Awesome News wrote on Aug 10, 2007 6:42 PM:And Congrats to Terry, Deana, Brother of Pennington and Crystal!!!!!!

ED wrote on Aug 10, 2007 6:48 PM:God bless the Gen.

Leanne & Marshall wrote on Aug 10, 2007 7:53 PM:Deanna, Terry and most of all Rob: HALLELUJAH!!!! WE COULDN'T BE HAPPIER. I ONLY WISH WE WERE THERE TO CELEBRATE WITH YOU ALL. NOW, 7 DOWN, ONE MORE TO GO!! Although, as we talked about, this is only part of the battle. The rest will be the hardest on these men. To deal with the event in their own way, in their own minds, on their own terms. But, know guys, we are all still here for you, and will be!!! You are our heroes!! And, yes indeed, God bless General Mattis!! And this family's heartfelt thanks.

MorallyRight1 wrote on Aug 10, 2007 7:55 PM:There is only one judge in these men's deals, and He has come through for our Marines. Yet, the job isn't quite finished yet. Leave no Marine behind.

There's A Lesson wrote on Aug 10, 2007 8:09 PM:Yeah ... I did it ... I at least participated in the murder of a civilian ... Can I go home now? ... And the answer is OK?! ... Why not just give him a medal and say Good Job Soldier?!

TO THERE'S A LESSON wrote on Aug 10, 2007 8:40 PM:YES THEY SHOULD GIVE HIM A METAL ITHINK THEY ALREADY DID IN FACT. THERE IS MORE TO THIS STORY THEN IS BEING TOLD OTHERWISE THEY WOULDN'T BE GOING HOME........TO ROB AND HIS FAMILY THANK GOD YOU ARE ALL TOGETHER AGAIN.

Brother Of Pennington wrote on Aug 10, 2007 8:43 PM:God Bless you all who have stood by not just Rob, but all the Pendleton 8. 1 to go.

Chris wrote on Aug 10, 2007 9:13 PM:Why bother with a trial. This is just a travisty. Maybe this big shot general can undue the deaths of the Iraqis. And for those of you praising this decision just don't come out here and talk about how we need to stay in Iraq because you are so concerned about the safety of the Iraqis because your true attitude toward the Iraqis is now out in the open for everybody to see.

John1 to "There's A Lesson" wrote on Aug 10, 2007 9:25 PM:Well, that's not how it came down, I can assure you. General Mattis made his own decisions here, and not all of them are necessarily the "Government's". JJ and I met with the General, as well, today. He feels very very strongly regarding his views of right and wrong, and the conversation is something I am still thinking about. For those who complain about Iraqi civilian deaths, Mattis does not forget them-but he has discretion regarding the P8; and for the P8 as individuals, he is making his feelings known. Read his comments on combat in his Haditha decisions to gain insight.

John1 to Rob, Deanna and Terry wrote on Aug 10, 2007 9:26 PM:JJ and I lift our drinks to you all. Cheers! Rob, you have our number- JJ wants to play video games and share a cold one with ya!

TFP wrote on Aug 10, 2007 9:53 PM:Lt. Gen. James Mattis, we SALUTE you.

Stan wrote on Aug 10, 2007 10:22 PM:The General knows his business. And it is good business, as well as moral, to free members of the military who are on the bottom of the stack, taking the heat for higher ups, as well as we in civilian life. It is good business. You want people enlisting in the Marines? Don't drag them through the mud. The same goes for other members of the Armed Forces.

Vietnam Jughead wrote on Aug 10, 2007 10:50 PM:Thanks Lt.Gen. Mattis. One more,. please

TFP wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:03 PM:To John1 and Stan: Semper Fidelis

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:14 PM:Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition! I'm "almost" speechless. This General takes a bended knee to NO one. Hey, Brother of Pennington! For months you did your brother proud. You were awesome. All my best to your family.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:15 PM:Thank you General Mattis. Don't forget the Last Man Standing.

Jimmy the III wrote on Aug 11, 2007 12:57 AM:This General needs to quit acting so quickly and handing out pardons like candy and consider what he is doing in his dispatching lower sentences by honoring Islamic justice to some degree since the crime was committed in Iraq and Islamic Nation. Other Islamic nations are watching what American justice is and is it real. And thus the families of those that were killed needs to be consulted as to degree of personal punishment to be vetted out, or alternatives like recompense, public service, remembrance, remorse, social and community service and tribute that must be made by each offending soldier prior to any reduction in time of sentences. This General needs to go to the Iraqi neighborhood, sit and have coffee or tea with the affected families, listen to the family members and hear their real feelings of a real life that was taken, this General who said that �shooting people can be fun�, this General needs to listen to the people in the neighborhood and village about those who were executed and their dreams and wishes for their village, then and only then proceed to consider sentences. If these soldiers had personal messages of sorrow or apologies or some form of personal tribute that the General could carry even better but that would be the convicted soldiers choice. If he hasn't done these things he has insulted these Arab peoples and should not be in command as he is endangering our nation as Arab culture operates by respect as every American soldier in Iraq and the Middle East will bear the brunt of this generals actions for years to come. This General does not have to agree but he has to show respect and reverence to memory and the community, if he did do these things this would breed good will beyond bounds for years to come for the Corp and for the Nation, for the Soldiers and himself. But he is giving out to many releases to fast without adequate consultation and respect that will hurt our frontline soldiers in the end. He does not live in a vaccuum. These are my opinions and that and a buck might get a cup of warm tea. General Mattis consider seriously the international complications of your actions, we know the potential results, the Arab culture only wants to see you have shown the respect as most any student of Islam and the middle eastern society and history knows. There is the power of forgiveness in Islam but there must be steps towards such forgiveness that must be taken. Few have been publicly been shared if any have been done. You as a leader must publicly take them and show honor and respect, if you don't Islamic justice can go sideways, and you know what that means and how it can affect our troops. Stop your march, fly to Iraq, and personally take those steps. Show you are an honorable and respectable man.

futuremomofawarrior wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:17 AM:Many prayers of thanks to God and Lt. Gen. Mattis. Mattis has heard many hours of testimony and his decisions have not been made lightly. I pray that Hutchins will be home with his family soon. We have been there since the shackles were put on without charges and we will be here till the 8th brave warrior is freed. Thank you againg Lt. Gen. we will be at the gate tomorrow to show our support and thanks. (One more please!) Lt. Gen. you have just helped ensure that our brothers and sisters fighting as we speak and our future warriors can serve their country with much more confidence than had this gone the other way. This also speaks volumes to all of our Veteran warriors who have seen much horror in war and know what these 8 have been through. God Bless America and her defenders PAST, PRESENT, and FUTURE

Marine Mom wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:37 AM:To those who are very obviously not of a military background and who do not have the faintest idea of how things work in Iraq, orders come from the TOP. These heroes take the heat for decisions coming from way, way above their rank. Before you make such uneducated remarks, talk to someone who has been there...or better yet, why don't you enlist and serve your country?

Coffeefiend wrote on Aug 11, 2007 5:37 AM:Hello Pennington Family, I'm overjoyed for you and wish you all the very best. Mrs. MW from MA

Randy wrote on Aug 11, 2007 6:15 AM:It is reassuring to know that the bedrock principle that all men are created equal can be waived by the whim of any American General!

BethinTexas wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:09 AM:Best news I have heard in a while! Hugs to Rob, Deanna, Terry and Crystal! To the nay sayers... you don't have the whole story. The general does. Do not assume you do. My thoughts are with Hutchins...until they all come home.

John wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:27 AM:Considering the lack of fairness the insurgents demonstrate towards American forces, there is NO REASON THAT ANY OF THESE MARINES SHOULD HAVE HAD TO GO THROUGH WHAT THEY HAVE HAD TO! THEY WERE TRAUMATIZED ENOUGH! I am glad to see the general has brought some level of sanity to all this!

kalreporter wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:40 AM:To There's a Lesson: Have you been to war? I can only say by you comments that you haven't. Why don't you go spend 21 months over in the sandbox. Rob, Terry, Deanna, I am so happy for all of you and for all the other Pendleton 8. They make me even more proud than I already am to be a MARINE MOM. You are all my heroes. God Bless you all.

mark wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:49 AM:I am relieved that finally there is not a politically correct General who is looking after the Marines that have to make split second life or death decisions in a very difficult environment. Is about time someone stood up for the brave men and woman who do the actual fighting.

Mary wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:50 AM:Decisions like this are just more fuel too support the enemey's assumption that we do not treat muslims fairly before the law. This will actually make our Marines still in harms way less safe as well as inspire home grown terrorists. I agree that 8 yers for a young Marine who was just following orders is too much but I hope to God they throw the book at the Sgt Hutchins. This young Marine was put into a situation where he had to decide if this was a lawful order and he did not make the right decision. That is his real crime and that is what he should have been charged with not murder.

John Murtha wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:11 AM:Owes ALL of these Marines an Official Apology, or He Should RESIGN! Murtha's a Disgrace to Our Corps and has broken the Tradition of a Band of Brothers. Shame on Murtha!

Tyler wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:33 AM:We need to quit demonizing our Marines and military as a whole. By singling out a group of people who perform a job not many of us want to do (and I'm guessing that many who call this a "travesty" fit into that category) we are helping the enemy fight our own people. We may not agree on war, going to war, or even continuing this war, but we are in it, and we need to be committed to winning it just as the enemy is on the ground. Only then will we have the initiative to succeed. Thank you General Mattis, Semper Fidelis.

MarineMom wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:36 AM:I'm so happy for Rob & his family!...thank you Gen. Mattis!Prayers have been answered!

Oside Gurl wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:46 AM:Amen

Al wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:58 AM:I would like to address this response to There's a Listen Here. [Personal attack deleted] These are Marines not soldiers. There's a big difference but I must conclude that you have never been in the military and have never served your country. Otherwise, you wouls know the difference and not show your stupidity. Furthermore, you have never seen combat. Don't rush to judge unless you've walked a mile in their shoes! [Personal attack deleted]

Jimmy the III wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:07 AM:This General Mattis is endangering our troops around the world, this is the same General who said "its fun to shoot people", the world is watching and keeping track of what you do General and it doesn't look good from what is being written about your recent releases. Is this General going to Iraq and personally visiting with the families? No! Did he show respect to the victims at the grave sites in prayer? NO! Did he see that some form of recompense was done according to both Christian and Islamic cultural tradition and law by these convicts? No! Did he even visit with the families Imams? No! General Mattis you may have the power to grant the release, but the messages you are sending to the rest of the world is clear and it's not what the gingoists and your rah rah supporters think it is and it will hurt our nation and I'm sure it will be a tool used by the enemies against us. You've just played into their hands sir. If you doubt this read the editorials coming out in the arab press and the flames that are spreading across the internet world about the mere hand slapping for war crimes you gave to our soldiers compared to the punishments that were allowed to be inflicted upon other Arabs and how many Arabs are still be held in Gitmo for a lot longer for less of a charge than these men were convicted of. General you are stoking the flames of terrorism by the way you are acting. Go to Iraq, visit the families, visit communities, pray at the grave sites, listen to the people and sit and talk to the Imams then return and render true verdicts then you will be respected and the fires of terror will not be stoked.

premeditated murder wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:24 AM:This was anything bout a "split second life or death decision" as Mark wrote. Some people defend any atrocity committed by "our side". Saddam loyalists were just the same.

To John wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:34 AM:John, there is no moral equivalecy. We can and should hold our marines to a higher standard. Does the fact that the insurgents kill innocents make it ok for us to do the same? If you want the Iraqi masses to help our efforts, they need to see a clear moral difference between us and the insurgents. Unfortunately, the disposition of these cases is sending the message that Iraqis have no clear moral choice. Unfortunately, that fact will result in more people failing to inform, more people failing to co-operate, more people undermining our efforts--and yes, more people shooting that the marines who took over for these criminals.

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:49 AM:Hold on while I pick my jaw up off the ground. Wondering what the General will do for the ring leader.

SemperFudge wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:09 AM:disgusting. It's nice to see our military has about as much of a sense of morality as the Taliban or Al-Qaiyda. There's no difference between what these murders did than what Al-Zarqawi did when he sawed off that kid's head in front of the camera. To all you ex-marines out there sticking up for this guys, I have a question: how does it feel to know you're "fighting force" is no different than the terrorists who're kicking the stuffing out of the american military?

Bubba wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:12 AM:We are at WAR here are we not? What a bunch of BS

Sure, Randy wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:48 AM:Go to Iraq and start chanting the "All Men Are Created Equal" principle and let us know what they say before they behead you.

JSten wrote on Aug 11, 2007 11:06 AM:The business is war. Its too easy to armchair quarterback the events leading up to this trial, and to take potshots at the outome. I hope these soldiers can recapture some of their lost lives. Its time to move on for the rest of us.

Shirley wrote on Aug 11, 2007 11:54 AM:Welcome home, Rob! Your parents were rocks through this all. Your fellow K brothers must be dancing in the streets. Mrs. H from NE

D&D Maui wrote on Aug 11, 2007 12:03 PM:Hooray for the guys. Hooray for Gen. Mattis. Hooray for the Warriors. Hooray for the Penningtons.Hooray for answered prayer.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 1:01 PM:To Jimmy: You must have made your comments on the wrong site. Try Al-Jazeera. You'll probably get more favorable feedback.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 1:28 PM:Jimmy. Back off the threats to OUR General and to America. Your Islamic Justice needs no reason to go "sideways", as you put it. It has been "sideways" for centuries. We are not talking about ISLAMIC Justice. We are in AMERICA where we have AMERICAN JUSTICE. We don't crucify our own for your culture or any other. Let's face it Jimmy; that was the plan from the beginning was it not? Make the Marines appear guilty of a crime? We are at war with TERRORISTS. To quote someone who has a lot of Americans PO'd right now: "If you're not FOR us, you're AGAINST us." Oh Mercy; Recompense? $2500.00 a pop for each TRIBAL (Not "family") member isn't enough? Fifteen months in prison and some of your countrymen turning on you isn't enough? losing everything you ever wanted isn't enough? Losing everything you ever worked your rear off for isn't enough? Losing everything you went through hell and EARNED isn't enough? Take your "fires of terror" and sit on them. Get out of OUR country. These are my opinions and not those of NCTimes.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 1:41 PM:To What?: WHAT? OH! I see. You want the "ring leader" to pay a heavy price? Well, when they find whoever gave the orders or the OK, don't bet on it because it will be someone above the rank of Sergeant. I believe "that" would be your "ring leader".

Citizen wrote on Aug 11, 2007 1:44 PM:This decision is a threat to the military justice system and its independence, as are the panels' decisions. The military's independent justice system depends upon its efficiency and perceptions of its fairness by the outside world and Americans. Punishing offenders is a precondition to full Geneva protection for an armed force. If an "us v. them" view prevails so that all war crimes in Iraq are dealt with kid gloves--as appears to be the case here and in other cases--then the right of the military to police its own will be in jeopardy and deservedly so. Even Hutchins' 15 year sentence is a slap on the wrist. It looks like two standards of justice, one where the military's members are threatened or are threatening the institution's interests and another when its members offend the broader community, citizens of occupied territories, and, presumably, also to enemy combatants to the extent they're not supposed to be killed while in custody. One of the great crimes of the Russian and German armies in WWII was their mutual disregard for civilians and combatants. In both cases, civilians and POWs were killed en masse. Both of these militaries' uniforms, sense of sacrifice, pomp, circumstance, and comraderie are not worth much if that same military is a tool for crimes against humanity, the murder of civilians and prisoners, and other dishonorable actions. These things need to be punished or the military becomes little more than a bunch of self-important self-satisfied guys with guns. We are not that yet, but the alienation of our now all volunteer military from Americans and their values is at an all time high. Its bad reputation abroad for actions in Iraq (and the failure to punish them) is bad and getting worse. I know that Mattis is a very educated man, well aware of the problem of atrocity in wars like Algeria and Vietnam and WWII. And I agree that there is some symmetry in not letting Pennington stay in the can for 8 years for doing actions less bad than some guys who are now walking free. But if he frees Hutchins, the ring-leader and author of this plan, or reduces his sentence, this would be a monumental mistake and also an injustice. It would dishonor the Marines and it would dishonor the US, whose national honor depends in part upon adhering to the law of war, treating the murder of civilians and prisoners seriously, and for dealing with our own offenders seriously and impartially and, in cases like this, harshly.

Citizen wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:03 PM:AW4 everyone has testified Hutchins gave the orders, and Hutchins never testified to the contrary. So you can prove your insinuation some higher up gave that order, or the rest of us can continue not to take you seriously. It's your choice. Rumor is not a rebuttal, and that's all the defense has had throughout this caper.

Chris wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:07 PM:I just love how all these people justifying what the general did are the same ones who criticize everybody else for doing the same thing. This was a cold blooded premeditated murder. Period. The victim was and innocent Iraqi. But I love how these bloggers bring up what other Iraqis have done so it is alright to kill someone who has not cut off someone's head or killed anyone to our knowledge. But these bloggers are of the same ilk as those who praised our military for getting rid of those red skins (American Indians). But through out history we allways found ways to rationalize our vicious attacks on the rest of humanity.

Taz wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:19 PM:War crimes committed in Iraq should be tried in Iraq with Iraqis on the panel. We have proven that we are totally incapable of trying our own when their crimes are against Iraqi citizens. The General should declare a mistrial and let the tribunal that handled the Sadaam trial have Hutchins and the rest of the co-conspirators.

To Jimmy the III wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:27 PM:Lieutenant General Mattis IS Honorable and Respectable. He's shown this by doing the Right Thing with these Marines. To Brother of Pennington: I agree. 1 More to go. A Heartilly EARNED Salute to General Mattis from a Retired Marine!!!

John1 to Jimmy the III wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:36 PM:First off, Mattis did not "hand out a pardon". He can't pardon. He can issue orders of clemency. The two are very different. In addition, Mattis is very aware of, and sensitive to, the deaths of innocents (assuming those can be determined from the insurgents). Mattis has done his homework, sat with the tribal leaders and has about a million pct more understanding of the macro and micro situations than you.

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:44 PM:You're arguing the wrong points. The Plt LT, the Company CO and the two Btn CO's involved took the squad and Platoon to task for being "too soft" and "lovey dovey". They sent the Btn Sgt Major, the Company 1st Sgt and other men to put it to the Platoon and squad-told them to 'raise the violence'. The Platoon CO actively talked about 'taking out insurgents' like the movie "Boondock Saints". Meanwhile, this squad provided all the intelligence for the Btn Task Force, and did so with no interpreter and 45 minutes of classroom training, little rest and hardly any downtime in 4 months. The results were either death or dishonor. Where is your outrage at the lack of leadership? All these enlisted men have felonies and Sgt Hutch is sentenced severely. So now, where is your outrage at the officers who failed to lead?

John1 to Taz wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:46 PM:That "should be" violates these men's rights under the US Constitution and UCMJ. So your suggestion is silly and useless. Additionally, the General cannot "declare a mistrial".

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 2:54 PM:To Citizen: CNN's Jason Carroll reported that Thomas also mentioned an unidentified Lieutenant. Google it if you must. It was in his report after the televised interview 6 months ago. I've mentioned it before. Seems you may have a problem with selective memory.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:04 PM:My comment at 1:41PM: NEVER try to fix eggs and comment at the same time!

Citizen wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:25 PM:John1, there is a difference from saying "be aggressive" and war crimes. Anyone with any intelligence can understand that difference, and few other Marines seem confused. The "lovey dovey," I understand from other open sources, had to do with this squad and platoon's overall lack of discipline. That much is obvious. As for AW4's mystery lieutenant, if someone heard this order, i.e., Hutchins, Thomas, or whoever, why can't they just say his name. No one's revealed this. Is it Phan? Is it someone else? Hutchins could easily have disclosed this if he wished. And, frankly, it only means more people need to be punished since an obviously illegal order does not provide a defense to an unlawful killing and should not be followed. This is stuff Marines learn in boot camp.

Michael D. wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:27 PM:If we allowed the folks who are upset with General Mattis' decision to run the military, the U.S. and all other free nations would have ceased to exist long ago. The fact is, the world is a brutal place and there are many who hate liberty, seek dominance over us and will not be stopped by our being nicer or more sensitive to their culture or by handcuffing our military with ridiculous rules of engagement and murder trials for soldiers who don't kill nicely. It is ludicrous to whine about the folks who are doing the work you are afraid to do and the job that must be done so that you can sit on your comfy couch and arrogantly pontificate about issues you know nothing about. It's time for the anti-Bush lefties and the rest of the double-digit I.Q. leftist lemmings to grow up and start helping the U.S. instead of supporting our enemies. As an alternative, you could wrap your head in a table cloth, go live in a cave with other stone age morons and worship a prophet who preaches the murder of everyone who doesn't live by the idiotic and repressive rules created by a bunch of miserably grumpy old slobs.

to AW4's comment at 3:04 wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:54 PM:Most reasonable comment you've ever made.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:56 PM:To John1: Your comments at 2:44PM; why hasn't the media reported things like this in detail? Just tidbits here and there influence the way people perceive the cases. Did I just answer my own question? I just thought of something. Seems to me General Pace said it all; "I think it's fair to say that the environment you're in certainly will impact on how you perceive the threat...So you can't just look at it in isolation. Clearly the environment does impact your perception of the threat". Well, could the Corps' make up its mind? These Marines were left to their own initiative and sanctioned to do what it took to stop the threat to their lives and the lives of those who stuck them out there in the first place. They were damned if they did, and were damned if they didn't.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:58 PM:Will the real AW4 stand up!

Julia wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:03 PM:Oh yes, hooray for Gen. Mattis, hooray for all the jingoistic postings! All the talk about the war, the enemy. These hateful posts seem to forget that the victim was an innocent native, the one that these proud warriors were supposed to protect from terrorists. You do remember, Mon General, you being the expert on the counterinsurgency: "People is the prize". In your reasoning, at least you could have referred to the victim by his name: Hashim Ibrahim Award, 52 years old.

Ray wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:08 PM:On rare occasion (3:04) AW4 comes thru as a real person, not some crazed apologist for murder or a would be court reporter. On those occasions she actually seems like she might have a sense of humor and a degree of humanity. But those occasions might be the counterfeit AW4.

John1 to Julia wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:34 PM:Julia, did you read closely the reports of the last 3 trials? The judges forbade the use of the name Awad because the prosecution could not prove identity. But I will say again that in his interview with my son, General Mattis did not forget a person was killed. He also does not forget the 65 of 160 killed in a Marine Company outside of Ramadi. He has a big job- he has to remember both.

John1 to AW4 wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:36 PM:You speak of a conflicted prioritization and indeed Mattis himself is conflicted. He feels for his Marines so much, but also must enforce ROE's which make no rhyme nor reason. He has a hard job. Why doesn't the media report? Hmmph- that's not in line with the Party ideology, you know that!

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:40 PM:No, the "lovey dovey" did not have to do with lack of, or attainment of, discipline. And the example used by the leadership was to "raise the level of violence"- a la First Platoon's example- and not a recitation of the line between aggressive and crime. That's not only Phan, but Corriea, Degrossiers and Looney, too.

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:41 PM:If you truly believe this an incident without parallel, then you need to speak with more grunts.

John1 to SemperFudge wrote on Aug 11, 2007 4:43 PM:Huh? Which terrorists kicking who where?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 5:05 PM:Gee thanks Ray. A degree of humanity? "I"m" NOT the one talking about keeping men in prison for years or threatening our General or this country with "fires of terror". THAT is Inhumane. THAT lacks humanity. Me? I'm apparently just a thorn in your side. Try picking on someone who actually has been Inhumane on these blogs. I, like many others, have compassion...for those who have been persecuted. Just because I have no respect for those who take pleasure in seeing these guys and their families suffer, is NOT inhumane. I didn't see you speaking out against the less than "humane" comment, bordering on threat, to me by James on another article. Get a dictionary 4cryinoutloud!!!

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 5:55 PM:No I don't want Hutchins to pay a heavy price. I want all eight of them to pay a just price. I don't care if the President of The United States of America gave the order to murder this guy. It would be an illegal order and anyone who recieved such an order would be legally bound to refuse to follow it. We aren't talking about bystanders catching rounds in a fire fight. We aren't talking about a Marine tossing a hand gernade into a house that they are taking fire from and there were inocents in it. There are inumerable ways that the wrong people can end up dead in combat when there is no one to blame for it. Capturing someone, tying them up and executing them is not one of them. They didn't even murder the guy they were after. They just grabbed who ever they could find when they couldn't find him. What would I consider just punishment? Five years and a dishonerable discharge for anyone who knew what they were going to do and did nothing to stop it. Fifteen years and a dishonerable discharge for anyone who actually put a round in the victim.

TMP wrote on Aug 11, 2007 5:59 PM:To the families of these 7 Marines... You have stood with pride, dignity, and honor beside your sons not just since the beginning of this nightmare that began almost 16 months ago, but since the day they made the choice to join the Marines. Just remember, the people in your lives that matter know you and know your sons; and they/we have supported you since that first phone call and continue to do so today! We KNOW that there were/are circumstances that are not public knowledge, and quite frankly, it is no one else's business!!! Those who matter... know. Those who don't... well, who cares what they say or think! A year from now or 5 years from now they and their comments will be a thing of the past, but your friends will still be here supporting you and your sons!!

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 6:07 PM:To Jimmie the III While I don't agree with the out come of this case I have something to say to you. I couldn't care less about Islamic justice or custom. What they call honor and justice is what has taken what was the foremost civilization of it's time and turned it into a primitive tribal bunch of murdering animals. So this is going to make them want to kill us? Like that is a change. They already want to kill us. Big whoop. What I care about is America and the honor of her armed forces. Which took a major hit by this miscarriage of justice. We gave up a little of the moral high ground with the actions of eight marines and a little more of it with our response to these actions.

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 6:15 PM:I sometimes wonder why I bother posting to these blogs. I know I am not going to change anyones opinion. So why do I bother? I have decided I post to these blogs to show that not everyone who reads this online paper is an unthinking bloodthirsty expletive deleted. In this case I am saying that not everyone thinks it is ok to murder someone. Even in a war there are rules of morality. These rules are what differentiates us from the terrorists. If we follow them. If we hold our troops accountable for their actions. IF. We seem to have failed in that if this time.

What would JFK say: wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:09 PM:Why are American boys doing what Iraqi boys should be doing for themselves?

Support But Don't Excuse wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:13 PM:I completely and totally support our troops, and also believe there may have been some higher up influence in the actions of these marines. However, that does not excuse what was done. If we want to be able to take the moral high ground when it comes to telling the rest of the world how to live then we need to walk the walk. That was not done in this case. In this case we have reduced ourselves to the levels of our enemy and given up our ability to separate ourselves from the animals. I do think these 'higher ups' should be held accountable for the situations our young marines have been placed in, but that does not exempt the young marines from being held accountable for their actions as well. Anything less and we continue to sell ourselves short as a world leader.

John1 to JFK wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:46 PM:JFK got us into Vietnam.... and his electoral henchman Johnson killed 58,000 Americans to keep it going.

John1 to What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 7:47 PM:The prosecution and NCIS couldn't even prove the identity of the dead Iraqi. How would you prove your wants?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:32 PM:There's one thing that fascinates me about the mindset of those who want to see these Marines punished even though None of us really know the whole story or the truth. Why is it that they never give the accused any credit whatsoever for the years of their lives spent as good, decent, citizens? Sergeant Hutchins, throughout 22 years of his life, was a good kid, never in trouble, churchgoer, not a problem child, a good student all through high school, joined the Marine Corps which was part of his spirit bred in him as a child because of the respect he had for his father and grandfather; both retired Marines. At trial a Commander under whom the Sergeant served, testified about his intelligence, integrity, abilities, and distinguished service. He showed his respect for this young man by walking over to him and shaking his hand. NO media report on that, but "mastermind" was run into the ground with almost every article. Until April 2006 when Iraqi insurgents waited five days to accuse the Squad of killing "whoever"; Sgt. Hutchins had an impeccable record of service to his country and to the Marine Corps. Now he is 23 years old. I will never understand a mindset that totally ignores 22 years of one's life, chooses to negate it as if it never was, and passes judgment for one day for an incident that happened during WAR. 365 days in a year x 22 years = 8,030 days of one's life negated. This country owes him gratitude for the years of honorable things he's done. He does NOT deserve to have that negated by anyone.

To John1 wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:35 PM:That your son and his co-conspirators killed an unknown man, doesn't make it better. Do you sneer and jeer at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Have you no decency? You literally turn my stomach. This particular arguement is so offensive. Shame!

To Taz wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:49 PM:I know the Middle East is very hot this time of year and the political climate isn't what you are used to either. However, I'm sure if you tried living there for a few weeks your attitude and viewpoint would change very quickly. Your statement would be retracted by a much humbler and realistic outlook on what is really happening in the world and not just a utopian U.N. viewpoint as you have now.

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:08 PM:I don't care who the victim was. If the US Army soldiers who pulled Saddam Hussein out of his rat hole had executed him on the spot I would of wanted them to go to Leavenworth. WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS!! The good guys don't summarily execute people.

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:49 PM:I didn't negate his years of service. He did when he executed a bound man.

Mike / Marine Father wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:49 PM:General, I and my families as well as many americans, WE SALUTE YOU and YOUR COURAGE, No other Politician would do what you had done, You are a true Marine and a Great American. You made American people proud, especially those of us who served our country in so many wars. We were not asked to be send. We were send to fight for those countries' freedom but hate American. You did great "JUSTICE" for our men and women in uniform. American finally find a person who actually belived in his MArines and fully supported them no matter what. You and your staff should be proud of what you done. Those individuals who question your actions, either have no clue of what war is all about, or they should go to IRAQ and fight for there freedom. Once again GENERAL thank you for standing up for your Marines. Iraqis are departing their country in thousands a day, the United should make them saty and fight for their country.

What? wrote on Aug 11, 2007 9:53 PM:You keep arguing that they did nothing wrong and should go free. I disagree. If executing people is ok then why not take a page out of Saddam's book? He was hip to the whole summary execution thing. Lets gas every town or village where an IED goes off. Why not? AW4 and John1 seem to think anything goes in war. They would do it to us so it must be ok right?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:33 PM:To What?: There you go again. One of the best "negaters" around. Is your heart so pure that you can judge so harshly? I feel a chill!

Mike / Marine Father wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:35 PM:General, I and my families as well as many americans, WE SALUTE YOU and YOUR COURAGE, No other Politician would do what you had done, You are a true Marine and a Great American. You made American people proud, especially those of us who served our country in so many wars. We were not asked to be send. We were send to fight for those countries' freedom but hate American. You did great "JUSTICE" for our men and women in uniform. American finally find a person who actually belived in his MArines and fully supported them no matter what. You and your staff should be proud of what you done. Those individuals who question your actions, either have no clue of what war is all about, or they should go to IRAQ and fight for there freedom. Once again GENERAL thank you for standing up for your Marines. Iraqis are departing their country in thousands a day, the United should make them stay and fight for their country.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:36 PM:Awesome! John1 (7:46PM); I've been saying that for years. It is a known historical fact. NO getting around it. Oh My! Whole new can of worms. Just wait.

AW4cryinoutlouds wrote on Aug 11, 2007 11:01 PM:WHAT's with the "We're the Good Guys" routine? This is NOT a Geneva Convention war. Everyone is "supposed" to abide by the Geneva Convention. Only the Good Guys have tried to fight WHAT one considers a Moral War. How's it been workin' for us? When will the Good Guys get sick and tired of OUR troops being targets for Barbarians who have No morals or rules, abide by NO morals or rules, and spit on Our morals and rules. If this continues, the Good Guys are going to be fighting the Bad Guys here in the Good old USA!

Sandy wrote on Aug 11, 2007 11:20 PM:I am sorry no one here laments for the approximately million Iraqi civilians we killed. Can we find a General to bring them back to life? While we should back our troops, we should also begin to learn about the Arab culture we do not understand and must respect. Short of that, we will continue to serve uselessly and more innocents will be murdered on both sides, putting such Generals in comical situations.

Adding a little sisterly love... wrote on Aug 12, 2007 1:04 AM:To: TMP, TFP, John, Leanne, muh Brother, D&D Maui, and everyone else who is here supporting Rob and the rest of us (as always), THANK-YOU!!! You guys are wonderful. To Rob, who is sleeping in the next room over: Love you, bro. So good to see and talk to you again. I missed you so much.

John1 to the 8:35PM poster wrote on Aug 12, 2007 7:44 AM:I don't understand your post. Some posters wanted "the family of the Iraqi" on any legal "tribunal" (I thought those were proven unconstitutional) for the P8. My point was, how would one accomplish this? It's silly in and of itself, since whatever else, as Americans, the P8 have the protections guaranteed by the Constitution and UCMJ.

thisiswar wrote on Aug 12, 2007 7:55 AM:In this war if the killing of this person saved the life of one Marine would it be justifiable? If the killing of this person saved the life of 100 Marines would it be justifiable? If the killing of this person was “intended” to save the life of Marines would it be justifiable. My answer is yes, yes, and yes. The actions that night of the CP8 and their subsequent treatment will forever be a prime example of how political and media influence dulls the warrior’s sword and makes all freedom loving peoples more vulnerable. I thank the CP8 for being on that wall that night while I slept, at home with my loved ones, without care because they were there. Thank you CP8, thank you General Matttis. We have one more Marine that deserves his freedom.

TO AW4 wrote on Aug 12, 2007 8:43 AM:I want to thank you for all your support of the cp8. You have said things I could only dream of saying. All the supporters at the gate thank you to me being one. I only hope that if I ever need a spoke person you will be there. Now to bring the last man home.Thanks again from the front gate....Sharon

TO ROB AND FAMILY wrote on Aug 12, 2007 8:46 AM:I want to thank you for all you went threw to support us in the time of war. You will ALWAYS be a hero. I meet your mother and father at the front gate and to you I say keep Rob close to you and safe. Get on with your lives and I hope it gets better real soon. It has to you are home. God bless you.Sharon

What? wrote on Aug 12, 2007 9:47 AM:Me? Pure of heart? Not even close. But it doesn't take a saint to know that it is wrong to shoot a bound prisoner.

John1 to Rob's Sis wrote on Aug 12, 2007 10:01 AM:Tell Rob that it has been my continuing honor and pleasure to have made his acquaintance and to shake his hand, throw a joke, and hear him sing "we ain't gonna take it" when we passed in the Brig. I hope to lift a toast to him and the P8 personally.

Civil lawsuit wrote on Aug 12, 2007 10:08 AM:I think that the Awad family members should file a civil law suit against all P8 who were convicted of murder or conspircy to commit murder. Awad's family should hold each and everyone involved accountable since the Marine Corp could not. This is what is happening in that other famous case against the former football player accused of murdering his wife and her friend.

John1 to Civil Lawsuit wrote on Aug 12, 2007 12:04 PM:LOLOL!! Well, first, you'd have to establish it WAS AWAD who died!!! Then they'd have to publicly disclose what the US Government already paid them. Oh, yeah, and if all the above are done, then you'd have to actually FIND Awad's family. Then, let's see, let's calculate the assets of not just the persons you identify, but all the P8- men who as an AVERAGE, earned about 40 cents an hour while in combat, and have collectively paid out more than $1million in legal fees. I bet you have more pocket change than all 8 combined right now. Go ahead, sue.

John1 to Sandy wrote on Aug 12, 2007 12:07 PM:"The Arab culture".. you realize this is the same Arab culture who had no respect for 1st Squad because they didn't beat down on them like the Army's 10th Mountain Div did?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 12, 2007 12:46 PM:To Sharon: Hi girl. Thanks for the kind words but I should be thanking you and all those who have stuck with these guys every weekend for over a year. I figured you'd quit after a couple of months. I'm so glad I was wrong about that. I was there recently at Larry's trial. I met Skip, Kilo Mom, a great bunch of retired Marines, active duty Marines, a terrific Gunney, a Marine who travelled over 20 hours by bus to be there for Sgt. Hutchins, the defense team, Larry and his family. I wish the General could meet the Sergeant but it probably isn't allowed. This young man has been put through hell for 15 months. He does not deserve this from his own countrymen. Yep! Bring the Last Man Home! I've already been blessed Sharon: Meeting a Marine who believed in himself and had the courage to stand up for those beliefs when he could have taken an easier path, meeting a loving and supportive family that my husband and I will always call friends, and blogging back and forth to Americans who have good hearts. I call those Blessings. Take Care. AW4.

John1 to AW4 wrote on Aug 12, 2007 1:27 PM:AW- I think it is now allowed for the General to meet Hutch. I think it is scheduled, but not for awhile yet.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 12, 2007 1:43 PM:To What? @ 9:47AM: Thanks for the admission. Hope you weren't COERCED into it. That would be refreshing.

McGee wrote on Aug 12, 2007 1:55 PM:Sandy, RE: John1's response to you. Inorder to get away with murder or genocide, you have to demonize your victims and make it seem that their death is ok. So John1 decides to demonize and marginalize "Arab culture" and act as if the slaughter of babies, grand parents, brides and grooms, students, hard working devout souls, the sick, elderly and infirm, is like slapping a gnat. Arab culture represents a good percentage of the total population of the world. He is a really sick man and fortunately he and his, don't represnt America or Christianity or even the Marines. They are a perverse abberation.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 12, 2007 3:05 PM:To John1: Thank You.

The Jackson's wrote on Aug 12, 2007 5:11 PM:Hey, congrats!! We are very happy for you and your family. Please take care of each other. Our thoughts and prayers for Hutchins will continue. As for all you bloggers who think you know these guys and have some kind of right to judge them, piss off. Your opinions are just that.....your opinions. Lt. Gen. Mattis is privy to all actions, evidence and has a great knowledge of what goes on in Iraq, which YOU DO NOT. He is a fair man with the guts to do the right thing. We thank him immensely and are happy for all these Marines that he released!

John1 to McGee wrote on Aug 12, 2007 6:06 PM:Realism isn't demonization nor marginalization. It's realism. If one truly wants to understand "Arab culture", then don't forget the warts. As is the fact that much of Arab culture revolves around 7th Century thinking and intellectually, Wahabbism has derailed advancement of thought in "a good part of the world". You rail against me, but your argument is shallow and immature. No one speaks of or acts as if "killing babies", etc. is akin to slapping a gnat. Go back to your old and tired arguments that were as wrong during Vietnam as now and think a little harder.

John1 to The Jacksons wrote on Aug 12, 2007 6:25 PM:Semper Fi, Terri, et al!! Motivating response! Say hi to Tyler for me.

McGee wrote on Aug 12, 2007 9:29 PM:John1, social anthropologist and Arab scholar? I think not. Historian of 20 Century American history? I think not. Apologist for cold blooded murder, that sounds about right.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 12, 2007 11:52 PM:McGee doesn't sound Arabic; so what's with the love-fest for, and the defense of barbaric terrorists who sacrifice their own; who kill their own babies, grand parents, brides, grooms, students, hard working devout souls, the sick, elderly, and infirmed? They could care less who suffers or dies for their cause against those who don't follow their beliefs. Why the defense of them and not Americans or our Marines? Would you like to share...McGee? How in blazes would You know what represents America, Christianity, or the Marines? If there is any perverse abberation try the mirror and you just may find it.

John1 to McGee wrote on Aug 13, 2007 7:29 AM:Whatever, dude. You're wrapped too tight around your axis.

Citizen wrote on Aug 13, 2007 8:23 AM:Don't you all see that conflating the enemy--a smallish group of a few thousand terrorists--with every single Iraqi is an immoral type of thinking that leads to violence against innocent civilians? Don't you see that it contradicts the entire concept of operations which is to protect Iraqi civilians from the terrorists that terrorize them into silence and passive cooperation. This collective guilt viewpoint is the thinking of Hitler and the Holocaust where all Jews were lumped together as "a criminal race" under the banner of Jewish-Bolshevism. Communists and their crimes were imputed to all Jews, regardless of their individual guilt. Germans were exhorted to kill the Jews before they come (with the Red Army) to destroy the German nation. AW4 above brings up the familiar and tired refrain that noting the humanity of the enemy's civilian population somehow is disloyal to Americans. It is not. It is the mark of a Christian and civilized nation. A man here was tied up, selected at random, and killed to send a message. The only defense is he was from a "terrorist tribe" whatever that means, and that possibly some hidden intelligence report that none of the perpetrators had access to or reviewed showed him to be a suspected terrorist. The latter is irrelevant, of course. As a detainee he could not have been killed regardless. The Marines in this squad knew that. That's why they covered up their actions. That's why some of them tried not to participate, e.g., Bacos, Pennington. We don't kill prisoners. And when some of our own do, we should punish them. This should not be that controversial. It's only controversial because some folks in the military and their families have adopted a tribalistic outlook, where everyone outside of the small circle--military, American--deserves to be treated with no quarter or respect, even if he is an old man, tied up, without benefit of judge, jury, a lawyer or a weapon, begging for his life in the middle of the night in Iraq.

Citizen wrote on Aug 13, 2007 12:11 PM:Criminal punishment is not a matter of being "holier than thou" or disregarding the other 22 years of Hutchins' life. It's a matter of trying to rebalance the scales of justice after something wrongful and illegal happened. If Hutchins killed an American at home (or another Marine in Iraq), I don't think the other 22 years of his life mattered that much. And this is appropriate; we can't ever fully know why anyone commits a crime. We can't really presume to judge them as a complete person. We simply judge the action, and we do this because law and punishment are essential to a civilized society and to a disciplined military. I agree that it is especially important that justice in a war zone take into account the confusion of the battlefield, the sliperiness of the terrorist enemy, and the frequent confusion by our guys of enemy and noncombatant. But that is not an issue here because this was not in a firefight. There was no real confusion. This was a premeditated killing, and when the original victim could not be found, another was selected at random. There is no evidence to the contrary, whether from Hutchins' testimony or anyone else's. There is literally no extant disagreement about the basic facts of this case. It would be nice if the accused defenders' at least quit denying the obvious and defended these facts on their merits. Pennington's Brother and a few others have, but most just hurl insults at the prosecution and NCIS and the Iraqis in general. The basic actions and whether they're wrong are dismissed too often in a manner that basically justifies genocide, i.e., our guys can do no wrong and deserve complete discretion because it's a war. But if we can kill Iraqis with impunity, surely our men can rape, rob, steal, and extort from them too and this shouldn't be punished; after all, they're our boys and may have a little PTSD. But if this justifies crimes against Iraqis, it justifies all kinds of crimes against their fellow Marines and other Americans too. But since we do expect self-control in that respect, we should not in a racist manner use the stress of war to justify anything and everything against the Iraqi civilians and detainees.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 13, 2007 1:49 PM:To Citizen: I pray you never are a juror. God help anyone who hasn't been PROVEN guilty of anything. God help anyone who should be given leniency. God help ANY ONE!!!

Citizen wrote on Aug 13, 2007 2:13 PM:Here's a hint as to your defective moral reasoning kids: Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men is not one of the good guys. Schindler, not Amon Goeth, is the good guy in Schindler's List. In Platoon, Sgt. Barnes is not the good guy, even though he acted much like the murderers in Hamdania. If anything, the movie Breaker Morant shows some of the moderately complicated issues involved here, but those guys did a bad thing too, and unlike these guys, actually were executed for it. So, was the British empire in 1900 politically correct?!? I don't think so. I don't think these guys deserved the same punishment as they would in a civilian matter for obvious reasons, but 1-2 year sentences hardly sends the right message.

What? wrote on Aug 13, 2007 3:23 PM:Well said Citizen. Right up to "hardly sends the right message" I don't think justice is about sending a message. It is about punishing amoral actions. It is also about protecting everyone else from people who refuse to live in a civilized manner. We have been punishing murders for centuries and still murders kill. Hey AW4cryinoutloud all CP8 have been convicted of involvement in this murder. Whether by plea agreement or Jury. That is as close as we will ever get to PROVING what happened. Which is close enough for me. I find your unquestioning suport of the Corps and specifically the CP8 an interesting contrast to your contempt of the Corps justice system.

McGee wrote on Aug 13, 2007 3:35 PM:You are fighting the good fight Citizen and you make perfect sense. I am worn out but "carry it on".

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 13, 2007 3:46 PM:Actually, you've several of the extant facts incorrect.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 13, 2007 4:15 PM:Sending The Right Message! That's what the Prosecutor said. Where is it in Any book of law concerning sentencing, or in the UCMJ, that sentencing is to be decided To Send the Right Message? Seems to me that someone is NOT abiding by the UCMJ and is Sending the WRONG Message. Well; there was nothing new about that throughout the hearings or trials. Yep! INjustice at its best. Just make it up as you go along. Don't actually abide by the rule of law.

John1 to AW4 wrote on Aug 13, 2007 10:16 PM:That's ok, AW4- these experts don't even know that the SQ-1 PVD confinement, for instance, was adjudged illegal.They just made up the illegal confinement in the Brig, now shown in the Padilla case to have caused psychological trauma so severe that dementia now is feared....

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 13, 2007 10:52 PM:Say WHAT! What?: NO! All of CP8 have NOT been "convicted". Five made plea deals accepting responsibility in order to receive lighter sentences. Those are NOT convictions. You were correct about one thing; it's as close as we'll ever get to PROVING what happened. By your comment you seem to understand that NOTHING was PROVEN. I don't see any contrast to my support of our Marines and the military justice system. The military justice system doesn't seek the truth. It persecutes and intimidates to achieve its end result. Did you not notice that many of the military attorneys are private citizens called to defend the accused? I should think you'd find "that" a huge contrast right there. The government appoints the men who defend those the government is prosecuting. Oh Wow! WHAT a system.WHAT is fair, impartial, or Just about that? Don't worry about there being any contrast in my beliefs. There is none. I support the Marines who are being screwed over by the military they serve; the military that answers to the Pentagon; the Pentagon that answers to Congress. Talk about contrast! Wake up!

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 13, 2007 10:57 PM:Poor McGee; No stamina. Must not be a Marine.

McGee wrote on Aug 14, 2007 6:36 AM:Once again, AW4 makes an assinine comment that brings down the level of the blog. She really plays to the lowest common denominator--and I do mean "common". Grow Up!

What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 9:53 AM:A plea bargin is an admission of guilt to a lesser charge to avoid going to trial. If honor is so important to a Marine why would one take a plea deal if he was innocent? Oh impressive acronyms John1. I am not impressed. Potentially violent and dangerous confinement is a detail after the fact. Lets see if we can agree on the basics of what happened. These 8 Marines went out with the intent to kidnap and execute an insurgent. When they couldn't find him they grabbed another man, bound him and took him to a crater where they shot him to death.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 11:06 AM:To McGee: Have you missed months of assinine comments and far worse? Before you accuse another of lowering the level of the blogs you should get your facts straight. Some were already in the basement. You may want to re-read your own comments to John1 at 1:55PM on the 12th; Although I'm sure you feel that you and those who agree with you don't have to adhere to the same standards. If my comment about mental stamina of Marines is considered by you to be low, please tell me what your reference to John1 as "a really sick man" or that he and his "are a perverse aberration", represents. Wait! Let me help! Try LOW and Assinine.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 11:11 AM:To McGee: By the way; you're the one who said he was worn out. Hope you are well soon.

Citizen wrote on Aug 14, 2007 12:06 PM:Before we get too far off the beaten path, there is an important point on the merits I made above re collective guilt and collective responsibility and its connection to things like genocide. Instead of talking about who levied the worse insult, I'd like one of the P8 defenders to address this point. And saying that the Arabs are really really bad is not a response. Because there is no doubt that the Arab terrorists are very bad. The question is what does that imply about how we can and can't treat those who are merely Arab or merely Muslim but are not terrorists.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 12:18 PM:To What?: What? Oh come on. You know why. Let's start with the Navy Corpsman. There was no shock that he'd be the first if any should. NOT a Marine! You did it again. You answered your own question. If you're an adult you must be aware that the innocent take plea deals for more than one reason. These innocent Marines were well aware they were being railroaded and knew that NO one was going to do anything about it. These innocent Marines had been threatened, coerced, intimidated, and denied their rights in Iraq. These innocent Marines were shackled, confined in solitary confinement, and intimidated for three weeks IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY, BY THEIR OWN PEOPLE, and intimidated for three weeks while under the LAW of Presumption of Innocence and with NO charges having been preferred. The media defamed them, Murtha defamed them, ignorant Americans defamed them, and as a result; the whole damned world condemned them. And you have the nerve to ask why anyone would take a plea deal? They had to get Civilian attorneys to protect whatever rights remained after the ones that were denied. These innocent Marines agreed to testify against their leader and others and to lesser charges in order to get shorter sentences. It is not rocket science. One innocent Marine made a plea deal until his attorney wised up. One innocent Marine chose to go to trial and testified against his leader. Only ONE innocent Marine upheld the honor of which you speak. Only ONE innocent Marine sat in a cell for 15 months while those around him took deals and spoke against him. Only ONE innocent Marine was not allowed to speak out while others were. ONE innocent Marine upheld the honor of which you speak, stood his ground, stood for his belief in himself, and never testified against his men. If anyone failed to live up to the code of the Marine Corps it lies with those above him, of those who judged him and punished him severely because he didn't cry, because he didn't beg, because he didn't grovel. ONE Marine did not take a Bended Knee. Research it. You, by your comments, have just illustrated how a story and statements that are not handwritten or recorded but are typed "later" by investigators can be flawed and incorrect; which, in a court of law, can ruin the lives of the accused. At 9:53AM you said the Marines took the man "to a crater". There's a large (pardon the pun) difference between a small hole and a "crater". You have just proven the inefficiency, inadequacy, and lack of concern for the "truth" and verification of it by the media and by NCIS. I thank you for that fine illustration of what has happened from the beginning of the lying insurgents in Iraq to Hearings and Courts-Martial here in the USA.

What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 12:57 PM:As long as the editor/babysitter approves it it isn't too low. However I personally try to ignore personal attacks. While I will gleefully go after opinions I try not to attack the poster personally. It is a fine distinction that some can't see when they find their opinions under assault. What good is name calling? Besides if there is no respect for the other posters why bother?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 1:06 PM:To Citizen: Your re collective guilt and collective responsibility and connection to genocide is "your" fantasy. It has nothing to do with LAW. It has no part in the legal process of the cases of the P8. Merely Arab, Muslim, or (merely?) terrorists? One must first be able to tell the difference. Earlier you negated the 22 years of the life of an honorable Marine by justifying your opinion with the idea of rebalancing the scales of justice after something wrongful and illegal. Again; your fantasy. IF you abide by military law then your opinion has been null and voided by the Army Lawyer, November 2000: "The Force Standing ROE and Rules of Deadly merely establish policy; they do not supercede law. Nonetheless, they IMPERIL THE LIBERTY OF MILITARY PERSONNEL BY AUTHORIZING FORCE THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE LAW, EXPOSING THEM TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY AND SEVERE PENALTIES." Sound familiar? You might also try reading "Warfighting" by General Krulak, who said, "we must realize errors by Junior leaders stemming from overboldness are a necessary part of learning. We should deal with such errors LENINENTLY; THERE MUST BE NO ZERO DEFECTS MENTALITY. Abolishing "zero defects" means that we do NOT stifle boldness or initiative THROUGH THE THREAT OF PUNISHMENT!!!Too bad; the corps seem to have forgotten all about that one. I've put this out there before but for those of you who have disdain for our troops, it doesn't seem to fit 'your' agenda.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 2:23 PM:To What?: As long as the editor/babysitter approves it? One person doesn't read all of the posts for all of these articles. There are too many. There are several "babysitters". I've had some nasty ones thrown at me for months. I could give times and dates, etc; if the babysitters wouldn't mind. There are three that crossed way over the line and should never have been allowed. Someone has used my blog name for months to misrepresent my views. So, when you say it isn't too low if the babysitter allows it, then you need to read ALL of the blogs for the past year to get a true perspective.

Citizen wrote on Aug 14, 2007 3:50 PM:Genius, there is no argument this killing complied with any known ROE so your first quote is irrelevant. Is there an ROE that allows a flex-tied terrorist to be shot, for the shooting to be covered up, and for the participants to lie about it. On the second quote, boldness and outright murder and an associated cover up are two different things. It's too bad you're too obtuse to see the differences. Finally, your use of the word "fantasy" is peculiar, as my argument is something one learns about in college called an "argument by analogy" or, relatedly, a reductio ad absurdum. Your labeling it a fantasy does not deal with the underlying point and the problem--the moral and policy problem--of your racist reasoning. Your reading comprehension skills and logical reasoning skills are way off; your last quote is the best example I've seen of your inane and illogical attempts to muddy the waters. My point was simple and you eluded it: if you say all these people are terrorists until proven otherwise, you've laid the logical foundations of genocidal actions and policies. Nothing you've said has refuted my conclusion, and everything you've said has made manifest the major premise of my argument.

What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 4:36 PM:The singular babysitter was a figure of speach. Naturally there are more than one. And just as naturally their opinions of what is acceptable varies wildly. I have had some of my posts not posted and I couldn't figure out why. I put a real effort into keeping it clean and within the ROE. Hehe. I have also seen posts where I was amazed that it didn't get deleted. I am sorry that there are people out there who hijack handles. With my common handle I can call it duplication of a less than original handle. Yours is too unique for that and there can be no doubt that the slime that falsly posted under it did so with malice. Thats the risk of a registration free blog. The good news is the post I saw was so opposite of your opinion that it was easy to tell it was an imposter.

What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 4:42 PM:Back to the point.AW4cryinoutloud so you are saying they didn't go out and grab anyone. No one was killed and nothing ever happened. The entire case was fabricated by rabid NCIS investigators and insurgents looking to tarnish our Marines?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 5:54 PM:To Citizen: Well, obtuse aside; your reductio ad absurdum is related in your opinion which derives from your "fantasy". I could also say that you are too obtuse to see the difference of things in this case. We can "obtuse" ourselves silly but it won't change the fact that you see it one way and I see it another. Both think we're correct. Here we go again! Now I'm a racist? What? I mean What will What? think of you with the sneaky little jabs? We are supposed to have respect for one another. So; with all "due" respect, I shall take the high road and leave the low road to you, if that's all right with you. Whoops! You're at it again! "My" reading comprehension and logical reasoning skills? What?! Help! I'm trying to maintain the high road here. Uh Oh! Now "my inane and illogical attempts to muddy the waters"? That low road is startin' to look good, What?. OK! Back to Citizen: Who said all these terrorists are guilty unless proven otherwise"? Wasn't me. Your fantasy again. Wake up! I said "How do you tell the difference"? Surely; as intellectual as you think you are and the legend that you've become in your own mind, you must have read somewhere (about 400 times) that NO one can tell the difference between the enemy and the friendly. There are Syrians, Jordanians, Iranians, etc, and NONE of those who are terrorists follow any ROE's. Gadzooks! Now I've "laid the foundations of genocidal actions and policies? High road AW4, High road! What? would be proud! Back to Citizen: I thought that Saddam Hussein had the genocidal actions and policies covered. Oh the power of one person. Please tell me it ain't so! I haven't changed your mind? OK! What? This one's for you... Citizen , you and I will just have to respectfully agree to disagree and move on, because neither shall I be swayed. I bet What? is proud of me today. And frankly; I RESPECT his (or her) comments even though I don't agree with eveything.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 6:30 PM:To What?: No to the first question. No to the second question. I'm saying that this is war and Marines were not trained to be policemen. They were trained and ordered to capture or kill insurgents. I'm saying that NO officer is going to ADMIT to orders being given. I'm saying that NCIS' (rabid investigators? I like that!), with their history and pattern of coercing, lying, threatening, not protecting the rights of those they investigate, not keeping records of interrogations, "create" crimes where there are none, NO one other than those involved know the truth of it all. The plea deal testimony was not consistent, the accusations by the Iraqi so-called witnesses who the P8 never had the chance to face or challenge, was inconsistent and could never be confirmed, verified, or Proven. The UCMJ has the Corroboration Rule. There was no evidence to corroborate anything. Coercion brought about plea deals to create a crime during a time of war and it makes me sick that this government put these young men out there to be sacrificed for the good of a foreign government that still can not stand on its own. Our government has sacrificed our Marines and given the enemy the laugh of the century. It has enabled the cause of the enemy. My husband and I have met Sergeant Hutchins, and this is a Marine who believes to the depths of his soul that he did what was asked of him. Whether we like it or understand it, it should not ruin this young man's life. To pass judgment on someone you know absolutely nothing about other than what you read in the media? What? Does any truly informed American really believe everything he reads in the media? Mark Twain: "If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed. If you do read the newspaper you are misinformed". What a visionary.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 14, 2007 6:49 PM:To What?: I forgot. Yes to the question about insurgents looking to tarnish our Marines! Good grief; it's a strategy they've been using for quite awhile. It's been all over the news for years, military articles, Ex Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld warned of it. I have the articles. I can't believe you weren't aware of this.

What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 8:33 PM:I will grant that there should be a level of skepticism to any Iraqi testimony. We can also agree that the insurgents will do anything to discredit our troops. You say in your last post that they did kidnap someone and that something did happen when you answered no to both of my questions. You replied to my 9:53am question as if it was a statment in your 12:18pm post. How about an answer to my Aug 14, 2007 9:53 AM: post? Here's the question. "Lets see if we can agree on the basics of what happened. These 8 Marines went out with the intent to kidnap and execute an insurgent. When they couldn't find him they grabbed another man, bound him and took him to a crater where they shot him to death." Change Crater to a small hole.

John1 to What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 8:49 PM:What, your 8:33PM post is not correct in the facts of discovery, in quantity, intent nor the specifics of the Iraqi's death. I would recommend you obtain the discovery record of trial and then revert to the blog.

What? wrote on Aug 14, 2007 10:31 PM:John1 So nobody was shot to death? Nobody was bound? Nobody was taken from their home?

Go Figure wrote on Aug 14, 2007 11:13 PM:John1 can you admit that your son was involved in a murder of an Iraqi person, aka Awad. John1 I think you know the answer but you will never admit it.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 15, 2007 12:06 AM:To What?: You said, "so you are saying".... To that, in effect, I was answering NO, I WASN'T Saying...etc...THAT is why I continued with, "I'm saying that this war...etc,". I don't know how else to explain it. God! I feel like Richard Nixon..."Now let me be perfectly clear". As for us agreeing on the basics; you and I don't look at this the same way at all. We don't agree at all. The only truth I'm aware of that everyone agreed on is that they were "ordered to capture or kill insurgents". I've complained about the plea deals from the beginning. Too many discrepancies and stories not gelling. Too many versions and ZERO corroboration. If I were on a jury I would demand corroboration or proof. There is none. I could not convict or sentence anyone to prison without proof beyond a reasonable doubt and there is a lot of doubt. I don't know how many times or different ways to get that across but I'm pretty sure this will be the last time because, like I've said more than once, this is war and orders are given. When they are followed; however they're followed, it is NOT a crime. If you call it a crime, bully for you. I'll deal with your decision. I guess you'll just have to deal with mine.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 15, 2007 12:09 AM:To Go Figure: Oh give it up! Deal with it!

Citizen wrote on Aug 15, 2007 9:14 AM:This is truly a baffling discussion. Guys who think the P8 are guilty generally say: here's what happened, here's the evidence, and here's why I think it's wrong. Their defenders say things like "post is not correct in the facts of discovery, in quantity, intent nor the specifics of the Iraqi's death" and "As for us agreeing on the basics; you and I don't look at this the same way at all. We don't agree at all." In other words, they never say what they think actually happened and why it was right. They never say who gave these orders and what evidence shows this. They never say what document shows Awad (or the unknown victim) was an insurgent and, MORE IMPORTANT, whether the squad knew that at the time of the murder and EQUALLY IMPORTANT why legally that exonerates them for murder after this suspected insurgent became a detainee. They never say why Magincalda's interview which confirms the basic outline of the story is unreliable. The defenders never say what they think happened, yet they insist these guys are heroes. The only one who has sorta suggested what happened is Pennington's brother, who basically says IED attacks went down after the attack, suggesting this was a good shoot of a bad guy. OK, fair enough, but is Pennington's brother aware that throughout Anbar Sheiks are cooperating with us because they're sick of foreign insurgents. These are the Sunnis who once hated us and made Anbar in 2003-05 the worst part of the country. They are now cooperating precisely because most Marines did not run around Anbar killing random Iraqis, but instead because they impressed the Sheiks that cooperation was in their best interests and their security would be guaranteed by the Americans. So Pennington's brother offered the only halfway decent rationale, but I think it suffers from the classic logical fallacy: post hoc ergo propter hoc (i.e., after this therefore because of this). Everyone else just says things like "there are things you don't know" or vaguely there is "reasonable doubt." There is a difference between reasonable doubt, and believing some testimony over others because it's more believable, it is consistent with earlier statements, and it's consistent with physical evidence, in this case a dead body, DNA, and a series of bogus radio transmissions.

What? wrote on Aug 15, 2007 9:58 AM:AW4, well it seems to me that we are both tired of this debate. Neither you or John1 will admit that anyone was was taken from their home, bound and executed. You both skate around this when ever I ask it. Then you fallback to the old they were just following orders defence while still avoiding the hard question. The order you keep quoting is "ordered to capture or kill insurgents" lets change one word in this order and see the difference. "ordered to capture and kill insurgents" It's a huge change of meaning with that one word. They were given the first order and carried out the second. My opinion that what these men did was wrong hasn't changed and I don't think your and John1's opnion has budged either. So with that I am signing off this particular blog.

Confused wrote on Aug 15, 2007 10:12 AM:She fights like a tenacious pit bull cur for what she believes in but advises "Go Figure" to "give it up" and "deal with it". I like the old AW4 better, or is this the imposter? I never can tell.

Citizen wrote on Aug 15, 2007 10:35 AM:AW4 still dodges the issue. Even above, she says, "Surely; as intellectual as you think you are and the legend that you've become in your own mind, you must have read somewhere (about 400 times) that NO one can tell the difference between the enemy and the friendly." I don't concede this. Terrorists, for starters, carry weapons, bombs, etc. when they're combatants and they identify themselves that way. They also are identified by informants and other evidence. But if one were to accept AW4's view, then once again why does that not logically lead to the conclusion that any American can kill any Iraqi for any reason and should never be prosecuted for murder because we can never absolutely know if the person in question was an insurgent. And if that is the case, why can't we logically commit genocide but blame it all on the inability of separating insurgent from friendly and blame it also on the fact that the whole lot of Iraqis are terrorist supporters and sympathizers, which I concede many are even if they are not terrorists per se. After all, AW4 suggests the Geneva convention is unnecessary above, viz., "This is NOT a Geneva Convention war. Everyone is "supposed" to abide by the Geneva Convention. Only the Good Guys have tried to fight WHAT one considers a Moral War. How's it been workin' for us?" So, if we don't abide by the Geneva convention and if we don't make our best efforts to distinguish insurgent from non-insurgent Iraqi, why can't we just kill them all? What would be wrong with that (in the eyes of the P8 defenders)? When McGee suggested that we should not dehumanize all Arabs, lest we start killing them too casually, AW4 said, "so what's with the love-fest for, and the defense of barbaric terrorists who sacrifice their own; who kill their own babies, grand parents, brides, grooms, students, hard working devout souls, the sick, elderly, and infirmed?" They're not all barbaric terrorists. And the babies, grand parents, etc. don't deserve to be killed unless they are, I hope we can agree. Yes mistakes happen in war, and mistakes of identity are probably common in a counterinsurgency war like Iraq, but some things are not mistakes, they're purposeful wrong actions such as what happened in Hamdania. One more thing, AW4, and you needn't interpret this as an insult but rather as friendly advice: I suggest you organize your thoughts and re-read your answer before you post so it makes a little more sense than your last one, e.g., this incohrent rant: "Whoops! You're at it again! "My" reading comprehension and logical reasoning skills? What?! Help! I'm trying to maintain the high road here. Uh Oh!"

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 15, 2007 11:06 AM:To Citizen: Rather than being baffled and accusing others of having an opinion unworthy of your consideration, you might try to comprehend comments that 'have' given specific reasons, given articles, quotations, law, etc. Since you don't seem to require proof beyond a reasonable doubt, you impugn, ignore, and seek to portray them as beneath your imagined intellectual level. Try reading the GAO report on NCIS. Read the whole thing; it's very long. Try researching NCIS and its charges of misconduct over the years. Try researching the UCMJ and its giant loopholes that do Nothing to protect the rights of the accused. Gads! Just try researching before you accuse others of knowing less than you. The remark about Sunnis cooperating because Marines aren't running around killing random Iraqis? There was nothing truthful or intelligent in that remark. It was just a cheap shot, obvious to anyone. If you'd spend less time with your attempt at 'legaleze' bull, you might actually learn something. Good grief! No wonder you're "baffled".

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 15, 2007 11:44 AM:To Confused: Nope, not the imposter. I didn't mean to step on John1's ability to speak for himself. He does it very well. I'm on a short fuse right now with the ignorance of some, and I lack respect for such an unecessary comment, which was personally insulting. What kind of person would expect a parent to do anything other than stand up for his child? Would Go Figure would throw his child to the dogs? Not to mention that John1 can run circles around this guy when it comes to the knowledge of the goings on in the hearings and the trials. Go Figure apparently still hasn't heard that the deceased can not be proven to be Awad. Go Figure says he knows the answer to the question, then why ask it 4cryinoutloud? I thought I'd voice my opinion and keep it short, therefore the comment; "Give it up and deal with it!"

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 15, 2007 12:01 PM:To Citizen: My remarks blew right past you. Whoops, related to you. The next was a repeat of your remark about "my" reading comprehension, in the form of a question. The word What? was to What?; the blogger who said we shouldn't insult each other. Then my comment of trying to maintain the high road, etc. If you can't keep up, No wonder you don't understand what is actually happening in this country and the injustice to our Marines. I shall now make you happy. I'm joining What? in signing off. Hope you can figure that one out. AW4.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 15, 2007 12:23 PM:To What?: Yep! We both think we're right. The quote about "capture or kill": Hamdania Marines Pressured To Gather Intelligence, Ferret Out Insurgents, NCTimes, February 7, 2007., Mark Walker. "If" it matters that Thomas said orders came also from other than the Sergeant, try: New Charges Coming Against Marine, Marine Corps Times, February 9, 2007, Thomas Watkins/AP, (and) Marine Discusses the Killing of an Innocent Iraqi, CNN, February 12, 2007, Jason Carroll. I'm signing off too. AW4.

Citizen wrote on Aug 15, 2007 12:35 PM:Here's the thing: what do the P8 defenders think happened in a few sentences. Do they think Awad was armed? Do they think he was really Gowad? Do they think they were ordered directly and explicitly to violate the ROEs in this instance? And, if so, by whom? Why wasn't this person called as a witness for the defense? Do they think they killed the victim to send a message and that this was OK? Do they think they killed him, but that everyone (or at least every "military age male" in that town could've been killed lawfully? Do they deny he was tied up, that Americans fired weapons to simulate a firefight, that they filed false reports, or that he was selected more or less at random when Gowad couldn't be found? Do they think he was Gowad or a relative, or that the squad believed as much at the time, and that this justifies it? Do they think the NCIS made up their basic sketch of what happened from whole cloth? Do they think Bacos, Jodka, Pennington, Shumate, and Jackson were all lying in their plea bargains and court testimony? Do they think anything in the records will say something the accused could not have said for themselves on the witness stand about what happened and why it was justified? Do they think improbably he was the only IED mfg. in Hamdania and that his murder alone stopped the IED problem in Hamdania--which still existed post-attack? These are simple and basic questions that must be answered before we can call these men heroes. Because, as it stands, there is a judicial fact-finding they're all felons either by their own admission or by the findings of a court marital panel.

Chuck wrote on Aug 15, 2007 2:06 PM:I think its obvious that neither Pennington or Mattis will be getting a Christams card from the Marine hater, John Murtha. In doing the right thing, Mattis may have hurt his career path with the bureaucrats, but earned the total respect of all of San Diego County, and all Marines across the world. Now, if only Mattis can get the rules of engagement changed so the Marines can do what they do best, with the odds stacked in their favor, instead of in the favor of the terrorists, as demanded by Time Magazine and Murtha.

What? wrote on Aug 15, 2007 2:55 PM:Arrrggggg! I thought I was done here!!! Hey Chuck, blanket statements like "but earned the total respect of all of San Diego County" are bound to be wrong. Get ten people together selected at random and I would bet you couldn't get all ten to agree on anything! Shoot based on the posts to this blog alone I can tell that not everyone in San Diego think Gen Matis did the right thing. In fact I would bet there are Marines that don't think he did the right thing. Maybe not the majority of them but I think there are some. In fact I would hope there are a lot of them.

Joe wrote on Aug 15, 2007 3:07 PM: I had hoped that kidnapping and gang shooting of a bound non-combatant in a hole wouldn't be held up as the USMC finest work. Chuck had to disappoint me. I live in San Diego County and I can assure you that Mattis hasn't earned my respect! I have no respect for him, I feel that like Pontius Pilate, he has responded to the roar of the mob.

Go Figure wrote on Aug 15, 2007 6:02 PM:Looks like AW4 can not handle the truth and is going to take her ball and go home. Some times the truth hurts and people have a hard time dealing with it. Come on AW4 get back into the game. Don't be like John1 who takes cheap pot shots here and there. AW4 can you say convicted felons.

What? wrote on Aug 15, 2007 6:23 PM:Go Figure, I have to say that your last post was a cheapshot. Attack the post not the poster.

TFP wrote on Aug 15, 2007 8:58 PM: "Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001? Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they? And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? Well, I don't. I don't care at all. I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11. I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking off Nick Berg’s head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat. I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques. I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs. I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights. In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care. When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest assured: I don't care. When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank: I don't care. When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts: I don't care. And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and -you guessed it -I don't care ! ! ! ! ! And may I add: "Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don't have that problem." -- Ronald Reagan I have another quote that I would like to add: "If we ever forget that we're One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under." Also by.. Ronald Reagan One last thought for the day: In case we find ourselves starting to believe all the anti-American sentiment and negativity, we should remember England’s Prime Minister Tony Blair’s words during a recent interview. When asked by one of his Parliament members why he believes so much in America, he said: "A simple way to take measure of a country is to look at how many want in... And how many want out." Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you: 1. Jesus Christ 2. The American G. I. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Go Figure wrote on Aug 15, 2007 9:52 PM:I'm sorry for my cheapshot toward AW4 and John1 but they have taken so many over the last year toward other bloggers who had a different points of view.

What? wrote on Aug 15, 2007 10:21 PM:Sigh, I'm back. You don't fight a war against a tactic, terrorism. You fight a war against an enemy Al Qaeda. We aren't fighting against Muslims we are fighting a war against extremist muslims who use terror. Reagan turned out to be a better President then he was an actor. He also had the best speach writers money could buy so I am sure he is an easy source of good quotes. Big woop. Come out and fight like a man? Is executing a bound captive fighting like a man? In my mind this is only slightly less evil then what happened to Mr Berg and it is therefore resonable to say that the men who shot him are only slightly less evil then the man who beheaded Berg. Frankly I think your biggest problem TFP is the fact that you don't care.

John1 to Joe wrote on Aug 15, 2007 11:04 PM:I believe you can write Mattis directly. You will find that he made up his own mind and actually stays involved in the final case outcomes. Not like Pilate at all.

John1 to What? and Go Figure wrote on Aug 15, 2007 11:26 PM:Go Figure, you are free to hurl insults all you want; it's a free country until the Caliphate takes over, I reckon. As to the ackronyms earlier, it's just easier shorthand. Those ackronyms have been used in several NC Times stories, so they are nothing new. To both What? and GF; my son took a plea deal to, in the end (and admitted during NCIS interrogations which were themselves illegal and not used in JJ's plea trial, but not reported by NCIS accurately) stand and admit his part in the death of an Iraqi citizen in Hamdania, Iraq. The specifics of the case are public record; neither of you state them accurately. Some were more involved, some less; some more keen to act, some less. But wrongly or rightly, all stuck together as a squad, due to a sense of loyalty stronger than we can imagine; all were illegally confined in a method, which in the Padilla case now unfolding in Federal court, has been proven to cause extreme psychological trauma. This confinement was adjudged illegal during the findings of fact in the Pennington trial. You may state your opinions of whose is more or less evil, and place in writing your distaste of all 7 Marines and 1 Sailor so convicted in the case and despite the serious problems all now have incurred from combat, with some having been deployed three times, you are free to state your cases. But love her or hate her as you do, AW4 has at least made some attempt to understand the persons involved. In that way, she has gleaned more insight and context of the case than is possible for you both.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 16, 2007 1:36 AM:Criminitney! I think I need to go to BA: Blogger's Anonymous. I only came back to see whazzup! AW4cryinoutloud; Go Figure! Can you say railroaded or kangaroo court or screwed-over? I can handle the truth. I sat in a courtroom and witnessed evidence for the prosecution ignored, NCIS lies ignored, justice ignored. THAT is the truth. I was picking up my ball and going home because the arguing was going nowhere. Insults prove nothing and everyone has made up their mind as to what they believe so why continue? I gave 2 articles to check out. Anyone do it? Anyone even curious? There isn't enough time or space to go back over every little detail to prove anyone's argument. These Marines are my countrymen and regardless of what may or may not have happened during time of war against a barbaric people, I will not crucify my own. I expect my own to be given the benefit of the doubt, to be given their Constitutional rights; which they were NOT. I expect the government to PROVE guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt; which it did Not! I do Not expect my own countrymen to be DEALT an unjust hand from the bottom of the deck; which they were! Bottom Line: I will defend them till Hell freezes, and anyone who doesn't like it can rant and rave, whine and protest, kick and scream, and insult till they run out of hot air. My mind is made up and shall remain so. I only pray that General Mattis sees through this injustice and grants Sgt. Hutchins his freedom along with the others.

to John 1 (from Citizen) wrote on Aug 16, 2007 7:00 AM:With all due respect, it seems like you often dodge the questions and issues in this case and retreat into vague pronouncements about the nobility of these convicted felons. What do you basically think happened? You keep saying "this stuff is public record." Guess what, people in Maine and DC and elsewhere can't easily go to the clerk's office for the Pendleton JAG and just photocopy this stuff. The official transcripts are still in process. The reporting on the case, which does have access to the records and has been consistently excellent here in the NC Times (in my opinion) basically accords with what I've said above. Moreover, it's easy enough to say what you think happened. I noticed you got on GF and What?'s cases, but you ignored my collection of pretty basic factual questions above. As for this squad's loyalty, I think it's not much of a virtue when it's in the service of a criminal conspiracy. Finally, their confinement was not that big of a deal. There are three levels and, as accused murderers, they got the highest. There was nothing unusual about that; everyone made a big deal about shackles, but that was just for visistors and was SOP. It distracts from the main issue of their guilt or innocence though. And if it's such a bad method of confinement that it turns the innocent guilty, then I guess we can soon expect to see you campaigning to free Khalid Sheik Mohammad since his was much worse and his confessions therefore can't be trusted? Since you're not that consistent, I mean this sarcastically of course.

Here we go again wrote on Aug 16, 2007 8:29 AM:Well AW4, you apparently are not alone in the "identity theft" department. The post at 8:58pm by TFP is NOT the same TFP who posted previously. One would think with as much time as was spent penning the comment posted at 8:58, that the blogger could at least come up with his own screen name, but I guess it is a compliment to TFP and to you as well that there are those out there who think enough of you and/or your comments to use your screen names.

Addicted2 wrote on Aug 16, 2007 9:33 AM:Hello AW4cryingoutloud, my name is Harry and I am a blogaholic.

CPL wrote on Aug 16, 2007 10:34 AM:I think we should bring all the Marines home from Iraq, and when we do we should bomb Iraq. OOOOORAAAAH!!

Citizen wrote on Aug 16, 2007 11:00 AM:AW4 keeps saying evidence was ignored and she witnessed it? How? Jury deliberations are secret, and they are the finders of fact. They weigh the credibility of witnesses, and in this case, quite unusually, you had multiple witnesses to a murder. So, if they believed those witnesses, it's pretty easy to convict, particularly when the basic parameters of the situation are only confronted on the margins by the accused. PS I read your articles AW4, they did not prove what you thought they did, as I said earlier in response to that quote. And I've read the GAO study, which was a number of years ago and also doesn't prove malfeasance in this case. But if it does, I guess we should release all the Marines in the brig who wacked their wives, deserted, raped their kids, etc., of which there are several thousand in Leavenworth.

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 16, 2007 11:36 AM:Not all my posts are deemed blog worthy. I am running about 2 for 5. The official transcripts are completed. The reporting in the media has not been complete nor 100% factual. NCT does better than most. What do I think happened? A meltdown failure of command. Marines without leadership, and desperate with fear. First Squad took an action which they now have paid for. As for anything else, I will keep it to myself. A father must at times grieve alone.

What? wrote on Aug 16, 2007 12:03 PM:Hello all, My name is What? and I am a blogaholic. It all started inocently enough, watching online videos and posting the occasional funny comment. Next thing I know I am reading an online paper and getting into serious debates with people I don't even know about the issues of my community.

What? wrote on Aug 16, 2007 12:24 PM:Just for contrast. Rodrigo Mendoza was sentenced to six years in state prison for the DUI crash that killed his son. No intent to kill anyone. Just stupidity that resulted in death. Murder in the civilian world will get you 25 to life.

What? wrote on Aug 16, 2007 12:39 PM:We are talking about being blogaholics on a blog!!! That's like having an AA meeting in a BAR!!!!!

Citizen wrote on Aug 16, 2007 12:40 PM:Isn't there something weird about AW4 and John1. They say, in effect, these guys are great, we know what happened, it's misreported, or, at worst, there's reasonable doubt. They say the P8's critics are wrong-headed, ignorant, mean-spirited, etc. Then we ask, hey what happened? What do you know that's been misreported? They both retreat into paroxysms of self-pity, the grieving father, the stalwart defender of the P8 who is "entitled to her opinion." Give me a break. If you're writing for a general audience presumably it's to share facts and analysis and say something useful for the readers. If it's just to toot your own horn without much regard to facts, logic, reason, etc, then it's just sophistry worthy of John Kerry or worse. Something happened here. There is evidence of what it is. And even given what that something was, there is a range of opinion as to how bad it was, if at all. Say what you mean and mean what you say and quit freaking out and doing hit and run as soon as someone calls out your BS. It's pathetic and dishonorable and insult to human intelligence.

What? wrote on Aug 16, 2007 12:50 PM:Has anyone here ever served on a jury that made it to deliberations? I have and I can tell you it sucked. 12 people who all heard the same testimony, saw the same evidence and came to 12 different conclusions as to what happened. Needless to say we ended up hung after three days of deliberations. 8-4 or 9-3 I forget. My point is if 12 jurors agreed after hearing the testimony and seeing the evidence I am inclined to give quite a bit of credibility to their verdict.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 16, 2007 1:36 PM:My name is AW4cryinoutloud and I am a blogoholic. It also started innocently for me. I somehow ended up on a site called NCTimes and was frustrated by some comments about the accused who had not even had any hearings and were supposed to be presumed innocent. It snowballed from there to a terrible addiction. Thank goodness I'm not the only one who suffers from this addiction. AWgee! You guys are funny!

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 16, 2007 1:43 PM:To Here we go again: Yep! It's like a virus. I'd happily give the guy a shot for an antibiotic. I know just the spot!

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 16, 2007 3:00 PM:To What?: It wasn't 12 jurors. It was 9 Panel members. They needed 4 to not convict. So there could have been 6 of 9 who voted to convict. Yet, even though they convicted; it was on UNpremeditated murder. If the so-called evidence was so consistent, as Citizen portrays, then how did different panel members come to such different conclusions? Everyone but Sgt. Hutchins is out, yet different decisions for two. Only one thing has been consistent for the past year and it wasn't Justice.

Harry wrote on Aug 16, 2007 3:49 PM:Yes, I served on a jury in a criminal case; in fact I was the jury foreperson. We did reach a verdict, but it took many many votes and rehash and rehash of evidence. I was very impressed with how diligently each juror took their job, and that the final outcome reflected serious and painstaking examination of all the evidence that was presented, consideration of reliability and motivation of witnesses, and a good deal of common sense. I believe 7 jurors changed their opinion during the process of deliberation...but in the end we were all convinced of the correctness of our decision. The judge thanked us profusely for our service. A jury verdict deserves more respect than to be set aside, the way Gen. Mattis disrespected the findings of the panel in these cases!

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 16, 2007 5:13 PM:Citizen- I do not pity myself. I grieve for my son. The two are very different. Sadly for all of this, I will emerge a much stronger person, and my family remains strong. You have the right to claim whatever you wish on my account. In reality, your disingenuous words and completely inaccurate characterizations will remain just those; your braying otherwise is merely a repetitive drumbeat.

Go Figure wrote on Aug 16, 2007 7:13 PM:To John1, My biggest problem of late with you is this idea of you wanting to toast a beer with everyone of the P8 once they get out the brig. Do you realize that the action of the SGT and CPLs cause the situation your son is faced with the rest of his life. I would expect a very junior Marine having this plan and the SGT/CPLs beating the junior Marine down for having such an idea. The actions of the SGT and CPLs has caused a lot of pain for everyone involved, P8, Marines, US Citizens and yes victim's family. You wanting to toast a beer with these guys just shows me you really don't care about their actions in destroying Marine's lives. I think it is a bad situation and by you and your son celabrating it sends a wrong message by toasting a beer. I'm off my soap box.

What? wrote on Aug 16, 2007 10:25 PM:So Go Figure is off his soap box. Sounds like a claim to stay off this blog. That's a sure sign that he/she is a fellow blogaholic. Maybe we should invite him/her to a meeting?

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 16, 2007 10:35 PM:Testing 1.2.3. I've tried to comment twice today. Nothing for 8 hours since the first try to Citizen. Tried again 5 hours ago. Guess I'll omit my remark about NCT and try again. Citizen said that the P8's confinement wasn't that big of a deal since they were accused murderers. When the P8 were shackled and placed in solitary confinement for three weeks they were NOT accused of anything. No charges had been preferred against them. They were all brought back here from Iraq "without" any shackles or cuffs. If they were so dangerous, just why was that? Tell those men who sat in cells for 3 weeks, shackled 23 hours a day, that it wasn't a big deal. Tell their families it wasn't a big deal. Try it yourself and then tell us if you think it's not a big deal. You said you read the articles I mentioned. What, specifically, was it that you refute? You read the GAO report. When was it written? What are NCIS' policies of interrogation and what reason have they used to justify their lack of taping interrogations? Be specific. You think you are only one who is knowledgeable, so why didn't you know that the P8 were NOT accused while in shackles? Be specific.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 16, 2007 10:59 PM:To What?: That's one meeting I think I'll miss.

Citizen wrote on Aug 17, 2007 8:40 AM:These guys are a bunch of weak-willed followers who lack moral courage to resist peer pressure put upon them to kill a random innocent person. They're all violent felons. So, while I don't think I owe any of them an ounce of respect, I do believe prudence might keep from getting in theirs and their families' faces. You never know if they'll just flex tie me and take me out, you know? Incidentally, the pre-trial confinement was approved by a magistrate and was one of three standard means of confining prisoners; you'd expect those being credibly investigated for kidnapping and murder to be detained at a pretty high level, no? The MCM specifically allows such confinement and restraint. As for the lack of taping, why should they tape? The final signed statement should supersede everything and stand on its own just like any other legal document supersedes prior discussions. Prosecutors and cops are supposed to get convictions; it's an adversary system. I wouldn't be opposed to taping, but here I think it's irrelevant. You had confessions plus testimony under oath don't forget, and you also had Magincalda's statement that they conspired to say the confessions were coerced, remember that? Or if I may quote the NC Times' reporting of LCPL Shumate's testimony, "He was angry at us . . . He [Magincalda] said we all should have gotten lawyers, and that we should all say that NCIS coerced false statements from us." If Shumate said this under oath, don't you think it's time to give up the unvarnished myth of NCIS coercion? It's simply not credible, particularly as an alternative and believable account of what happened that night has not been proffered byanyone.

John1 to Go Figure wrote on Aug 17, 2007 8:41 AM:GF, I have met all the men involved, as has been obvious from my posts. Shumate, Jackson,Thomas, Pennington and Magic, are close in my thoughts both as a man and as a father. Thomas, Pennington and Magic, and Bacos, too- have an especially acute situation in that each have served multiple tours and each fought and watched squadmates and friends die in Fallujah. Notwithstanding anything else that has happened, the 3 tours each have had in a very very sharp combat zone have damaged these young men. Whatever may have happened, all these men now must be healed-whether you, Citizen, or anyone else disagrees; as does my son. These men never really had the chance to ever decompress from their warfighting experiences, as those who served multiple tours really never wound down and were always in a re-training mode between deployments. When they were returned from Iraq and illegally confined as "PVD" and shackled, the psychological damages were profound and will require significant counseling and healing to resolve. In the Padilla case now just wrapping up, it was determined independently that the time in the brig caused psychosis in Padilla. For the P8, they never got to back off of combat; each day in the brig was a reminder of the case, and their combat. Essentially these men have been in combat since January of 2006, in their minds, if not their bodies. I can't express to you the devastation wrought on all 8 because of this. Add to that (and I know you don't care) the horrible treatment the prosecution and NCIS wrought on these men, the mind-games and truly shabby shabby, unprofessional and borderline (in the case of NCIS over the top) unethical treatment each were subjected to. Now,They're out. You don't like it, but as the father of one of the 8 and a friend and (I hope) quasi-father figure to all, I have to live in the reality, and that means reintroducing at least 6 of the 8 (Bacos is not part of the equation for now) to what it means to living "normally" again. I realize you would rather I turn my back on my sons and sons-by-proxy, scold them and excoriate, disown, etc. But that's not reasonable nor practical, nor would I in any event. Nor would you, in my place.

John1 to Harry wrote on Aug 17, 2007 8:44 AM:Harry, I am not sure of which case(s) Mattis has "disrespected". Those which went to jury had: time served, time served and 15 years. The cases with Pre Trial Agreements went 12 months, 18 months, 21 months (2 cases), and 8 years. Those PTA's were Mattis' negotiations, not a jury trial result.

AW4cryinoutloud wrote on Aug 17, 2007 3:23 PM:To Citizen: I'm beginning to think you're an NCIS agent. You focus on one goal: creating a crime in a time of war, where there was none; having no concern for unecessarily ruining lives. That must instill a sense of pride in your...mind?

Smoking mirrors wrote on Aug 17, 2007 4:26 PM:John1 you keep on saying unethical treatment by NCIS can you be more specific. From what I understand none of the statements NCIS took in Iraq were thrown out and were used during the trials and plea deals. Once again John1 you are putting up smoking mirrors. Where is the proof of unethical treatment from convicted felons and their defense attorneys. You have NONE!!!! I would think if the the statements NCIS took in Iraq were illegal they would not have been used in the plea deals and court Martials. By the way can you name a federal agency that tape records its interviews. I don't think so. I contacted the FBI and a few other agencies and none do. One other thing, my father in law who served in the second world war in the south Pacific was involved in several combat situations to many to count over a three period. He never murdered any non combatant(s) nor would he make excuses. He has been a major influence in my life.

John1 to Smoking Mirrors wrote on Aug 18, 2007 10:14 AM:I am glad your father in law is a positive influence in your life. Your understanding is flawed. In fact, the Stipulations of Fact agreed with the prosecution contravened the NCIS statements in many important respects; the NCIS reports and statements were in fact not used as a basis, the Stipulations were. For recent reference you will find the Military Judge (Lt Col Meeks) discussed this in the Hutchins trial. As regards unethical treatment and illegal confinement I refer you to the findings of fact by Col. Folsom, the judge in the Pennington part of the case.

John1 to Citizen wrote on Aug 18, 2007 10:20 AM:Citizen, the confinement as "SQ-1 PVD" was adjudged illegal confinement specifically because the magisterial hearings were not conducted per the MCM or MCO. That is not speculation, that is specific finding of fact in the cases and is a matter of public record (see Col Folsom's Finding of Fact). Unfortunately, it appears NCT did not find my earlier responses to you "blog worthy". [Editor's note: "Assertions of questionable ... information will decrease the likelihood of approval." To see the complete blog policy, go to nctimes.com/blogpolicy] I agree with you the arguments re: NCIS are now legally irrelevant since the Stipulations of Fact submitted with the prosecution are completely different documents.

Nicole wrote on Aug 28, 2007 2:40 AM:'Robert' glad you made it 'Soldier' glad you and ... 'Marshall' made it hope 'hutchin's' is Free soon to i think it is a disgrace that you Soldiers had to suffer the way you did, God Bless you all for serving your country!. (God Bless The Marine's) God Bless the people of the (United State's) of (America) & to the (republic) for which it stands one Nation under God (indevisible) with (liberty) & (justice) for (all.) God Bless the (Marine's) that sit in (judgement) by the people of the (United State's) of (America) & (foreign) countie's, God Bless the Soldier's who put their live's on the line, so the rest of us can go 'on'. God Bless the familie's that 'suffer' the loss of there loved one's the Soldier's who fight for our 'freedom'. God Bless us all those who 'suffer' for that which is 'good & just' for we are all connected!. We should lift up our (Soldier's) & treat them with (Honer) & (Respect), & give them the one thing everone deserve's, The one thing we are all fighting for Freedom, Love, Honer, & Respect. For it is true that the (Marine's) & all the (Military Branche's), the man & woman that fight in these Branche's are the (Savior's) of our (country,) the (Angels) of our 'country' the only one's brave enough to do what the rest of us (can't or won't) & that is "fight". Fight for (Freedom,) (Justice,) (Honer,) Peace-On-Earth & Goodwill to all Mankind. And God Bless ...(Marshall Lee Magincalda) who is an (American Marine.) Who fought for "Freedom," Justice, & Honer, Peace-On-Earth & Goodwill to all Mankind, And for all Mankind!. God Bless these (Man & Woman) Who "Sacrifice" More then the rest of us could ever "repay". May we as people think of these things that i (Nicole ...) have stated in this poem to him & the other (Military Fighter's) of the United State's of 'America.' May we see things through the 'Soldier,s' eyes before passing Judgement. 'Yes'! the (Soldier's) the 'Savior's & Angels' of the (United State's) of (America!.) God Bless America and thoes who protect it!, and may we Bless our Soldier's so they can bless us. To: him & the other Military Fighter's of the United State's of America!. Written By: Nicole [Posters may not include last names as we cannot guarantee the identity] Dated:08/28/07

Devil Dog wrote on Dec 3, 2007 4:48 PM:I dare put any one in a similar situation with not really knowing who the enemy is in a urban warfare setting. Pick up a weapon and Join in. Hope those of you that enjoy your lives here in the states really under stand the sacrifice being made here. Stop by a VA hospital and VA nursing home some time and see your tax dollars at work. How about supporting the troops instead of bashing them. Welcome home Marine. SEMPER FI DEVIL DOG!!!!