Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Navy SEALS arrest terrorist


Rock Slinger

Recommended Posts

Two Navy SEALs accused in the mistreatment of an Iraqi suspect in the 2004 slayings of four U.S. contractors were arraigned in military court Monday, and one SEAL said he was gratified by support from the public and some members of Congress.

The judge scheduled courts-martial next month for Petty Officer 2nd Class Matthew McCabe of Perrysburg, Ohio, and Petty Officer 1st Class Julio Huertas of Blue Island, Ill.A third SEAL will be arraigned later.

The SEALs have received an outpouring of public support on the Internet, and a California congressman has led a campaign urging Defense Secretary Robert Gates to intervene.

arrow3.gifRead more...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
  • Replies 16
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • eqgumby

    3

  • __Kratos__

    2

  • Rock Slinger

    2

  • Roughneck

    2

Top Posters In This Topic

Here we go the circus starts. Then we will hear pardons, parole or early release for good behavior and then a whole building gets blown.

Terrorist are not stupid, they will use our own system against us..

Edited by AROCES
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my understanding, is they were arrested for Lying about it and not that they hit the sob. I read about this case in another forum I go to. I go by RryinreaHaruno their. So look me up xd.

Edited by Ryinrea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my understanding, is they were arrested for Lying about it not that they hit the sob.

Do you always have to come with little details like that to rain on the patriotic parade? Shame on you! :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you always have to come with little details like that to rain on the patriotic parade? Shame on you! :devil:

Sorry, I had to say it xd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before anyone gets on their high horses about "treating the terrorists with respect that don't deserve" there's a big word there and that's "SUSPECTED".

I've no qualms whatsoever about lining convicted terrorists up against the wall and shooting them.

There's a saying "if they threaten my loved ones, the red wire goes on the left ball" - but but thunder I want to be sure that the only blood on my sword is that of my enemies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before anyone gets on their high horses about "treating the terrorists with respect that don't deserve" there's a big word there and that's "SUSPECTED".

I've no qualms whatsoever about lining convicted terrorists up against the wall and shooting them.

There's a saying "if they threaten my loved ones, the red wire goes on the left ball" - but but thunder I want to be sure that the only blood on my sword is that of my enemies.

Amen. The person's race, nationality, and/or religion make no difference in how they must be processed under OUR justice system. I know he's not American but he was under American authority at the time. And if our government can't project itself internationally as it functions at home, then how are we to be trusted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amen. The person's race, nationality, and/or religion make no difference in how they must be processed under OUR justice system.

But what suspects are charged with always makes a difference when making arrests. When a dangerous suspect is taken in there are often minor injuries like bloody lips and bruised ribs as a result of struggles. Even the officers sometimes get boo boos.

I know he's not American but he was under American authority at the time. And if our government can't project itself internationally as it functions at home, then how are we to be trusted?

This is how we function at home, isn't it?

If they lied then there maybe should be some consequences. If the suspect is the only one contradicting their testimony then they should drop the charges, IMHO. Will wait for the details of the case to come out.

Edited by Rock Slinger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what suspects are charged with always makes a difference when making arrests. When a dangerous suspect is taken in there are often minor injuries like bloody lips and bruised ribs as a result of struggles. Even the officers sometimes get boo boos.

This is how we function at home, isn't it?

If they lied then there maybe should be some consequences. If the suspect is the only one contradicting their testimony then they should drop the charges, IMHO. Will wait for the details of the case to come out.

I was refering to the point of how people say suspected terrorists deserve harsh treatment. Key word being 'suspected'. In the case on-topic, I would agree that if the SEALS are proven guilty of lying, then due punishment should be given, rather than avoided just because they're military.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my understanding, is they were arrested for Lying about it and not that they hit the sob. I read about this case in another forum I go to. I go by RryinreaHaruno their. So look me up xd.

One is being charged with assault and lying and the other two are being charged for lying.

Personally, I think it's crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One is being charged with assault and lying and the other two are being charged for lying.

Personally, I think it's crap.

What I understand is, the prisoner was struck while in custody, not while being apprehended. He complained. The custodians were asked what happened, and caught in a lie. They declined non-judicial punishment, so they must be courts-martialed.

The military operates under a different set of rules than the rest of the world. The UCMJ is very unforgiving.

Bottom line is, if they lied, and it's proved they lied, they are busted.

This isn't about the rights of a terrorist, it's about sailors telling lies. And that's a no-no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One is being charged with assault and lying and the other two are being charged for lying.

Personally, I think it's crap.

Perhaps you should write to their commander, you know, the man who brought the charges against them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What I understand is, the prisoner was struck while in custody, not while being apprehended. He complained. The custodians were asked what happened, and caught in a lie. They declined non-judicial punishment, so they must be courts-martialed.

The military operates under a different set of rules than the rest of the world. The UCMJ is very unforgiving.

Bottom line is, if they lied, and it's proved they lied, they are busted.

This isn't about the rights of a terrorist, it's about sailors telling lies. And that's a no-no.

Because we all know terrorists don't lie. ;)

Perhaps you should write to their commander, you know, the man who brought the charges against them?

The military brought charges against them and they're fighting it instead of taking a deal, that says a lot right there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because we all know terrorists don't lie. ;)

No no, my point is, the terrorist complained, maybe had a mark. The guys were asked independently if they beat up the terrorist, and they probably got three different answers. SOMEONE is lying, and that's a no no. They would have been better off telling the truth right away.

The military brought charges against them and they're fighting it instead of taking a deal, that says a lot right there.

Non judicial punishment is NOT a "deal." All it says, is that their lawyer (or the officer appointed to review their case) thinks they can get away free and clear if it's reviewed by a court martial.

Bottom line, if they lied they should take their punishment. I do NOT think they are being punished or prosecuted by Obama for roughing up a terrorist while capturing him, like the court of public opinion seems to be implying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The military brought charges against them and they're fighting it instead of taking a deal, that says a lot right there.

You might want to check this to see that it is not a deal. A commander has various options to persecute offenses against the UCMJ and the Corps ethics(and lying to a commander is specifically in there as offense). If he feels it is not important enough he can assign extra duty and leave it at that. If the commander feels that stricter action is required he can apply non-judicial punishment under art. 15, which is what you call a "deal", if the offender does not accept that it has to go to court. The usual punishment under art. 15 generally are temporary loss of rank and/or pay and/or assignment of extra duty. If a case like this goes to court they generally end up getting the boot.

In a case where a commander has been lied to by a group of people it will additionally have a conspiracy charge with it. That could mean Leavenworth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You might want to check this to see that it is not a deal. A commander has various options to persecute offenses against the UCMJ and the Corps ethics(and lying to a commander is specifically in there as offense). If he feels it is not important enough he can assign extra duty and leave it at that. If the commander feels that stricter action is required he can apply non-judicial punishment under art. 15, which is what you call a "deal", if the offender does not accept that it has to go to court. The usual punishment under art. 15 generally are temporary loss of rank and/or pay and/or assignment of extra duty. If a case like this goes to court they generally end up getting the boot.

In a case where a commander has been lied to by a group of people it will additionally have a conspiracy charge with it. That could mean Leavenworth.

I saw a guy go to jail for "sodomy". He admitted in civilian court he engaged in "*spam filter*" with a woman. Boom! Leavenworth, 3 years hard labor, bad conduct discharge. Yeah, the military can be rough. They are expected to conform to a higher standard, period.

Edited by eqgumby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.