NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/11/AR2007071100884.html

An investigating officer in the case against a U.S. Marine accused of killing civilians in Haditha, Iraq, has recommended that all charges against him be dropped, concluding that the government's allegations that the Marine executed a group of men in a residential home are "unsupported and incredible."

The findings by Lt. Col. Paul Ware could completely exonerate Lance Cpl. Justin L. Sharratt, who was part of a convoy that was attacked by a roadside bomb in Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005. Members of his unit then allegedly killed a group of students who were ordered out of a nearby car and then went house to house, killing as many as two dozen people, including women and children, some in their beds.

and another Marine will probably walk as well...

By clearing Sharratt in the specific shootings of Jasib Aiad Ahmed, Kahtan Aiad Ahmed and Jamal Aiad Ahmed, Ware also appeared to clear Wuterich in the same attack, concluding that the Marines' version of events was more credible than the claims of local residents who said the deaths were executions. Ware found that physical evidence showed that the shots -- all facing forward and from a distance -- were "inconsistent with an execution or persons reacting to an execution."

The shootings at the car are still under investigation, but it looks like there was no "execution" in the house.

No Murtha defenders, I see.

Wow! Marines more credible than a bunch of locals? Who'd believe that? Sounds like a government cover-up, if you want my opinion.

I guess that about wraps up this case.

No Murtha defenders, I see.

If I knew who, what, or anything about this mysterious murtha then I might defend or not.

As for the story, summarised as

people died:(
soldiers didn't execute them:)
allegations made by locals were correctly investigated by the military:)

If I knew who, what, or anything about this mysterious murtha then I might defend or not.

As for the story, summarised as

people died:(
soldiers didn't execute them:)
allegations made by locals were correctly investigated by the military:)

John Murtha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Murtha) is a congressman from Pennsylvania, former Marine, current Democrat. He mouthed off about some shooting in Iraq and I believe wanted to impeach Bush. Though I could be confusing my obscure political figures no one really cares about.

If I knew who, what, or anything about this mysterious murtha then I might defend or not.

As for the story, summarised as

people died:(
soldiers didn't execute them:)
allegations made by locals were correctly investigated by the military:)

If you want to see the guilty until proven innocent discussions, just search on Haditha. Clearly, the government is wrong because it's not the consensus of NSG that these guys could be innocent.

One does wonder how a Marine was coerced into giving pre-trial testimony that he "pissed on" a dead Iraqi's head and that his C.O. executed five civilians at close range...
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=12635692&highlight=Haditha#post12635692

John Murtha (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Murtha) is a congressman from Pennsylvania, former Marine, current Democrat. He mouthed off about some shooting in Iraq and I believe wanted to impeach Bush. Though I could be confusing my obscure political figures no one really cares about.

I'm sure the people of Pennsylvania love knowing they've elected a boob.

Hmm... I'll wait until action is actually taken in the case before I beleive jack shit. I don't trust the Armed Services to tell the truth to Americans. They've never hesitated to lie about how they fuck over the troops and civilians alike. When the Prosecutor drops charges, or when they are dismissed by the (Panel? Commission? Judge?) with convincing proof and not just obfuscation, I'll beleive it.

Hmm... I'll wait until action is actually taken in the case before I beleive jack shit. I don't trust the Armed Services to tell the truth to Americans. They've never hesitated to lie about how they fuck over the troops and civilians alike. When the Prosecutor drops charges, or when they are dismissed by the (Panel? Commission? Judge?) with convincing proof and not just obfuscation, I'll beleive it.

The typical UCMJ process is for the convening officer to go with the report's recommendations, as that is the purpose of an Article 32 hearing - to appoint an investigator to see if the charges merit a court martial, or if they are unfounded charges.

Since the investigator has stated that the charges are unfounded, the Article 32 convening officer will, unless he smokes meth, abide by its recommendations.

The typical UCMJ process is for the convening officer to go with the report's recommendations, as that is the purpose of an Article 32 hearing - to appoint an investigator to see if the charges merit a court martial, or if they are unfounded charges.

Since the investigator has stated that the charges are unfounded, the Article 32 convening officer will, unless he smokes meth, abide by its recommendations.

Wait... Let me get this straight: the court appoints an investigator to look into the charges, rather than having an independant prosecutor? What drugs was the Congressperson that designed that system on?

Wait... Let me get this straight: the court appoints an investigator to look into the charges, rather than having an independant prosecutor? What drugs was the Congressperson that designed that system on?

The prosecutor comes up only if the result of the Article 32 investigation shows that there are charges worth pursuing.

It's like a DA's office looking to see if they should take a criminal to court.

What drugs are you on? This is the UCMJ, and it's been this way since its inception. Or do you think that Bush somehow rewrote everything?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/11/AR2007071100884.html



and another Marine will probably walk as well...



The shootings at the car are still under investigation, but it looks like there was no "execution" in the house.

In that house. The killings in the other houses are also still under investigation. Since Lance Cpl. Sharratt did not take part in the killings at the car or in the other houses, this has no bearing on Murtha's comments, as far as I can tell. If you could provide a quote from Murtha, we could discuss this more effectively.

The Marines who attacked the car and the first two houses are still charged with murder, and are still under investigation.

At least, according to your source.

In that house. The killings in the other houses are also still under investigation. Since Lance Cpl. Sharratt did not take part in the killings at the car or in the other houses, this has no bearing on Murtha's comments, as far as I can tell. If you could provide a quote from Murtha, we could discuss this more effectively.

The Marines who attacked the car and the first two houses are still charged with murder, and are still under investigation.

At least, according to your source.

I already noted that the other things are under investigation.

Or did you miss that?

The prosecutor comes up only if the result of the Article 32 investigation shows that there are charges worth pursuing.

It's like a DA's office looking to see if they should take a criminal to court.

Yeah, but the DA is independant from the courts.

What drugs are you on? This is the UCMJ, and it's been this way since its inception. Or do you think that Bush somehow rewrote everything?


Claritin, Albuterol, Ibuprofen, and Caffeine (if that counts). Why do you ask?

No, I don't blame Bush. You'll note that I asked what Congressperson did it. That's because the power to create courts (including independant courts, like the Military Courts and the Intellectual Property Courts) is granted to Congress. I want to know which moron Congressperson 150 years ago decided it would be smart to set things up that way.

Yeah, but the DA is independant from the courts.

Claritin, Albuterol, Ibuprofen, and Caffeine (if that counts). Why do you ask?

No, I don't blame Bush. You'll note that I asked what Congressperson did it. That's because the power to create courts (including independant courts, like the Military Courts and the Intellectual Property Courts) is granted to Congress. I want to know which moron Congressperson 150 years ago decided it would be smart to set things up that way.

I'm sure Google can help you.

Actually, the military justice system goes back further than 150 years ago...

I'm sure Google can help you.

Actually, the military justice system goes back further than 150 years ago...

Fine. 232 years ago, in the case of the Marines, although I'll assume that until the current system of Government was formed, the laws regarding the courts had not been written.

Did murtha say "Every single one of these soldiers is guilty?" Or are you arguing that the entire Haditha incident didn't happen?

And I still think letting the military investigate the military is a stupid idea.

Did murtha say "Every single one of these soldiers is guilty?" Or are you arguing that the entire Haditha incident didn't happen?

it appears that one guy may be innocent in one incident. It doesn't indicate whether or not that same Marine may be guilty of an offense maybe 5 minutes before and after this incident. I'm still trying to figure out why Murtha shoudl eat it. RO, are you saying that this one incident means that there were not crimes comitted by anyone in the Haditha incident? If so your post has been ineffective in that reguard. It surely happened and I'm sure the military justice system will eventually determine the truth. Give it time and they'll determine just what happened.

I'm sure Google can help you.

Actually, the military justice system goes back further than 150 years ago...

He's saying the system is a bad one. The actual date of instigation doesn't matter.

I already noted that the other things are under investigation.

Or did you miss that?
No he missed you stating there were other investigations.
You actually said, "The shootings at the car are still under investigation, but it looks like there was no "execution" in the house", which totally ignores the fact that there's also investigations into the shootings in other houses which occurred at that time.
Indeed, the way you've phrased it - by saying "the house" it could easily be inferred that there was only one house not several, depending on whether one reads it as generic 'the' (/thuh/) or emphatic 'the' (/thee/).

As is usual with your posts, they're disingenuous to say the least, if not downright duplicitous.

Which of course is your sole aim for making such statements that can easily be inferred either way. When someone infers the way you personally don't believe (but secretly hope they will), you can act all smug and condescending about how it's all an evil liberal conspiracy to make you look bad. Furthermore it 'proves' how anti-American and stupid all Liberals are.

guess it helps you with your cognitive dissonance problems.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/4/24/164012.shtml


Not that NewsMax is all that reliable.

So far as the persons killed at the white car, they matched the descriptions given to the Marines by Naval Intelligence of insurgents planning an attack.

Also, I've read in another article (sorry I couldn't find it, so believe it if you want) that the two Iraqi 'student journalists' who gave the original videos of the homes after the killings to Time magazine had actual ties to insurgent groups in Iraq. And that the reason they were johnny-on-the-spot to get videos of houses with blood all over the walls is that they knew exactly how the attack would go down, according to the insurgent playbook:
1) carbomb to injure a few and distract the rest of the soldiers/marines
2) ambush with small arms fire
3) fall back into an urban position, usually among a civilian population, where they continue to fire on the Americans
4) laugh their arses off when civilians inevitably get hit in the cross-fire

No he missed you stating there were other investigations.
You actually said, "The shootings at the car are still under investigation, but it looks like there was no "execution" in the house", which totally ignores the fact that there's also investigations into the shootings in other houses which occurred at that time.
Indeed, the way you've phrased it - by saying "the house" it could easily be inferred that there was only one house not several, depending on whether one reads it as generic 'the' (/thuh/) or empatic 'the' (/thee/).

Thank you for the clarification.

I did manage to find a CNN article that quotes Murtha, so if anyone wants to compare what Murtha said with the findings of the officer, here you go:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/18/murtha.marines/

Thank you for the clarification.

I did manage to find a CNN article that quotes Murtha, so if anyone wants to compare what Murtha said with the findings of the officer, here you go:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/05/18/murtha.marines/

Thanks, but we need hardly bother. This thread is little more than RO jumping the gun yet again. One aspect of an ongoing investigation looks like it might clear one of the several accused persons (though it's still far from over), and he is ready to try to use it to attack John Murtha, a man who, arguably, knows more about military service and military failings and military atrocities and military rights and wrongs than RO does.

But this tiny bit of news-so-far about an investigation and proceeding that are far from concluded is not a big enough stick to hit Murtha with, so RO is wasting his time again.

The facts are these: John Murtha believes that an atrocity was committed based on what he was told by officers close to the event and the subsequent investigation. He characterizes that atrocity as "killing civilians in cold blood" which is what it would have to be in order to be an atrocity. And Murtha goes on to blame the occurrence of said atrocity on a flawed war plan, which he says put US troops in an untenable situation that, in his personal experience of war, tends to lead to such things.

IF it is proven, in the fullness of time, that no atrocity occurred at Haditha, THEN Murtha may have to eat his words. HOWEVER, nothing of the sort has been proven as of yet, so Mr. Murtha need not eat anything but his lunch.