Free the SEALs
I told you last week about the petition to free the Navy SEALs who’ve been hauled up for courts martial after an infamous jihadi in Iraq (the same one who masterminded the ambush of Blackwater contractors whose bodies were burned and hung on a bridge in Fallujah) accused them of punching him in the stomach during a raid earlier this fall.
There is now a legal defense fund for the trio.
Cliff May rallies support for the SEALs:
In his remarks accepting the Nobel Peace Prize, President Barack Obama said, “And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight.”
I agree. Our troops should uphold the highest standards. Notwithstanding such rare but extravagantly publicized lapses as Abu Ghraib, they do exhibit a degree of self-restraint that no other military, now or in the past, can match.
But the notion that international law provides strict legal protections for terrorists is a new and dubious innovation, cooked up by trans-national lawyers seeking power for themselves and their organizations, along with unprecedented limitations on American sovereignty.
The Geneva Conventions are treaties that bind signatories in order to render conflicts among those signatories less brutal. The Geneva Conventions were never designed to protect those who have not signed them and who routinely violate them.
…A terrorist in American custody should be aware that he is in the presence of principled professionals. But he should not believe that he is untouchable or that he is entitled to the rights enjoyed by an American citizen under the U.S. Constitution, a document he would gladly trample underfoot.
He should know that the troops who detain him are not like him: They won’t chop off his head on videotape while chanting praise for a divinity pleased by the carnage. But he also should know that if he asks for a fat lip, he might just get a fat lip.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
The trial of the last Haditha Marine: SSgt Wuterich takes plea deal
January 23, 2012 03:25 PM by Michelle Malkin
59 Comments
The last Haditha Marine: Trial update, prosecution collapse, plea deal in the works?
January 19, 2012 05:49 PM by Michelle Malkin
56 Comments
The last Haditha Marine: Wuterich trial update
January 5, 2012 06:19 PM by Michelle Malkin
26 Comments
Remember SSgt Frank D. Wuterich: The last Haditha Marine goes on trial
January 2, 2012 12:24 AM by Michelle Malkin
57 Comments
“Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”
December 25, 2011 03:26 AM by Michelle Malkin
75 CommentsJoe Biden: The Taliban Per Se is Not Our Enemy
December 19, 2011 04:06 PM by Doug Powers
105 Comments
Remembering Pearl Harbor: 70 years
December 7, 2011 10:10 AM by Michelle Malkin
123 CommentsA message from “Occupy Bagram”
November 20, 2011 07:54 AM by Michelle Malkin
63 CommentsMoonbat of the day: Suffolk Univ. law prof condemns sending care packages to troops, flying American flag
November 14, 2011 08:36 PM by Michelle Malkin
46 Comments
Categories: War,Worthy Causes
Patterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the NonconformistsJustOneMinute
» Cat Blogging In A Harsh New LightGateway Pundit
» Top Leftist Blog: Obama Must Quash Religious Freedom to Save Earth From Global Warming
Are standards are just fine! I’ll take a fat lip over a beheading anytime!
Are = Our (slap!)
Thanks for letting us know about the legal defense fund, Michelle. I’m in.
God bless all our fighting men and women.
The terrorists come from cultures which take lying to a fine science. Terrorist training includes lying about torture. So now we are told that a terrorist isn’t lying about being hit? Oh the poor baby! This administration is selling out our fine military to appease left wing wackos.
I have a proposal for keeping this from happening again.
Simply send me a plane ticket to wherever it’s needed and I will come punch the terrorists in the nose.
RWR
http://www.rightwingrocker.com
Yes they are.. And more..
What is the point of sending our best and brightest over to these hellholes if they aren’t allowed to fight? Really? The rules of engagement are so one-sided, against our guys, that I see no way for us to accomplish anything except get more of our men and women killed. And for what? Some stone-age rabble in some stinking cesspool?
After this stupidity I wonder what will be expected of our troops. Will they be expected to kindly ask terrorists to give up, then only touch them if wearing soft fluffy oven mits, place them in a comfy chair for transport, finally placing them in a luxiourous suite at the four seasons? Not to mention interogations. Will they have to say please after every questions, as in what is your next target, will you tell me please?
This is going to get our guys killed, not that it matters much to this administration. All Obama cares about is his popularity in the socialist countries of the world.
I’ve heard rumor- these SEALS are being prosecuted by order of Obama himself, seeking revenge after the local commander during the Maersk hijacking took the initiative and ordered SEAL snipers to take a shot if they could.
Obama was apparently furious, that the Navy would kill Muslim pirates without his permission.
We are going to DC this January to represent the SEALs. Wish us luck.
We could spend trillions of dollars in Afghanstan, build thousands of schools, sewage facilities and power plants, lose tens of thousands of troops over 20 years, and the second we left it would revert back to a tribal, medieval hellhole. Some people are just not worth the cost.
You know, if an American hating would be Marxist dictator somehow lied himself into position as President of the United States, downsizing the US military, demoralizing the patriots in it, making “diversity” a primary goal, and making sure loyalty to the man, not the Constitution, was required for retention and promotion, so that there wouldn’t be much of a military to mount a coup if it ever become screamingly obvious said would be dictator was an enemy of the Constitution, prosecuting warriots for doing their jobs would be a excellent move.
Mark Harvey,
Thanks to you and those going with you. Please represent our home for the Seals when you go. Thank them for all American’s who appreciate them.
L
Murph…..
It’s OUR citizens we are trying to protect from future terrorist attacks on US soil – not the “tribal, midieval” citizens of Afghanistan.
The reason we are in Afghanistan is because that is (or was) the primary training ground for Islamic terrorists.
DUH!!!
Is it okay to make the terrorists listen to Rap Music?
How about forcing them to watch “Keeping Up with the Kardashians” or “Olivia?”
how about making them listen to piglosi, maxine waters, and boxer snipets all day long…that would drive anybody to insanity…then just put them in a rubber room along with piglosi, waters, reid, and boxer…
I have no problem killing terrorists wherever they are as well as destroying any infrastructure that may aid them. However, it is a waste of time trying to drag Afghanistan out of the 7th century into the 21st.
Killing the enemy? Excellent.
Nation-building – No.
Duh!
If you take an 800 lb gorilla, tie his hands and feet, blindfold him, and chain him to a wall, even a 10 lb spider monkey can win the fight.
The ancient Romans had a relatively distinct policy. If you messed with them, then you got dead and anyone around you who could be presumed to be involved. Because of this policy, the tribal areas around the Italian peninsula became somewhat civilized. As soon as the Romans started to decline, the Barbarians had no trouble destroying civilization and creating a dark age in Europe.
Civilization is tough to create and is always in danger of destruction. Individual liberty is even more difficult to create and at least as easy to destroy.
It is apparent that nobody listens to what Obama says. He said winning is not important! So you sacrifice our warriors for the greater cause, SOCIALISM.
It is blindingly simple. These vermin can, and should, be shot on sight.
As Clausiwitz stated,”War is an extension of politics”. But this spinless Kenyan huckster should realize that there should be only two Rules of Engagement:
Bless these SEAL operatives and support them fully.
I normally have great respect for Clifford May’s opinions, but he is way off target this time.
This has nothing to do with international law. Nothing to do with the Geneva Conventions. Nothing to do with comparisons of how US citizens would be treated under the US Constitution. Nothing to do with our being a “role model” for terrorists and others to emulate.
What kind of crap analysis is that? It’s no different from the mythical “Yeah, but he was a really bad guy and he deserved it!” exemption from the UCMJ that an alarming number of people seem to think exists.
What this is about is very straightforward: IF the SEALs in question are found by court martial to be guilty as charged — of willfully failing to safeguard a prisoner in their custody, of lying to investigators and of trying to coerce a witness — then it’s about the good of the service in terms of the absolute need to maintain discipline and order and to consistently uphold its own laws.
That’s going to trump empathy and sympathy every time. It has to.
We have the best military force the world has ever seen. And no small reason for that is the carefully cultivated sense of training, professionalism and discipline that has weaved itself into the all-volunteer force since Reagan rescued us from the “hollow military” that I first joined 30 years ago.
I’ll be damned — we’ll all be damned — if we’re to summarily throw all that away for the sake of 3 men, based on nothing more than appeals to emotion and specious arguments that have nothing to do with how and why the UCMJ works.
I hope like hell that the prosecution loses this case. But if they don’t, then the accused are going to be have to be held accountable to the military regulations that they willingly agreed to abide by. Anything else would be a mockery of the notion of military justice, and once you start down that road, you can kiss it.
Regulus, why do you continue to ignore the possibility that this prosecution might be inappropriately politically motivated (think Duke lacrosse prosecution).
I’ll repeat my previous comments about this.
First, I wish I had the confidence to contend that all convening authorities in the military resist political pressures to proceed towards trial despite lacking a good probability for conviction, but this isn’t the case.
Unfortunately, if the military doesn’t proceed towards trial then it appears as if they are ’sweeping it under the rug’ or ‘covering it up.’ If the appearance of a cover up is unacceptable to the powers that be, then a trial results even if the legal case stinks.
Second, political pressures can often force the hand of those, and only those, influenced by political pressures.
So, you see? The only reason NOT to apply political pressure is due to concerns that the convening authority isn’t proceeding towards trial as a result of any political pressure yet will be influenced by political pressures to drop the charges.
Overall, I’m comfortable with that risk. I’d much rather press an ethical convening authority hard in order to make sure that this case really should go to trial. And I’m comfortable with the risk that the convening authority will cave despite having sufficient evidence to get a conviction.
Regulus
I think what Clifford May was trying to say is that the Obama Administration is trying to make our Global War on Terror a Harvard Business School case study, where there are no actual consequences to their ivory tower deliberations. And in even attempting to apply a strict set of rules to only one side of the conflict, they will guarantee an equally lopsided outcome.
You, on the other hand, seem to be saying that the UCMJ will be equally applied to friend or foe. And we can trust the terrorists to testify truthfully, and to abide by yet another code of conduct for which they have absolutely no regard.
Those of us who have served (and I mean you and I) understand that the UCMJ is an extra set of protections that service members have which are above and beyond the constitutional guarantees provided to the ordinary citizen. But I think most commenters here are worried that the current administration has about as much regard for the UCMJ and our servicemembers as they have already shown for the Constitution.
The UCMJ affords plenty of prosecutorial discretion.
Many of us don’t trust that prosecutorial discretion isn’t being politically influenced in this case.
Many of us were also skeptical about Nifong’s prosecution of the Duke lacrosse players. That skepticism was well founded according to the North Carolina attorney general.
I have one word for you:
Haditha.
Michelle… other than gaining hits on your blog, I do not understand why this is being debated here. This is a military issue that deserves to be pursued under MILITARY procedures. Until someone has proof that this is being manipulated by a politician.. this should be dropped from debate.
I do applaud you providing a link to the SEAL’s defense fund.
As a former SEAL (a.k.a. a “Teamguy”, thus the name), let me tell you a little something about prisoner handling.
When SEALs capture bad guys, you can assume they are capturing them in what you would call a non-permissive area – they’re not surrounded by friendlies. Therefore their objective is to extract their prisoner and themselves as quickly as humanly possible to minimize the threat to the team. A prisoner is obviously not part of the team, and therefore is not trained in moving like the team moves – expeditiously with no f-ing around. If a prisoner decides they want to be what SEALs would call non-compliant, or non-cooperative, then they must make him compliant in order to carry out the mission. They would attempt to first gain the prisoner’s cooperation with verbal instructions, and then with physical “cues”, such as guiding them in a certain direction, or squeezing their arm.
If the prisoner does not immediately respond to such direction, then the SEALs have no choice but to escalate their actions. Acute pain infliction is the international way of saying “start listening – now.” Such pain infliction may involve pressure points, joint locks, or perhaps a good old fashioned punch to the gut or mouth.
That is likely what happened here. Mr. Terrorist didn’t want to listen, SEALs were focused on completing their mission safely, and they popped him. How that then evolved into questioning these guys and pressing charges, God only knows. But I look forward to their vindication.
While we’re on this subject of terrorists. I am by no means convinced that 9/11 itself was perpetrated by our own Government as some have alleged, however with what is going on lately, I’mn not convinced they could not have been complicit either. There’s a lot of smart people that come here. Tell me why if Bin Laden & his group were actually responsible for 9/11, the FBI does not accuse him of it here?
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm
As someone who obviously knows military procedures better than supersean let me interject: NOTHING IS TOO HOLY TO BE DEBATED. It’s that whole freedom of speech thing, you may have heard of it. Made it to #1 in the Bill of Rights. Even GI’s can participate.
Note to Seals: take no prisoners. Lot less paperwork that way.
And if you disagree with me then you’re probably a racist.
On December 17th, 2009 at 10:18 pm, PKAmmoTroop said:
I agree.. Sunlight is indeed the best disinfectant..
If Michelle took this position on all issues, there would be no need for her to post anything.
Think of the articles she has posted over the past 3 months, and how many would not have been posted given your standard.
I would like to see Michelle dig into the first news articles about this and report on them.
In one of the first articles I read on this, it was reported the jihadi had been turned over to the Iraqi’s, then came back to the SEAL’s with a fat lip, and the jihadi claiming it came from the SEAL’s.
I haven’t read this in any follow-up articles.
All we need to do is re-frame the GWT debate for Obama. If we can make him see how much grotesque profit the jihadi’s are making, he would go after them with a vengeance.
I mean, what is 72 virgins if not an obscene bonus?
Look at the billions in profit raised by the Saudi’s for the movement…tax free to boot.
In this light, the jihadi’s are more obscene than Wall Street Bankers (well, the ones that don’t contribute big $$$ to Obama).
What about a cap and trade on the carbon released by all of those explosives detonated?
The other strategy would be to make Obama want to “help” them out of their current economic state.
If we can’t spend our way out of the GWT, maybe we could tax the jihadi’s out of business. We have the model. No. Not Iraq. Look at small business here in the US. The surge in taxes and regulations has almost finished them off.
A similar surge strategy employed against terrorists would have the same devastating result.
To sum it up. We either need to make Obama either see the terrorists as obscene capitalists or make him want to help them. They would be goners either way.
God Bless Our Brave Soldiers! Obowmao get off your ass and do something! (I know that is asking too much
)…
On December 17th, 2009 at 4:50 pm, Regulus said:
While I agree generally with your analysis and heartily agree that the watchword in this case is the good order and discipline of our armed forces is paramount. I would tend, from my reading of Mr. May’s commentary, to contend that he’s saying that NJP and now a Courts Martial may have been a sign of a team CO who didn’t have the proper respect and obedience of his team members and was forced to react in a way that may have been overblown. It is entirely possible that the detainee was not actually ‘roughed up’ a blow to the abdomen unless done in a way that causes internal injury is relatively difficult to see on even close examination. A ‘fat lip’ could be from any number of causes including other parties during his period in Iraqi custody. There was room for doubt in any case and I’ve alway tried to expect the best behavior from my men until they prove that respect, trust and expectation to be misplaced. This does not from all accounts seem to be what happened. It is entirely possible the the team leader overreacted or was so unsure of his leadership that he felt he did not have adequate control over his men and their behavior as to warrant formal disciplinary action (Captain’s Mast, Admiral’s Mast) as began this sordid tale.
From this point onward it will be up to a Courts Martial to decide the guilt or innocence of these men.
I have donated some small amount towards their defense as a token of my belief that they are innocent. I hope I’m correct. But must leave it in the hands of the Officers of the Courts Martial to find the truth of guilt or innocence.
Too many military issues are influenced by politics all the time. Why should there be any reason to believe that this issue is any different? Actually, given the fact that “prisoner treatment” issues are currently a ‘hot button’ for the military, it should be assumed that it’s impossible for this case to not be politically influenced.
Proof is a silly requirement to use prior to getting involved. There’s nothing wrong with pushing back politically.
I really don’t understand this mentality.
I’m happy that people didn’t feel this way about the men of the Duke lacrosse team.
Great question. The only possible answer is that Bin Laden & his group are lying about being actually responsible for 9/11.
A good point and unfortunately politics (especially racial politics) was the driving force to unfairly convict the Duke LAX team in the court of public opinion and three guys nearly had their lives ruined by various associated indivuduals.
Unfortunately I suspect this might happen to the three Seals and pray that I am wrong. I will currently give these three guys the benefit of the doubt until the evidence dictates otherwise.
GSP
On December 18th, 2009 at 9:58 am, corkie said:
You have to have lived with military justice to understand that the operative word is justice, and not law
The Duke Lacrosse team was caught up in a legal system. Which operates under a different set of circumstances than a military justice system as is apparent by the various Haditha verdicts
Really? Because I have lived with military justice, and I don’t understand why the heck justice would be a more operative word than law. Please attempt to explain what the heck you meant.
Not at all. Both cases have authorities making the decision to prosecute, and that’s what is at issue here.
@ PK AmmoTroop… come on man your attempts at delittling me wont get very far. I don’t know your quals and I don’t think you know mine so lets discuss the topic. If you were in a position of command responsibility like I was, you would appreciate my main point that if the guys lied during the investigation (even if they did the right thing initially) Article 107 lies the frame work for what punishment would be appropriate for them and you cannot serve with honor only when you want to.
In my personal and profession opinion this matter should not be debated in the blogsphere. Michelle can bring up the point and offer assistance to those involved but no one should make this a political discussion
supersean,
What the heck is this supposed to mean?
That sentence doesn’t even make sense.
And why shouldn’t this matter be debated? It’s a good think the Duke lacrosse case was debated here and elsewhere. A politically motivated case was derailed. If this case is politically motivated (and you DON’T know that it isn’t), then it needs to be derailed.
Since your throwing your professional opinion around, please provide us some specifics about your position of command responsibility.
@ Corkie
Well.. reading comprehension is obviously not your skill set. Let me make it a bit simpler for you… also read Article 107.
If the general public or the political spectrum is allowed to interfere with the USMJ process… what Michelle or any other commenter feels is not fair WILL become an unraveling of one of the most critical aspects of our nations military… the effectiveness of the chain of command. Like I said in my previous post I think it is appropriate to highlight that the case is occurring and provide a link to the SEALs defense fund.
Also.. you and other here keep bringing up the Duke Lacrosse cases as a reference to how there can be a wrongly prosecuted politically motivated case (which the Duke case was) but this is an apples to maple syrup comparison as prosecutor discretion not applicable in the USMJ. Different justice system… different set of rules.
I had 6 years in the USN 2 as an enlisted 4 as an officer in various logistics roles…. and you?
@ Corkie
To define this portion of my post
One of the proudest attributes of the men & women who serve our country is the honor and integrity they display in their service. If you do everything you should do with honor on the battlefield but lie or make false statements during the course of an investigation to cover up for a buddy or minimize a perceived misdeed this is what can be referred to as selective honor.
You must be honest and serve with integrity at all times. Anyone who has served in any capacity has seen this in action.
This is a stupid sentence.
That’s like stating, “IF the suspect murdered the victim, then it’s ok to prosecute him.”
How does that first IF get determined?
Are you insane? You’re 100% WRONG about this.
Please do all of us here a favor and research the responsibilities of a court-martial convening authority before you post another comment.
Convening authorities have to determine whether or not there’s enough evidence to ethically prosecute a case (to proceed with a court martial). Such determinations may be highly influenced by political pressures. That’s what’s at stake here.
Where the heck have you been all your life? Are you honestly attempting to claim that the “political spectrum” has never influenced a convening authority?
Hogwash.
You’re embarrassing yourself by claiming that Michelle Malkin “WILL” unravel the effectiveness of the military chain of command. Feel free to retract this statement.
And again, please provide us some specifics about your position of command responsibility.
YOU DON’T KNOW THAT THEY LIED OR COVERED UP ANYTHING!
@ Corkie
1. your post #47 shows that YOU are unable to comrehend the concepts I am relaying. The analogy I am using to support my case is that if you are WRONGLY charged with murder but lie to investigators.
2. Lets not make this a personal issue and debate the issue at hand. Rather continue to pry on who I am and my military service(Ive shared here many times before)discuss your points and lets debate them.
3. The charges against the SEALs were brought up because they are being accused of lying during the course of the investigation. I NEVER said that they lied (or did anything wrong to the prisoners) I am simply discussing the merits of charges being raised against them.
4. I am concerned that a charge being run UP the chain of command is being debated here on the blogsphere. I do NOT think this is the forum to question it (nor do I blame Michelle directly for this unravelling but this is another thread IMHO) Rather that you shouting insults…. debate this point if you disagree also share YOUR experience that would counter my points. That is the beauty and the value of this forum!
I’ve always understood the point that you’re trying to make.
Are you claiming to KNOW that they lied to the investigators? Speak up if you are.
If not, then your point doesn’t counter anything I’m saying.
YOU used your previous position of command responsibility to enhance your own credibility by stating,
You stated that MM and many commenters couldn’t appreciate your main point simply because they’d never had command responsibility.
If you retract this statement, then I will gladly stop asking you to describe your command responsibility.
I appreciate your time in the military and don’t doubt that you had leadership responsibilities as an officer. However, I don’t think it’s appropriate for you to claim that others on here aren’t qualified to discuss a topic simply because they were never a commanding officer of a military unit – especially since I don’t think you ever commanded a unit.
Certainly, you would agree that former JAG officers would be qualified to discuss this – even if they’ve never had command responsibility. Right?
Do you have access to the investigation documents? If not, then how the heck are you able to comment on the merits of the charges being raised against them.
Nobody, nobody, nobody, nobody, nobody on here is trying to claim that lying to investigators isn’t a chargeable offense.
Is that your only point? Are you merely claiming that lying to investigators is a UCMJ violation?
Would it make you happy if every commenter on here acknowledged that fact prior to making their points?
Now, did you research the responsibilities of a court martial convening authority? Do you now understand that they have to determine if the evidence of the violation warrants a court martial? Do you understand that this is true even if the suspected violation is lying to investigators?
Why? It’s a silly concern.
I think this is the perfect forum to question it.
It’s great that you don’t blame Michelle for unraveling something which hasn’t been unraveled.
Experience doesn’t counter points of fact!!!
The facts and analysis that I’m providing stand on their own.
I would gladly share my experience if we differed in opinion, but I’m still trying to get you to admit facts.
@ Corkie…
Look it really is simple and I would like to see how those who served in the military weigh in on my position. You keep mentioning the need for me to research the role & responsibility of a court martial convening authority… I respond I’ve lived it… have you?
Recap: There MUST NOT be outside interference on our military command structure. This DOES impact the integrity AND effectiveness of our operational capabilities. If the SEALs are innocent it will come out in their trial… no harm no foul and thanks to the support of those like Michelle Malkin they are getting representation not commonly afforded to our men & women in uniform.
Recap: I AM NOT debating the facts on this case… I am questioning why the validity of this case is being debated without access to the facts.. WE DO NOT KNOW THE FACTS so how can WE DEBATE the FACTS?
Do you know that they did more than punch the prisoner? I do not so I cannot debate this with you.
Do you know that they did not lie or attempt to cover up their actions? I do not so I cannot debate this with you.
I pray that they did not perform the deeds they are charged with, are found not guilty and return to their honorable service of killing or capturing the bad guys.