Marines’ Trials in Iraq Killings Are Withering - New York Times
CAMP PENDLETON, Calif., Aug. 29 — Last December, when the Marine Corps charged four infantrymen with killing Iraqi civilians in Haditha, Iraq, in 2005, the allegation was as dark as it was devastating: after a roadside bomb had killed their buddy, a group of marines rampaged through nearby homes, massacring 24 innocent people.
In Iraq and in the United States, the killings were viewed as cold-blooded vengeance.
Well, by the America-hating Fifth Columnists of the New York Times, at least.
After a perfunctory military investigation, Haditha was brushed aside, but once the details were disclosed, the killings became an ugly symbol of a difficult, demoralizing war. After a fuller investigation, the Marines promised to punish the guilty.But now, the prosecutions have faltered. Since May, charges against two infantrymen and a Marine officer have been dismissed, and dismissal has been recommended for murder charges against a third infantryman. Prosecutors were not able to prove even that the killings violated the American military code of justice.
The NYT’s disappointment is palpable.
Now their final attempt to get a murder conviction is set to begin, with a military court hearing on Thursday for Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich, the last marine still facing that charge. He is accused of killing 18 Iraqis, including several women and children, after the attack on his convoy.If the legal problems that have thwarted the prosecutors in other cases are repeated this time, there is a possibility that no marine will be convicted for what happened in Haditha.
I think the writer is about to burst into tears.
On the other hand, some scholars said the spate of dismissals has left them wondering what to think of the young enlisted marines who, illegally or not, clearly killed unarmed people in a combat zone.
The NYT is utterly clueless about the nature of insurgent warfare. Or, conversely, it isn’t clueless, but is utterly malignant in its desire to destroy the American military.
“We can’t say those guys didn’t commit a crime,” said Michael F. Noone Jr., a retired Air Force lawyer and law professor at Catholic University of America. “We can only say that after an investigation, there was not sufficient evidence to prosecute.”
Nor can we say they did commit a crime. But, like all the anti-war, anti-military, anti-American crowd, the NYT prefers its own wish-fulfillment fantasies to the results of a long-established legal procedure.
UPDATE: Hot Air » Blog Archive » Marine to sue Murtha over irresponsible Haditha accusations
Submit to Stumbled Upon!
While I do believe most of the NYT staff are clueless, in these cases I think it best to choose “..but is utterly malignant in its desire to destroy the American military.”.
Bill, wrong observation. If NYT desires a fulfillment of their fantasies then why isn’t the NYT using a crack team of investigative reports ON THE SCENE to bolster their bravado? Answer — they have no clue of how to go about it. That takes the skills of a shoe leather reporter not a ‘journalist’.
Of course, there’s no mention of the little fact that by hiding among civilians in civilian clothing the “insurgents” have committed the offense of perfidy under the Geneva Conventions, which removes them from protection under those Conventions.