Ladies and Gentlemen,

You do not want to miss this site.  Major General Vallely responded quickly to an email I sent him today.  Once you see his website and it’s purpose, “Stand Up America”, you too will want to place it on your favorites.

ATTENTION:   Americans and Patriots!

************************************************************************************

STAND UP AMERICA

*

http://standupamericaus.com/new-national-security-and-military-strategy:26640

Dutch To Leave Afghanistan – LA Times Editorial Frets Over Obama’s Prestige 2010 February 25th.

The Netherlands is pulling out of Afghanistan.

*Excerpt below from article written by John Work for David Horowitz’s “Front Page Magazine”: 

[Dutch Prime Minister Jan Balkenende recently threw in the towel when the debate against the opposing Labour Party over whether to leave Dutch troops in Afghanistan or to bring them home came to an impasse. Today, The Los Angeles Times’ take on this decision to retreat is largely aimed at how this will affect President Obama’s standing in the World. The Times’ editorial is another example of the left-leaning American Media Corps providing sympathy, armor and cover for Obama, directing attention away from the larger issue at hand: What is there to gain for The United States by staying in Afghanistan?]

TO READ FULL STORY:

 http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/02/25/dutch-to-leave-afghanistan-la-times-editorial-frets-over-obamas-prestige/

***************************************************************************************************

New York Times article / same topic:  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/opinion/25thur3.html

***************************************************************************************************

Ladies and Gentlemen,

You will see our story, with First Sergeant Hatley mentioned in the Spring of 2007 ……as you read along in the article link provided below…. 

The “detainee catch and release policy” is flawed beyond comprehension and as time goes by, you will notice that more and more stories related to this flawed policy directly affect our service members, who serve their country bravely and courageously, while some Americans sit back and don’t give it a second thought.  How many lives (American) have we lost and or put in mortal danger due to this policy? 

Since I am not an expert on this topic, but have a deep interest in, since this flawed policy was what existed when my husband John Hatley was in Baghdad, Iraq for OIF 06-08.  I ask that you read this article in it’s entirety and ask yourself afterwards, how in the world can we send our service members to WAR, with a flawed policy?  Somebody, somewhere needs to be held accountable.  How many more precious lives will “we” lose?  I’m not referrng to the enemy, I am referring to OUR AMERICAN SOLDIERS/TROOPS.  Why do we allow our service members to be treated as war-criminals?  Why do we have service members in prison right this very second, at Fort Leavenworth……………..as Prisoners of War in our own country?  Yes.  That’s what they are.  They are American POW’s………………….in an American prison.  Please read the article below and please discern how you can help us gain the release of all 3 of our soldiers;  1SG John E. Hatley (my husband), SFC Joseph P. Mayo and SGT Michael Leahy Jr.  ~Kim Hatley

[Excerpt from the article:]

In Iraq in the spring of 2007, 1^st Sgt John E. Hatley’s company is taking causalities to include a recent death from an enemy sniper team operating in his company’s area of responsibility. 1^st Sgt Hatley and two of his NCOs captured four Iraqis with assault rifles, ammunition, and two sniper rifles. After they take the Iraqis into custody and during transport they receive orders to release their prisoners. These soldiers are later charged and found guilty of executing the four Iraqi prisoners. 1^st Sgt Hatley and another NCO receive life sentences and the third NCO received 35 year in prison. You have to ask the question whether or not this incident would have ever happened, if these soldiers had a detainee system they could not only trust but also have confidence in to protect their backs.

Ok.  Here is the article: 

  http://warchronicle.com/DefendOurMarines/Weimann/SinsOfGenerals_PartFour.htm

Afterwards, please consider visiting the following websites to show your support.  Read their story.  Please do this, because they have families and loved ones and supporters who are doing what they can to get the word out about their situations.

http://www.defendmichael.com

http://www.defendjosephmayo.com

http://www.supportsgtleahy.com

Thank you for visiting their websites and showing your support, that they are not forgotten.  Please know that there are mothers, fathers, wives, brothers, etc……………managing these websites just as I try to manage mine here at www.defendjohnhatley.com .  There are people behind these websites you see and they are working on gaining the release of their soldier, 24/7 . 

Thank you.

July 16, 2008

 http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2008_hr/071608rivkin.pdf

(This is shown by PDF and is lengthy to read, but notice the date.)

 My husband (formerly) First Sergeant John Hatley was fighting in Baghdad, Iraq for OIF 06-08).  So yes, people in the higher rungs were already aware that the “detainee catch and release policy” was flawed and that something needed to be done.  Meanwhile, our poor soldiers are out there in the midst of battle, trying desperately to juggle fighting the enemy and adhering to being told to act like CSI in regards to detainees.  Our soldiers tried to turn them in, but were called and told to let them go, due to so-called “lack of evidence”?  This is pure insanity and recently, the policy has actually been changed to even stricter rules that our soldiers must get a “warrant” to turn in detainees?  Here it is, one day before the new year, 2010 and the flawed policy remains the same and has gotten even more insane.  We cannot afford to continue “allowing” the lives of our precious soldiers be put in jeapordy, to be killed by “second chancers”.  It is completely rational and believable that either all or some of the 6 precious soldiers my husband lost in the war, could have been killed by second chancers, previously released by the DHAA or refused by the DHAA for so-called lack of evidence.  One soldier of ours that was killed by an IED blast, was in fact killed by an IED that had been detonated by a detainee that had been previously released for so-called “lack of evidence”.  So yes.  One of our soldiers was killed by a second chancer, but he (insurgent) was never turned in, but instead used as an informant for our unit.

Well, it’s a war for God’s sakes and I understand that, but the vast majority of insurgents being released back out onto the streets does not make any sense.  Can you ask yourself, is there any truth in the fact that a senior Pentagon Planner was noted back in 2003, referring to Donald Rumsfeld as “WANTING A WAR ON THE CHEAP”?  Think about it a moment and think about how that thought process (decision) could impact the lives of our own, our own soldiers out on the battlefield.  Was this fuss over the paranoia from the Abu Garub Prison Scandal incident?  Is it true that our government became so hyper sensitive to the treatment of enemy combatants and also the possible costs for housing POW’s for the duration of the war?  Aren’t we supposed to detain (hold) POW”s in wars anymore?  If someone could share their thoughts on all this, please do.  I am desperately trying to understand this flawed, detainee catch and release policy.  With this cloud of political correctness going on these days and this mentality of “being nice to the enemy combatants”, how can anyone not be questioning those who are making these decisions?  The direction our country is going in, truley horrifies me. 

I just don’t see the oversight.  I haven’t heard of any as of yet.  Have you?

~Mrs. Kim Hatley

*****************************************************************************************

Ladies and Gentlemen,

As I grit my teeth behind my tightly pressed lips, I assemble yet another post, of a masterfully written article about War, written by Warren Kozak for the Wall Street Journal.  While I am not bitter, please do not assume that I am not angry.  I am, because our government is allowing our American soldiers to be treated as “war criminals” and my husband John is now inprisoned………………at Fort Leavenworth military prison (Kansas), as a POW in our own country.

(Please read this excerpt from the article I read in the Wall Street Journal and see if you can keep from gritting your teeth behind your lips…………………as you read it in it’s entirety.)

*A special thank you to Paul Dunaway and Marijane Green for pointing this article out to me for review.

_________________________________________________________________________________

~excerpt~

[During the Battle of the Bulge, in the bleak December of 1944, the Germans had quickly overrun the American lines. They took thousands of prisoners as they pushed through in a last chance gamble to turn the war around. One unit, part of the First SS Panzer Division, had captured over a hundred GIs. They were moving fast, and they didn't care to be burdened by prisoners. So the SS troops put the American soldiers in that field and mowed them down with machine guns.

Around 90 Americans were killed in that barrage. The Germans then walked through the tangle of bodies, shooting those who were still alive in the back of the head. The few that survived were brought to where my father was located in the nearby town of Liege where word of the massacre quickly spread.] – Warren Kozak

~end of excerpt~

Below is the link to the full article:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704304504574610660008372886.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Why does it seem that our country is putting the “enemy” ahead of our own service members?  Why do we allow our service members to be prosecuted vigorously, whilst allowing our enemies to flourish and to claim their so-called rights?  Is this rampant political correctness?  What about the ROE, rules of engagement?  What about the “detainee catch & release policy”?  As you read below, keep in your thoughts, the plight of MSG John E. Hatley, SFC Joseph P. Mayo, SGT Michael P. Leahy Jr., 1LT Michael Behenna, our 3 Navy Seals and the other service members that you may not know about, that are incarcerated in prison (Leavenworth) for so-called war-crimes….  Also, keep in your thoughts the service members already in the war zones, Iraq and Afghanistan…………………………….  

Ladies and Gentlmen, there exists an awful trend combination of;  political correctness, flawed ROE and the flawed policy of “detainee catch and release”.

Please read and share: 

[First, below is a message from Mrs. Marijane Green - Proud Army/Marine Mother]

What I thought I heard Mullen say was that even one Afghan civilian dies in a mission our troops may be conducting, an otherwise “successful” mission would be considered a “failure”.

[Now read this message from Admiral Mike Mullen, submitted by Marijane Green:]

We are not winning, which means we are losing and as we are losing, the message traffic out there to (insurgency) recruits keeps getting better and better and more keep coming,” Mullen said.

http://rr.com/news/topic/article/rr/9000/9711502/Mullen_expects_casualties_to_rise_in_Afghanistan

_______________________________________________________________________________

[Ok.....  Now read this.... Correspondence from Senator Sam Brownback, which was sent to Marijane Green, as of today, December 7th, 2009]

This letter is being posted so that readers will know what he says the plan is for Afghanitan:  protect the population, etc.   Mrs. Green wrote to him yesterday by e-mail and he responded today. Mrs. Marijane Green received this from her Kansas Senator Sam Brownback in response to her concerns about the Afghanistan war.

-Copy of correspondence from Senator Sam Brownback:

Dear Mrs. Green:    Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning U.S. military activities in Afghanistan. I always appreciate hearing from my fellow Kansans.    During my time as chairman of the Subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia, I held numerous hearings on Central Asia, including the situation in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. A decade ago, we knew the Taliban could be replaced with moderate Afghan leaders who would not terrorize and repress their own people. No one predicted, however, that such changes would come so quickly or dramatically.    The defeat of al Qaeda and Taliban forces in 2001 and 2002 marked a great achievement for U.S. forces in the war on terrorism. Since that time, however, we have seen the re-emergence of terrorist threats in the region, related in no small part to instability across the Afghan border in Pakistan. We cannot allow Afghanistan to revert to Taliban or al Qaeda control, so we must work to stabilize Afghanistan from the inside out, while addressing cross border threats that jeopardize long term success.    I am pleased that General David Petraeus, who oversaw the implementation of a successful counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, has been promoted to lead U.S. Central Command. In this position, he will command U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he has indicated he will implement counterinsurgency tactics and techniques similar to those used in Iraq. Though there are vast differences between the threats we face in Iraq and those emerging in Afghanistan, the principles of protecting the local population and taking advantage of security to strengthen the local economy will hold constant.    Our military commanders recommended that additional U.S. forces were necessary to achieve our goal in Afghanistan. I am pleased that President Obama followed this advice and ordered such an increase. Though the nature and scope of an “Afghan surge” may differ from the surge into Iraq, I believe that this is a critical theater in the war on terror that will require some increase in our presence. I am concerned by President’s Obama’s announcement of an eighteen month withdrawal deadline. I am, however, encouraged by statements by Secretary of Defense Gates indicating the timing and pace of withdrawal may be flexible depending on conditions on the ground. I hope the Administration will caref! ully evaluate those conditions on the ground before making further adjustments to our deployment levels.    I also strongly urge our NATO allies to surge forces into Afghanistan and eliminate the restrictions on their use. The international community stands to benefit greatly from a stable and democratic Afghanistan but will bear severe consequences if Afghanistan fails. Symbolic deployments that add little or nothing to NATO’s combat power will not defeat the Taliban, stabilize Afghanistan or accelerate the defeat of Islamist extremism in the region.    Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance in the future. For more information on the issues I am working on, please visit   brownback.senate.gov  .
	Sincerely,
	Sam Brownback United States Senator

Ladies and Gentlemen, please visit the below website for this soldier, because there have been changes/updates to his case.  What I have posted below is outdated and although I am trying to keep up on his case as well, you will fair much more up to date statuses by visiting his website directly:

http://www.defendmichael.com

**********************************************************************************************

[Below is an excerpt from the website:   defendmichael.com]

MILITARY PROSECUTORS WITHHOLD EVIDENCE; ARMY RANGER GOES TO PRISON FOR 25 YEARS FOR SHOOTING AL QAEDA OPERATIVE

The Story

Michael Behenna

On March 20^th, 2009, Army Ranger 1^st Lieutenant Michael Behenna was sentenced to 25 years in prison for killing Ali Mansur, a known Al Qaeda operative while serving in Iraq.  Mansur was known to be a member of an Al Qaeda cell operating in the lieutenant’s area of operation and was suspected to have organized an attack on Lt. Behenna’s platoon in April 2008 which killed two U.S. soldiers and injured two more. Army intelligence ordered the release of Mansur and Lt. Behenna was ordered to return the terrorist to his home.

During the return of Mansur, Lt. Behenna again questioned the Al Qaeda member for information about other members of the terrorist cell, and financial supporters. During this interrogation, Mansur attacked Lt. Behenna, who killed the terrorist in self-defense. The government subsequently prosecuted Lt. Behenna for premeditated murder.

Not only is this a miscarriage of justice on the behalf of Lt. Behenna, who was acting to prevent further loss of life in his platoon, it is demoralizing to the U.S. troops who continue to fight on behalf of the freedom and security of our nation. Whether it is U.S. border patrol agents, members of the armed forces, or FBI agents, no individual who is serving on the frontlines in the War on Terror should be so blatantly mistreated.

We urgently need your help to correct this terrible wrong against a loyal and faithful soldier. Please contact your congressman and ask them to intervene on behalf of 1LT Behenna. Below is a brief recap of the relevant aspects of Lt. Behenna’s case.

• September 2007: 1^st Lieutenant Michael Behenna deployed to Iraq for his first combat experience
• April 21, 2008: Lt. Behenna’s platoon was attacked by Al Qaeda operatives. The attack resulted in death of two of Lt. Behenna’s platoon members, two Iraqi citizens, and wounded two additional soldiers under Lt. Behenna’s command.
• May 5, 2008: Known terrorist Ali Mansur was detained at his home for suspected involvement in the attack on Lt. Behenna’s platoon
• May 16, 2008: Army Intelligence orders the release of Mansur
• Lt. Behenna, who lost two members of his platoon just weeks earlier, was ordered to transport Mansur back to his home
• Lt. Behenna attempts a final interrogation of Mansur prior to his release
• During the interrogation, Behenna is attacked by Mansur and is forced to defend himself. During the altercation, the terrorist is killed.
• Lt. Behenna failed to properly report the incident
• July 2008: The U.S. Army charges Lt. Behenna with premeditated murder for the death of Al Qaeda operative and terrorist Ali Mansur.
• February 23, 2009: Lt. Behenna’s trial begins
• Government and defense experts agree on the trajectory of the bullets killing Mansur
• Prosecution expert Dr. Herbert MacDonnell initiated contact with defense attorneys explaining his agreement with the testimony of Lt. Behenna and his presentation to prosecutors supporting Lt. Behenna’s version of events.
• Dr. MacDonnell is not called to testify in the case and instead is sent home.  Just before leaving the courthouse he picks up his coat from the prosecution room and says to the three prosecutors (Megan Poirier, Jason Elbert, and Erwin Roberts), ‘The explanation that Lt Behenna just testified to was the exact same scenario I told you yesterday.  Lt Behenna is telling the truth.’
• Jack Zimmermann, defense counsel, asks prosecutors if they have any exculpatory evidence that should be provided to the defense (referring to Dr. MacDonnell’s demonstration). Prosecutors deny having any such evidence despite having been told by their own expert witness that Lt Behenna’s explanation was the only logical explanation.
• Prosecutors withholding of this evidence allowed them to argue that Lt. Behenna executed Ali Mansur while seated when the forensic experts, including Dr. MacDonnell, agree that Ali was standing with his arms outstretched when shot
• Lt. Behenna is convicted of unpremeditated murder and assault by a military panel of seven officers, none of whom had combat experience.
• Dr. MacDonnell contacts prosecution requesting that the information provided in his demonstration be given to the defense.
• Prosecutors provide such information after a verdict was rendered, but prior to sentencing.
• At the request of the presiding judge, Dr. MacDonnell provides his information to the court via telephone
• The judge orders both sides in the case to file briefs relating to a possible mistrial
• After reading the briefs the judge set an additional hearing and ordered additional briefs, including one from the defense requesting a new trial.
• On March 20, the judge denied defense motions to declare a mistrial and to order a new trial
• Lt. Behenna’s attorneys are appealing the verdict
• Lt. Behenna is currently serving a 25-year sentence

To visit the website and to learn more about 1LT Michael Behenna:

http://defendmichael.wordpress.com/

____________________________________________________________________

[Article link submitted by website moderator below:]

(Private Hutchins is a Marine who is currently incarcerated at Leavenworth, along with John Hatley and a handful of other soldiers/troops, that most of the US public do not know about.  Please read about him below…)

http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/military/article_87d82964-47e0-5c87-8da9-b67f1229c189.html

____________________________________________________________________

[Article link submitted by Marijane Green below:]

Four members of a Camp Pendleton squad convicted of taking part in the kidnapping and murder of an Iraqi civilian in 2006 have been ordered by the Secretary of the Navy to be removed from the military.

Secretary Ray Mabus also directed the Marine Corps to demonstrate why a lieutenant who oversaw the unit and acknowledged abusing detainees should be allowed to stay in the service.  (read article…)

http://www.nctimes.com/news/local/military/article_5cee7c58-56e0-546d-93c7-99fb4f9b04dc.html

____________________________________________________________________

[Article link submitted by Marijane Green below:]

Marine Officer could face demotion in Iraqi deaths

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ijlZuyAYL8ztNBbPZmQK-O7-UY1AD9CBFE403

_______________________________________________________________________________

Another case of “political correctness”…………

May 29, 2008

Exclusive: U.S. Marines and Truth

W. Thomas Smith, Jr.

An article published yesterday in the New York Times focuses on a crack group of leathernecks with the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, who have been taking the fight hard to the Taliban in Afghanistan since landing in that country earlier this year. The Marines’performance has been exemplary – in very tough environs I might add – as would be expected of America’s few good men.

The Times cannot deny this fact. But the Old Gray Lady also and obviously cannot pass up an opportunity to get in its personal dig against U.S. Marines – or any other soldiers, sailors, or airmen who might give it the opportunity – even when the dig is based on an obvious untruth (at the very least, a public deception).

Here’s what the Times says regarding the 24th MEU:

“It was their first major combat operation since landing in March, and it stood in stark contrast to the events of a year earlier, when a Marine unit was removed in disgrace within weeks of arriving because its members shot and killed 19 civilians after a suicide bombing attack.”

What the Times fails to explain in this piece (but to its credit, did mention in a Saturday piece), is that the Marines in 2007 – WHO WERE NOT REMOVED IN DISGRACE by the way – have since been exonerated. And there never was any proof – forensic or otherwise – that 19 civilians were killed.

This is the kind of thing that shames me as a journalist (Far too many in our profession are too quick to publicly condemn – thus convict in the court of public opinion – and then fail to adequately retract the inaccuracies which have the potential of ruining peoples’ lives.) and boils my blood as a former Marine.

In a statement released Friday, Lt. Gen. Samuel T. Helland, commanding general of U.S. Marine Corps Forces, Central Command, determined that the officers – including Maj. Fred C. Galvin, commander of Fox Company, Second Marine Special Operations Battalion; and Capt. Vincent J. Noble, special ops platoon commander – and the troops in the Marine convoy “acted appropriately and in accordance with the rules of engagement and tactics, techniques and procedures in place at the time in response to a complex attack.”

Galvin’s Marines were ordered out of Afghanistan – far too hastily in my professional opinion – pending an investigation that dragged on far too long, and in which too much political correctness and perhaps (based on my own personal musing) a bit of inter-service rivalry were infused: Not to mention the fact that the word of the locals, and a human rights group that was not there at the time, was considered more believable than that of the Marines.

The locals, whose stories often conflicted with one another’s, never could come up with a firm casualty count (though U.S. Army officers reportedly made cash payments to Afghans who said they were survivors or members of survivors’ families).

Fact is, there is no proof – much less evidence – that any civilians were killed: No bodies or forensic evidence, except for that of the suicide bomber, were recovered.

“No civilians were killed,” says Galvin’s mother, Toni Galvin, who along with her family and an entire network of Marine Moms, have been fighting to get their sons vindicated in the public eye. “Army Lt. Gen. Frank Kearney took the word of the area locals. Yet many of our guys withstood nearly a year of interrogation by the NCIS [Naval Criminal Investigative Service] trying to get them to break.”

But truth can’t be broken.

Maj. Galvin, Capt. Noble, and the other braveMarines who have had to endure this shabby treatment after serving our country honorably in one of the world’s most dangerous places, are the true victims: These young men deserve medals and promotions. Why aren’t those Americans who say they support the troops demanding that?

Instead, most Americans reading the Times on Saturday would have simply picked up the paper, read about a Marine unit being “removed in disgrace,” shaken their heads (wrongly assuming the report to be true), had another sip of coffee, and gone on with their lives. Meanwhile, Galvin, Noble, the other Marines wrongly accused of “overreacting” in a firefight, were hung out to dry.

Yes, the Marines were exonerated – as they should have been – which means they will not be sent to prison. But what about their careers? Their reputations? The one-plus year of hell they’ve had to endure? And what about the third-largest newspaper in the nation still reporting that they were “removed in disgrace?”

- Visit W. Thomas Smith Jr. at uswriter.com.

Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (1)

——————————————————————————–

Well said Mr. Smith. I served with Fred Galvin and can attest to his military skill, competency as a leader and coolness under fire. There is no one better to have around when the bees start buzzing all around you. It’s a shame the general officer ranks are not full of men with his tenacity and clarity of purpose.

SF

posted by : ShakeyJake
Saturday, October 31, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Direct link to article:  http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.235/pub_detail.asp

______________________________________________________________________________

Please read the following article written by the mother of Major Galvin.  Until I had the opportunity to speak with her, I had not known how this situation with the Marines ended.  Here is what she wrote:

//

Only winning officers should be promoted

---

By T.E. Galvin

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Posted Aug 26, 2008 @ 12:29 PM

---

Zabcikville, TX —

 Last year we sent a company of 120 SpecOps Marines to Afghanistan, where their patrol was hit by a suicide bomber and ambushed. Twenty minutes after the attack, the media-savvy enemy began broadcasting false stories that the Marines had killed 10 civilians, contrary to the testimony of the Marines.
    Army Col. Nicholson apologized profusely and made generous payments to Afghans who claimed injuries. He’s the guy who made the classic “I am embarrassed to be an American” speech: “So I stand before you today, deeply, deeply ashamed and terribly sorry that Americans have killed and wounded innocent Afghan people. We are filled with grief and sadness at the death of any Afghan, but the death and wounding of innocent Afghans at the hand of Americans is a stain on our honor and on the memory of the many Americans who have died defending Afghanistan and the Afghan people. This was a terrible, terrible mistake, and my nation grieves with you for your loss and suffering. We humbly and respectfully ask for your forgiveness.”
    At a court of inquiry, Nicholson acknowledged that the number of dead and wounded had not been established and that U.S. troops who arrived on the scene 30 minutes after the bombing found no dead or wounded Afghans.
    The court concluded that the Marines acted appropriately and recommended every Marine in the convoy be awarded the Combat Action Ribbon and a sergeant injured during the blast receive the Purple Heart.
    These Marines are now burdened with tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, and their reputations have been smeared. In war you cannot hesitate, you cannot question the support that you need.
     I ask that only winning officers be promoted. I strongly object to Army Brig. Gen. Nicholson being promoted to “deputy commander of Command South in Afghanistan.”
 
T.E. Galvin 
Overland Park

http://www.dodgeglobe.com/opinions/x81488848/Only-winning-officers-should-be-promoted?view=print

---

[Link submitted by Marijane Green]

(Added on here on Jan 22nd, 2010)

Support for our Navy Seals rising!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/22/support-swells-for-3-seals-accused-of-assault/?source=newsletter_must-read-stories-today_more_news_carousel

______________________________________________________________

[Link submitted by Marijane Green]

SEALS arraigned in Norfolk as protesters rally in support.

http://hamptonroads.com/2009/12/seals-arraigned-norfolk-protesters-rally-support

____________________________________________________________________

(A special  thank you to Mrs. Marijane Green, for sharig this article below.)

 http://cnsnews.com/news/article/58016

Navy Seals could face year in prison for punching alleged masterminder of the Fallujah Murders.

____________________________________________________________________

(A special thank you Mrs. Marijane Green, for sharing this article below.)

Los Angeles Times

Navy SEALs capture most-wanted Iraqi terrorist, but now they’re charged with punching him.

November 30, 2009 | 6:06 am

Catching Up: An amazing story out of Iraq over the holiday with likely domestic political repercussions, involving another possible case of political correctness gone awry: Three Navy SEAL commandos, who recently captured one of the most-wanted terrorists in Iraq, are now being charged criminally by the Navy for giving the terrorist a bloody lip.

The captive is Ahmed Hasim Abed, who was codenamed “Objective Amber.” He’s the alleged mastermind of the capture, mutilation and deaths of four Blackwater security guards in 2004 (see photo above). After patiently tracking the suspect and capturing him, the SEALs turned the prisoner over to Iraqi authorities in September. He then complained of being punched at some point. He was returned to U.S. custody, resulting in…. …the formal action against U.S. enlisted service personnel, by officers apparently still sensitive over past prisoner abuse charges at the Abu Ghraib prison.

So now the Navy has placed formal charges for allegedly roughing up an enemy combatant against three members of its elite commando unit, whose sharpshooters were universally hailed earlier this year for simultaneously blowing the heads off three Somali pirates who’d captured a merchant ship captain.

The three newly-charged SEALs, believing they acted appropriately in and after the clandestine capture operation, have rejected non-judicial punishments and requested formal, separate courts-martial. Rowan Scarborough of Fox News, who broke the story, quotes Neal Puckett, one of the commando’s defense attorneys, as saying: I don’t know how they’re going to bring this detainee to the United States and give us our constitutional right to confrontation in the courtroom. But again, we have terrorists getting their constitutional rights in New York City, but I suspect that they’re going to deny these SEALs their right to confrontation in a military courtroom in Virginia.

The decision by the Obama administration’s Justice Dept. and Atty. Gen. Eric Holder to reject military tribunals for some Guantanamo terrorist detainees and bring them to New York City for civilian trials has raised controversy among those who see the prisoners as military participants in the global war on terrorism, undeserving of the extra legal protections afforded outside the military judicial system.

Now, on the basis of the captive’s claim, the Pentagon is charging U.S. service members with physical mistreatment. The captive is a suspect in an incident from March 2004, when four Blackwater-employed security guards protecting food supplies in a convoy in Fallujah were captured, tortured, burned and hung from a local bridge in an iconic, grisly photo that came to portray the unchecked violence in that land.

This SEAL incident comes as internal government investigations continue — with congressional hearings to follow — into the deadly shooting spree at the Army’s Ft. Hood in Texas in early November. A Muslim U.S. Army major, Abu Nidal Hasan, has been charged with killing 13 fellow soldiers. Surprising details have since emerged that Hasan’s militant antiwar attitude and ties to a radical Muslim cleric in Yemen were known before the shootings but not acted upon, perhaps over political correctness and concerns about targeting a Muslim.

Tomorrow, after three months of deliberation, President Obama is scheduled to detail his newest new Afghanistan strategy in a speech from the U.S. Military Academy. Afghanistan is also the subject of White House talks today between Obama and Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. Obama is expected, among other things, to outline an exit strategy and conditionally increase the number of U.S. troops on the ground there, as he did in March. That decision brought U.S. military involvement to the current 68,000.

The U.S. SEALs are set to be arraigned Dec. 7.