DESERT BUG wrote on Feb 26, 2008 7:44 AM:"Many decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States have affirmed the right of the accused under the Confrontation Clause to have a face-to-face confrontation with the accuser, and an opportunity to cross-examine the accuser. In the 2004 decision of Crawford v. Washington, the Supreme Court emphasized that the right to confront one's accusers could not be taken away in cases where judges believe that testimonial hearsay evidence is reliable, because such hearsay evidence had not had its reliability tested through the procedural crucible of cross-examination." [Googled from Wikipedia]

Mom of A Marine wrote on Feb 26, 2008 1:05 PM:Well of course, Desert Bug, they have a right to confront their accusers. Didn't happen in the Hamdania case...Of course they don't want to come here and be cross examined. They need to bring Tim McGirk and his sidekick in....they they Haditha guys can confront THEIR accuser who verified none of his information before he went wild with his story. Reporters in Iraq is about as smart as a cross walk on the Indy 500 racetrack. They make our military UNSAFE and it is ridiculous! They are there with their own agenda.

Massachusetts Democrat wrote on Feb 26, 2008 2:22 PM: . . . government witness testimony via videotape . . . no right to cross-examine . . . no right to question . . . guilt presumed . . . who said the East German Stasi went out of business after the wall fell? . . .

E.L. MERCON wrote on Feb 26, 2008 2:30 PM:This entire fiasco is politically motivated by certain parties in the Pentagon and Congress as well as self serving factions of the government of Iraq.

These men were sent to do a mission; they did it, that should be the end of it.

NOBODY SHOULD BE PROSECUTED FOR DOING THEIR JOB.

ONLY POLITICIANS INSIST THAT THEY BE PERSECUTED FOR DOING THEIR JOB.

These politicians and the "political military" in the Pentagon have started something they well may wish they had never engendered. When the dust settles down from these "show trials" American citizens are going to want to know WHO WAS IT that called for these "show trials" and WHY THEY DID IT.

...

E.L.M.

DESERT BUG wrote on Feb 26, 2008 2:35 PM:"These figures are pretty measly when compared with those of Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., who led the House with nearly $160 million in earmarks..." [from today's NCT editorial page] Hey Murtha, you're corrupt and you've been in trouble before. You're the same guy that's been thowing mud all over brave Marines, such as Frank Wuterich. You need to be examined in court and made to explain your nasty comments. You're a disgrace Murtha!

DESERT BUG wrote on Feb 26, 2008 2:52 PM:Murtha: You're nothing but an Al Queda stooge. You call an act of war, the collateral damage of war "slaughtering in cold blood?" Hey, Osama bin Laden loves you Murtha. Come to Pendleton, admit you were grandstanding and explain yourself in person. Justify your nutty allegations and come clean.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Feb 26, 2008 7:12 PM:There's an NCT article from a few months ago titled: "Request for Generals at Next Haditha Hearing Denied". A quote in it reveals one of the best examples of this flawed, archaic, and biased military system of so-called jutice. Quote: "In the military justice system, a defense request for witnesses is first filed with prosecutors. If they reject the request, the defense can appeal to the hearing officer who has the authority to overrule the denial." Excuse me but someone forgot the Constitution and the intent of the Forefathers that the accused be given whatever it takes for his defense. Someone also forgot that jurors have the absolute power, even over the judge. This was done to protect the accused from the government which was known for persecuting and convicting and sentencing and flogging and keelhauling the convicetd. This was the very thing we, as a country, fled. The very thing that we changed. Well, Almost! Jurors have the right to hear all evidence and the power to make their own decisions, unhindered and uninfluenced by any judge. Yet, over decades, these rights have been trampled all to hell and back, to the point that today we have an antiquated military judicial system that continually and without remorse seeks to persecute and destry an accused. The only change this archaic system has made is to halt the practice of flogging, etc. This is NOT Justice. This is downright Persecution. Our troops are denied the RIGHTS guaranteed them under our Constitution. We betray ourselves when we allow our own countrymen to be persecuted in this way.

Mom of A Marine wrote on Feb 26, 2008 10:13 PM:YES...I hope they subpeona MURTHA...he's got some splainin' to do!!

Hello wrote on Feb 27, 2008 10:24 AM:Where's all of our comments from yeterday? You never posted any comments from 2:35 pm until 7:12 pm PST. Were you guys out training at Starbucks? What's up with your screening and posting process lately, or is it censorship?

thanks
[Editor's note: Only a few comments were submitted to this story during that specified time. Some were not posted due to their libelous nature and others were postponed so an editor can check facts asserted. If you have any other questions, please submit them to blogeditor@nctimes.com.]

Steve wrote on Feb 27, 2008 10:57 AM:Between Murtha and Time Magazine, they should be held liable in a civil suit for defamation of character...It will be interesting to see the outcome of this one...

DESERT BUG wrote on Feb 27, 2008 11:26 AM:Looks like one of my blogs from yesterday was dumped by a blog ed. Oh well. My point was and is: Tigmother has been making a big deal from the fact that military juries have convicted in some of the P8 cases. Well, SO WHAT? I've served on enough juries to know that juries, military or otherwise, can only deal with what they are given. The military juries in these cases were only agreeing that the facts given them were correct. Well, excuse me, but WE KNOW THAT the FACTS were NOT in dispute. What was not adequately dealt with was the obvious: THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE EXIGENCIES OF COMBAT, EXPERT TESTIMONY ON COMBAT FATIGUE AND UNDUE COMMAND INFLUENCE among many, many factors. Now as to the "facts" in Frank Wuterich's case, he has stated those completely. Again, that's not what is in play here. In the name of JUSTICE, let him go and pardon those who have been so WRONGLY convicted. I can only hope that for Larry Hutchins and all the others that somewhere along the appeals trail or the pardon process, FAIRNESS will FINALLY prevail. In the meantime, don't forget to deluge the White House and the politicians with your demands for a redress of these terrible wrongs.

DESERT BUG wrote on Feb 27, 2008 11:30 AM:I must add perhaps the most important request. I am sure that for most people who understand the ghastly injustice being done to some great Marines, they've already done this. Remember them, please, in your prayers.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Feb 27, 2008 6:02 PM:With all due respect to [Editor's] reply to "HELLO", I bet this won't get posted. Since when have you cared about libel? When someone used my blog name to misrepresent my views and I asked that something be done about it I was told it was impossible. Now, all of a sudden, not only are you concerned with liability, you're concerned with checking the facts asserted? For months I've been giving "facts". My blog wasn't printed yesterday either. I waited for hours and had to re-do. I presented "facts", I presented quotes, which are fact and can be verified. I'd like to know just how you ascertain the "facts"? The Prosecutor in the hearings and courts-martial of the P8 couldn't do it. The prosecutor in these hearings can't do it. The Judges can't do it. Heck! The news media hasn't been able to do it for over 2 years. So, please share the source of your vast knowledge of the "facts" with those of us who "know first hand" most of the "facts". I was under the impression our opinions are our own and were not policed. THIS is MY opinion and that is a "fact". Will it pass muster and be printed or is freedom of speech not worth the effort to protect? AW4.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Feb 27, 2008 7:06 PM:To NCT Editor: At least freedom of speech is worth effort to you. Thanks. AW4.

Mom of A Marine wrote on Feb 27, 2008 10:46 PM:I've been censored a few times, also. What I want to know, regarding this article, WHO is doing the translating of these "witness" accounts?? Does the DEFENSE get to pick THEIR own translator. These "witnesses" have been coached for years now anyway......Phhsshhh! More BS. As I said before...they don't want to be face those that they accuse, or their lawyers for cross-examination. Gee, wonder why??? I don't.

Steve wrote on Feb 28, 2008 5:06 AM:I get concerned about this whole positive identification thing. I was watching several videos of air support being called in, and when that happened, everything was destroyed as it should. But listen to this. How is it possible to positively identify someone from 20,000 feet in the air? How is it possible to identify civilians? It is not. So does that mean that someone is going through the killing field after a bombing raid and picking out who were civilians and who were combatants? Of course not. But they will for our Marine infantry. The infantry apparently falls under a seperate set of rules. These are Marines not police officers. We are trained to be the most feared fighting force in the world. It seems now we are the most scrutinized. The enemy is using our own government to destroy the moral of Marine infantrymen. Causing us now to second guess. In basic training we are trained to make split second decisions, because if you hesitate you might get killed. Ssgt Wuterich made that decision, cleared the houses where they were receiving fire. There were civilian casualties. There are always civilian casualties. He was clearing a threat to save his Marines, and accomplished that mission. What makes it different for our Govt. to order the bombing of intentional civilian targets (Nagasaki,Hiroshima) and not be held accountable for murder, but a Marine infantryman doing his job to be charged. The civilians in those houses knew what these insurgents were doing, and they put themselves in harms way for doing so. As harsh as the reality may be, that is a consequence of war.

Huw wrote on Mar 17, 2008 5:04 PM:All he has done is emulate on a small scale what the CIC did on a big one.
An attack happened.
Immediate response was to kill the easiest targets.Subsequent response was to go into a place pretending it was a threat and murdering more innocent civilians.
Oh and lying about it, look you in the eyes and lie like its the most natural thing in the world to him.