0001]

Wouldn't they be charged becasue the broke the law?

[abbydog95]

Wouldn't they be charged becasue the broke the law? Not because the terrorists have more rights

You have to rember that he is a known high threat terriorist and killed 4 gaurds, the seals did their job and instead of being hereos there being treated like criminals.

[Howlin0001]

Wouldn't they be charged becasue the broke the law? Not because the terrorists have more rights

You have to rember that he is a known high threat terriorist and killed 4 gaurds, the seals did their job and instead of being hereos there being treated like criminals.

I am assuming there is laws to say what can and can't be done to prisoners? So even if they are Navy SEALs then I don't think they are above the law.

[Sam]

That's just silly. But consider this is coming from FOX, though.

[Skully]

I'd love to beat the [cabbage] out of a terrorist. :)

[abbydog95]

That's just silly. But consider this is coming from FOX, though.

Why would the news place matter? News is news it has to be true or else it would be illegal.

[Furah]

Wouldn't they be charged becasue the broke the law? Not because the terrorists have more rights

You have to rember that he is a known high threat terriorist and killed 4 gaurds, the seals did their job and instead of being hereos there being treated like criminals.

Just because the man is a terrorist doesn't mean he no longer has any rights, the SEALs assaulted a prisoner. They assaulted a man who was already captured, had it happened as a result of him attempting to escape or kill one of the SEALs it would be a different case.

[Kaida23]

You have to remember that the only person saying this man was assaulted *after* he was in custody is him. The Canadian government is going through something similar right now, where reports of beating up terrorist prisoners were coming from other terrorist prisoners. It is a common ploy by prisoners to get their captors in trouble. I think that's it's much more likely that the supposed "assault" was nothing more than the SEALs simply trying to subdue him while in the process of capturing him. It's unlikely that he simply surrendered to them, and I'm sure he, and anyone around him, put up a fight.

 

There are international regulations set down by the U.N., among others, regarding the treatment of prisoners of war. If these men are guilty of assaulting a prisoner after he was securely in custody, then they will be punished. However, they cannot be judged guilty with nothing more than one person's accusation, and certainly not before they have even gone to trial.

 

That's just silly. But consider this is coming from FOX, though.

Why would the news place matter? News is news it has to be true or else it would be illegal.

Generally, the news source doesn't matter, but Fox News doesn't have the greatest journalistic reputation. Besides, reported news is supposed to be checked and verified but that isn't always the case. Often, news agencies are so busy trying to get stories out that they are not looked into properly.

[Barihawk]

Define irony.

 

They rape and murder men, women, and children. They cut off heads of prisoners and mutilate corpses and then proudly display them. And the world simply looks on.

 

One of our guys gets rowdy and smacks one of them in the face. The world goes into outrage.

 

 

I understand that hitting a prisoner is wrong and all that, but it's nothing compared to what happens to their prisoners. I would charge the offending soldier with dereliction of duty and punish him accordingly but making a huge issue out of this is wrong. Then again, there are probably many people who would gladly pay to punch the guy in the face, so whatever.

[Saru Inc]

That's just silly. But consider this is coming from FOX, though.

 

 

Are you stupid?

 

 

This is awful news, I mean [cabbage] charging them with assault? While it was wrong to punch them, he's a murderer. And it's not like he's crippled, in a week he'll have no signs of the assault.

 

 

 

That's just silly. But consider this is coming from FOX, though.

Why would the news place matter? News is news it has to be true or else it would be illegal.

 

Generally, the news source doesn't matter, but Fox News doesn't have the greatest journalistic reputation. Besides, reported news is supposed to be checked and verified but that isn't always the case. Often, news agencies are so busy trying to get stories out that they are not looked into properly.

 

With what demographics does it have a bad reputation? Liberals? Well obviously, I mean you should see the bad reputation CNN and MSNBC have with Conservatives.

[mcneilp]

Define irony.

 

They rape and murder men, women, and children. They cut off heads of prisoners and mutilate corpses and then proudly display them. And the world simply looks on.

 

One of our guys gets rowdy and smacks one of them in the face. The world goes into outrage.

My thoughts exactly.

That guy deserves more than a punch to the face.

[Kaida23]

This is awful news, I mean [cabbage] charging them with assault? While it was wrong to punch them, he's a murderer. And it's not like he's crippled, in a week he'll have no signs of the assault.

Unfortunately, we, being the "good guys", have to follow proper rules of warfare. That includes not mistreating prisoners, regardless of what they have done or how they would have treated us were the positions reversed.

 

Generally, the news source doesn't matter, but Fox News doesn't have the greatest journalistic reputation. Besides, reported news is supposed to be checked and verified but that isn't always the case. Often, news agencies are so busy trying to get stories out that they are not looked into properly.

With what demographics does it have a bad reputation? Liberals? Well obviously, I mean you should see the bad reputation CNN and MSNBC have with Conservatives.

I was referring to the journalistic community as a whole, and not referring specifically to Fox News' obvious Conservative slant (overtly leaning one way or the other is a bad position for any news agency). Their stories are over-sensationalized, poorly researched, and aimed at the lowest common denominator of T.V. viewers. They're kind of like the National Enquirer , but with a little bit less lying.

 

I think this supports my previous statement nicely: Fox News reports fake murder story from ACORN video as fact

[cryztalwing]

You think that's bad, than how about this? You would think that they would be glade and happy that an Al Qaeda operative was taking down by an Army Ranger right? Nope, they put him in prison for 25 years. So were is the "War on Terror"?

 

Government withholds evidence, and Army Ranger goes to prison for 25 years for shooting an Al Qaeda operative.

 

http://defendmichael.wordpress.com/

[Saru Inc]

This is awful news, I mean [cabbage] charging them with assault? While it was wrong to punch them, he's a murderer. And it's not like he's crippled, in a week he'll have no signs of the assault.

Unfortunately, we, being the "good guys", have to follow proper rules of warfare. That includes not mistreating prisoners, regardless of what they have done or how they would have treated us were the positions reversed.

 

Generally, the news source doesn't matter, but Fox News doesn't have the greatest journalistic reputation. Besides, reported news is supposed to be checked and verified but that isn't always the case. Often, news agencies are so busy trying to get stories out that they are not looked into properly.

With what demographics does it have a bad reputation? Liberals? Well obviously, I mean you should see the bad reputation CNN and MSNBC have with Conservatives.

I was referring to the journalistic community as a whole, and not referring specifically to Fox News' obvious Conservative slant (overtly leaning one way or the other is a bad position for any news agency). Their stories are over-sensationalized, poorly researched, and aimed at the lowest common denominator of T.V. viewers. They're kind of like the National Enquirer , but with a little bit less lying.

 

I think this supports my previous statement nicely: Fox News reports fake murder story from ACORN video as fact

 

Hm. I guess we're not reading the same link. Go read it again, before you make blatant accusations with no grounds.

[Kaida23]

I was referring to the journalistic community as a whole, and not referring specifically to Fox News' obvious Conservative slant (overtly leaning one way or the other is a bad position for any news agency). Their stories are over-sensationalized, poorly researched, and aimed at the lowest common denominator of T.V. viewers. They're kind of like the National Enquirer , but with a little bit less lying.

 

I think this supports my previous statement nicely: Fox News reports fake murder story from ACORN video as fact

 

Hm. I guess we're not reading the same link. Go read it again, before you make blatant accusations with no grounds.

I'm sorry, I guess we're not. Which accusations did I make with no grounds? The article seemed to confirm all of them.

 

1. Over-sensationalized - It was headline freakin' news!

2. Poorly researched - the very fact that it was a complete lie seems to support that. Not to mention Glen Beck's admission that they "haven't been even able to confirm from the state of California whether Tresa's husband from 10 years ago was killed, or if he's dead, or if she even had a husband." And yet, they still ran the story.

3. Lowest common denominator - prostitutes? murder? caught on tape? This seems like it could have been taken from an episode of The Jerry Spinger Show

 

That wasn't news, it was a ratings grab.

Now we're supposed to believe this same "news" outlet that a SEAL allegedly beat up a prisoner while in custody? You'll forgive me for being skeptical.

[Dizzle229]

[bleep] the law, this guy got what he deserved. Just think about it. If Osama is captured, they're going to [bleep]ing DECAPITATE the bastard, and they certainly won't be in trouble for it.

[Nero]

[bleep] the law, this guy got what he deserved. Just think about it. If Osama is captured, they're going to [bleep]ing DECAPITATE the bastard, and they certainly won't be in trouble for it.

No they wouldn't, because then America would lose it's vaunted 'holier than thou' status. I find it laughable all the people advocating that we should do exactly unto them as they did to us. It just propogates a useless cycle of violence that in the end nobody gains anything from.

[Barihawk]

[bleep] the law, this guy got what he deserved. Just think about it. If Osama is captured, they're going to [bleep]ing DECAPITATE the bastard, and they certainly won't be in trouble for it.

 

Actually, Osama will likely be sent to a life sentence at Leavenworth with no hope of release. Or survival among the inmates.

[abbydog95]

[bleep] the law, this guy got what he deserved. Just think about it. If Osama is captured, they're going to [bleep]ing DECAPITATE the bastard, and they certainly won't be in trouble for it.

 

Actually, Osama will likely be sent to a life sentence at Leavenworth with no hope of release. Or survival among the inmates.

They wouldnt let him near the others for that very reason, they would want him to live and suffer, not die in 10 mins from being there..

[abbydog95]

You think that's bad, than how about this? You would think that they would be glade and happy that an Al Qaeda operative was taking down by an Army Ranger right? Nope, they put him in prison for 25 years. So were is the "War on Terror"?

 

Government withholds evidence, and Army Ranger goes to prison for 25 years for shooting an Al Qaeda operative.

 

http://defendmichael.wordpress.com/

Thats a load of bull s*** on the government part...

[Giordano]

God dayum. If I was him I would go back and kill the [bleep]er for good taste.

[Furah]

God dayum. If I was him I would go back and kill the [bleep]er for good taste.

Why? So he can get what he wants? He dies, if he's right, he goes to paradise. If he's wrong he's gone forever and can't feel anymore. Put him in jail till he dies and it's worse for him than hell, he has to sit in a rat hole and likely get raped. He could then get AIDS while slowly rotting away in a cell. Hopefully he keeps his sanity so he has to suffer each day.

[Giordano]

God dayum. If I was him I would go back and kill the [bleep]er for good taste.

Why? So he can get what he wants? He dies, if he's right, he goes to paradise. If he's wrong he's gone forever and can't feel anymore. Put him in jail till he dies and it's worse for him than hell, he has to sit in a rat hole and likely get raped. He could then get AIDS while slowly rotting away in a cell. Hopefully he keeps his sanity so he has to suffer each day.

You're too First-Degree murder...I'm more of a second. :razz:

[Dizzle229]

I actually have to agree with Mage here. I'd rather a terrorist die slowly and painfully over a period of years than with a shot to the head.